First Thoughts
on Year C Epistle Passages from the Lectionary
Pentecost 2
William Loader
Pentecost 2: 2 June Galatians 1:1-12
Paul's
letter writing is marked by adherence to stylised beginnings and
endings. Adapted to his own ends, he employs formal beginnings to all
his letters, following the general structure: "A to B, Hi". The way he
expands this structure tells us much about his intentions. Thus here
his words, asserting himself as an apostle as, literally, "not from
human beings nor through some human person, but through Jesus Christ",
address right at the beginning the problem he faces. For some people in
Galatia had come to doubt his legitimacy and question whether he was
appropriately authorised. In particular, he had come to be at odds with
the pillar apostles, Peter and James, so why should they listen to him!
He claims that his authority is Jesus himself and God, who raised him
from the dead. He explains this further in 1:11-12, claiming divine
revelation and so divine authoroity, offering elaboration in 1:13-24,
which become the focus in next week's epistle reading.
It may sound like a rather odd claim to say that he received the gospel
he preached through revelation, as though it dropped out of the sky at
his conversion, and was not likely to be very persuasive for those
hearing his letter read to them. In reality he must have come to know
the gospel through human beings, at least in the days when he opposed
it. Otherwise he would have had no idea why he opposed it. Paul is not
really making an ambit claim to independent revelation, but deriving
his authority from who Christ is and who God is. When he later argues
his case we can see that this is the basis for his claims. God is
compassionate to all, offering a right relationshjip to all, Jew and
Gentile, without discrimination. So Paul argues from the nature of God,
from the heart of the gospel. He does so in contrast to the people we
know who opposed him, who apparently claimed authority because they had
letters of commendation or authorisation from key apostles. Paul did
not despise such institutional authority, but he understood that real
authority lay in understanding the nature of God, in theological
understanding at the deepest level.
This is no academic exercise for Paul nor a personal power struggle.
His issue with the Galatians goes right to heart of who he thinks God
is and that has profound implications for them and for everyone. It has
stirred his passion so much that he abandons the usual srtylised
pattern in his letters of following the words of greeting by a
statement either of thanksgiving or of blessing in relation to the
recipients. Instead in 1:6 he goes straight into confrontation,
expressing his dismay at their having abandoned the gospel as he
proclaimed it to them and at their following another. The other gospel
which was winning their approval was insisting that they be circumcised
and follow biblical law (5:2-12).
The new missionaries who came to clean up the mess which they
believed Paul had created insisted that if Gentiles were to join the
people of God they must adhere to what scripture clearly required in
Genesis 17 and be circumcised and follow other requirements set out in
scripture for Gentiles. Their argument was plausible. They could turn
on Paul, accusing him of picking and choosing which parts of scripture
to believe. They could suggest that Paul engaged in cheap evangelism,
winning converts by watering down what God required. They could accuse
Paul of "seeking human approval" (1:10), literally, seeking to please
human beings. Theirs was a kind of early fundamentalism which must have
sounded convincing. A fundamentalism which declares the Bible the Word
of God and insists on adhering to every word is bound to sound
convincing, because, at least at first sight, it is consistent and does
not mess about with setting priorities and making choices about what is
or is not important. Jesus' opponents in many of the gospel stories
appear to have approached scripture like this.
Paul was angry because he saw these preachers undermining what he saw
as the heart of the gospel. Curse them! That's perhaps too strong, but
one can see that is really important for Paul. Notice that he is not
prepared to be bullied into submission by being told that their gospel
has apostolic blessing or even angelic blessing (1:8-9). Those
mechaisms do not count. Only truth, as he sees it at the heart of the
gospel, counts. His letter will show that he had to take this stance
even against Peter and James eventually, even though they initially
accepted him. Paul was consistent. He refused to agree that Jews and
Gentiles should have to eat separately, even though Peter and even his
fellow missionary, Barnabas, succumbed to it (2:11-14). Paul, for his
part, sought not human approval but God's approval (1:10).
So begins his letter. We owe it to Paul that he took an approach to
faith and scripture which sought its heart and ultimately argued
theologically from the nature of God as a God of grace and love towards
all. Paul did not waiver from this. He argued it up and down the pages
of his letters. He modelled a hermeneutic, a way of interpreting
scripture, which made it possible to see what really mattered. It was
an uphill struggle - and always is, because it calls for maturity and
perspective and people find the retreat into infallible rules and fixed
absolutes makes them feel more secure. Ultimately such fixedness has to
dispense with Jesus or convert him to their cause against all that he
lived and died for - and it has often done so very successfully. Each
time people have rediscovered Paul, however, the church has revived.
Gospel: Pentecost 2: 2 June Luke
7:1-10
Return to Home Page