Perspectives on Paul

Five Views

McKnight, Scot, Oropeza, B. J., Scot McKnight, B. J. Oropeza

• Publisher: Baker Academic
• Year: 2020
• Print ISBN: 9781540960757
• eBook ISBN: 9781493427321
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Biblical Criticism & Interpretation

This five-views work brings together an all-star lineup of Pauline scholars to offer a constructive, interdenominational, up-to-date conversation on key issues of Pauline theology. The editors begin with an informative recent history of biblical tradition related to the perspectives on Paul. John M. G. Barclay, A. Andrew Das, James D. G. Dunn, Brant Pitre, and Magnus Zetterholm then discuss how to interpret Paul's writings and theology, especially the apostle's view of salvation. The book concludes with an assessment of the perspectives from a pastoral point of view by Dennis Edwards.

1
The Roman Catholic Perspective on Paul

BRANT PITRE

Introduction

The current debate over the “New Perspective” on Paul arguably was launched in 1977 by E. P. Sanders’s book Paul and Palestinian Judaism.1 Over the years, one fascinating feature of this debate is that Sanders’s interpretation has sometimes been criticized for being too “Catholic.” For example, Kent Yinger points out that critics of the New Perspective on Paul (NPP) contend that it “blurs the distinction between Roman Catholic and Protestant soteriology.”2 In particular, Sanders’s concept of “covenantal nomism” is singled out as dangerously close to a Catholic perspective: “Covenantal nomism and NPP versions of salvation seem closer to Roman Catholic views than to Luther’s. They certainly highlight the role of obedience more than ‘by grace alone through faith alone’ would seem to do. . . . Such ecumenical union sounds to many like the clearest signal that the gains of the Reformation are being lost.”3

Sanders himself was the first to draw a connection between nineteenth-century Protestant caricatures of Judaism as a legalistic religion of “works righteousness” and similar views of Catholicism: “One must note in particular the projection on to Judaism of the view which Protestants find most objectionable in Roman Catholicism: the existence of a treasury of merits established by works of supererogation. We have here the retrojection of the Protestant-Catholic debate into ancient history, with Judaism taking the role of Catholicism and Christianity the role of Lutheranism.”4

In this essay I will seek to show that Sanders’s interpretation of Paul is in fact very close to Catholic soteriology on several key points. As a Catholic, I do not see this as a weakness of Sanders’s position. Instead, I would argue that Sanders’s reading of Paul coheres with Catholic readings over the centuries because both are based on compelling interpretations of what Paul himself actually says. By way of illustration, my essay will have three objectives.

First, I will focus on key passages in Paul that are foundational for Catholic exegesis. Space does not permit me to address every aspect of the Catholic doctrine of justification. Instead, I will limit myself to four central issues: (1) justification as forgiveness and real participation “in Christ”; (2) initial justification by grace through faith alone; (3) the meaning of “works of the law”; and (4) final justification according to works and not by faith alone.5

Second, I will give a brief overview of how these key passages in Paul have been interpreted in the Catholic tradition. On the one hand, this will entail surveying what individual commentators have said in the patristic, medieval, and modern periods. On the other hand, since I have been tasked with summarizing “The Roman Catholic perspective on Paul,” we will also need to pay attention to official Catholic teaching on justification, which can be found in three key places: (1) the Council of Trent’s Decree on Justification (1547);6 (2) the official Catechism of the Catholic Church’s article on “Grace and Justification” (1992);7 and (3) the General Audiences of Pope Benedict XVI on Saint Paul (2008–9).8 For readers unfamiliar with the Catholic perspective, I cannot overemphasize the importance of reading these documents firsthand, with specific attention to how they interpret Paul.9

Third, I will highlight key areas of overlap between the Catholic perspective on Paul and the work of E. P. Sanders. One prominent Lutheran exegete recently described Sanders’s work as an “assault” on “the Lutheran Paul.”10 As I hope to show, one reason Sanders has been accused of undermining the Protestant Reformation is that his exegesis of Paul unintentionally arrived at several of the same conclusions as patristic and medieval Catholic interpreters of Paul, as well as the Council of Trent. As far as I know, this kind of close comparison of Sanders and the Catholic perspective has never been done. My hope is that it will highlight common ground in the task of “rereading Paul together.”11

Justification as Forgiveness and Real Participation “in Christ”

The first aspect of the Catholic perspective on Paul that needs to be emphasized is that justification involves both the remission of sins and a real participation in the death and resurrection of Christ. Through faith and baptism, a person is both reputed to be righteous and transformed from being a slave of sin “in Adam” to being a child of God “in Christ.”

The Apostle Paul: Justification, Baptism, and Being “in Christ”

In support of this view, consider the following passages in which Paul links justification and dying and rising “in Christ,” especially through baptism:12

The law was our custodian until Christ came, that we might be justified by faith. . . . For in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. (Gal. 3:24–27)

You were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God. . . . He who is united to the Lord becomes one spirit with him. (1 Cor. 6:11, 17)

If any one is in Christ, he is a new creation. . . . All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself. . . . For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. (2 Cor. 5:17–18, 21)

As one man’s trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men. For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man’s obedience many will be made righteous. (Rom. 5:18–19)

Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life. . . . For he who has died is justified from sin. (Rom. 6:3–4, 7)

We will return to the specific role of faith below. For now, three observations are necessary. First, Paul repeatedly connects the noun “righteousness” (δικαιοσύνη, dikaiosynē) and/or the verb “justify” (δικαιόω, dikaioō) with being “in Christ” (ἐν Χριστῷ, en Christō) or “united to” Christ (Gal. 3:24, 26; 1 Cor. 6:11, 17; 2 Cor. 5:17, 21; Rom. 6:1–11). Second, Paul also connects being “in Christ” with being “baptized” (βαπτίζω, baptizō) (Gal. 3:27; Rom. 6:3). In one case...

Table of contents

• iCover
• iiHalf Title Page
• iiiTitle Page
• ivCopyright Page
• vDedication
• viiContents
• ixPreface
• xiAbbreviations
• 1Paul in Perspective
• 251 The Roman Catholic Perspective on Paul
• 832 The Traditional Protestant Perspective on Paul
• 1333 The New Perspective on Paul
• 1714 The Paul within Judaism Perspective
• 2195 The Gift Perspective on Paul
• 259Afterword
• 267Author Index
• 273Scripture Index
• 279Subject Index
• 286Back Cover