Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Borg (1973) - A New Context For Romans Xiii PDF
Borg (1973) - A New Context For Romans Xiii PDF
http://journals.cambridge.org/NTS
Marcus Borg
TERENCE Y. MULLINS
In order to affirm that these words are intended by Paul to carry the same
meaning as they did in the ministry ofJesus, we would have to show that the
Roman congregation needed this advice; that is, that it or a considerable
portion of it might have been tempted to adopt an antagonistic attitude
toward the Roman state.
It is common to say that we know very little about the church in Rome at
the time when Paul wrote.1 What we do know is that it had a fair number of
Jews in it. The fourth-century writer Ambrosiaster cites a tradition that the
Christian community in Rome arose among Roman Jews who then evan-
gelized Gentiles,2 a tradition indirectly supported by Acts ii. 10, which
reports the presence of Roman Jews among the pilgrims at Pentecost. The
contents of the epistle point to a mixed Gentile and Jewish membership, with
perhaps a slightly greater degree of Jewish influence than in the churches
founded by Paul.3 Further, it is probable on a priori grounds that many of the
Gentile members were originally attached to the synagogues as 'God-fearers',
so that even they had an original association with Judaism. Judaism and
Jewish communities constituted the matrix of Christianity. The Christian
tradition and the socio-cultural characteristics of Christian communities
eventually evolved away from their Jewish origins, but it would be naive to
suppose that after only two decades of Christian history any community
incorporating Jews in its foundation was largely detached from Jewish affairs.
Roman authorities were sociologically justified in the fifties in their policy of
regarding Christianity as a Jewish sect. Hence events which affected the
Roman Jewish community could be expected to be of concern to the Christian
community in Rome as well. Thus there are solid grounds for assuming that
we can learn something about the Roman church by asking about the Roman
Jewish community.
We must ask two questions about the Jewish community in Rome. Was
there continuing contact between Jews in Rome and Palestine so that the
chaotic events in the homeland were known about among Roman Jews?
1
E.g. A. Nygren, Commentary on Romans (London, 1952), p. 4.
8
Cited with approval by W. Sanday and A. C. Headlam, The Epistle to the Romans (Edinburgh,
1895), p. xxv; and Dodd, op. cit. p. xxvii.
3
Dodd, op. cit. p . xxviii; J . B. Lightfoot, Philippians (London, 1890), pp. 16-17.
1
A generally accepted figure; see H. J. Leon, The Jews of Ancient Rome (Philadelphia, i960),
pp. 135-6 and the authorities cited in 135 n.
2
E.g. Acts ii. 10; Philo, Legatio ad Gaium, 156; Cicero, Pro Flacco, 66-g.
3
So Sanday and Headlam, op. cit. p. xxviii, citing Acts vi. g.
4
Ps. Sol. ii. 6, xvii. 13-14; Philo, Legatio, 155; Josephus, B.J. 1. 157, Ant. xiv. 79, perhaps B.J.
11. 68; see E. Schiirer, The Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ (Edinburgh, 1893), 11. ii. 234;
C. Roth, The History of the Jews in Italy (Philadelphia, 1946), pp. 4-5; G. LaPiana, 'Foreign Groups
in Rome During the First Centuries of the Empire', H.T.R. xx (1927), 368.
6
Josephus, B.J. 11. 80-1, Ant. XVII. 30-1; B.J. 11. m , Ant. XVII. 342-3; B.J. 11. 243-4, Ant.
xx. 131-2.
* B.J. 11. 80-93, Ant. XVII. 299-314. ' B.J. n. 80-1, Ant. xvn. 300-1.
8
Deut. xvii. 14-15; T. Sanh. iv. 10: 'A king cannot be appointed outside the land of Israel, nor
can one be appointed unless he be eligible for marriage into the priesdy families' (i.e. a full Israelite).
Earlier the Pharisees had opposed the rule of Herod: Ant. xv. 370, XVII. 42; B.B. 36.
9
Ant. xiv. 175. Cf. Cambridge Ancient History, x. 322-3, 326, for the fate of the Sanhedrin and high
priesthood under Herod.
10
B.J. 11. 80, Ant. xvn. 300.
It has often been claimed that this passage does not fit very smoothly either
into its immediate context or into Romans as a whole; it is an ' independent
excursus',2 a 'self-contained envelope completely independent of its con-
text'. 3 Indeed, so disruptive does it seem that one scholar has argued that it
must be a non-Pauline interpolation.4 However, our interpretation argues
that it not only fits into its immediate context, but that it also has an intimate
connection to Romans as a whole. The connection lies in the question of the
Roman church's obligation to Israel.
Paul too feels a deep and agonizing obligation to Israel: ' I feel in my heart
great grief and ceaseless pain. For I could wish that I myself were separated
by a curse from Christ if that would benefit my brethren, my human
kinsmen - the Israelites.'5 But that obligation, though it extends so far as
being willing to surrender one's own salvation, does not entail joining in
Israel's cause against Rome: instead, the words of Romans xii. 14-21,
already discussed, affirm: do not return evil for evil, live in peace with all
men, do not avenge yourselves, bless those who persecute you. Immediately
following these words is the opening phrase of Romans xiii, artificially
separated from Romans xii by the later chapter and verse divisions: 'Let
everyone (i.e. every Christian in Rome)6 subject himself to the supreme
authorities.' To say this in this context to this church is to say, 'Your
obligation to Israel cannot encompass participation in their cause against
Rome.' 7 That is, Romans xiii. 1-7 continues the thought of Romans xii. 14-21
rather than being a 'self-contained envelope'. As such, it is not intended as a
1
Since the interpretation of Romans xiii for which we are arguing does not depend directly
upon exegesis of individual words or verses, but on the context within which it is set, we shall not be
concerned with a verse-by-verse detailed exegesis.
2
O. Michel, cited though not approved of by G. E. B. Cranneld, A Commentary on Romans 12-13
(Edinburgh, 1965), p. 61.
3
J. Kallas, 'Romans 13. 1-7: An Interpolation', N.T.S. xi (1964-5), 365, and authorities cited
on pp. 365-6.
4
Ibid.
6
Rom. ix. 2-3, adopting the translation of C. K. Barrett, The Epistle to the Romans (London,
1957). P- '74-
6
Cranneld, op. cit. p. 72.
7
Cf. Dodd, op. cit. pp. 2014, for an exegesis that sees Jewish nationalism in the background.
like swords, Prov. xxv. 18; a loose woman is like a sword, Prov. v. 4; the mouth of the servant is
like a sword, Isa. xlix. 2); it also denotes the knife with which Abraham was to sacrifice Isaac
(Gen. xxii. 6, 10) and the swords with which the priests of Baal gashed themselves (3 Kingd.
xviii. 28). In all other cases, it has its literal meaning as a weapon or as a synonym for warfare.
1
As can be seen, from its distribution: one-fourth of the occurrences (45) are in Jeremiah, almost
another fourth (38) in Ezekiel, and 18 more in Isaiah.
a
There are indications in the New Testament and elsewhere that 'Babylon' was a cryptic means
of referring to Rome in the first century. In chapter xxvii ofJeremiah (LXX; chapter 50 in English),
the u&xmpcc is directed against Babylon. Though we have no evidence for this, it is tempting to con-
jecture that Jewish nationalist groups saw this chapter as an indication that God's sword would be
directed against Babylon = Rome; if so, then Paul turns this expectation upside down and affirms,
in effect, 'The sword will not be turned against Rome, for Rome bears the sword.'
8
Cranfield, op. cit. p. 73.
4
Ibid. p. 74.
When Paul wrote this passage to the Christians in Rome Judaism was on the
brink of catastrophe as a result of its longstanding resistance to Roman
imperialism. An emerging Christianity, founded by a Jew whom the Romans
had crucified - regarded still by Rome as a Jewish sect, and inextricably
implicated, by history and culture, by ideology and associational patterns, in
the Jewish world - was inevitably caught up in the crisis of Jewish-Roman
relations. What was the right posture to adopt toward Rome? This was a
burning question for Diaspora and Palestinian communities alike, one certain
to underlie any theoretical interest in the status of civil authorities.
Against such a background Paul, a Christian proud of his Jewish heritage,
writing to a Church still in contact with Judaism, in a city where the Roman-
Jewish confrontation existed in taut microcosm, broached the subject of civil
authority. The above argument supports what would in any case appear to
be a strongprimafacie assumption: that Paul's advice was not theoretical, nor
vaguely general, and certainly not adulatory in its attitude toward Rome;
that it advocated an immediate policy, based upon Paul's understanding of
the purpose for which Christ died, for negotiating a specific political crisis.
1
See Cullmann, op. cit. pp. 50-70, 95-114. Our interpretation does not exclude the possibility
that loualai has a double reference to both Roman authority and an extra-terrestrial power, but
argues that primary illumination of the passage comes from the context for which we are arguing.
a
Cranfield, op. cit. p. 75.