Ferdinand Prat, St Paul

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11567b.htm
Preliminary questions
Apocryphal Acts of St. Paul
Professor Schmidt has published a photographic copy, a transcription, a German
translation, and a commentary of a Coptic papyrus composed of about 2000 fragments,
which he has classified, juxtaposed, and deciphered at a cost of infinite labour (!cta
Pauli aus der "eidelberger #optischen Papyrushandschrift $r% &, 'eip(ig, &)0*, and
+usat(e etc%, 'eip(ig, &)0,-% .ost critics, whether Catholic (/uchesne, 0ardenhewer,
1hrhard etc%-, or Protestant (+ahn, "arnac#, Corssen etc%-, belie2e that these are real
!cta Pauli, although the text edited by Schmidt, with its 2ery numerous gaps,
represents but a small portion of the original wor#% 3his disco2ery modified the
generally accepted ideas concerning the origin, contents, and 2alue of these apocryphal
!cts, and warrants the conclusion that three ancient compositions which ha2e reached
us formed an integral part of the !cta Pauli 2i(% the !cta Pauli et 3heclae, of which
the best edition is that of 'ipsius, (!cta !postolorum apocrypha, 'eip(ig, &4)&, 25,6
72-, a .artyrium Pauli preser2ed in Gree# and a fragment of which also exists in
'atin (op% cit%, &0*6&7-, and a letter from the Corinthians to Paul with the latter8s reply,
the !rmenian text of which was preser2ed (cf% +ahn, Gesch% des neutest% 9anons, ::,
,)26;&&-, and the 'atin disco2ered by 0erger in &4)& (d% "arnac#, /ie apo#ryphen
0riefe des Paulus an die 'aodicener und 9orinther, 0onn, &)0,-% <ith great sagacity
+ahn anticipated this result with regard to the last two documents, and the manner in
which St% =erome spea#s of the periodoi Pauli et 3heclae (Illustrious Men 7 - might ha2e
permitted the same surmise with regard to the first%
!nother conse>uence of Schmidt8s disco2ery is no less interesting% 'ipsius maintained
? and this was hitherto the common opinion ? that besides the Catholic !cts there
formerly existed Gnostic !cts of Paul, but now e2erything tends to pro2e that the
latter ne2er existed% :n fact @rigen >uotes the !cta Pauli twice as an estimable writing
(Commentary on John AA%&2 B De Principiis ::%&%5 -B 1usebius (Church History :::%5%,
and :::%2,%*- places them among the boo#s in dispute, such as the Shepherd of
"ermas, the !pocalypse of Peter, the 1pistle of 0arnabas, and the 3eaching of the
!postles% 3he stichometry of the Codex Claromontanus (photograph in Cigouroux,
/ict% de la 0ible, ::, &*7- places them after the canonical boo#s% 3ertullian and St%
=erome, while pointing out the legendary character of this writing, do not attac# its
orthodoxy% 3he precise purpose of St% Paul8s correspondence with the Corinthians which
formed part of the !cts, was to oppose the Gnostics, Simon and Cleobius% 0ut there is
no reason to admit the existence of heretical !cts which ha2e since been hopelessly
lost, for all the details gi2en by ancient authors are 2erified in the !cts which ha2e
been reco2ered or tally well with them%
3he following is the explanation of the confusionD 3he .anicheans and Priscillianists
had circulated a collection of fi2e apocryphal !cts, four of which were tainted with
heresy, and the fifth were the !cts of Paul% 3he !cta Pauli, owing to this
unfortunate association, are suspected of heterodoxy by the more recent authors such as
Philastrius (/e haeres%, 44- and Photius (Cod%, &&*-% 3ertullian (On Baptism &7 - and St%
=erome (Illustrious Men 7 - denounce the fabulous character of the apocryphal !cts of
Paul, and this se2ere judgment is amply confirmed by the examination of the fragments
published by Schmidt% :t is a purely imaginati2e wor# in which improbability 2ies with
absurdity% 3he author, who was ac>uainted with the canonical !cts of the !postles,
locates the scene in the places really 2isited by St% Paul (!ntioch, :conium, .yra, Perge,
Sidon, 3yre, 1phesus, Corinth, Philippi, Eome-, but for the rest he gi2es his fancy free
rein% "is chronology is absolutely impossible% @f the sixty6fi2e persons he names, 2ery
few are #nown and the part played by these is irreconcilable with the statements of the
canonical !cts% 0riefly, if the canonical !cts are true the apocryphal !cts are
false% 3his, howe2er, does not imply that none of the details ha2e historical foundation,
but they must be confirmed by an independent authority%
Chronology
:f we admit according to the almost unanimous opinion of exegetes that !cts &, and
Galatians 2D&6&0, relate to the same fact it will be seen that an inter2al of se2enteen
years ? or at least sixteen, counting incomplete years as accomplished ? elapsed
between the con2ersion of Paul and the !postolic council, for Paul 2isited =erusalem
three years after his con2ersion (Galatians &D&4- and returned after fourteen years for the
meeting held with regard to legal obser2ances (Galatians 2D&D Epeita dia dekatessaron
eton-% :t is true that some authors include the three years prior to the first 2isit in the
total of fourteen, but this explanation seems forced% @n the other hand, twel2e or
thirteen years elapsed between the !postolic council and the end of the capti2ity, for the
capti2ity lasted nearly fi2e years (more than two years at Caesarea, !cts 2*D27, six
months tra2elling, including the sojourn at .alta, and two years at Eome, !cts 24D50-B
the third mission lasted not less than four years and a half (three of which were spent at
1phesus, !cts 20D5&, and one between the departure from 1phesus and the arri2al at
=erusalem, & Corinthians &;D4B !cts 20D&;, and six months at the 2ery least for the
journey to Galatia, !cts &4D25-B while the second mission lasted not less than three
years (eighteen months for Corinth, !cts &4D&&, and the remainder for the
e2angeli(ation of Galatia, .acedonia, and !thens, !cts &,D5;6&7D5*-% 3hus from the
con2ersion to the end of the first capti2ity we ha2e a total of about twenty6nine years%
$ow if we could find a fixed point that is a synchronism between a fact in the life of
Paul and a certainly dated e2ent in profane history, it would be easy to reconstruct the
Pauline chronology% Fnfortunately this much wished6for mar# has not yet been
indicated with certainty, despite the numerous attempts made by scholars, especially in
recent times% :t is of interest to note e2en the aborti2e attempts, because the disco2ery of
an inscription or of a coin may any day transform an approximate date into an
absolutely fixed point% 3hese are
the meeting of Paul with Sergius Paulus, Proconsul of Cyprus, about the year *;
(!cts &5D7-
the meeting at Corinth with !>uila and Priscilla, who had been expelled from
Eome, about ,& (!cts &4D2-
the meeting with Gallio, Proconsul of !chaia, about ,5 (!cts &4D&2-
the address of Paul before the Go2ernor Gelix and his wife /rusilla about ,4
(!cts 2*D2*-%
!ll these e2ents, as far as they may be assigned approximate dates, agree with the
!postle8s general chronology but gi2e no precise results% 3hree synchronisms, howe2er,
appear to afford a firmer basisD
(1) he occupation o! Damascus "y the ethnarch o! #in$ %retas and the escape o! the
%postle three years a!ter his con&ersion (' Corinthians 11()'*))+ %cts ,(')*'-). /
/amascene coins bearing the effigy of 3iberius to the year 5* are extant, pro2ing that at
that time the city belonged to the Eomans% :t is impossible to assume that !retas had
recei2ed it as a gift from 3iberius, for the latter, especially in his last years, was hostile
to the 9ing of the $abataeans whom Citellius, Go2ernor of Syria, was ordered to attac#
(=oseph%, !nt%, AC:::, 2, &5-B neither could !retas ha2e possessed himself of it by
force for, besides the unli#elihood of a direct aggression against the Eomans, the
expedition of Citellius was at first directed not against /amascus but against Petra% :t
has therefore been somewhat plausibly conjectured that Caligula, subject as he was to
such whims, had ceded it to him at the time of his accession (&0 .arch, 57-% !s a matter
of fact nothing is #nown of imperial coins of /amascus dating from either Caligula or
Claudius% !ccording to this hypothesis St% Paul8s con2ersion was not prior to 5*, nor his
escape from /amascus and his first 2isit to =erusalem, to 57%
(') Death o! %$rippa0 !amine in Judea0 mission o! Paul and Barna"as to Jerusalem to
"rin$ thither the alms !rom the Church o! %ntioch (%cts 11('1*1'('2). / !grippa died
shortly after the Pasch (!cts &2D5, &2D&)-, when he was celebrating in Caesarea solemn
festi2als in honour of Claudius8s recent return from 0ritain, in the third year of his reign,
which had begun in *& (=osephus, !nt%, A:A, 2ii, 2-% 3hese combined facts bring us to
the year **, and it is precisely in this year that @rosius ("ist%, 2ii, ;- places the great
famine which desolated =udea% =osephus mentions it somewhat later, under the
procurator 3iberius !lexander (about *;-, but it is well #nown that the whole of
Claudius8s reign was characteri(ed by poor har2ests (Suet%, Claudius, &4- and a
general famine was usually preceded by a more or less prolonged period of scarcity% :t is
also possible that the relief sent in anticipation of the famine foretold by !gabus (!cts
&&D2462)- preceded the appearance of the scourge or coincided with the first symptoms
of want% @n the other hand, the synchronism between the death of "erod and the
mission of Paul can only be approximate, for although the two facts are closely
connected in the !cts, the account of the death of !grippa may be a mere episode
intended to shed light on the situation of the Church of =erusalem about the time of the
arri2al of the delegates from !ntioch% :n any case, *, seems to be the most satisfactory
date%
()) 3eplacin$ o! 4eli5 "y 4estus t6o years a!ter the arrest to Paul (%cts '7('1). / Fntil
recently chronologists commonly fixed this important e2ent, in the year ;06;&% "arnac#,
@% "olt(mann, and .cGiffert suggest ad2ancing it four or fi2e years for the following
reasonsD
(&- :n his Chronicon, 1usebius places the arri2al of Gestus in the second year of $ero
(@ctober, ,,6@ctober, ,;, or if, as is asserted, 1usebius ma#es the reigns of the
emperors begin with the September after their accession, September, ,;6September, ,7-%
0ut it must be borne in mind that the chroniclers being always obliged to gi2e definite
dates, were li#ely to guess at them, and it may be that 1usebius for lac# of definite
information di2ided into two e>ual parts the entire duration of the go2ernment of Gelix
and Gestus%
(2- =osephus states (!nt%, AA, 2iii, )- that Gelix ha2ing been recalled to Eome and
accused by the =ews to $ero, owed his safety only to his brother Pallas who was then
high in fa2our% 0ut according to 3acitus (!nnal%, A:::, xi26x2-, Pallas was dismissed
shortly before 0ritannicus celebrated his fourteenth anni2ersary, that is, in =anuary, ,,%
3hese two statements are irreconcilableB for if Pallas was dismissed three months after
$ero8s accession (&5 @ctober, ,*- he could not ha2e been at the summit of his power
when his brother Gelix, recalled from Palestine at the command of $ero about the time
of Pentecost, arri2ed at Eome% Possibly Pallas, who after his dismissal retained his
wealth and a portion of his influence, since he stipulated that his administration should
not be subjected to an in2estigation, was able to be of assistance to his brother until ;2
when $ero, to obtain possession of his goods, $ero had him poisoned%
3he ad2ocates of a later date bring forward the following reasonsD
(&- 3wo years before the recall of Gelix, Paul reminded him that he had been for many
years judge o2er the =ewish nation (!cts 2*D&0627-% 3his can scarcely mean less than six
or se2en years, and as, according to =osephus who agrees with 3acitus, Gelix was named
procurator of =udea in ,2, the beginning of the capti2ity would fall in ,4 or ,)% :t is true
that the argument loses its strength if it be admitted with se2eral critics that Gelix before
being procurator had held a subordinate position in Palestine%
(2- =osephus (!nt%, AA, 2iii, ,64- places under $ero e2erything that pertains to the
go2ernment of Gelix, and although this long series of e2ents does not necessarily re>uire
many years it is e2ident that =osephus regarded the go2ernment of Gelix as coinciding
for the most part with the reign of $ero, which began on &5 @ctober, ,*%
:n fixing as follows the chief dates in the life of Paul all certain or probable data seem to
be satisfactorily ta#en into accountD Con2ersion, 5,B first 2isit to =erusalem, 57B sojourn
at 3arsus, 576*5B apostolate at !ntioch, *56**B second 2isit to =erusalem, ** or *,B first
mission, *,6*)B third 2isit to =erusalem, *) or ,0B second mission, ,06,5B (& and 2
3hessalonians-, ,2B fourth 2isit to =erusalem, ,5B third mission, ,56,7B (& and 2
CorinthiansB Galatians-, ,;B (Eomans-, ,7B fifth 2isit to =erusalem, arrest, ,7B arri2al of
Gestus, departure for Eome, ,)B capti2ity at Eome, ;06;2B (PhilemonB ColossiansB
1phesiansB Philippians-, ;&B second period of acti2ity, ;26;;B (& 3imothyB 3itus-,
second arrest, ;;B (2 3imothy-, martyrdom, ;7% (See 3urner, Chronology of the $ew
3estament in "astings, /ict% of the 0ible "Hnic#e, /ie Chronologie des 'ebens des
!p% Paulus, 'eip(ig, &)05%
Life and work of Paul
Birth and education
Grom St% Paul himself we #now that he was born at 3arsus in Cilicia (!cts 2&D5)-, of a
father who was a Eoman citi(en (!cts 22D2;624B cf% &;D57-, of a family in which piety
was hereditary (2 3imothy &D5- and which was much attached to Pharisaic traditions and
obser2ances (Philippians 5D,6;-%
St% =erome relates, on what ground is not #nown, that his parents were nati2es of
Gischala, a small town of Galilee and that they brought him to 3arsus when Gischala
was captured by the Eomans (Illustrious Men , B :n epist% ad Phil%, 25-% 3his last detail
is certainly an anachronism, but the Galilean origin of the family is not at all
improbable%
!s he belonged to the tribe of 0enjamin he was gi2en at the time of his circumcision the
name of Saul, which must ha2e been common in that tribe in memory of the first #ing
of the =ews (Philippians 5D,-% !s a Eoman citi(en he also bore the 'atin name of Paul% :t
was >uite usual for the =ews of that time to ha2e two names, one "ebrew, the other
'atin or Gree#, between which there was often a certain assonance and which were
joined together exactly in the manner made use of by St% 'u#e (!cts &5D)D 8aulos ho kai
Paulos-% See on this point /eissmann, 0ible Studies (1dinburgh, &)05, 5&56&7%- :t
was natural that in inaugurating his apostolate among the Gentiles Paul should ha2e
adopted his Eoman name, especially as the name Saul had a ludicrous meaning in
Gree#%
!s e2ery respectable =ew had to teach his son a trade, young Saul learned how to ma#e
tents (!cts &4D5- or rather to ma#e the mohair of which tents were made (cf% 'ewin,
'ife of St% Paul, :, 'ondon, &47*, 46)-% "e was still 2ery young when sent to
=erusalem to recei2e his education at the school of Gamaliel (!cts 22D5-% Possibly some
of his family resided in the holy cityB later there is mention of the presence of one of his
sisters whose son sa2ed his life (!cts 25D&;-%
Grom that time it is absolutely impossible to follow him until he ta#es an acti2e part in
the martyrdom of St% Stephen (!cts 7D,46;0B 22D20-% "e was then >ualified as a young
man (neanias-, but this was 2ery elastic appellation and might be applied to a man
between twenty and forty%
Conversion and early labours
<e read in the !cts of the !postles three accounts of the con2ersion of St% Paul ()D&6&)B
22D562&B 2;D)625- presenting some slight differences, which it is not difficult to
harmoni(e and which do not affect the basis of the narrati2e, which is perfectly identical
in substance% See =% .assie, 3he Con2ersion of St% Paul in 3he 1xpositor, 5rd series,
A, &44), 2*&6;2% Sabatier, agreeing with most independent critics, has well said
('8!potre Paul, &4);, *2-D
3hese differences cannot in any way alter the reality of the factB their bearing on the
narrati2e is extremely remoteB they do not deal e2en with the circumstances
accompanying the miracle but with the subjecti2e impressions which the companions of
St% Paul recei2ed of these circumstances% % % % 3o base a denial of the historical character
of the account upon these differences would seem therefore a 2iolent and arbitrary
proceeding%
!ll efforts hitherto made to explain without a miracle the apparition of =esus to Paul
ha2e failed% $aturalistic explanations are reduced to twoD either Paul belie2ed that he
really saw Christ, but was the 2ictim of an hallucination, or he belie2ed that he saw "im
only through a spiritual 2ision, which tradition, recorded in the !cts of the !postles,
later erroneously materiali(ed% Eenan explained e2erything by hallucination due to
disease brought on by a combination of moral causes such as doubt, remorse, fear, and
of physical causes such as ophthalmia, fatigue, fe2er, the sudden transition from the
torrid desert to the fresh gardens of /amascus, perhaps a sudden storm accompanied by
lightning and thunder% !ll this combined, according to Eenan8s theory, to produce a
cerebral commotion, a passing delirium which Paul too# in good faith for an apparition
of the risen Christ%
3he other partisans of a natural explanation while a2oiding the word hallucination,
e2entually fall bac# on the system of Eenan which they merely endea2our to render a
little less complicated% 3hus "olsten, for whom the 2ision of Christ is only the
conclusion of a series of syllogisms by which Paul persuaded himself that Christ was
truly risen% So also Pfleiderer, who howe2er, causes the imagination to play a more
influential partD
!n excitable, ner2ous temperamentB a soul that had been 2iolently agitated and torn by
the most terrible doubtsB a most 2i2id phantasy, occupied with the awful scenes of
persecution on the one hand and on the other by the ideal image of the celestial ChristB
in addition the nearness of /amascus with the urgency of a decision, the lonely
stillness, the scorching and blinding heat of the desert ? in fact e2erything combined to
produce one of those ecstatic states in which the soul belie2es that it sees those images
and conceptions which 2iolently agitate it as if they were phenomena proceeding from
the outward world (9ectures on the in!luence o! the %postle Paul on the de&elopment o!
Christianity, &4)7, *5-%
<e ha2e >uoted Pfleiderer8s words at length because his psychological explanation is
considered the best e2er de2ised% :t will readily be seen that it is insufficient and as
much opposed to the account in the !cts as to the express testimony of St% Paul himself%
Paul is certain of ha2ing seen Christ as did the other !postles (& Corinthians
)D&-B he declares that Christ appeared to him (& Corinthians &,D4- as "e
appeared to Peter, to =ames, to the 3wel2e, after "is Eesurrection%
"e #nows that his con2ersion is not the fruit of his reasoning or thoughts, but an
unforeseen, sudden, startling change, due to all6powerful grace (Galatians &D&26
&,B & Corinthians &,D&0-%
"e is wrongly credited with doubts, perplexities, fears, remorse, before his
con2ersion% "e was halted by Christ when his fury was at its height (!cts )D&62-B
it was through (eal that he persecuted the Church (Philippians 5D;-, and he
obtained mercy because he had acted ignorantly in unbelief (& 3imothy &D&5-%
!ll explanations, psychological or otherwise, are worthless in face of these definite
assertions, for all suppose that it was Paul8s faith in Christ which engendered the 2ision,
whereas according to the concordant testimony of the !cts and the 1pistles it was the
actual 2ision of Christ which engendered faith%
!fter his con2ersion, his baptism, and his miraculous cure Paul set about preaching to
the =ews (!cts )D&)620-% "e afterwards withdrew to !rabia ? probably to the region
south of /amascus (Galatians &D&7-, doubtless less to preach than to meditate on the
Scriptures% @n his return to /amascus the intrigues of the =ews forced him to flee by
night (2 Corinthians &&D52655B !cts )D2562,-% "e went to =erusalem to see Peter
(Galatians &D&4-, but remained only fifteen days, for the snares of the Gree#s threatened
his life% "e then left for 3arsus and is lost to sight for fi2e or six years (!cts )D2)650B
Galatians &D2&-% 0arnabas went in search of him and brought him to !ntioch where for
a year they wor#ed together and their apostolate was most fruitful (!cts &&D2,62;-%
3ogether also they were sent to =erusalem to carry alms to the brethren on the occasion
of the famine predicted by !gabus (!cts &&D27650-% 3hey do not seem to ha2e found the
!postles thereB these had been scattered by the persecution of "erod%
Apostolic career of Paul
3his period of twel2e years (*,6,7- was the most acti2e and fruitful of his life% :t
comprises three great !postolic expeditions of which !ntioch was in each instance the
starting6point and which in2ariably ended in a 2isit to =erusalem%
irst mission !Acts "#$"%"&$'()
Set apart by command of the "oly Ghost for the special e2angeli(ation of the Gentiles,
0arnabas and Saul embar# for Cyprus, preach in the synagogue of Salamina, cross the
island from east to west doubtless following the southern coast, and reach Paphos, the
residence of the proconsul Sergius Paulus, where a sudden change ta#es place% !fter the
con2ersion of the Eoman proconsul, Saul, suddenly become Paul, is in2ariably
mentioned before 0arnabas by St% 'u#e and manifestly assumes the leadership of the
mission which 0arnabas has hitherto directed%
3he results of this change are soon e2ident% Paul, doubtless concluding that Cyprus, the
natural dependency of Syria and Cilicia, would embrace the faith of Christ when these
two countries should be Christian, chose !sia .inor as the field of his apostolate and
sailed for Perge in Pamphylia, eighty miles abo2e the mouth of the Cestrus% :t was then
that =ohn .ar#, cousin of 0arnabas, dismayed perhaps by the daring projects of the
!postle, abandoned the expedition and returned to =erusalem, while Paul and 0arnabas
laboured alone among the rough mountains of Pisidia, which were infested by brigands
and crossed by frightful precipices% 3heir destination was the Eoman colony of !ntioch,
situated a se2en day8s journey from Perge% "ere Paul spo#e on the 2ocation of :srael and
the pro2idential sending of the .essias, a discourse which St% 'u#e reproduces in
substance as an example of his preaching in the synagogues (!cts &5D&;6*&-% 3he
sojourn of the two missionaries in !ntioch was long enough for the word of the 'ord to
be published throughout the whole country (!cts &5D*)-%
<hen by their intrigues the =ews had obtained against them a decree of banishment,
they went to :conium, three or four days distant, where they met with the same
persecution from the =ews and the same eager welcome from the Gentiles% 3he hostility
of the =ews forced them to ta#e refuge in the Eoman colony of 'ystra, eighteen miles
distant% "ere the =ews from !ntioch and :conium laid snares for Paul and ha2ing stoned
him left him for dead, but again he succeeded in escaping and this time sought refuge in
/erbe, situated about forty miles away on the frontier of the Pro2ince of Galatia% 3heir
circuit completed, the missionaries retraced their steps in order to 2isit their neophytes,
ordained priests in each Church founded by them at such great cost, and thus reached
Perge where they halted to preach the Gospel, perhaps while awaiting an opportunity to
embar# for !ttalia, a port twel2e miles distant% @n their return to !ntioch in Syria after
an absence of at least three years, they were recei2ed with transports of joy and
than#sgi2ing, for God had opened the door of faith to the Gentiles%
3he problem of the status of the Gentiles in the Church now made itself felt with all its
acuteness% Some =udeo6Christians coming down from =erusalem claimed that the
Gentiles must be submitted to circumcision and treated as the =ews treated proselytes%
!gainst this Paul and 0arnabas protested and it was decided that a meeting should be
held at =erusalem in order to sol2e the >uestion% !t this assembly Paul and 0arnabas
represented the community of !ntioch% Peter pleaded the freedom of the GentilesB
=ames upheld him, at the same time demanding that the Gentiles should abstain from
certain things which especially shoc#ed the =ews%
:t was decided, first, that the Gentiles were exempt from the .osaic law% Secondly, that
those of Syria and Cilicia must abstain from things sacrificed to idols, from blood, from
things strangled, and from fornication% 3hirdly, that this injunction was laid upon them,
not in 2irtue of the .osaic law, but in the name of the "oly Ghost% 3his meant the
complete triumph of Paul8s ideas%
3he restriction imposed on the Gentile con2erts of Syria and Cilicia did not concern his
Churches, and 3itus, his companion, was not compelled to be circumcised, despite the
loud protests of the =udai(ers (Galatians 2D56*-% "ere it is to be assumed that Galatians 2
and !cts &, relate to the same fact, for the actors are the same, Paul and 0arnabas on
the one hand, Peter and =ames on the otherB the discussion is the same, the >uestion of
the circumcision of the GentilesB the scenes are the same, !ntioch and =erusalemB the
date is the same, about !%/% ,0B and the result is the same, Paul8s 2ictory o2er the
=udai(ers%
"owe2er, the decision of =erusalem did not do away with all difficulties% 3he >uestion
did not concern only the Gentiles, and while exempting them from the .osaic law, it
was not declared that it would not ha2e been counted meritorious and more perfect for
them to obser2e it, as the decree seemed to li#en them to =ewish proselytes of the
second class% Gurthermore the =udeo6Christians, not ha2ing been included in the 2erdict,
were still free to consider themsel2es bound to the obser2ance of the law% 3his was the
origin of the dispute which shortly afterwards arose at !ntioch between Peter and Paul%
3he latter taught openly that the law was abolished for the =ews themsel2es% Peter did
not thin# otherwise, but he considered it wise to a2oid gi2ing offence to the =udai(ers
and to refrain from eating with the Gentiles who did not obser2e all the prescriptions of
the law% !s he thus morally influenced the Gentiles to li2e as the =ews did, Paul
demonstrated to him that this dissimulation or opportuneness prepared the way for
future misunderstandings and conflicts and e2en then had regrettable conse>uences% "is
manner of relating this incident lea2es no room for doubt that Peter was persuaded by
his arguments (Galatians 2D&&620-%
Second mission !Acts "*$#+%",$'')
3he beginning of the second mission was mar#ed by a rather sharp discussion
concerning .ar#, whom St% Paul this time refused to accept as tra2elling companion%
Conse>uently 0arnabas set out with .ar# for Cyprus and Paul chose Silas or Sil2anus,
a Eoman citi(en li#e himself, and an influential member of the Church of =erusalem,
and sent by it to !ntioch to deli2er the decrees of the !postolic council% 3he two
missionaries first went from !ntioch to 3arsus, stopping on the way in order to
promulgate the decisions of the Council of =erusalemB then they went from 3arsus to
/erbe, through the Cilician Gates, the defiles of 3arsus, and the plains of 'ycaonia% 3he
2isitation of the Churches founded during his first mission passed without notable
incidents except the choice of 3imothy, whom the !postle while in 'ystra persuaded to
accompany him, and whom he caused to be circumcised in order to facilitate his access
to the =ews who were numerous in those places%
:t was probably at !ntioch of Pisidia, although the !cts do not mention that city, that
the itinerary of the mission was altered by the inter2ention of the "oly Ghost% Paul
thought to enter the Pro2ince of !sia by the 2alley of .eander which separated it by
only three day8s journey, but they passed through Phrygia and the country of Galatia,
ha2ing been forbidden by the "oly Ghost to preach the word of God in !sia (!cts
&;D;-% 3hese words (ten phry$ian kai :alatiken choran- are 2ariously interpreted,
according as we ta#e them to mean the Galatians of the north or of the south (see
G!'!3:!$S-% <hate2er the hypothesis, the missionaries had to tra2el northwards in
that portion of Galatia properly so called of which Pessinonte was the capital, and the
only >uestion is as to whether or not they preached there% 3hey did not intend to do so,
but as is #nown the e2angeli(ation of the Galatians was due to an accident, namely the
illness of Paul (Galatians *D&5-B this fits 2ery well for Galatians in the north% :n any case
the missionaries ha2ing reached the upper part of .ysia (kata Mysian-, attempted to
enter the rich Pro2ince of 0ithynia, which lay before them, but the "oly Ghost
pre2ented them (!cts &;D7-% 3herefore, passing through .ysia without stopping to
preach (parelthontes- they reached !lexandria of 3roas, where God8s will was again
made #nown to them in the 2ision of a .acedonian who called them to come and help
his country (!cts &;D)6&0-%
Paul continued to follow on 1uropean soil the method of preaching he had employed
from the beginning% !s far as possible he concentrated his efforts in a metropolis from
which the Gaith would spread to cities of second ran# and to the country districts%
<here2er there was a synagogue he first too# his stand there and preached to the =ews
and proselytes who would consent to listen to him% <hen the rupture with the =ews was
irreparable, which always happened sooner or later, he founded a new Church with his
neophytes as a nucleus% "e remained in the same city until persecution, generally
aroused by the intrigues of the =ews, forced him to retire% 3here were, howe2er,
2ariations of this plan% !t Philippi, where there was no synagogue, the first preaching
too# place in the unco2ered oratory called the proseuche, which the Gentiles made a
reason for stirring up the persecution% Paul and Silas, charged with disturbing public
order, were beaten with rods, imprisoned, and finally exiled% 0ut at 3hessalonica and
0erea, whither they successi2ely repaired after lea2ing Philippi, things turned out
almost as they had planned%
3he apostolate of !thens was >uite exceptional% "ere there was no >uestion of =ews or
synagogue, Paul, contrary to his custom, was alone (& 3hessalonians 5D&-, and he
deli2ered before the areopagus a specially framed discourse, a synopsis of which has
been preser2ed by !cts &7D2565& as a specimen of its #ind% "e seems to ha2e left the
city of his own accord, without being forced to do so by persecution% 3he mission to
Corinth on the other hand may be considered typical% Paul preached in the synagogue
e2ery Sabbath day, and when the 2iolent opposition of the =ews denied him entrance
there he withdrew to an adjoining house which was the property of a proselyte named
3itus =ustus% "e carried on his apostolate in this manner for eighteen months, while the
=ews 2ainly stormed against himB he was able to withstand them owing to the impartial,
if not actually fa2ourable, attitude of the proconsul, Gallio% Ginally he decided to go to
=erusalem in fulfillment of a 2ow made perhaps in a moment of danger% Grom
=erusalem, according to his custom, he returned to !ntioch% 3he two 1pistles to the
3hessalonians were written during the early months of his sojourn at Corinth% Gor
occasion, circumstances, and analysis of these letters see 3"1SS!'@$:!$S%
-hird mission !Acts ",$'#%'"$'+)
Paul8s destination in his third journey was ob2iously 1phesus% 3here !>uila and
Priscilla were awaiting him, he had promised the 1phesians to return and e2angeli(e
them if it were the will of God (!cts &4D&)62&-, and the "oly Ghost no longer opposed
his entry into !sia% 3herefore, after a brief rest at !ntioch he went through the countries
of Galatia and Phrygia (!cts &4D25- and passing through the upper regions of Central
!sia he reached 1phesus (&)D&-% "is method remained the same% :n order to earn his
li2ing and not be a burden to the faithful he toiled e2ery day for many hours at ma#ing
tents, but this did not pre2ent him from preaching the Gospel% !s usual he began with
the synagogue where he succeeded in remaining for three months% !t the end of this
time he taught e2ery day in a classroom placed at his disposal by a certain 3yrannus
from the fifth hour to the tenth (from ele2en in the morning till four in the afternoon-,
according to the interesting addition of the Codex 0e(ae (!cts &)D)-% 3his lasted two
years, so that all the inhabitants of !sia, =ews and Gree#s, heard the word of the 'ord
(!cts &)D20-%
$aturally there were trials to be endured and obstacles to be o2ercome% Some of these
obstacles arose from the jealousy of the =ews, who 2ainly endea2oured to imitate Paul8s
exorcisms, others from the superstition of the pagans, which was especially rife at
1phesus% So effectually did he triumph o2er it, howe2er, that boo#s of superstition were
burned to the 2alue of ,0,000 pieces of sil2er (each piece about a day8s wage-% 3his time
the persecution was due to the Gentiles and inspired by a moti2e of self6interest% 3he
progress of Christianity ha2ing ruined the sale of the little facsimiles of the temple of
/iana and statuettes of the goddess, which de2out pilgrims had been wont to purchase, a
certain /emetrius, at the head of the guild of sil2ersmiths, stirred up the crowd against
Paul% 3he scene which then transpired in the theatre is described by St% 'u#e with
memorable 2i2idness and pathos (!cts &)D256*0-% 3he !postle had to yield to the storm%
!fter a stay at 1phesus of two years and a half, perhaps more (!cts 20D5&D trietian-, he
departed for .acedonia and thence for Corinth, where he spent the winter% :t was his
intention in the following spring to go by sea to =erusalem, doubtless for the PaschB but
learning that the =ews had planned his destruction, he did not wish, by going to sea, to
afford them an opportunity to attempt his life% 3herefore he returned by way of
.acedonia% $umerous disciples di2ided into two groups, accompanied him or awaited
him at 3roas% 3hese were Sopater of 0erea, !ristarchus and Secundus of 3hessalonica,
Gaius of /erbe, 3imothy, 3ychicus and 3rophimus of !sia, and finally 'u#e, the
historian of the !cts, who gi2es us minutely all the stages of the 2oyageD Philippi,
3roas, !ssos, .itylene, Chios, Samos, .iletus, Cos, Ehodes, Patara, 3yre, Ptolemais,
Caesarea, =erusalem%
3hree more remar#able facts should be noted in passing% !t 3roas Paul resuscitated the
young 1utychus, who had fallen from a third6story window while Paul was preaching
late into the night% !t .iletus he pronounced before the ancients of 1phesus the
touching farewell discourse which drew many tears (!cts 20D&4654-% !t Caesarea the
"oly Ghost by the mouth of !gabus, predicted his coming arrest, but did not dissuade
him from going to =erusalem%
St% Paul8s four great 1pistles were written during this third missionD the first to the
Corinthians from 1phesus, about the time of the Pasch prior to his departure from that
cityB the second to the Corinthians from .acedonia, during the summer or autumn of
the same yearB that to the Eomans from Corinth, in the following springB the date of the
1pistle to the Galatians is disputed% @n the many >uestions occasioned by the despatch
and the language of these letters, or the situation assumed either on the side of the
!postle or his correspondents, see 1P:S3'1S 3@ 3"1 C@E:$3":!$SB 1P:S3'1 3@
3"1 G!'!3:!$SB 1P:S3'1 3@ 3"1 E@.!$S%
Captivity !Acts '"$'(%',$#")
Galsely accused by the =ews of ha2ing brought Gentiles into the 3emple, Paul was ill6
treated by the populace and led in chains to the fortress !ntonia by the tribune 'ysias%
3he latter ha2ing learned that the =ews had conspired treacherously to slay the prisoner
sent him under strong escort to Caesarea, which was the residence of the procurator
Gelix% Paul had little difficulty in confounding his accusers, but as he refused to
purchase his liberty% Gelix #ept him in chains for two years and e2en left him in prison
in order to please the =ews, until the arri2al of his successor, Gestus% 3he new go2ernor
wished to send the prisoner to =erusalem there to be tried in the presence of his
accusersB but Paul, who was ac>uainted with the snares of his enemies, appealed to
Caesar% 3henceforth his cause could be tried only at Eome% 3his first period of capti2ity
is characteri(ed by fi2e discourses of the !postleD 3he first was deli2ered in "ebrew on
the steps of the !ntonia before the threatening crowdB herein Paul relates his con2ersion
and 2ocation to the !postolate, but he was interrupted by the hostile shouts of the
multitude (!cts 22D&622-% :n the second, deli2ered the next day, before the Sanhedrin
assembled at the command of 'ysias, the !postle s#illfully embroiled the Pharisees
with the Sadducees and no accusation could be brought% :n the third, Paul, answering his
accuser 3ertullus in the presence of the Go2ernor Gelix, ma#es #nown the facts which
had been distorted and pro2es his innocence (!cts 2*D&062&-% 3he fourth discourse is
merely an explanatory summary of the Christian Gaith deli2ered before Gelix and his
wife /rusilla (!cts 2*D2*62,-% 3he fifth, pronounced before the Go2ernor Gestus, 9ing
!grippa, and his wife 0erenice, again relates the history of Paul8s con2ersion, and is left
unfinished owing to the sarcastic interruptions of the go2ernor and the embarrassed
attitude of the #ing (!cts 2;-%
3he journey of the capti2e Paul from Caesarea to Eome is described by St% 'u#e with an
exactness and 2i2idness of colours which lea2e nothing to be desired% Gor commentaries
see Smith, Coyage and Shipwrec# of St% Paul (&4;;-B Eamsay, St% Paul the 3ra2eller
and Eoman Citi(en ('ondon, &)04-% 3he centurion =ulius had shipped Paul and his
fellow6prisoners on a merchant 2essel on board which 'u#e and !ristarchus were able
to ta#e passage% !s the season was ad2anced the 2oyage was slow and difficult% 3hey
s#irted the coasts of Syria, Cilicia, and Pamphylia% !t .yra in 'ycia the prisoners were
transferred to an !lexandrian 2essel bound for :taly, but the winds being persistently
contrary a place in Crete called Goodha2ens was reached with great difficulty and Paul
ad2ised that they should spend the winter there, but his ad2ice was not followed, and the
2essel dri2en by the tempest drifted aimlessly for fourteen whole days, being finally
wrec#ed on the coast of .alta% 3he three months during which na2igation was
considered most dangerous were spent there, but with the first days of spring all haste
was made to resume the 2oyage% Paul must ha2e reached Eome some time in .arch%
"e remained two whole years in his own hired lodging % % % preaching the #ingdom of
God and teaching the things which concern the 'ord =esus Christ, with all confidence,
without prohibition (!cts 24D5065&-% <ith these words the !cts of the !postles
conclude%
3here is no doubt that Paul8s trial terminated in a sentence of ac>uittal, for
the report of the Go2ernor Gestus was certainly fa2ourable as well as that of the
centurion%
3he =ews seem to ha2e abandoned their charge since their co6religionists in
Eome were not informed of it (!cts 24D2&-%
3he course of the proceedings led Paul to hope for a release, of which he
sometimes spea#s as of a certainty (Philippians &D2,B 2D2*B Philemon 22-%
3he pastorals, if they are authentic, assume a period of acti2ity for Paul
subse>uent to his capti2ity% 3he same conclusion is drawn from the hypothesis
that they are not authentic, for all agree that the author was well ac>uainted with
the life of the !postle% :t is the almost unanimous opinion that the so6called
1pistles of the capti2ity were sent from Eome% Some authors ha2e attempted to
pro2e that St% Paul wrote them during his detention at Caesarea, but they ha2e
found few to agree with them% 3he 1pistles to the Colossians, the 1phesians, and
Philemon were despatched together and by the same messenger, 3ychicus% :t is a
matter of contro2ersy whether the 1pistle to the Philippians was prior or
subse>uent to these, and the >uestion has not been answered by decisi2e
arguments (see 1P:S3'1 3@ 3"1 P":':PP:!$SB 1P:S3'1 3@ 3"1
1P"1S:!$SB 1P:S3'1 3@ 3"1 C@'@SS:!$SB 1P:S3'1 3@ P":'1.@$-%
Last years
3his period is wrapped in deep obscurity for, lac#ing the account of the !cts, we ha2e
no guide sa2e an often uncertain tradition and the brief references of the Pastoral
epistles% Paul had long cherished the desire to go to Spain (Eomans &,D2*, 24- and there
is no e2idence that he was led to change his plan% <hen towards the end of his capti2ity
he announces his coming to Philemon (22- and to the Philippians (2D2562*-, he does not
seem to regard this 2isit as immediate since he promises the Philippians to send them a
messenger as soon as he learns the issue of his trialB he therefore plans another journey
before his return to the 1ast% Ginally, not to mention the later testimony of St% Cyril of
=erusalem, St% 1piphanius, St% =erome, St% Chrysostom, and 3heodoret, the well6#nown
text of St% Clement of Eome, the witness of the .uratorian Canon, and of the !cta
Pauli render probable Paul8s journey to Spain% :n any case he can not ha2e remained
there long, for he was in haste to re2isit his Churches in the 1ast% "e may ha2e returned
from Spain through southern Gaul if it was thither, as some Gathers ha2e thought, and
not to Galatia, that Crescens was sent later (2 3imothy *D&0-% <e may readily belie2e
that he afterwards #ept the promise made to his friend Philemon and that on this
occasion he 2isited the churches of the 2alley of 'ycus, 'aodicea, Colossus, and
"ierapolis%
3he itinerary now becomes 2ery uncertain, but the following facts seem indicated by the
PastoralsD Paul remained in Crete exactly long enough to found there new churches, the
care and organi(ation of which he confided to his fellow6wor#er 3itus (3itus &D,-% "e
then went to 1phesus, and besought 3imothy, who was already there, to remain until his
return while he proceeded to .acedonia (& 3imothy &D5-% @n this occasion he paid his
promised 2isit to the Philippians (Philippians 2D2*-, and naturally also saw the
3hessalonians% 3he letter to 3itus and the Girst 1pistle to 3imothy must date from this
periodB they seem to ha2e been written about the same time and shortly after the
departure from 1phesus% 3he >uestion is whether they were sent from .acedonia or,
which seems more probable, from Corinth% 3he !postle instructs 3itus to join him at
$icopolis of 1pirus where he intends to spend the winter (3itus 5D&2-% :n the following
spring he must ha2e carried out his plan to return to !sia (& 3imothy 5D&*6&,-% "ere
occurred the obscure episode of his arrest, which probably too# place at 3roasB this
would explain his ha2ing left with Carpus a cloa# and boo#s which he needed (2
3imothy *D&5-% "e was ta#en from there to 1phesus, capital of the Pro2ince of !sia,
where he was deserted by all those on whom he thought he could rely (2 3imothy &D&,-%
0eing sent to Eome for trial he left 3rophimus sic# at .iletus, and 1rastus, another of
his companions, remained at Corinth, for what reason is not clear (2 3imothy *D20-%
<hen Paul wrote his Second 1pistle to 3imothy from Eome he felt that all human hope
was lost (*D;-B he begs his disciple to rejoin him as >uic#ly as possible, for he is alone
with 'u#e% <e do not #now if 3imothy was able to reach Eome before the death of the
!postle%
!ncient tradition ma#es it possible to establish the following pointsD
Paul suffered martyrdom near Eome at a place called !>uae Sal2iae (now 3re
Gontane-, somewhat east of the @stian <ay, about two miles from the splendid
0asilica of San Paolo fuori le mura which mar#s his burial place%
3he martyrdom too# place towards the end of the reign of $ero, in the twelfth
year (St% 1piphanius-, the thirteenth (1uthalius-, or the fourteenth (St% =erome-%
!ccording to the most common opinion, Paul suffered in the same year and on
the same day as PeterB se2eral 'atin Gathers contend that it was on the same day
but not in the same yearB the oldest witness, St% /ionysius the Corinthian, says
only kata ton auton kairon, which may be translated at the same time or
about the same time%
Grom time immemorial the solemnity of the !postles Peter and Paul has been
celebrated on 2) =une, which is the anni2ersary either of their death or of the
translation of their relics%
Gormerly the pope, after ha2ing pontificated in the 0asilica of St% Peter, went with his
attendants to that of St% Paul, but the distance between the two basilicas (about fi2e
miles- rendered the double ceremony too exhausting, especially at that season of the
year% 3hus arose the pre2ailing custom of transferring to the next day (50 =une- the
Commemoration of St% Paul% 3he feast of the Con2ersion of St% Paul (2, =anuary- is of
comparati2ely recent origin% 3here is reason for belie2ing that the day was first
obser2ed to mar# the translation of the relics of St% Paul at Eome, for so it appears in the
"ieronymian .artyrology% :t is un#nown to the Gree# Church (/owden, 3he Church
Iear and 9alendar, Cambridge, &)&0, ;)B cf% /uchesne, @rigines du culte chrJtien,
Paris, &4)4, 2;,672B .cClure, Christian <orship, 'ondon, &)05, 27764&-%
Physical and moral portrait of St. Paul
<e #now from 1usebius (Church History C::%&4 - that e2en in his time there existed
paintings representing Christ and the !postles Peter and Paul% Paul8s features ha2e been
preser2ed in three ancient monumentsD
! diptych which dates from not later than the fourth century ('ewin, 3he 'ife
and 1pistles of St% Paul, &47*, frontispiece of Col% : and Col% ::, 2&0-%
! large medallion found in the cemetery of /omitilla, representing the !postles
Peter and Paul (@p% cit%, ::, *&&-%
! glass dish in the 0ritish .useum, depicting the same !postles (Garrara, 'ife
and <or# of St% Paul, &4)&, 4);-%
<e ha2e also the concordant descriptions of the !cta Pauli et 3heclae, of Pseudo6
'ucian in Philopatris, of .alalas (Chronogr%, x-, and of $icephorus ("ist% eccl%, :::, 57-%
Paul was short of statureB the Pseudo6Chrysostom calls him the man of three cubits
(anthropos tripechys-B he was broad6shouldered, somewhat bald, with slightly a>uiline
nose, closely6#nit eyebrows, thic#, greyish beard, fair complexion, and a pleasing and
affable manner% "e was afflicted with a malady which is difficult to diagnose (cf%
.en(ies, St% Paul8s :nfirmity in the 1xpository 3imes, =uly and Sept%, &)0*-, but
despite this painful and humiliating infirmity (2 Corinthians &2D76)B Galatians *D&56&*-
and although his bearing was not impressi2e (2 Corinthians &0D&0-, Paul must
undoubtedly ha2e been possessed of great physical strength to ha2e sustained so long
such superhuman labours (2 Corinthians &&D2562)-% Pseudo6Chrysostom, :n princip%
apostol% Petrum et Paulum (in P%G%, ':A, *)*6),-, considers that he died at the age of
sixty6eight after ha2ing ser2ed the 'ord for thirty6fi2e years%
3he moral portrait is more difficult to draw because it is full of contrasts% :ts elements
will be foundD in 'ewin, op% cit%, ::, xi, *&065, (Paul8s Person and Character-B in Garrar,
op% cit%, !ppendix, 1xcursus :B and especially in $ewman, Sermons preached on
Carious @ccasions, 2ii, 2iii%
-heology of St. Paul
Paul and Christ
3his >uestion has passed through two distinct phases% !ccording to the principal
followers of the 3Kbingen School, the !postle had but a 2ague #nowledge of the life
and teaching of the historical Christ and e2en disdained such #nowledge as inferior and
useless% 3heir only support is the misinterpreted textD 1t si cogno2imus secundum
carnem Christum, sed nunc jam no2imus (2 Corinthians ,D&;-% 3he opposition noted in
this text is not between the historical and the glorified Christ, but between the .essias
such as the unbelie2ing =ews represented "im, such perhaps as he was preached by
certain =udai(ers, and the .essias as "e manifested "imself in "is death and
Eesurrection, as "e had been confessed by the con2erted Paul% :t is neither admissible
nor probable that Paul would be uninterested in the life and preaching of "im, <hom
he lo2ed passionately, <hom he constantly held up for the imitation of his neophytes,
and <hose spirit he boasted of ha2ing% :t is incredible that he would not >uestion on this
subject eyewitnesses, such as 0arnabas, Silas, or the future historians of Christ, Sts%
.ar# and 'u#e, with whom he was so long associated% Careful examination of this
subject has brought out the three following conclusions concerning which there is now
general agreementD
3here are in St% Paul more allusions to the life and teachings of Christ than
would be suspected at first sight, and the casual way in which they are made
shows that the !postle #new more on the subject than he had the occasion, or
the wish to tell%
3hese allusions are more fre>uent in St% Paul than the Gospels%
Grom !postolic times there existed a catechesis, treating among other things the
life and teachings of Christ, and as all neophytes were supposed to possess a
copy it was not necessary to refer thereto sa2e occasionally and in passing%
3he second phase of the >uestion is closely connected with the first% 3he same
theologians, who maintain that Paul was indifferent to the earthly life and teaching of
Christ, deliberately exaggerate his originality and influence% !ccording to them Paul
was the creator of theology, the founder of the Church, the preacher of asceticism, the
defender of the sacraments and of the ecclesiastical system, the opponent of the religion
of lo2e and liberty which Christ came to announce to the world% :f, to do him honour, he
is called the second founder of Christianity, this must be a degenerate and altered
Christianity since it was at least partially opposed to the primiti2e Christianity% Paul is
thus made responsible for e2ery antipathy to modern thought in traditional Christianity%
3his is to a great extent the origin of the 0ac# to Christ mo2ement, the strange
wanderings of which we are now witnessing% 3he chief reason for returning to Christ is
to escape Paul, the originator of dogma, the theologian of the faith% 3he cry +uruc# (u
=esu which has resounded in Germany for thirty years, is inspired by the ulterior
moti2e, 'os 2on Paulus% 3he problem isD <as Paul8s relation to Christ that of a
disciple to his masterL or was he absolutely autodidactic, independent ali#e of the
Gospel of Christ and the preaching of the 3wel2eL :t must be admitted that most of the
papers published shed little light on the subject% "owe2er, the discussions ha2e not been
useless, for they ha2e shown that the most characteristic Pauline doctrines, such as
justifying faith, the redeeming death of Christ, the uni2ersality of sal2ation, are in
accord with the writings of the first !postles, from which they were deri2ed% =ulicher in
particular has pointed out that Paul8s Christology, which is more exalted than that of his
companions in the apostolate, was ne2er the object of contro2ersy, and that Paul was
not conscious of being singular in this respect from the other heralds of the Gospel% Cf%
.organ, 0ac# to Christ in /ict% of Christ and the Gospels, :, ;&6;7B Sanday, Paul,
loc% cit%, ::, 44;6)2B Geine, =esus Christus und Paulus (&)02-B Goguel, '8apMtre Paul
et =Jsus6Christ (Paris, &)0*-B =ulicher, Paulus und =esus (&)07-%
-he root idea of St. Paul.s theology
Se2eral modern authors consider that theodicy is at the base, centre, and summit of
Pauline theology% 3he apostle8s doctrine is theocentric, not in reality anthropocentric%
<hat is styled his 8metaphysics8 holds for Paul the immediate and so2ereign fact of the
uni2erseB God, as he concei2es "im, is all in all to his reason and heart ali#e (Gindlay
in "astings, /ict% of the 0ible, :::, 7&4-% Ste2ens begins the exposition of his Pauline
3heology with a chapter entitled 3he doctrine of God% Sabatier ('8apotre Paul, &4);,
2)7- also considers that the last word of Pauline theology isD God all in all, and he
ma#es the idea of God the crown of Paul8s theological edifice% 0ut these authors ha2e
not reflected that though the idea of God occupies so large a place in the teaching of the
!postle, whose thought is deeply religious li#e that of all his compatriots, it is not
characteristic of him, nor does it distinguish him from his companions in the apostolate
nor e2en from contemporary =ews%
.any modern Protestant theologians, especially among the more or less faithful
followers of the 3Kbingen School, maintain that Paul8s doctrine is anthropocentric,
that it starts from his conception of man8s inability to fulfill the law of God without the
help of grace to such an extent that he is a sla2e of sin and must wage war against the
flesh% 0ut if this be the genesis of Paul8s idea it is astonishing that he enunciates it only
in one chapter (Eomans 7-, the sense of which is contro2erted, so that if this chapter had
not been written, or it had been lost, we would ha2e no means of reco2ering the #ey to
his teaching% "owe2er, most modern theologians now agree that St% Paul8s doctrine is
Christocentric, that it is at base a soteriology, not from a subjecti2e standpoint,
according to the ancient prejudice of the founders of Protestantism who made
justification by faith the >uintessence of Paulinism, but from the objecti2e standpoint,
embracing in a wide synthesis the person and wor# of the Eedeemer% 3his may be
pro2ed empirically by the statement that e2erything in St% Paul con2erges towards =esus
Christ, so much so, that abstracting from =esus Christ it becomes, whether ta#en
collecti2ely or in detail, absolutely incomprehensible% 3his is pro2ed also by
demonstrating that what Paul calls his Gospel is the sal2ation of all men through Christ
and in Christ% 3his is the standpoint of the following rapid analysisD
/umanity without Christ
3he first three chapters of the 1pistle to the Eomans shows us human nature wholly
under the dominion of sin% $either Gentiles nor =ews had withstood the torrent of e2il%
3he .osaic 'aw was a futile barrier because it prescribed good without importing the
strength to do it% 3he !postle arri2es at this mournful conclusionD 3here is no
distinction Nbetween =ew and GentileOB for all ha2e sinned, and do need the glory of
God (Eomans 5D22625-% "e subse>uently leads us bac# to the historical cause of this
disorderD 0y one man sin entered into this world, and by sin deathB and so death passed
upon all men, in whom all ha2e sinned (Eomans ,D&2-% 3his man is ob2iously !dam,
the sin which he brought into the world is not only his personal sin, but a predominating
sin which entered into all men and left in them the seed of deathD !ll sinned when
!dam sinnedB all sinned in and with his sin (Ste2ens, Pauline 3heology, &2)-%
:t remains to be seen how original sin, which is our lot by natural generation, manifests
itself outwardly and becomes the source of actual sins% 3his Paul teaches us in chapter
7, where describing the contest between the 'aw assisted by reason and human nature
wea#ened by the flesh and the tendency to e2il, he represents nature as ine2itably
2an>uishedD Gor : am delighted with the law of God, according to the inward manD 0ut
: see another law in my members fighting against the law of my mind, and capti2ating
me in the law of sin (Eomans 7D22625-% 3his does not mean that the organism, the
material substratus, is e2il in itself, as some theologians of the 3Kbingen School ha2e
claimed, for the flesh of Christ, which was li#e unto ours, was exempt from sin, and the
!postle wishes that our bodies, which are destined to rise again, be preser2ed free from
stain% 3he relation between sin and the flesh is neither inherent nor necessaryB it is
accidental, determined by an historical fact, and capable of disappearing through the
inter2ention of the "oly Ghost, but it is none the less true that it is not in our power to
o2ercome it unaided and that fallen man had need of a Sa2iour%
Iet God did not abandon sinful man% "e continued to manifest "imself through this
2isible world (Eomans &D&)620-, through the light of a conscience (Eomans 2D&*6&,-,
and finally through "is e2er acti2e and paternally bene2olent Pro2idence (!cts &*D&;B
&7D2;-% Gurthermore, in "is untiring mercy, "e will ha2e all men to be sa2ed, and to
come to the #nowledge of the truth (& 3imothy 2D*-% 3his will is necessarily subse>uent
to original sin since it concerns man as he is at present% !ccording to "is merciful
designs God leads man step by step to sal2ation% 3o the Patriarchs, and especially to
!braham, "e ga2e his free and generous promise, confirmed by oath (Eomans *D&5620B
Galatians 5D&,6&4-, which anticipated the Gospel% 3o .oses "e ga2e "is 'aw, the
obser2ation of which should be a means of sal2ation (Eomans 7D&0B &0D,-, and which,
e2en when 2iolated, as it was in reality, was no less a guide leading to Christ (Galatians
5D2*- and an instrument of mercy in the hands of God% 3he 'aw was a mere interlude
until such time as humanity should be ripe for a complete re2elation (Galatians 5D&)B
Eomans ,D20-, and thus pro2o#ed the /i2ine wrath (Eomans *D&,-% 0ut good will arise
from the excess of e2il and the Scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise,
by the faith of =esus Christ, might be gi2en to them that belie2e (Galatians 5D22-% 3his
would be fulfilled in the fullness of the time (Galatians *D*B 1phesians &D&0-, that is, at
the time set by God for the execution of "is merciful designs, when man8s helplessness
should ha2e been well manifested% 3hen God sent his Son, made of a woman, made
under the lawD that he might redeem them who were under the lawD that we might
recei2e the adoption of sons (Galatians *D*-%
-he person of the 0edeemer
$early all statements relating to the person of =esus Christ bear either directly or
indirectly on "is role as a Sa2iour% <ith St% Paul Christology is a function of
soteriology% "owe2er broad these outlines, they show us the faithful image of Christ in
"is pre6existence, in "is historical existence and in "is glorified life (see G% Prat,
3hJologie de Saint Paul-%
(1) Christ in His pre*e5istence
(a- Christ is of an order superior to all created beings (1phesians &D2&-B "e is the
Creator and Preser2er of the <orld (Colossians &D&;6&7-B all is by "im, in "im, and for
"im (Colossians &D&;-%
(b- Christ is the image of the in2isible Gather (2 Corinthians *D*B Colossians &D&,-B "e is
the Son of God, but unli#e other sons is so in an incommunicable mannerB "e is the
Son, the own Son, the well60elo2ed, and this "e has always been (2 Corinthians &D&)B
Eomans 4D5, 4D52B Colossians &D&5B 1phesians &D;B etc%-%
(c- Christ is the object of the doxologies reser2ed for God (2 3imothy *D&4B Eomans
&;D27-B "e is prayed to as the e>ual of the Gather (2 Corinthians &2D46)B Eomans &0D&2B
& Corinthians &D2-B gifts are as#ed of "im which it is in the power of God alone to grant,
namely grace, mercy, sal2ation (Eomans &D7B &;D20B & Corinthians &D5B &;D25B etc%
before "im e2ery #nee shall bow in hea2en, on earth, and under the earth (Philippians
2D&0-, as e2ery head inclines in adoration of the majesty of the .ost "igh%
(d- Christ possesses all the /i2ine attributesB "e is eternal, since "e is the first born of
e2ery creature and exists before all ages (Colossians &D&,6&7-B "e is immutable, since
"e exists in the form of God (Philippians 2D;-B "e is omnipotent, since "e has the
power to bring forth being from nothingness (Colossians &D&;-B "e is immense, since
"e fills all things with "is plenitude (1phesians *D&0B Colossians 2D&0-B "e is infinite
since the fullness of the Godhead dwells in "im (Colossians 2D)-% !ll that is the
special property of the God belongs of right to "imB the judgment seat of God is the
judgment seat of Christ (Eomans &*D&0B 2 Corinthians ,D&0-B the Gospel of God is the
Gospel of Christ (Eomans &D&, &D), &,D&;, &,D&), etc%-B the Church of God is the Church
of Christ (& Corinthians &D2 and Eomans &;D&; s>>%-B the 9ingdom of God is the
9ingdom of Christ (1phesians ,D,-, the Spirit of God is the Spirit of Christ (Eomans 4D)
s>>%-%
(e- Christ is the one 'ord (& Corinthians 4D;-B "e is identified with =eho2ah of the @ld
Co2enant (& Corinthians &0D*, &0D)B Eomans &0D&5B cf% & Corinthians 2D&;B )D2&-B "e is
the God who has purchased the Church with his own blood (!cts 20D24-B "e is our
great God and Sa2iour =esus Christ (3itus 2D&5-B "e is the God o2er all things
(Eomans )D,-, effacing by "is infinite transcendency the sum and substance of created
things%
(') Jesus Christ as Man
3he other aspect of the figure of Christ is drawn with no less firm a hand% =esus Christ is
the second !dam (Eomans ,D&*B & Corinthians &,D*,6*)-B the mediator of God and
men (& 3imothy 2D,-, and as such "e must necessarily be man (anthropos Christos
Iesous-% So "e is the descendant of the Patriarchs (Eomans )D,B Galatians 5D&;-, "e is
of the seed of /a2id, according to the flesh- (Eomans &D5-, born of a woman
(Galatians *D*-, li#e all menB finally, "e is #nown as a man by "is appearance, which is
exactly similar to that of men (Philippians 2D7-, sa2e for sin, which "e did not and could
not #now (2 Corinthians ,D2&-% <hen St% Paul says that God sent "is Son in the
li#eness of sinful flesh (Eomans 4D5-, he does not mean to deny the reality of Christ8s
flesh, but excludes only sinful flesh%
$owhere does the !postle explain how the union of the /i2ine and the human natures
is accomplished in Christ, being content to affirm that "e who was in the form of God
too# the form of a ser2ant (Philippians 2D;67-, or he states the :ncarnation in this
laconic formulaD Gor in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead corporeally
(Colossians 2D)-% <hat we see clearly is that there is in Christ a single Person to whom
are attributed, often in the same sentence, >ualities proper to the /i2ine and the human
nature, to the pre6existence, the historical existence, and the glorified life (Colossians
&D&,6&)B Philippians 2D,6&&B etc%-% 3he theological explanation of the mystery has gi2en
rise to numerous errors% /enial was made of one of the natures, either the human
(/ocetism-, or the /i2ine (!rianism-, or the two natures were considered to be united in
a purely accidental manner so as to produce two persons ($estorianism-, or the two
natures were merged into one (.onophysitism-, or on pretext of uniting them in one
person the heretics mutilated either the human nature (!pollinarianism-, or the /i2ine,
according to the strange modern heresy #nown as 9enosis%
3he last6mentioned re>uires a brief treatment, as it is based on a saying of St% Paul
0eing in the form of God % % % emptied himself (ekenosen eauton, hence kenosis- ta#ing
the form of a ser2ant (Philippians 2D;67-% Contrary to the common opinion, 'uther
applied these words not to the <ord, but to Christ, the :ncarnate <ord% .oreo2er he
understood the communicatio idiomatus as a real possession by each of the two natures
of the attributes of the other% !ccording to this the human nature of Christ would
possess the /i2ine attributes of ubi>uity, omniscience, and omnipotence% 3here are two
systems among 'utheran theologians, one asserting that the human nature of Christ was
2oluntarily stripped of these attributes (kenosis-, the other that they were hidden during
"is mortal existence (krypsis-%
:n modern times the doctrine of 9enosis, while still restricted to 'utheran theology, has
completely changed its opinions% Starting with the philosophical idea that personality
is identified with consciousness, it is maintained that where there is only one person
there can be only one consciousnessB but since the consciousness of Christ was truly
human consciousness, the /i2ine consciousness must of necessity ha2e ceased to exist
or act in "im% !ccording to 3homasius, the theorist of the system, the Son of God was
stripped, not after the :ncarnation, as 'uther asserted, but by the 2ery fact of the
:ncarnation, and what rendered possible the union of the 'ogos with the humanity was
the faculty possessed by the /i2inity to limit itself both as to being and acti2ity% 3he
other partisans of the system express themsel2es in a similar manner% Gess, for instance,
says that in =esus Christ the /i2ine e$o is changed into the human e$o% <hen it is
objected that God is immutable, that "e can neither cease to be, nor limit "imself, nor
transform "imself, they reply that this reasoning is on metaphysical hypotheses and
concepts without reality% (Gor the 2arious forms of 9enosis see 0ruce, 3he "umiliation
of Christ, p% &5;%-
!ll these systems are merely 2ariations of .onophysitism% Fnconsciously they assume
that there is in Christ but a single nature as there is but a single person% !ccording to the
Catholic doctrine, on the contrary, the union of the two natures in a single person
in2ol2es no change in the /i2ine nature and need in2ol2e no physical change of the
human nature of Christ% <ithout doubt Christ is the Son and is morally entitled e2en as
man to the goods of "is Gather, 2i(% the immediate 2ision of God, eternal beatitude, the
state of glory% "e is temporarily depri2ed of a portion of these goods in order that he
may fulfill "is mission as Eedeemer% 3his is the abasement, the annihilation, of which
St% Paul spea#s, but it is a totally different thing from the 9enosis as described abo2e%
-he ob1ective redemption as the work of Christ
<e ha2e seen that fallen man being unable to arise again unaided, God in "is mercy
sent "is Son to sa2e him% :t is an elementary and often repeated doctrine of St% Paul that
=esus Christ sa2es us through the Cross, that we are justified by "is blood, that we
were reconciled to God by the death of his Son (Eomans ,D)6&0-% <hat endowed the
blood of Christ, "is death, "is Cross, with this redeeming 2irtueL Paul ne2er answers
this >uestion directly, but he shows us the drama of Cal2ary under three aspects, which
there is danger in separating and which are better understood when comparedD
(a- at one time the death of Christ is a sacrifice intended, li#e the sacrifice of the @ld
'aw, to expiate sin and propitiate God% Cf% Sanday and "eadlam, Eomans, )&6)*,
3he death of Christ considered as a sacrifice% :t is impossible from this passage
(Eomans 5D2,- to get rid of the double ideaD (&- of a sacrificeB (2- of a sacrifice which is
propitiatory % % % Puite apart from this passage it is not difficult to pro2e that these two
ideas of sacrifice and propitiation lie at the root of the teaching not only of St% Paul but
of the $ew 3estament generally% 3he double danger of this idea is, first to wish to
apply to the sacrifice of Christ all the mode of action, real or supposed, of the imperfect
sacrifices of the @ld 'awB and second, to belie2e that God is appeased by a sort of
magical effect, in 2irtue of this sacrifice, whereas on the contrary it was "e <ho too#
the initiati2e of mercy, instituted the sacrifice of Cal2ary, and endowed it with its
expiatory 2alue%
(b- !t another time the death of Christ is represented as a redemption, the payment of a
ransom, as the result of which man was deli2ered from all his past ser2itude (&
Corinthians ;D20B 7D25 Ntimes e$orastheteOB Galatians 5D&5B *D, Nina tous hypo nomon
e5a$oraseOB Eomans 5D2*B & Corinthians &D50B 1phesians &D7, &*B Colossians &D&*
NapolytrosisOB & 3imothy 2D; NantilytronOB etc%- 3his idea, correct as it is, may ha2e
incon2eniences if isolated or exaggerated% 0y carrying it beyond what was written,
some of the Gathers put forth the strange suggestion of a ransom paid by Christ to the
demon who held us in bondage% !nother mista#e is to regard the death of Christ as
ha2ing a 2alue in itself, independent of Christ <ho offered it and God <ho accepted it
for the remission of our sins%
(c- @ften, too, Christ seems to substitute "imself for us in order to undergo in our stead
the chastisement for sin% "e suffers physical death to sa2e us from the moral death of
sin and preser2e us from eternal death% 3his idea of substitution appealed so strongly to
'utheran theologians that they admitted >uantitati2e e>uality between the sufferings
really endured by Christ and the penalties deser2ed by our sins% 3hey e2en maintained
that =esus underwent the penalty of loss (of the 2ision of God- and the malediction of
the Gather%
3hese are the extra2agances which ha2e cast so much discredit on the theory of
subsitution% :t has been rightly said that the transfer of a chastisement from one person
to another is an injustice and a contradiction, for the chastisement is inseparable from
the fault and an undeser2ed chastisement is no longer a chastisement% 0esides, St% Paul
ne2er said that Christ died in our stead (anti-, but only that he died for us (hyper-
because of our sins%
:n reality the three standpoints considered abo2e are but three aspects of the
Eedemption which, far from excluding one another, should harmoni(e and combine,
modifying if necessary all the other aspects of the problem% :n the following text St%
Paul assembles these 2arious aspects with se2eral others% <e are justified freely by his
grace, through the Eedemption, that is in Christ =esus, whom God hath proposed to be a
propitiation, through faith in his blood, to the shewing of his NhiddenO justice, for the
remission of former sins, through the forbearance of God, for the shewing of his justice
in this timeB that of himself may be N#nown asO just, and the justifier of him, who is in
the faith of =esus Christ (Eomans 5D2*62;-% "erein are designated the part of God, of
Christ, and of manD
God ta#es the initiati2eB it is "e who offers "is SonB "e intends to manifest "is
justice, but is mo2ed thereto by mercy% :t is therefore incorrect or more or less
inade>uate to say that God was angry with the human race and that "e was only
appeased by the death of "is Son%
Christ is our Eedemption (apolytrosis-, "e is the instrument of expiation or
propitiation (ilasterion-, and is such by "is Sacrifice (en to autou aimati-, which
does not resemble those of irrational animalsB it deri2es its 2alue from Christ,
who offers it for us to "is Gather through obedience and lo2e (Philippians 2D4B
Galatians 2D20-%
.an is not merely passi2e in the drama of his sal2ationB he must understand the
lesson which God teaches, and appropriate by faith the fruit of the Eedemption%
-he sub1ective redemption
Christ ha2ing once died and risen, the Eedemption is completed in law and in principle
for the whole human race% 1ach man ma#es it his own in fact and in act by faith and
baptism which, by uniting him with Christ, causes him to participate in "is /i2ine life%
Gaith, according to St% Paul, is composed of se2eral elementsB it is the submission of the
intellect to the word of God, the trusting abandonment of the belie2er to the Sa2iour
<ho promises him assistanceB it is also an act of obedience by which man accepts the
/i2ine will% Such an act has a moral 2alue, for it gi2es glory to God (Eomans *D20- in
the measure in which it recogni(es its own helplessness% 3hat is why !braham
belie2ed God, and it was reputed to him unto justice (Eomans *D5B Galatians 5D;-% 3he
spiritual children of !braham are li#ewise justified by faith, without the wor#s of the
law (Eomans 5D24B cf% Galatians 2D&;-% "ence it followsD
3hat justice is granted by God in consideration of faith%
3hat, ne2ertheless, faith is not e>ui2alent to justice, since man is justified by
grace (Eomans *D;-%
3hat the justice freely granted to man becomes his property and is inherent in
him%
Protestants formerly asserted that the justice of Christ is imputed to us, but now they are
generally agreed that this argument is unscriptural and lac#s the guaranty of PaulB but
some, loth to base justification on a good wor# (er$on-, deny a moral 2alue to faith and
claim that justification is but a forensic judgment of God which alters absolutely
nothing in the justified sinner% 0ut this theory is untenable, forD
e2en admitting that to justify signifies to pronounce just, it is absurd to
suppose that God really pronounces just anyone who is not already so or who is
not rendered so by the declaration itself%
=ustification is inseparable from sanctification, for the latter is a justification of
life (Eomans ,D&4- and e2ery just man li2eth by faith (Eomans &D&7B
Galatians 5D&&-%
0y faith and baptism we die to the old man, our former sel2esB now this is
impossible without beginning to li2e as the new man, who according to God, is
created in justice and holiness (Eomans ;D56,B 1phesians *D2*B & Corinthians
&D50B ;D&&-% <e may, therefore, establish a distinction in definition and concept
between justification and sanctification, but we can neither separate them nor
regard them as separate%
2oral doctrine
! remar#able characteristic of Paulinism is that it connects morality with the subjecti2e
redemption or justification% 3his is especially stri#ing in chapter ; of the 1pistle to the
Eomans% :n baptism our old man is crucified with NChristO that, the body of sin may be
destroyed, to the end that we may ser2e sin no longer (Eomans ;D;-% @ur incorporation
with the mystical Christ is not only a transformation and a metamorphosis, but a real
reaction, the production of a new being, subject to new laws and conse>uently to new
duties% 3o understand the extent of our obligations it is enough for us to #now oursel2es
as Christians and to reflect on the 2arious relations which result from our supernatural
birthD that of sonship to God the Gather, of consecration to the "oly Ghost, of mystical
identity with our Sa2iour =esus Christ, of brotherly union with the other members of
Christ% 0ut this is not all% Paul says to the neophytesD
3han#s be to God, that you were the ser2ants of sin, but ha2e obeyed from the heart
unto that form of doctrine, into which you ha2e been deli2ered% % % % 0ut now being made
free from sin, and become ser2ants to God, you ha2e your fruit unto sanctification, and
the end life e2erlasting (Eomans ;D&7, 22-%
0y the act of faith and by baptism, its seal, the Christian freely ma#es himself the
ser2ant of God and the soldier of Christ% God8s will, which he accepts in ad2ance in the
measure in which it shall be manifested, becomes thenceforth his rule of conduct% 3hus
Paul8s moral code rests on the one hand on the positi2e will of God made #nown by
Christ, promulgated by the !postles, and 2irtually accepted by the neophyte in his first
act of faith, and on the other, in baptismal regeneration and the new relations which it
produces% !ll Paul8s commands and recommendations are merely applications of these
principles%
3schatology
(&- 3he graphic description of the Pauline parousia (& 3hessalonians *D&;6&7B 2
3hessalonians &D76&0- has nearly all its main points in Christ8s great eschatological
discourse (.atthew 2*, .ar# &5, 'u#e 2&-% ! common characteristic of all these
passages is the apparent nearness of the parousia% Paul does not assert that the coming of
the Sa2iour is at hand% :n each of the fi2e epistles, wherein he expresses the desire and
the hope to witness in person the return of Christ, he at the same time considers the
probability of the contrary hypothesis, pro2ing that he had neither re2elation nor
certainty on the point% "e #nows only that the day of the lord will come unexpectedly,
li#e a thief (& 3hessalonians ,D265-, and he counsels the neophytes to ma#e themsel2es
ready without neglecting the duties of their state of life (2 3hessalonians 5D;6&2-%
!lthough the coming of Christ will be sudden, it will be heralded by three signsD
general apostasy (2 3hessalonians 2D5-,
the appearance of !ntichrist (2D56&2-, and
the con2ersion of the =ews (Eomans &&D2;-%
! particular circumstance of St% Paul8s preaching is that the just who shall be li2ing at
Christ8s second ad2ent will pass to glorious immortality without dying N& 3hessalonians
*D&7B & Corinthians &,D,& (Gree# text-B 2 Corinthians ,D26,O%
(2- @wing to the doubts of the Corinthians Paul treats the resurrection of the just at
some length% "e does not ignore the resurrection of the sinners, which he affirmed
before the Go2ernor Gelix (!cts 2*D&,-, but he does not concern himself with it in his
1pistles% <hen he says that the dead who are in Christ shall rise first (proton, &
3hessalonians *D&;, Gree#- this first offsets, not another resurrection of the dead, but
the glorious transformation of the li2ing% :n li#e manner the e2il of which he spea#s
(tou telos, & Corinthians &,D2*- is not the end of the resurrection, but of the present
world and the beginning of a new order of things% !ll the arguments which he ad2ances
in behalf of the resurrection may be reduced to threeD the mystical union of the Christian
with Christ, the presence within us of the Spirit of "oliness, the interior and
supernatural con2iction of the faithful and the !postles% :t is e2ident that these
arguments deal only with the glorious resurrection of the just% :n short, the resurrection
of the wic#ed does not come within his theological hori(on% <hat is the condition of the
souls of the just between death and resurrectionL 3hese souls enjoy the presence of
Christ (2 Corinthians ,D4-B their lot is en2iable (Philippians &D25-B hence it is impossible
that they should be without life, acti2ity, or consciousness%
(5- 3he judgment according to St% Paul as according to the Synoptics, is closely
connected with the parousia and the resurrection% 3hey are the three acts of the same
drama which constitute the /ay of the 'ord (& Corinthians &D4B 2 Corinthians &D&*B
Philippians &D;, &0B 2D&;-% Gor we must all be manifested before the judgment seat of
Christ, that e2ery one may recei2e the proper things of the body, according as he hath
done, whether it be good or e2il (2 Corinthians ,D&0-%
3wo conclusions are deri2ed from this textD
(&- 3he judgment shall be uni2ersal, neither the good nor the wic#ed shall escape
(Eomans &*D&06&2-, nor e2en the angels (& Corinthians ;D5-B all who are brought to trial
must account for the use of their liberty%
(2- 3he judgment shall be according to wor#sD this is a truth fre>uently reiterated by St%
Paul, concerning sinners (2 Corinthians &&D&,-, the just (2 3imothy *D&*-, and men in
general (Eomans 2D;6)-% .any Protestants mar2el at this and claim that in St% Paul this
doctrine is a sur2i2al of his rabbinical education (Pfleiderer-, or that he could not ma#e
it harmoni(e with his doctrine of gratuitous justification (Eeuss-, or that the reward will
be in proportion to the act, as the har2est is in proportion to the sowing, but that it will
not be because of or with a 2iew to the act (<eiss-% 3hese authors lose sight of the fact
that St% Paul distinguishes between two justifications, the first necessarily gratuitous
since man was then incapable of meriting it (Eomans 5D24B Galatians 2D&;-, the second
in conformity to his wor#s (Eomans 2D;D kata ta er$a-, since man, when adorned with
sanctifying grace, is capable of merit as the sinner is of demerit% "ence the celestial
recompense is a crown of justice which the 'ord the just judge will render (2 3imothy
*D4- to whomsoe2er has legitimately gained it%
0riefly, St% Paul8s eschatology is not so distincti2e as it has been made to appear%
Perhaps its most original characteristic is the continuity between the present and the
future of the just, between grace and glory, between sal2ation begun and sal2ation
consummated% ! large number of terms, redemption, justification, sal2ation, #ingdom,
glory and especially life, are common to the two states, or rather to the two phases of
the same existence lin#ed by charity which ne2er falleth away%
About this page
APA citation. Prat, G% (&)&&-% St% Paul% :n 3he Catholic 1ncyclopedia% $ew Ior#D
Eobert !ppleton Company% Eetrie2ed Gebruary 20, 20&* from $ew !d2entD
httpDQQwww%newad2ent%orgQcathenQ&&,;7b%htm
2LA citation. Prat, Gerdinand% St% Paul% 3he Catholic 1ncyclopedia% Col% &&% $ew
Ior#D Eobert !ppleton Company, &)&&% 20 Geb% 20&*
RhttpDQQwww%newad2ent%orgQcathenQ&&,;7b%htmS%
-ranscription. 3his article was transcribed for $ew !d2ent by /onald =% 0oon%
3cclesiastical approbation. ;ihil O"stat. Gebruary &, &)&&% Eemy 'afort, S%3%/%,
Censor% Imprimatur. T=ohn Cardinal Garley, !rchbishop of $ew Ior#%
Contact information. 3he editor of $ew !d2ent is 9e2in 9night% .y email address is
feedbac#752 at newad2ent%org% (3o help fight spam, this address might change
occasionally%- Eegrettably, : can8t reply to e2ery letter, but : greatly appreciate your
feedbac# ? especially notifications about typographical errors and inappropriate ads%