Walking with St. Paul Introduction to Galatians

Oct 27, 2008

During this Jubilee Year of St. Paul, I thought it might be helpful to spend some time in the Pauline Epistles. I decided to begin with Galatians for several reasons:

- It is one of my personal favorites

- It has been the center of my study over the past few months in preparation for a retreat on the "fruit of the Spirit" in Galatians 5:22-23

- Its use/misuse during the Protestant Revolt that has led to many of the divisions within Christianity today that needs to be addressed

- Its powerful presentation of the Gospel, and

- Because I think it is the first epistle that St. Paul penned (this is a hotly debated topic that we will discuss in more detail as the study progresses).

As we move through the letter to the Galatians, I recommend you pick up a copy of the Ignatius Study Bible: Galatians & Ephesians. It has the RSV-CE text (which I will be using primarily), and very helpful notes. There will be points of disagreement I have with the notes, but they are not doctrinal, and primarily concerns the dating of the letter.

As with all I teach, I stand on the shoulders of giants. I have had many teachers that have helped me penetrate this important letter. They include Sts. John Chrysostom and Ambrose of Milan, Eugene Peterson, Ben Witherington, Fr. Frank Matera, the theology faculty of the University of Navarre, Bishop N.T. Wright, Dr. Tim Gray, Wei-Hsien Wan, among others.

As we explore the letter, we will look at its original historical context (following St. Paul’s first missionary journey but before the Jerusalem Council), its audience, its unique terms and basic structure, as well as its misuse by some commentators who viewed it through the lens of their own historical events, rather than in its original setting.

Who were the Galatians?

While there is much debate about the boundaries of the region called Galatia in the first century, some of the earliest inhabitants of that area were a warlike and wild people of Celtic origin. They migrated from central Europe across Italy and Macedonia to Asia Minor (modern-day Turkey) where they were hired by the local king as mercenaries (around 280 B.C.). As different world powers controlled this region (Greece and Rome), different ethnic groups also populated this area. There were even small Jewish communities in Asia Minor. The ethnically Celtic element of Galatia primarily stayed in the northern part of Galatia, a region that some believe St. Paul may have visited in his second missionary journey, though there is no mention of it in Acts and modern archaeology has demonstrated that there were no Roman roads there until well after St. Paul’s life. Although the northern region was properly called Galatia, historical sources indicate that the southern areas of Asia Minor (Lycia and Cilicia), where St. Paul traveled during his first missionary journey were also under the geo-political area referred to broadly as Galatia. All that to say, I believe this letter was directed to the cities he lived and taught in during that first journey, namely Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, Perga, etc. Although my position isn’t the most popular position among scholars, it is held by significant exegetes like Witherington, Mitchell, Hemer, Bruce, Sir Ramsey, and even our own Dr. Tim Gray (and most, if not all, of the CBS staff in Denver). Overall, it fits better with the external and internal evidence surrounding the letter to the Galatians. We will explore this in more detail later.

Let me set up the chronology of St. Paul with this approach in mind

AD 33/34 - Call of Saul by Christ on the Damascus Road (Acts 9:1-25).

Following his healing and baptism, Saul spent "several days" with Ananias in Damascus preaching in the synagogues.

He then traveled to Arabia (Gal. 1:17). Some interpret this to mean the Nabatean Kingdom rather than the Arabian Peninsula, but I disagree. I think Saul went to Mt. Sinai (Horeb). This is where the Lord communed with Moses and Elijah, revealing his nature and confirming their call. I think the connection to Elijah is especially important. Both Elijah and Saul were zealous for God. Both publicly opposed the real or perceived enemies of God’s people, and they both had a kind of crisis of faith that led them into the desert. The fiery prophet Elijah, confused and afraid, went to Mt. Sinai where the Lord spoke to him in a "still, small voice" and from there "missioned" him back into the world (1 Kings 19:9-18). Interestingly, following his encounter with the Lord, the prophet goes to Damascus. Where does Saul go after being in Arabia? Damascus! It is also interesting that St. Paul tells us he spent three years there (Gal. 1:18). This corresponds with the length that Jesus spent with his original twelve disciples. St. Paul tells us, he received his message and mission directly from Jesus by revelation (Gal. 1:12). I believe that primarily happened during his time in Arabia on this significant mountain. Finally, both are given special companions for their ministry (Elisha and Barnabas respectively).

Following his desert formation, Saul returned to Damascus and then journeyed to Jerusalem (Gal. 1:18) where he spent 15 days with Cephas (St. Peter) and James. Saul’s story and transformation is vouchsafed by his new companion Barnabas (Acts 9:26-29).

Saul will then continue to witness for Christ in Tarsus and surrounding areas (Syria and Cilicia, Acts 9:30; Gal. 1:21).

Later, Barnabas will take him to Syrian Antioch (Acts 11:25-26), where a thriving community is growing. According to Acts, they taught here for at least one year (Acts 11:26). According to tradition, this community was founded by St. Peter around AD 37. It is one of the ancient sees (patriarchates) of early Christianity because of its founder, St. Peter (like Rome was in the West).

A famine is predicted by Agabus and an offering is taken in Antioch for the church in Jerusalem. Saul and Barnabas carry it to the Holy City. In Galatians, Saul tells us he went up to Jerusalem because of a "revelation" (Gal. 2:2), which I think is a reference to this prophetic word regarding the famine (Acts 11:28). Chronologically, we are about 14 years after Saul’s encounter with Christ (Gal. 2:1), which puts us around AD 47-48. He is welcomed in Jerusalem by the "pillars" - Peter, James and John. They approved his mission to the Gentiles, and charged him to continue to keep the poor in mind (Gal. 2:9-10). This acknowledgement of Saul’s mission by the Apostles in Jerusalem, gives Antioch the green light to send Saul and Barnabas on a full-fledged mission to Asia Minor.

In Acts 13, Saul and Barnabas are set apart by the elders in Antioch to carry the Gospel message to the Gentiles. This is Saul’s first missionary journey, on which he changes his name to Paul (probably after his first Gentile convert - Sergius Paulus, whose family he will visit in Antioch Pisidia).

During this journey, they will visit the southern cities of Galatia (the recipients of Paul’s first epistle). Paul and his companion Barnabas returned from their first missionary journey, reporting their successes to the church in Antioch (Syria).

Sometime later (neither Acts nor the letter to the Galatians makes it clear), Cephas will make an apostolic visit to Antioch (Gal. 2:11). This is where I believe the confrontation with Cephas by Paul occurred. Luke does not include this encounter in his account, we learn of it solely through Paul’s letter to the Galatians. Paul implied in Galatians that on previous apostolic visits, Cephas ate with Gentile believers, but now another group from Jerusalem (called the "circumcision party") are also in Antioch. Cephas, in a moment of failure, rejects table fellowship with Gentile believers, leading even Barnabas astray. Saul confronts Cephas for his insincerity (we will look into this encounter in more detail when we study Galatians 2).

It is clear that members of this ‘circumcision party," which Paul will call "agitators," were seeking to undue Paul’s work with the Gentiles. They retrace his first missionary journey and convince the new Christian communities that Gentiles must receive circumcision and Jewish followers of Christ are not free from the Mosaic Law. Word of their undermining work is brought to Paul, who sent this hastily written letter to those communities in Galatia.

The relationship between Jews and Gentiles, and both to the Law, threatened to divide the infant Church, so the community in Antioch sent Paul and Barnabas to Jerusalem where the apostles will make a universal judgment on the issue. The Jerusalem Council is convened (Acts 15) and the Church leadership set the guidelines for Gentile converts.

(Story continues below)

Paul carried that decision with him on his second missionary journey to those communities he established on his first journey, a decision which supported the assertions in his earlier letter to the Galatian communities.

Others argue that Paul’s letter to the Galatians was not written until after the Jerusalem Council and possibly to a group of northern Galatians. I (among others) don’t believe it fits with the narrative in Acts or Paul’s account in Galatians 2. There is no evidence he ever visited northern Galatia, and given Paul’s careful defense of the Gospel in Galatians regarding the requirements for Gentiles, it seems bizarre that he would never mention the Jerusalem Council. There would be no controversy or confusion, as the Council’s decision would be the "last nail in the coffin" for the agitator's position. There are several other reasons why I think this chronology best represents the historical events, but we won’t go into that kind of detail here. We can respectfully agree to disagree on this, as it isn’t a dogmatic matter.

Now that we have established a chronology and historical setting, let me say some introductory remarks about the letter itself. As with all of Paul’s letters, we have a difficult challenge. We are reading some one else’s mail and therefore are trying to reconstruct a conversation when we can only hear one end of the dialogue. There is a real danger of misreading the conversation if we don’t know the context and culture of Paul’s time.

A major figure - Martin Luther - did just that. He failed to properly reconstruct the conversation based on its original context and instead read Galatians and Romans through the lens of his own personal experience and the controversies of his era. For him, Paul was addressing Jewish-Christians who thought they could earn heaven by their good deeds (insert the Catholic Church), verses Paul’s message of salvation by faith alone (insert Martin Luther and his unique doctrine sola fide). That interpretive template laid over these two letters became the norm. Martin and others were like Paul, chiding the "foolish Galatians" (insert Roman Catholic laity) about their embrace of "another gospel." Even Paul’s rebuke of Peter was, for them, analogous to Luther’s rebuke of the Catholic Church. Therefore, Luther reframed the letter based on his own life experience and fundamentally misread the original context and issues.

Luther’s unfortunate approach (which had no precedence in Church History) would shape Protestant commentaries for the next 500 years. It revealed the real dangers of reading God’s word outside the Christian community and apart from the Magisterium. Whenever a person sets himself up as the sole interpreter of God’s word, he is bound to misread it at some point and sadly, in this case, all the political circumstances in Germany converged to make this a shattering and devastating event.

Now, nearly 500 years later, with some time and objectivity between the Revolt, and us conditions for a clearer interpretation and real dialogue with Protestants has emerged. The landscape is changing and remarkable. Pauline scholars like, E.P. Sanders, present a compelling case to revisit Paul’s original context rather than follow Luther’s lines of interpretation (and Sanders is a Lutheran!). Others like Richard Hayes, N.T. Wright, Fr. Felix Just, SJ, have also contributed much to the illumination of Paul’s writings in their proper context. Add to that, the historic Catholic/Lutheran dialogues that have produced a joint statement on justification, which distanced itself from Luther’s views. We are in a new era of ecumenism and scripture scholarship.

The proposed structures of the letter to the Galatians are many and varied; I prefer to keep it as simple as possible. As with other Pauline epistles, Paul will move from doctrinal to behavioral themes (what to believe and its implications on how we live). For our purposes, I propose the following outline:

1:1-10 Greeting and Astonishment

1:11-2:21 The True Gospel vs. a Counterfeit

- The Messenger and his Message

3:1-5:12 Freedom from the Mosaic Law

- Paul’s Argument vs. the Judaizers

5:13-6:10 Freedom for Love and Service

6:11-18 Conclusion

In my estimation, Paul has a simple goal for the Galatians: Preserve the life-giving freedom of the Good News for Jews and Gentiles, a freedom from the Law and a freedom for self-giving love.

Finally, there are five key definitions that we developed at the Denver Catholic Biblical School, which are crucial for studying Galatians and Romans:

Flesh: Depending on its context, it can mean 1) the physical body, or 2) our fallen human nature (human effort not cooperating with grace).

Righteousness of God (sometimes "righteousness" for short): God’s faithfulness to his covenant promises - not only to Abraham and Israel, but also to all of Creation.

Works of the Law (sometimes "works" for short): All the markers that, under the Mosaic covenant, designated membership in God’s covenant family, e.g., circumcision, dietary/kosher laws, OT feasts, Sabbath observances.

Gospel: The announcement that the crucified and risen Jesus of Nazareth is Israel’s Messiah and the world’s true Lord (kyrios); in other words, that the Lord, the God of Israel has returned to Zion in the person of Jesus and has been enthroned as King, though his death, Resurrection and Ascension.

Faith: The gift of God that enables us to believe and entrust ourselves to his saving power (Baptism and an obedient life are always in Paul’s mind when he speaks of faith).

Justification (justified): The process of adoption into God’s covenant family, by which we are made sons and daughters; those who have been justified are called righteous/just, i.e. they are in covenant relationship with Israel’s God.

I know that was a lot of information, but it will all prove useful as we move through this remarkable letter in more detail. Next week, we will begin with Galatians chapter one.

|