Today’s
post is my contribution to the blog tour for J.R. Daniel Kirk’s new book
Jesus I have Loved, But Paul? (BakerAcademic, 2012). This post is part of a
larger blog tour and you can read previous reviews of earlier chapters at the
blog hub. Don't forget to click on the link to the left to enter a chance to win a selection of books from Baker.
I was
asked to review chapter seven, Liberty
and Justice for All? Overall I have
enjoyed Kirk’s approach to Paul as he seeks to demonstrate the connections
between the messages of Jesus and Paul via the story of Israel. I think he
provides a fresh, accessible approach to Paul that will help many.
Kirk
opens up this chapter by observing that students of the Bible who are
interested in social justice don’t have much time for Paul. Jesus is all about
proclaiming liberty and justice for the oppressed and captive. Paul, on the
other hand, doesn’t seem to get the job done.
One
source of this dissatisfaction with Paul is the way his letters were used in
the 19th century
slavery debate. Paul’s letters were often used to support slavery and Paul has
not always been loved by African Americans. By way of example Kirk includes the
famous quote by Howard Thurman’s grandmother who refused to read the letters of
Paul because of the way they were used to keep the enslaved enslaved.
“During
the days of slavery,” she said, “the master’s minister would occasionally hold
services for the slaves. Old man McGhee was so mean that he would not let a
Negro minister preach to his slaves. Always the white minister used as his text
something from Paul. At least three or four times a year he used as a text:
‘Slaves, be obedient to them that are your masters . . . as unto Christ.’ Then
he would go on to show how it was God’s will that we were slaves and how, if we
were good and happy slaves, God would bless us. I promised my Maker that if I
ever learned to read and if freedom ever came, I would not read that part of
the Bible.”
But in
spite of Paul’s rather checkered past in social justice circles, Kirk suggests
that Paul does have a driving concern for social justice in his letters.
He begins
by pointing out that Jesus’ synagogue sermon in Luke 4 contains a gospel
message that is the very heart beat of social justice: good news preached to
the poor, captives released, oppressed freed. Jesus’ sermon and his Isaiah 61
text proclaim the beginning of the Jubilee year. This is the “good news” of the
gospel and it is a message that includes all people, not just Jews. How then do
Paul’s letters relate to Jesus’ message?
Kirk
starts by focusing on Paul’s inclusion of Gentiles in the church. He views this
as Paul’s call for racial equality. He notes that Paul does not require
Gentiles to become Jews, but he also does not require Jews to abandon their own
identity. There is plenty of room for both in the church. And this, Kirk
suggests, is a Pauline argument against raced based policies and practices that
encourage racial superiority and/or subjugation. In the narrative of the gospel
all of God’s people are set free.
But Kirk
also recognizes that there is some counterevidence in Paul. He looks to the
household code in Ephesians 6:5-9 where slaves are told to offer their service
with “enthusiasm” as if serving the Lord and not their master.
Slaves,
obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, in singleness of heart, as
you obey Christ; 6 not only while being watched, and in
order to please them, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from the
heart. 7 Render service with enthusiasm, as to
the Lord and not to men and women, 8 knowing that whatever good we do, we
will receive the same again from the Lord, whether we are slaves or free. 9 And, masters, do the same to them.
Stop threatening them, for you know that both of you have the same Master in
heaven, and with him there is no partiality. (Eph 6:5 NRS)
Kirk concedes that these instructions presume a social hierarchy that is regulated by
Paul rather than offering a way out. But he also notes that it is a system
regulated by the gospel. Jesus is looking over the shoulder of the slaveholder
and is receiving the treatment meted out by the earthly master (p. 150). Kirk
suggests that while “this passage does not call for an opening up of the full
freedom of the gospel to those who are enslaved, it does plot a trajectory for
the transformation of the institution of slavery within the church (p.150). Yet
Kirk also notes that Paul is not suggesting that slaves simply stay as they
are. He offers 1 Corinthians 7:22 as an example of how slaves should take
freedom if the opportunity presents itself.
Moving on
from race and slavery, he looks at other areas of social justice in Paul. In
particular is his focus on economic justice. Paul’s collection in 2 Corinthians
8-9 is economic justice in action as the Gentile churches collect money to
support Jewish congregations in Jerusalem. Just as Jesus’ sermon declared
economic freedom for the poor so too Paul’s understanding of the gospel
includes giving to the poor and helping to rectify the inequalities in the
world.
The
chapter closes with a return to the challenges faced by African-Americans and
the hopes voiced in Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech. Kirk connects
King’s speech with the message of Jesus which is one that includes social
justice. And he argues that Paul’s gospel message was also one of freedom.
Paul, like Jesus, Kirk argues, is the same one announced by Jesus.
Questions/Critique
I want to
begin my critique by stating that Kirk is to be praised for his efforts. Far
too often Paul and Jesus are kept in separate theological corners. The problem
of course is that we are only hearing part of what the New Testament has to
say. I think this is a balanced, well written book. And there is much I would
like to have heard Kirk say, but I also realize that deadlines, page limits,
and target audiences are always major factors when publishing. So with that in
mind I would like to raise a few questions that came to mind as I read this
chapter.
My first
question is where is the narrative thread in this chapter? In chapter one he
does a good job of explaining the connection of Israel’s story with the gospel
message of Jesus and Paul. He also notes that this narrative is the “backbone
of Paul’s theology” (p. 27). But I am not seeing how Israel’s story fits in
here. I understand the appeal to Luke 4 and Jesus declaring the year of
Jubilee, but I wonder if there is more to it than that. Central to the story of
Israel is the exodus from Egypt, Israel’s release from slavery. And I wonder
how that story influences Paul’s view of slavery and the instructions he issues
concerning the institution?
Looking
at it from another angle, how did Christian slaves react to hearing the story
about God freeing slaves, but then being told not to worry about their own
enslavement? There seems to be a difference between the kind of freedom offered
by Jesus in Luke 4 and that offered by Paul. Jesus is proclaiming a freedom
which sounds very radical, especially in the year of Jubilee when all slaves
were to be released. Paul, however, says to stay put, be good and only accept
freedom if it happens to come your way. While there may be some move towards
transforming slavery within the context of the church, it is not clear how
comforting Paul’s words were to the slave. Moreover, Ephesians assumes that the
Christian slave has a Christian master. What might be the perspective of the
person enslaved and oppressed by an unbeliever? What does the story of Israel
and Paul’s theology hold for that slave? At one point in the chapter Kirk
suggests that Jesus’ agents of freedom could be sent to Thailand to free a
woman from life as a sex slave or an Indian family from indentured servitude
making bricks (p. 146). But I wonder what message Paul has for these people?
Stay put and do your job as if you are pleasing Jesus? I realize these are
tough questions, but they are important. My review of this chapter comes one
day after we celebrate the birth of Martin Luther King and one week after the
national day of awareness of human trafficking. So these are timely questions
as we consider the message of Jesus and Paul to the oppressed. And I think we
need to do a better job of showing how Paul offers real freedom to the modern
oppressed.
I also
have some questions about Paul’s concern for the poor. True, he does organize a
collection for the church in Jerusalem. But this application of giving to the
poor is within the context of the poor in the church. Paul is not extending it
to those who are outside of the church. I am not suggesting that Paul was not
concerned with the non-believing poor, but with the letters we have the only
evidence we have is of Paul telling us how to take care of our own.
While I
appreciate and affirm Kirk’s methodology here I do wonder how it works out
practically when we try to apply that story. Perhaps what might have made
this chapter a bit clearer would be a brief case study of how we apply Paul
today. As Kirk has noted, Paul’s theology does not always seem to have the
radical nature of Jesus’ message.
