Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 20

The Woes of the Prophets and the Rights of the Apostle: The Internal Dynamics of 1 Corinthians 9

HARRY P . NASUTI
Department of Theology Fordham University Bronx, NY 10458

ALTHOUGH CORINTHIANS 9 WAS ONCE routinely seen as an interruption

of its surrounding chapters, this is no longer the case.1 The chapter is now widely recognized as an integral part of the discussion of meat sacrificed to idols found in chaps. 8 and 10.2 This change in perspective is based upon the recognition that Paul is here furnishing a personal example of the free re nunciation that he is urging on the "strong" at Corinth. Far from being a problem, this mix of personal example and theological argument is now perceived as a common device to be found throughout the letter.3 Such an integrating perspective is a definite advance over earlier views which saw this chapter as a digression or the result of careless editing. Never theless, it may be that the current focus has led to an overlooking of certain
For examples of the earlier view, see J. Weiss, Der erste Korintherbrief (Kritisch exegetischer Kommentar 5; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1910) 211-13, 231-32; and J. Hering, The First Epistle of Saint Paul to the Corinthians (London: Epworth, 1962) xiii-xiv, 75. 2 See, most recently, G. Galitis, "Das Wesen der Freiheit: Eine Untersuchung zu 1 Kor 9 und seiner Kontext"; and M. Bouttier, "1 Co 8-10 considr du point de vue de son unit," Freedom and Love: The Guide for Christian Life [1 Co 8-10; Rm 14-15] (Monograph Series of Benedictina: Biblical-Ecumenical Section 6; ed. L. De Lorenzi; Rome: St. PauPs Abbey, 1981) 127-45 and 205-61, respectively; also W. Willis, "An Apostolic Apologia?: The Form and Function of 1 Corinthians 9," JSNT 24 (1985) 33-48. 3 See,e.g., B. Fiore("'Covert Allusion'in 1 Corinthians l-4,"GB47[1985]85-102)for an analysis of the rhetorical role of personal example in the theological argument of chaps. 1-4. 246
1

THE DYNAMICS OF 1 CORINTHIANS 9

247

dynamics at work within Paul's personal statement itself.4 Raising such a possibility is, of course, not meant to deny the close connection of chap. 9 to the surrounding chapters. It is instead meant to suggest that the chapter has a significant literary structure and rhetorical thrust of its own and that these features imply an additional dimension which this chapter brings to the larger argument. The present essay will focus on the internal dynamics of 1 Corinthians 9 and will attempt to outline certain interpretive possibilities that seem to have been overlooked to date. More specifically, this essay will consider whether Paul's arguments in defense of his apostolic "rights" are as uniform as they are usually seen to be. In so doing, it will raise the possibility that closer attention to the different types of arguments Paul uses here reveals something further about how Paul saw both his social role at Corinth and his overall relationship to the gospel. To the same purpose, the essay will explore further certain allusions that seem to be contained in Paul's statement of renunciation. It is hoped that this highlighting of such structural and allusive features will shed new light on the important dialectic between Pauline theology and Pauline practice. An Overview of the Argument about Apostolic Rights In chap. 8, Paul is again attempting to reconcile his theological principle of Christian freedom with the communal realities of the Corinthian situation. Here the issue is that of how the different members of the community should treat meat which had been sacrificed to idols. By making concern for those of weak conscience a consideration in the behavior of the rest of the community, Paul makes it clear that he is not denying the latter's Christian freedom as much as he is counseling the correct use of that freedom. In the specific case of meat sacrificed to idols, Paul even allows that the correct use of freedom puts certain limits on the public consumption of such food out of consideration for those whose conscience is not as strong.5
4 Even those studies which consider more specific issues in this chapter do not entirely appreciate the rhetorical thrust at work here. See, e.g., E. Ksemann, * * A Pauline Version of the 'Amor Fati,'" New Testament (Questions of Today (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1969) 217-35; and G. Theissen, "Legitimation and Subsistence: An Essay on the Sociology of Early Christian Missionaries," The Social Setting of Pauline Christianity (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1982) 27-67. G. Dautzenberg ("Der Verzicht auf das apostolische Unterhaltsrecht. Eine exegetische Untersuchung zu 1 Kor 9," Bib 50 [1969] 212-32) offers a rare attempt to deal with the entire chapter on its own terms. 5 For a discussion of the social realities of class and status that seem to underlie these distinctions at Corinth, see W. A. Meeks, The First Urban Christians. The Social World of the Apostle Paul (New Haven: Yale, 1983) 69-70, 97-100.

248

T H E CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY | 50, 1988

With 9:1, Paul moves his argument about Christian freedom into a new and very personal stage. In doing this, Paul not only refers to his own use of 6 general Christian freedom but also brings this together with his more spe cific behavior as an apostle. Included here is a defense of his apostolic cre dentials, especially with regard to his apparently unusual refusal of support from those to whom he preached the gospel. Such a defense of his credentials was often a priority for Paul, since his legitimacy as an apostle was linked to the authenticity of his gospel.7 The point of such a defense here is not, however, so much personal as it is paradigmatic in its implications for the behavior of the Corinthian strong towards their weaker counterparts.8 To this end, Paul quickly proves his case for apostleship in w 1-2 and proceeds to focus on the unusual nature of his apostolic behavior, again especially with respect to his refusal of community support. In his apologia, Paul is, of course, at pains to point out that his refusal of community support is not due to any lack of a right to such support. He has just as much a claim to this support as others who make use of such rights.9 Indeed, in the case of the Corinthians, he feels he has even more of a claim than others, since he is able to claim a certain apostolic priority there (cf. 12a). The unusual feature of Paul's argument is that he is apparently quite concerned to prove the apostolic rule to which his own behavior10 is the exception. Most commentators see here a "series of proofs" which extends from 7 to 14 and is intended to demonstrate the point that an apostle is entitled to support for his apostolic activities.11 After proving his case, Paul
In chap. 9, the theme of general Christian freedom may be found in the first question of 1 (which picks up 8:13), the summary statement of w 19-22, and possibly the question of 4. The last depends on whether one sees this verse as referring to general Christian freedom or to Paul's apostolic right to community support. See H. Conzelmann, / Corinthians (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975) 153 n. 15, 154 n. 27. 7 See Galatians 1-2 and, especially, 2 Corinthians 10-13, where the issue of refusal of support is addressed. 8 Cf. Galitis, "Freiheit," 129, 132; and Willis, "Apologia," 33-48. 9 One may again note the question of whether 4 refers to the specific issue of com munity support or to the more general issue of Christian freedom. There is also the question of whether 5 is concerned with the specific issue of community support of an apostolic "wife" or with the more general issue of the right of an apostle to such a "wife." Again see Conzelmann, / Corinthians, 153 n. 15, 154 n. 27; also J. B. Bauer, "Uxores Circumducere (1 Kor 9,5)," BZ n.s. 3 (1959) 94-102. 10 And, interestingly, that of Barnabas. Note the plurals in w 4-6,11-12. 11 H. F. von Campenhausen (Die Begrndung kirchlicher Entscheidungen beim Apostel Paulus [Sitzungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophischhistorische Klasse 1957, 2; 2d ed.; Heidelberg: Winter, 1965] 25) calls it a "display of proofs."
6

THE DYNAMICS OF 1 CORINTHIANS 9 249 then is seen as rejecting its conclusions in 15 in favor of his own free proclamation of the gospel. This renunciation of apostolic "rights" (exousia) forms a background to Paul's renunciation of general Christian rights and his exhortation to the Corinthian strong to do the same. The overall argument seems to run as follows: If I, as an apostle, can forgo both my general Christian rights and my special apostolic rights in favor of the gospel, surely you (strong) can also forgo your own general Christian rights in favor of that same gospel. While this generally accepted view of Paul's argument is undoubtedly correct, it does not do full justice to the dynamics of this chapter. On purely structural and rhetorical grounds, it might first of all be objected that w 7-14 are not a single body of proofs culminating in the Pauline renunciation of 15. There is instead a previous renunciation in 12b, which seems to inter rupt the set of proofs. One may, of course, see this as an anticipation of Paul's conclusions, after which Paul continues his series of proofs. However, 12b may in other respects be as much a dividing point in the argument as an anticipation. It is this possibility that needs to be explored here.

Paul's Apostolic Rights: Arguments Secular and Sacred The first of the proofs is the general argument from everyday life to be found in 7.12 Three types of activity are brought forward, each of which seems to be recompensed from the outcome of the activity. It is significant that in the case of planting a vineyard and tending a flock, the recompense is specifically seen as an "eating" of the results of these activities.13 The recompense is directly related to the activity. The activity of soldiering is less specific, though here too there is the possibility that the recompense arises directly from the activity, if the soldier is seen as being fed from the spoils of war.14
Theissen ("Legitimation," 43) says that Paul "piles up arguments," and Conzelmann (/ Co rinthians, 157) claims that he is "multiplying" and "collecting" arguments. 12 H. Gale (The Use of Analogy in the Letters of Paul [Philadelphia: Westminster, 1964] 104-5) has suggested that this verse may also contain certain allusions to Scripturespecifically, to Deut 20:5-6 and Prov 27:18,26. Such a scriptural background is quite plausible, though not as necessary to Paul's argument as it is in w 8-10 which follow. 13 Tis phyteuei ampelna kai ton karpon autou ouk esthiei; tis poimainei poimnn kai ek tou galaktos tspoimns ouk esthiei; The form of the latter question is suggestive in view of the parallel with w 13-14. 14 On the question of whether opsnion refers to provisions or wages, see C. C. Caragounis, ": A Reconsideration of Its Meaning," NovT 16 (1974) 35-57, esp. 51-52; cf. W. F. Orr and J. A. Walther, / Corinthians (AB 32; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1976) 238.

250 THE CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY | 50, 1988 The scriptural proof in w 8-10 is similar. The unmuzzled ox feeds di rectly as a result of its activity of treading out the grain. Similarly, the human plowman and thresher, with whom Paul sees this verse as really concerned, also will receive a share of the results of their labors. 15 The dominant thrust of all these examples is not simply that one is recompensed for one's work. Rather, one is also recompensed from one's work, in the sense that one receives a share of that which one does.16 One is not simply rewarded with an external reward. There is instead an intrinsic connection between one's activity and one's recompense. This intrinsic connection is important for how one understands the question of 11. Again taking up agricultural imagery, Paul talks of sowing spiritual goods (pneumatika) among the Corinthians. The result that one expects from such a sowing is that Paul will himself reap spiritual goods. Indeed, Paul assumes this expected conclusion when he asks whether it is "too much if we reap your material goods (sarkika)." The argument is one of "how much the more. " If Paul has a right to the expected spiritual benefits, how much the more does he have a right to the (less important) material benefits! The result is a proof of Paul's case for material rights. Another "how much the more" argument follows in 12. Paul concurs in the rightful claims of others upon the Corinthians, while asserting that his own claims are superiorapparently because he feels that the originating activity of sowing gives him, at least on one level, a certain priority over those who later work with what he has sown.17 Verses 11-12a form an inclusio with w 4-6,18 both repeating the general apostolic argument and particularizing it to the Corinthian situation. At first sight, this seems to be the end of Paul's argument for general apostolic rights and his own particular rights at Corinth. Having proven the case for such rights, he is now able to make his point about the need to renounce one's rights in the service of the gospel.19 This he does in 12b, where he claims to have not made use of his exousia. Yet, in w 13-14 he seems to resume his arguments, offering another example of recompense for one's activity and a command of the Lord to the same end. As noted above, it is common to see this as a simple piling up of proofs. Such a view may, however, not be the only possibility here.
Again with the possible exception of soldiering in 7. Note the use of metech in w 10,12. 17 On another level, of course, all such workers are equal, as is argued in 3:6-8. On the importance of this other level for the present passage, see below. 18 Or w 5-6, or even just 6, depending on how one views w 4-5; cf. nn. 6 and 9 above. 19 Such a renunciation in no way compromises the legitimacy of such rights; see Meeks (Urban Christians, 99), who notes that "the apostle's rights (exousia) . . . are by no means abolished by his decision not to assert them."
16 15

THE DYNAMICS OF 1 CORINTHIANS 9 251 One must first of all note in these verses the same intrinsic connection between activity and recompense that was seen in w 7-10. Those who serve temples (hoi ta hiera ergazomeno) eat "from the temple" (ek tou hierou esthiousiri), and those who serve the altar (hoi t thysiastri paredreuontes) share in the altar (t thysiastri symmerizonta). Similarly, those who proclaim the gospel (tois to euaggelion kataggellousin) are to live "from the gospel" (ek tou euaggeliou zri). But does this simply restate Paul's arguments of w 7-10 so as to back up the conclusions of 11, as is assumed by the commentaries? Or has the argument shifted to a different level here? What seems to indicate such a shift is the different nature of the ex amples cited in w 7-10 and 13-14. Soldiers, planters, shepherds, oxen, plow men, and threshers all work at secular pursuits for secular recompense. On the other hand, temple functionaries and preachers of the gospel are not engaged in secular pursuits as much as in divine service. The important question is whether Paul sees the recompense for the latter as still remaining consistent with the nature of their activity. In the case of temple service, the recompense for such activity is an "eating" of the temple food. It is unlikely that one should understand this on a purely physical level. While this is just possible for the first half of the verse, it is almost completely unlikely for the second half. That sharing a temple sacrifice has more than physical connotations (at least for Paul) is assumed in the whole larger discussion concerning meat sacrificed to idols.20 Whether the temple referred to here is the Jewish temple or pagan temples (or both), the point is the same. In partaking of such food, one also shares something with the being in whose service one serves.21
For a discussion of various possible meanings (sacramental, communal, and social) that participation in a sacrifice might have had in the Hellenistic world, see W. Willis, Idol Meat in Corinth: The Pauline Argument in 1 Corinthians 8 and 10 (SBLDS 68; Chico, CA: Scholars, 1985) esp. 7-64. 21 For the present argument, it is not crucial to determine the precise nature of this sharing. In Willis's terms (see n. 20 above), neither a sacramental nor a communal interpretation is necessary, although it is very unlikely that the sharing mentioned here is to be seen as limited to, or even focused upon, the sharing among the human participants themselves. Thus, G. Agrell (Work, Toil, and Sustenance: An Examination of the View of Work in the New Testament [Lund: Verbum-Haken Ohlssohns, 1976] 109-10) has noted that this verse is reminiscent of the regulations in Num 18:8-31 and Deut 18:1-8, according to which the priests and Lvites are to receive that which has been offered to God and has become holy. It is perhaps significant that this is coupled with the perception that God himself is the inheritance of these cultic officials. In any event, it is only necessary for the above argument that the officials in question are to be seen as sharing something with the deity and that this carries with it more than physical implications for those who eatespecially in the case of the temple functionaries. Certainly, Paul sees such implications here.
20

252 THE CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY | 50, 1988 The question of a more-than-physical recompense is also raised by 14. Here again, most commentaries seem to see this verse as yet another argu ment in support of Paul's claim to material recompense for the preaching of 22 the gospel. To this end, they often refer to Luke 10:7 and Matt 10:10 and see the present verse as a rare Pauline citation of a saying of the earthly 23 Jesus. That this saying was known in the Pauline tradition is clear from its quotation in 1 Tim 5:18. It is, however, noteworthy that Paul's version of this saying is not the same as the version found in the Synoptics and 1 Timothy. The latter version refers to a worker (ergats) and his wages or reward (misthos).24 At least in the Lucan passage, this misthos refers to an actual "eating and drinking," much as seems to be at issue here.25 The present verse does not use any of these terms. Instead, it speaks of the "command" for the preachers of the gospel to "live from the gospel" (ek tou euaggeliou zen).16 As H. Conzelmann has suggested, this phrase has a
22 According to many commentators, the saying of the Lord is the climax or clinching point of the argument; cf. Weiss, Korintherbrief 239; Galitis, "Freiheit," 135. Contrast the views discussed in n. 26 below. 23 On the relationship of this verse to the saying attested in the Synoptic tradition, see D. L. Dungan, The Sayings of Jesus in the Churches of Paul. The Use of the Synoptic Tradition in the Regulation of Early Church Life (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971) 3-80; and B. Fjrstedt, Synoptic Tradition in 1 Corinthians. Themes and Clusters of Theme Words in 1 Corinthians 1-4 and 9 (Uppsala: Teologiska Institutionen, 1974) 65-99. These analyses do not, however, reckon with the possibility that Paul may be adapting Jesus' saying for his own purposes, as suggested in the present article. For such a possibility (but a different interpretation), see also Dautzenberg ("Verzicht," 216-18), who sees Paul as generalizing to adapt this saying to a different geographicaland eschatologicalworld. 24 Matt 10:10 has trophs where Luke and 1 Timothy have misthos, apparently in keeping with the subsistence nature of the missionary's existence in Matthew. Note also Matt 10:8 in this respect. 25 1 Tim 5:18 does not explicitly refer to such material concerns; it instead uses this saying (and the Deuteronomy citation of 1 Cor 9:9) in the context of the "double honor" due to worthy elders. 26 According to Dungan (Sayings, 20-21; cf. J. Moffatt, The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians [MNTC 7; New York: Harper and Brothers, 1938] 118; and also J. MurphyO'Connor (1 Corinthians [New Testament Message 10; Wilmington, DE: Glazier, 1979] 87), Paul has turned a command of the Lord into a discretionary privilege. For Dungan, this explains the "peculiar, off-hand fashion" in which Paul has mentioned the command of Jesus here. In the interests of the gospel, Paul is seen as claiming a freedom even with respect to the commands of the Lord. Theissen ("Legitimation," 27-67) also comments on Paul's portrayal of Jesus* command of charismatic asceticism as a basis for the privilege of community support. For Theissen, Paul's self-support has left him open to the charge of not being a true apostle who trusts in the Lord for his support, as do those apostles who are based in Palestine. The problem is, of course, that in his ground-breaking mission to the Hellenistic cities, Paul is unable to count on the same hospitality afforded to Jewish-Christian missionaries in Jewish Palestine (or to those missionaries who visit already established Hellenistic churches, such as those of Paul). In

THE DYNAMICS OF 1 CORINTHIANS 9 253 possible double meaningreferring to either the material support that one receives from the proclamation of the gospel or the spiritual life of the gospel itself.27 Though Conzelmann does not note it, this would be similar to the twofold material and spiritual connotations of the previous verse. Like most commentators, Conzelmann seems to assume that the physical meaning is primary here, so that this verse is simply another part of Paul's proof of those apostolic rights which he has already renounced in 12b. It is, however, worth considering whether the additional spiritual con notations are not more significant than this. Certainly, such a rhetorical element as the clear grouping of examples along secular/ sacred lines (on either side of w 11-12) would seem to lead to such a conclusion, as does the repeated intrinsic connection of activity and recompense. Such patterns raise the possibility that Paul is not simply giving a para phrase rather than an exact quote here.28 He may actually be shaping his citation for a specific purpose. At issue is one's understanding of the zen, a word which Paul does use to refer to life in its basic sense of continued existence, but which he more often uses to refer to the type of life made possible through Jesus Christ. Considering the dominant pattern of intrinsic recompense discussed above, it seems likely that this latter sense plays a larger role here than has generally been recognized. In this view, w 13-14 do not simply continue Paul's argument in favor of the material rights of the apostles, though they are certainly to be seen as supportive of such an argument. Rather, these verses also seem to raise the possibility of certain spiritual benefits which result from Paul's activity on behalf of the gospel. Both thematically and structurally, w 13-14 form a rather exact parallel to w 7-10. Thus, 7 argues for material recompense on the basis of general (secular) practice, while w 8-10 make a similar argument
defending himself against the Corinthians' charges, Paul seems to argue that he has been specificially destined by God to transgress the usual norms of early Christian missionary be havior. As Theissen notes, Paul's refusal to rely on community support violated the letter of Jesus' command but was in keeping with its spiritespecially after there came to be more Christian communities on which such missionaries could easily come to rely as a matter of course. These observations are suggestive in terms of the overall question of Paul's status at Corinth. One wonders, however, whether this is the thrust of Paul's argument in the present context of 1 Corinthians 8-10; cf. Galitis, "Freiheit," 129, 132; Willis, "Apologia," 33-48. As noted in the text, the point seems rather to be that (as commanded by the Lord and required by the gospel) Paul has put more value on spiritual things than on material things, and that the Corinthians should do the same. Such an interpretation preserves both the command aspect of this verse and its spiritual thrust in the present context. 27 Conzelmann, / Corinthians, 157; see also Moffatt, First Corinthians, 120. 28 As suggested by Weiss, Korintherbrief, 239; cf. Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians, 157 n. 16.

254 THE CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY | 50, 1988 on the basis of revelation. Similarly, 13 argues for spiritual (as well as material) recompense on the basis of general (sacred) practice, while 14 makes a similar argument on the basis of revelation. Such spiritual recom pense was, of course, the logical implication of 11, where Paul claimed to have sown spiritual goods among the Corinthians. It is, in fact, implied by the entire argument in w 7-15 and is fleshed out in what follows. In 15a, Paul again claims to have made no use of any of the rights discussed previously. As such, this verse forms an inclusio of sorts with 12b, a connection also indicated by the repetition of the verb chraomai. However, while vv 12b and 15a are an obvious rejection of the results of the previous secular arguments (vv 7-12a), the final part of 15 comments further on that rejection in light of the somewhat different arguments of w 13-14.29 One may summarize this section of the argument by noting the way Paul's rhetoric serves both his practical concerns and his wider theological argument. Both Paul's examples and his larger argument move from the material to the spiritual. For Paul, the two are necessarily intertwined. What one does on one level has important repercussions on the other. This is true of both Paul's activities among the Corinthians and the Corinthians' own actions with regard to idol meat. Even though both of these activities have material significance, their true significance lies in the effect they have on one's relationship to the gospel. In what follows, Paul goes on to spell out the spiritual implications of his own apostolic activities. The Status of the Apostolic Prophet As Paul notes in 12b, the reason for renouncing his rights is to avoid placing any obstacle in the way of the gospel. This obviously refers to Paul's missionary activity (cf. w 19-22), as well as to his larger argument about the need to renounce one's rights in service to others. However, the arguments of w 13-14 also have certain personal implications which concern the rela tionship of Paul himself to that which he serves. It is this more personal side of the argument which is developed in vv 15b-18. Life and Death, Boasts and Woes One may begin consideration of this intricate passage by asking why Paul raises the hypothetical possibility of his death, seemingly as an opposite
29 One may note that it is in 12b that the more forceful conjunction alia is to be found. The de of 15 simply refers back to this previous rejection after the somewhat different argu ments of w 13-14. In some ways, w 12b-15, with their inclusio around a twofold argument, form a contrasting parallel to the previous inclusio and twofold argument of w 4-12a (or 6-12a).

THE DYNAMICS OF 1 CORINTHIANS 9 255 to his boasting. As is often pointed out, part of Paul's boast seems to be connected with the refusal to accept material recompense for his apostolic labors. Thus, his grounds for boasting could be negated by making use of his rights or writing to that effect, as seen in 15. But why is the alternative to this the death (apothanein) of the apostle, as seen in the middle of the verse? It appears that a link is to be made here with the zn of 14. (Note that Paul uses both verbs in the infinitive form.) Paul seems to feel that if the alter native is to accept material support (and, by so doing, place an obstacle in the way of the gospel), it is better that he dieand by his death to continue to live in the gospel.31 The death envisioned here does not negate the gospel. Indeed, it is the death of self-renunciation by which the gospel is lived. Of such a death it is possible to boast. Paul's refusal of material support is a participation in such a death, and as such, it is also a participation in the life of the gospel. Paul connects this refusal of support with boasting elsewhere in the Corinthian correspondence, in 2 Corinthians 10-13.32 There, Paul again notes that he preached the gospel to the Corinthians without cost, and he boasts of the fact that he did not (and will not) burden anyone in Corinth (2 Cor 11:7-10). For this to be a legitimate boast in the context of 2 Corin thians 10-13, it must be a boast of his weakness, as seen in 11:30. In this context, Paul's self-abasement in refusing to burden the Corinthians is part of those weaknesses and hardships which make him strong (cf. 12:10). The point is, of course, not that Paul feels free to boast of his great deeds in the service of the gospel. Rather, as 2 Corinthians 11-12 make clear, he boasts of the suffering and weakness which the service of the gospel has imposed upon him. It is this which joins him to the cross of Christ. It is this death which enables him to live. This may be seen further in 16a of the present passage, where Paul specifically rules out the possibility that his preaching of the gospel gives him any grounds for boasting. The rest of the verse, however, gives new reasons for Paul's refusal to boast of the preaching of the gospel, as well as further
An anacoluthon is to be found in the Greek of 15, the result being that the implied comparison of death and boasting is not completely smooth. Paul is concerned to rule out the possibility that anyone could negate his boasting. 31 One sees a similar connection of physical death and spiritual life elsewhere in the Corinthian correspondence; cf. 2 Cor 4:11 and 6:9; also 13:4. 32 On the connection of 2 Corinthians 10-13 with the present passage, see C. Maurer, "Grund und Grenze Apostolischer Freiheit: Exegetisch-theologische Studie zu 1. Korinther 9,** Antwort. Karl Barth zur siebzigsten Geburtstag am 10 Mai 1956 (Zollikon/Zurich: Evangelis cher, 1956) 630-41. Maurer clearly sees that Paul's refusal of community support is a partici pation in the life-giving self-abasement of Christ. See also Dautzenberg, "Verzicht," esp. 224-26, 229-31,
30

30

256 THE CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY | 50, 1988 insights into Paul's perception of himself. Verse 16b continues: anagk gar moi epikeitai. This is usually taken to refer to the imposed or compulsory nature of Paul's activity, a possibility supported by 17, where the volun tary/involuntary nature of this activity is discussed further.33 This interpre tation also has in its favor the implied link between the divinely chosen and compelled biblical prophets (especially, as Conzelmann notes, Jeremiah) and 34 the similarly appointed apostle. These features are certainly present in the text, but there are other, less noticed connotations of the phrase in question. The critical word here is the anagk, which has other meanings besides that of compulsion. Indeed, in the Pauline corpus, an at least equally prominent connotation of anagk is "distress," either of the present eschatological age (1 Cor 7:26) or of the state of the apostle himself (2 Cor 6:4; 12:10).35 The latter usage is particularly suggestive for the present passage. In 2 Cor 6:3-4, anagk is part of a long list of hardships which the apostle endures rather than place an obstacle (didontes proskopri) in the way of anyone's coming to salvation. This fits well with the present context in 1 Corinthians 9, where not making use of his rights to material recompense is part of Paul's attempt to avoid placing an obstacle in the way of the gospel (egkopn dornen in 12b). As noted above, such hardship is not seen as an occasion for boastingexcept insofar as it exemplifies the weakness which allows the power of Christ to work in the apostle. Thus, the distress that Paul suffers in not making use of his rights is part of his enduring anything so as not to place an obstacle in the path of the gospel (v 12b). The alternatives are the death which manifests the death of Christ (and so gives grounds for boasting; cf. 15b) and the placing of an obstacle in the path of the gospel. To do the latter (and so not have anagk in the sense of distress) is to forfeit one's spiritual life in favor of one's material life. It would not be to live from the gospel. Verse 16 concludes with the phrase ouai gar moi estin ean m euaggelismai. This is usually taken as a sign of Paul's being compelled to preach in the manner of the biblical prophets. This view is supported by 17 and is undoubtedly correct. Once again, however, such a view does not seem to
See the discussion in Kasemann, "Amor Fan," 217-35 Again, see Kasemann, "Amor Fati," 229, also Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians, 158 26, where the link between Paul and the prophet Jeremiah is made on the basis of Gal 1 15 and Jer 1 5 C K Barrett (A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians [HNTC, New York Harper & Row, 1968] 209) likewise notes a similarity with Jeremiah here, quoting Jer 20 9 For a comparison of PauFs idea of necessity and freedom with that of the Stoics and Philo, see R A Horsley, "Consciousness and Freedom among the Connthians 1 Cor 8-10," CBQ,40 (1978) 574-89, esp 587-88 35 See also the notoriously difficult passage, 1 Cor 7 37, which speaks of both anagk ana exousia, as in the present chapter
34 33

THE DYNAMICS OF 1 CORINTHIANS 9 257 do full justice to the passage. Crucial here is Paul's use of a self-directed woe formula, a form of expression which has both a general human reference and specific biblical antecedents. In view of the apparent reference in these lines to Paul's "prophetic call," the biblical antecedents are perhaps particularly noteworthy, especially since they are often to be found in prophetic texts. A distinction, however, must be made between the self-directed woe to be found here and the "other-directed" woes common throughout the Bible. Because of their prominent role in prophetic preaching, the latter have been the object of intensive form-critical investigation.36 In contrast, the selfdirected woes have received much less attention, usually being analyzed only in conjunction with their more interesting relative.37 In Hebrew, the difference between these woes is for the most part reflected by a difference in vocabulary and syntax. In the classic prophetic woe-oracles, the particle hy is usually followed by a substantive which describes those who are the reason for the woe and who are soon to be afflicted by God. In this case, the prophetic speaker is not the afflicted party, except insofar as he is stricken with grief over the affliction of Israel. On the other hand, the particle Doy is usually used with a preposition indicating the afflicted party, who is often the speaker himself. The LXX does not distinguish between hy and Doy in any consistent way, though it does, for the most part, maintain the interjection-substantive syntax for the classical prophetic woe-oracle, reserving the dative for the self-directed form. The NT does not even maintain this distinction, as it uses the dative in places similar to the classical oracle.38 1 Cor 9:16c obviously has its main links with the ^oy tradition of selfdirected lamentation. It is, in fact, the only NT example of such a usage. In such a vein, it seems to be significant that the context of the present passage is Paul's reference to his apostolic task, since the prophets also use this form in commenting on their own prophetic calling. Thus, e.g., Isaiah responds to the vision of God in the temple with the words ^y-l and a confession of his sinfulness (Isa 6:5). Jeremiah responds to the anguish of his ministry with the same phrase in Jer 15:10, as does Baruch in Jer 45:3 (LXX Jer 51:33).39
36 See, e.g., E. Gerstenberger, "The Woe Oracles of the Prophets," JBL 81 (1962) 249-63; R. J. Clifford, "The Use of Hy in the Prophets," CBQ 28 (1966) 458-64; J. G. Williams, "The Alas-Oracles of the Eighth Century Prophets," HUCA 38 (1967) 75-91; G. Wanke, "ix und in," ZAWn (1966) 215-18; and W. Janzen, Mourning Cry and Woe Oracle (BZAW 125; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1972). 37 See esp. Wanke, "IR und in," 215-18; and Janzen, Woe Oracle, 24-27. 38 For an analysis of the LXX and NT usage, see Clifford, "Hoy" 463. 39 Cf. also Jer 10:19, though the speaker is not clear here. This is also the case in Mie 7:1 (using ^allay).

258 THE CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY | 50, 1988 There is a certain difference between these prophetic examples with regard to the reasons for the woe. Isaiah utters his woe because he has perceived his own (and the people's) sinfulness and the attendant danger in the presence of the Lord. One may refer to Lam 5:16 and Job 10:15 for similar combinations of woe and sinfulness. Jeremiah and Baruch, on the other hand, lament not their sinfulness but the distress that their ministries have brought upon them. Such a reaction to distress may also be seen in Isa 24:16; Jer 4:13,31; 6:4; and Ps 120:5 (>y). On the surface, Paul's hypothetical woe seems to be closer to that of Isaiah, since a refusal to preach the gospel would place him contrary to the will of God. Thus, Paul may be contrasting himself with the sinful prophet who must utter a woe because of his sinfulness. However, the relationship with the Jeremiah passage is even more suggestive, especially since it is Jeremiah's call which seems to be paradigmatic for Paul. Both Jeremiah and Baruch utter their "woes" as a result of the sufferings they have received for preaching the word of God. Indeed, they, more than any other prophets, lament the sufferings their prophetic activities have brought upon them. It is significant that their laments are not accepted by God. Baruch can even be reproached for seeking "great things" for himself. Instead of such great things, God gives both Jeremiah and Baruch their lives, as in Jer 45:5 (LXX Jer 51:35). Paul also preaches the word of God and suffers for it. However, for Paul this does not result in a lament. Rather, Paul sees grounds for lament in not preaching the gospel. Unlike Jeremiah and Baruch, Paul does not lament the distress which his preaching brings; he boasts of it. The difference lies in Paul's view of suffering, a difference shaped by his gospel of the cross. Jeremiah wishes he had never been born because of his suffering (Jer 15:10); Paul would rather die than give up the suffering which is his grounds for boasting in the gospel. Baruch is given his physical life (psyche) as a result of his activity (Jer 45:5; LXX Jer 51:35). Paul is given his spiritual life (zn) as a result of his activity and would rather suffer unto death than give up this life. Paul's self-conception in 16 is clearly such as to link him with the biblical prophets, especially Jeremiah. Like them, Paul suffers distress as a result of his preaching. The difference between Paul and such prophets lies in their view of suffering. For Paul, it is not something to be lamented. It is instead a grounds for boasting which opens the door to true life. In such a way, Paul does not make use of those rights which would alleviate his dis tress. To do so would be to put an obstacle in the way of the gospel. Again, the Question of Recompense It is significant that Paul should continue in w 17-18 with a discussion of his compensation for preaching the gospel. The misthos of these verses is precisely the word which was lacking in Paul's earlier reference to recom-

THE DYNAMICS OF 1 CORINTHIANS 9 259 pense for preaching the gospel (v 14; cf. Luke 10:7; 1 Tim 5:18). Paul here raises the question of whether he is to receive any misthos for his apostolic activities. Such a misthos appears to be ruled out by the involuntary nature of Paul's activity. Instead of receiving a misthos, Paul claims to have been entrusted with a stewardship (oikonomia). When seen solely from the per spective of its involuntary origins, it is not entirely clear why such an oiko nomia should rule out a misthos,40 Nevertheless, Paul answers the question of his misthos in the negative, again noting that he does not make use of his right in the gospel. The paradoxical nature of these verses is often noted: Paul's reward is to receive no reward.41 However, to stop with this is again not to appreciate fully the dynamic at work here. The point seems to be that Paul rejects any misthos as provided by the Corinthians, however much such a misthos is his right (as seen by his own proofs and the non-Pauline form of the saying in 14). He has, as he notes in 17, a stewardship. The fruits of a steward's labors are not his own. Rather, they belong to his master, since the resources he uses are not his own but his master's (cf. 1 Cor 4:1-2). The steward, of course, shares in a portion of the master's livelihood (cf. Luke 12:42). Paul sees this earlier in 1 Corinthians when he notes the eschatological misthos granted to the apostolic laborers as the fellow workers of God (3:8,14). This is not a misthos of merit (as ruled out by Rom 4:4), but rather a result of the divine grace granted to Paul as God's worker (1 Cor 3:910). The very involuntary nature of his call rules out any self-righteousness and vanity. This earlier discussion of apostolic roles and rewards in 1 Corinthians 3-4 contributes much to the understanding of Paul's arguments here. In these chapters, Paul again uses agricultural imagery to describe his ministry and again claims for himself the distinctive role of "planting" the Corin thians. This act of planting gives him a certain priority over his fellow work ers, a priority upon which Paul insists in 9:1 l-12a. Nevertheless, in the larger theological context, this evangelical division of labor counts for nothing, since God is the only real force behind the growth of the community (cf. 3:7). The point is explicitly made in 3:8-9. Paul's relationship to the Corin thians is that of a planter to a field and, even more specifically, that of a planter in the service of someone else who owns a field. The implications of this are again that the fruits of the planter's labor do not ultimately belong to him. Instead, his misthos is that which is given to him not by the field itself but by the person in whose employ he labors.
40 41

See Barrett, Corinthians, 210. So Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians, 158.

260 THE CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY | 50, 1988 Paul chooses his imagery in these passages so as to rule out the possi bility that the Corinthians might have any real misthos to give him. This has important implications for how Paul sees his social role at Corinth, espe cially if, as R. Hock has suggested, Paul's argument is to be seen in the context of the Hellenistic debate about the proper means of support for a 42 philosopher. Certainly, Hock is correct when he sees Paul's defense of his refusal of support and his artisan's self-sufficiency as a form of weakness about which he is able to boast and which is a good model for the Corinthians in their dealings with one another.43 But Paul does more than this here. Paul radi calizes the argument by denying the possibility that the Corinthians are his true employers and that therefore they have any real misthos to give. For Paul, the only real misthos is an eschatological misthos which is God's alone to give and which God makes available free of charge.44 Paul shares in the gospel precisely because he also makes the gospel available free of charge. If, as is his right, he were to receive a misthos from the Corinthians, he would cease to share in the work of the master and would instead become a paid employee of the Corinthians. His real recompense is, as noted in 14, to live from the gospelto share in the work of the gospel, so as to share in the life of the gospel. One may summarize by noting the relationship of this section to that which has gone before. In the proofs of w 7-14, Paul not only makes a claim to material recompense from the Corinthians but also raises the possibility of another, more spiritual recompense. In w 15-18, Paul again renounces the former recompense so as to lay the groundwork for the latter. By empha sizing his accountability to God rather than to the Corinthians, Paul demon strates the basis for both his freedom and his true recompense.
42 See R. Hock, The Social Context of Paul's Ministry: Tentmaking and Apostleship (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980) 50-65. 43 The term misthos, which Paul uses here, was also used for both the fees that a phil osopher might charge for his services and the salary which he would receive upon entering the household of a patron. Both of these were common means of support for philosophers and were usually seen as more acceptable than the alternate means of begging or working; see Hock, Social Context, 52-59. 44 V. Furnish (// Corinthians [AB 32A; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1984] 507-8) has discussed further the implications of Paul's refusal of support at Corinth in terms of the clientpatron relationship that the Corinthians probably assumed here. According to Furnish, Paul's refusal was seen by the Corinthians as a "renunciation of their status as a patron congregation and therefore a repudiation of their friendship, as well as a regrettable act of self-humiliation." Again, however, the point is even stronger here. Paul asserts that the Corinthians are unable to be his patron because they have nothing of real value to offer him.

THE DYNAMICS OF 1 CORINTHIANS 9 261 Implications for the Apostolic Mission and the Corinthian Situation Verses 19-22 are perhaps the most commented upon verses in this chap 45 ter and as such need far less comment here. Their place in the larger ar gument of chaps. 8-10 is clear, as Paul again uses his own personal situation to counsel the proper use of freedom for service, even if that means a certain curtailment of the use of such freedom. What has been felt to be more problematic here is the connection with the argument ending in 18.46 This, however, presents little problem once one sees the thrust of Paul's comments on misthos and oikonomia. Because he is God's steward, Paul has made himself a slave to all hu manity, even though he is a free man. Like a slave told by his master to serve another, Paul accepts no misthos from those whom he serves. It is, in fact, Paul's slavery to God which makes him free with respect to humanity, even as he serves humanity.47 Once again, it is instructive to view this in the context of the Hellenistic debates about the proper means of support for a philosopher. Despite its widespread use as a means of support, the acceptance of a misthos from those whom philosophers served left such philosophers open to the charge of having compromised their freedom.48 Again, Paul not only reaffirms his freedom by refusing a misthos from the Corinthians. He also denies that the Corinthians have any real misthos to give him. His "profit" (kerdaineiri) lies instead in the further spread of the gospel, among both Jews and Gentiles. As such, his real misthos lies in the opportunity to share in both the master's work and the fruits of the master's gospel.
45 See, e.g., G. Bornkamm, "The Missionary Stance of Paul in I Corinthians and in Acts," Studies in Luke-Acts (P. Schubert Festschrift; ed. L. E. Keck and J. L. Martyn; Nashville: Abingdon, 1966) 194-207; and P. Richardson, "Pauline Inconsistency: I Corinthians 9:19-23 and Galatians 2:11-14,** NTS 26 (1979-80) 347-62, among many others. 46 H. Lietzmann (An die Korinther /-//[HNT 9; 4th ed.; ed. W. G. Kmmel; Tbingen: Mohr (Siebeck), 1949] 43), e.g., sees more of a connection between 19 and the previous chapter than with the excursus of 9:1-18. 47 While Paul talks about making himself a slave to all humanity, it is clear from standard Pauline usage that he does this only because he is already the slave of Christ (cf. 1 Cor 4:1). It is this slavery which explains Paul's simultaneous claim of freedom in 19. See again Meeks (Urban Christians, 99), who notes that Paul "has not ceased to be free (eleutheros) by freely enslaving' himself to others." Both as God's steward and as Christ's slave, Paul receives no misthos from the Corinthians. 48 Such criticism was made against both the practice of accepting fees and that of entering another's household. The critics of such practices were to be found mostly among the Cynics, who looked to Socrates as their predecessor in such allegations. Again see Hock (Social Context, 52-55) for discussion and bibliography.

262 THE CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY | 50, 1988 This becomes explicit in 23, a verse which has been seen to have a "utilitarian sound" because of its apparent concern for personal salvation. Conzelmann is certainly right to see this statement in terms of Paul's general 49 understanding of election and salvation sola gratia. The specific key here, however, is Paul's statement about becoming a sharer (sygkoinnos) of the gospel. It is this to which Paul's arguments throughout the chapter have been leading. The proper recompense for Paul's apostolic activities is not the material recompense to which he has an obvious right. Rather, he seeks to share in the spiritual fruits of his laboror rather, to share in the gospel itself. One must be careful here. Paul does not claim to earn such rewards. Only if what he were doing were of his own will (and abilities) would he be entitled to such a reward. Rather, his activity is a stewardship entrusted to him.50 He makes use of what is not his own so that he might share in what is not his own. He cannot boast except of the weakness which shows God's powera weakness which is intrinsic to the gospel and which is here demonstrated by his refusal of material support. The athletic imagery of w 24-27 makes the transition between Paul's personal example and his exhortation to the Corinthians with regard to the specific issues of chaps. 8-10. Once again, however, the connection with the rest of the present chapter has not been fully seen.51 This is not merely, as often thought, a general Pauline exhortation to the Corinthians for selfcontrol. Rather, it is also closely related to the personal statements that have gone before. In such a way, Paul's contrast between perishable and imperishable wreaths in 25 recalls his earlier distinction between the material and spir itual recompense of his own activity among the Corinthians. Similarly, Paul's disciplining and subduing of his own body in 27 is not simply an example of general bodily restraint. It is also a specific reference to his refusal to take material recompense from the Corinthians. This is made clear by the second half of the verse, which speaks of the danger of being "disqualified" after preaching to others. In the context of the present chapter, this can only refer to the receiving of a misthos from the Corinthians for his apostolic activity. Even though such a misthos is his right, its acceptance would put an obstacle in the path of the gospel and make him a hired person of the Corinthians rather than God's steward and a sharer in the gospel.
49 50

Conzelmann, / Corinthians, 161. One may also recall the similar relationship of reward and duty to be found in Luke

17:7-10.
51 Conzelmann (/ Corinthians, 161-62) sees it as standing out from its context, even though he notes the connection of 27 with 23; see Weiss, Korintherbrief, 246.

THE DYNAMICS OF 1 CORINTHIANS 9 263 Paul's central concept of sharing may even be at work in the difficult metaphor of 24. Indeed, only one receives the prize52Christ Jesusbut all run that they may obtain it. In running, one shares in the life of the one who has run and won the prize. The Corinthians should run likewise. Conclusions In this chapter, Paul does more than simply present himself as an ex ample of how the Corinthians should act in the case of meat sacrificed to idols. He also presents, in his own person, a summary of his gospel. Chosen in a way similar to that of the prophets, Paul is liable to all the distress which afflicted such prophets. In the present context, such distress includes a forgoing of material support for his apostolic activities. From the perspective of the crucified Messiah, such material deprivation is to be wel comed as a sharing in the cross of Christ, a sharing which opens the way for a sharing in the life of the gospel. Unlike some of his prophetic predecessors who lamented their material circumstances, the apostle rejects any attempt to ease his condition by availing himself of what he fully asserts are his rights. To live from the gospel, one must live the gospel. The cornerstone of this gospel is freedom, but this is not simply the freedom to eat idol meat. The freedom Paul claims is a more basic eschatological freedom from the ways and expectations of the present world. Such a freedom is gained at the cost of suffering and renunciation, since Paul must still live and work in this present world. Yet, to avoid such suffering would be to compromise the gospel which he serves. In the case of Corinth, Paul preserves his freedom by accepting no recompense from the Corinthians. Indeed, Paul does not even allow that the Corinthians have any real recompense to give him. Only the one for whom Paul really works is able to give such a recompense, and he makes it available freely. As God's steward, Paul does likewise and so is united with his Lord. In such a way, he shares in the life and work of the free gospel, even as he has shared in its death. The point of Paul's personal example for the situation described in chaps. 8 and 10 is clear. The renunciation that Paul is asking of the Corin thian strong in these chapters is precisely that material renunciation which allows one to share in the gospel. Such a renunciation is an expression of true freedom, a freedom not only in the world but also from the world. Such freedom is only gained at the cost of material sacrifice, yet it opens the way for spiritual life.
52 brabeion; cf. Phil 3:14. On the similarity of Phil 3:3-12 to the present passage, see Dautzenberg, "Verzicht," 231.

264 THE CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY | 50, 1988 In this chapter, Paul claims for himself both the woes of the prophets and the rights of an apostle. By not making use of his rights, he is able to boast of his woes. In boasting of his woes, he offers himself as both a paradigm for the Corinthians and an illustration of the gospel.

^ s
Copyright and Use: As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling, reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a violation of copyright law. This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However, for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article. Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available, or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s). About ATLAS: The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association (ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American Theological Library Association.

Вам также может понравиться