|
|
|
Paul in Israel’s Story |
|
|
|
Book Review John L. Meech ( This book
from the AAR Academy Series is an impressive interdisciplinary work which
moves nearly seamlessly through the fields of biblical theology, systematic
theology, and philosophy. Although properly speaking it perhaps falls into
the category of what Pamela Eisenbaum has
characterized as a “neotraditionalist” reading of
Paul (meaning the traditional approach considered in light of the new
perspective), nevertheless Meech’s work
demonstrates a nuanced systematic reading of Paul which arguably articulates
what many biblical scholars have (in my opinion) not as successfully
envisioned -- a hypothetical “post-new perspective perspective.”
This is in part precisely because Meech sidesteps
focused biblical debate in a larger philosophical quest to address the
postmodern problem of the self as articulated by Paul Ricoeur. Specifically,
although not uniquely, Meech begins by lessening
the tension between Luther and the new perspective by reading Luther’s
doctrine of justification against the background of the eschatological
community as constituted in Christ (cf. pp. 12,13). In proceeding to lay out
a biblical interpretation of Paul’s self-understanding, Meech
chooses as his principal dialogue partners James D.G. Dunn, N.T. Wright,
Terence Donaldson, and Stephen Westerholm.
Theologically Meech considers himself a Bultmannian (cf. p. 5), although he strongly argues that
a critical reappraisal of Bultmann is essential. Specifically,
while following Bultmann in asserting that a
transcendent encounter with the risen Lord can be articulated in
phenomenological terms (cf. p. 46), Meech rejects Bultmann’s eschatology as being empty of content,
preferring instead Jürgen Moltmann’s
account of the community of the living and dead in Christ. More to the point,
and this is what occupies most of Meech’s book, Bultmann’s attempt to move directly from Paul’s
interpretative horizon to our own by means of his program of
demythologization is supplanted by a series of detours as articulated by Paul
Ricoeur in addressing the problem of the self as
other. Meech further qualifies Ricoeur’s
work by emphasizing the self in the context of a community. Writing of Paul’s
shift in his self-understanding, Meech draws
together his biblical, theological, and philosophical arguments: Paul fails to recognize his community with Jesus because
of a misdirection of the community’s aim in Paul and others. In what Paul
later articulates as an encounter with the risen Christ, he is confronted by
a silent suffering other who cannot be articulated in his community’s story.
When he retells the community’s story so that Jesus can appear as a living
body like himself, Paul can finally represent Christ’s suffering as his own
(“I bear on my body the brandmarks of Jesus,” Gal.
6:17). In this reconfigured story, a more original community of persons is
disclosed in which each person is a living body. Paul shifts from one who
confidently addresses his world to one who is addressed by a new referent --
the crucified and risen Christ. That the referent is new does not mean that
Paul’s reconfiguration created it. Rather, in retrospect he can say that his
community always bore witness to Christ and that the community is continuous
in its embrace of this other despite its former misdirection. Paul narrates
this concordant discordance as the community’s dying and rising with Christ
and locates his own dying and rising in the community (p. 132). Those
who, like myself, remain somewhat less than enthusiastic about Luther and Bultmann should nevertheless be able to appreciate Meech’s correctives vis-à-vis Moltmann,
Ricoeur, and an emphasis on community in
articulating an approach to Paul’s self-understanding. Regardless of whether
this approach proves compelling in the long run, nevertheless Meech’s thoughtful book should be considered seriously as
a welcome and long overdue initial systematic treatment of key Pauline themes
in the newly reconfigured landscape of Pauline biblical studies and
contemporary philosophical discourse. It will be very interesting to see how
future works explore this otherwise uncharted territory. Mark M. Mattison |
|
|
|
|
|
|
