The Fourth Sunday after Trinity
Paul’s boasting in Corinth
Do you like those biscuits known as
‘boasters’?
A zany website describes them as the best in the
world, after a ‘world cup of biscuit tasting’ in which they beat off golden
crunch creams in the final.
Not surprisingly I suppose, they are ‘boasters’
after all!
And boasting, is what this
morning’s reading from 2 Corinthians
is all about.
Before the city of Corinth was destroyed by the
Roman troops of Lucius Mummius
in 146BC, it was a centre of commerce and sport, hosting the biennial Isthmian
Games.
When Julius Caesar rebuilt Corinth a century
later the Games returned to what had become the Roman capital of the Greek
region of Achaia: Corinth was a competitive place, and competitive people often
boast about their successes.
But Paul refused to play their game.
He argued that the limits of
human behaviour and spirituality are set by God, they are not targets to
overleap, or benchmarks to beat.
Similarly, fellow Christians
are co-workers, perhaps under obedience or tuition, but they are not
rivals.
If they become so, there is a good chance that
issues give way to personality conflicts.
This is what happened in Corinth from time to
time, causing Paul distress and difficulty.
And it caused him to engage in a correspondence
involving letters, some of which we still have.
It is worth explaining a bit about Paul’s
relationship with the Corinthians and how his letters got written.
For there has been much
discussion and some controversy about how 2
Corinthians came to be.
Some people argue that, like 1 Corinthians and Romans, it is a complete and singular letter, written by Paul
around 55AD.
While Paul’s authorship is
rarely disputed, there are scholars who claim that 2 Corinthians is not a single letter, but is actually constructed
of two or more letters, which may not have been written at the same time.
In 2 Corinthians 2:3-4 Paul mentions a ‘sorrowful letter’, which he
felt the need to write to them.
This letter is not now
thought by many to be 1 Corinthians, even
though it is certainly sorrowful and hard-edged in places.
Also the possibility that some
letters of Paul have been lost to history has to be taken into account.
We may well not have access
to some of what Paul wrote, and we certainly do not have copies of the letters they wrote to him, even if we do know what he wrote to them.
Wouldn’t it be fascinating if
we found the First and Second Letters of the Corinthians to Paul?!
But we don’t – at best,
he occasionally quotes back bits they wrote to him in order to counter their
arguments or beliefs.
A bit like an email
correspondence, where you send back what you received.
Of course, it’s easy to make
mistakes doing that – have you ever forwarded an email by accident to
someone who probably shouldn’t see it?
Or replied to ‘all’ when you
didn’t mean to?
There is a convention - and I
received something like it this week from someone – where an email comes
saying ‘so-and-so would like to recall the email entitled “such and such”’.
So in your mailbox you end up
with an email that the sender is asking you not to read!
How odd – and tempting
– that is!
But this is the modern way of
‘taking back what you said’, a sort of apology really.
In the past you just had to
say sorry.
But now, it’s not so much
‘Computer says ‘No’’ - it can also say ‘I take it back’!
But to return to Paul - if
only he had written emails – for then we could read what they wrote to
him, causing him to reply as he did!
His correspondence with the
Corinthians is a bit like that – if you read it carefully, and piece it
together in the correct order, it reveals a kind of discussion – a sort
of pagans versus Christians dialogue.
All this may mean that the
letter Paul referred to as ‘sorrowful’ was not lost after all, but was later incorporated
into what we now have in our Bibles.
If so, chapters 10-13 (a part
of which we heard this morning) are a prime suspect in this case, mainly
because of a change in style of writing, and discrepancies in the way in which
Paul refers to events and to himself.
1
Corinthians reveals that he was dealing with an adventurous,
even unruly bunch, who, having converted to
Christianity, needed support, encouragement, and sometimes, reprimand.
Paul has to assert the truth of the Gospel, and
defend his own credentials in instructing and telling them off.
In the nine
chapters of 2 Corinthians
Paul describes his spiritual labours and other activities, and we can identify a genuine
affection for the Corinthian Church.
Paul comes across as quite
modest, not needing to commend himself, or boast to them.
In chapters 8-9 Paul broaches
the thorny subject of stewardship – the giving of money to support the
Judean Christians.
Yet in 10-13, he is less
reticent about his credentials, is even quite bold, being quite critical of
their narrow-minded and self-indulgent ways.
Paul evidently felt the need
to defend his spiritual credentials, to boast, and even to attack the
Corinthians, which he does so until the close of the book (Chapter 13).
Thus we encounter two different,
but related sides of Paul’s character, which seem to jump about in 1 and 2 Corinthians.
It is confusing for us and it
must have been a bit confusing for the Corinthians.
So Paul gained a reputation for having a bark
worse than his bite.
Those who wanted to undermine his authority claimed there was a serious
discrepancy between the way he dealt with them in person and by letter.
‘This is not the
Paul we know’, was their complaint.
So what was Paul
really like?
Coincidentally,
only last week the Pope announced that his tomb has been found, perhaps not
surprisingly underneath the church dedicated to him at St Paul’s outside the
Walls, in Rome.
Three years ago a
marble sarcophagus, inscribed with the text Paulo
Apostolo Mart (Paul, Apostle and Martyr) was dug up, and this supported the view
that although St Paul had been originally buried in the catacombs on the Appian
Way, his body was moved to a site over which the Church was built.
Carbon dating
analysis revealed bone fragments from the 1st or 2nd centuries.
So
the bones could well be St Paul’s, and, after all, they must be somewhere
around Rome where he was martyred.
Exciting as the
discovery may be, it’s hardly controversial.
We might wonder
though, what he looked like.
The second
century apocryphal text, the Acts of Paul
and Thecla, describes Paul as a thin-haired,
short man, with crooked legs, joined eyebrows and a slightly hooked nose.
A fresco picture
of him, in the fourth century catacombs of St Thecla
has been recently cleaned, and fits this description, and corresponds to some
of the tradition icons of St Paul that have been copied over many centuries.
Paul does not
seem to have a frightening appearance.
On the other hand
the Corinthians had probably not encountered him when as Saul of Tarsus, he
inspired fear among Christians (see Acts
8:3, 9:1-2, 13, 26).
So although Paul
was a passionate man, those against him did not credit him for it, preferring
the easily dismissible, mild mannered guest that visited them.
This apparent discrepancy
in Paul’s behaviour was used to discredit him.
Even though he wrote
strongly sometimes, some of his readers concluded that the written Paul is not
the real Paul, and so could be ignored.
It was a
convenient approach and we can imagine how frustrating it must have been.
Paul is their
father in God, as it were, and it must have pained him to be severe at times,
but for him their spiritual protection and development were the main priority,
rather than simply being considered to be a nice bloke.
It is a classic
dilemma in ministry.
So we must never
overlook what drove Paul.
He was utterly
committed - having met the Risen Christ on the Road to Damascus - he was
utterly committed to spreading the gospel, particularly to gentiles.
In this much he
was willing to be ‘all things to all men’ – he would engage with the
pagan Corinthians on issues such as sexuality, morals, the afterlife, magic,
spirituality and even hat-wearing.
Yet his
enthusiasm and ability was tempered, tempered by his ‘thorn in the flesh’ a
phrase still very much in use today.
It may well be
that each and every one of us has some kind of thorn in the flesh –
something which hinders us, or draws us back, makes us reticent or wary of
doing things even when we know we could or should do them.
While we have no
idea what Paul’s ‘thorn’ was – and there have been all kinds of theories
as to whether it was physical, mental, emotion or even sexual – we do
know that whatever it was it served the purpose of preventing him being too
self-assured – too boastful.
This may mean
that it was something which others might know about such that if he banged on
too much, they might say ‘O come on Paul, you know you can’t say that because…’
We don’t know
– and I guess one of the key features of a thorn in the flesh, is that it
is not very visible, causes discomfort, and you don’t say much about it, but always
feel its presence.
Spiritually
speaking, such a thorn serves to intravenously insert a bit of humility.
None of us is
perfect, and knowing so is quite good for us.
It prevents us
from boasting too much, and gives us an element of weakness of character.
Yet Paul says it
is in such weakness that the power of Christ is made manifest.
None of us can be
entirely strong in ourselves – we need Christ to make us strong.
And so, if there
is one thing we can boast about it is
our weakness, and, as Paul says ‘whenever I am weak, I am strong’.
Assuming you can
do stuff is dangerous – and failure is painful.
Knowing that you
depend on Christ for strength, gives strength and inspiration, and if success does
not come, we still know that Christ is with us, for richer for poorer, in
sickness and in health, in weakness and in strength.
St Paul admits
it, but he is speaking for us all.
Thus any reward, or consolation is in the Lord,
not in self-congratulation.
And that is why boasting, really does take the
biscuit!
So to God, who gives us strength in the gospel
in spite of our weaknesses, be glory and thanksgiving,
now and always, Amen.