Evaluate Paul's purpose in writing to the Church at Rome.

Question.

What was Paul’s purpose in writing the letter to the church at Rome?

Synopsis.

As the question of Paul’s purpose in writing the letter to the church at Rome is considered it becomes immediately obvious that there will be no clear cut answer. So varied are the different interpretations of this issue that any attempt to devise a new approach would be likened to re-inventing the wheel. For the purposes of this essay two scholarly attempts to solve this mystery will be looked at.

It will be seen that each is really a variation of the other and that the purpose can be honed done to a short list of possibilities.

However, as this is applied to our contemporary situation many of the differing views will come into an important focus.

Firstly, W.S. Campbell¹ writes that the debated purposes behind Paul’s letter to the Romans are; a). a letter of self introduction². The letter is to be seen as an introduction to prepare the way for his missionary activities in Spain as laid out in chapter 15:22-32. Paul, in anticipation of his visit to Rome is looking to gain support for the extension of his mission to the gentiles. This is a view that is supported by J.A.T. Robinson who holds that the purpose of Romans is beyond dispute³.

The main objections to this proposal are that it is not consistent with Paul’s other letters and what is known of Paul, in that he would feel obliged to seek the approval of the Roman church for his theology⁴. Also the references are seen as being so vague to his intended visit that they could hardly be the main theme of his letter⁵; b). Romans is an assertion of Paul’s Apostolic Authority. Anton Fridrichsen and G. Klien view the letter to the Romans as an attempt to impose the authority of Paul on the church, not so much as what they can do for Paul as what Paul can do for them⁶; c). Romans as a letter to Jerusalem⁷. This explanation deals with the issues of the division between the Jewish and Gentile church. Paul while in deep thought over these issues has, as he set his sights on Jerusalem a need to bring unity to the cause of the gospel. Thus he writes to the Jerusalem church to take up the issue of justification by faith⁸. Campbell stresses that the weakest point to be found in the view that Romans is a letter to Jerusalem, “is that although this interpretation enables us to establish some connections between the writing of Romans and Jerusalem it fails to provide any conclusive reason why the letter should actually have been addressed to Rome”⁹; d). Romans as a circular letter to Rome.

This explanation owes much to T.W. Manson who argues on textual grounds that the letter is best interpreted as a letter to Rome and others¹⁰.

If Romans is to be viewed as a circular letter then the reason needed for justifying it either as a letter to Roman or Jerusalem is removed. Again however claims Campbell, this fails to provide an adequate explanation as to why it was sent to Rome¹¹; e). finally, Campbell puts forward the idea that Romans was a letter written to Rome to deal with an internal problem¹². Possibly a division had been formed between liberal minded Gentile Christians (the strong in faith) and the more conservative Jewish Christians (the weak in faith)¹³. The letter is written to the former who Campbell sees as the cause of an internal dispute, causing Paul to exegete the righteous purpose of God¹⁴. In an effort to counteract the disunity Paul goes on to emphasise the equality of both Jew and Gentile in sin (3:20) and in the gospel (10:12)¹⁵.

A second author that has assessed these issues is Leon Morris. It must be noted that Morris in many places follows the lines of debate as laid out in Karl P Donfried’s book “The Romans Debate”¹⁶. Space will dictate that not all views will be adequately dealt with, however it is hoped the main themes will treated with proper respect.

The first view that is put under the microscope is that Romans was a Compendium of Christian Teaching¹⁷. A view that W.G.T. Shedd would whole heartedly agree with¹⁸. Those who hold this view see the steady treatment of important themes throughout the epistle as the key to understanding Paul’s purpose. However as Morris rightly points out this does not allow for the specific references to Roman found in the epistle¹⁹. Likewise there are many important theological issues such as Christology, the Resurrection and the Church that are obvious by their omission.

Secondly, Morris looks at the understanding that Romans is Paul’s mature thinking on Essential Christianity²⁰. He quotes Gunter Bornkamm who claims that it is Paul’s last will and testament²¹. Bornkamm feels that Paul is referring back to his conversion experiences and writing his reflection on them in the light of his own journey, having dealt with perplexing questions that had arisen out of his encounters with the Judaisers²².

Bornkamm elevates the hypothesis of T.W. Manson (mentioned earlier) to be a valid explanation of why the specific references to Rome exist in the epistle²³. Morris like Campbell asks the questions, if this is Paul’s reflections or last will and testament, why did Paul send the Epistle to Rome? A satisfactory answer this view fails to be provided.

Thirdly, Romans is seen as a discussion of the church. A view Franz J. Leenhardt holds as the key to the Epistle. With Paul setting his sights towards Spain the Roman church needed to be the base of the Church as Jerusalem was to distant to be the “Mother Church”²⁴.

Fourthly, Morris like Campbell looks at the view that Romans is a circular letter. T.W. Manson as stated earlier is the main exponent of this view²⁵. “I am by no means convinced of the truth of this suggestion” is how John Knox feels about this explanation²⁶. The scheme he posits is however not without merit but leaves too many mysteries unsolved.

Fifthly, Morris again highlights as does Campbell the idea that Romans is a letter to the Jerusalem church²⁷.

Sixthly, Morris looks at the idea that Romans is collection of Personal claims. This suggestion closely follows that of Campbell’s when he talks about Romans being an assertion of Paul’s Apostolic authority²⁸. This also would be closely linked to Morris’s seventh point that some see Romans as Paul laying down his Apostolic Foundations.

Morris’s eighth point of the Weak and Strong²⁹ is linked with Campbell’s idea that some see Romans as a letter written to alleviate the disunity caused by internal conflict. This is a theme Robert J. Karris holds as the means of unlocking the truth behind the epistle³⁰. Karris writes, “thus the occasion for Romans and its purpose are to be seen in Paul’s attempts to unify the divergent communities in Rome”³¹. On this point A.J.M. Wedderburn³², writes in defence of Campbell’s article and to emphasis this point, “gentile Christians could have had an adverse affect upon the outcome of Paul’s journey to Jerusalem and thus the unity of the whole church”³³.

As Morris draws near to his own stance he gives an overview of Matthew Blacks idea that Romans is about Paul Liberalising a reactionary church³⁴ followed by Wilhelm Wuellner’s³⁵ and Robert Jewett’s³⁶ concept of it being a Rhetorical Genre.

For Morris the depth of Romans lies in Paul’s preparation for a visit. He has on his side a substantial scholarly support, although he admits it does not take away all of the difficulties, it does however take into account Paul’s having been a missionary for some twenty years.

As this author feels is correctly pointed out by C.H. Dodd³⁷, the purpose of Romans is outlined in Romans 15:14-33. Paul was writing to build a base for his intended mission into Spain. It was important for Paul’s future plans to secure the sympathy of the church and thus he sets out to give a comprehensive and reasoned statement of the fundamentals of the Christian faith as he had lived it³⁸.

G.G Findlay adds a qualifier that is worthy of note, “Such an epistle, while it paved the way for his approaching visit, would at the same time fore-arm this church against the Judaizing agitators”³⁹.

C.K. Barrett would widen this idea a little further and say that the epistle to the Romans not only prepares the way for Paul’s approach to Rome and his intended mission beyond but that it is also, “Paul’s exposition of ‘his’ gospel to the gentile churches which had come into existence independently of his efforts”⁴⁰.

Thus it can be seen that to wade through the mire of different ideas and scholarly research on this issue is to say the least, hazardous. This author find’s the evidence last mentioned to be the most compelling although that of Karris has a vast impact when we look at applying the purpose of Romans to our contemporary situation. In concluding this part of the essay Ann Jervis’⁴¹ idea that Paul was writing to exercise his mandate for mission and his preaching the Gospel in writing was, “to claim the Roman believers as part of his ‘offering’ of ‘sanctified’ and ‘obedient’ gentiles” has considerable merit.⁴²

As mentioned, when the purpose of Romans is applied to our contemporary situation the view of Karris takes on a new element. Reta Finger who holds that Paul’s primary purpose in writing Romans is to prepare for his visit and his intended mission to Spain points out two problems that he faced in doing so⁴³.

One, a theological problem, how do you preach a gospel that is aimed at breaking down hostility when those whom you wish to help you spread it have barriers of their own⁴⁴.

The other, a practical problem of how he can ask the support of a group of Christians when they are so divided. If one group agrees to help there is the potential for the other to undermine the work⁴⁵.

Thus, in a contemporary situation the letter would be of prime importance to any minister, missionary or evangelist who was considering calling on a church to support them in an outreach to the world in which they live. The purpose of Romans would still be as that of Paul, to prepare the hearts of the church so that on all occasions they could represent a united front to all whom they would present the gospel.

Paul has in a very systematic way presented to the church of Roman an exposition of where they should be at, and how they got there. What use is it today to a body of believers to evangelise the world but offer them in physical terms a place in a church that is lacking unity and equality. There needs to be no division between the strong and the weak.

We all need to be reminded from time to time of what Christianity is all about and what Christ has done for us. Hence today it is not inappropriate to systematically preach through the book of Romans so as to bring about a renewal of spiritual activity in the believer. It is too easy in a world that has no room for God for the church to be caught up into the worldly heaven of materialism.

In Conclusion what use is it for the church to offer something to the world that it already has, why would they want to come to a place that exhibits all the signs of being no different from the rest. Paul in Philippians 1:27f, talks about striving side by side and being of one mind as we live a life worthy of the gospel. In Romans he offers the opportunity to reflect and understand what that gospel is all about so that when the church reaches out to meet the people of Spain or elsewhere they are presenting to these people a reflection of a Christly kingdom.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.

Barrett, C.K.,A Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans. (Adam & Charles Black: London, 1957).

Black, Matthew., Romans. (Eerdmans; Grand Rapids,1973).

Bornkamm, Gunter., “The Letter to the Romans as Paul’s last will and Testament” Australian Biblical Review XI 1963 2-14.

Campbell, W.S., “Why did Paul write Romans?” The Expository Times. Volume LXXXV No 9 (June, 1974) 264-268.

Dodd, C.H., The Epistle to the Romans. (Hodder & Stoughton: London, 1954).

Donfried Karl P., The Romans Debate. (T&T Clark; Edinburgh, 1977).

Findlay, G.G.,The Epistle of Paul The Apostle. (Charles H. Kelly: London, 1903).

Finger, Reta Haltenman., Paul and the Roman House Churches, (Herald Press: Scottdale; Pennsylvannia, 1993).

Karris, Robert, J.,“Romans 14:1-15:13 and the Occasion of Romans”, The Romans Debate. (Ed. Karl P. Donfried: T&T Clark; Edinburgh, 1977) 65-84.

Jervis, Ann., “The Purpose of Romans”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament: Supplement Series 55. (JSOT Press: Sheffield, 1991).

Jewett, Robert.,“Romans as an Ambassadorial Letter”, Interpretation, XXXVI No 1 (1982) 5-20.

Knox, John.,“A note on the Text of Romans”, New Testament Studies. Volume 2 (1955-56) 193. (191-193).

Manson, T.W., “St Paul’s Letter to the Romans and Others”, The Romans Debate. (Ed. Karl P. Donfried: T&T Clark; Edinburgh, 1977).

Marrow, Stanley, B., Paul his Letters and his Theology. (Paulist Press; New York, 1986).

Morris, Leon., The Epistle to the Romans. (Eerdmans; Grand Rapids, 1988).

Robinson, J.A.T., Wrestling with Romans. (SCM Press; London, 1979).

Shedd, W.T., Commentary on Romans. (Grand Rapids, 1980 repr. Of 1879 edn.).

Wedderburn, A.J.M., “The Purpose and Occasion of Romans Again”, The Expository Times, Volume XC No 5 Feb 1979 137-141.

Wuellner, Wilhelm., “Paul’s Rhetoric of Argumentation in Romans: An Alternative to the Donfried-Karris Debate over Romans”, Catholic Bible Quarterly. XXXVIII 1976 330. 330-351.