Читать книгу Der Philipperbrief des Paulus - Eve-Marie Becker - Страница 28

3. 1 Cor 7071 Kor07:32071 Kor07,32ff.071 Kor07,32ff.: anxiety and individual decision-makingDecision-making

In 1 Cor 7071 Kor07:32071 Kor07,32ff.071 Kor07,32ff., Paul remarks: ‘Take your existential μέριμναμέριμνα, μεριμνάω as a tool for deciding about your sexual behavior and your family life.’ Here, Paul makes human “anxiety” into a criterion of individual ethics. In doing so, he contributes to a broader ancient discourse about “selfhoodSelbst, self, selfhood”. In her analysis of early Imperial Roman literature, Shadi BartschBartsch, Shadi argues that the sense of the human Self is especially developed in its encounter with sexuality and ethics.Bartsch, Shadi1 In Paul’s view, of course, the “action space” for developing selfhood via sexuality and ethics is primarily not Roman society but the sphere of ecclesia. Individual ethics is thus framed by communal identity. Before I examine how Paul conceptualizes “anxiety” as a tool of individual sexual ethics, I will first outline Paul’s general concept of sexual ethics in its communal setting.

3.1. Paul and sexual ethics: 1 Thess 4131 Thess04 and beyond

From his earliest letter-writing, Paul deals with sexual ethics. Like other topics of ethical discourse, questions about sexual ethics primarily result from discussions within the community, but they also emerge from communication with those “outside” (ἔξω) the community. Paul expresses his goals of general ethical teaching most clearly in 1 Thess 4131 Thess04, by stating: “we exhort you … to mind your own affairs, and to work with your hands, as we charged you; so that you may command the respect of outsiders, and be dependent on nobody” (v. 10-12pass.).

Like various other fields of ethical teaching – such as law, the economy, food and dress codes – in sexual ethics, the formal tools of Pauline rhetoric are also diverse.Löhr, Hermut1 Hermut LöhrLöhr, Hermut writes, “… Paul’s ethics seems to be on the border between ‘Gebotsethik’ (ethics based on commandments) and ‘Einsichtsethik’ (ethics based on insight or understanding);”Löhr, Hermut2 the variety of ethical arguments indeed corresponds to the diversity of topics discussed; Paul frequently exposes something like “dispositional ethics”. In all ethical discourse, Paul is ultimately concerned with the “sanctification” or “holiness” (ἁγιασμός) of the community as a communal entity. This concern is socio-politically significant: Paul intends to strengthen the social attractiveness of Christ-believing communities3 and to organize communal life around a perfect “political environment,” as it is discussed in political theory in and beyond Aristotle (pol 9:1280bAristotelespol9,1280b). By caring for the community’s sanctification, issues of sexual behavior seem to be most popular and most urgent – for the group and the individual (s. above).

Paul’s ethical admonitions are sometimes very concrete. This is most evident within the so-called catalogues of virtues and vices, for instance in 1 Cor 6:9071 Kor06,9: “… neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor sexual perverts … will inherit the kingdom of God.” Here, by addressing groups of people, Paul almost exclusively incriminates what he believes constitutes sexual immorality: πόρνοι, ἀρσενοκοῖται.071 Kor06,94 However, as early as 1 Thess 4131 Thess04, Paul proclaims: “… this is the will of God, your sanctification (ἁγιασμός): that you abstain from unchastity (πορνεία); that each one of you know how to take a wife for himself in holiness and honor, not in the passion of lust (ἐν πάθει ἐπιθυμίας) like heathen who do not know God … For God has not called us for uncleanless (ἀκαρθασία), but in holiness (ἁγιασμός) …” (1 Thess 4:3-8pass.).

Paul’s approach to sexual ethics here is exhortative. It addresses the collective of community members. The discoursal frame is religious. Since Paul aims at the sanctification of communal sexual ethics, current exegesis tends to argue that, in his sexual ethics, Paul wishes to implement cultic purity. It seems as though Paul combines various traditions of ethical teaching, which are partly derived from Jewish instruction and partly analogous to Stoic ethics: When Paul wants the Thessalonians to “abstain” (ἀπέχεσθαι) in a general sense from “immorality” (πορνεία), he also uses a “technical term” – ἀπέχεσθαι – which “aimed at distinguishing Christian from pagan morality.”CiceroTusc3,7CiceroTusc3,23f.CiceroTusc4,115 It is thus common for current scholarship on Pauline ethics to emphasize how, in his teaching about sexuality, Paul combines Hellenistic moral philosophy and Jewish parenesispar(a)enesisParänese.Betz, Hans Dieter6 Will Deming has worked extensively on this topic, especially in regard to 1 Cor 7071 Kor07.7

Such a description of Pauline sexual ethics might be adequate. However, this description focuses on either the collective or communal or the religious aspects of Paul’s moral arguments. Thus, as much as scholars tend to neglect Paul’s concept of “anxiety” and “care,” they also tend to overlook the individual implications of Pauline ethics. In 1 Cor 7071 Kor07 in particular, Paul does not restrict himself to a collective moral exhortation; rather, he presupposes and enforces a human selfSelbst, self, selfhood-understanding according to which ethical discourse can be developed individually. He does so by taking himself as a paradigm and pointing to his own human “anxiety”: consequently, μέριμναμέριμνα, μεριμνάω occurs as an anthropological viz. ethical criterion of individual decision-makingDecision-making.

3.2. Sexuality and anxiety: individual decision-makingDecision-making in 1 Cor 7071 Kor07

In 1 Cor 7071 Kor07:32071 Kor07,32, Paul states: “I want you to be free from anxieties (ἀμέριμνος).” This seems to be close to Paul’s admonition in Phil 4 (s. above). Again, Paul is concerned with the analysis of human existence because, in 1 Cor 7, the context is also full of various temporal, that is eschatological, motifs. Paul says, “the appointed time has grown very short (ὁ καιρὸς συνεσταλμένος).” However, in this frame of correctly perceiving time, Paul does not only admonish his community; rather, he makes his engagement with individual anxiety into the final criterion of sexual ethics.

How does Paul achieve this? The general discourse about sexual ethics is raised by the Corinthians themselves, who write to Paul and ask him about various subjects (1 Cor 7071 Kor07:1071 Kor07,1; περὶ δέ) which all concern the legitimacy of sexual practice among Christ believers. One central question is whether those who are unmarried should marry. If the Corinthians simply take Paul as an individual paradigm here, they will remain single and live unmarried. And, indeed, Paul recommends his unmarried lifestyle to the Corinthians (v. 8).

At the same time, Paul is well aware of the moral challenges of remaining unmarried. He argues that, if the Corinthians “cannot exercise selfSelbst, self, selfhood-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion (πυροῦσθαι)” (v. 9). Paul is clearly aware of erotic affects,Gefühl(e)1 and he is realistic enough to consider these affects when responding to the Corinthian questions (cf. v. 36). Since he cannot refer to the Lord’s authority here (v. 10), everything Paul says about the status of being “unmarried” is based upon his individual view: “I have no command (ἐπιταγή) of the Lord, but I give my opinion (γνώμη) as one who by the Lord’s mercy is trustworthy” (v. 25). At this point, Paul actually reveals the principles of individual decision-makingDecision-making.

In light of eschatological hope, Paul would like the Corinthians to adopt an adequate type of Christ-believing “anxiety.” For this reason, he does not intend to “lay any restraint (βρόχος) upon” the Corinthians (v. 35). He therefore identifies various options for handling “anxiety” by, of course, sympathizing with how “anxiety” appears among those who are unmarried.2 “The unmarried man is anxious (μεριμνᾷ) about the affairs of the Lord, how to please the Lord; but the married man is anxious (μεριμνᾷ) about worldly affairs, how to please his wife, and his interests are divided. And the unmarried woman or girl is anxious (μεριμνᾷ) about the affairs of the Lord, how to be holy in body and spirit; but the married woman is anxious (μεριμνᾷ) about worldly affairs, how to please her husband” (v. 32b-34). Paul concludes that getting married “is no sin” (v. 36), but refraining from marriage is a better choice (v. 38).

Paul’s recommendation to remain single is remarkable, especially when seen in the light of Hellenistic-Roman politics and culture: Augustan marriage legislation was designed to increase the birthrate in the early Roman Empire,SuetonAug34Rom3 and Aristotelian politics is rooted in the theory that marriage is the prototype of communitarian life in the polis (pol 1:2Aristotelespol1,2).4 Most evidently, in 1 Cor 7071 Kor07, Paul elaborates on eschatological “anxiety” as an individual tool of decision-makingDecision-making.Zeller, Dieter5 In Paul’s argument, μέριμναμέριμνα, μεριμνάω is a basic pattern of anthropology and ethics. While Paul generally engages in communal affairs, such as the οἰκοδομή (“manner of building”)6 of the Corinthian community, in 1 Cor 7, he is primarily concerned with each person’s existential “anxiety”; in this way, he reflects on the female and the male person equally. Reflections about “anxiety” and “care” help to develop the experience of the human Self. It is precisely in this that the Corinthians can ultimately follow Paul’s personal example. It is the individual paradigm of decision-makingDecision-making rather than Paul’s personal lifestyle or his case for celibacy (Dieter ZellerZeller, Dieter)Zeller, Dieter7 or practices of “temporary abstinence”8 that the Corinthians should follow.