BACKGROUND:

One of the striking changes in early Christianity between the time of Paul's own ministry (in the 40's-50's) and the period of the later Pauline Traditions (in the 70's and after) is a demographic shift in church membership.
    It seems that the majority of early converts to the Jesus-movement were of the Plebian class (fishers, tradesfolk, peasant farmers) or were slaves.  Paul mentions a few Aristocratic women in his letters (e.g., Phoebe in Rom. 16:1-2, and addresses one letter to an Aristocratic man (Philemon), but Meeks has shown that these are the exceptions rather than the rule.
    By the time we begin to reach the 80's and 90's, however, it seems that church membership is shifting so that there are more wealthy members of the churches and more Aristocratic men who are joining--and are explicitly sought as members.  The author of Matthew's gospel, for example, seems to be writing to a more well-off community in Antioch of Syria.  Even moreso, the author of Luke-Acts is writing a two-volume work (Luke-Acts) specifically for and at the behest of a wealthy Roman official named Theophilus.  This demographic shift is taking place in Asia Minor as well as in Syria and Rome.
    There are obvious advantages to the churches having Aristocratic members as patrons, i.e., to provide monetary support for community needs, including community meals, and to intervene with the Roman officials if/when any problems arise.  Some Christian writers in the late first-early second century, like Luke, specifically try to persuade Aristocratic Roman men to join the churches.  This attempt to gain Aristocratic male "recruits" seems to have been somewhat successful; there is evidence of this in the later Pauline Traditions (e.g., Tit 3:13).
    However, like any apologetic, the gain in Aristocratic church membership has a price, of which there also is evidence in the later Pauline Traditions.  In short, the rise in conversions of Aristocratic men inevitably has an impact on how Paul's own letters are read, repeated, revised, and replaced by the Pauline Traditions.  The object of these discussion questions is to help you trace out the changes and adaptations which you seen from Paul to the Paulinists, and to give you an opportunity to evaluate what you see as their advantages and disadvantages.

THE QUESTIONS:

1. Compare and contrast Col. 3:18-4:1 & Tit. 2:9-10 with Gal. 3:26-28, Philemon 15-16, & 1 Cor. 7:17-24 (be sure to check for any textual variants, differences in translations, and/or translators' notes).  What kinds of similarities and differences do you see in the way slaves are viewed here?  What does this suggest about the social roles of slaves in the developing Pauline communities?
2. Compare and contrast Eph. 5:21-6:9 with Gal. 3:26-28 & 1 Cor. 7:1-16 (again, checking for any textual variants, differences in translations, and/or translators' notes).  What kinds of similarities and differences do you see in the way women are viewed here?  What does this suggest about changing roles of women in the developing Pauline communities?
3. Compare and contrast Gal. 3:26-28 & 1 Cor. 11:2-16 with 1 Tim.2:8-15 (be sure to check for any textual variants, differences in translations, and/or translators' notes).  Again, what similarities and differences do you see in the way women's roles are viewed here?  What does this suggest about changes in leadership roles of women in the developing Pauline communities?
4. What trends do you see in the changing views of social roles which are taking place from Paul to the Paulinists?  What kinds of social, economic, and political factors do you think might have given rise to (or encouraged) these changes?  What might these changes tell us about the historical experience of late first-century Christians?
5. To what extent do you think these trends are still impacting on Christian communities today?  For example, if you belong to a church yourself, where would you place your community on this spectrum from Paul to the Paulinists?  What specific things do you have in mind when you make this assessment?
6. What features of each view (Paul's and the Paulinists') do you like, which do you dislike, and why?  What advantages and disadvantages do you see for each view?  What kinds of theological concerns are you taking into account in your assessment?
7. In this class, we have recognized that there are different ways of reading the Bible, and that How the Bible Means Depends on How You Read.  The differences are quite noticeable in this case of social roles in the early churches.
• For example, those who read the Bible literalistically argue that the later letters (Col, Eph, 1-2 Tim, & Titus---the ones I call "Paulinist") lay out in detail what we already find in the seven undisputed Pauline letters.  And they convey at face value God's word to Christians today.  So, true Christians must continue to adhere to the teaching about women's roles which is found, e.g., in 1 Timothy.  (BTW, according to this view, there is no particular reason why the teaching on slavery should no longer be applied---unless it is simply because it is against federal law, which precludes having any practical setting for doing so. )
• Following the historical model endorsed by the Roman Catholic Church, on the other hand, suggests that the shift in roles should be considered at least partially shaped by the social and political changes taking place during the historical period when these documents were produced.  This means that the ultimate "word of God" must be sifted out from the culturally-conditioned material in these letters.  In the final analysis, the revelation which God is trying to convey in these letters may be quite different than it appears to be at face value.  Slavery is a case in point: God permitted Christians to have slaves for a time, but no longer.  According to this view, slavery was not explicitly taught as a Christian value, but was tacitly accepted as one of the social-political structures which the church simply could not change at that point in history.
How would you suggest reading and applying the different views we find in Paul and the Paulinists?  Do you find one of these two views to be the best model, or is there another way which you would suggest?