Paul: The Letter Writer

Paul: The Letter Writer. By M. Luther Stirewalt, Jr. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003, v + 159 pp., $22.00 paper.

M. Luther Stirewalt, Jr., Professor Emeritus of Classics and New Testament Greek at Trinity Lutheran Seminary in Columbus, Ohio, contends in this hrief volume that Paul was a highly literate person who corresponded with geographically scattered groups of people through the adaptation of the official Roman letter and the employment of it in his apostolic correspondence. The book contains four chapters (pp. 1-125), an appendix of examples of official letters (pp. 127-39), a bibliography (pp. 140-54), and a Scripture index (pp. 155-59).

The book opens abruptly with chapter 1, which is devoted to the logistics of ancient Greek letter writing-the means by which the Greek letter was composed, delivered, and received. Stirewalt maintains that in Hellenistic society there was a marked difference between the logistics of personal letter writing and official letter writing. He further maintains that the logistics of personal letter writing offered no really reliable or consistently available model for Paul's sense of authoritative call. Instead Paul fashioned the logistics for his communication after the examples of official correspondence by adapting official epistolary form and function as a means of discharging his apostolic ministry.

In chapter 2 Stirewalt provides a comparative analysis of the five units that indicate to him that Paul adapted the conventions of official correspondence: (1) identification of the primary sender; (2) naming of the co-senders; (3) multiple address; (4) dual structure of the letter body; and (5) subscriptions. Whereas the sender-identity discloses an official's position in the political order, Paul employs it to present himself as an intermediary in the divine kingdom. Paul employs co-senders not in the official function of a governing body but rather as witnesses to the epistolary event and the message. Paul's employment of multiple address is similar to that of the official who addressed a jurisdiction, with his receptor congregation serving as the corporate group that receives the message and thereby shares the responsibility of compliance or the reward of commendation. Paul freely adapts the dual structure of the letter body typical of official letters (background information and message) in his own correspondence "by incorporating into the necessary background and into the intended messages a wide variety of other units suitable to his purposes" (p. 55). To his subscriptions, which in official letters confirmed the writer's identity and authenticated his message, Paul added personal touches by composing them in a modified epistolary sub-form, consisting of salutation, body, greeting, and farewell.

In chapter 3 Stirewalt extends his discussion on the official letter-form and settings by making general epistolary observations on Paul's seven uncontested letters (1 Thessalonians, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Romans, Philippians, and Philemon). Stirewalt adopts the chronology of J. Becker, who affirms the temporal priority of 1 Thessalonians and 1 Corinthians. Against this chronological backdrop Stirewalt detects a development in Paul's facility in employing the epistolary form. In 1 Thessalonians Stirewalt detects hesitancy as Paul is only beginning to discover the use and force of the independence of oral and written messages in official communication. With 1 Corinthians Paul finds a great deal more confidence in using the written word to carry out his ministry. Stirewalt considers epistolary analysis of 2 Corinthians difficult due to textual problems. In contrast to the direction of current discussion, Stirewalt's analysis of Philippians in the light of official correspondence leads him to conclude that Paul was only indirectly and partially influenced by the conventions of personal friendship letters. Rather, "Paul's modes of expression are those of an official speaking within the context of a community in which he is an authority" (p. 89). Stirewalt detects in Philemon a striking combination of personal/pastoral and recommendation/official styles. Galatians too bears the marks of official correspondence. Paul's adaptation of official forms reaches culmination in Romans, which Stirewalt describes as an example of the letter-essay.

In chapter 4 Stirewalt offers brief reflections on Paul and his apostolic, epistolary ministry. For the conduct of his epistolary ministry Paul combined the forms and functions of personal and official letter writing. Paul wrote letters at times because he was absent from his congregations and at times because he considered writing to be a preferable means of addressing problems in the assemblies. The letter of reconciliation and consolation to the Corinthians (2 Corinthians 1-7) provides a fitting paradigm of his apostolic ministry.

Stirewalt provides a wealth of helpful parallel material combined with a number of interesting insights speckled throughout this study. As a result, this is a volume that will be worth consulting on matters related to the conventions of ancient epistolography and for his various insights on seven of Paul's letters. At the same time readers may not find Stirewalt's broader thesis that Paul adapted the official Roman letter and employed it in his apostolic correspondence easy to evaluate, because he does not appear to be consistent in his argument. On several occasions Stirewalt concedes that Paul combines the forms and functions of both personal and official letter writing (e.g. pp. 91, 107, 113), and hence the readers must wonder to what degree his initial strong dichotomy between the logistics of personal and official letters (cf. pp. 1, 18) breaks down in application to Paul's letters. Many readers will likewise question, on historical grounds, the trajectory with which Stirewalt works (1 Thessalonians and 1 Corinthians as Paul's earliest letters), the speculative development he finds in Paul the letter writer (hesitancy in 1 Thessalonians, growing confidence in 1 Corinthians, and the like), and some of the critical assumptions with which he operates (e.g. the composite nature of 2 Corinthians [pp. 11-12, n. 47; 77-801).