CORIA

CORIA – Cathedral Choir (15th century).

to vice. Paul, in the First Canonical Epistle, also wishes to correct this rigorist interpretation.

I. OCCASION

1 Corinthians was occasioned by disturbing reports that had reached Paul and by a series of questions put by the believers of Corinth in a letter sent to the Apostle through Stefana, Fortunato, and Acaico. The reports came partly from “those of Cloe,” that is, from the employees of this woman, who must have had commercial dealings with Ephesus, and partly from the community’s own delegates. From the former Paul learned that factions were forming among the believers, claiming the names of Paul, Apollo, and Cephas (I Cor. 1:12); but it is not excluded that Stefana, Fortunato, and Acaico also supplied him with details about the dissensions afflicting their community. The three, however, may have arrived in Ephesus when 1 Corinthians was already being composed, and they would therefore have been responsible only for the information on which the letter is based from chapter 5 onward: the extremely serious case of incest, the disputes among the believers, and the scandal of their frequent recourse to pagan courts. The remainder appears to be a response to the questions addressed to Paul in a letter from the community (I Cor. 7:1); but it is natural that the delegates should have helped clarify the meaning and scope of the issues and doubts troubling their Church.

The second of the Apollo (v.), who had worked zealously in Corinth while Paul was beginning his lengthy ministry in Ephesus. Many members of the community were captivated by the fluent and polished speech of the Alexandrian and by his skill in using the Scriptures. Almost at the same time, others must have come from Jerusalem who gloried in the name of Cephas, decisively setting him in opposition to Paul. The latter scarcely deserved the title of apostle; his teaching was incomplete, since he showed no appreciation for the law given by God to his people. Thus, while those who professed to be “of Paul” and “of Apollo” did not go beyond the bounds of a personal allegiance free from doctrinal errors, those who proclaimed themselves “of Cephas” were probably tinged with Judaizing errors.

Some have conceived the group of “those of Christ” as the most pernicious of all, since, under the pretext that Jesus had emancipated us from servitude to the law, it would have taught libertine theories, such as those put into practice by the incestuous man mentioned in chapter 5, whom some regarded almost with a sense of pride. But it is highly doubtful that the words “but I belong to Christ” (1:12) constituted the slogan of a faction analogous to the others mentioned. Paul does not mention it explicitly again in the course of the letter, and Clement of Rome, later on, would recall only three groups of partisans.

Against the party spirit that threatened to tear the young community apart; in order to stigmatize the incestuous relationship, correct the abuse of recourse to pagan courts and the emancipation of women in religious assemblies, and the excesses in the celebration of the “Lord’s Supper”; and, finally, in order to respond to the many doubts raised by the believers, Paul wrote 1 Corinthians.

II. DIVISION AND CONTENT

Rather than following a logical plan, the various subjects succeed one another in I C in the occasional order of their presentation.

Besides the customary prologue (1:1-9; an auspicious greeting to the faithful and thanksgiving to God) and epilogue (16), two sections may be distinguished (1:10-6:20 and 7:1-15:58).

1. Correction of vices and abuses (1:10-6:20). — a) Factions in the community of Corinth and their condemnation (1:10-4:21). After the factions have been denounced and deplored in the name of the unity to be maintained in Christ, head of the Church (1:10-17), the plan of divine wisdom is explained: it has chosen the humblest persons and means for its realization, to confound proud human wisdom, in whose name the recipients divide themselves into factions (1:18-31). On account of this divine wisdom, which is manifested to the « perfect », the readers were and still are immature, given their manifestly carnal nature (2:1-3:4). Since the preachers of the Gospel are merely God’s co-workers, to whom different tasks are assigned in the same field of labor, the faithful must beware of undue preferences and, on account of empty human wisdom, must not engage in futile rivalries (3:4-13). The following points conclude the section: a paternal admonition; the purpose of Timothy’s mission; the announcement of Paul’s own visit (4:14-21).

b) Suppression of grave disorders (chaps. 5-6). — The condemnation and punishment of the incestuous man (5:1-8) provides the occasion for dealing with public sinners, corrupted members of the community, and for dispelling the misunderstanding caused by an earlier letter (5:9-13). Recourse to pagan tribunals, and, if possible, every dispute among the faithful, are to be avoided (6:1-11). The reason obliging the Christian to flee impurity is that he is a member of the mystical body of Christ and a temple of the Holy Spirit (6:12-20).

2. Solution of the doubts submitted by the community and particular questions (7:1-15:58). — a) Marriage and virginity (7:1-40). The legitimacy, rights and duties, and indissolubility of Christian marriage, and the privilege granted in favor of the spouse converted to the faith (7:1-24). Virginity is nobler than marriage, but it is imposed on no one (7:25-40).

b) Use of meats offered to idols (8:1-11). — Although it is lawful in itself to eat the flesh of animals sacrificed to idols (v. IDOLOTITI), since the latter are nothing, Christian wisdom (γνώσις) nevertheless requires consideration for less enlightened consciences (8:1-13). Freedom must not be abused; therefore Paul himself renounces the privileges inherent in the apostolate, doing so in the service of Christ’s cause by becoming all things to all people and subjecting his own body to that severe discipline which is a necessary condition for attaining the crown of victory (9:1-10:13). In practice, one may not take part in sacrificial banquets, since this conflicts with participation in the Lord’s table; privately, however, one may also eat meats offered to idols, except when charity, which must prevail over everything, requires avoidance of giving scandal to the weak (10:14-11:1).

c) Discipline of religious assemblies (11:2-14:40). — Women must participate with their heads veiled (11:2-16). The Eucharistic supper is to be celebrated without excesses offensive to poor brethren and irreverent toward the august mysteries (11:17-34). The charisms are all equally worthy of esteem, considering their source (the Holy Spirit) and their purpose (the benefit of the community); but, when their particular functions are considered, some are more and others less noble, although all contribute, like the various members of the body, to the common good (12:1-31a). Above every charismatic gift stands charity, the animating principle of all things, without which the noblest charisms are devoid of value. Moreover, they are destined to cease in the life to come, as faith and hope will also cease, whereas charity will endure eternally (12:31b-13:13). From a comparison between prophecy and glossolalia, it follows that the former is to be preferred to the latter (14:1-33). Women are to keep silent in the assemblies of the community; and everything is to proceed with decorum and order (14:34-40).

d) Resurrection of the dead (chap. 15). — Once the Resurrection of Christ, which is the foundation of our faith, is admitted, the possibility that the dead will return to life cannot be doubted. The pledge of our resurrection is found in incorporation into Christ, the head from whom the members cannot be separated (15:1-34). A series of analogies from the natural order illustrates the manner of the resurrection. The body will be changed from corruptible into glorified, as is also demanded by the complete triumph over the tyrannical dominion of death and sin (15:35-58).

In the epilogue (chap. 16), practical suggestions are given for the collection (16:1-4); Paul announces an approaching visit to Corinth (16:5-9); recommendations are made on behalf of Timothy, Apollo, and the delegates of the community (16:10-18); greetings, authentication of the author, and a final blessing follow (16:19-24).

III. DATE OF COMPOSITION

The most commonly accepted date is 56, when Paul’s work in Asia was already well under way and aroused very strong hostility (16:9), which presupposes a considerable period of residence in Ephesus. In the spring of 56 (the reference to Easter seems to occur in 5:7; Pentecost is not far off: 16:8), the second year of work in this city was coming to an end, and magnificent prospects were opening up in Asia; but incipient reactions were also being noted, which were later to culminate in the riot of the silversmiths (Act. 19:23-40).

E. B. Allo (p. LXXXVI ff.), following in the footsteps of F. Bachmann, thinks that I C. was written in 55, and more precisely after the three months of preaching in the synagogue, when Paul, having turned to the pagans, caught sight of the abundant harvest that he would be able to reap from them (I Cor. 16:8 ff.). But Paul does not say that the great door had opened precisely at the moment when he was writing: the verb he uses (ἀνέογεν) may indicate an event that took place even in the distant past, the consequences of which continue to endure. Moreover, on the supposition that the “door” had been “flung wide open” precisely then, it is difficult to understand why Paul planned to remain in Ephesus only until Pentecost, which could not have been very far off. If the work had instead been well under way for some time, it is understandable that he should have been thinking of leaving Ephesus shortly, in order to return to the capital of Achaia, from which not very reassuring news was arriving. All things considered, the date of spring 56 or 57 seems the most satisfactory (cf. P. Benoit, in Revue biblique, 44 [1935], p. 610 f.).

IV. PAULINE AUTHENTICITY

The Pauline authenticity of I C would seem beyond dispute, so striking and unmistakable are the characteristics that reveal the personality of Paul the Apostle. Only the radicals of the Dutch school have dared to deny, wholesale, the authenticity of this letter as well as of the other major Pauline letters.

Alongside the allusions in the Didaché and in s. Ignazio, there is in s. Clemente Romano a perfectly clear reference to I C, as a letter written by Paul in circumstances analogous to those in which the bishop of Rome was writing. There follow s. Policarpo, s. Giustino M., the letter to Diagneto, the Muratorian Fragment, s. Ireneo, Clemente Alessandrino, and Tertulliano.

The difficulties raised concerning the literary quality of I C. (perhaps Paul was thus tacitly responding to the vain presumption of his Corinthian sons) fade before the undeniable similarities of language and style with those of the letters to the Galatians and Romans and, above all, before the fundamental harmony of their content. Moreover, I C. is in perfect agreement with the narrative of the Acts (cf. I Cor. 4, 17 ff. and 16, 5: Act. 19, 2, 21; I Cor. 1, 14: Act. 18, 8; I Cor. 3, 6: Act. 18, 27 f.). But perhaps the most decisive internal indication is the full authority with which the author of I C. speaks—an authority that could be attributed to no one other than Paul, founder and father of that community.

II. SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS

SUMMARY:

I. Occasion and date of composition

II. Division and content

III. Pauline authenticity

IV. Integrity.

I. OCCASION AND DATE OF COMPOSITION

In order to understand properly the motives underlying II C., it would be necessary to resolve certain much-debated questions, and in particular: was Paul in Corinth between the first and the second letter? Furthermore, is Paul’s epistolary activity on behalf of this community limited to the two canonical letters, or is there some other writing now lost, in addition to the probable precanonical letter to which I Cor. 5:9–11 seems to refer?

Whereas in the past no one thought of an intermediate letter between I and II C., and very few saw in I Cor. 5:9 an allusion to a letter preceding our first canonical one, modern scholars are generally inclined to accept the latter point, and many also hold that a letter between I and II C., the letter “with many tears,” is indispensable for making sense of a large part of the content of II C. and of Paul’s various attitudes toward the community.

Among modern scholars, the view that the author stayed in Corinth between the first and second canonical letters has also found considerable favor—a stay to which the letter written “with many tears” would have referred. It seems, in fact, that Paul’s “third” visit, to which II Cor. 12:14; 13:1 repeatedly returns, cannot be explained by two stays before I C.: one would have to suppose that the punishment of an offense connected with one of these visits was held in abeyance for several years, whereas II C. refers to it very vividly, as to a very recent event. The tendency is increasingly firmly to exclude the possibility that II C. is still referring to the incest mentioned in I Cor. 5:1–5, above all because of the personal insult involved in the grave event censured in II C.

The hypothesis both of the letter and of the intervening journey seems fairly well founded. Paul would have left the field of work at Ephesus for a few weeks, following the good news brought to him by Timothy (who was too optimistic in this case), on his return from a mission to Corinth. During Paul’s brief visit, the offense was committed that affected not him alone but also the community (II Cor. 2:5).

The letter “with many tears,” which Paul sent on his return to Ephesus, did not fail in its purpose. After a subsequent mission to Corinth, Titus was able to reassure Paul about the state of that community. The meeting with Titus, so ardently longed for by Paul (II Cor. 2:12 f.; 7:5 f.), took place in Macedonia (probably at Philippi) rather than at Troas, as had been arranged, because Paul left Ephesus earlier than expected following the riot of the silversmiths.

Once the most painful period in the relations between Paul and the faithful of Corinth had been overcome, through the community’s full recognition of his apostolic authority and the exemplary punishment of the one who had committed the “offense,” II C. sought above all to be a letter of reconciliation between father and children, in which the Apostle repeatedly and freely expressed his unchanged affection. This is essentially the case through the end of

chapter 9; although even in the first nine chapters there are vigorous, and at times harsh, polemical passages aimed at dispelling the last misunderstandings and thwarting the obstinate schemes of the agitators. Although they were listened to much less by the faithful, these men continued to hurl their poisoned arrows at Paul, accusing him, among other things, of inconsistency and frivolity in promising what he would then be unable, or unwilling, to fulfill.

In view of this, it is not difficult to establish the date of composition. The events to be inserted between I C. (spring of 56 or 57) and II C. (Timothy’s return, Paul’s journey, Titus’s mission and the intermediate letter [?], Titus’s return) must have occupied several months, leading us toward the end of 56 (57), during the last winter of the third missionary journey. This letter and the stay in Corinth that followed it finally dispelled the clouds that had weighed for too long upon the beloved community.

II. DIVISION AND CONTENT

Even more than for I C., it is difficult to trace a logical outline of II C. The fruit of a moment of intense passion, perhaps the most serious in Paul’s apostolic life, it is a spontaneous and impetuous outpouring, in which pain and joy alternate, the father’s gentleness and the judge’s severity, profound depression and bold courage, personal apologetics and sudden, luminous doctrinal perspectives, the concern to lay a stone over the past and serene prospects for the future. One must follow Paul in his sudden passage from one thought and feeling to another, from the calmest affection to the harsh tone, and return with him to subjects already evoked earlier. In this way, one relives, to some extent, the inner drama of this letter, which more than any other reveals to us the multifaceted aspects of Paul’s temperament.

The most usual division, according to the predominance of the subject treated, is into three parts, preceded by a prologue and followed by an epilogue.

The prologue (1, 1-11) reflects the circumstances and state of mind of Paul, who gives thanks to God for deliverance from an exceedingly grave trial, endured in the interest of the apostolic ministry and of the faithful.

1. Explanations concerning the background of II C., that is, a general defense of Paul’s conduct (1, 12-7, 16). - a) Relations with the community after I C. (1, 12-2, 17). Paul, confident that harmony of feeling will be restored, explains that he substituted a letter for the journey he had announced, not out of frivolity or inconstancy, but out of indulgence (1, 12-2, 4). It was necessary to punish the man who had offended his apostolic authority; but since the guilty party shows himself repentant, he should no longer be excluded from the religious life of the community (2, 5-11). After saying that, concerned about the condition in which the community of Corinth found itself, he had also renounced the favorable apostolic prospects that Troas offered him, Paul sketches an apology intended to demonstrate his fidelity as a minister of the evangelical word (2, 12-17).

b) Paul’s self-defense (3, 1-7, 4). - Paul expresses his bold confidence, motivated by the sublimity of the evangelical ministry. His living letter is his faithful people (3, 1 ff.). He has been entrusted with the ministry of the spirit, not of the letter (3, 4-11); and this frees him from resorting to the «veil», as Moses did, a symbol of the inferiority of the Old Testament in relation to the New, the manifest revelation of God (3, 12-4, 6). There is a vivid contrast between the natural weakness of the apostles and the supernatural strength and efficacy of their mission. Following Christ’s example, they face every sacrifice and death itself, keeping their eyes fixed on future recompense (4, 7-5, 10). The example of Christ, who sacrificed himself for the salvation of all, is a pressing motive for working for the «new creation» and for the «ministry of reconciliation», for which Paul daily annihilates himself (5, 11-6, 10). Let the readers not live like the Gentiles! (6, 11-7, 1).

c) Confident relations with the faithful (7, 2-16). - Always at peace regarding his own conduct toward the Corinthians and proud of them (7, 2 ff.), Paul, because of the good news brought by Titus, is lifted from profound sadness and feels that full confidence has been restored between himself and the beloved community (7, 5-16).

2. The collection for the poor of Jerusalem (8, 1-9, 15)

The example of the faithful of Macedonia, so generous in their poverty, should spur those of Corinth to complete what they began some time ago (8, 1-15). Titus and the two envoys accompanying him are commended for the collection and for the good of the community of Corinth itself. Let the faithful of Corinth not show themselves inferior to the Macedonians! (8, 16-9, 5). The fruits of generosity are God’s blessing and the efficacious prayer of those who have benefited (9, 6-15).

3. Controversy with declared adversaries (10, 1-13, 10)

a) Negative aspect, that is, refutation of the accusations (10, 8-1, 18). Paul does not act according to the dictates of worldly prudence, but animated by the spirit of Christ: strong both from afar and near at hand, by letter and in speech (10, 1-13); nor does he boast, like his adversaries, beyond measure, but according to a divine rule and in the Lord (10, 12-18).

b) Positive aspect. Paul would have no lack of grounds for boasting, as one not inferior to the others (11, 1-12, 18). - If Paul is inferior to the «superapostles» in anything, it is in having renounced his rights so as not to be a burden to the community (11, 1-15). Nor does he lack merits and extraordinary gifts, counterbalanced, however, by the «thorn» driven «into the flesh», which enables him to learn in practice how every gift comes from God, who chooses weak human instruments for his works (11, 16-12, 20). This defense ought rather to be made by the faithful of Corinth, for whom Paul has already done so much and is ready to do even more, even at the cost of receiving far less affection in return than the affection he gives (12, 11-18). On his next visit to Corinth, Paul will proceed against the guilty; nevertheless, he hopes not to be compelled to make use of the fullness of his apostolic powers (12, 19-13, 10).

In the epilogue (13, 11 ff.), final warnings (11), two brief affectionate words of greeting (12), and a solemn blessing and good wish (13).

III. PAULINE AUTHENTICITY

As regards the external evidence, it should be noted that II C. was probably used by St. Policarpo; the author of the Letter to Diognetus drew inspiration from it; it is cited by Teofilo of Antioch and St. Ippolito. It is explicitly attributed under the name of Paolo by Ireneo, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and the Muratorian Fragment, to confine ourselves to the most ancient testimonies. The fact that II C. is cited less frequently should not be surprising, given that it is less doctrinal and more personal. Hence, however, that body of internal evidence which has led the great majority of critics, including non-Catholics, to recognize in it the unmistakable seal of Paolo. He who speaks so decisively and imperatively to the faithful of Corinth makes clear, beyond any possibility of doubt, his entirely distinctive position with regard to the community, of which he is founder and father, and, when necessary, also judge. No other letter depicts with such force the character of Paolo, the impetuosity of his feeling, so quick to pass from the most vibrant enthusiasm to depression, and so stubbornly attached to his spiritual children, even when they show coldness, or indeed hostility, toward him. II C. also fits so closely into the most complicated period of Paolo’s apostolate that no forger could easily have made such an imaginative effort, just as no forger would ever have thought of presenting Paolo in the compromising setting created by his adversaries.

For this reason, only the few radicals mentioned under I C. and a few other isolated scholars have dared to challenge the authenticity of this letter, the most Pauline of the Pauline letters.

IV. INTEGRITÀ

Per un certo numero di critici moderni II C. non sarebbe un'opera di getto, uno scritto unico, bensì un complesso di più lettere scritte in circostanze diverse, unite, poi, artificiosamente, ad opera di un redattore. Così, per limitarci ad uno dei più rappresentativi, C. Clemen (Paulus, sein Leben und Werken, I: Untersuchung, Giessen 1904, p. 85) vi ha ravvisato tre lettere: 1ª: 6, 14-7, 1; 2ª: 10, 1-13, 10; 3ª: 1, 1-6, 13; 7, 2-9, 15; 13, 11-13.

Non è difficile difendere l'integrità di II C. fino a tutto il cap. 9, dimostrando l'infondatezza di questi smembramenti. Difficoltà più serie s'incontrano per i capp. 10-13,

che parrebbero dovuti a uno stato d'animo profondamente diverso da quello delineato nei capitoli precedenti. Qui, in sostanza, è il fulcro della difficoltà. Tra le ipotesi emesse per risolvere questo, che è uno almeno problema per l'impostazione storica e per l'interpretazione di II C., s'è proposto pure di considerare questi quattro capitoli come la lettera «dalle molte lacrime», scritta da Paolo dopo il grave fatto lesivo della sua autorità apostolica. Ma pare che si possa spiegare in altro modo l'inegabile differenza che c'è nel tono di quest'ultima parte di II C.: l'asprezza improvvisa del linguaggio, talora addirittura caustico, la vivacissima ripresa polemica, che ci riportano a dolorosi retroscena nei rapporti tra l'Apostolo e la comunità. Si potrebbe, in ogni caso, supporre che notizie cattive fossero giunte nuovamente dall'Acsa durante la stesura della lettera, che poté anche essere fatta a intervalli. Spiritosa ma non seria è la battuta di H. Lietzmann (p. 158) che l'enigma possa spiegarsi con una notte insonne tra II Cor. 9 e 10.

Senza pretendere di risolvere il problema, si deve osservare che le accuse contro le quali Paolo polemizza sono, in complesso, le medesime trattate con più patatezza nei capitoli precedenti. La differenza è più nel tono che nell'oggetto della polemica. Paolo potrebbe essere stato indotto da ragioni, per così dire, tattiche a riservare per la fine questo serrato attacco ai suoi avversari e l'energia richiesta di una decisa presa di posizione da parte della comunità. Una cosa è abbastanza chiara, che cioè, se c'è una parte di II C. scritta da Paolo senza le lacrime agli occhi, è proprio questa in cui si vorrebbe scorgere la lettera scritta «con molte lacrime».

La tradizione manoscritta non presenta traccia del preteso lavoro redazionale, di cui II C. sarebbe il risultato.

Tra i moderni: R. Cornely, Commentarius in S. Pauli Apostoli epistolas, II: Prior Epistola ad Corinthias, Parigi 1890; 2ª ed. ivi 1909; III: Epistolae ad Corinthias altera et ad Galatas, ivi 1892; 2ª ed. ivi 1907; M. Sales, La Sacra Bibbia, Nueva Testamento, II, Torino 1914, pp. 103-237; F. S. Gutjahn, Die zwei Briefe an die Korinther, in Die Briefe des heiligen Apostoli Paulus, II, 2ª ed. Graz e Vienna 1921-22 (IC); ivi 1917 (II C.); J. Sickenberger, Die Briefe des heiligen Paulus an die Korinther und Römer, in Die heilige Schrift des Neuen Testamentes, 4ª ed., VI, Bonn 1932, pp. 1-167; E. B. Alle, Saint Paul, Première Épître aux Corinthiens, Parigi 1934; id., Saint Paul, Seconde Épître aux Corinthiens, ivi 1937; J. Huby, Saint Paul, Première Épître aux Corinthiens (Verbum Salutis, 13), ivi 1946; P. C. Spica, Épîtres aux Corinthiens, in La Sainte Bible di Pirot-Clamer, II, 11, ivi 1948, pp. 161-399. Acattolici: A. Robertson-A. Plummer, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, in The International Critical Commentary, Edimburgo 1911; 2ª ed. ivi 1914; A. Plummer, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, in op. cit., ivi 1915; Ph. Buchmann, Der erste Brief des Paulus an die Korinther (Kommentar zum N. 7, di Th. Zahn, 7), 4ª ed., Lipsia 1936; id., Der zweite Brief des Paulus an die Korinther (ibid., 8), 4ª ed., ivi 1922; H. Lietzmann, An die Korinther I, II, in Handbuch zum N. 7., 3ª ed., Tuhinga 1931.

Per le questioni particolari: E. Golla, Zwischenreise und Zwischenbrief. Eine Untersuchung der Frage, ob der Apostol Paulus zwischen dem ersten und zweiten Korintherbrief eine Reise nach Korinth unternommen und einen uns verlorengegangenen Brief an die Korinther geschrieben habe (Biblische Studien, 20, 10), Friburgo in Br. 1922; T. W. Manson, St Paul in Ephesus: The Corinthian correspondence, in Bulletin of the John Rylads Library, 26 (1941-43), pp. 101-20, 327-41; L. Cerfaux, L'Église des Corinthiens (Témoins de Dieu, 7), Parigi 1947; R. Hundstorfer, Die Adressaten des ersten Korintherbriefes. Eine Versuch, die Empfänger dieser Briefes näher zu bestimmen, Kremsmünster 1948. Teodorico da Castel San Pietro