SOCIOLOGICAL STUDIES IN PAUL: THEISSEN, MEEKS, KEE, MALHERBE

- Jerin Reginald

1. INTRODUCTION
Sociological Criticism is a significant twentieth-century development in New Testament
scholarship. Since the latter part of the last century, scholars have realized that understanding the
NT on theological grounds alone is inadequate. The social setting of the NT and early
Christianity has been seen as an indispensable ingredient in holistic interpretation. Even many of
the most conservative scholars, who relied upon linguistic and grammatical methods of
interpretation, have come to realize that language and grammar operated within a social matrix
that shapes their function and meaning.1 The systematic application of the research, concepts,
and theory of social sciences to biblical exegesis and the study of its social world emerged as a
programmatic methodological enterprise in 1970s. The pioneering work was done by Max
Weber (1864-1920).2

As early as 1960, but especially since 1970, we have seen virtual explosion of studies on the
sociological dimensions of the New Testament. E. A. Judge’s The Social Pattern of Christian
Groups in the First Century was one of the earliest attempts to utilize social description to
understand early Christianity. Then, in addition, a large number of scholars have begun to apply
various sociological theories to the study of the NT and early Christianity. One of the pioneers in
this endeavor is Gerd Theissen. This paper deals with the Sociological studies on Paul
undertaken by Gerd Theissen, Wayne A. Meeks, Howard Clark Kee and Abraham J. Malherbe.

2. GERD THEISSEN
The Corinthian congregation is marked by internal stratification. The majority of the members,
who come from the lower class, stand in contrast to a few influential members who come from
the upper classes. This internal stratification is not accidental but the result of structural causes.
The social makeup of the Corinthian congregation may be characteristic of the Hellenistic
congregation as such.

1
R. Mulholland, “Sociological Criticism,” New Testament Criticism and Interpretation, edited by David Alan Black
& David S. Dockery (Michigan,: Zondervan Publishing House, 1991), 299.
2
John H. Elliott, What is Social-Scientific Criticism? (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993), 17.

1
Paul himself describes the social makeup of the Corinthian congregation in I Cor. 1:26-29. He
mentions three categories of people: those who are wise, those who are powerful, and those of
noble birth. The terms “wise” and “powerful” are linked to previously stated ideas about wisdom
and foolishness, power and weakness. But “noble birth” brings into play something entirely new,
a specific sociological category which Paul emphasizes.3 Moreover in I Cor. 4:10, Paul puts
himself at the bottom of the scale of the social prestige but sees the Corinthians as occupying the
top.

2.1. The Strong and the Weak in Corinth

The quarrel between “the strong” and “the weak” in the Corinthian congregation is a matter of
different customs. The weak avoid all meat sacrificed to idols since it could never be known with
certainty that ritual actions had not accompanied the slaughter of the meat. The strong, on the
other hand, appeal to their “knowledge” and say: there is only one God; there are no idols and
hence “no meat sacrificed to idols” (I Cor. 8:4ff).4

The conflict between the strong and the weak at Corinth can be explained by class-specific
tensions caused by social stratification. Since the poor were not accustomed to eating meat
outside of cultic feasts, they would have been more inclined to associate meat with idolatry than
would the rich, who bought meat at the macellum for everyday use, that is outside a cultic
context. The meat consumption among the common people was very limited and restricted to
exceptional situations. The everyday food of the common people continued to be vegetarian. The
archaeologically preserved macella are imposing buildings. Their architecture shows that they
belonged to an affluent milieu. From this we can conclude that the fact that Paul presupposes the
purchase of meat in the macellum in 1 Cor. 10.25 is an indication of the presence of well-to-do
people in the Corinthian congregation.5 The popinae (public houses) belonged to the life of the
common people. Many poor people in the cities did not even have their own kitchen stove in
their rented apartments and could not prepare warm meals.6 They had to buy them in the

3
Gerd Theissen, The Social Setting of Pauline Christianity (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1982), 70.
4
Theissen, The Social Setting of Pauline Christianity, 121.
5
Theissen, “Social Conflicts in the Corinthian Community” JSNT 25/3 (2003): 385.
6
Theissen, “Social Conflicts in the Corinthian Community” JSNT 25/3 (2003): 382.

2
popinae. But generally they bought vegetarian food. Meat was only affordable to a few people
and it was reserved for special occasions. Paul tries to privatize the conflicts concerning meals:
everybody should eat enough to be filled at home, but within the congregation there should be
equality.

2.2. Group Conflicts at the Lord's Supper (1 Corinthians 11:17-34)

Common meals always enact status and social communality. Hence, from the Lord's Supper, it is
possible to draw conclusions about the social status of the participants and the social function of
the meals. The conflict at the Lord’s Supper is revealed in the fact that “When you come
together, it is not really to eat the Lord's Supper. For when the time comes to eat, each of you
goes ahead with your own supper, and one goes hungry and another becomes drunk.” (1 Cor.
11:20-21). Here Paul speaks of divisions and factions in the Corinthian Community.7 The
analogy between pagan offering meals and the Lord's Supper (1 Cor. 10.21) presupposes that the
Christian meals were no less filling than the pagan meals.

2.2.1. The Poor and the Rich Christians

Paul does not say, ‘Why do you not eat at home (εν οϊκω)?’ as he does in 11:34. On the contrary,
he creates an opposition between those ‘who have (εχειν) houses’ and those ‘who have not (μη
εχοντες)’. In this way there is a strong emphasis on ‘having’ that may imply possession. It can be
assumed that the conflict over the Lord’s Supper is a conflict between poor and rich Christians.
The cause of this conflict was a particular habit of the rich. 8 Paul criticizes those who are eating
their own meal along with the Lord's Supper for putting the others to shame. This may refer to
the superior status they demonstrate by the inequality of meals.

In Theissen’s interpretation of 1 Cor. 11:17-34, at the Lord's Supper two groups with differing
social status appear. The well-to-do in the Corinthian congregation adopted from their
environment a pattern of behaviour that they ate more and better food than the poor at the Lord's
Supper. It is this against which Paul protests. Generally, we can say that Paul uses the symbolism
of the Lord's Supper as a means on the one hand to promote integration within the congregation

7
Theissen, The Social Setting of Pauline Christianity, 147.
8
Theissen, The Social Setting of Pauline Christianity, 151.

3
(1 Cor. 11:17-39) and on the other, to promote separation from the pagan environment (1 Cor.
10:14-33).
2.2.2. Variable Beginnings for the Meal
It appears that there were problems with the inception of the meal. Paul admonishes them to wait
for one another (I Cor. 11:33). Moreover, v.21 could be taken to mean that each begins to eat
“right away”. While according to v.33 it seems as if the corporate meal has begun prematurely so
that those who come later get less than their fare share. V.21 strongly hints that some Christians
had already begun earlier with their private meal, the congregational meal then following later.

2.2.3. Different Quantity of food and drink

Paul’s warning in I Cor. 11:29 also points to a “supplementary” meal in addition to the Lord’s
Supper. In all probability this should be interpreted to mean that some do not distinguish in the
Lord’s Supper between the food which belongs to the supper and their i;dion dei/pnon. Some have
more than others. The wealthy Christians not only ate by themselves and began before the
regular Lord’s Supper, but also had more to eat. Paul alludes to the greater quantity of the i;dion
dei/pnon when he writes, ‘one goes hungry and another becomes drunk’ (I Cor. 11:21).

2.2.4. Meals of Different Quality

Paul’s instruction to eat the ‘private meal’ i;dion dei/pnon at home becomes more readily
comprehensible if it is assumed that something better than mere bread and wine was involved.
When the community in Corinth came together for the common kuriakon dei/pnon there was for
some, in addition, an i;dion dei/pnon containing something in addition to bread and wine. Baked
goods, fish and meat would be for such a supplementary dish.

The core of the problem was that the wealthier Christians made it plain to all just how much the
rest were dependent on them, dependent on the generosity of those who are better off.
Differences in menu are a relatively timeless symbol of status and wealth. This in turn elicits a
feeling of rejection which threatens the sense of community.

2.2.5. Love-Patriarchalism

4
Paul’s ideas in I Cor. 11:17ff do not simply presuppose certain social relationships within the
Corinthian community. Above all they express social intentions, the desire to influence
interpersonal relationships in a certain direction. Paul wants to settle the problem of the “private
meal” by confining it to private homes. Within such a community the compromise suggested by
Paul is realistic and practical. It offers a good example of the ethos of early Christian love-
patriarchalism which arose in the Pauline communities and which we encounter most clearly in
the household codes of the deutero-Pauline letters (Col. 3:18ff; Eph. 5:22ff). The sacramental act
of the Lord’s Supper is a symbolic accomplishment of social integration.

3. WAYNE A. MEEKS

3.1. Social level of Pauline Christians

In the letters that survive, especially those to Corinth, there are a number of direct and indirect
evidence about the social level of Pauline Christians. For example, Philippians 4:22 tells us that
there were Christians in the “household of Caesar.” Admonitions in the letters often imply the
presence of both slaves and slave-owners in the congregations. A number of passages are
addressed to free hand-workers or craftsmen. Paul's directions about the collection for Jerusalem
tell us a little about the means of his followers. Arrangements made to support the extensive
travel by leaders of the mission and others as well are important clues and Paul's use of
commercial metaphors give a hint. Several of the conflicts that occurred in the Pauline
communities have economic and social dimensions, as Gerd Theissen has shown. The Pauline
congregation generally seems to reflect a pretty fair cross-section of urban society of its time.9
Those persons prominent enough in the mission or in the local groups for their names to be
mentioned or for them to be identifiable in some other way usually exhibit signs of a high rank in
one or more dimensions of status.10

3.2. Status of Women at Corinth

In Corinth, the status of women became a matter of controversy, as it is seen in I Cor. 11:2-16
and 14:33b-36. There are women who headed households, who ran business and had

9
Wayne A. Meeks, The Social Context of Pauline Christianity, Interpretation, 271
10
Meeks, The Social Context of Pauline Christianity, Interpretation, 271.

5
independent wealth, who traveled with their own slaves and helpers. Some who are married have
become converts without the consent of their husbands (I Cor. 7:13), and they may initiate
divorce which Paul does not encourage. Moreover, women have taken on some of the same roles
as of men in the sect itself. Some exercise charismatic functions like prayer and prophecy in the
congregation (I Cor. 11:2-16). Others are Paul’s workers as evangelists and teachers. Both in
terms of their position in the larger society and in terms of their participation in Christian
communities, a number of women broke through the normal expectations of female roles.11

4. HOWARD CLARK KEE

4.1. Role of Women in the Early Christian World

In ancient literature - pagan, Jewish, and Christian - there is no statement about the place of
women more radical than Paul's declaration in Galatians that "in Christ" there is no place for the
ethnic, social, and sexual differences the wider society maintains: "In Christ there is neither Jew
nor Greek, male nor female, slave nor free..." (Gal. 3:28). It is obvious that there are married
couples, but also unmarried women and widows who are active in the churches established by
Paul (1 Cor.7:8-9, 25-35). Women are not only active participants in the life of the early
Christian communities, but, they are assigned leadership roles as well. In Romans 16:1, Phoebe,
was a deaconess in the church at Cenchrae, one of the ports of Corinth. A couple, whom Paul
met in Corinth, had been of great assistance to Paul in Corinth and later in Ephesus. Paul gives
both of their names - Priscilla and Aquila - but priority is given to Priscilla's name; both are
given equal rank as co-workers with him in the Gospel, and the church meets in their house.
Other female co-workers are mentioned by name in Philippians 4:2, Euodia and Syntyche, and in
Romans, Tryphaena and Tryphosa (Romans 16:12), and Julia and Olympia (Romans 16:15).

Also, Paul was powerfully influenced by the socio-cultural patterns and values of his time. In
sharp contrast to the radically egalitarian pronouncement in his letter to the Galatians, he wrote
to the Corinthians affirming the hierarchy of human existence as in the created order itself: Man
as the head of the woman (1 Cor. 11:2-12). That secondary position is elaborated in 1 Cor.

11
Wayne A. Meeks, The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul (NY: Yale University,
1983), 70.

6
14:33-35, where women are instructed to keep silent in the church meetings and to ask their
husbands on returning home for clarification of what was said or done in the service. Yet, Paul at
the same time insists on the mutuality of men and women in that each was created for the other
(1 Cor. 11:8) and that, in the Lord, each is dependent on the other (1 Cor. 11:11). Thus, Paul,
bound as he is in some respects to the male-dominated social values of his time and culture, does
substantially modify these perspectives both in theory and in practice, allowing significant roles
for women in the launching of the Christian mission to the Gentile cities of the first century
Mediterranean world.12

5. ABRAHAM J. MALHERBE

5.1. On Marriage
In I Thess.4:3-8 and I Cor. 7, Paul gives advice on marriage. That marriage is to be entered “in
holiness and honour, not in the passion of lust like heathen who do not know God” (I Thess. 4:4-
5), betrays the sharpness of the community’s redefinition with respect to non-Christians. And
Paul’s direction that, in marrying, the Christian should not “transgress, and wrong his brother in
this matter” (4:6), whatever it may mean in detail, points to the communal dimension of marriage
within the group.13

5.2. Brotherly Love

In I Thess.4:9, Paul talks of a special relationship within the Christian community. He uses the
term “brotherly love” filadelfi,aj. When Paul says of this, he distinguishes his thought from
that of Epicureans. The most obvious difference between Paul and the Epicureans lies in their
respective attitudes toward society. Epicureans shunned society as contemptuous. Paul’s entire
discussion, on the other hand, is aimed at earning the respect of society by promoting self-
sufficiency. His view of brotherly love is not utilitarian; on the contrary, brotherly love requires
that the Thessalonians not burden each other but be self-sufficient. Nor does Paul conceive of the
Christian community as a conventicler that isolates itself from the rest of society.14

12
Howard Clark Kee, “The Changing Role of Women in the Early Christian World,” Theology Today, 230.
13
Abraham J. Malherbe, Paul and the Thessalonians, (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987), 51.
14
Malherbe, Paul and the Thessalonians, 104.

7
5.3. Relationship with the Pagan Community
The Thessalonians’ social relationships within the community, as well as between the
community and wider society, were being redefined, evidently not without stress. In Thess. 5:14-
15, he names three classes of people in need of exhortation: the disorderly, the discouraged, and
the weak. Paul does not only direct the attention of the community inward. Groups such as the
Thessalonians could not exist without defining their relationship to the larger society. Thus I
Thessalonians exhibits an interest in how the recently converted Christians were to conduct
themselves toward outsiders.15 Paul encourages a positive attitude toward non-Christians (3:11-
12; 5:15). Christians are to love all as they love each other (3:11-12) and should not repay evil
with evil but seek to do good to all as they do to each other (5:15). The Christian’s love and
concern for non-Christians is an extension of the care they have for each other.

--------------------------------------------------

15
Malherbe, Paul and the Thessalonians, 95.