Paul on Marriage and Singleness: Reading 1 Corinthians with the Augustan Marriage Laws by David Alan Reed A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Theology of the University of St. Michael’s College and the Biblical Department of the Toronto School of Theology in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Theology awarded by the University of St. Michael’s College © David Alan Reed 2013 Paul on Marriage and Singleness: Reading 1 Corinthians 7 with the Augustan Marriage Laws David Wheeler-Reed Doctor of Philosophy in Theology University of St. Michael’s College 2013 Abstract This thesis examines what happens if Paul’s directives to married and single persons in 1 Corinthians 7 are read in light of Corinth’s Roman cultural context. It seeks to make analogical comparisons between Paul’s directives in 1 Corinthians 7 and the Augustan Marriage Laws known as the Lex Iulia and Lex Papipa Poppaea. When Paul’s directives are read with the Augustan marriage laws, a very complex picture of Paul develops. First of all, against “empire- critical” readers of Paul, the apostle is not entirely against all aspects of the Roman empire. Instead, this thesis demonstrates that as a colonized individual himself, Paul was a “hybrid” figure, who simultaneously borrowed from and fought against many of the ideas of Roman imperialism. Second, this work shows that when Paul disagreed with the Augustan marriage legislation, he did so mainly with respect to what it had to say about widows. In fact, Paul’s directives to widows are very similar to the thoughts of many other Roman moralists in the first- century CE. Thus, when Paul addresses widows he is standing on the side of the Roman people over and against Augustus’ legislation. As this work comes to a close it explores how Augustus and Paul clothed their moral ideas in apocalyptic discourse. Additionally, it suggests that what Paul and Augustus have most in common is that many of their moral ideas failed to produce any results. For Paul his voice was updated and changed by the writers of the Deutero-Pauline epistles and the Pastoral epistles; for Augustus his voice was muted and refined by later Roman jurists. These types of insights are ii meant to provide a “redescription” of Paul and the Corinthians to further develop future readings of Paul and 1 Corinthians 7. iii Acknowledgements First of all, I am grateful to Professor L. Ann Jervis, my adviser, whose contributions to this project have been above and beyond the normal call to duty of a thesis adviser. I have benefited greatly from her insightful questions and constructive criticisms as well as her support and enthusiasm for my work. I owe Ann a great debt. With great patience and kindness, she has helped me find not only my academic voice but also a part of myself I did not know even existed. She will continue to be a colleague and a friend for many years to come. Second, I wish to thank Professor John Kloppenborg of the Centre for the Study of Religion at the University of Toronto for helping me with this project. Long ago John taught me the value of dedicated research and historical grunt work. Additionally, he taught me the value of asking all of the hard, critical questions that many of us do not wish to ask. For these things I will be forever grateful. I also wish to thank Professors Dorcas Gordon and Scott Lewis of the Toronto School of Theology for reading various drafts of this work. Their help and insights have been invaluable. I also want to thank Dr. Larry Welborn of Fordham University for helping me navigate the field of Greco-Roman studies. I could not have located many of the texts that I needed without his help. Additionally, I want to thank Dr. John Fitzgerald of Notre Dame for believing in me as a junior scholar and giving me chance after chance to present papers at the annual SBL. Additionally I wish to thank several friends and family members. In particular I am grateful to Karen and Tom--they know what they did. And, I can never say enough about my parents and their support. Mom and dad... Thank you for everything! Finally, all thanks are due to Kari, my beautiful wife, and to two individuals known as J and Y. None of this would have been possible without them. iv Notes on Abbreviations The format of this thesis conforms to that specified in the Instructions for Contributors to the Catholic Biblical Quarterly. See: http://catholicbiblical.org/publications/cbq/cbq- instructions for details. The abbreviations of biblical books, journals, etc. also conform to the format of the CBQ. For classical journals see the abbreviations list in L’Année Philologique. The abbreviations of classical authors used in this thesis comes from the 2009 edition of The Oxford Classical Dictionary. Abbreviations for inscriptions can be found in Bradley H. McLean’s An Introduction to the Study of Greek Epigraphy of the Hellenistic and Roman Periods from Alexander the Great down to the Reign of Constantine (323 BCE - 337 CE). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2002. Abbreviations for coins can be found at: http://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk. Abbreviations for papyri conforms to the abbreviations used by the Duke Papyrus Archive. Finally, all quotes from classical authors are from the Loeb Classical Library unless otherwise noted. v Table of Contents Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1 Chapter 2: The Augustan Marriage Laws ....................................................................................18 Primary Sources 20 Ius Liberorum, Punishments and Rewards 41 Widows 48 Who was Affected by These Laws? 51 Chapter 3: 1 Corinthians 7 - Marriage, Sex, and Singleness ...................................................... 57 1 Corinthians 7:1b - Slogan or Not? 61 1 Corinthians 7:7-8, 39-40 Singleness or Celibacy? 64 1 Corinthians 7:26-29 - The Present Crisis 73 A Redescription of Paul and the Corinthians in 1 Corinthians 7 80 Conclusion 89 Chapter 4: The Augustan Laws and 1 Corinthians 7 ...................................................................91 Similarities 93 Differences 112 Hybridity 124 Conclusion 133 Bibliography .............................................................................................................................. 138 vi Chapter 1 Introduction The interpretation of Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians is greatly affected by whether Corinth is understood as a Roman city or a Greek city.1 As Robert Nash observes, “[I]nterpreters have often failed to distinguish between the ancient Greek city-state of Corinth and the Roman colony of Corinth known to Paul.”2 For example, Gordon Fee notes the tradition that Corinth had gained a reputation for sexual vice to such an extent that Aristophanes (ca. 450-385 BCE) coined the verb Κορινθιάζοµαι.3 He also notes that the Asclepius room in the Corinthian museum contains a large number of clay votives fashioned as human genitals that were “offered to the god for healing of that part of the body, apparently ravaged by venereal disease.”4 However, even though Fee argues that the sexual promiscuity of the Corinthians has been blown 1 The information pertaining to Roman Corinth is vast. For an overview, see, D. F. Engels, Roman Corinth: An Alternative for the Classical City (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990). Inscriptional evidence also attests to the Romanization of Corinth. See, for instance, J. H. Kent, The Inscriptions, 1926-50, vol. 8.3 (Princeton: American School of Classical Studies in Athens, 1966); and, A. B. West, Corinth: Latin Inscriptions, 1896-1926 (Princeton: American School of Classical Studies in Athens, 1931). Collections of articles dealing specifically with the archaeological remains of Roman Corinth are: Timothy E. Gregory, ed., The Corinthia in the Roman Period, Journal of Roman Archaeology Supplementary Series, vol. 8 (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1993); and, Charles K. Williams II and Nancy Bookidis, eds., Corinth: The Centenary 1896-1996, Corinth: Results of the Excavations Conducted by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, vol. XX (Athens: The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 2003). 2 Robert Scott Nash, 1 Corinthians, ed. R. Alan Culpepper, Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary (Macon: Smyth & Helwys, 2009) 3. Moreover, Nash notes, “Information about the Greek city found in some ancient writings and archaeological reports has been read as if it applied to Corinth in Paul’s time.” The Romanization of ancient Corinth post 146 BCE is described in great detail by David Gilman Romano, "Post 146 B.C. Land Use in Corinth, and Planning of the Roman Colony of 44 B.C.," in The Corinthia in the Roman Period, ed. T. E. Gregory (Ann Arbor: JRA, 1993) 9-30. On pp. 26-27 he describes Roman Corinth as a “Hippodamian type city” with the usual division into strips of land. Thus, Roman Corinth measured 1 actus wide, per strigas. In Romano’s opinion, “Corinth was designed by an experienced Roman city planner working fully within the tradition of Roman city and colonial planning.” No one disputes that Corinth became a Roman colony under Julius Caesar in 44 BCE when the Romans consciously renamed the colony Colonia Laus Julia. See, for instance, Bruce W. Winter, After Paul Left Corinth: The Influence of Secular Ethics and Social Change (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001) 10. In Roman Corinth Engels adds that “[the Romans] avoided the more common -ius or -us ethnic, which implies that the Italian colonists wished to distinguish themselves from the original Greek inhabitants. See, Engels, Roman Corinth, 69, citing CIG 1, no. 106. There is no reason to think, then, that Corinth was anything else than a Roman city. 3 Gordon D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987) 2. 4 Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, 2 1 2 out of proportion by most NT scholars because of their over-reliance on Strabo’s description of a thousand temple prostitutes on the Acrocorinth, he fails to note that in Roman times votive offerings to Asclepius were indicative not of sexual promiscuity but of reproductive issues.5 Jerome Murphy-O’Connor makes a similar mistake in his book St.