Speech Delivered by Oscar Cardinal Rodríguez Maradiaga
Archbishop of Tegucigalpa, Honduras

NPLC 25th Anniversary Celebration
March 26, 2009
Church of St. Paul the Apostle, New York

We are in the Year of Jubilee of St. Paul: A gift from His Holiness, Pope Benedict XVI to all the church; and a gift that is producing optimum results. He has reminded us that to remember this apostle is not just “to reflect on the past and overcome history”; rather, “St. Paul wants to talk to us today.” Besides, the Holy Father said that the reason which brought him to declare the Pauline year is founded in “listening to Paul and learning today and now from him. Learn from him as our teacher in ‘the faith and the truths’ which are the reasons for the unity among Christ’s disciples.”

In spite the admirable advances in the technical and scientific world, there is a progressive loss of moral, spiritual and transcendental values. This loss has produced in the world a culture highly centered in greed, power, wantonness and the selfishness that is at the root of the startling financial earthquake, felt already throughout the world and affecting all dimensions of life.

The religious and cultural pluralism of today’s society can be clearly seen in the church today. There are other sources and ideas which compete with the church, weakening and relativizing its social impact and its pastoral action. Not all Catholics are prepared to withstand the multiplicity of ideas and practices present in today’s society. This fact has become evident in the relative silent aloofness from the church by many, and their adherence (without much thought) to other beliefs and other religious institutions. This situation is made worse through the ethical and religious relativism of the present culture. On the other hand, the present pluralism opens the door to personal freedom and conscientious religious choice. All this shows the urgent need of a greater Christian formation among the laity, which would allow them to develop an attitude of firm identification with their Christian vocation and to have a clearer evangelical discernment when confronting the present pluralism.

In its 2,000 years of history, the church continues to be the bearer of enduring values and principles, capable of evangelizing this culture. One of its royal messengers was the Apostle Paul, who dedicated his whole life to love, to make the Good News of Jesus Christ known to all, and to make it part of the culture of his time (especially amongst the gentiles).

I invite you to take a short journey through some aspects of the life of this intrepid missionary.

Paul: A Jew from the Diaspora

According to the Acts of the Apostles (Acts 22:3), Paul was born in Tarsus, Cilicia (St. Jerome states that his parents were from Giscala, in Galilee). We need to ask ourselves about the importance that it may have, in the life of a Jew of that time, to be born in the Diaspora – in other word – outside of the “holy territory.” It seems that the answer is: a Jew born in the Diaspora was more open than his racial brothers and sisters born in the Holy Land. The everyday contact with other reality and other cultures was a strong invitation not to close up to others. Survival itself pushed those Jews to be potentially more open to a world that thought and acted differently.

Diaspora (a word which comes from the Greek language, and which means “dispersion”) is an ancient phenomenon in the life of God’s people. The massive migration to territories outside of their land began in the seventh century before Christ. In other words, the Jews who lived in foreign lands, even though they kept their religious and cultural identity, later opened themselves to the world, with all the risks implied in it. One of the results of such opening, without doubt, is the translation into Greek of the Hebrew Bible – a translation known as “of the Seventy” (Septuagint), which circulated among the Jewish communities long before the birth of Jesus. It should be noted that the translation contains many adaptations of the Hebrew text, which is a clear sign that they had no problem with adapting to the “new culture.” In Paul’s land the Jews used that translation, while in the Holy Land they used the Hebrew text with simultaneous translation into Aramaic. These details are enough for us to begin seeing Paul as the fruit of an environment, of a time and of a culture.

His name itself allows us to go in that direction. His name was Saul (Saul, possibly as homage to the first king in the history of God’s people, since both were from the tribe of Benjamin), but he adopted or received from infancy an “adapted” name (Paul). This was a common practice among the Jews of the Diaspora. According to St. Luke (Acts 13:9), the change from Saul to Paul is made when he begins his first journey, taking into account that he will be in contact with pagans. Paul was born exactly in that environment, in the Diaspora, and in contact with non-Jews. Therefore it is probable that, from birth, he received the name “Saul-Paul” and that, due to his contact with communities made up principally by non-Jews, he assumed the name Paul. The date of his birth is unknown. However, he would have been a few years younger than Jesus. Today we know that Jesus was born around the year 6 B.C. Paul was possibly born in the year 5 A.D. Paul himself states that he was circumcised on the eighth day, as the Law required (Lev. 12:3), becoming in that way part of God’s people. He was a legitimate Jew and was raised and educated as a Jew (Phil 3:5).

The education of Paul

Tarsus was a big city, on a kind of frontier between the Semitic (Oriental) and the Greco-Roman (Occidental) cultures. Culturally, and during that time, there was rivalry between Tarsus and Athens, because Tarsus was famous for its schools of philosophy: Stoics and Cynics. There is no doubt that Paul was influenced by the lifestyle of his birth city, by the culture and by the way and manner of its citizens. In fact, when he wrote his first letter, he offered very important criteria to the Thessalonians about the Babels which were the big cities of that time: “Put all things to the test: keep what is good.” (1Thes 5:21)

There is no doubt that the life style and the cultural atmosphere in the city of Tarsus helped in the education of Paul. In that city, with its eminently Greek culture, was the tomb of Sardanapalus, considered the founder of the City of Tarsus. Above his tomb, it is written: “Traveler: eat, drink and enjoy life; the rest has no importance.” Later, when Paul wrote to the Corinthians, he goes back to that thought, and shows that without faith in the resurrection the best man can do is follow the advice of the ancient city founder: “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we will die.” (1 Cor 15:32b).

In Tarsus, the devotees of Isis would dress, especially during the celebrations, in heavenly blue clothes to identify themselves with her divinity. This obviously helped as a base for Paul to speak about the “garments” which identify Christians, as if it were an identity card (see as a sample, Rom 13:14; 2 Cor 5:2; Eph 4:2-24; 6:11; Col 3:10-14).

Since Tarsus belonged to the Roman Empire, it had its slave markets. Without doubt Paul had seen slave auctions. This was his starting point for later on, when he used that image to speak about the importance of the death and resurrection of Jesus (i.e. 1 Cor 6:20; 7:21-25). In his letters he uses several times the image of “the ransom/the purchase” of slaves to illustrate the image of Jesus’ action on behalf of Christians.

Paul writes and normally communicates in Greek. A few decades before Paul’s birth, in Tarsus, was born a very renowned educator called Athenodorus. Athenodorus was the teacher and a good friend of Caesar Augustus (Tarsus exported educators). Some phrases show the content of that teacher who, without doubt, must have had some influence on Paul. For example: “For each creature, its conscience is God” (we see how this phrase resounds in Paul’s thoughts in Rom 14:22a: “Keep what you believe about this matter, then, between yourself and God” and: “Treat your brother as if the Lord were watching you and speak to the Lord as if others were listening”(this is, according to 1Thes 2:3-7, Paul’s way to be and act before God and his people).

The different schools of philosophy had a great influence in Tarsus: especially the Stoics and the Cynics. Many scholars who study Paul’s writings affirm that he was especially influenced by the Stoics, particularly when he states that he can face anything through the one who strengthens him (Phil 4:13); or in the famous passage in Rom 8:35-39, where he asks: “Who then can separate us from the love of Christ?” (See also the text in 1 Tim 6:7-8 as well, reminiscent of similar passages in the wisdom writings, especially Prov 30:8-9.)

The social environment of Tarsus had a great influence on the formation of Paul. Athletics, the legal system (Roman Law), the architecture, the arts, and the culture are present in his writings as metaphors of the Christian life. Just think, as an example, of the “triumphal procession” of the victorious generals, which served as base for Paul’s description of his participation in the glorious victory of Christ over death (cf. 2 Cor 2:14-15). Another meaningful detail is that women in Tarsus would not go out into the streets without a Persian veil. This was a sign that they had the protection of a man, so that their dignity was preserved. A woman in Tarsus, while using the elegant veil, made everyone know that she had dignity and a husband who loved her and would take care of her. It seems that Paul, when he later wrote to the Corinthians, and ordered women to cover their heads while prophesying, wanted this fact to be evident (1 Cor 11:2-16).

At home, Paul received a Jewish upbringing. He affirms that he is from the Tribe of Benjamin; that he is a Hebrew, a son of Hebrews; and that he was circumcised on the eighth day (Phil 3:5). He knew Greek and must have known the Septuagint – the Greek translation of the Old Testament. At around five years of age, he must have learned from his father the essential nucleus of the Law (Deut 5-6. See especially what it says in 11:19: “Teach them to your children”). He learned the Great Praise (Ps 113-118) which was sang in the great Jewish feasts; learned the meaning of the principal Feasts (Passover, Pentecost, Tabernacles, etc.), and the daily praise which the Jews would pray each morning (Ps 146-150). At that age he learns to read and write. Starting at five years old, Paul prays morning and evening, every day, the “Shemá, Israel” (Dt 5.1) which his father taught him. Nothing is known about Paul’s mother. But the maternal figure definitely influenced Paul’s personality. Frequently we hear only about the severe aspects of Paul’s personality. Nevertheless, in his letters, there is proof of much love and tenderness which are typical of a mother and a sign that with her he learned to be loving, to give of himself (as a mother does with her children); and he did the same with the faithful (Gal 4:19; 1 Thes 2:7-8). We know, through the Acts of the Apostles, that he also had a sister (Acts 23:26). Their profession must have been learned from their father.

Next to the Jewish synagogues there was, normally, a synagogue school. Paul, like any other Jewish boy, started going at six years of age. Most certainly, he was accompanied by the pedagogue, a slave charged with taking the boys to the school. Later on, Paul used the image of the “pedagogue” to speak of the evangelists who came after him through Corinth (cf. 1 Cor 4:14-17), and to speak about the Law (Galatians and Romans). The pedagogue would carry the school utensils (the wax writing board and the stylus to write . . .). In school, children would sit in the floor, and write with a metal stylus on a wax board placed on their knees. The first few years of school were dedicated to learning about the History of Israel: its most important times, the patriarchs and the matriarchs, the heroes and heroines (cf. Rom 9:4-5). In the school Paul had his first contact with the expectation of the Jews concerning the coming of the Messiah.

At 10 years of age, the student would go on to the “second level”, which was the Oral Law phase of education. It was necessary to come in contact with the application of the general ethical, rabbinic and pharisaic principals. This must have been a very difficult time for Paul, and what marked him the most –because it was a true sacrifice for him, to get rid of it after his conversion (the “mere rubbish” which he speaks of in Phil 3:8). The Pharisees considered the Oral Law just as important as the written l\Law, and gave to it the same level of importance as the Ten Commandments. It seems to come out when he says in the Letter to the Colossians: “Don’t handle this,” “Don’t taste that,” “Don’t touch the other” (Col 2:21). An education based on taboos, on prohibition and sin, on freedom and grace.

With his 15th birthday, Paul probably moved to Jerusalem with the aim of continuing his studies and becoming a Rabbi. It was the rabbinical orientation which so determined the course of his life. To study in Jerusalem was to reach the highest academic level in the Jewish world. The intellectual training received by Paul was excellent. Besides that, the rabbinical precepts prescribed that, as he reached 18 years of age, the young man had to get married. In Jerusalem, he attended the Temple school: the school of scholars of the Jewish Law and the Pharisees; the most important “high academics” school of the Jewish world at that time. He was a disciple of Gamaliel, a Pharisee, and doctor of law; a member of the Sanhedrin and a man esteemed by all the people, as stated in the Acts of the Apostles (Acts 5:34). At the same time as he studied, he had to work, as was done by all the professors no matter how great they were. This is an important detail to be able to understand how Paul was and behaved. Later on, he worked with his own hands –not to be an economic burden to the community, and to avoid the possibility that the Good News would get confused with money or with commercial business. With that attitude, he radically distances himself from other Christian evangelists. He also distances himself from the Greek mentality, where an educated person would never do a physically strenuous work, something that was left to slaves.

Gamaliel was a disciple of Hillel, a renowned person already in the time of Jesus. He was of flexible and conciliatory character, and his theological beliefs opposed the rigor of the law as proposed by the Shammai school. The flexibility and conciliatory spirit taught by Gamaliel became very important for Paul for the education of the communities of faith he formed later on.

The young Paul literally sat at the feet of Gamaliel, since the teacher usually taught while standing and the students would sit in a circle around him. In that facet of his life, Paul studied the Old Testament using the Hebrew text, with an oral Aramaic translation. The professor would do the “exegesis” of the text; that is, the various interpretations, the new ways of reading it, while asking questions of the students in order to spur them to enter the debate. It probably resulted in a “cascade of ideas” with heated discussions. Paul emulated that style of teaching, which for us may seem difficult to follow. As an example, we simply need to read Romans or Galatians to discover how that type of reasoning is present (even though for us it may seem strange). Also, the way Paul interprets some passages in the Old Testament is also due to the academic formation received while in Jerusalem (e.g., 1 Cor 9:9-10).

The “curricular level” had two courses: The Halakah, that is, the traditions and prescriptions of the law in its totality (a type of Canonical Law); and the Haggadah, the religious truths which the Bible offers (a type of moral and dogmatic theology in today’s theology schools). Here, Paul learned the different ways to interpret the Old Testament. Later on, he applies the same techniques to comprehend Christianity. Sometimes we can read in his writings a typological reading (Adam is a figure of Christ, cf. Rom 5:14); other times an adaptable reading (the equality among the Old Testament tribes justifies a collection to help the poor, cf. 2 Cor 8:15); and other times an allegorical reading (as is the quotation of Deut 30:11 in Rom 10:6-9).

In our language the word “pharisee” is normally associated with a “false and hypocritical person.” Nevertheless the primary meaning of the Hebrew word is “separated.” The Pharisees started one or two centuries before Christ and, among the good things they left us, was the belief in the resurrection of the dead. In the synoptic Gospels the Pharisees, together with the Teachers of the Law, were among the greatest opponents and adversaries of Jesus. The Pharisees knew that they were a separated minority. They were not too many in numbers, but they could make a lot of noise by their manner and their behavior. Some studies say that, in Jesus’ and Paul’s time, the group of the Pharisees constituted fewer than ten thousand people. Their most important characteristic was probably the practice of scrupulously following the oral as well as the written Law. In fact, together with the written Old Testament text, they defended the known Oral Torah. In other words, everything that had been transmitted orally had the weight of the Law and should be followed. The Pharisees were distinguishable from the other groups in the time of Jesus, because of their rigorous observance of each minimal detail of the Law. In the Gospels, Jesus criticizes this practice of the Pharisees and Teachers of the Law and treats them as “blind guides” and “hypocrites” (e.g., Matthew 23.) Nevertheless, it is not wise to study the pharisaic movement based only on the criticisms made in the Gospels. For example, the text of Matthew 23 seems to show that the problems of the Christian communities in the year 80 A.D. were much more acute than the conflict of Jesus with the Pharisees and the Teachers of the Law. In fact, at the time in which the Gospel of Matthew was written (after 80 A.D.), Christians were having serious troubles with the Pharisees and the Teachers of the Law, the only important Jewish groups who had survived the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem during the year 70 A.D.

Paul was a Pharisee. He so affirms it in Philippians 3:5. We do not know if his father was also a Pharisee – since he received a Pharisaic upbringing, as stated in Acts 23:6. (However, Luke does not always give a faithful interpretation of Paul; often it is the opposite: the Paul of Acts says things that Luke would like him to say). It is better to suppose that Paul opted to become of the party of the Pharisees after the years of formation he had in Jerusalem, especially with Gamaliel. Luke, the author of the Acts of the Apostles, affirms that Gamaliel was a Pharisee (Acts 5:34). Sometime later, when he is in prison in Jerusalem, Paul affirms that he was “brought up here to Jerusalem as a student of Gamaliel. I received strict instruction in the Law of our ancestors and was just as dedicated to God …” (Acts 22:3). It is known that everything referring to or attributed to Paul in the Acts of the Apostles, should not be given absolute credence. This thought of Luke in Acts finds resonance in Galatians 1:14: “I was ahead of most other Jews of my age in my practice of the Jewish religion, and was much more devoted to the traditions of our ancestors.”

For the patterns of the time, Paul was an “international” man, knowledgeable of many cultures, and intellectually well prepared for the mission God had reserved for him even “before he was born” (Gal 1:15). Mysteriously God formed him and conducted him for the great objective of being the “apostle and teacher to the gentiles” (1 Tim 2:7). He knew several languages: Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek and possibly Latin. Since he was Hebrew, son of a Hebrew – “a pure-blooded Jew” (Fil 3.5), he profoundly knew the culture, the faith and the traditions of his people. But also knew and recognized the cultural value of the non-Jews, among whom he lived since birth. He communicated orally and in writing in the international language of the time: Greek. Being knowledgeable of the ways for developing relationships in his society, he discovers in it extraordinary strength for proclaiming the Good News. In fact, after observing how communications worked between cities, the good postal system established by the Roman Empire, he copies the idea of the letter, and transforms it into an instrument for evangelizing. We should keep in mind that he was the first New Testament writer. When the preaching of the Gospel was only done orally, he was inspired in his letters, which were then written to evangelize with written texts. He then becomes, without wanting or knowing it, the first great writer of the New Testament. Jesus left nothing written, but Paul did!

The previous sections described how Paul came in contact with the Greek cultural world and gave that culture the light of the Gospel. He knew well the philosophers of his time, their arguments and their points of view. He overcame the fear of confrontation among cultures by being different from his race brothers. For them, other people were totally foreigners, impure, lost and condemned by God. That slow maturity brought, without fear, his opening to the world, with a will to meet and to dialog.

He definitely had difficulties in that sense. In the Letter to the Galatians he says: “You stupid Galatians! I told you exactly how Jesus Christ was nailed to a cross. Has someone now put an evil spell on you?” (Gal 3:1) On those words, some scholars see the possibility that Paul communicated visually with the Galatians, especially if we take into account the impossibility of speaking clearly to them, since their dialect was unknown to Paul. He may have communicated with them through drawings of Jesus crucified.

Many scholars believe that the hymns in the Letters of Paul (i.e. 1 Cor 13; Phil 2:5-11 etc.) are texts that existed long before the letters were written. That is very possible. But it is appropriate to ask what was done by Paul in the communities where he stayed for some time (according to Acts 19:11 he stayed a year-and-a-half in Corinth, while the community was being formed). To know it would explain how they celebrated their common faith, etc. Besides this, the hymns found in the letters of Paul (as well as those in the Deutero-pauline writings) perfectly fit into the collection of letters. So is it permissible to ask if they were not written by Paul, or at least, with his collaboration?

Did Paul have talent as a poet? It is very probable.

I would like to conclude with some very interesting reflections of Dr. Gene Edward Veith, Dean of Arts and Sciences of Concordia University, Mequon, Wisconsin, in his article entitled Through All Generations: “Today, as pundits try to dissect the differences between Baby Boomers and Baby Busters, the Sixties Generation and Generation X, even the church becomes fractured along generational lines. But the Bible puts forth the constant theme that God, His saving Word, and His Church extend "through all generations" (Ps. 89:1).

Members of the so-called Generation X dislike being all grouped together under a generational stereotype. Whether they are "slackers," paralyzed by apathy and hopelessness, or driven achievers and money-makers, they tend to have a cynical edge and a wholly admirable distrust of phoniness. Another trait is their frustration that Baby Boomers, however old they get, still demand all the attention.

Many churches today feel the need to be contemporary. The assumption is that in order to reach people the church should put aside its old-fashioned styles and get with the times. The hoary liturgy should be done away with and those archaic hymns should be replaced with music people are listening to today.

It is true that American society today is generationally segmented.

The Christian church, St. Paul tell us, "consists of many diverse members who come together in the unity of the Body of Christ" (1 Cor 12.:2-27). "There should be no division in the body" (12:25). We are warned, so that generational differences, like those of "ethnicity, race, gender or social class" (cf. Gal 3:28), must not be allowed to get in the way of the unity we have in Jesus Christ.

This unity extends through time, "throughout all generations," including those generations of the past. In a typical church service, the hymns that are sung literally do span the generations. A typical worship service thus exemplifies the commerce of ages that is intrinsic to the communion of saints.

A new baby represents a new generation, but the baby is baptized into the one Body of Christ. In church, the old and the young, the rich and the poor, parents and children, Boomers and X-ers, kneel together in prayer, hear the Gospel each of them desperately needs and join together in the unfathomable spiritual intimacy with Christ and with each other, that is Holy Communion.

There are different generations, but they are all equally in need of Christ. The Church is the place where generational differences are to be transcended, not reinforced; where ephemeral fashions and cultural distinctions are subsumed into an eternal perspective, into a kingdom which "endures from generation to generation" (Daniel 4:34). Only a church which resists being merely of one generation can be “relevant to them all”.