“All Things To All People”: Paul’s Principle of Accommodation Part 1
“All Things To All People”: Paul’s Principle of Accommodation Part 2
3. The principle in practice
Paul’s principle of accommodation, as explained in 1 Corinthians 9, refers primarily to his social conduct. Instances in Acts and the Epistles can be used to show that he practised it in this way. However, it follows that Paul also applied the principle of accommodation to his proclamation of the Gospel, for his conduct and his message were of one piece, working for the salvation of men and women. In this vein, many discussions on the principle of accommodation also show how it impacts his dialectical and apologetic methodology.[1] This principle is a whole way of “relating to people on their own ground and according to their own background and understanding”.[2]
3.1 Social Conduct
When Paul reminded Peter that he lived “like a Gentile and not like a Jew,”[3] there can be little doubt that Paul himself for the most part also lived as a Gentile as he carried out his Gentile mission.[4] Judging from the context of the controversy with Peter,[5] this would have involved Paul in at least table-fellowship with Gentiles, thus breaching Jewish food laws.[6] However, the book of Acts also reveals that Paul remained in the fellowship and ministry of the synagogue for as long as possible, for his strategy involved using the synagogue as “a base of operation for his mission”.[7] In order to do this, he would need to have come as an observant Jew,[8] even to the extent of accepting the discipline of the synagogue, which he did at least five times.[9] The thirty-nine lashes were a Jewish punishment that Paul could have escaped from as a Roman citizen. But, in this matter, he voluntarily placed himself under the old Jewish law so he could have the opportunity to win others who were under the law.[10]
The book of Acts reveals other matters in which Paul deliberately conformed to Jewish custom. When the half-Jew Timothy joined Paul and Silas in Lystra, Paul took the pragmatic option of having him circumcised to regularise his position and avoid alienating the Jews in the places they were to visit.[11] It may have been intended to demonstrate to the Jews that “whatever missionary work Paul and Timothy would do in this area, it would not be without respect for Jewish sensibilities.”[12]
During Paul’s last stay in Jerusalem, he agreed to join four men who were fulfilling a Naziritic vow[13] by undergoing a purification rite, accompanying them into the Temple, and paying for the sacrifices that would close their vows.[14] Paul did this to dispel rumours about his attitude to the law that were particularly damaging to the leaders of the Jerusalem church and their Jewish mission. This was a time of heightened Jewish nationalism and the Jerusalem leaders faced a backlash because of their connection with Paul and his Gentile mission.[15] Paul had to show that “he is a loyal Jew and his mission to the Gentiles was not an anti-Jewish one: he opposed neither his people nor their keeping of the Law.”[16] Paul was not, in fact, opposed to Christian Jews continuing to observe the law provided that it was not compelled as a way of salvation, so he willingly accommodated to Jewish feeling in Jerusalem in an attempt to protect the witness of the Gospel there.[17]
3.2 Pastoral problems
Some scholars have pointed out examples of Paul’s use of the principle of accommodation in dealing with various pastoral problems in his churches.[18] Many of these instances are found in 1 Corinthians where Paul addresses himself in turn to “problem” groups who may be described as “the libertines”, “the ascetics”, “the strong” and “the ecstatics”.[19] In each case, Paul seeks to meet his Gentile converts on their own ground[20] and to identify himself with them as far as possible so that he can better teach them. He begins at the point where he can agree with them, avoids raising matters and using arguments which would needlessly alienate them, and proceeds in their own terms to lead them into a more mature understanding and expression of their faith.[21] Chadwick remarks on Paul’s “astonishing ability to reduce to an apparent vanishing point the gulf between himself and his converts and yet to ‘gain’ them for the Christian gospel.”[22]
Let us take the example of Paul’s response to those who were using their liberty for sexual immorality.[23] Paul does not try to counter these libertines with a simple legal pronouncement against fornication,[24] for this was the very legalism they had rejected. Such a response would have become a stumbling block rather than a help to their Christian growth. So Paul begins by accepting their basic position – “All things are lawful for me”, but goes on to show that Christian freedom is not simply a matter of what is lawful. Real freedom, he says, means not being enslaved to one’s sinful passions; it is centred in relationship to Christ, and it is conditioned by love of neighbour. In this way Paul seeks to persuade his hearers to “shun fornication”, based on reasons of liberty rather than restriction.
3.3 Evangelistic preaching
Paul’s ability to adapt to his hearers is also demonstrated in his evangelistic preaching as recorded in Acts.[25] We can see this when we compare the sermon given to Jews in the synagogue of Pisidian Antioch[26] with the speech given before Gentile philosophers of the Areopagus.[27] The two speeches vary greatly in their character and details, but proclaim the same Gospel because Paul’s basic methodology allows him to accommodate the form of the message to different social contexts.
In speaking to the Jews, Paul begins by expounding on their own shared history as a people – the salvation history of Israel as set down in their authoritative writings. He develops it in such a way as to highlight the note of expectation that is there and expose their need for fulfilment. Then he presents Jesus as the long-awaited Saviour, and the realisation of all their aspirations. Having brought his hearers to the essential point, Paul reaches the limit of accommodation and clearly states the challenge for a response to this Gospel.
With the Athenians, however, Paul must take another route to clearly communicate the claims of Christ. He establishes a point of contact with them by remarking on their manifest religiosity. He uses evidence from their own culture and acknowledged philosophical authorities to present God the Creator as the answer to their own sense of religious lack and to demonstrate the inappropriateness of their idolatry. His speech moves towards a climax as he issues a call to repentance in view of imminent judgement by Jesus, whom God has raised from the dead. Once again, Paul has reached the goal of accommodation by bringing people to the point of decision about Christ himself.
4. Conclusion
“I have become all things to all men” is a summary statement of the principle of accommodation that characterised Paul’s pastoral and evangelistic practice. His principle was that, in accordance with the freedom established and directed by the Gospel of Christ, he would identify as closely as possible with all the different categories of people amongst whom he found himself at various times, in order to clearly communicate the Gospel and remove all unnecessary barriers to their acceptance of it. Paul put this into practice by accommodating his social conduct, and his preaching and teaching to the various social and cultural contexts in which he worked. For example, when amongst Jews he observed their food laws, and when amongst Gentiles, he ate whatever was placed before him. He willingly submitted to the rule of the synagogue and performed certain Jewish rites when the occasion warranted. In dealing with pastoral problems, Paul identified as closely as possible with the position of his misguided converts and proceeded in the terms most amenable to them to lead them into maturity. Similarly, in his evangelistic preaching, Paul related to his hearers on their own ground and used elements from their own background and understanding to lead up to the solution and the challenge of the Gospel.
Bibliography
[1] Noted by Richardson and Gooch, ‘Accommodation Ethics’, 102, 105.
[2] Barton, ‘Was Paul a relativist?’, 191.
[3] Galatians 2:14.
[4] Bruce, Paul, 127.
[5] On the question of Paul’s apparent inconsistency in rebuking Peter at Antioch see Kruse, Paul, 131-133.
[6] Compare 1 Corinthians 10:27.
[7] Bornkamm, ‘Missionary stance’, 200.
[8] For the difficulties in Paul’s claim to be an observant Jew when he also lived as a Gentile at other times, see comments by Richard N. Longenecker, Paul, apostle of liberty: the origin and nature of Paul’s Christianity (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1964), 260-262.
[9] 2 Corinthians 11:24.
[10] Longenecker, Paul, apostle of liberty, 247-248.
[11] Acts 16:3. See Bruce, Paul, 215-216.
[12] Ben Witherington III, The Acts of the Apostles: a socio-rhetorical commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 475. For the argument that Paul even circumcised the Gentile Titus as an accommodation, see D. W. B. Robinson, ‘The circumcision of Titus and Paul’s “liberty”‘, Australian biblical review 12 (1964), 24-42.
[13] This involved shaving the head. Compare Acts 18:18.
[14] Acts 21:17-26. Witherington, Acts, 649.
[15] Bruce, Paul, 348. Paul may have come to Jerusalem on this occasion to present the collection from the Gentile churches. Witherington, Acts, 644.
[16] Witherington, Acts, 644.
[17] Space does not permit discussion of Paul’s acceptance of the so-called Apostolic Decree (Acts 15) as an example of accommodation to the Jews. See, for example, J. Gresham Machen, The origin of Paul’s religion (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1921), 92-96.
[18] See, for example, Chadwick, ‘All things to all men’, 261-275; Barton, ‘Was Paul a relativist?’, 164-192; and Longenecker, Paul, apostle of liberty, 232-244.
[19] 1 Corinthians 5-6, 7, 8-10, 12-14 respectively.
[20] Chadwick, ‘All things to all men’, 272.
[21] Longenecker, Paul, apostle of liberty, 242, 244.
[22] Chadwick, ‘All things to all men’, 275.
[23] 1 Corinthians 6:12-20. This example comes from Longenecker, Paul, apostle of liberty, 232-235.
[24] He might, for instance, have appealed to the so-called Jerusalem Decree of Acts 15.
[25] This section is indebted to Barton, ‘Was Paul a relativist?’, 183-191.
[26] Acts 13:13-43
[27] Acts 17:22-31.