Since the discussion of these textual phenomena has been of necessity somewhat long, it may be well to point out their bearing on the general view of the date and destination of the Epistle. Roughly speaking, they leave it unchanged on any theory which regards ch. 15 as genuine, whether belonging to a fir.st or to a second edition. Rome remains as the destination, and the closing period of the third missionary journey as the date. The rejection of ch. 16 only removes the reference to Corinth as the place of writing. It must, however.
ROMANS, EPISTLE TO THE
ROMANS, EPISTLE TO THE 411
be reniembered that if Lake's view that the Epistle was not originally intended for Rome he accepted, the reference of the details of the Epistle to the circumstances of the lioman Church will fall to the ground.
3. Authenticity. — The Pauline authorship of the Epistle is pnu'tically uiulisputed, except by the Dutch School. Hut since their views have found no foothold even among the most advanced critics, it does not seem necessary to discu.ss them here. The curious English reader may find them slated by W. C. von Manen in ElU, .i.v. ' Romans (Epistle),' with a refutation in the .same Encyclo- pa'dia by P. W. Schmiedel, s.v. ' (Jalatians ' ; .see also R. J. Knowling, Wittiess of the Epixllcs, London, 1892, j). 133 fi'., Testimony of St. Paul to Christ, do., 1905, p. 34 ff., and Lake, Earlier Epistles of St. Paul, p. 421 ft'. The external evi- dence for Romans is in fact peculiarly strong. It begins with 1 Peter, and perhaps with Hebrews and James (see § 9), and clear traces, though with- out definite quotation, are found in Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Polycarp, and Justin Martyr (see full quotations and references in Sanday-Headlam, p. Ix.xix tr. ; Moliatt, p. 148). Marcion (c. A.D. 140) is the lirst to mention the Epistle by name ; from the time of Irenasus onwards we have numerous direct quotations. In the Muratorian Canon it stands the last of the seven Epistles to the Churches.
i. Purpose of the Epistle. — It seems obvious at first sight to look for the object of the Epistle in circumstances connected with the Roman Church. Most of St. Paul's letters are in fact piices d'oc.casion, called forth by special difficulties or dangers arising in churches in which he is interested ; the Epistles to Galatia and Corinth are the outstanding examples. Accordingly, attempts have been made (Baur, etc.) to recon- struct from hints attbrded by the Epistle the con- ditions of the Christian community in Rome, and the relations existing between its Jewish and Gentile elements ; the 'strong' and the ' weak' of clis. 14, 15 are identified with parties supposed to have arisen there ; and from these features so discovered the main purpose of the Epistle is deduced. It will not be denied that this method is justifiable in certain cases, but it is questionable whether it gives us the right point of view from which to approach this jiartieular Epistle. For Romans is distinguished from the other Epistles just named by two important features, (a) It is addressed to a church which St. Paul has not founded, or even visited. He must therefore have been dependent upon reports received from others for any knowledge of its difficulties or of the various influences at work. No doubt such reports were available (?Prisca), but (b) the Epistle it- self does not suggest that it was written in view of them. There is no hint in it * that St. Paul's purpose is to counteract errors or divisions which lie has reason to believe have actually arisen. Indeed, he seems to safeguard himself from being supposed to do so (15'^), and suggests that his object is the imparting of a spiritual gift (1" 15'*). He does not insist on his authority as an apostle except in the opening section. What he does insist on is his desire and frustrated attempts to visit Rome(l" 15--"). It would appear, therefore, that the letter is intended partly to take the place of this visit, and partly to prepare the way for it, if it should be possible in the future. Remembering the circumstances under which it was written, we can hardly doubt that the writer was acutely con- scious that the visit might in fact never take place. Already we have hints of the premonitions as to the result of the journey to Jerusalem (15^'), * Except 16'^, on which see } 2 (o).
which soon became still more defined (Ac 20'^' 21'"''). St. Paul realized the outstanding import- ance of Rome and a church there both at the numient an<l still more for the future. He may well have felt that in case he should never be able to go there himself he would wish that church to have some permanent record of his teaching. The Epistle is not a formal compendium of Paulinism, but it is the longest and most carefully thought-out statement of his views on certain points, and we may conjecture that, though add^^s.sed to Rome, St. Paul had in mind the possibility of its pene- trating to other churches.* In other words, the letter docs not ari.se primarily from a desire to meet a particular situation in the Roman Church ; it arises from the wish to put it and others in posses- sion of his views in some more or le.ss permanent form. Apart from the few personal reterences, it might have been equally well written to any church, and we can tlraw few conclusions from it as to tlie circumstances of the Roman Church in particular. The Epistle, however, remains of the greatest value as atibrding material for the recon- struction of the thought and conditions of Apos- tolic Christianity. It tells us the kind of questions St. Paul found men asking generally, the difficul- ties they felt, and the forms of error to which they were exposed. For the particular examples he had in mind we should probably look to the churches he knew, or even to the church in which he happened to be writing, rather than to Rome.