25. His apostolic service
Paul begins by expressing his confidence in his Roman readers: I myself am convinced, my brothers and sisters, he writes, that you yourselves are full of goodness, filled with knowledge and competent to instruct one another (14). He is of course engaging in a little harmless diplomatic exaggeration. But it would be unfair to accuse him of insincerity. Nor does it seem right to describe his words as ‘a courteous apology’. He is simply assuring them that he knows and appreciates their qualities – their kindness (as agathōsynē can be rendered), their extensive Christian knowledge and their proven ability to teach and warn one another.
If then they are such fine and gifted Christians, why has Paul thought it necessary to write to them as he has done? He supplies two reasons. First, I have written to you quite boldly on some points to remind you of them again (15a). The apostles attached great importance to their reminding ministry. To them had been entrusted the task of formulating the gospel and thus of laying the foundations of the faith. Consequently, they kept reminding the churches of the original message and calling them back to it. Paul’s second reason for having written had to do with his unique ministry as the apostle to the Gentiles, to which he has already referred three times (1:5; 11:13; 12:3). I have written, he goes on, because of the grace God gave me (15b) to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles (16a). Although he did not found the church in Rome, he nevertheless has authority to teach its members on account of his special vocation, by God’s grace alone, to be the apostle to the Gentiles.
For the next seven verses Paul unfolds the nature of his ministry, drawing his readers’ attention to three particular features of it.
1. Paul’s ministry was a priestly ministry (15:16–17)
He calls himself a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles with the priestly duty of proclaiming the gospel of God, so that the Gentiles might become an offering acceptable to God, sanctified by the Holy Spirit (16). Many readers are taken by surprise that Paul should describe his service in priestly terms like this, but the vocabulary he uses is clear. Although leitourgos (minister) usually meant a public servant, as in 13:6, yet in the biblical literature both the noun and its cognate verb leitourgeō are used ‘exclusively of religious and ritual services’ (BAGD). So in the New Testament they are applied both to the Jewish priesthood and to Jesus our great high priest. Next, the verb hierourgeō (priestly duty) means to serve as a priest (hiereus), especially in relation to the temple sacrifices. And Paul continues the imagery with his reference to an offering [prosphora] acceptable to God [euprosdektos, used of sacrifices] and sanctified [used of consecrating sacrifices] by the Holy Spirit. These five terms, directly or indirectly, all have priestly and sacrificial associations.
So what is Paul’s priestly ministry, and what sacrifice does he have to offer? The answer clearly has to do with the gospel and the Gentiles. Paul regards his missionary work as a priestly ministry because he is able to offer his Gentile converts as a living sacrifice to God. It is not that he enables them to offer themselves to God (cf. 12:1), as some commentators suggest. For it is he himself who presents the sacrifice. Although Gentiles were rigorously excluded from the temple in Jerusalem, and were on no account permitted to share in the offering of its sacrifices, now through the gospel they themselves become a holy and acceptable offering to God. This significant development was in fulfilment of Isaiah’s prophecy that diaspora Jews (of whom Paul was one) would proclaim God’s glory in distant lands and bring people to Jerusalem from all the nations ‘as an offering to the Lord’. I wonder if Paul recalled his priestly ministry to Gentiles when less than a year later he was falsely accused of bringing one into the temple area?
Although Paul’s priestly ministry as apostle to the Gentiles was unique, the principle he sets out has a vital contemporary application. All evangelists are priests, because they offer their converts to God. Indeed, it is this truth more than any other which effectively unites the church’s two major roles of worship and witness. It is when we worship God, glorying in his holy name, that we are driven out to proclaim his name to the world. And when through our witness people are brought to Christ, we then offer them to God. Further, they themselves join in his worship, until they too go out to witness. So worship leads to witness, and witness to worship. It is a perpetual cycle. No wonder Paul is grateful for his share in this privileged ministry and breaks out: Therefore I glory in Christ Jesus in my service to God (17).
2. Paul’s ministry was a powerful ministry (15:18–19a)
I will not venture to speak of anything except what Christ has accomplished through me in leading the Gentiles to obey God by what I have said and done (18) – by the power of signs and wonders, through the power of the Spirit of God (19a). This is a very valuable statement of Paul’s own understanding of his ministry. The repetition of the word dynamis [power] in verse 19 justifies our calling it a ‘powerful ministry’. He draws attention to at least five features of it.
First, Paul describes the objective of his ministry as being to lead the Gentiles to obey God (eis hypakoē, ‘with a view to obedience’). The same two Greek words occur in 1:5 and 16:26. There, however, Paul’s phrase is ‘to call all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from faith’; here it is ‘leading the Gentiles to obey God’. It is surprising that he now omits any reference to faith, for of course his objective is to bring people to Christ, indeed to faith in Christ (e.g. 1:16). Nevertheless his emphasis is on obedience, presumably because it is the essential consequence of saving faith, and is a vital ingredient of Christian discipleship.
Second, Paul refuses to recount his own exploits. All he will dare to talk about, he says, is what Christ has accomplished through me. To be sure, the relationship between Christ and his evangelists is variously portrayed in the New Testament, and sometimes it is seen as a collaboration (e.g. ‘we are fellow workers in God’s service’). But Paul is not altogether comfortable to think of himself as Christ’s partner; he prefers to be Christ’s agent or even instrument, so that Christ works not ‘with’ him but ‘through’ him. ‘We are . . . Christ’s ambassadors,’ he writes, ‘as though God were making his appeal through us.’ It is safer to think in this way because if the work is Christ’s, the glory will be Christ’s as well (cf. 17).
Third, Paul writes, what Christ has accomplished has been by what I have said and done, literally ‘by word and deed’. This combination of words and works, the verbal and the visual, is a recognition that human beings often learn more through their eyes than through their ears. Words explain works, but works dramatize words. The public ministry of Jesus is the best example of this, and after his ascension into heaven he continued ‘to do and to teach’ through his apostles. It would be wrong to conclude, however, that ‘works’ means only miracles. One of Jesus’ most powerful visual aids was to take a child into his arms, and one of the early church’s was their common life and care for the needy.
Fourth, Christ’s ministry through Paul was by the power of signs and wonders. This expression brings together the three commonest biblical terms for the supernatural. ‘Signs’ indicates their significance (especially in demonstrating the arrival of God’s kingdom), ‘power’ their character (demonstrating God’s power over nature) and ‘wonders’ their effect (arousing people’s amazement). Paul’s only other use of these three words in relation to his ministry is in 2 Corinthians 12:12, where he calls them ‘the marks of a true apostle’. This is not to deny that God can perform miracles today, for it would be absurd to impose limitations on the creator of the universe. It is rather to acknowledge that their chief purpose was to authenticate the unique ministry of the apostles.
Fifth, Paul’s ministry was also through the power of the Spirit of God. Since this clause is separate from the reference to the power of signs and wonders, its meaning is likely to be different too. Physical miracles are not the only way in which the power of the Holy Spirit is displayed. Indeed his usual way is through the Word of God, which is his ‘sword’. It is he who takes our feeble human words and confirms them with his divine power in the minds, hearts, consciences and wills of the hearers. Every conversion is a power encounter, in which the Spirit through the gospel rescues and regenerates sinners.
3. Paul’s ministry was a pioneer ministry (15:19b–22)
So, Paul continues, what Christ has achieved through him is this: from Jerusalem all the way round to Illyricum, I have fully proclaimed the gospel of Christ (19b). This is Paul’s succinct and modest summary of ten years of strenuous apostolic labour, including his three heroic missionary journeys. The expression all the way round (kyklō) should probably be translated ‘in a circle’ or ‘in a circuit’. Then one can visualize, or trace on a map, the arc of Pauline evangelism encircling the Eastern Mediterranean. From Jerusalem it goes north to Syrian Antioch, then further north and west through the provinces of Asia Minor, and across the Aegean Sea to Macedonia. From there it leads south to Achaia, then east across the Aegean Sea again, and via Ephesus back to Antioch and Jerusalem.
But two questions arise. First, did not Paul begin from Antioch, rather than from Jerusalem? Yes and no. Although the first missionary journey was indeed launched from Antioch, the Christian mission itself began in Jerusalem, and after his conversion and commissioning Paul certainly preached in Jerusalem, albeit to Jews. Second, did Paul ever evangelize Illyricum? It is situated on the western, Adriatic seaboard of Macedonia, and corresponds approximately to Albania, Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and part of Croatia. Luke certainly gives us no account of a Pauline visit to Illyricum in Acts. But he leaves room for it, since there is a gap in his narrative of the best part of two years between his leaving Ephesus and his embarking for Jerusalem. While in Macedonia at that time he may well have walked west along the Egnatian Way from Thessalonica, at least to the borders of Illyricum.
This reconstruction would justify Paul’s claim to have fully proclaimed the gospel of Christ, or better, to have ‘completed the preaching of the gospel of Christ’ (reb), within this arc. This does not of course mean that Paul had ‘saturated’ the whole area with the gospel, as we might say today. His strategy was to evangelize the populous and influential cities, and plant churches there, and then leave to others the radiation of the gospel into the surrounding villages. So ‘we understand his claim to have completed the gospel of Christ to be a claim to have completed that trail-blazing, pioneer preaching of it, which he believed it was his own special apostolic mission to accomplish’.
Having plotted on the map the sweeping arc which represented his ten years of missionary outreach, Paul goes on to explain the consistent pioneer policy which lay behind it: It has always been my ambition to preach the gospel where Christ was not known [literally ‘not named’, i.e. ‘not honoured’], so that I would not be building on someone else’s foundation (20). Paul was quite clear, as is evident from his teaching about charismata (e.g. 12:3ff.), that Christ calls different disciples to different tasks, and endows them with different gifts to equip them. His own calling and gift as apostle to the Gentiles were to pioneer the evangelization of the Gentile world, and then leave to others, especially to local, residential presbyters, the pastoral care of the churches. He used two metaphors, agricultural and architectural, to illustrate this division of labour, especially as it related to himself and Apollos in Corinth. ‘I planted the seed, Apollos watered it.’ Again, ‘I laid a foundation as a wise builder, and someone else is building on it.’ It was in keeping with this policy that, positively, he would evangelize only where Christ was not known, and negatively, he would avoid building on someone else’s foundation.
Rather, that is, instead of departing from his policy, he found that Scripture itself validates it, as it is written:
Those who were not told about him will see,
and those who have not heard will understand.
The prophet was writing about the mission of the Servant of the Lord to ‘sprinkle many nations’, so that they would see and understand what had not so far been told them. Paul sees the prophecy fulfilled in Christ, the true Servant, whom he is proclaiming to the unevangelized.
Paul concludes: This is why I have often [‘all this time’, reb] been hindered from coming to you (22). In the first chapter Paul wrote that he had ‘many times’ planned to visit them, but had so far ‘been prevented’ (1:13), although he did not reveal what had stopped him. Now he does. It had to do with his mission policy. On the one hand, because he was concentrating on pioneer evangelism elsewhere, he was not free to come to them. On the other hand, because the Roman church had not been founded by him, he did not feel at liberty to come and stay. Soon, however, as he is about to explain, he will visit them, since he will only be ‘passing through’ (24) on his way to the unevangelized field of Spain.