An interview with N. T. Wright

Fortress Press: In light of your recent and ongoing work on Paul—specifically for us, then, your book Paul: Fresh Perspectives—what direction do you see in Paul studies “beyond the new perspective”?

N. T. Wright: First, I want to mention that I am currently working on Paul and the Faithfulness of God (the provisional title for volume IV of Christian Origins and the Question of God) and I hope to have it ready sometime next year. The present book, Paul: Fresh Perspectives, is in many ways a ‘taster’ for that much longer study and I hope will keep the pot boiling.

There are dozens of ‘new directions’ in Pauline studies. The ‘new perspective’ itself is a loose assortment of directions, some more sociological, some more theological, some pursuing detailed debates about Paul’s conversion and so on, others exploring his narrative strategies and use of scripture. Some take Paul as such a typical Jew that he is scarcely a Christian anymore; others insist that he broke decisively with the parent Judaism, though in a very Jewish way. The debate about ‘apocalyptic’ in Paul (Lou Martyn and others) rumbles on with variations and confusions this way and that. Douglas Campbell’s new book goes further than most down the ‘apocalyptic/salvation-history therefore not justification’ line, and will provoke controversy. Meanwhile, the question of Paul and social ethics (Boyarin, Horrell, and so on in a line from Wayne Meeks onward) is lively, and the question of Paul and empire (Horsley and others—see Fresh Perspectives chapter 4!) is extremely interesting and getting hotter. So too is the question of Paul and the stoics: though Engberg-Pedersen has not convinced that many Pauline scholars, the questions he’s raised won’t go away, and the fine studies of Dale Martin and others keep raising the questions about Paul’s use of/integration with his Greco-roman context. In other words, there is no one ‘line of thought’; not even two or three. Make that more like two or three dozen. This is an exciting time to be studying Paul.

FP: Your church work has inevitably thrown you into controversial social issues. What’s the relevance of the Apostle Paul and his legacy to that work?

NTW: Well, let’s take some of them. In the UK we have a big debate right now about euthanasia. The newspapers and many politicians want to go that route, and we in the churches tend to line up against. How does Paul help? By his strong creational theology, showing that a positive valuation of creation results in a recognition of death not as something to be flirted with but as a real (though defeated) enemy. This perspective has led many in the churches to found and support Hospices, which are the real alternative either to a very nasty death experience or (to avoid that) assisted suicide. Also, Paul’s valuation of human life makes it very difficult to support the idea of helping someone else kill themselves.

Or take the poverty/debt crisis. The New Testament ideal of society is where each member looks out for each other one and the burdens that some carry are shared with those better off. The Archbishop is about to make a major speech to the Trade Union Congress in the UK on social ideals and how to work for them, and this relates closely. Most people know our present economic arrangements are not working but have no other vision. The New Testament ideal of community, articulated especially by Paul, is quite compelling.

Then again: work. This is getting more important as the western world sees massive increases in unemployment and nobody quite knows why. Paul’s vision of a human being is of someone reflecting God’s image into the world, and part of the church’s responsibility is to foster that vocation through whatever means possible. For many, it’s through work; but where work is unavailable, the church should be there to help people explore other worthwhile means of image-reflection.

Paul and Empire: hugely relevant. For Paul, Jesus is Lord so Caesar isn’t. We are only really just beginning to discover how Paul’s essentially Jewish narrative of the kingdom of God, focusing on the lordship of Jesus, challenged the Roman imperial ideology in the first century and challenges all great imperial narratives now. Today’s post-enlightenment western world has such a grand narrative, and we need to see how the gospel challenges it while not collapsing into the general postmodern morass.

And of course sex: Paul’s vision is utterly creational, that is, he affirms the Genesis 1 and 2 vision of the goodness of the created order, and its fruitfulness through male/female union, as opposed to the idea that the givenness of creation is dispensable in favor of alternative (and essentially unfruitful) practices. In other words, he is neither merely prejudiced nor simply reflecting some alien cultural norms but offering deep and scripturally rooted reflections that must be wrestled with.

Underneath all of this is the question of theology and social policy, or if you like, church and state. We in the UK have one (not entirely satisfactory) way of lining this up, which some of us work from within but critically; in the United States a different lineup of issues obtains, with equal and opposite challenges! What Paul offers is a vision of new creation breaking into the present time through Jesus as Messiah and Lord, and the followers of Jesus being tasked with living under his lordship and both exemplifying and commending the alternative way of being human that follows.

FP: How has your involvement in the diocese of Durham changed your perspective about the relevance of biblical scholarship to the church and to society?

NTW: Most people in my diocese are not ‘educated’ in the sense of university or college training. It’s an old working class area, with (admittedly) a wonderful world class university in the middle of it and other splendid educational institutions. But most people in most churches would not normally expect to read biblical scholarship. It is therefore up to the teachers to teach the clergy and such laity as are interested—and it’s remarkable how quickly they catch on when they start—to think clearly, to find the worthwhile material out of the range of scholarship that’s available, some of which frankly will not be particularly helpful to them.

But biblical scholarship remains hugely relevant, because the Bible must be brought to life in each place and each generation and that requires constant fresh thought and work to stop us slipping back into easy generalizations that don’t really do justice to the material. Particularly today I believe that the gospel vision of God’s kingdom is hardly even glimpsed, let alone grasped, by ordinary church members, and it is vital to take the fresh scholarship in this area and translate it into the language that ordinary, non-educated folk can understand and through which they can catch a vision of God at work in their midst. I am a passionate believer in the importance of making the bridge between the scholar and the wider society, and we try to do that all the time.

In addition, my part of northeast England often feels cut off from the places of power (that is, London and the southeast). It’s not that far away in American terms but it often feels like a different world. We urgently need to wrestle with the issues of power in society, of how to get things done, of how to pray and work through the barriers put up by money and prestige. Here recent scholarship can be a real stimulus and help.

N.T. Wright is the author of many books, including Paul: In Fresh Perspective, Fortress (2008).