Brandon O’Brien on Paul Behaving Badly

tonygill — Sun, 09 Oct 2016 08:00:26 +0000

The Apostle Paul (née Saul) was a central figure in early Christianity, with his adventures being written about in Acts and his many writings making their way into the New Testament, earning him the title of Saint Paul in some Christian circles. But a careful reading of Paul’s writings through 21st century eyes would give the appearance that he was a racist, chauvinistic jerk. Prof. Brandon O’Brien, an assistant professor of Christian theology at Ouachita Baptist University and co-author with Randolph Richards of Paul Behaving Badly: Was the Apostle a Racist, Chauvinist Jerk? joins us to talk about who Paul was and what he represented in the culture of his time. He also helps us understand Paul in our own contemporary terms. The conversation begins with Brandon’s rationale for writing the book, which is a response to other popular titles such as God Behaving Badly and Jesus Behaving Badly. We review Paul’s history, including his pre-Christian life, his conversion, his proselytism, and his time in prison. Tony asks what his Roman captors were thinking when they allowed him to write letters while incarcerated, and Prof. O’Brien explains a bit of what Paul’s imprisonment entailed — from wallowing in a cistern to being under house arrest. Brandon then goes over the case for Paul being a jerk, with the principle reason being his brash arrogance that is contrasted with Jesus’s softer style. Paul’s tenor undoubtedly rubbed some of the original disciples the wrong way. Brandon also notes that Paul was an “occasional writer,” meaning not that he wrote here and there, but that he wrote to individuals and groups under very specific occasions. Indeed, Prof. O’Brien points out that we really only have one side of the conversation when we look at the various epistles in the New Testament; it is likely that there was much more context and give-and-take dialogue that formed the basis for his communications with the Galatians or Ephesians, to name a few. We then go through point-by-point some of the harsher criticisms that could be levied on Paul, including that he was a puritanical killjoy, that he was racist, that he didn’t denounce slavery, and that he was a male chauvinist pig. Brandon gives each of these critiques their full due, but also places them into context. Along the way, we learn about how race/ethnicity/religion were often combined in regional stereotypes in the first century after Christ, what slavery entailed in those early years, and what the life of women was like. We also learn why Brandon didn’t drink ginger ale as a kid! Brandon points out that while we might see Paul as being very culturally backwards in our day, he was indeed very progressive in his views for the era in which he lived. Along the way, we discuss how our cultural context can affect the way we view the historical record. Prof. O’Brien finishes the discussion with some reflection on what he learned by studying Paul more closely, and how pastors might approach the writings of Paul as they preach in the cultural ethos of our modern era. Recorded: September 30, 2016.

Robert Sirico on Markets, Morality, Faith & Freedom

tonygill — Mon, 04 Jun 2012 08:00:55 +0000

Religious leaders are often quick to criticize free market economics because of the belief that it harms the poor, creates greater inequality, and relies upon the base motives of selfishness. However, can a moral case be made for capitalism and free markets? Rev. Robert Sirico, co-founder and president of The Acton Institute, explores this question in depth. We begin our discussion by reviewing Father Sirico’s personal journey from his idealistic youth in the 1960s and early ’70s to his transformation into a proponent of free market economics. His intellectual development is all the more interesting in that it occured as he was simultaneously drawn back to the Catholic faith of his youth, eventually choosing to enter the seminary and become an ordained priest. During this discussion we review his thoughts on Ayn Rand and other libertarian thinkers such as Friedrich Hayek and Frédéric Bastiat. We then venture into a discussion about greed, selfishness, and self-interest with Rev. Sirico laying out the difference between these different concepts and noting how the pursuit of self-interest can also be good for others as entrepreneurs attempt to benefit themselves by making others happy. Greed, on the other hand, is defined as the pursuit of desire with the intent of subordinating others. Father Sirico then makes a case that socialism tends to promote greed more so than capitalism. This discussion allows us to review early communal experiments by the Pilgrims and Fr. Sirico explains why liberation theologians and others are mistaken to interpret the social organization of the early Church Fathers as an example of socialism. We then discuss the role of profits, the gap between the rich and poor, the nature of envy, and the importance of voluntarism. Our discussion closes with an examination of President Bush’s faith-based initiative (which Rev. Sirico gave some early input on), how government policy (even if pursued with good intentions) may inhibit the important social role of individual charity, and a discussion of the recent controversy surrounding the health care mandate and the Catholic bishops. With the latter issue, we review the tension between a corporatist worldview and the Catholic principle of subsidiarity, a nice review of our earlier discussion with Prof. Phillip Muñoz. Finally, Rev. Sirico details the origins of the Action Institute and his role with that institution. Recorded: May 29, 2012.

Research On Religion » Acts

Brandon O’Brien on Paul Behaving Badly

Robert Sirico on Markets, Morality, Faith & Freedom