Pastoral Epistles Commentary by Chris Hutson

Last updated on: January 22, 2021 at 5:13 am by Michael F. Bird

Pastoral Epistles Commentary by Chris Hutson 2020-10-18T18:14:37-04:00 Michael F. Bird

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Christoph R. Hutson

First and Second Timothy and Titus
(Paideia; Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2019)
Available from Baker

By Michael F. Bird (from my SBL paper in 2020)

There are many find commentary series available, probably too many, but the Paideia is among the best for the economic size of the volumes, the first-rate contributors involved, and the mix of clarity and insightfulness which its commentators generally show. Christopher Hutson’s volume on the PE I believe ranks among the very best of that series and offers an excellent contribution to the study of the PE which will ensure it is a noticeable wave rather than a mere drop in an otherwise growing ocean of secondary literature in Pauline studies. In addition, to the commentary itself, the inset boxes are full of great contextual information that will help readers and Hutson’s discussion of theological issues in each section shows that he is not lazy in asking the ever-important “so what?” questions and by doing so provides a tremendous aid to real contemporary readers of the PE who seek discern how best to serve God and what is faith seeking understanding.

I am quite aware from experience that writing a commentary on a biblical text is a taxing and testing enterprise, because you need to find something new to say even though you don’t have something new to say about everything before you. Moreover, as a reviewer, I’m supposed to do more than offer accolades and affirmation and be – in the best sense – critical and prosecutorial in my review of said commentary, which means it falls to me to play the part of a grumpy Talmud to Hutson’s colourful Mishnah. To that end, I want to offer some brief comments on Hutson’s overarching approach to the purpose of the PE, his handling of the authorship question, and then look at a couple of his comments on the text.

First, as for the purpose of the PE, Hutson says it is “a collection of letters for young ministers and how to be effective ministers of Christ Jesus” (p. 1). Here I think one should differentiate purpose from utility. Notwithstanding the purpose of the individual letters, I think the purpose of the PE as a whole is to function as a kind of canonical capstone to the Pauline letter collection, to highlight certain aspects of Paul’s legacy, to define the nature of Pauline Christianity, and to contribute to the veneration of Paul as Christ’s apostle to the Gentiles. That said, I am sympathetic to Hutson’s take here because, as a seminary professor, the main use I have for the PE is none of the things I just mentioned, but for ministerial formation for Christian leaders, clergy, chaplains, missionaries, and laity. In classes filled with ordinands, the PE stands out for defining the content of orthodox faith and for defining the character required for Christian service. The PE are among the best resources in the canon for ministerial formation and they naturally lend themselves to that role. But I doubt whether that is the purpose of the pastoral letters individually or even of their redactors and/or collectors. I think Hutson might have confused the PE’s purpose with the PE’s utility in the reception history and contemporary usage. Added to that, Paul could engage in exhortation like a Seneca, but I’m less inclined to see in Seneca’s moral epistles as the best analogy to the PE given that Paul’s life – whether real or imagined – is not that of a philosopher bequeathing his tradition to his pupils, but of the apostle and martyr engaged in the mist of mission and preparing for martyrdom, preparing to take his stage among the champions of faith (pp. 6-7). In the end, though, I’m certainly glad that Hutson has written this principally for “ministerial students” (p. 27) who I am sure will benefit immensely in their discernment and preparation for ministry by reading this very helpful commentary on the PE.

Second, on the authorship question, I confess to remaining vexed by the PE. There are parts which, to my mind, sound authentically Pauline and reflect a real situation in Paul’s own career. Then there are other parts of the PE that do sound like second-century veneration of the apostle (e.g. 1 Tim 2:7) or else betray a latter provenance, esp. with the warning about the heresy “falsely called knowledge” in (1 Tim 6:10). Added to that, 2 Timothy has always had better odds on authenticity than, say, Titus. I’m not sure the PE are a “transparent forgery” (p. 2), but neither do I think we have these letters from Paul’s hand without an intervening process of redaction or compilation. Hutson’s approach somewhat skirts the issue, avoiding both “arrogant academics or pious dogmatists” with his insistence that the “Pastoral Paul” is either Paul or else an author who wants them to be read “as if from Paul” (p. 2). On the one hand, this is a workable solution for commentary writing, it is certainly safer, having a bob both ways as we’d say in Australia. But, we have to accept that in reality there is a difference between reading the PE in light of Paul’s latter years during the Neronian pogrom in Rome and reading the PE in light of debates with Valentianism, Marcionism, and the growing institutionalization of the church into “early Catholicism” in the second century. I think a little more is at stake in interpretation here and, diplomatic as it might be, one might have to nail the colours to the mast and fly them in the commentary. I’d prefer either “Paul” or “the Pastor” to a hybrid “the Pastoral Paul.”

Third, in individual texts, Hutson demonstrates that he is a wise and judicious exegete. One has to mention, of course, 1 Tim 2:12-15, this is the “main event” as they would say in boxing. Hutson recognizes that a prohibition of words towards women in teaching authority in the church is made, and he notes that “this verse is the slender column that supports the entire stained-glass ceiling above which women are not allowed to rise in many churches” (p. 75). His own approach is to see the prohibition as largely reflecting the situation in Ephesus and perhaps attributable to the rise of the “new Roman women” (as Bruce Winter calls them) who pursued a mode of independence against the patriarchal mores of their culture. Hutson believes that women are expected to learn in subordination to teaching authority so that, potentially, they can take their position in church authority. As such the prohibition has been applied far wider than the Pastoral Paul intended. I think that is a cogent and defensible reading of the text. Coming to 2 Tim 3:16-17, Hutson takes the standard view that theopneustos means “God-breathed,” in the sense that it originated with God (p. 195). I think that may well be the case, but there is a minority view worth considering, championed by Luke Johnson and Jack Poirier, that the word means “life-giving,” that is to say, Scripture is a means of divine life through divine instruction. Finally, concerning Tit 3:4-5, he understands the washing of regeneration and renewal by the Holy Spirit” to reflect one event, not two separate moments, whereby “God and the Holy Spirit are active in baptism,” which, brings a wry smile to the lips of Anglican who finds himself in full agreement with a more sacramental reading of the text (p. 244).

My assessment is that Chris Hutson is to be congratulated for volume that is a deposit of decades of scholarship on the PE, it is a concise and cogent commentary, rich in historical detail, not sensational but sober, and willing to ask the hard questions of theological interpretation at key points. I do not believe that the PE were intended for ministerial formation, however, with a commentary such as this one, it is certainly easier to use the PE for contemporary ministerial formation for those seeking a place of service in Christian churches.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

January 19, 2021

OnScript Interview with Mike Bird and Scott Harrower on the Trinity

Next Post

January 25, 2021 How Philo Paved the Way for Gnosticism

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Bible Lands Blogosphere Book Review Calvinism Colleges & Universities Ecclesiology Emerging Adulthood Evangelicalism Foreign Affairs Gospel of John Greco-Roman World Humor Just War N. T. Wright Old Testament Resurrection Terrorism Theological Education Travel Uncategorized Writing

Select a Month September 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 January 2011

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

How many days was Jesus tempted in the wilderness?

Select your answer to see how you score.

50 days 30 days 60 days 40 days

Books by This Author Books by Mike Bird

See All Titles »