Abstract
Hanges engages upon a comparative study. The comparison is between views of ‘founder figures’ in religious contexts in Greco-Roman antiquity, and Paul’s self-understanding as founder of churches. To establish the comparison this volume is arranged over six chapters, the first five of which set out the methodology of the study and the evidence drawn from Hellenistic-Roman cults, while the final chapter makes the comparison with the Pauline evidence. The study opens with the observation that ‘[s]cholars often assume that the apostle Paul “founded” churches, yet without defining what they mean by saying that Paul founded churches’ (p. 1). After having critiqued the lack of reflection on the meaning of ‘founder’ terminology, Hanges proposes that Paul ‘consciously appropriates a cultural pattern or model, well-known from Hellenistic religions, as a crucial element in his own understanding of his role as the founder of cultic communities’ (p. 17).
From here Hanges seeks to provide the evidential base for apprehending that cultural model of founder figures by presenting and commentating upon a series of key texts from Hellenistic religious contexts that reflect prevailing understandings of foundational figures. In chapter two the earliest surviving evidence is surveyed by examining Homeric texts. In contrast to some suggestions, Hanges suggests that the story of Tlepolemos lacks many of the common elements of a foundational narrative. However, turning to the story of Nausithous (Odyessey 6.7-10) it is noted that the ‘founder is guide, general, city-planner, law-giver, and transferrer of cult’ (p. 51). It is this last element that is important for Hanges’ argument. One of the more controversial conclusions in this chapter is the suggestion that the idea of a deity’s commissioning of a founder through a vision ‘is not likely to have come to Paul through Jewish channels, since among Jews, after the Moses narrative, the pattern is non-repeatable’ (p. 138). The third chapter looks at texts dealing with the transference of the cult of Serapis to Delos and Opous. The key aspect of these transfer stories is that they reflect a ‘traditional motif of the divine selection of the founder and the founder’s role as conservator of tradition to validate the new cult’s existence’ (p. 259). Chapter 4, ‘The Role of the Founder-Figure as Cult Authority and Organizer’, examines two test cases, the first being the reformation of the house-cult of Dionysios of Philadelphia. Such a process is seen as involving a selective assimilation of prior traditions to legitimate the new cult movement (p. 304). The fifth chapter emphasizes the legacy of a founder-figure as a means of asserting connection and continuity with tradition.
The final chapter considers the role of Paul as a founder of churches in light of the evidence set out in the first five chapters. The conclusion to this chapter suggests that Paul founded and legitimized his own communities in line with patterns ‘exhibited in the formation of other cultic institutions of the period, but in ways that reveal his own awareness that these patterns simply reflect the way things are done in his world’ (p. 451). Hanges also suggests that while Paul’s foundational role was significant to certain later Christian writers, nonetheless ‘Paul’s theological legacy fades into the background; only Paul the apostolic missionary maintains a position of authority through the second century’ (pp. 450-451).
This is a rich study, which draws upon many significant primary texts. It may be the case that many who read this work will not wish to travel quite as far as Hanges, who attributes the model for Paul’s self-understanding of his role as a founder-figure exclusively to Hellenistic-Roman cult models. However, the evidence that he has laid out will surely mean that this factor can no longer be neglected.