98 gregory p. fewster
imagery appears within a discussion of community gifts and worship as
he makes exegetical application to his canonical program in relation to
the Pauline corpus. the order in which childs addresses particular Pauline
texts is consistent with historical readings (i.e., 1 corinthians 12; romans 12;
ephesians 4);35 however, he does so in order to highlight how his canoni-
cal reading diverges from more traditional readings. for example, childs
views the use of the motif in romans as theological abstraction as com-
pared to Paul’s use in 1 corinthians 12, which addresses particular, material
issues (i.e., church division and the abuse of gifts).36 given the implica-
tions of canonical shaping, childs suggests that romans does not merely
serve to “abstract” the particulars of the motif in 1 corinthians 12, but gives
the reader warrant to apply these principles to the ever-changing mate-
rial circumstances of the church.37 While childs does not enter into any
serious exegetical discussion with reference to ephesians 4, he does sug-
gest that historical readings do not satisfactorily deal with the tensions
between the Pauline and deutero-Pauline letters. this is expressed in what
appears to some as an early charismatic Paul and a later institutionalized
Paul, or the conscious attempt by the pseudepigrapher at Paulinization.
though he is not explicit about this, it seems that childs values ephe-
sians as a corrective against attempts to characterize the particularities
of this “later” Paul as a historical expediency; ephesians provides theo-
logical warrant for such developments.38 ephesians and colossians play
a more significant role in Wall’s analysis as they reveal a certain conser-
vatism present in “authentic” Pauline ecclesiology.39 thus, for Wall, the
canonical shape of the Pauline corpus that includes inauthentic letters is
of the church (minear, Images, 203). Here, the historical reality of authorship becomes
secondary to canonical meaning.
35 childs’s discussion is restricted to these passages and does not include colossians
because his discussion is with reference to gifs and worship and not the body metaphor
per se. Wall also takes a similar tact, at least separating the authentic Paulines from the
disputed Paulines (see robert W. Wall, “ecumenicity and ecclesiology: the Promise of the
multiple letter canon of the new testament,” in robert W. Wall and eugene e. lemcio,
The New Testament as Canon: A Reader in Canonical Criticsm [ Jsntsup 76; sheffield:
sheffield academic Press, 1992], 197–202).
36 see especially childs, Reading Paul, 145–46.
37 childs, Reading Paul, 147–48.
38 see childs, Reading Paul, 148–53.
39 Wall, “ecumenicity and ecclesiology,” 200. Wall suggests, for example, that the
authentic Paul was concerned more with social relationships within the church, rather
than between the church and outsiders. this is perhaps necessitated by Paul’s expecta-
tion of the imminent parousia; the social systems of the surrounding culture need not be
engaged.