Wednesday, 24 March 2010

Philippians 3:20

There is a bit of debate about how to translate πολίτευμα in Philippians 3:20. In modern commentaries, the translation ‘citizenship’ is usually rejected because of its weak attestation in ancient texts.

Reumann in his commentary provides a helpful survey of the discussion, and argues that to translate this word some ‘reflection of “state, constitutive government,” etc., is needed, but also of the social world of clubs, guilds, and (religious) associations’. He settles for ‘civic association’.

The problem I see with translating πολίτευμα as ‘civic association’ is that, in English, it is quite an un-intuitive phrase. Any perceived ‘governance’ by a ‘civic association’ would be, at most, minimal.

It may be that the idea of ‘citizenship’, at least in modern English usage, actually has a stronger sense of identity and value than the ancient concept which was more associated with rights and privileges. So, for example, in modern-day Australia, the term ‘un-Australian’ is used of someone who acts in a way that goes against the (perceived) values of the Australian community (e.g. burning an Australian flag or, worse, supporting the England cricket team). This, admittedly, colloquial term reflects the fact that citizenship is being increasingly conceived in terms of behaviour and values which govern the community at a deeper way than governments can. So, even a resident of a country is criticized if they do not live according to the values of the country (cf. the criticism of immigrants who do not learn English when they come to the UK). Perhaps, then, as an English translation, ‘citizenship’, understood in this more modern, fluid sense captures the sense of the Greek word as an association with governance over its members.

5 comments:

Seumas Macdonald said...

You are right that 'citizenship' in modern discourse is a stronger identity subject. It seems to me that the ancients thought of citizenship as more about a set of priveleges to be acquired. Whereas we think of citizenship as innate, nationalist (not city-based), normally exclusive, and constitutive of identity and ethos.

Roger Gallagher said...

"So, for example, in modern-day Australia, the term ‘un-Australian’ is used of someone who acts in a way that goes against the (perceived) values of the Australian community (e.g. burning an Australian flag or, worse, supporting the England cricket team)."

What do you expect from a land where the national cricket team existed 24 years before the nation?

Good to see this blog back in action.

Frederik Mulder said...

Hi Peter - great to see you blog again! I'm also busy with Phil 3:20-21 at the moment. I'm focussing on the link between our "citizenship" and the transformation of our lowly bodies with that of His glorious body....

Hope you're well Peter!
Frederik

Anonymous said...

INSERT

Anonymous said...

Best Forex Brokers stp ndd ecn http://4runnerforex.com
free metatrader demo, the top forex broker is 4runnerforex tight low spreads.