Scholarly Reflections
Botha, P.J.J. "Chapter Ten: Paul and Gossip." Orality and Literacy in Early Christianity. Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2013, 222-244.
Botha, observing that many of the conflicts in which the apostle Paul found himself could be related to communication issues, suggests that the contextual framework through which to view these communication events may be that of gossip (Botha 2013, 222). A focus solely on the doctrinal issues involved in disputes may obscure the nature of interactional and relational tension.
The Pauline letters regularly address conflicts, often portraying the conflict as existing between the views of Paul and his "opponents" (Botha 2013, 223). Botha considers the ways in which tension was manifested, as well as its purpose, to be of significance. He considers the underlying informal discussions which we would normally consider as gossip to have contributed to the attitudes of people on both sides of the divide. We recall that while gossip is normally considered in negative terms, it is in fact merely an informal communicative process in which a report can be escalated or diffused.
Botha illustrates the caution with which we approach gossip by way of numerous biblical references to the negative type of gossip (Botha 2013, 224). While rumor can elevate a person's reputation, it is not often used for that purpose. The world, throwing caution to the wind, tends to be full of gossip, often of the negative sort (Botha 2013, 225). Particularly in a society attuned to oral communication, the stories people tell about others are easily passed on. This was widely criticized, but remained a significant issue throughout the culture (Botha 2013, 226).
The process of news in the form of possibly unsubstantiated reports reaching Paul, and being responded to by him, suggests that, though he condemned gossip, he became involved in it at times (Botha 2013, 226). A definition of gossip, however, may be helpful. "The implicit definition of gossip seems to be the repetition of hearsay with some moral connotation" (Botha 2013, 227). In essence, it is done personally, and it makes an evaluation about the person about whom it happens. The motivation may be positive. The same method is used as businesses evaluate competitors, customers, and business plans, as politicians learn about opponents or supporters, etc. (Botha 2013, 228). In these functions, the dynamic social interactions may be positive.
Botha suggests that the people involved in the conflict situations reflected in Paul's letters may well have known one another. Disputes, after all, most often occur between people who are acquainted with each other (Botha 2013, 228). He also notes that children are very effective at spreading information about their friends and the families of their friends (Botha 2013, 229). Servants also are privy to a great deal of information which is not normally considered public in nature. Loyalties to various people we care for can often move us to disclose information which will be of value.
Botha notes that Paul's activities, family history, and alliances would all serve to create curiosity and likely discussion (Botha 2013, 230).
Again, Botha observes that the oral nature of the society would have facilitated all sorts of gossip, and would increase its power in society, as those with stories to tell would be readily heard (Botha 2013, 232).
Paul's work, though often focused on a synagogue, would have largely taken place within household contexts, rather than in more neutral, "public" settings (Botha 2013, 233). Further, a traveler such as Paul would often be in the home of someone prepared to provide some level of patronage. The home of a wealthy person would normally serve as a place for lectures and other intellectual activity. Because these events were, at least on some levels, private, others would have a tendency to ask questions (Botha 2013, 234). This facilitates various types of gossip.
Because Paul often held employment to care for his needs, and because of his itinerant lifestyle, he could easily be looked down on both as a servile artisan and as someone who did not have a positive established reputation among local artisans (Botha 2013, 235).
Paul himself uses reports about others and their situations to build his case for his own point of view (Botha 2013, 236). Sometimes this would work to his advantage, but at other times it would provoke more opposition. Group cohesiveness could increase in his favor or in the favor of his opponents (Botha 2013, 237). The community cohesiveness and loyalty, while a great asset, may also be fragile, if, as Botha suggests of Paul, it is pushed too far and too fast by its participants. The moral assessment may be applied to all members of the group, and can result in expulsion of some.
Botha concludes that the dynamic of informal communication we identify as gossip is an important aspect of understanding the various conflicts which are evident in Paul's letters (Botha 2013, 238).