Stefano Romanello, «Rom 7,7-25 and the Impotence of the Law. A Fresh Look at a Much-Debated Topic Using Literary-Rhetorical Analysis», Vol. 84 (2003) 510-530
By means of a literary-rhetorical analysis, it can be stated that Rom 7,7-25 forms a literary unit, depending upon the propositio of Rom 7,7a. In fact, the question on the possible equalization between Mosaic Law and sin raises a new discussion, carried out precisely in Rom 7,7-25. The climax of the pericope appears to be the powerless character of the Law with respect to sin, depicted through two different examples. In the first one, in vv. 7-13, it is not stated that through the Law sin become known by the "I", but that through the Law sin gains force and becomes ineluctably effective. In the second one, in vv. 14-25, sin is an active subject quite apart from Law, that remains nevertheless ineffective in counteracting it. In any case, these two different depictions point both to the ineffectiveness of the Law. The affirmations on the positive nature of the Law are incorporated in this pericope in order to be diminished –even if not denied. This rhetorical strategy can be called concessio. In Rom 8,1-17 the believer’s life is depicted in different terms from the life of the "I" of Rom 7,7-25. This comparison leads to the recognition of the new basis on which our relation with God becomes possible. In the meantime, it clarifies that the Law cannot promote this new identity in believers. For this reason, emphasis on the incapacity of the Law must not be considered as an act of contempt for it. Instead, it clarifies the objective reasons why the Law cannot be regarded as a soteriological principle.
the Law as spiritual"28. These evaluations have to assume that the "I" is Christian, but this seems untenable to me, as argued above. Furthermore, it must be added that Paul does not explicitly assert that the Law is subject to a kind of "Christian redemption", either in this pericope or elsewhere. In fact, he never states that Christ led the Law back to its original spiritual meaning. Finally, one has also to acknowledge that the pathos carried by the depiction of the pitiful state of slavery of the "I", emphasized mostly by the peroratio, points to the inability of the Law to rescue the subject who entrusts himself to it. The climax of the argumentation, then, appears to be the powerless character of the Law, not its good nature.
Nevertheless, this underlining of the inability of the Law stands alongside the assertion of its different nature. What is the reason for this juxtaposition? To be sure, this chapter offers a tragic and dramatic depiction of the meeting of a subject with divine Law and powerful sin29. But since in these events Mosaic Law reveals both its positive nature and its powerless character, is there any way to consider these two contrasting propositions in a coherent system of meaning? Simply stated: do Paul’s evaluations on the Law show only a dramatic tension, in which different statements are simply made, or is there any consistency between them?
In my opinion, the very fact that the argumentation in vv. 7b-8a is not included under the denial of the equalisation between Law and sin in v. 7a shows that this denial, even though it is not rebutted, is not the main thrust of the pericope. From a rhetorical point of view, the argumentative strategy that affirms something and subsequently underlines something else, resulting in a more weighty argument, can be called concessio30. It recognises that some ideas of an interlocutor (no matter if he is real or fictional) are true, but are diminished by some other affirmations which outweigh them. The weight of the concessio can be appreciated above all in verses where paraphrases can be expressed. V.14 is an example: "we know that the Law is spiritual; notwithstanding this fact, it must be stated that I am fleshly (so that I cannot accomplish the spiritual demands of the Law)"; or vv. 22-23: "I rejoice in the Law of God according to the inner man, notwithstanding this fact, there is another law in my members, that prevents the Law of