4

We see St Paul telling the faithful in Romans 11:24 (NRSVCE):

For if you have been cut from what is by nature a wild olive tree and grafted, contrary to nature, into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these natural branches be grafted back into their own olive tree.

In terms of Botany, it is usually the refined plant's shoot that gets grafted on the wild plant (which is physically sturdy) so that it may grow up as healthy branch of the refined plant. For instance, shoot of rose-plant of big yellow-colored flower grafted on wild rose which otherwise produces white -colored small flowers, will grow up to produce yellow flowers. Was the method of grafting adopted in Biblical times different ? Or, was it that St Paul was not aware of the right method of grafting ? Or, was it possible that he wanted to bring home to the Romans a great spiritual truth at the cost of factual accuracy in day-to-day horticultural knowledge ?

My question therefore is: According to Catholic scholars, does St Paul compromise his knowledge of horticulture in Romans 11:24 ?

Improve this question
2
  • 2
    V.24 Paul states this procedure was "contrary to nature". He starts in v.17, so read the whole bit. Normally, a shoot of a cultivated tree would go into a common or wild olive. But this metaphor is used "contrary to nature", a wild branch (the Gentiles) into the cultivated olive tree. That wasn't natural and the graft wouldn't take. But the whole 'tree' represents the people of God, rooted into the patriarchs; some branches broken off, wild ones inserted - an uncommon work of God. But I'm not a Catholic so I can't expand this into an answer, sorry.
    – Anne
    Commented Mar 17, 2022 at 14:47
  • 1
    Thanks, Anne. Arthur Wallace ( I do not know of his denominational affiliation ) writes that there prevailed a practice of invigorating dying olive trees by way of grafting wild olive braches onto them. It almost did an 'effect of vaccination ' (NB: the usage is mine ). So, St Paul perhaps intended to establish that intake of gentiles into the House of Israel would only invigorate it.
    – Kadalikatt Joseph Sibichan
    Commented Mar 18, 2022 at 4:27

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
1

I note that the comment section has a very nice answer from Anne.

I dunno what knowledge of horticulture Paul had. But the practice of splicing and grafting shoots from one olive to another is as Anne pointed out are a practice since ancient times. See here for some modern research into old olive trees.

As was pointed out, this practice was done to revitalize a tree so you wouldn't lose it. So it would continue to grow and produce olives for you for many more years.

Sure it is contrary to nature to perform grafting, but we are the stewards of creation and if it helps us and the plant survive it is not wrong. (This would extend to modern technology like splicing plant genetics just as much as husbandry or the evolution of corn over hundreds of years)

As the verse points outs, there are 3 things being referred to here.

  1. The tree // Olive root (The church)
  2. The wild branches (The gentiles)
  3. The cultivated/natural branches. (The Jews)

And if you read further into it is really straightforward.

I am talking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch as I am the apostle to the Gentiles, I take pride in my ministry in the hope that I may somehow arouse my own people to envy and save some of them. (Romans 11:13-14)

If some of the branches have been broken off, and you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root, do not consider yourself to be superior to those other branches. If you do, consider this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you. You will say then, “Branches were broken off so that I could be grafted in.” Granted. But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but tremble. For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either. (Romans 11:17-21)

Was the method of grafting adopted in Biblical times different? Yes.

St Paul was not aware of the right method of grafting ? No, he seems to be aware of the method that was used. Not like roses, but a living branch, onto a broken branch.

He wanted to bring home to the Romans a great spiritual truth at the cost of factual accuracy in day-to-day horticultural knowledge ? No, but of course he did want to bring them great spiritual truths. :)

Improve this answer
3
  • Welcome to the site, Wyrsa, and a very nice answer that was. (!) I note that a Catholic view is looked for, so wonder if the quote you give at the end was from a Catholic scholar? Even if not, could you give the reference / source so that it can be further checked by anyone interested in doing that? It was a very good, pertinent quote, irrespective of who wrote it.
    – Anne
    Commented Aug 5 at 15:23
  • Thank you Anne, though to be fair the only thing I put in that blockquote format was the Bible verses and the authors specific questions with the simplest answers. The rest is all from my own understanding of the verse. I don't think this particular verse would be different for Catholics or Orthodox. I did add emphasis to the aspects of the branches, root, tree, etc within the Bible as well. So... this answer is all me and I'm all smiles that you thought it was such a good answer.
    – Wyrsa
    Commented Aug 5 at 15:56
  • Well, if nobody can give a Catholic scholar's quote in order to answer the Q, it's okay to give a non-Catholic viewpoint (I'm assuming you're not one). This answer might flag the Q up and prompt another answer. If it gives the requested Catholic scholar info, no doubt the OP will select that for the green tick but your answer should stand, regardless.
    – Anne
    Commented Aug 5 at 17:22

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .