Romans 16:16

“ Salute one another with an holy kiss. All the churches of Christ salute you. ”

The apostle has just saluted in his own name the influential members of the different flocks of the church of Rome; but he naturally feels the need of also testifying his affection to the whole church; and he charges all its members to do so for him toward another. For this purpose they are to use the customary form of the brotherly kiss. If we did not know positively from the Fathers, particularly Tertullian (osculum pacis) in the De Oratione, c. 14 (comp. 1Pe 5:14) that the reference here is to an external rite, we should be tempted to hold the opinion of Calvin and Philippi, according to which we must give the term holy kiss a purely spiritual meaning: the salutation of brotherly love. But we learn from the Apostolic Constitutions that at a later time rules were laid down to remove from this custom all that might be offensive in it, so that it is more probable the term ought to be taken literally. We may be assured that in the apostolic churches all was done with order and dignity. This is what is expressed by the epithet ἅγιον, holy, which recurs 1 Corinthians 16:20, 2 Corinthians 13:12, and 1 Thessalonians 5:26. Probably the president of the assembly gave the kiss to the brother who sat next him, and he to his neighbor, while the same thing took place on the part of the women.

While the apostle in thought sees the Christians of Rome saluting one another by this sign of brotherhood, a greater spectacle is presented to his mind, that of all the churches already composing Christendom, and which are likewise united by the bond of communion in Christ. He has just himself traversed the churches of Greece and Asia; he has spoken to them of his already formed plan of proceeding to Rome (Acts 19:21; Acts 20:25), and they have all charged him with their salutations to their sister in the capital of the world. Now is the time for him to discharge this commission. Through his instrumentality, the members of Christ's body scattered over the earth salute one another with a holy kiss, just like the members of the church which he is addressing. The T. R. has rejected the word all, no doubt because it was not understood how Paul could send greetings from other churches than those among which he was at the time.

The Greco-Latin text has transferred this second half of the verse to the end of Romans 16:21, with the evident intention of connecting it with the salutations of Paul's companions. But these have too private and personal a character to allow of the apostle appending to them so solemn a message as that of all the churches of the East to the church of Rome. This message must form an integral part of the letter; it is quite otherwise with these salutations (see below).

We are now in a position to judge of the question whether this passage belongs to our Epistle. In it twenty-six persons are individually designated twenty-four by their names. Of these names it may be said that one or two are Hebrew, five or six Latin, fifteen to sixteen Greek; three Christian communities assembling in different localities are mentioned (Romans 16:5; Romans 16:14-15); besides two groups having more of a private character (Romans 16:10-11). It appears evident to us that the apostle feels the need of paying homage to all the faithful servants and all the devoted handmaids of the Lord who had aided in the foundation and development of this church, and before his arrival completed the task of the apostolate in this great city. Not only is the apostle concerned to testify to them his personal feelings; but he expresses himself in such a way as to force the church, so to speak, to take part as a whole in this public testimony of gratitude toward those to whom it owes its existence and prosperity. If such is the meaning of this truly unique passage in St. Paul's letters, does it not apply infinitely better to a church which, like that of Rome, had not yet seen an apostle within it, than to those of Ephesus or Corinth, where the entire activity of laying the foundation was, as it were, personified in a single individual? Hence those different expressions used by the apostle: “fellow-worker in the Lord,” “who labored,” or “who labor,” “all those who are with them,” and even once the use of the title apostle. We seem, as we read these numerous salutations, to have before us the spectacle of a beehive swarming on all sides with activity and labor in the midst of the vast field of the capital of the world, and we understand better the whole passage of chap. 12 relative to the varied gifts and numerous ministries, as well as the remarkable expression: πάντι τῷ ὄντι ἐν ὑμῖν, every man that is [as a worker] among you (Romans 16:3). “Here is,” says Gaussen, “a picture to the life of a primitive church; we can see to what height the most ignorant and weak of its members can rise....We wonder at the progress already made by the word of God, solely through the labors of travellers, artisans, merchants, women, slaves, and freedmen who resided in Rome.” Not only did the apostle know a large number of these workers, because he had been connected with them in the East (Andronicus and Junias, Rufus and his mother, for example), or because he had converted them himself (Aquilas and Priscilla); but he also received hews from Rome, as is proved by the intimate details into which he entered in chap. 14; and he might thus know of the labors of many of those saluted, whom he did not know personally. Such is probably the case with the last persons designated, and to whose names he adds no description. The Greek origin of the most of these names constitutes no objection to the Roman domicile of those who bear them. What matters it to us that, as M. Renan says, after Father Garucci, the names in Jewish inscriptions at Rome are mostly of Latin origin? If there is any room for surprise, five or six Latin names would perhaps be more astonishing at Ephesus than fifteen or sixteen Greek names at Rome. Have we not proved over and over that this church was recruited much more largely from Gentiles than from Jews, and that especially it was founded by missionaries who had come from Syria, Asia, and Greece? M. Reuss no doubt asks what became of all those friends of Paul, when, some years later, he wrote from Rome his Epistles to the Colossians and Philippians; and later still, the Second to Timothy. But, in writing from Rome to the churches of Colosse and Philippi, he could only send salutations from individuals who knew them. And a little before the Second to Timothy, there occurred the persecution of Nero, which had for the time dispersed and almost annihilated the church of Rome. Our conclusion, therefore, is not only that this passage of salutations may have been written to the church of Rome, but that it could not have been addressed to any other more suitably. As at the present day, Paris or even Rome is a sort of rendezvous for numerous foreign Christians of both sexes, who go thither to found evangelistic works; so the great pagan Rome attracted at that time the religious attention and zeal of all the Christians of the East.

Let us remark, in closing, the exquisite delicacy and courtesy which guide the apostle in those distinguishing epithets with which he accompanies the names of the servants or handmaids of Christ whom he mentions. Each of those descriptive titles is as it were the rough draft of the new name which those persons shall bear in glory. Thus understood, this enumeration is no longer a dry nomenclature; it resembles a bouquet of newly-blown flowers, which diffuse refreshing odors.