458 Jean-Noël Aletti soumettre (3) en conscience aux autorités politiques? De nombreuses propositions ont été faites, résumées dans le dernier commentaire en date, celui de R. Jewett, que je me contente de citer textuellement (4): The passage has been interpreted as a warning not to participate in Jewish zealotism, in revolutionary agitation, or, as seems even less likely, not to create unrest that would jeopardize “the already vulnerable situation of the beleaguered Jewish population in Rome (5)”. It has been seen as a warning against Christian enthusiasm that believed the requirement of a state was incommensurate with the new age, which hardly matches the details in the passage (6). The quiet early years of the Nero regime are depicted as the background of this positive view of the state (7), and Paul wished to avoid any gesture of disloyalty that might jeopardize the peaceful extension of the Christian mission (8). According to the comprehensive survey by Vilho Riekkinen, investigations of the background of Paul’s view of the governing authorities have sifted biblical Hebrew, Hellenistic Jewish, Greco-Roman, and early Christian sources. Since no single tradition or source contains all of the material in 13:1-7, it appears that Paul has incorporated terminology and ideas from a variety of directions (9). Only recently have scholars begun to view this passage in the light of the Roman civic cult (10) which could be a step toward taking fuller account of the political and cultural context of Paul’s letter and its missional purpose (11). Jewett lui-même pense que Paul n’a pas l’intention de fonder une éthique politique, et il interprète le passage rhétoriquement; selon lui, l’apôtre veut trouver dans la communauté romaine un appui pour son (3) Le verbe uJpotavssesqai peut avoir un sens passif (“être soumis”) ou actif (“se soumettre”). Comme dans la plupart de ses occurrences chez Paul le contexte suppose une soumission volontaire, il vaut mieux le traduire en français par un réflexif. (4) R. JEWETT, Romans, 785-786. Dans ce paragraphe, les appels de note et les études citées sont de l’auteur. (5) N. ELLIOTT, “Romans 13:1-7 in the Context of Imperial Propaganda”, Paul and Empire. Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society (éd. R.A. HORSLEY) (Harrisburg, PA 1997) 196. (6) E. KÄSEMANN, “Principles for the Interpretation of Romans 13”, ID., New Testament Questions of Today (Philadelphia, PA 1979) 196-216. (7) M. THEOBALD, Römerbrief (Stuttgart 1993) II, 88. (8) K. HAACKER, “Der Römerbrief als Friedensmemorandum”, NTS 36 (1990) 25-41. (9) V. RIEKKINEN, Römer 13. Aufzeichnung und Weiterführung der exegetischen Diskussion (AASF 23; 1980) 95. (10) N. ELLIOTT, “Romans 13:1-7”, 184-204. (11) R. HEILIGENTHAL, “Strategien konformer Ethik im Neuen Testament am Beispiel von Röm 13.1-7”, NTS 29 (1983) 55-61.