The most obvious connection to Rome for Paul was his Roman citizenship. While it is a significant issue in Acts, there is no reference to it in his letters. This is not unusual since he often did not insist on his rights as a Roman citizen in Acts. There is no real reason to bring it up in a letter to a church. Citizenship is stressed in Acts at the times when Paul is under arrest and later when he appeals to Caesar. But was Paul really a Roman Citizen?
Citizenship was not common in the first century. Not everyone was guaranteed the privilege of being a citizen of the Empire. In 28 B.C., there were approximately 4.9 million citizens; by the time of Claudius, there were 5.9 million. Most of these lived in Italy or were serving in the army.
Privileges of Citizenship. A citizen was always subject to Roman law. No matter where they were living at the time, they had a right to an official Roman trial before a tribunal. A citizen could not be scourged without a hearing (cf Acts 16 in Philippi). In capital cases, the citizen always had the right to appeal to the emperor (as Paul does in Acts), and crucifixion was not usually an option for a citizen if found guilty of a capital offense.
Obtaining citizenship. There were several ways to obtain Roman citizenship in the first century. Freeborn residents of Rome were automatically citizens, and if they moved away from Rome, they retained their citizenship. Soldiers who were veterans of 10 years or more may be granted citizenship, as might individuals or whole territories that had performed some service to the empire. A vote of the Senate would confirm this. Some scholars speculate that Paul’s family was granted citizenship through service in the army as tentmakers.
Could someone buy a citizenship? Polhill (Paul, 16) says this is unlikely, but one might bribe the right people to secure the recommendation for the gift of citizenship. A common way to obtain citizenship was to be a slave that a Roman citizen emancipates. This was first suggested by Jerome and is followed by many scholars today. That slave is given the name of their former master along with citizenship. It is often suggested that Paul’s family received their citizenship in this way. A generation or two back in Paul’s line, they were slaves to a Roman citizen who freed them and gave them his citizenship.
Philo reports that Pompey took Jews to Rome as slaves in 63 B.C. This is a good possibility for deporting Paul’s family, though it is hard to account for their return to Tarsus as citizens. Josephus also says that slaves were taken from Galilee in 4 B.C. after the tax-revolt of Judas the Galilean (Antiq. 27.288; JW 2.68). This may be too late to explain Paul’s citizenship since he was probably born only a few years later.
Would a strict Pharisee want to be a Roman citizen? It seems likely that Paul and his family would be considered apostates for even accepting Roman citizenship. At this point in history, it seems unlikely that accepting Roman citizenship involved any idolatry or recognition of the emperor as a god. Stegmann states that Roman citizens were required to sacrifice to the gods of Rome, but Reisner points out that this was not true during Paul’s lifetime (Reisner, 151). Philo reports in Legatio ad Gaium 155 that there was a large Jewish Community in Rome when he visited the city, and that Augustus respected the synagogues of the Jews.
How did a person prove they were a Roman citizen? Permanent records were to be kept in the town of birth, registered within thirty days, and witnessed by seven witnesses. It is possible that there was some physical identification (soldiers had them), but the penalty for falsely claiming citizenship was so severe that few would risk it.
A few scholars deny the historicity of Paul’s citizenship. He does not mention it in his letters, so the only source is the book of Acts. Several questions have been raised. First, would a “tent-maker” be able to obtain citizenship? This question implies a link between social standing and citizenship, which may not have existed. Since citizenship could be granted for various reasons, many people considered “socially undesirable” were citizens. A citizen was not equivalent to the “social elite” of Rome. Paul generally visits provincial capitals, places where citizenship was more common, especially among freed slaves and ex-soldiers. It is possible that Paul targeted this group of “fresh citizens” with the gospel (E. A. Judge, New Documents 2:106-107).
A second objection centers on Paul’s mistreatment as described in 2 Cor. 11:24ff. This type of abuse would not be possible if Paul were a Roman citizen. This argument compares the unlawful arrest in Acts 16 (in Philippi) to the list of abuses Paul suffered before writing 2 Corinthians. It is impossible, it is argued, for a Roman citizen to have been so abused as Paul claims. Stegmenn notes that Paul is either the worst case of torture of a Roman citizen in history, or a masochist. This objection fails to note that suffering for one’s fate is a mark of Christ. Paul suffers for the Gospel because his Lord suffered (Gal 6:17, Phil 3:10, 2 Cor 4:10, 6:4ff)
The scourging mentioned in 2 Corinthians was likely a synagogue “correction” by the Jews, not by civil authorities. It is possible that Paul could have brought charges against those who whipped him, but it is more likely that Paul would emulate Christ by suffering his abuse in silence in the hope that he might win some to the faith.