Yoder on suffering

Yoder says:

...the true missionary congregation is marked by suffering. This suffering, like that of the faithful servant in 1 Peter, is not the result of misbehaviour but of conformity with the path of Christ. It is not the resigned acceptance of limitations or injustice in an imperfect world but the meaningful assuming of the cost of nonconformed obedience.

It is no accident that the word 'martyr' has the double meaning of testimony and innocent suffering. The suffering of the church is not a passing tight spot after which there can be hope of return to normalcy; it is according to both Scripture and experience the continuing destiny of any faithful Christian community... (From The Royal Priesthood p. 86).

Is it the continuing destiny? Is that true of experience, really? If suffering is here persecution, then surely that is not the case experientially. The suffering of the faithful servant in 1 Peter is not the sign of his faithfulness: it is, rather, the very real possibility that he courts. But his duty is not suffering but faithfulness. His faithfulness is the sign rather than his suffering. There is no hope of a return to normalcy, true: but neither is it quite true to say that it is the 'continuing destiny' of any faithful Christian community, as if the lack of suffering was a sign that the plot had been well and truly lost. Suffering itself conveys no dignity of its own.

Notes on Humility VII

What does it actually look like to live out this humble calling?

One false trail in Christian spirituality has been to institute outward signs and symbols and practices of obesiance so as to make a great public display of humility. But these become quickly corrupted with the perverse human tendency to find pride even in these symbols. So, for example, the church procession always puts the most important person at the back rather than the front: the first shall indeed be last! But we all know of course that the last person in a church procession is the most important and usually the most prettily dressed. Even practices like footwashing become opportunities for pride rather than true humility, because in symbolic or ritual practices they become something else other than what they originally were.

Humility as a virtue finds difficulty in being expressed symbolically, or outwardly. How could it not?

I think, rather than religious displays of humility, we rather ought to be seeking reminders of our utter dependence on the grace of God alone. We need to know even better than we do how vulnerable we actually are, and how needy, and how poor. In practice, Peter wants us to live amongst our fellow citizens, and even amongst ourselves, in quiet devotion to doing good. We not subversives or revolutionaries - at least not in the way we normally think of it. Our revolution is a quiet one: we point power to its own source by freely submitting to it. We lead through care and by service, not looking for the benefits of leadership. We put aside our natural tendency to disrupt leaders of all kinds. We take the immense risk of laying down our freedom to self-realise through our action, to express ourselves and our wills in reference only to our own selves, in favour of following the model of Jesus Christ, who used his freedom in humble and obedient service and died an ignominious and shameful death. His risk is our risk, too: we risk not being who we could be. But his promise is our promise, also: as he was raised from the dead, so we have a guarantee of our own exaltation, or the glorious inheritance that can never perish, spoil or fade...

Notes on Humility VI

Luke 14:11 For all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.

Humility means giving up your own personal ambition to be exalted. It means giving up on celebrity! But it is not without reward: the NT never says, oh, humble yourself because humility is just a good thing to do in and of itself. That's not to say it isn't, but the Bible consistently urges humility in light of the promises of God to raise up the humble and oppose the proud. A mistake is to see this as some kind of exchange or economy of heavenly merits: do humble acts, or be humble and sure as eggs exaltation will follow.

No. Humility is not an investment now for later pride. The reward that is on offer is not what the worldly seize at. It is something exceeding it: glory - you will receive the crown of glory that will never fade away (1 Peter 5:4). The crown of glory is bathed in the light of the glory of God. You will shine like stars in the universe because you will glow with the radiance of God himself.

Notes on Humility V

Of course, Nietzsche hated the humility of Christianity and derided it as servile, base, low and disgusting. Oh, and womanly. It was ignoble, and not worthy of the great-souled individual.

1 Peter specifically addresses wives and slaves and asks that they be humbly submissive. That much perhaps we may have expected - isn't this cringing debasement precisely what is most natural to women and slaves (to channel N for a minute? But it also enjoins all citizens to submit to the emperor; and young men to submit to elders in the church.

How Nietzschean is contemporary culture? Well certainly I think it has adopted a belief that only through the spirited action of the great souled individual will humanity ever be truly free. Perhaps we are more democratised than he would have been. But still, the desire to soar, to be great, and glorious: is this not Nietzchean?

As he writes in Beyond Good and Evil: 'The noble soul has reverence for itself'. I don't think he means a cringing vanity here, nor even that bizarre self-reflexivity you encounter when sportspeople refer to themselves in the third person: rather, the noble soul is in thrall to its own destiny to the point of religious fervour. This is more worshipful a reverence...

Notes on Humility IV

1 Peter 5:8-10
8Be self-controlled and alert. Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour. 9Resist him, standing firm in the faith, because you know that your brothers throughout the world are undergoing the same kind of sufferings.
10And the God of all grace, who called you to his eternal glory in Christ, after you have suffered a little while, will himself restore you and make you strong, firm and steadfast. 11To him be the power for ever and ever. Amen.

This whole passage is reminiscent of the teaching of Jesus and particularly as he spoke to his disciples in Gethsemane. 'Be alert' he kept telling them, and they kept falling asleep. 'Keep watch': be ready for the coming of the end, and the coming of the devil, too. Vigilence is required, and presence of mind.

Is it too much to imagine that Peter has in mind the beasts of the arena, who feasted on human flesh as a spectacle? It is certainly a vivid picture. The trial is coming when you will be tempted to deny Christ. That is the devil's aim. He uses many and various means; but the result of conceding to him is destrution. Resistance however is not futile: the suffering of the Christian is not isolated. The real devouring beast in the arena was not the slathering furry creature who was eyeing off the victim for its lunch: no, to get eaten was fine! This was not self-destruction. Rather, to deny Christ was to fall prey and become easy meat to the 'lion'.

Notes on Humility III

1 Peter 5:6-7: 6 Humble yourselves, therefore, under God's mighty hand, that he may lift you up in due time. 7 Cast all your anxiety on him because he cares for you...

In Greek literature, 'humbling yourself' was almost always used in a derogatory and negative sense: we might better translate it 'debasing oneself', or 'acting in a servile and lowly manner'. Epictetus for example, would write that 'all that alienates man from himself and makes him dependent makes him small (ie humbles him). It is an expression used of the trivial or the petty, the lowborn, ignoble and crass.

What does it look like to humble yourself anyhow? I note first of all that it is not 'humility' as a virtue, or an attitude, that is looked for here. Rather we have a reflexive verb: 'humble yourselves'. It is something one does, rather than something one is. It not here a quality that you possess.

But it is kinda hard to describe it as an activity, isn't it? There are no outward forms or movements described. It is not something you do with your body - though you may express it through your body or represent it through your body.

If we imagine that vs 7 as a parallel to vs 6 fills out and completes the sense, we see that 'humbling yourself' and 'casting all your anxiety' do inform one another. Grundmann in Freidrich's TDNT writes: 'As the context shows, this consists in man's putting his whole confidence in the grace of God, who cares for those who subject themselves to Him.' Notably, in the post-apostolic era, once the sense of the imminent return of Christ had passed, the notion of humbling oneself was channelled away from this not active action and into penitence and fasting and similar ritualised and symbolic activities.

The humbling of oneself here is vis a vis God but of course it must reference others too. Indeed it springs out of a discussion of the mutual relationships within the church community. If you are humble towards God, then so must you be to others as a matter of course.

Notes on Humility II

1 Peter 5:1-4

1To the elders among you, I appeal as a fellow elder, a witness of Christ's sufferings and one who also will share in the glory to be revealed: 2Be shepherds of God's flock that is under your care, serving as overseers—not because you must, but because you are willing, as God wants you to be; not greedy for money, but eager to serve; 3not lording it over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock. 4And when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the crown of glory that will never fade away.

Peter's address to the elders of the church both upholds and relativises the order of church government here. It is as an equal, not as a superior apostle, that he addresses the eldership: he makes his appeal to them in terms of their shared expectation and status, not in terms of their difference. By doing so he shows them exactly what he wants them to do. He recalls for them the twin poles of suffering and glory that have dominated the letter, and which are the frames on the Christian life. Humility does not mean not leading. The exercise of humility does not mean that there is no authority or power involved. But rather, it means the service and care of those who are lead. Note that this is to be real heartfelt and eager care, not reluctant and merely dutiful care. This is not the description of a professional, or a bureaucrat; there is not the kind of exchange economy of labour here in speaking of eldership. The elders of the church were most likely quite literally 'olders', not a seperate class of individuals called to a particular life-long ministry. They are simply senior, and entrusted with the care of the flock.

They are to exercise the function of overseers (vs 2). I think this passage is a great example of how, in the NT, the form of church government is quite flexible. There is order, but not a specific order as later evolved in terms of bishop, priest, deacon; nor a kind of pristine egalitarian early church presbuteral church government model. The functions of church ministry are there: oversight, eldership, pastoral example, diaconal service and so on; but these are not attached to specific titles and offices as a hard and fast rule.

For further reading: JB Lightfoot's 1888 Philippians Commentary has a great piece on 'The Christian Ministry'. Wonderful.

Notes on Humility

1 Peter 5:6-7
6Humble yourselves, therefore, under God's mighty hand, that he may lift you up in due time. 7Cast all your anxiety on him because he cares for you.

It seems to me that the path of humility is risky. This is the reason we are afraid of being humble. This is why these two verses belong together: a lack of humility may result from an anxiety that we will be overlooked if we are not proud: that if somehow we don't broadcast our own success and achievements we will be less than authentic selves. Unless we get the recognition we deserve, we will live unfulfilled lives. Somehow, we learn from childhood that the value of a deed is not complete until it is recognised and applauded. The acts we do need their answer, their reply in the form of honour and recognition, if they are to be meaningful acts. I don't mean anything too dramatic by this. The thing women say about men and housework - that when they do the vacuuming they expect a cheer squad and grateful thanks - reflects a deep pattern within us (both genders) of wanting to be noticed for our achievements. And frankly, sometimes you need to create the conditions by which your own deeds can be recognised.

The whole of life is like a job interview... or, it sometimes seems this way. That's how we educate kids, anyhow!

Peter realises that we may be hesitant about persuing humility, especially in the context of the patterns of society vis a vis leadership, roles, and so on. Being humble is not secure: there seem to be no guarantees that you will ever get what you deserve if you are humble, nor even survive. There is no promotion without a bit of self-promotion. But in this 'being humble' there is a particular future in view. It is under the protective and caring oversight of God himself that we humble ourselves, placing ourselves - i mean our very selves, though we are uncertain yet of what these might become - into the care of the almighty, in the palm of his gentle hand at the end of his might arm. This is faith exercised in hope: that he might lift you up in due time.

Speaking of women: it is interesting that Peter at first addresses this comment to young men in the context of their submission to the elders in the congregation. But then he broadens out his comment to include 'all of you'. Feminist theologians since the early 60s (Valerie Saiving was the writer of the first article along these lines) have argued that pride is not women's besetting sin, in fact. So telling women to be humble is not actually going to be a hard sell because they are culturally conditioned, even now, to be humble to the point of self-deprecation. In fact, this itself can be sinful: a rejection of God's Yes to the female self as worthwhile, in Christ. Oughtn't we be telling women to HAVE some pride and stop being so darn humble? Aren't there too many Marthas already?

Well, while I think Saiving and her friends have a point that is psychologically and sociologically apposite (though perhaps this is for women to say rather than me), I am not sure how theologically helpful it is. Which is to say: the kind of humility she is talking about is not quite the same as the humility that is asked of Christians. The NT does not envisage Christians debasing themselves, or seeking the dissolution of the self. The NT does not uphold low self-esteem somehow: rather it puts self-esteem on a proper footing, in Christ. Generally as a human being and as a woman and particulary as an individual she can count herself worthy, in Christ: her humanity has been assumed in him and so healed in him to (to use the expression of Gregory of Nazianzus). The kind of low self-esteem that Saiving says is women's besetting sin is not a deep acceptance of the providential hand of God that 'he will lift you up in due time', but a collapsing into despair, or a resignation to self-hatred. This is not the humility of the Mary of the Magnificat, but something else again.

Neither should we think we are being humble when we play the cultural game of false humility. The English are especially good at it; though Australians have their version of course. Some cultures are happy with displays of out and out gauche pride. In England and Australia this is not the norm. One has to be more refined than this. So, when sportsmen are interviewed after a particularly impressive performance, they must praise the team, or say 'the conditions were right for me today' or somehow deflect glory from themselves in order that they may bask in it all the more. In England, you may meet someone and ask what they do: if they say, 'oh, I dabble in medicine' you may just find out later that they are the Professor of Surgery and a world leader in their field. But this is merely a cultural convention, I think rather than a true practice of humble living.

In Peter's terms, and the whole of First Peter is about this really, humility means giving honour and obedience and submission to those whose role it is lead, to the point of suffering; and for those who lead, to lead not by exploitation or accruing honour to yourself. It's not very revolutionary, is it?

A personal note: as a 'young man' of the much maligned Gen X, I am increasingly frustrated by the unwillingness of baby-boomers to pass on power and leadership to the next generation (what is John Howard doing?) This is, it seems to me, just as true in church circles as elsewhere. The baby-boomers have no concept of tradition except as a negative, (even the church ones): they grew up seeing themselves as the radicals who would bring about the revolution (even the church ones). They were extremely rebellious, and were not particularly submissive to the twittering grey-haired fools of the previous generation that they thought were spoiling everything (even the church ones). They challengened social orders, hierarchy and the authority of office (even the church ones). Of course, what this means is that, in inheriting power in church and society, they have become much more authoritarian, because they excercise power through personality and not through office. And they expect we gen Xers - the most pliant and apathetic and weary generation in history - to fight them for power as they fought their predecessors...

And yet, this is not how authority is to be transmitted intergenerationally in the church. But the boomer 'born to rule' mentality should not be answered by more of the same. The message for me and others of my generation is to reign in our natural (male?) combativeness, our need to win in some generational conflict to earn the right to share in the leadership of the group (as if we were a pride of lions or something); and to exercise a submissive humility. Our we worried 'our time' will never come? Our we counting down the days till our leaders retire? When will they notice us, and stop treating us like we are in short pants? He will lift you up in due time.