At the same time, all
of these considerations serve as a reminder of just how important a role food
and considerations about food played in the ancient world (and in many parts of
the world today), in which gaining one’s sustenance is actually the primary,
daily concern. When work is engaged upon primarily to obtain food for
self and family, and secondarily to meet the remainder of life’s basic needs,
it is not difficult to assert that a divergent set of priorities will be in
effect.
Little wonder then that
the church’s meal table, open to all and for all to share equally, with the
wealthier and more well-to-do providing for all while sharing equally with all
with no expectation of receiving an increase in their honor standing in
exchange for the provision (ideally), was a table that served to draw people
in, while also being ripe for corruption and a new and more insidious form of
oppression---whether wantonly or through neglect, by ingrained social forces
and sensibilities. Little wonder then, that the stories of Jesus’
miraculous feedings, with enough for all and to spare, with all sharing equally
at the hand of the One that represents the church (and that the church
represents) gained such prominence in the community that called Jesus Lord and
for whom the meal table was a prominent feature.
Continuing then with
this Petrine analysis, maintaining an examination of the third chapter, and re-grasping
the handle of mutual self-sacrificial love that undergirds the call for wives
to be subject to their husbands, Peter can be heard moving to a directive to
“Let your beauty not be external---the braiding of hair and wearing of gold
jewelry or fine clothes---but the inner person of the heart, the lasting beauty
of a gentle and tranquil spirit, which is precious in God’s sight”
(3:3-4). These words are heard, of course, in the context of table
fellowship.
Apart from the fact
that the outward appearance can most certainly reflect the inward disposition,
it is probably safe to say that Peter’s concern here is not with what appears
on the surface. What he is concerned about is the other-preferring love
that is to be on display at the church’s meal table, which will then, because
of the Gospel’s transformational power combined with the power and
deterministic capacity of the meal table, be translated into other-preferring
actions in and for the community (the world) in which the Christians find
themselves.
How can one make this
conclusion? Here, Peter calls for the wealthier women in the church
community---those that can avail themselves of the costly braiding of hair (in
which jewels, precious metals, and other ornamentations would be woven into the
hair), gold jewelry, and fine clothes---to consider those in their church
community that are far less fortunate than they when it comes to such
things.
This is not a blanket
directive, nor should it be considered a ban or a condemnation of these types
of things. Rather, it is an inducement from Peter to this church to act
in love towards one another. In this case, Peter is asking the wealthier
women of the church---the women who would, though they had no real honor of
their own, share in the honor of their husband, dressing and presenting
themselves accordingly---to leave such things aside when they gather with their
fellow believers and participate at meals together. By removing the
trappings of honor and dignity that garner the respect and admiration of the
world, which can serve, albeit perhaps unintentionally, to keep true and
undivided fellowship from taking place, the “inner person of the heart” comes
to the fore, as love and respect for one’s fellow Christian is
demonstrated.
No comments:
Post a Comment