Because this is a
mixed congregation of both Jews and Gentiles, one can surmise that Paul’s use
of “the law” would be well understood to be those basic provisions of the law
(circumcision, Sabbath keeping, food regulations, refraining from worship of
idols) that served as identity markers for Jews, and were constant points of
contention and division in the early church. Knowing this allows one to see
how the unity and actions of love that are outlined and encouraged in chapter
twelve of Romans come into play. In addition to that, when considering
that this is a letter that will be read to a gathered church at a single
sitting, it is worth remembering a very early statement in the letter, wherein
Paul uses the phrase “from faith to faith” (Romans 1:17).
This simple statement
sees Paul borrowing from the imperial propaganda of the day, which presents
Caesar as the supreme benefactor. The statement implies that Caesar is
faithful to his subjects, providing them with peace and security, and therefore
his subjects are faithful and loyal to him and to Rome. One must hear the
words of the thirteenth chapter with such words and thoughts in mind, in the
knowledge that Paul is presenting Jesus as the actual supreme benefactor, of
which the Caesar is merely a parody. All civic interactions proceed
within this framework, and the self-sacrificial love modeled by Jesus which saw
Him go to the cross (unconcerned with the shame because of the honor He trusted
would come), becomes the model upon which the life of the Christian community
is based (unconcerned with shame because of the honor that comes with what
counts as the fulfillment of the law, thereby marking one out as a member of
the people of the Creator God and a participant in His kingdom).
From here, Paul
advances towards the meal table, which it is clear that he has in mind as he
goes on to write “Let us live decently as in the daytime, not in carousing and
drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and sensuality, not in discord and
jealousy” (13:13). Though it is not meant to serve as an accusation, this
is language of the portion of the Hellenistic meal referred to as the
“symposium” (period of revelry---singing of songs, debates, speeches,
etc…---following a meal), and as it is possible that this church is hearing
this letter while gathered for fellowship that will include a meal, the
language would not be lost on them either. It is to this then that Paul
adds “put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh to
arouse its desires” (13:14).
A great disservice is
done to the apostle if one simply substitutes personal and subjective notions
of “the flesh” here, rather than considering “the flesh” within the context of
the potential for disunity, division, stratification, and unwarranted
authoritarianism within the church, as well as its connotations of the old age
prior to the Resurrection, the inauguration of the new creation, and of the
kingdom of the covenant God, in which preferring others above oneself is to be
the norm.
One must also take
this statement into consideration in the context of the dissertation regarding
the Christian’s responsibilities towards governing authorities. Because
one considers himself or herself to be part of the kingdom of God, a desire of
the flesh might be to cast off all restraint and disregard governing
authorities. This was obviously a real possibility, which would account
for Paul’s insistence that such authorities are “God’s servant for your good”
(13:4a), and that it is “necessary to be in subjection” (13:5a) (Note:
Though democracies did exist, Paul does not have knowledge of a government that
is constituted by “We the people,” such as to be found with the United States
of America; so it is incumbent upon all generations of Christians, the world
over, to understand Paul’s words in context and then to work out the
implications of those words within their own time and place, guided by the
dictates of the existing kingdom of heaven.)
Rather than thinking
about putting on the Lord Jesus Christ in the context of the cultivation of
private spirituality, the understanding of putting on the Lord Jesus Christ
should be shaped, and processed horizontally and outwardly, by embodying the
transformational, kingdom-of-God-contexted love that was put on display by
Jesus throughout the entirety of His mission, culminating in the cross.
This would certainly serve to quell any fleshly desires that might be
manifested (separations based on honor and shame) or discussed (open rebellion
against Rome that could result in the taking up of arms and the discrediting of
the Jesus movement) at the meal table, thus resulting in a life of true
holiness (a life laid on the altar of sacrifice in service to Israel’s God).
No comments:
Post a Comment