Timothy & Countering The Culture (part 4)

Though the patron-client system functioned at multiple levels, in which the client of one patron could also have clients of his own, it would be obvious that the most noble of families could have large numbers of clients supporting them in their endeavors.  Along the same lines, entire kingdoms or nations, once conquered and made subservient, could become clients to the Roman commander that had conquered them.  Such was the way of the world. 

Of course, if clients had clients, and if this reached all the way down to the basest level of society, it would also hold true for the other side of the ladder.  Even a noble family would be the clients of a more honorable family, with this being the case all the way up to, in the days of Jesus and subsequently of the Apostle Paul, the Caesar himself.  Ultimately, all were looked upon as clients of Caesar, who was faithful and loyal to his subjects.  Those subjects, in turn, were to be faithful and loyal to Caesar.  This ideal was embodied in the common phrase “ek pistis eis pistin,” which is often translated as “from faith to faith”.  The Apostle Paul borrowed this common and well-known phraseology and subversively put it to use in his letter to the Romans (1:17).

It is this system of patronage that truly formed the foundation of the Roman state.  Not only did it serve to create stability, but the unwavering loyalty of clients could aid certain families in retaining power for extended periods of time.  At the same time, it created something of a welfare network, which was especially useful within an empire that lacked the means (or, at least, did not direct those means) to support those most in need and incapable of providing for themselves. 

The client system that surrounded a patron would look out for its members, ensuring that no harm would come to its own.  If one member of the client group would be struck down by poverty, the other clients, and most likely the patron as well, would see to it that the one in need could get a loan.  In the worst case, they would see to it that their fellow client would receive a decent funeral.  If the patron was unable to provide assistance personally, he would orchestrate the assistance (gaining honor), perhaps asking other clients to come to the aid of another that had fallen on hard time. 

In continuing to explore the patron-client dynamic of Paul’s day, one can look to Seneca---a Roman philosopher, statesman, dramatist, and humorist that was a contemporary of the Apostle Paul.  Seneca wrote: “Let us, therefore, show how acceptable a gift is by loudly expressing our gratitude for it; and let us do so, not only in the hearing of the giver, but everywhere.  He who receives a benefit with gratitude, repays the first installment of it.”  This statement would reflect the general attitude of a client towards his patron, who would be looked upon as the source of gifts.  For what it’s worth, Seneca himself was a tutor of the Emperor Nero, later becoming an advisor.  Most assuredly, he would have considered Nero to be his patron, so though these words would be generally reflective of the patron-client relationship, they would most likely be penned with the Caesar in mind.    

Subject To Rulers & Authorities (part 2)

Of course, this is not the only time that Paul touches on this subject of relationship to governing powers.  In his letter to the Romans, Paul instructs the recipients of that letter, a group of believers that are located in the power center of the world in that day, writing “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities” (13:1).  “Yes,” Paul would in effect say, “Jesus has had all things put under His feet, and yes, all are subject to Him, even the Caesar;” but also, “there is no authority except by God’s appointment, and the authorities that exist have been instituted by God.  So the person who resists such authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will incur judgment” (13:1b-2). 

We hear this with the backdrop of the accusations leveled against Christians (Nero would effectively blame the Christian community for the burning of Rome, building on those accusations), and the corresponding need to be wise and circumspect in their public dealings, so that even though their recognized a king superior to Jesus and a kingdom superior to Rome, they were not a threat to public order.  By way of digression, we could certainly note that the truth of Paul’s communication would be remarkably displayed during the Jewish revolt of 66-70 A.D., which resulted in the devastating destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple and the banishment of Jews from their promised land. 

Returning then to Titus, Paul adds to his instructions regarding subjection, obedience, and readiness, writing that “They must not slander anyone, but be peaceable, gentle, showing complete courtesy to all people” (3:2).  This is Paul’s charge to those that refer to the Christ as their Lord.  The question of “why” would probably and reasonably have been ventured at this point.  Answering that question, Paul writes, “For we too were once foolish, disobedient, misled, enslaved to various passions and desires, spending our lives in evil and envy, hateful and hating one another” (3:3).  It is possible to believe that Paul could very well have been speaking biographically here, reflecting on his attitude towards the Roman rulers and authorities to whom he had been subject for the entirety of his life. 

If he was speaking biographically, then it would have been natural for him to extend his thinking beyond his own mindset and to consider the attitude towards Rome that was widely held by an undoubtedly large percentage of the nation of Israel.  In that attitude and mindset, in which hopes of rebellion and revolt played such a large part---with its narrow focus on the nationalistic benefits to be obtained through God’s action on behalf of Israel through a warring and conquering Messiah---words such as foolish, disobedient, misled, enslaved, evil, envious, and hateful could have sprung to mind.  If Paul was indeed reflecting on God’s covenant with His people who were given the responsibility to be a light to the nations and a blessing to all peoples, and their failure to come anywhere close to that ideal though given repeated warnings and experiences of God’s power that should have jolted them on to that path, then perhaps such thoughts were entirely appropriate.   

After recounting his own position, that of his people, and undoubtedly that of humankind in general as part of his insistence that believers in the Lord Jesus Christ rightfully submit themselves to rulers and authorities, in spite of foolishness, disobedience, being misled, enslavement, evil, enviousness, and hatefulness, Paul writes, “But when the kindness of God our Savior and His love for mankind appeared, He saved us not by works of righteousness that we have done but on the basis of His mercy” (Titus 3:4-5a).  Effectively, for Paul, the kindness of God appeared when the Christ, the Messiah, appeared.  He adds that said kindness was applied “through the washing of the new birth and the renewing of the Holy Spirit” (3:5b).  This washing and renewing, again, demonstrating the kindness of God, was fully manifested in “Jesus Christ our Savior” (3:6b), for it was in Him that God “poured out on us in full measure” (3:6a), the Spirit that would lead to the reception of His salvation.