However, contrary to what might be expected, not only did
Laodicea not request assistance from Rome or from the emperor, they actually
declined the assistance that was offered, choosing instead to rebuild and
restore the city from their own means. This, of course, would grant
Laodicea some measure of independence from Rome; but only a measure, as they still
relied on the existence of the empire and the relative security and stability
it afforded. In fact, Laodicea received from Rome the title of “free
city,” and was the “conventus” of its territory, meaning that it functioned as
the capital city of a division of the Roman province in which it was
located. This meant that it would be the seat of a district court, as
well as the headquarters for other governmental functions for the region.
Taken together, the
facts of the great wealth of the city, that the wealth enabled them to decline
assistance from Rome after a catastrophe, and that it was a seat of provincial
government (though not relying on the largesse or beneficence of Rome or of the
emperor, in contrast to so many other cities of the region), Jesus’ chiding of
His church for its insistence that they were rich, that they have acquired
great wealth, and that they were in need of nothing becomes quite
understandable.
Now, this is not
meant to be a condemnation of wealth. Taking a negative view of wealth,
whether civic or individual, based on these words, would be unwarranted and out
of context. What one must keep in mind as progress is made in pulling
back the layers of nearly two thousand years of cultural changes that have
served to obfuscate from view what would have been easily seen and understood
by the Laodiceans in their day (they would have known about declining imperial
assistance in rebuilding, they would have known why, and as citizens of
Laodicea they would have been quite proud of that fact), is that their wealth
is what is causing them to engage in practices that have Jesus wanting to vomit
them out of His mouth. Therefore, these practices are not in line with what can
be observed in His mission, nor are they in accordance with the message of the
Gospel.
The practice or
practices (as the case may be) of this “lukewarm” city (Laodicea) stands in
contrast to what takes place in the “hot” and “cold” cities (the well-known
epithets assigned to Hierapolis and Colossae). The church in Laodicea,
correspondingly, is being asked to observe the difference in practice between
itself and the churches in those other cities and to mimic the practice,
thereby becoming either hot or cold, either of which was perfectly acceptable
to Jesus.
After commenting on
their wealth and need of nothing, Jesus makes an interjection that serves to
negate any vaunted ideas of self as citizens of Laodicea that might have arisen
from such thoughts, saying that this church did not realize that they were
actually “wretched, pitiful, poor, blind, and naked” (3:17b). Not only is
this a challenge to their honor, metaphorical and analogical application seems
to be unavoidable, as Jesus wants them to understand that though they may be
wealthy, their nauseating practice that partially stemmed from the fact of
their wealth actually showed them to be something far different.
