“‘Dear Lord God, I wish to preach in your honor. I wish to speak about you, glorify you, praise your name. Although I can’t do this well of myself, I pray that you may make it good.’”[i]

Introduction

There’s a malignant and pervasive feature of Protestant Christian social and political ethic that goes like this: faith has nothing to do with the temporal realm, preaching is never supposed to be political, and obedience for obedience’s sake is law. Faith is only of and for the spiritual realm and has no activity in the temporal realm. There, in the temporal realm, the Protestant Christian is to, simply put, abide in obedience to temporal leaders and authorities, getting along nicely with others, and—if it so fits—proclaiming Christ in word to those who are without Christ by faith. There might be some room for actions of charity toward those less fortunate than we. However, when it comes to social action, even political response including resistance, the Protestant Christian is summoned into quietness and socio-political abstinence—our job is to obey whatever and whomever is in charge, bearing badges of model citizenry. The Christian is to endure passively all the actions of the temporal realm, no matter how gross and offensive they are; and not only endure but to advocate for such wayward temporal leadership and calling others into obedience. The tl/dr: faith is only about being saved from some future hell and has no legs, no arms, no hands, no words or deeds to act in the temporal realm; such action is only for those selected by God to lead, however they see fit.

I understand the impulse behind this notion of socio-political quietness and hyper-obedience. However, I also know that it’s an impulse built from a partial and thus inadequate understanding of Christian endurance in the face of violence and abuse. How we got to this quietness and hyper-obedience stems from an impoverished reading of Luther himself, a relentless influence from late 16^th and early 17^th century protestant and Lutheran scholars trying to further establish Protestantism and Radical Protestantism after Luther’s death, and, sadly, a corrupted reading of biblical texts like our passage from 1 Peter. While the first two are interesting and about which I would be more than happy to wax ineloquently, it’s the last one that is our focus.

1 Peter 2:19-25

For Peter, the important thing in Chapter 2 is that those who are stuck in the captivity of the institution of slavery with non-Christian masters,[ii] abide their unjust[iii] suffering when they do good.[iv] They are to direct their reverence to God and not to their earthly masters,[v] who might be taking perverse pleasure in unjustly punishing a slave for doing good.[vi] Peter writes, For this [is] grace if, through consciousness of God, one endures the unjust suffering of pain of body and mind. For what sort of fame [is it] if you endure when missing the mark and being treated harshly? But if doing good and suffering you will endure, this [is] grace in the presence of God (vv.19-20). Peter encourages his audience—people who are in slavery—to endure being mistreated when they do well. Peter credits this endurance under unjust suffering to the grace of God and the consciousness tuned in and toward God and God’s will.[vii] This endurance under unjust suffering won’t get one saved; this endurance under unjust suffering is evidence of being saved, for it is evidence that the grace of God is present and the one who has this grace of God by faith in Christ is in the presence of God by the power of the Holy Spirit. While the phraseology is exhausting and difficult,[viii] Peter is not emphasizing suffering as salvific; Peter is centering the idea that to endure is God in you enduring through you, thus, it is grace and God bearing the unjust suffering. Concurrently, this endurance of unjust suffering is not only a benefit to the person so enduring[ix] (tangible experience of the grace of God with them in this unjust suffering[x]), but it becomes a point of witness to and an exposing of the perpetrator of the unjust suffering.[xi] Patient endurance by the grace of God in the face of unjust suffering renders both the unjust suffering and the one committing it exposed and guilty.

Peter then brings up Christ’s suffering and death. He writes, for into this you were called, because Christ also suffered on behalf of you, leaving for you an example to be imitated so that you might devote yourself to his footprints, ‘he did not miss the mark and he was not found with deceit in his mouth’ (vv.21-22). For Peter, not only did Christ set an example for believers to follow, but Christ’s innocent suffering on behalf of becomes paradigmatic for believers, too. In other words, yes, Peter is making a correlation here between Christ’s work on the cross as “enduring unjust suffering” as participation in God’s mission in the world to save the world from captivity, indifference, and death—for these are present when one embarks on dolling out unjust suffering on an innocent person (or on any person). Peter yokes the believer not only to Christ, but in Christ underscoring that since their newborn[xii]^,[xiii] location is in Christ (like an address) they will—by God’s grace and with faith—walk in Christ’s footsteps, imitating them like a young child copies and traces over letters.[xiv] Refusing to make suffering itself salvific, Peter is practical in addressing his audience of slaves to pagans: beloved, you, too, are going to suffer unjustly…fear not, for you are not alone or lost; God not only goes with you but has gone before you.[xv] Peter is emphasizing that by enduring unjust suffering for doing good, they will reinforce their identification with Christ.[xvi]

Peter drives this idea home by making the point[xvii] that this isn’t promotion of blind endurance to suffering but actively resisting revenge and retaliation.[xviii] Peter writes, When he was being abused, he was not abusing; when suffering he did not threaten; but he was handing [himself] over to the judge who judges justly (v.23). And this is the point of it all: foregoing retaliation and revenge while trusting in Abba God who is the just judge, the Judge who was judged in our place.[xix] Peter’s audience—familiar with just and unjust violence due to their station in life[xx]—is to see their endurance under unjust suffering as a way of mimicking and following in the example of Christ that has, like Christ’s work, tangible application and implication in the world. To seek revenge or to retaliate[xxi] is to take matters into one’s own hands and determine that both God is untrustworthy as judge and deny the efficacy of Christ’s work on the cross.[xxii]

Thus why Peter then adds, [xxiii]

He himself he carried up our sins/missing the mark in his body upon the wood/cross, for the purpose and result of removing/causing to be dead sins/missing the mark that we might live for righteousness; for by his wounds you were healed. For you were as sheep being misled, but now you were returned towards the shepherd and over seer of your souls (v.24-25).

It is not by the wounds endured in temporal unjust suffering that the slave is saved,[xxiv] but by the wounds of Christ who suffered on behalf of Peter’s audience[xxv]—Christ who suffered a death reserved for rebels and slaves (Peter drives home Christ’s identification with his audience).[xxvi] Thus, for Peter, they can endure for Christ’s sake and to the glory of God because Christ is the foundation of their salvation.[xxvii]^,[xxviii] For they were lost like sheep, says Peter, and found and returned to the fold of God, given new life, divine love, and enduring liberation—things denied slaves, people considered not to be people worthy of saving at all.[xxix] Through them, God will work to expose unjust suffering and the person causing the unjust suffering because God is a trustworthy and just judge; Christ’s resurrection is the demonstration that unjust suffering does not go unnoticed and unvindicated by God.[xxx]

Conclusion

So, what do we make of what Peter has written to his audience? There’s wisdom to be had here that resonates with both faith and socio-political praxis (these two are not in opposition). Can we not have faith and endure suffering and be an advocate against injustice without retaliating?[xxxi] I believe Martin Luther can help us here. In his treatise, Temporal Authority: To What Extent it Should be Obeyed, Luther writes about this very tension in the life of the Christian in the world,

…at one and the same time you satisfy God’s kingdom inwardly and the kingdom of the world outwardly. You suffer evil and injustice, and yet at the same time you punish evil and injustice; you do not resist evil, and yet at the same time, you do resist it. In the one case, you consider yourself and what is yours; in the other, you consider your neighbor and what is his. In what concerns you and yours, you govern yourself by the gospel and suffer injustice toward yourself as a true Christian; in what concerns the person or property of others, you govern yourself according to love and tolerate no injustice toward you neighbor. The gospel does not forbid this; in fact, in other places it actually commands it.[xxxii]

We—you and I—can turn the other cheek when unjust violence comes our way, enduring, as Peter exhorts, patiently by God’s grace and in faith and trust that God is who God says God is. What we cannot abide by, though, is when our neighbor is under attack—spiritually, emotionally, physically, mentally, psychologically, etc. We can let injustice directed toward us roll off our backs especially when it is for doing something good (and, these days, that “doing something good” is a rather low bar!), but we cannot let our neighbor suffer so. Just as Peter encourages us to walk in the way of the suffering Christ, he, without words, encourages those of us who are not immersed in and held captive by modern institutions of slavery to expose senseless and unjust violence for the sake of our neighbor and to the glory of God. We can suffer in a way that brings release from captivity, life where there is death, and love where there is indifference. In this way we walk in the footsteps of the Christ who redeemed us and liberated us through his death and resurrection. We love because God so loved us first (1Jn 4:19).

---

[i] LW 54:157-158; Table Talk 1590.

[ii] I. Howard Marshall, “1 Peter,” The IVP New Testament Commentary Series, eds. Grant R. Osborne, D. Stuart Briscoe, and Haddon Robinson, (Downers Grove: IVP Press, 1991), 87. Peter is addressing a crowd very familiar with overt slavery

[iii] Marshall, “1 Peter,” 88. “This advice cannot have been easy to accept. Slaves could well suffer at the hands of their masters. Peter calls it unjust suffering. This contrasts with the view of many people who would have argued (like Aristotle) that, strictly speaking, one couldn’t be unjust to slave because slaves were not persons, but chattels and workhorses. This view was not universal (the Stoics repudiated it, for example). And naturally Christians recognized that slaves were people.”

[iv] Peter H. Davids, The First Epistle of Peter, TNICTNT, ed. F.F. Bruce (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990), 106. “Thus the motive for the submission and service is not their respect for their masters, but their respect for God, who receives the service as if it were done to him and whose name is honored by their good behavior. Therefore their submission is not bounded by their masters’ actions…but extends ‘to the unjust’….”

[v] Davids, First Epistle of Peter, 106. Slave’s “reverence or fear is directed to God, not to the masters, is indicated by the facts that (1) the phrase comes before the reference to the masters in the Greek word order, and (2) fear or reverence…in 1 Peter is always directed toward God, never toward people, whom Christians are not to fear…”

[vi] Davids, First Epistle or Peter, 106. “Peter…is writing in a time of persecution in which slaves, who were under almost total control of their masters, would be especially vulnerable. He can make no assumptions that their masters will not take perverse delight in torturing a slave for his faith. Even in such a case the slave is to follow the teaching of Jesus and submit…”

[vii] Davids, First Epistle or Peter, 107. “..it is more likely that ‘of God’ is to be understood as describing the character of the conscience, that is, one conscious of God and his instruction, as in the normal connection of God with conscience in the NT…even if Peter makes this connection in a grammatically difficult way. What he means, then, is that God is pleased with Christian slaves who bear up under unjust suffering, not because there is no other option or because of their optimistic character, but because they know this pleases God and conforms to the teaching of Jesus.”

[viii] Marshall, “1 Peter,” 88. “Nevertheless, Peter says, it is possible to bear unjust suffering in a different way. When a person puts up with suffering because he is conscious of God, this is commendable. These two phrases are difficult to understand even if their general sense is clear.”

[ix] Davids, First Epistle or Peter, 108. “This endurance is an act that finds favor with God, on which he smiles with approval. It is a deed of covenant faithfulness to the God who has extended grace to them…and as such leads to the paradoxical joy already mentioned in 1:6-7.”

[x] Marshall, “1 Peter,” 89. “It stands to reason that if slaves receive a physical beating or lashing because they have committed some misdemeanor or crime, there is no particular credit to them for it, even if they bear it patiently….However, if a slave endures suffering  that is undeserved—in deed, punishment actually inflicted for doing good—then this is a different story. This is commendable in the sight of God.”

[xi] Davids, First Epistle or Peter, 108. “….there is a type of fame if one does good and suffers. In this situation one can show true endurance because it is wrongful suffering.”

[xii] Marshall, “1 Peter,” 91. “…right from the opening phrase it is apparent that Peter is presenting far more than an example. He briefly tells the story of the Christ who suffered for you and develops a doctrine of Christ’s death that shows how Christians can be transformed to live for righteousness.”

[xiii] Marshall, “1 Peter,” 92. “Christ has called them to a new way of life which involves patient suffering like his. As his followers, they must share his lot.”

[xiv] Davids, First Epistle or Peter, 110. “…we are like a child placing foot after foot into the prints of his father in the snow, following a sure trail broken for him. But this trail of Christ includes suffering, not for our sins (he has already suffered ‘on your behalf’ in that respect), but as part of the pattern of life to which he has called us.”

[xv] Davids, First Epistle or Peter, 114. “For slaves this was good news. They might be suffering; indeed, they might be suffering because of their faith. But they were not lost. Christ was with him, and they were under his care even if their present physical experiences were unpleasant.”

[xvi] Davids, First Epistle or Peter, 111. “This teaching fits well as an encouragement to suffering slaves, for they are concerned about suffering for doing right. Jesus their lord was perfectly innocent in every way, they are reminded, and yet he suffered. Thus their innocent suffering can be part of their identification with Christ.”

[xvii] Davids, First Epistle or Peter, 111.

[xviii] Marshall, “1 Peter,” 90.

[xix] Ref. to Karl Barth’s CD 4.1

[xx] Marshall, “1 Peter,” 87-88. “Unlike Paul, who taught mainly slaves with Christian masters, Peter is concerned here with slaves working in the homes of pagan masters. In a Christian household the close contact of slaves and masters could lead to brotherhood ….In a pagan household this familiarity increased the possibilities of friction, especially if Christian slaves, who now believed themselves spiritually equal to their masters, tried to force their position. Whatever their situation, Christian slaves should fulfill their obligation to be subject to their masters. Whether their masters are gentle or perverse is not the point; the relationship demands obedience.”

[xxi] Marshall, “1 Peter,” 96. “Peter’s teaching also clearly states what is involved in following Christ. The pattern that must be followed is his refusal to retaliate when he was attacked.”

[xxii] Marshall, “1 Peter,” 92-93. “Jesus modeled patient suffering for Christians to follow. The way in which he endured his suffering is the binding pattern that those who have been saved by the death of Christ must follow.”

[xxiii] Davids, First Epistle or Peter, 114. “For slaves this was good news. They might be suffering; indeed, they might be suffering because of their faith. But they were not lost. Christ was with him, and they were under his care even if their present physical experiences were unpleasant.”

[xxiv] Marshall, “1 Peter,” 92.

[xxv] Marshall, “1 Peter,” 92. “Jesus suffers as the Servant of Yahweh and fulfills his destiny to bear the sins of others and so bring them to God.”

[xxvi] Marshall, “1 Peter,” 94. “….Peter simply drives home the fact that Jesus really suffered physically. On the cross  may well allude to the fact that Christ shared the kind of execution which was normally reserved for slaves and rebels.”

[xxvii] Marshall, “1 Peter,” 91. “….Christ cannot be an example of suffering for us to follow unless he is first of all the Savior whose sufferings were endured on our behalf.”

[xxviii] Marshall, “1 Peter,” 92.

[xxix] Marshall, “1 Peter,” 95.

[xxx] Marshall, “1 Peter,” 94. “The purpose of this sacrificial act, however, is not simply that we should be set free from the consequences of our sins. Perter sees it as an act which is meant to set us free form sin itself….”

[xxxi] Marshall, “1 Peter,” 90. “One can take actions against injustice and unjust structures in society without engaging in personal retaliation.”

[xxxii] Luther LW 45 96