For Paul, hope does not mean expecting life to go well. He tells the Thessalonians to expect just the opposite: they should expect trials (1 Thess 3:3). Hope, for Paul, was not a mere emotion or sunny outlook, nor was it reducible to information about the future. The hope of which Paul speaks in 1 Thessalonians is a God-given habit of mind that produces joy in the midst of suffering. It is characterized by endurance or patience (1:3), providing confidence that God has conquered death through Christ (4:13; 5:8). In other words, for Paul, hope looks forward to a glorious future, but also it offers a changed life in the present (see Rom 5:2–5). From this perspective, it is easy to see why later tradition called hope a “theological virtue.” It is “theological” in the sense that it is a gift from God and helps the recipient to know God. It is a “virtue” because it is not simply an idea or emotion but rather a firm disposition that changes one’s entire outlook on life. The medieval Irish hymn “Be Thou My Vision” expresses this perfectly with a line that echoes 1 Thess 5:10: “Waking or sleeping, Thy presence my light.” Knowing God reframes how we view reality, giving us “light.” Hope brings a new way of life, one that is lived in light of our final end.14
1. See also Isa 13:6; Joel 1:15; 2:1; Zeph 1:14.
2. See especially Jeffrey A. D. Weima, 1–2 Thessalonians, BECNT (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2014), 348–51. See also the cautious remarks of Joel R. White, “‘Peace and Security’ (1 Thessalonians 5.3): Is It Really a Roman Slogan?,” NTS 59 (2013): 382–95.
3. M. Eugene Boring, I & II Thessalonians, NTL (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2015), 181.
4. Elie Wiesel, Night (London: Penguin, 2008).
5. “The Lord’s Prayer,” in Treatises, trans. Roy J. Deferrari, FC 36 (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1958), 159–60.
6. John M. G. Barclay, “Conflict in Thessalonica,” CBQ 55 (1993): 517–20.
7. Festal Letters 1–12, trans. Philip R. Amidon, FC 118 (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2009), 197.
8. The grammatical question hinges on the relationship of the aorist participle “putting on” to the present-tense main verb “let us be sober.” See the discussion in Weima, 1–2 Thessalonians, 362.
9. Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd ed. (1989), s.v. “salvation,” 1.a.
10. E.g., Weima, 1–2 Thessalonians, 367.
11. Interpretatio in xiv epistulas sancti Pauli (PG 82:652 [my translation]).
12. Nijay K. Gupta, 1–2 Thessalonians, NCC (Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2016), 1.
13. Alexander Pope, Essay on Man. See the discussion of this poem and the overall argument of Terry Eagleton, Hope without Optimism (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2015), 42.
14. On all of these points, see Pope Benedict XVI’s encyclical on hope, Spe Salvi (Saved in Hope).
Final Admonitions
1 Thessalonians 5:12–28
Paul concludes, as he usually does, with a series of final exhortations. Paul talks about how to treat leaders and enemies within the church, encourages unceasing prayer, and prays for the complete sanctification of all within the congregation. This section is packed with traditional Christian teachings (e.g., “See that no one returns evil for evil”) that Paul has adapted for this particular occasion. A lazy reader might be tempted to skim over this material, but the letter’s conclusion summarizes many of the letter’s key points, and it contains some of its most memorable and influential lines.
Regard for Authorities in the Lord (5:12–13)
12We ask you, brothers, to respect those who are laboring among you and who are over you in the Lord and who admonish you, 13and to show esteem for them with special love on account of their work. Be at peace among yourselves.
NT: Gal 6:6; 1 Tim 5:17–22
Catechism: the body of Christ, 1267–70
[5:12–13]
Up until this point in the letter no mention has been made of ecclesial authorities other than the apostles themselves, but here we learn that certain unnamed members have a special responsibility to care for the congregation. Though three tasks are mentioned (laboring, exercising authority, admonishing), in the Greek it is clear that Paul is talking about one group of people rather than three. At this point in Paul’s ministry it is unlikely that Greek-speaking Christians used the titles episkopoi (“bishops”), presbyteroi (“elders”), or diakonoi (“deacons”), which is probably why we do not find them in this passage. Later New Testament texts do use these terms but do not distinguish between bishops and elders (Acts 20:17, 28; Phil 1:1; Titus 1:6–7).1 By the beginning of the second century, the three ordained offices are clearly distinguished in the letters of St. Ignatius of Antioch, but bishops and elders are not given the designation “priest” (hiereus) until later than that (see sidebar, “St. Ignatius of Antioch on Respect for Leaders,” p. 126). Nevertheless, this passage is evidence that from the earliest days of Christianity there were leaders in local churches. In later centuries, readers of 1 Thessalonians understandably took Paul to be talking about respect for ordained clergy. John Chrysostom, for instance, assumes that this passage is about respect for local priests, and Thomas Aquinas takes it to refer to deference to Church authorities.2
LIVING TRADITION
Blessed John Henry Newman on the Development of Doctrine
In his Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine, Newman remarks on the impossibility of finding a point in the ancient Church when doctrine stopped growing.
If we turn our attention to the beginnings of apostolical teaching after His ascension, we shall find ourselves unable to fix an historical point at which the growth of doctrine ceased, and the rule of faith was once for all settled. Not on the day of Pentecost, for St. Peter had still to learn at Joppa about the baptism of Cornelius; not at Joppa and Caesarea, for St. Paul had to write his Epistles; not on the death of the last Apostle, for St. Ignatius had to establish the doctrine of Episcopacy; not then, nor for many years after, for the Canon of the New Testament was still undetermined. Not in the Creed, which is no collection of definitions, but a summary of certain credenda, an incomplete summary, and, like the Lord’s Prayer or the Decalogue, a mere sample of divine truths, especially of the more elementary. No one doctrine can be named which starts omnibus numeris at first, and gains nothing for the investigations of faith and the attacks of heresy. The Church went forth from the world in haste, as the Israelites from Egypt “with their dough before it was leavened, their kneading troughs being bound up in the clothes upon their shoulders.”a
a. An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine (London: James Toovey, 1845), 107–8.
These leaders’ responsibilities include “admonishing” the rest of the church, a word that could refer to moral exhortation (see 5:14), as well as other instruction. These unnamed leaders are also laboring and doing work for the sake of the church, words that Paul uses to describe his own manual labor (e.g., 2:9) as well as the work of those who preach the gospel (e.g., 1 Cor 15:10). In addition to teaching and moral exhortation, the leaders’ work might include mundane administration in support of the community’s life, such as the distribution of resources to those in need. Another possible task of leaders who could read probably included reading this letter aloud to the gathered church (1 Thess 5:27).
The leaders are also said to be set over you (proistēmi) in the Lord. The word proistēmi commonly refers to people who have an official responsibility to manage or help others, such as court officials, pagan priests, or legal guardians. In 1 Timothy it refers to the “presiding” role of presbyters (5:17) and the “managing” of households (3:4–5, 12).3 Since the early twentieth century some have argued that proistēmi could mean “care for” or “show interest in” rather than “rule over,” hence the NIV’s translation, “care for you in the Lord.” Due to ongoing disputes about the nature of authority in the Church, scholars have subjected this phrase to extra scrutiny, and there is a marked tendency in some recent commentaries to prefer interpretations that downplay these leaders�
� authority as much as possible in hope of demonstrating that the Church was egalitarian at this early stage.4 But the evidence of proistēmi being used to refer to simple “caring” is not strong.5 When it does refer to caring or providing, it is the caring expected of someone in an official capacity.6 There is no doubt that these leaders “cared for” the congregation, as the NIV suggests, but they also wielded a measure of authority as teachers. Paul did not share the modern wish for a church without authority.7
LIVING TRADITION
St. Ignatius of Antioch on Respect for Leaders
In the early second century, Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, was taken to Rome to be martyred. While on the way, he wrote a series of letters to various churches. His letter to the church in Smyrna sheds light on Paul’s use of the word “know” (oida) in 1 Thess 5:12 and attests to an emerging emphasis on episcopal authority:
Flee from divisions as the beginning of evils. You must all follow the bishop as Jesus Christ followed the Father, and follow the council of presbyters as you would the apostles; respect the deacons as the commandment of God. Let no one do anything that has to do with the church without the bishop. Only that Eucharist which is under the authority of the bishop (or whomever he himself designates) is to be considered valid. Wherever the bishop appears, there let the congregation be; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the catholic church. It is not permissible either to baptize or to hold a love feast without the bishop. But whatever he approves is also pleasing to God, in order that everything you do may be trustworthy and valid. . . . It is good to acknowledge [oida = “know”] God and the bishop. The one who honors the bishop has been honored by God; the one who does anything without the bishop’s knowledge serves the devil.a
a. To the Smyrnaeans 8:1–9:1, in The Apostolic Fathers: Greek Texts and English Translations, ed. and trans. Michael W. Holmes, 3rd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007), 255, 257.
How did Paul expect the congregation to treat its leaders? Unlike some other early Christians, he does not ask the congregation to obey its leaders (see Heb 13:17). Instead, he asks them to “know” (oida) their leaders, a word that the NABRE translates as respect. What does this mean? The Thessalonian church was small and had existed only for a short time, so it could hardly mean that they should “get to know” their leaders. Paul sometimes uses the language of knowing to indicate respect (e.g., 1 Cor 16:18), but these passages use a different Greek word. Fortunately, Ignatius of Antioch provides us with a close parallel to what Paul says here, using “know” to refer to honoring God and the bishop (see sidebar, “St. Ignatius of Antioch on Respect for Leaders,” above). “Knowing” in this case would mean something like “acknowledging” them with appropriate honor or respect (see 2 Thess 1:8). Theodoret of Cyrus, an ancient Greek interpreter of Paul, summarizes this passage accordingly: “It is right for all of you to consider your teachers worthy of honor.”8
Paul also asks the congregation to esteem these leaders. Unfortunately, the NABRE translation of this verse (show esteem for them with special love on account of their work) leaves much to be desired: what exactly is “special love?” The NRSV is more satisfactory: “Esteem them very highly in love because of their work.” Paul wants the congregation to hold these leaders in high regard because their efforts make the life of the Thessalonian church possible. St. John Chrysostom compares this love to the affection that one should have for the person who introduced you to your spouse; the gratitude is in proportion to the importance of the work.9 Paul also asks the congregation to be at peace among yourselves. This does not necessarily imply that he thought there was a problem, but Paul would have known very well that disputes could easily arise in the future. Some of the most reliable ancient manuscripts read, “Be at peace among them.” If this is what Paul wrote, then the point would be to forestall conflict with the leaders of the congregation.
Short Exhortations (5:14–22)
14We urge you, brothers, admonish the idle, cheer the fainthearted, support the weak, be patient with all. 15See that no one returns evil for evil; rather, always seek what is good [both] for each other and for all. 16Rejoice always. 17Pray without ceasing. 18In all circumstances give thanks, for this is the will of God for you in Christ Jesus. 19Do not quench the Spirit. 20Do not despise prophetic utterances. 21Test everything; retain what is good. 22Refrain from every kind of evil.
Lectionary: 1 Thess 5:16–24; Third Sunday of Advent (Year C)
[5:14]
As the letter draws to a close, Paul gives a series of final, rapid-fire instructions. Some interpreters since John Chrysostom have thought that in verse 14 Paul is giving special instructions to the leaders. He just described leaders as those “who admonish you” (5:12), and here he says, We urge you, brothers, admonish the idle. Though Paul surely expected the leaders to be prominent among those admonishing, these instructions are probably addressed to the whole church. There is no signal in the text that would indicate a restricted audience, and the exhortations that follow in 5:15–22 certainly apply to everyone. St. Caesarius of Arles rightly concludes that in this passage the “Apostle also preaches not only to the clergy but to the laity.”10 The word translated as “idle” (ataktos) usually means “disorderly,” and is often used to describe unorganized troops. The NABRE, following an old custom among English translations, overinterprets this word, assuming that it refers to a specific kind of disorder: refusal to work. Lazy disorder is clearly a problem in 2 Thessalonians (3:6–10), and in the present letter Paul does remind the congregation of the importance of work (4:11), but it is not obvious that this is what Paul is talking about here. A more cautious approach is to leave open the possibility that Paul is concerned about other sorts of disorder as well. Paul wants the congregation to reach out to the disorderly, the fainthearted, and the weak. Paul’s concern for these groups makes a great deal of sense given what we already know about the congregation from chapter 4. We know that there were Christians in Thessalonica who were struggling to refrain from fornication (4:3–8), and that some of them were grieving the loss of some of their number (4:13–18). It is certain, therefore, that there was plenty of disorder and faintheartedness to admonish and encourage.
[5:15]
The members of the Thessalonian congregation are to correct and encourage one another, but it is inevitable that they will sometimes wrong one another, unintentionally or otherwise. When this happens, they must refuse to repay evil for evil. The Old Testament command of “eye for eye” (e.g., Exod 21:23–24) was designed to limit retaliation by forbidding disproportionate acts of revenge, and in the other Old Testament and noncanonical Jewish texts it is sometimes said that it would be better not to seek vengeance at all (Prov 20:22). Paul teaches that it was not enough simply to refuse to get revenge. One must go a step further and always seek what is good for others in the Church and for all people outside the Church as well. This command goes beyond passivity or nonretaliation to actively pursue the benefit of others. John Chrysostom calls this way of life “the greater philosophy, not only to refrain from repaying evil with evil, but to repay evil with good.”11 Exhortations to love of enemies became common in early Christianity and are best known from the Sermon on the Mount.12
[5:16–18]
The conclusion of the letter recalls its beginning. The letter begins with Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy’s claim to “give thanks to God always for all of you, remembering you in our prayers, unceasingly” (1:2). They rejoice that the Thessalonians have endured persecution with the joy of the Holy Spirit. Now, at the letter’s end, Paul asks the grieving congregation to rejoice, pray, and give thanks at all times. Is it possible to pray and give thanks at all times? Paul uses three parallel phrases describing the perpetual nature of these activities: always (pantote), without ceasing (adialeiptōs), In all circumstances (en panti). The first and third suggest not unceasing activity but praise that is offered in all kinds of circumstances. The word adialeiptōs does suggest nonstop behavior, though there could be an element of e
xaggeration here (see the use of the same word to describe prayer in 1 Macc 12:11). Even so, prayer that is more or less unceasing is a tall order (see Reflection and Application on 5:14–22).
LIVING TRADITION
The Necessity of Forgiveness and Love of Enemies
Paul, without further explanation, asks the Thessalonians to return evil with good. Two main rationales for refusing vengeance appear elsewhere in the Pauline Letters and in the broader biblical tradition. The first is that vengeance belongs to God alone (Prov 20:22; 24:29). Humans are not able to deal out judgment with fairness and must leave this to the true judge. As Paul puts it in Romans, “Beloved, do not look for revenge but leave room for the wrath; for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord’” (12:19, citing Deut 32:35). The second rationale is summed up in Eph 4:32: “Be kind to one another, compassionate, forgiving one another as God has forgiven you in Christ.” In other words, God’s people ought to show others the same mercy that God showed them. The Our Father links God’s offer of forgiveness to our forgiveness of others (Matt 6:12, 14; see also Mark 11:25), and the parable of the unforgiving servant (Matt 18:23–35) makes the same point very clear: those who have been forgiven must extend the same forgiveness to others or else face divine judgment. Since God is merciful, God’s people must love their enemies (Luke 6:35–36). In the second century, Polycarp told the church in Philippi that God would raise them from the dead if they “love what Jesus loved” by forgiving and refusing to repay “evil for evil” (To the Philippians 2.2–3). In the second century, Acts of John 81 says that one must not repay evil for evil.
First and Second Thessalonians Page 16