First and Second Thessalonians

by Nathan Eubank

2 Thessalonians 3:10 among Monks and Ascetics

  In the ancient Church 2 Thess 3:10 was often cited to show that it is necessary for those who have devoted themselves to prayer as monks or ascetics to work with their own hands rather than relying on the generosity of others. St. Athanasius (ca. 296–373), bishop of Alexandria, writes:

  [St. Antony] went through the first stages of the ascetical life, carefully weighing his resolution not to return to his inheritance and not to recall his kindred, and directing his whole desire and all his energies to strengthening his spiritual practices. He labored with his hands, therefore, because he heard: “If any man will not work, neither let him eat,” spending a part for bread and a part on the needy. He prayed continually, because he had learned that one must pray in secret without ceasing.a

  St. Basil the Great (ca. 329–379), bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, writes:

  [He should] not make a display of dress or shoes, as this is indeed idle ostentation. He should use inexpensive clothing for his bodily needs. He should not spend anything beyond actual necessity or for mere extravagance. This is an abuse. He should not seek honor nor lay claim to the first place. Each one ought to prefer all others to himself. He ought not to be disobedient. He who is idle, although able to work, should not eat; moreover, he who is occupied with some task which is rightly intended for the glory of Christ ought to hold himself to a pursuit of work within his ability. Each one, with the approval of his superiors, should, with reason and certainty, so do everything, even to eating and drinking, as serving the glory of God.b

  a. “Life of St. Anthony,” in Early Christian Biographies, trans. Mary Emily Keenan, FC 15 (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1952), 137.

  b. Letters: 1–185, trans. Agnes Clare Way, FC 13 (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1951), 58.

  [3:13]

  With the words But you, brothers, Paul shifts from addressing the idle to addressing the congregation as a whole. The idle are to work to earn their own bread, and the rest of the congregation is to remain steadfast in doing good. The NABRE states that they should not be remiss, but a better translation would be “Do not weary in doing good.”12 “Doing good” (kalopoieō) could apply to any good deed, but this language often refers to material generosity, and the context suggests that this is the case here. Those who refuse to work are rebuked and told that they should not eat if they will not work, but the rest of the church should not take this as an excuse to stop doing good for others. As Abraham Malherbe puts it, Paul is “warning against overinterpretation of his directions.”13 This is not a matter of balancing contrary principles (self-reliance and generosity). Rather, the entire congregation is urged to increase in their care for others: the idle, by no longer making themselves a burden, and the rest, by continuing to do good deeds.

  [3:14–15]

  After so many attempts to convince the idle to start working, Paul realistically expects continued problems and gives the congregation instructions on how to handle those who do not obey. Verse 6 mentioned the need to avoid the idle, and here we find expanded instructions: they are not to associate with such people so that such people will become ashamed. The practice of excluding unrepentant sinners is well attested in early Christianity.14 This is a drastic measure that could be devastating to members of what was already a beleaguered minority. The purpose of this action is not to destroy them, however, as verse 15 makes clear. The excluded members are to be regarded not as enemies but as “brothers,” a label that indicates that the purpose of their exclusion is their reintegration. This also implies that those who continue to refuse to work will still be treated with respect, as one would a brother or sister. “He who admonishes his brother,” Chrysostom comments, “doesn’t do it in public; he doesn’t make a show of the rebuke. Instead, he does it privately and with much care and sorrow.”15

  Reflection and Application (3:6–15)

  The instruction Paul gives the Thessalonians about the necessity of work in 3:10 (“If anyone was unwilling to work, neither should that one eat”) has become a well-known proverb. In the ancient Church it became a favorite argument against monks who refused to work (see sidebar, “2 Thessalonians 3:10 among Monks and Ascetics,” p. 187); it has often been cited to show that trusting God with the future does not give license to laziness but rather provides freedom from worry.16 It was even cited in Soviet propaganda as a reminder that every citizen must work, though of course it was scrubbed clean of any mention of St. Paul.17 Unfortunately, however, 2 Thess 3:10 is often cited by those who wish to argue against helping the needy, an idea that directly contradicts Paul’s own teaching. This abuse of the Pauline proverb began already in antiquity, as St. John Chrysostom’s sermons show. Chrysostom chides those in his congregation who quote the verse and start nosing into beggars’ affairs to make sure they really need help.18 In our own time, American politicians sometimes appeal to 2 Thess 3:10 as justification for cutting aid to the poor.19 During the 2012 presidential election season I attended a public lecture given by a friend on principles for voting. The lecture, a distillation of the main points from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ document “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship,” mentioned care for the poor and vulnerable among the goals of any Catholic citizen. After the lecture one man raised his hand and objected, “In the Old Testament it says, ‘If a man doesn’t work, he shouldn’t eat.’” He was mistaken about the source of the proverb, but his assumption that it teaches us not to help the poor is all too common.

  The fact that so many have seen 2 Thess 3:10 as a good justification for neglecting the needy shows that this interpretation of the verse has a certain plausibility to it. It is worth taking the time, therefore, to show why this interpretation is wrong. Here is a list of arguments, beginning with general observations and gradually working down to specific points from 2 Thessalonians.

  1. Those who cite this verse presumably believe that the Bible has something to say about how to live. If this is the case, one wonders why this particular verse should be given so much weight when there are so many other passages enjoining liberality. For example,

  Give to the one who asks of you, and do not turn your back on one who wants to borrow. (Matt 5:42)

  Religion that is pure and undefiled before God and the Father is this: to care for orphans and widows in their affliction. (James 1:27)

  Is this not, rather, the fast that I choose:

  releasing those bound unjustly,

  untying the thongs of the yoke;

  Setting free the oppressed,

  breaking off every yoke?

  Is it not sharing your bread with the hungry,

  bringing the afflicted and the homeless into your house;

  Clothing the naked when you see them,

  and not turning your back on your own flesh? (Isa 58:6–7)

  There are many, many more similar examples.20 Second Thessalonians 3:10 should not be used as an excuse to ignore the rest of the Bible.

  2. Those who cite this verse presumably believe that Paul in particular has something to say about how they should live their lives. If this is the case, then it might be helpful to check one’s interpretation by what Paul says about the poor on other occasions. To take one particularly clear example, see 2 Cor 9:13:

  Through the testing of this ministry [i.e., the collection to aid poor Christians in Jerusalem] you glorify God by your obedience to the confession of the gospel of Christ and by the generosity of your sharing with them and with all others. (my translation)

  For Paul, generosity to all people brings glory to God and shows obedience to the gospel.

  3. Those who refuse to help the needy because of 2 Thess 3:10 are acting on the assumption that the person asking for help is in need because he or she is lazy or dishonest. Most of the time, however, we do not have the slightest idea what led a person to the point of asking others for help. John Chrysostom unmasks the lack of charity in this assumption:

 
; You say the beggar is an impostor. Man, what are you saying? For the sake of a single loaf of bread or a garment you call him an impostor? Then they say the beggar will sell it immediately. Do you manage all your affairs well? Is laziness the only reason people fall into poverty? Is no one poor from shipwreck? From lawsuits? From robbery? From dangers? From illnesses? From other problems? But if we hear someone mourning these things and crying out, naked, and looking to heaven with long hair and ragged clothes, immediately we call him impostor, cheat, liar! Are you not ashamed? Whom do you call an impostor?21

  More often than not we do not know why a person is in need, and it is cruel to assume the worst. Chrysostom frequently preaches against those who are overly inquisitive about the goodness of those to whom they give. Seeking to give only to those we deem worthy is to “take away the greater part of almsgiving, and will in time destroy the thing itself. And yet that is almsgiving: it is for the sinners, it is for the guilty. For this is almsgiving [eleēmosynē], to have mercy [eleeō] not on the successful, but on those who have done wrong!”22 Moreover, most of us, if we are honest, will admit that we often waste money on ourselves. Why not let someone else waste our money once in a while?23

  4. Paul’s command to work in 2 Thess 3:10 is directed primarily toward Christians in Thessalonica who are refusing to work, not to hardworking people who need to stop giving to beggars. These idlers were able-bodied Christians who appear to be living off the generosity of others. Paul wants them to get to work. He is not saying that aid should be withheld from beggars or other people in need. This point bears repeating: Paul is not saying what many people today seem to think he is saying. The best interpretation of verse 10 is Paul’s restatement of the point in verse 12: Lazy people, start working! Those who pass judgment on the industriousness of strangers miss Paul’s point entirely.

  5. There is good reason to believe that the laziness in Thessalonica was made possible by the mutual support of the Christians there: they are eating other people’s bread.24 Paradoxically, then, the favorite verse of those who oppose charity actually attests to the early Christian habit of sharing possessions. Moreover, Paul wanted them to keep helping one another even after some had taken advantage, as verse 13 shows. Indeed, for Chrysostom, the key to proper interpretation of this passage is to hold verse 13 together with verses 10–12:

  I say these things not to encourage idleness. No way! Rather, I earnestly wish all to work, for idleness teaches every evil. But I exhort you not to be unmerciful or cruel, since Paul . . . when he said “If any will not work, neither should he eat,” didn’t stop there but added, “But you, do not be weary in doing good.” You say, “No, these statements contradict each other. For if he commanded them not to eat, how can he urge us to give?” . . . But these commands complement each other. For if you are ready to be merciful, the poor man will be set free from his idleness, and you will be set free from your cruelty.25

  The apparent tension between verse 10 and the many biblical exhortations to generosity vanishes upon closer examination. In both cases Christians are to be motivated by love of neighbor, the love that works hard not to burden others (1 Thess 2:9; 2 Thess 3:8), and the love that shows mercy to those in need.

  6. Contrary to what non-Catholics sometimes imagine, the Magisterium very rarely dictates how particular passages of Scripture should be interpreted. This passage is an exception. In his 1931 encyclical Quadragesimo Anno, Pope Pius XI warns against “the unwarranted and unmerited appeal made by some to the Apostle,” which twists this verse to argue that only the gainfully employed should have access to money, food, and housing.26 It is wrong to use this verse as a justification for ignoring the needy because

  the Apostle is passing judgment on those who are unwilling to work, although they can and ought to, and he admonishes us that we ought diligently to use our time and energies of body, and mind and not be a burden to others when we can provide for ourselves. But the Apostle in no wise teaches that labor is the sole title to a living or an income.27

  Pope Pius confirms what exegesis and the testimony of the Fathers has already shown: Paul directs the lazy to work, and everyone else to be generous.

  Prayer for Peace and the Lord’s Presence (3:16)

  16May the Lord of peace himself give you peace at all times and in every way. The Lord be with all of you.

  [3:16]

  Prayers for peace and the presence of the Lord are common in the biblical tradition (Num 6:26; Ruth 2:4) and in Paul’s Letters (Rom 15:33). The prayer for peace at all times and in every way reflects the turmoil currently experienced by the Thessalonian church. They were suffering persecution and significant theological confusion and fear, as well as the obstinate refusal of some to follow Paul’s teaching about work. In the immediately preceding lines it became apparent that the congregation would soon experience painful tensions as they disciplined the members of the church who refused to work. Paul thus prays that they would have peace on all of these fronts. There is some debate regarding whether this prayer is the conclusion of what came before, as the NABRE’s paragraph break suggests, or is the beginning of the end of the letter.28 The very fact that we are unable to decide may indicate that the prayer helps to transition from the difficult issue discussed in 3:6–15 to the close of the letter.

  Final Greeting (3:17–18)

  17This greeting is in my own hand, Paul’s. This is the sign in every letter; this is how I write. 18The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with all of you.

  [3:17]

  Like many other ancient letter writers, Paul dictated his letters to an †amanuensis. At the end of Romans, Paul’s amanuensis reveals himself and offers greetings: “I, Tertius, the writer of this letter, greet you in the Lord” (16:22). Though Paul “wrote” Romans in the sense that he composed the letter, Tertius was responsible for transcribing what Paul said. Sometimes letter writers would take the stylus from the amanuensis and write a few lines in their own hand. This could function simply as a personal touch, similar to handwriting a note or signature at the bottom of a typed letter, or as a mark of authenticity.29 Letter writers did not always draw attention to the change of handwriting, since it was obvious to the recipients. On some occasions, however, Paul does draw explicit attention to the fact that he has taken the pen, perhaps in order to make his presence felt or to ensure that those who heard the letter read aloud in the church would be aware of the shift (see 1 Cor 16:21; Gal 6:11; Col 4:18; Philem 1:19). On this occasion, after noting that This greeting is in my own hand, he adds: This is the sign in every letter; this is how I write. Paul does not end every letter with these words, so the “sign” cannot be the words of the greeting. Rather, the sign is probably the change of handwriting.30 Why does Paul draw attention to his handwriting in this way? Most modern commentators would concur with Jerome, who said that Paul wanted “to remove suspicion that the entire epistle he sent was a forgery.”31 The possible existence of false letters was mentioned in 2:2. By drawing attention to his handwriting Paul offers them a guard against any possible future forged letters. The use of the singular also shows that Paul is the principal author, though the letter is from Silvanus and Timothy as well (see commentary on 2 Thess 1:1).

  [3:18]

  It was Paul’s custom to close his letters with a prayer for the gift or grace of Jesus to be with the recipients. It is easy to read too much into small details in Paul’s Letters, but the repetition of all of you may be significant here, following closely on the prayer for the Lord to be with “all of you” in verse 16 (see 1 Cor 16:24; 2 Cor 13:13). Difficult times are ahead, including the probable exercise of ecclesial discipline in admonishing the idle members. It is fitting, therefore, that Paul stresses that he prays for the grace of Jesus to be with all of them, including those who are about to be disciplined for being idle busybodies.

  1. Abraham J. Malherbe, The Letters to the Thessalonians: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, AB 32B (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2000), 444.

  2.
Interpretatio in xiv epistulas sancti Pauli (PG 82:669). Gordon Fee (The First and Second Letters to the Thessalonians, NICNT [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009], 311) labels 3:1–5 a captatio benevolentiae, a rhetorical technique that aims to charm listeners in order to persuade them.

  3. Homiliae in epistulam ii ad Thessalonicenses (PG 62:493 [my translation]).

  4. Béda Rigaux, Saint Paul: Les Épitres aux Thessaloniciens, EBib (Paris: Lecoffre, 1956), 700.

  5. See also 1 Thess 5:14.

  6. Those who are not persuaded that Paul wrote the letter will read this section as an expansion of 1 Thess 2:9–12 and 4:9–12 by a later writer.

  7. E.g., the overconfident footnote in the NABRE: Paul admonishes “them about a specific problem in their community that has grown out of the intense eschatological speculation, namely, not to work but to become instead disorderly busybodies (2 Thes 3:6–15).”

  8. On the importance of sharing possessions in Paul’s Letters, see Nathan Eubank, “Justice Endures Forever: Paul’s Grammar of Generosity,” JSPHL 5, no. 2 (2015): 169–87.

  9. E.g., Didache 1.5 and Shepherd of Hermas Mandate 2.5 warn against accepting alms without need. See various related suggestions in Victor Paul Furnish, 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians, ANTC (Nashville: Abingdon, 2007), 177.

  10. The NABRE places “our” in brackets because it is missing from some important early manuscripts.

  11. The third-person imperative can be used as a functional second-person imperative (1 Tim 4:12). In this case the rest of the congregation is implicitly led to help reinforce Paul’s injunction. But the command is given most directly to “such people” who do not work.