Galatians 6: Crucifixion on the Brain II

Note what we might call the "evolution" in Paul's thought right before our eyes with respect to the cross. Sometimes it simply refers to the historical event of Jesus death (5:11); sometimes it suggest a symbolic meaning of discipleship (6:12). But in many of the quoted instances above it becomes something not only that Christ faced, but that we also face. Paul has become "crucified with Christ" (the verb is sustauroo--the addition of the prefix "sun" makes it mean "together with"), and this act brings him into union with Christ in a mystical or special way. But Paul not only identifies with Christ in his death; he also crucifies desires and passions--puts them to death as much as the cross ended Jesus' earthly life. But that isn't all. So identified is he with the pain of the world and its need for salvation that it can be said to be "crucified" to him and he to it.

What is going on here with the constant barrage of crucifixion language? I think it is primarily driven by the pain Paul feels at his potential betrayal by the Galatians. They had come to faith under his ministry; they were one of the first congregations with which he formed an attachment. They were thus one of the first congregations where he could "try out" his new theology--that a person need not become a Jew before becoming a Christian. And, joy of joys, they received his message with gratitude. Paul had felt such pride in the Galatians. But then, someone from Jerusalem had come in to "check out" his work. They may have been sent by James or others to "spy" on Paul. In any case, the Galatians then got cold feet. They seemed to lose their zeal for the Pauline Gospel.

Paul was hurt, amazed, scandalized. How could they do this? He had displayed Christ right before their eyes (cf. 3:1), and now they were turning from him and from Christ. He had to make sure that the defections wouldn't go any further. How do you do this? Well, you can't force people to stop thinking new thoughts. But you can use language of pain, language that reflects not only Christ's suffering but your own suffering to get across the idea that defections were not acceptable. And he does so with such eloquence and passion that we are brought into the very heart of Paul. Crucifixion, that painful, undignified and cruel death, becomes the image that he adopts for the various activies that now are before him. He crucifies the desires (how, actually, do you do that? I don't think anyone knows); he is crucified with Christ (what, in fact, does that mean?); he somehow believes that his relationship to the world, and vice-versa, is one of mutual crucifixion (6:14).

Now that we understand how this was Paul's language and we see the reason for its use, we ask the question of how "crucifixion-language" is relevant to us in our 21st century world. We don't use images of crucifixion now in literature or popular speech; the cross hasn't been used as an instrument of execution for at least 1700 years in the West. What "relevance," then, does crucifixion language have for us? I think we are on the right track if we see it as "pain language." That is, we utter pain language whenever we become involved with someone or invested with ideas in a personal way and then things don't turn out as we desire. Pain, sometimes extreme emotional pain (sometimes physical pain also) results. When this happens we need a language to help express our pain. Crucifixion-language, which Paul uses here, is helpful for us to frame our own language of pain. We may or may not use the words of crucifixion, but Paul helps us center on words that fit the pain in our hearts in a number of circumstances--and he encourages us to find and use these words.

What would your "pain vocabulary" be today? I recently lost a friend, and I devoted three essays to describing my mixed emotions about that. Thus, a first point is that "pain vocabulary" is something that ought to be carefully cultivated in our speech and writing.

II. Bearing the Burdens

Paul is sometimes most brilliant and helpful when he dispenses ethical advice. He is especially skillful in Gal. 6:1-6. The image behind restoring a person in v. 1 is that of a physician setting a bone that has been broken. But most striking to me is the combination of potentially contradictory advice which, when you think about it, makes perfectly good sense. Paul advises the Galatians to "bear one another's burdens" and thus fulfill the law of Christ (v. 2). But then, in v. 5, he tells them that all must carry their own load. Isn't that insighful psychology? We know that we can help each other out in life, by bearing with each other. Often others don't want their problesm "solved" by us; they just want to know that someone is thinking about them, praying for them, understanding them in their struggles. Why don't they want us to "solve" their problems? Because, in most instances, each person instinctively realizes that s/he must "bear his/her own load." I may have difficulties in bringing up my children or in facing certain problems with them. Others can be helpful in sharing their experiences or even getting me to the right professionals with whom to talk, but ultimately the child stays with me and s/he and I have to work out the problems. I may be facing difficulties at work or in defining or achieving career goals. Counselors may help me get a focus on issues; friends can lend encouragement and insight. But, ultimately, I have to "bear my own load" in making and following through on decisions. Paul's awareness of the mutuality of sharing and the responsibility of the individual ought to be stressed.

Sowing and Reaping

Paul is certainly not the first author, or the first biblical author for that matter, who makes the connection between sowing and reaping. The prophet Hosea says, "Those who sow the wind will reap the whirlwind" (8:7). But Paul takes that commonplace a step further in Gal 6. He says:

"So let us not grow weary in doing what is right, for we will reap at harvest-time, if we do not give up" (6:9).

He supplements the "sowing/reaping" principle with the idea of endurance or perseverance. This idea is that there are "seasons" of life, for sowing and reaping, and that if we sow faithfully, we will eventually reap. But we flag in zeal; we become distracted with the glitter of our culture; we become discouraged when we see the enormousness of the mountain that we need to climb. Paul's advice here is salutary--that we will reap at the harvest time, if we don't give up.

I taught in higher education (college and law school) for nearly 20 years. By the end of my career teaching I was telling students that the most important thing for success in their future ventures was not their absolute brilliance or even their street-smarts. What mattered most was their ability to come back after defeats, to persevere in what they had begun, to be faithful and diligent in the work that was before them. I truly believe that to be the case in life. Paul's advice, not to grow weary in well-doing, and to expect the reaping of what we sow if we do not lose heart, is advice for the 21st century. Our "celeb-loving" culture is often enamored, even obsessed, with the idea of the glitz or seeming "magic" of the celebrity life. But, in fact, for more than 99% of people it will be through diligence and not flagging in zeal that things are accomplished. Preach Paul in this, and you will be doing your people a good turn.

Conclusion

Just to show that Paul still has "crucifixion" or "pain-language" on the brain as he closes the Epistle, he can't finish without saying:

"From now on, let no one make trouble for me; for I carry the marks of Jesus branded on my body" (6:17).

Christianity, and his understanding of it, is really a life and death issue for Paul. Most of us have lost that fervency in the 21st century, but unless we recapture the way that faith-language and experience defines our lives, we might miss not only Paul's "crucifixion" language but also his ethical advice. For Paul's ethics are rooted in the Christ who came and gave himself for all.

2744