To love a brother who is kind and pleasant in return—this is a trivial matter. This is the way the world also loves. “The crowd judges friendships by their usefulness” (Cicero, De finibus). Accordingly, John does not say: “Let us love those who are saintly, agreeable, and rich.” No, he says: “Let us love the brethren,” in such a way that then nothing but the brotherhood is loved and regarded; for a brother is loved out of a sense of duty, not because of usefulness and not because of praise. All the gifts we have should serve those who do not have them. For example, he who is learned should serve him who is not learned; he who is rich should serve him who is poor; he who is sensible should serve him who is foolish, etc. it is easy to love Paul and other apostles. They serve you even after their death. But to love those who are weak, troublesome, and unlearned—this indeed is to love truly. Otherwise there is no brotherhood, but there is carnality. In short, it is the duty of Christians to serve, not for their own advantage but for the advantage of the brethren.Lectures on 1 John (LW 30), comment on 3.18.
Luther paints an all too familiar picture of how twisted our friendships can get. Instead of being opportunities to serve, our relationships can so quickly become mere opportunities to get ahead. "Friends with benefits" one might say. But while genuine friendship can turn this way, even more abhorrent is the picking of friends for reasons of advantage straight from the outset. I have seen this, and it ain't pretty.
Here's to friendship instead of carnality.
4 comments:
Aristotle calls these friendships of utility and argues that they have their place. I mean, without the kind of deviousness you imply here, isn't it ok to have business contacts? Or to be friends with you teacher in a different way than you would be with your mate because there is common task which you share?
I think Luther has in mind relationships which are characterised by their self-centredness. This isn't to say that common tasks are not part of creating relationships, or that the benefits of being friends with someone is not something to recognise or enjoy. But it's the stripping of someone else for your own gain which is something truely awful, and fundamentaly against the Biblical concept of self-giving which is meant characterise our relationships.
Business contacts are fine, but as Christian business-people surely we will network in a way which is different to others?
What struck me reading Luther's words is how difficult they are. It's Romans 7 all over again - I want to love the unlovely, but then find myself hanging out with people who are like me. I keep on thinking of Brian when he's gone a few weeks without a bath.
I discovered this blog from Craig's blog at These Infinite Spaces - it's good to have friends with blogs in high places, isn't it?
I must admit that even though I'm just starting my career as a solicitor and I apparently I should be "networking", I'm really reticent about doing so because I really detest the superficial nature of the process. I tend to want to make friends because of my inherent interest in the person, rather than because of what they can do with me. All this smoozing and sucking-up really tends to make me nauseous. But then I discover that I'm been being a hypocrite because lately I have been shamelessly looking for contacts to attract to my blog and people to advertise what I write!
I guess what came to mind when I read your post was James 2 (but particularly verses 1-4). I don't think that there is anything intrinsically wrong with having friends in high places, but I'd like to think that we are giving equal time and energy to the marginalised, oppressed and disenfranchised in our society. For many people we are the friend in a high place and we can use our influence (even if it only giving them a warm blanket) to assist them. I think that way we can retain our integrity as Christian brothers and sisters while avoiding the malaise of middle-class Christianity.
Post a Comment