300 philip l. tite
imitated.26 Ps.-Paul is the ideal model for the laodicean Christians, for, as
he claims in v. 7, he embodies the very soteriological and eschatological
benefit that the recipients are exhorted to continue striving towards (v. 3)
and for which the co-workers (v. 4) serve as Ps.-Paul’s means of extending
that benefit to the recipients.27 the recipients, furthermore, are presented
as essential collaborators with the holy spirit for ensuring Ps.-Paul’s eter-
nal salvation (quod ipsum factum orationibus vestries et administrante
spiritu sancto). thus, the recipients’ prayers in v. 7 situate the laodicean
Christians within a context of not only mutual suffering with the apostle
but also mutual benefit to each other. Consequently, a strong social cohe-
sion underlies Ps.-Paul’s relationship with the recipients, building on the
interdependency of their prayers for each other (i.e., v. 7 nicely parallels
per omnem orationem meam in v. 3).28 By intersecting Ps.-Paul’s suffer-
ing (perhaps even with an allusion to potential martyrdom, vv. 7b and 8)
with that of the laodicean church, the author encourages the recipients
to not abandon their faith when threatened or challenged. their mutual
suffering, furthermore, is due to their being on the correct path (e.g., the
author refers to his suffering being “in Christ”; cf. the “true gospel” back
26 on the importance of imitation in the Pauline tradition, especially 1 thessalonians,
see lyons, Pauline Autobiography; lyons, “Modeling the holiness ethos: a study Based on
first thessalonians,” Wesleyan Theological Journal 30.1 (1995): 187–211. see also abraham J.
Malherbe, “exhortation in first thessalonians,” NovT 25 (1983): 238–56, especially 240–41,
who recognizes that Paul’s call for imitation in 1 thess 2:1–8 is established by an antitheti-
cal construction. emulation as a rhetorical device also is prominent in the Cynic tradition
(e.g., Ps.-Crates, Epistle 19, which builds on positive and negative exempla). see donald r.
dudley, A History of Cynicism: From Diogenes to the 6th Century AD (2nd ed.; ed. Miriam
griffin; london: Methuen, 2003 [1937]), 182–83, 198–201 (especially in regard to heracles
as a legendary figure to be emulated).
27 Magee, “exalted apostle,” 128, claims that laodiceans weakens the “rich theology of
suffering for the sake of the church” in Philippians, resulting in a simple elevation of Paul’s
suffering in laodiceans but without “[t]he picture of Paul rejoicing in publicly suffering for
Christ... as a badge of honor. thus in Ep. Lao. 6 the original evangelistic context has been
bypassed in favor of an elevation of the nobility of Paul’s suffering.” By privileging canoni-
cal Philippians as interpretive key, as well as ignoring the integrated texture of laodiceans
on its own merits, Magee has missed the hortatory function of Pauline suffering in laod-
iceans (“exalted apostle,” 128–30) and has thus misunderstood the function of suffering
as a theme within this letter. as my discussion demonstrates, Ps.-Paul’s suffering serves a
central function as moral exemplar for the letter body.
28 these two mentions of prayers (vv. 3, 7) not only underscore the mutual suffering
and benefit that each offers, but, by inverting the role of the one who offers prayers and
the subject of those prayers, the author establishes a type of spiritual reciprocity. the end
goal for each set of prayers is eternal life (for Ps.-Paul, possibly within the context of mar-
tyrdom; for the laodiceans, on the day of judgment). such reciprocal benefit by means of
prayers discursively reinforce the philophronetic tone of the letter while, simultaneously,
isolating other Christian teachers as outside this well established (and efficient) system
of reciprocity.