At times, Greek and Roman philosophers turned to the subject of friendship as a moral category. Aristotle, Cicero, Seneca, and Plutarch gave considerable thought to the nature of true friendship and to the relationship between it and the virtues. In this brief reflection, I would like to point out a few points made by the 1st/2nd century philosopher and writer, Plutarch, in his essay, ‘On Abundance of Friends.’ Some of his comments offer a way to compare and contrast his statements with our understanding of the church.
The question to consider is, 'How does thinking about the church as a place for forming and practicing friendship expand our understanding of the church?' Plutarch's comments will challenge a shallow view of 'friendship,' such as we have with Facebook 'friends.' The Covid pandemic has shut down fellowshipping together, challenging our understanding of the church as primarily a worship service with programmes and some light fellowship around these. Plutarch's comments also address this problem. Yet Paul's understanding of the church calls for even a higher bar of relationships than Plutarch's concern for more depth to friendship. Paul uses the language of intimate friendship for the church, but he also uses the language of family. Especially, however, Paul's understanding of church relationships and community are always and essentially in Christ. These initial comments should orient the reader to the following engagement with Plutarch.
Not Many Friends
Plutarch's main point is that true friendship precludes having many friends. He says,
But among many
other things what stands chiefly in the way of getting a friend is the desire
for many friends…’ (II).[1]
As he concludes his essay, Plutarch
restates his point:
… the soul
suitable for many friendships must be impressionable, and versatile, and
pliant, and changeable. But friendship requires a steady constant and
unchangeable character, a person that is uniform in his intimacy. And so a
constant friend is a thing rare and hard to find (IX).
Rather, he avers, friendship comes in
pairs. That is, one hears of celebrated
friendships between two people, not a group.
Choosing Your Friends Carefully
A corollary of this point is that one
should not fall into friendship but choose friends carefully. Plutarch says,
We ought not,
therefore, lightly to welcome or strike up an intimate friendship with any
chance comers, or love those who attach themselves to us, but attach ourselves
to those who are worthy of our friendship (IV).
The argument does make good sense and is
the sort of advice to offer young people.
One might also apply this to the broken friendship in the betrayal of
Jesus by Judas, and Plutarch does discuss the painful ending of a friendship
too quickly formed. Yet the story of
Judas among Jesus’ intimate disciples might also alert us to the problem in
Plutarch’s advice. The formation of
friendships involves vulnerability and, as a matter of fact, disappointment and
pain. This vulnerability points to one
aspect of ecclesiology: the church functions as a cauldron in which intimidate friendships
might be formed among people who fellowship, worship, and work together. This more ‘process’ notion of friendship must
be willing to accept that there will be failed friendships, even betrayals.
Three Components of Friendship
Just what goes into the cauldron for the
formation of friendship? From the following
two overlapping quotations, Plutarch identifies three components of friendship:
What then is the
purchase-money of friendship? Benevolence and complaisance conjoined with
virtue, and yet nature has nothing more rare than these (II).
And since true
friendship has three main requirements, virtue, as a thing good; and
familiarity, as a thing pleasant; and use, as a thing serviceable; for we ought
to choose a friend with judgement, and rejoice in his company, and make use of
him in need… (III).
We might restate the point. Friendship has to do with the formation and
support in one another of common virtues, with the bond of fellowship, and with
mutual care and concern. This point from
Plutarch is also applicable to considerations about the church. Some, for example, wish to focus on the Christian
community as a friendship bond among diverse persons. This is certainly a key characteristic of the
church in the New Testament, as Paul points out in Galatians 3.28; 1
Corinthians 12.13; and Colossians 3.11.
This is, however, not a celebration of diversity but a celebration of
unity despite diversity. The emphasis is
on the unity, and that unity is found in Christ. Thus, the New Testament does not celebrate
diversity in community but unity in Christ.
With Plutarch, Paul would agree
on the importance of friends having common virtues. This applies to the friendships formed in the
church. There is no room for friendship
understood as something separable from common virtues—no ‘walking together’ of
people who disagree over matters of virtue.
This is a regular point in Paul’s writings, and the Corinthian
correspondence stands as an example of the importance of having clear lines
such that believers are not ‘unequally yoked with unbelievers’ (2 Corinthians
6.14) and do not tolerate egregious sin as a mark of love and grace but rather
expel the immoral person (1 Corinthians 5).
Plutarch’s point about friends
having mutual care and concern for one another is also a feature of Paul’s
letters. First, there is a common labor that
builds bonds of friendship: Paul begins the letter of Philippians by noting the
church’s partnership in the Gospel—their labor towards the same evangelistic
ends (1.5). Second, this leads to mutual
care and concern between Paul and the Philippian believers. They are partakers with Paul in grace, in his
imprisonment, in his defense and confirmation of the Gospel, and this has the effect
of binding them together more firmly in the mutual affection of Christ Jesus
(1.7-8). This mutual care and concern is
very practical. Paul sends Timothy back
to the church when he cannot visit.
Timothy is ‘genuinely concerned for your welfare’ (2.20). The church has sent along Epaphroditus to be
with Paul and minister to his needs and do the work of Christ (2.25, 30). Such reflections on Paul’s letters could be
greatly expanded. The point is that, as
with Plutarch, friendship requires agreement about virtues, intimate
fellowship, and a relationship of mutual care and concern. In the church, people fall out over
disagreements about Christian virtue, their bond of fellowship can fail, and
they may settle for common worship and not be more deeply formed in friendship
by mutual care and concern. What Paul
would insist in this is that friendship in the church, koinonia, must be fellowship in
Christ. Common virtues, the nature
of fellowship, and the activity and care of the church’s members are defined by
Christ, our relationship with Christ and who He is.
Conclusion
In comparing Plutarch's philosophical reflection on friendship to what Paul says about intimate relationships in the church, we see how important it was for Paul to move to a theology of friendship. That is, relationships were understood and practiced as 'in Christ' relationships. This overlaps at points with Plutarch's emphases about friendship--even in ways that challenge our practices in the church--but Plutarch's views ultimately fall short of what Paul expected from believers. While reminding us in an age of Facebook and Covid of the importance of true friendship, Plutarch's thoughts need to be expanded by asking at every point, 'And what does it mean to understand this aspect of friendship as in Christ?' In a cultural context that celebrates diversity as a virtue, we need to respond that the Christian virtue is unity in Christ, not our differences in some sort of community of toleration and inclusion. Diversity, toleration, and inclusion are not absolute virtues but are always to be understood as values that need to be considered in Christ. Plutarch helps us to think more deeply about the church as a cauldron for the formation of intimate friendship, but Paul helps us to gain an ecclesiology that understands Christian fellowship as in Christ friendship and family. Therein lies a worthy challenge for our practice of church.
[1] Plutarch, Plutarch’s Morals, Vol. 1, trans. Simon
Ford (Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1878).
Comments