Journal of Biblical Literature - Society of Biblical Literature

Bauman-Martin: Women on the Edge 265
that created situations of persecution in these households and occasioned the
second change in the Haustafel form mentioned above—specifically, the omission
of an address to Christian masters, the omission of addresses to parents
and children, and the lengthening of the address to wives and slaves.
It has been suggested that the author of 1 Peter did not address Christian
masters because of the Christian community’s poverty; there simply may not
have been a substantial class of Christian men wealthy enough to own slaves. 42
In addition, the need to address them would not have been as urgent because
they would not have been persecuted within their own households. The effect
of the adjustment to the code is significant in that the slaves, rather than masters,
become paradigmatic of the Christian household of faith. 43 The author of
1 Peter omitted the exhortations to children and parents because (1) children
were less likely to convert to Christianity on their own, and children would follow
their parents if the parents became Christian; and (2) he was not concerned
about the harmony of the actual physical households but was more interested
in the endurance and continuing faith of the persecuted Christians, the household
of God. 44 These household circumstances also explain why the code is
centered on slaves and women; when the paterfamilias converted, the entire
household was obligated to convert as well, but when a wife or a slave converted
alone, the order of the household was compromised. 45
Indeed, many women converted over the objection of their families, creat-
tians’ neighbors. Elliott lists ignorance (2:15), curiosity (3:15), suspicion of wrongdoing (2:12;
4:14–16), hostility (3:13–14, 16; 4:4), and slander (2:12; 3:16; 4:14; 3:3). The response on the part of
the Christians was correlative: sorrow (2:19), fear (3:14), suffering (2:19, 20; 3:14, 17; 4:1, 15, 19;
5:9, 10), (Home for the Homeless, 79–80).
42 Elliott, Home for the Homeless, 70.
43 Elliott, 1 Peter, 514. This is in contrast to the attitude in Acts (particularly the account of
Lydia and the prison guard) that masters and patresfamilias were more privileged members of the
Christian communities. Paul’s attitude toward slavery is more imprecise, as Jennifer Glancy details
in “Obstacles to Slaves’ Participation in the Corinthian Church,” JBL 117 (1998): 481–501.
44 Much of Balch’s argument rests on his interpretation of 3:8, which reads, To; de; tevlo"
pavnte" oJmovfrone", sumpaqei'", filavdelfoi, eu[splagcnoi, tapeinovfrone", which is translated in
the NRSV as “Finally, all of you, have unity of spirit, sympathy, love for one another . . . .” Balch
argues that oJmovfrone" is the author’s push for Greco-Roman–style harmony in the actual physical
households. But since in this verse the author addresses “all of you” he appears to ask that all the
Christians have unity of spirit among themselves; pavnte" cannot refer to all the members of an
unequally yoked household because the author cannot address the non-Christians. Moreover, in
the next verse he assumes that their enemies/neighbors will not be of the same spirit when he urges
the Christians not to “repay evil for evil or abuse for abuse.” So also Elliott, Home for the Homeless,
128, passim. The author’s designation of the community as the oi\ko" of God in 2:5 and 4:17
strengthens this idea that the physical household was not his focus.
45 Children would rarely have converted against their father’s wishes; and if they had perchance
converted, the blame for their conversion would have been placed on the mother or the
slave/tutor.