Having received an e-mail reply from a student, I acknowledged receipt and proceeded, unintentionally, to bypass it in a process. (Bad professor!) Later, I wrote to this student—and three others who had not responded, as requested, three weeks prior. The first student respectfully, diplomatically dealt with my missive to make sure I had indeed received the earlier response. I apologized for having missed the first mail. (Apologies can be so important. Better professor.)
Some of us are better at face-to-face communications than email or texting (or handwriting a letter or note!), and vice versa, but it’s a given that some communications aren’t dealt with appropriately. I had received the student’s initial communication but had not aptly dealt with it. She did, on the other hand, adeptly deal with my missive, which was out of place in her case.
I regularly receive communiques from the school district, from workplaces, and other entities. Although they purport to be important, many are not even useful or welcome. Some “important notifications” turn out, practically speaking, to be unimportant, despite the requirement to send them.¹ Holiday and birthday greetings from insurance companies and dental offices are just weird. It’s all part of living in the Information Age, I suppose. Some mass e-mails even come from “no-reply” addresses—contributing to a general feeling of isolation and insignificance in the world. (Perhaps this observation arises because I’m an introvert with a certain personality type. Perhaps it’s also on target.)
The school’s notices seem about 90% non-applicable. A quick assessment of texts received in the last couple of months indicates a lower percentage—maybe 50-70%—yet the subjective sense is important here, too: if it seems to me that 90% of texts are not applicable, I am less likely actually to pay attention to the significant ones. About half of these texts seem to be about the frequent combining of two bus routes, presumably because there are not enough bus drivers.² Most of the rest are about regular trend reports (not interested) or sports events (not applicable at this time). Then, when a real need for news occurs—say, about parent-teacher conferences or missing assignments or even reports of school violence—the news doesn’t come as quickly as I’d prefer, and sometimes, not at all. The balance seems off, and the validity of some communications, questionable. How do I respond to the unimportant school communications? Most of the time, with inner annoyance and a quick swipe of the hand. Every now and then, I’ll attempt to make a difference in some respectful way. Sometimes, I just grunt or harrumph.
Scriptural communications are “received,” too, although the communication is not direct. How do we deal with those things? The imperatival communiques in the New Testament (“missives” such as epistles and letters, and other passages) ought to be understood first in their respective literary and historical contexts, without leaping to assume the requests for response are directly applicable. We might wonder what the first hearers/readers did with communications such as these:
“. . . you should follow the directions I gave to the churches in Galatia. . . . each of you should set aside and save something from your surplus in proportion to what you have, so that no collections will have to be made when I arrive. (1 Cor 16:1-2)”
“Therefore, as you go, disciple people in all nations. . . .” (Matt 28:19)
“Keep on rejoicing in the Lord at all times. I will say it again: Keep on rejoicing! Let your gracious attitude be known to all people.” (Philippians 4)
“Each of you must know how to control his own body in a holy and honorable manner . . . .” (1Thess 4)
“Go and do what he did.” (Luke 10)
All passages quoted, context-less on purpose, from the International Standard Version, © 1996-2011
Now: what do (should) we do with such (sampled) exhortations? How should we “deal” with these communications? Careful. We mustn’t assume the response should be the same as in the 1st century. Of course a full understanding of the context will be of assistance here. The Luke quotation has been humorously appended to “Judas went out and hanged himself” in order to make the point, but context is no matter to be laughed off. The 1Corinthians passage is well known but not often pondered in its historical context and the resultant, possible applications in our day.³
Romans 10 contains no imperatives at all, so I didn’t quote from there, yet many Christ-followers seem to insist on specific understandings of specifics within that chapter. Romans 12, on the other hand, has six imperatives, but it’s not necessarily clear how to attend to them. In order to interpret and apply the Philippians passage above, (1) one ought to know something of the conceptual center of the letter in chapter 2, and (2) one should also be familiar with the immediately preceding mention of two women Euodia and Syntyche, along with the notion of partnership in spreading the good news. (Aside: Philemon also makes a point of such partnership, but the similarity is to be explored, not assumed identical.) The 1Thess quote is situated in a context of behavioral response to the Christ-message, but the knowledge that sexual purity is a feature of the specific context will help in interpreting this exhortation.
So what do we do with the communications in the New Testament? Not necessarily the same things as the early Christ-followers did. On the other hand, it’s far too easy to be lazy, not responding in any sense at all.
¹ Financial, insurance, and medical enterprises are regulated so much that employees in these arenas go comatose. The “important communications” that check regulatory “boxes” have a stultifying effect, leading to overload—and the inability to dig down to the truly significant.
² One might query whether two routes are needed in the first place. Perhaps further communication could occur.
³ Misapplication of this text is rampant. See these posts for more: