Mimetic Love: A Reflection on 1 Corinthians 9:16-23

There’s a popular saying out there that says “Hurt people hurt people.” It’s a helpful proverb that reminds us that people who are acting out are often acting more out of their past hurts and patterns than out of anything in the present. We see this at work everywhere from the playground to legislatures to battlefields. The fact is, whether intentionally or not, a major way we learn — how to respond to stress or danger, what is acceptable behaviour, what is desirable — is by copying what we see others do, or what others want. And more often than not, in a broken world where hurt people hurt people, this leads to rivalry and violence. This is the heart of René Girard’s mimetic theory, which posited that mimesis (a fancy word for copying), and especially mimetic rivalry, is the basic principle of human relationships and culture. In recent decades, many Christian theologians have picked up on Girard’s ideas — not out of any particular love for French philosophy, but because his thought points out something interesting in how Jesus and Paul talk about the Gospel: In a world of mimetic violence, the answer is mimetic love.

We see this principle in today’s Epistle from Paul’s First Letter to the Corinthians. After discussing about how preaching the Gospel is for him its own reward, he writes:

For though I am free with respect to all, I have made myself a slave to all, so that I might win more of them. To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though I myself am not under the law) so that I might win those under the law. To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law) so that I might win those outside the law. To the weak I became weak, so that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that I might by all means save some. I do it all for the sake of the gospel, so that I may share in its blessings. (1 Corinthians 9.19-23)

In our contemporary Western culture, becoming “all things to all people” feels a little false and manipulative. But that’s not what’s going on here. This isn’t about putting on different masks to ingratiate oneself to different types of people. It’s really about hospitality, which Christianity has always understood to be just as much about receiving as giving. What Paul is saying might make more sense if we look back to other recent Epistle readings.

In the lesson from three weeks ago, he introduced a new way of looking at ethical decisions, rejecting the legalistic binary of right and wrong, but introducing in their place two principles to guide our behaviour: the principle of growth, for self and the community (”Everything is permitted to me, but not everything is edifying.”), and the principle of genuine choice (”Everything is permitted to me, but I will not be dominated by anything.”). In so doing he demonstrated that freedom is not about being able to do whatever we want, but about being just as free to say ‘no’ as to say ‘yes’, as the situation, as love, requires.

The major point of tension in the early Church was the extent to which Jewish ceremonial Law was to be operative for Christians. In Galatians, where the specific issue was whether Gentile believers needed to be circumcised, he was adamant that the answer was to be ‘no’: Gentile Christians were not to submit to circumcision. But in Romans and in last week’s reading from here in 1 Corinthians, where the major issue is about eating meat that had been sacrificed in pagan religious ceremonies (i.e., pretty much any meat that would be available for most people), the answer was more nuanced. In Romans 14-15, he argues that while those who think it’s fine to eat such meat are in the right, they should still refrain from doing so in the company of their siblings in Christ who find it offensive. After all, in this case, the stakes are pretty low: “We are no worse off if we do not eat, and no better off if we do. But take care that this liberty of yours does not somehow become a stumbling-block to the weak” (1 Corinthians 8.8-9). He took a stronger stance on the circumcision issue because it was an essential matter of Christian identity, but here where the stakes are far lower, he is happy to submit in love for the sake of community life. Again the point he’s making is about the freedom to ‘be in choice’, and to choose the more loving path. As Presiding Bishop (Episcopal Church of the USA) Michael Curry once said, we aren’t called to agree with each other; we are called to love one another. And it’s as simple, and complicated, as that.

And now in today’s reading, he sets it out plainly: In a Jewish environment, he’s happy to follow Jewish custom; in a Gentile environment, he’s happy to follow their cultural norms This isn’t about putting on a false face to fit in, but about being lovingly adaptable for the sake of the community, for the sake of love. And in such a demonstration of love, he hopes to defuse the tensions within the community over this divisive issue and expects that others will copy his loving attitude, showing love and kindness to those on the other side as he showed love to them.

To put all this back into the context of mimetic theory, people are always going to learn how to respond, how to act, and how to treat others by looking at and copying others. So we have to be intentional about both the example we set, and who it is we choose to copy. As Christians, it should be obvious (yet so rarely is!) that the person whose example we should copy is Jesus, who himself did away with all notions of purity and piety and happily ate and talked with anyone and everyone, from sex workers and Roman collaborators to priests and theologians. Copying others is not always avoidable, but copying rivalry and anger is. We are always free to copy Christ’s love, even when it’s inconvenient.