Honour and Shame in the Lukan Passion Michael Cadge Whereas in the West today economics is the predominant driving force for individuals, in the first- century Mediterranean world, the pivotal values were honour and shame (Mahlangu, 2001:85; Tennent, 2007:91). From a Western perspective, it is often difficult to fully appreciate the importance of honour and shame regarding understanding Scripture, therefore a greater understanding of the culture can lead to a more enriching interpretation (Tennent, 2007:91). This essay will look particularly at how an understanding of the honour and shame culture can inform our understanding the Lukan Passion narrative, which, compared to the other Gospel narratives, particularly portrays Jesus as the one who is most worthy of honour, even though crucifixion was deemed the most shameful death possible. In the first-century Mediterranean world, honour was essentially a person's (or group's) claim to value, worth and social standing in their own eyes and, most importantly, the public recognition of that worth (Moxnes, 1996:20; Domeris, 1993:291). In this context, honour is primarily to do with power (one's control over others), gender status (duties and rights), and religion (piety and righteousness) (Malina, 1993:30-1). The society was also dyadistic, in that one's identity was formed by one's family or group, with the head of the family or group being chiefly responsible for honour (Tennent, 2007:95; Malina, 1993:55). As such, honour is ascribed through heritage, birth and/or one's family or grouping (Moxnes, 1996:20; e.g. 1 Sam. 9:1), and can be ascribed by notable persons of power or through adoption, approval or appointment (Malina, 1993:38,54; e.g. Matt. 3:17).
Honour is also acquired through achievement (e.g. Luke 7:5) and in the social contest of challenge and riposte, the most common way of losing and gaining honour; honour which is in limited supply (Tennent, 2007:86; cf. Neyrey, 1994:155-7). Essentially, a challenge is made by someone who is generally an equal on the social ladder. The receiver then judges whether the challenger is worthy of reply, and responds accordingly (Malina, 34-5,54). It is then the public who ultimately decide who is honoured, and who is dishonoured (or even shamed), resulting in a new social status, or status transformation, for both parties (Moxnes, 1996:20; Malina and Neyrey, 1991:36). The body, especially the head, is the key place of honour, with nakedness or being beaten being particularly dishonourable (Neyrey, 1994:157). The first-century Mediterranean society is thus agonistic (from the Greek agonia, meaning "contest") (Hellerman, 2000:218; Horrell, 2000:213). In the New Testament, vocabulary of honour and shame is frequently deployed (e.g. Luke 9:26; Mark 12:4; John 8:49; Heb. 2:9; Rom. 13:7). The nouns ???? (doxa; "glory") and ???? (time; “honour") occur 165 and 41 times respectively, with the verb ????? (timao; “to give honour") occurring 21 times (Domeris, 1993:284-5). Other associated words for honour, such as "glory", "esteem", "fame", etc., and other associated words for shame, such as "disgrace", "dishonour", "mock", etc., are commonly used (e.g. John 5:44; 1 Thess. 2:6; Rev. 4:10-11; Mark 12:4; John 8:49; 1 Cor 1:26; 11:4-6) (Malina, 1993:59;