ReCIPROCITy AND sUFFeRING IN 1 PeTeR 2,19-20 431 This sense of exchange is also present in the work of the ancient epistolary theorist Pseudo-Demetrius. When discussing the gratitude which the “thankful” letter is designed to recall, the author provides the following example as a display of deference for benefits received 23: I hasten to show in my actions how grateful I am to you for the kind- ness (euverge,thsaj) you showed to me in your words. For I know that what I am doing for you is less than I should, for even if I gave my life for you, I should still not be giving adequate thanks for the benefits I have received (avxi,an avpodw,sein ca,rin w-n eu= pe,ponqa). If you wish anything that is mine, do not write and request it, but demand a return (ca,rin). For I am in your debt. In this instance, ca,rij extends beyond a simple expression of gratitude (“thanks”). This is clear from the fact that ca,rij is portrayed as a response to the situation of a debtor repaying a lender. The term thus represents a reciprocal gift which the recipient of benefits/favors is obliged to return. What this evidence reveals is that when used within the context of reciprocity and gift-exchange, the flexibility of ca,rij allowed it to refer not only to the initial favors granted to someone, but also to the counter- gift whereby the beneficiary offered a socially-obligatory response. This insight holds out significant potential for understanding 1 Pet 2,19-20. In the past, some attention has been paid to ca,rij as God’s benefaction to humanity, but to this point no one has considered ca,rij as a form of human reciprocation. III. Ca,rij as Reciprocal Response in 1 Peter 2,19-20 To say that ca,rij is a human response to God brings us closer to the meaning of 1 Pet 2,19-20. What is lacking is a grid through which to interpret the dynamics of this social relationship. Drawing from our discussion of the social domain of ca,rij in the Greco-Roman world, we will suggest that the term is best understood within the context of Interpretation. studies in Honor of Merrill C. Tenney [ed. G.F. HAWTHORNe] [Grand Rapids 1975] 60-72). The gods are thought to grant favors to humanity (cf. SEG VIII 549: =Isi . . . pa,ntej te,rpontai, te brotoi. sw/n cari,twn e[neka), and in return, humans respond with thankfulness and service to the gods (cf. C. MICHel, Recueil d’inscriptions grecques [Brussels 1900] 252 [no. 334]: avpodw/| ta.j avxi,aj ca,ritaj toi/j qeoi/j). This relationship continues as the gods reciprocate with gratitude (cf. SIG3 708: para. qew/n tij ca,rij kai. tw/n euvergethqe,ntwn). 23 Pseudo-Demetrius, Epistolary Types 21. Text and translation from A.J. MAlHeRBe, Ancient Epistolary Theorists (sBlsBs 19; Atlanta 1988) 40-41.