The Divine Duty of Drudgery

A Son of Sanguinius

The path to glory for the Christian is necessarily one of suffering. It is the agonizing way, the narrow gate, which leads to life (Matt. 7:13-14). The easy road is the devil’s lie.

—Mark Jones, Knowing Christ[1]

Despite what C. S. Lewis may claim, the Stoic idea that emotions are morally neutral in themselves has much more application to his understanding of emotions, and the way that the Bible talks about emotions. The way C. S. Lewis talks about prayer implies the view that emotion is morally indifferent without an object. Any emotion can be good or evil depending on the object. Much joy is vanity. Some joy is evil. Some anger is good. There is no hope without despair. Hope and despair, or at least hope and fear, have a symbiotic relationship. There is no hope without fear, at least according to John Calvin. There is a symbiotic relationship between hope and despair in The Pilgrim’s Progress. Whenever a negative label is attached onto endurance and coldness, the unintended side effect is eviscerating Christ’s virtue into Docetism.

Emotion being neutral in and of itself has implications for the concept of drudgery. Of all the definitions and uses of drudgery mentioned below, the work itself is considered distasteful in and of itself, rather than as an attitude that is placed onto neutral work by the worker. Christ endured drudgery. Drudgery is really a synonym for suffering. Suffering is a part of life. Christ endured suffering. Drudgery is often Christian’s duty.

The word “drudgery” is sometimes used in ways that is at odds with many dictionaries. Some say that “work done without desire is drudgery,” but this is sometimes explicitly contradictory of some well documented literary and historical uses of the word that carry the current connotation. The Oxford English Dictionary defines “drudgery” as “The occupation of a drudge; mean or servile labour; wearisome toil; dull or distasteful work.”[2] This term has an independent denotative attitudinal component embedded in the term itself. To place an attitude from the agent onto this word is outside the definition. Drudgery can exist inside or outside of duty. Drudgery can exist inside or outside of either desire or despair. Drudgery is work that tends to inculcate an attitude, but not an attitude itself. Attitudes toward work in the abstract are outside of the definition of the word. The work may be distasteful, dull, or wearisome, but that is not generally due to the attitude of the worker. Drudgery is a type of work that is inherently wearisome, but definitionally, it is not a thing to which work can be degenerated. Drudgery is work. To say that work can be treated of as drudgery is not helpful, and is a corruption of the definitions presented.

The Oxford English Dictionary states a number of prominent times in which the word “drudgery” was used in literature. The first is of 16th century English clergyman Robert Crowely using drudgery in his book, as a neutral word in 1548:”To tyll the grounde and doe your other droudgery.” In this sentence, drudgery is roughly synonymous with tilling the ground, or farming. Farming is not usually considered bad in and of itself. Some consider farming to be more natural than living in a more urban environment. Crowely uses the word drudgery as attitudinally independent of the worker. The worker does not impose the meaning of drudgery onto the work. The work is drudgery regardless of how the worker feels about the work.

The next use of the word drudgery is from 17th century English clergyman and metaphysical poet George Herbert in 1633:”A servant with this clause Makes drudgerie divine.” Although this line in the poem “The Elixir” has more connotative negativity, it is still mainly neutral, because it implies that a servant can do drudgery with desire to please his divine master. This is in contrast to the way that some in the present day use the term. Herbert uses drudgery in a way that makes drudgery as a relatively attitudinally neutral noun that can be accomplished with desire. Herbert uses the word drudgery as attitudinally independent of the worker.

The next use of the word drudgery is from 17th century Church of England clergyman and historian Peter Helyn to a similarly fairly neutral use of the word in 1652: “Who put them to all drudgeries and servile works.” This again shows the word to be used in a sense that denotes menial work that may be implied to be of a low social position, thus making the one doing the drudgery rather ordinary. The word is here still used as a neutral noun that has no attitudinal component. One imposes an attitude onto the social level of work. The social level of work in the 21^st century is not necessarily always drudgery as it likely was in the 17^th century, but it is likely to be more manual and therefore more menial and wearying. Helyn uses the word drudgery as attitudinally independent of the worker.

The next use of the word drudgery is from Lawyer, diarist, and biographer of Samuel Johnson, James Boswell. In 1791 Boswell wrote: “He now relieved the drudgery of his Dictionary..[.]by taking an active part in the composition of ‘The Adventurer’.” The use of the word “adventurer” in contrast to the act of “drudgery” is in line with the former uses of the word to denote very mechanical and socially low work. The agent is to be relieved from the work itself, which is wearisome. The agent is not changing his attitude toward his work. The work of the drudgery of compiling and editing the dictionary itself is not changing. The worker is doing different work (writing a composition involving an adventurer) that is less inherently wearisome and dull. The worker is not changing his attitude toward the dull work of compiling the dictionary. The worker is not repenting for calling the wearisome work of compiling the dictionary wearisome. Samuel Johnson uses the word drudgery as attitudinally independent of the worker.

The next use of the word drudgery is from 19th century scholar M. Pattison, who in a book on Milton in 1879 wrote: “If there is any literary drudgery more mechanical than another, it is generally supposed to be that of making a dictionary.” As in the other examples, the word drudgery is used in regard to its mechanical or menial nature, not the attitude of the one doing the drudgery. The drudgery is itself neutral and mechanical, with no attitudinal component. The speaker is stating, in agreement with the other proof above, that compiling a dictionary is inherently wearisome, and therefore qualifies as “drudgery,” regardless of the thought of the compiler. It is not within the realm of possibility that a compiler of a dictionary would find such compiling to not be drudgery, but it is nevertheless stated as a usual state of affairs that dictionary compiling is indeed inherently drudgery regardless of how the author feels about the work of compiling the dictionary in and of itself. Pattison uses the word drudgery as attitudinally independent of the worker.

The next use of the word drudgery is from the 19th century Unitarian heretic W. C. Gannett, who wrote in his 1890 book Blessed be Drudgery that: “Drudgery is the gray Angel of Success.” Again, the use of the word drudgery is in regard to its mechanical, menial, and low nature, but not to the attitude of the agent. Drudgery is the gray angel, so the work, or drudgery, is gray, but the agent need not be. Gannett appears to have written this book in the presence of the slave-trade, with reference to how evil in the world can be used to show that drudgery can be a blessing. If drudgery can be a blessing, it is unlikely to be inherently sinful. It is unlikely that if the slaves bore a good attitude toward their masters, the work itself would be less draining, wearisome, and painful. The work slaves tended to do in fields harvesting crops tended to be inherently hard, menial labor. The attitude of the slave cannot greatly change the hardness of the labor, so it qualifies as drudgery, regardless of how the laborer feels about the labor. Heretic Gannett uses the word drudgery as attitudinally independent of the worker.

In all of these usages, the word “drudgery” is inherently wearisome and dull work, independent of the worker. To Crowley, Farming and drudgery are roughly synonymous. If the worker enjoys the work, and Herbert suggests, the work is still drudgery, even though it is done with desire. Helyn uses the word drudgery to suggest servile labor, of which the agent is attitudinally neutral, except in so far as it implies that a low social “ordinary” position is thought undesirable. Again, the attitude of the agent does not determine the work to be “drudgery”; The work in and of itself is referred to as “drudgery.” Boswell uses the word drudgery in contrast with adventure, but he assigns neither sin nor attitude to the agent of the drudgery. Similarly, Pattison makes reference to the mechanical and menial state of the work itself, not the attitude of the worker. Gannett also references the mechanical and menial state of the work, probably in relation to social position of slavery, and the weariness attendant to it, but he does not mention the attitude of the slaves, thus making the drudgery attitudinally independent of the worker.

Webster’s Third New International Dictionary defines “drudgery” much like the Oxford English Dictionary: “dull, fatiguing and unrelieved work or expenditure of effort : work of an irksome or menial nature done through necessity.”[3] Again, the definition points to the work itself a having negative states that encourage a state of mind as necessary response to the work itself, not as an optional attitude toward the work. Some work, such as road construction, is hard on the body. As such, it could be construed as drudgery, because it is inherently wearisome and dull work. The attitude of the work does not enter into the definition, because the work itself has the qualities of drudgery embedded into it.

The American Heritage International College Dictionary similarly defines drudgery as “Tedious, menial, or unpleasant work.”[4] The Oxford Universal Dictionary defines “drudgery” as “The occupation of a drudge; mean, servile, or wearisome toil; distasteful work.”[5] As in the other definitions, the work itself is considered distasteful in and of itself, rather than as an attitude that is placed onto neutral work by the worker. It is not the drudge who makes work drudgery; It is God who makes the work drudgery.

Most translations of the Bible do not use the word “drudgery.” The semi-heretical paraphrase of the Bible The Message uses it, but even then, it is used as a concept attitudinally independent of the agent doing the work: “I’ve known drudgery and hard labor, many a long and lonely night without sleep, many a missed meal, blasted by the cold, naked to the weather.” Eugene Peterson uses drudgery in his paraphrase of 2 Corinthians 11:22-27 as a neutral concept to Paul. In his paraphrase, Peterson has Paul engaging in drudgery, while not sinning through his attitude. Peterson then uses drudgery as an antonym to leadership in his paraphrase of Hebrews 13:17: “Be responsive to your pastoral leaders. Listen to their counsel. They are alert to the condition of your lives and work under the strict supervision of God. Contribute to the joy of their leadership, not its drudgery. Why would you want to make things harder for them?” Peterson uses the word drudgery to refer to work that is itself difficult. Even though the work is made harder by agents, the work itself is not made difficult or wearisome by the agent doing the drudgery, thus the term in this example is altitudinally independent of the worker.

In all of these definitions and uses, the work itself is considered distasteful in and of itself, rather than as an attitude that is placed onto neutral work by the worker. It is not the worker who makes work drudgery; It is God who makes work drudgery. Drudgery is a neutral concept of inherently difficult work. In these definitions, it is attitudinally independent of the worker. In periods of extreme stress, however, C. S. Lewis goes so far as to indicate that God enjoys the prayers of sadness of those in hard times more than prayers of those joyful in good times.

If doing God’s will when all trace of God appears to have vanished from the world is drudgery, then 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬 𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐮𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐝𝐫𝐮𝐝𝐠𝐞𝐫𝐲 by dragging his cross, while bleeding, across Jerusalem to the hill of The Skull where he would die. If such is the case, 𝐝𝐫𝐮𝐝𝐠𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐢𝐬 𝐚𝐧 𝐮𝐧𝐚𝐯𝐨𝐢𝐝𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐮𝐫𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐡𝐲𝐬𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐞, and to endure it is to imitate Christ, and as far from sin as the Earth is from Epislon Eridani 5. Without drudgery, virtue would be superficial. If such premises are true, then to call drudgery sin would be Damnably sinful inconsistency.

If Romans 6:18 does accurately translate as “slaves to righteousness,” then the Oxford English Dictionary’s definition of “drudgery” being akin to “what slaves do,” applies. A drudge is a slave, or something close to it. Drudgery is what drudges do. Are drudges not ordinary? Sometimes drudgery is duty with desire. Christ wanted to please the Father, did He not? He was dragging a cross like a slave. This appears to meet the requirements for the term. Sometimes drudgery is inevitable. Pilgrim drudged his way through a slew of despair.[5.5] It was an inevitable part of his journey. If drudgery were a sin, then pain would be a sin. If pain were a sin, pain killer addiction would be ensured. But pain is not a sin. In the end, drudgery is synonymous with suffering.

Many theologians have stated or implied throughout the centuries that suffering is necessary for salvation. In Knowing God, J. I. Packer states that to equate the image of Christ with suffering is the mark of an immature Christian, and that such images “equate devotion with brooding over Christ’s physical sufferings.”[6] Many of the collected prayers of the Puritans emphatically equate devotion with the feeling of guilt, sometimes analogizing the nails in Christ’s body to the Christian’s sin.[7] One of the prayers in this book was written by Richard Baxter, who unfortunately equated devotion—specifically believing the promises of Heaven—with being suicidal.[8] Packer suggests reading Baxter.[9] But the opposite extreme is to equate the image of Christ with the complete lack of suffering, thus creating a Christ of Docetism, who does not feel pain. The German-Dutchman Thomas à Kempis said that Christ was in “constant anguish” on earth.[10] In Knowing Christ, Mark Jones states that many reformed authors thought of Christ’s existence while on earth as a “perpetual gethsemane.”[11] The Presbyterian scholar J. Ligon Duncan mentions in his book on suffering that there is no recorded mention of Christ laughing, but plenty of his sorrowing, and that the job of the Christian is to suffer.[12] Christ is not known as a man of laughters. The martyr Eric Bonhoeffer said that says that the psalms are “Christ’s vicarious prayer for the church.”[13] But if Christ had experienced no pain, there would have been no need for the psalms, much less the Lamentations of the prophet Jeremiah.

But the Biblical Christ has such great pain that he was sorrowful unto death (Matthew 26:38). He quoted many psalms, but he never quoted Canticles, and on the cross, he quoted Psalm 22 in asking why God had forsaken him. Christ’s life featured great suffering that can could be called worse than drudgery—torture and crucifixion. Jesus did not want to die, but he focused on the kingdom of Heaven.[13.5] To some, the image of this is an idol, but to others, the cross is in part a realization that to engage in life one must live in the center of suffering to live in the world through “voluntary suffering transcended.”[14] Without an awareness of the drudgery that Christ endured, Easter is hollow. Instead of speaking of drudgery, Christ calls us to seek first the kingdom of God as “our master concern,” to use Robert C. Roberts’s phrase, [15] however drudgerous the journey may be. Sometimes, drudgery is duty, regardless of the attitude of the drudger. ​Adam’s fall sent men into an estate of sin and drudgery.[15.5] The point of the phrase using the word is that those who do work without focusing on the kingdom of God will have more pain than if they focus on the Celestial City as their master concern, even while drudging through the slough of despond near the terrestrial city.

If emotion can be good or bad, so can drudgery. Drudgery is a fact, not an attitude. Christ did drudgery. Drudgery is synonymous with suffering. Christ suffered worst than anyone can or ever will.[16] Much of life is suffering. Suffering is the Christian’s duty. Drudgery is often the Christian’s divinely ordained duty.

Works Cited

---

[1] Jones, Mark. Knowing Christ. (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 2015), 112.

[2] “drudgery, n.”. OED Online. March 2021. Oxford University Press. https://www.oed.com/view/Entry/57978?redirectedFrom=drudgery (accessed April 21, 2021).

[3] “Drudgery.” Webster’s Third New International Dictionary. 1961. (Springfield: Merriam-Webster Publishing 1993), 695.

[4] “Drudgery.” The American Heritage International College Dictionary. 1969. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1993. 3rd. ed., 2000), 422.

[5] “Drudgery.” The Oxford Universal Dictionary. 1933. 3rd. ed. (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1955), 567.

[5.5] Bunyan, John, and William R. Owens. The Pilgrim’s Progress. (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2008), 16-17.

[6] Packer. James. Knowing God. 1973. (London: Hodder and Stoughton,1993), 47.

[7] Bennett, Arthur. The Valley of Vision: A collection of Puritan Prayers and Devotionals. 1975. (Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 2007), 31.

[8] Baxter, Richard. The Saint’s Everlasting Rest. 1657. (Ross-shire: Christian Focus Publications, 1998), 465-466. See footnote 3 of Sanitizing Pain from Psalms: On Docetist Hymns that Mock the Holy Spirit; Endurance for the original quotation.

[9] Packer, James. “The English Puritans by Reformed Theological Seminary on Apple Podcasts.” Apple Podcasts. 2007. https://itunes.apple.com/us/itunes-u/the-english-puritans/id378878741?mt=10.

[10] Thomas à Kempis. The Imitation of Christ. c. 1418–1427. (New York: Catholic Book Publishing, 1977), 93.

[11] Jones, Mark. Knowing Christ. (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 2015), 88.

[12] Duncan, J. Does Grace Grow Best in Winter?. (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2009), 46, 68.

[13] Bonhoeffer, Eric. Life Together. Trans,  John W. Doberstein. 1939. (London: SCM Press, 2010), 20.

[13.5] Luke 22:42.

[14] “Biblical Series XIV: Jacob: Wrestling with God Transcript.” Jordan Peterson, 30 Apr. 2018, http://www.jordanbpeterson.com/transcripts/biblical-series-xiv/.

[15] Roberts, Robert. Spiritual Emotions: A Psychology of Cristian Virtues. (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2007).

[15.5] Genesis 3:17-19.

[16] Duncan, J, 77.