"The World"

 

I'm reading Franciscan Richard Rohr's short book about evil, The World, The Flesh, and The Devil (2021), and benefitting from many of its insights.

(Starting this blog, I wanted to cite the verse where those "enemies of our souls" are enumerated...and was quite surprised to find there is none.  That specific formulation seems to have originated with the writings of Peter Abelard (d. 1142) and Thomas Aquinas (d. 1274), and was established in English-language usage by its appearance in in the first Anglican Book of Common Prayer (1549).

    Some point to Jesus' temptations in Matthew 4 and Luke 4 as the basis of our familiar formulation, though the order of temptations in those passages differ from it.).

I'm less conversant than Rohr with much current theology, and recent psychological and social research, and sometimes can't follow his meditations on evil's manifestations.  But many of his comments, regards our life-experience in Christ, seem spot-on.

    Rohr emphasizes the role "the world" plays as a vector of sin in our lives (after carefully disclaiming any attempt to de-emphasize the role of our human failings, "the flesh").  Coming from a tradition that treated sin almost-exclusively in terms of personal wrong-doing (and primarily as literal "fleshly" sins: our drunkenness, sexual immorality, and the like), I was struck by his comment that

"...this much deeper meaning of sin is found in the largely social judgements of YHWH against the whole society, in the oracles of the prophets that were almost always aimed at Israel's corporate evil.  How did we not see this ?"  (p.14)

Of this "social matrix" which encourages and enables sin, he also reflects that

"Conformity with the loudest group's mood is--for many people, maybe even most people--equated with being moral...the public mood is another way to describe 'the world,' evil's first hiding place..."  (p. 23)

It occurs that "the loudest group" closely equates to "majority rule:" society's largest group will always be the loudest.  Similarly, Rohr's "the public mood" is probably very much what we mean when we invoke "public opinion," or "the will of the people."

God asserts that He, ALONE, sovereignly rules all things...the "Kingdom of God," which Jesus says is first priority.  So it's hard not to view our much-vaunted belief in "democracy" (demos +kratia, "the people rule") as directly contradicting...and affronting...God.

And per Rohr's insights, the operative mechanisms of democracy seem to be those which most encourage and enable societal sin, "the world"...and which we thoughtlessly "equate with being moral."

It goes a long way toward explaining why human beings believe passionate absurdities ("the war to end all wars," for example), that we think problems can be solved by means which are the problem.

 

Wisdom

 

The idea I've long held of what scripture says about wisdom...and it says a lot...is that wisdom is essentially a moral quantity.  I consider that "wisdom," in scripture essentially means knowing, and doing, "the right thing."

But scripture also recognizes what it usually terms "worldly wisdom.;" and which is never about doing "the right thing."  I was thinking about that fact this morning: how can both (even with one's contrasting modifier) be rightly termed "wisdom" ?

My teacher Derek Prince once preached on wisdom from Ecclesiastes 10:10:: "If the axe is dull and he does not sharpen its edge, then he must exert more strength.  Wisdom has the advantage of bringing success."  And I think that may be the key.

Wisdom makes our efforts successful...in whatever purpose we expend our efforts.  If our purpose is worldly...to enrich ourselves, glorify ourselves, make our lives comfortable...there is an app for that, a worldly "wisdom" that enables us to succeed: even if our endeavors totally lack any intent to do the right thing.

That may be what's going on in Jesus' surprising commendation of the unrighteous steward in Luke 16:1-9: that even though his purpose was entirely to feather his own nest, he evidenced an understanding of how God's creation "wisdom" works, and trusted it to succeed, even among the "sons of this age."

As God's creation, we know wisdom is a good thing: and man possesses no good thing except by God's gift.  Wisdom is one such gift: and I think Romans 11:29 may apply here, that God's gifts are "irrevocable" in doing the work for which He created them.

I AM

 

There can be no end to the depth of wisdom contained in His Name, when God commanded Moses to tell the Israelites that "I AM" had sent him.

But the first, hidden-in-plain-sight, meaning must be God's absolute IMMEDIACY.  That in all we time-bound creatures perceive as "now," or "the past," or "future," God IS.

God therefore deserves our absolute immediacy.  As Jesus put it, that "You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind." (Matthew 22:37).

God is absolutely Immediate to us, for us: we're called to correspondingly be to him.

The Problem of Salvationism

 

The problem of salvationism, the "evangelical" emphasis on being saved, is that it answers the question "Where does God fit into my life ?"

It's a legitimate question that everyone should ask himself.

But it's not the ultimate question: and indeed comes at that question from the wrong end, our limited and purely personal end.  "Life" is, after all. God's essence...and ours only by His gift..

The ultimate question must be where I fit into God's Life.

To my understanding, Jesus called that all-encompassing Life of  I AM "The Kingdom of God."  How could the Fact He IS be anything less than His absolute Rule of all that originates in Him ?

The ultimate question for each of us, where we fit into the LIFE of God, comes down to Jesus' command that we "seek first" not our own salvation, but the Kingdom of God.

Change

 

“Look among the nations ! Watch !
 Be horrified! Be frightened speechless !
 For I am accomplishing a work in your days—
You would not believe it even if you were told !"

A few weeks ago, God had me meditating on "new things."  The scripture that had leaped out to me was this one, in Habakkuk 1:5, that God is indeed does new things...which we wouldn't be able to believe, even if He told us.

It's a statement that raises profound theological questions.

We know that God is the same yesterday, today, and always.  We know that God's BE-ing--"I AM THAT I AM"--His Character, could we speak as if His Absolute One-ness comprises separate elements...is integrally manifest in His every act.

How then could God do or say something "new," something He'd never said or done before, except He act contrary to His unchanging Character...by lying, for example, or doing unrighteousness...and negate His Being ?

And that, of course, He has never done, and never will.  His promise to do a "new" thing can only be His accomodation, in human language, to our experience of God's Immediacy: His promise is that He will do things which we have never experienced before...or could even imagine.

Which is exactly God's Character, and exactly His unchanging way with us, always.  His perceptive worshippers learn to expect His "inscrutability," His unexpectedness.

Habbakuk's words have seemed especially relevant because a few months ago our church left the denomination it had been affiliated with.  And because of that change, the congregation had to choose its own pastor, which we'd never done before.  I think we all have a sense of excitement that God is right now doing a "new thing" among us.

But as God says to Habakkuk, "new" things...especially unimaginable new things...also elicit fear.  Even while we expect to be astounded by God, we are always most comfortable in life when "things" remain the same.  When our world...which we cannot help seeing as our personal circumstances...changes, so must our "world-view," if it's to be based in reality: and God is always The Reality.

Because of Who God IS, our "tried and true" (and therefore comfortable) thoughts and reactions must change to accommodate His "new things:" and frankly, we fear change.  And we deeply hate anything that requires we change.

I know I do.

It's undoubtedly God's intent in doing "new things," that we don't get comfortable except in His Reality.  And in His greatest "new" work, Christ's death and resurrection, He promises we can change.  For none but the changed can see His unimaginable works,  and welcome and rejoice in the astonishing continual "newness" of our unchanging "I AM."

General Milley

 

There are reports a soon-to-be-published book will claim that General Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff sat down with the leaders of America's "war room" after the January 6th attack on the Capitol, and asked each to personally swear he would immediately notify Milley if ordered by the then-president to launch military action or nuclear missles.

When he received a call from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, questioning the security of America's nuclear arsenal in the then-president's control, Milley reassured her.  He then called the head of the National Security Agency to tell them "...keep watching, scan:" and called the head of the CIA to request her organization to "Aggressively watch everything 360."

General Milley then called his counterparts in other nations, friendly and unfriendly, who had put their militaries on high alert because of the chaos in Washington, to reassure them that America would NOT "lash  out" militarily in the last days of the then-president's administration.

If these reports are subsequently verified (and it's always unwise to take first "reports" at face-value), General Milley did the right thing in what he was said to have called "the absolute darkest moment of theoretical possibility."  His attempt to keep Americans...indeed, all the world's people...safe from nuclear immolation by an unhinged president is a higher law than any Constitutional provision could ever be.

I have to wonder if the situation General Milley had to deal with was, as we've heard about virtually every act of that president, "unprecedented" ?  Or did the nation's military leaders during Nixon's last-days mental and emotional melt-down also feel they had to act to keep America's nuclear arsenal secure from him ?

I wonder too why I wasn't on General Milley's call-list ?  LOL.  It would have saved me a lot of worry and stress...and I doubt I'm the only one...to have had top-level reassurance that our crazed president would not be able to destroy the world, to keep his hold on power.

What Year Is This ?

 

I'm not enough of Roman historian to know: but have to imagine that when Roman Christians began using the "Anno Domini," it was intended to differentiate them from their fellow Romans use of the Empire's AUC (anno urbis conditae, "year since the city's founding") dating-system.

A good intent, no doubt, to set themselves apart from "the world" and its ways.  But, at least in its English version, "the year of our Lord" has always sounded to me a bit arch, or even combative: "the year of OUR Lord (not yours)."

So I still remember how it forcibly struck me, reading "Pogo" some 60 years ago, when one of cartoonist Walt Kelly's characters referred to "the year of everybody's Lord."

The truth of those words hit me immediately, their spiritually-profound truth...in a newspaper-cartoon !!

Their truth still resonates with me.

Patriotism (again)

 

I'm a patriotic person.

If "patriotism" means loving one's country, I do.  How could I not love the only land and people I've ever known, and ever identified with ?

And I understand "love" to mean desiring, and striving for, all the BEST for the one you love.

Any Christian knows that the BEST for America...for any country...is God's favor.

So every 4th of July I have the same question: does God's favor rest on those whose "patriotism" consists of proclaiming "We're Number One !!" and "Hooray for us !!" ?

Poor, poor America !

 

Never Before Said

In the long history of the English language, probably every possible thought, and every possible combination of words, has been expressed millions of times.  Virtually all of our daily conversation consists of the same commonplace, pedestrian, predictable cliches.

It seems unlikely there can exist any sentence, phrase, or combination of words we can ever say in English that has not been spoken by some English-speaker, somewhere, before.

But maybe . . .

On Easter my wife and I were watching our church' worship-service online.  When that broadcast was over, for whatever computer reason, the broadcast switched to the worship-service of (I think) the National Cathedral in Washington.

Like many whose experience of worship is almost entirely "low church," I'm always intrigued by how the other half worships.

Not to ridicule, or make self-flattering comparisons.  It's always intriguing to see if there is, in other Christians' services, a sense of worshippers' hearts poured out in praise to God...and a sense of His Presence in their midst.

Quite often, there is.  And it's an elevating God-honoring experience to enter into the spirit of worship with our "high church" brothers and sisters.

So it was on Easter, although their service was definitely different than anything we are used to.

The sumptuous and colorful vestments of the dignitaries, and the towering mitre of the Bishop, all seemed quite foreign.  The energetic praise-songs of the black choir were less so: we've all enjoyed the rich music of America's black church, in numerous documentaries, if not in person.  A woman gave the sermon (which she would probably have called a "homily"): and while that's a bit non-standard in our "Evangelical" tradition, I've been a member of a "conservative" church whose pastor was a woman.

Her sermon was powerful, evincing, and elevating listeners in, ardent love toward God.  No question: she spoke God's word to God's people.

The rousing closing hymn, as choristers shouted loud "Hallelujah !!"s, raised the spirit of worship to even greater heights.  And as the dignitaries, led by the Bishop, processed down the aisle to leave, I could see many of them were so in the spirit of worship that they were, like David, dancing (a bit) before the Lord.

The lesser dignitaries were somewhat restrained, their dancing mostly some rhythmic swaying and bobbing with the music: feeling self-conscious, perhaps, of the weight of their office, and of public display.

The Bishop much less so.  I can't say he busted moves that would have won any dance-competition: but he gave his whole body to the spirit of worship, energetically enough that it seemed at times his mitre might fall off.

At that moment, I remarked to my wife what I think may be a completely unique English sentence, never before spoken by anyone, anywhere: "Man !  That bishop can really shake his booty !"

I'm thinking of patenting the words.

Tim's Passing

Our beloved brother Tim Smith, Onesimus, in Australia passed away last month.  Since coming to know them, Tim and his wife Margaret have been among those I take as exemplars of what it means to be believers.

When Tim received his diagnosis, he and Margaret immediately began to study everything scripture says about God healing His people.  I quickly realized that God had made Tim and Margaret my teachers: teaching not only what God says about healing, but also how every follower of Christ must face life seeking God's Presence with prayer and study of His word.

 In March, Tim posted the following blog.  I re-post his wisdom here in his memory.

[On Sunday I was asked to introduce communion at the church I attend. This is the text of my brief talk].

_____________________

When I was given a medical death sentence in 2019, I started to seek God for answers. In addition to studying scripture, I found healing testimonies on YouTube for encouragement.

One thing that stood out was a repeated reference to the taking of communion, how in the time leading up to their freedom from terminal illness – people had been led to take bread and wine daily, in remembrance of Jesus sacrifice.

Why was communion significant to them? I would like to briefly share the answer I found to that question.

(1 Cor 11:24-31) When He had given thanks, He broke the bread and said ‘Take, eat; this is My body which is broken for you, do this in remembrance of me.’ In the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying ‘This is the new covenant in My blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.’

For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes.

Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgement to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. For this reason many are weak and sick among you, and many sleep (have died).

This is the only NT reference I can recall addressing a reason for God’s people being sick enough to die. So, what did Paul mean when he wrote about eating and drinking unworthily – not discerning the Lord’s body?

I’ve come across three possibilities, all of which I think have value. Two address how we relate to one another as the body of Christ, but today I’ll look at one that addresses how we relate to Jesus and His sacrifice.

When we eat the bread and drink the wine, what are we remembering?

I suspect that a lot of the time we are thinking of being saved from our sins, having them washed away by His shed blood. Hebrews tells us there is no remission of our sins without the shedding of blood. That is why we drink the wine – the blood it represents was shed to establish the new covenant, bringing about a permanent solution to the sin that keeps mankind separated from God. There is no more need for constant animal sacrifices or journeys to the Temple in Jerusalem to make those sacrifices, that were required under the old covenant.

But what about the bread representing His body, broken for us?  The body that Paul says is not being ‘discerned’ correctly, thereby making room for sickness and death?

In Isaiah 53 we read: ‘He Himself bore our sicknesses, and He carried our pains… He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities the chastisement of our peace was upon Him and by His stripes (the wounds from scourging) we are healed.’ (Isaiah 53: 4-5)

Here we see Jesus’ suffering and death was NOT only focused on dealing with our sin – it also included the bearing of our sickness and pain, and paying the price of our healing through the whipping that tore apart His flesh.

We have no difficulty remembering His sacrifice paid for our sin, and we have no problem believing that our sins are forgiven. We accept what scripture says to assure us of that. We willingly put our faith in God’s promise alone. That is all the evidence we have and need.

But what about healing? We have physical symptoms as a constant reminder.  We allow them to be more real to us than the promises of God’s word and Jesus’ sacrifice for our healing. But shouldn’t we put more faith in God’s word than in what we feel – like we do for forgiveness? Would we so willing deny our salvation if at times we didn’t ‘feel ‘saved?

Andrew Murray wrote over 100 years ago, ‘We see in the accounts of the gospels, that it was more difficult for the Jews at that time to believe in the pardon of their sins than in divine healing. Now it is just the opposite. (Divine Healing, Andrew Murray p 10;  – Murray died in 1917, )

Most of us have no trouble believing our sins have been dealt with by Jesus shedding His blood. But many have difficulty understanding that sickness was dealt with through the same sacrifice.  Shed blood and broken body working together as a single, all sufficient sacrifice for both spiritual and physical healing.

Psalm 103 gives us an ongoing reminder:

Praise the Lord, my soul;
all my inmost being, praise his holy name.
Praise the Lord, my soul,
and forget not all his benefits—
Who forgives all your sins
and heals all your diseases,

As we eat and drink, let us be sure that we are not forgetting any of the benefits that the bread and wine remind us of. If you want to avoid the weakness, sickness and even death that Paul attributes to eating and drinking unworthily; make some time in your life to search the scriptures to reinforce what Jesus’ sacrifice was ALL about, so we don’t miss any of His benefits through ignorance of them.