The Internet Monk Archives

For Independence Day: Our Greatest Speech, Our Greatest Need

On this U.S. Independence Day 2017, many are lamenting our current national and political situation, noting the ever-hardening divisions that seem to mark our citizenry.

Although in many respects I join this lament, I also try to have some historical perspective and realize that we have lived in far more divided times, including an era when half our nation was at war with the other half. The Civil War was a brutal, devastating conflict, beyond what I think most of us could imagine.

In the context of those dark days, Abraham Lincoln gave what I consider to be the greatest speech in American history: his second inaugural address.

I think it well worth our time to meditate on these words today, to take them to heart, and to ask how we might proceed into our future to mend and heal the divisions that separate us today, “to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.”

• • •

Fellow-Countrymen:

At this second appearing to take the oath of the Presidential office there is less occasion for an extended address than there was at the first. Then a statement somewhat in detail of a course to be pursued seemed fitting and proper. Now, at the expiration of four years, during which public declarations have been constantly called forth on every point and phase of the great contest which still absorbs the attention and engrosses the energies of the nation, little that is new could be presented. The progress of our arms, upon which all else chiefly depends, is as well known to the public as to myself, and it is, I trust, reasonably satisfactory and encouraging to all. With high hope for the future, no prediction in regard to it is ventured.

On the occasion corresponding to this four years ago all thoughts were anxiously directed to an impending civil war. All dreaded it, all sought to avert it. While the inaugural address was being delivered from this place, devoted altogether to saving the Union without war, urgent agents were in the city seeking to destroy it without war–seeking to dissolve the Union and divide effects by negotiation. Both parties deprecated war, but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive, and the other would accept war rather than let it perish, and the war came.

One-eighth of the whole population were colored slaves, not distributed generally over the Union, but localized in the southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was somehow the cause of the war. To strengthen, perpetuate, and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union even by war, while the Government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it. Neither party expected for the war the magnitude or the duration which it has already attained. Neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with or even before the conflict itself should cease. Each looked for an easier triumph, and a result less fundamental and astounding. Both read the same Bible and pray to the same God, and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God’s assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men’s faces, but let us judge not, that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered. That of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has His own purposes. “Woe unto the world because of offenses; for it must needs be that offenses come, but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh.” If we shall suppose that American slavery is one of those offenses which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South this terrible war as the woe due to those by whom the offense came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a living God always ascribe to Him? Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray, that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman’s two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said “the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.”

With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation’s wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.

Support Scuba Missions!

I’m helping a group of young people from our local Methodist church on a mission trip in Providence, Rhode Island this week. We are working with Providence Rescue Mission through Praying Pelican Missions.

We have all we need, but I thought I’d introduce you to a couple that is asking for support for their “mission” work right now.

• • •

Video by John Crist. See more at John Crist Comedy.

3rd Sunday after Trinity: Cantata & Pic of the Week

(Click on picture for larger image)

• • •

I’m deeply thrilled about our choice of worship music today. We present three movements from, perhaps, J.S. Bach’s greatest cantata: BWV 21, “Ich hatte viel Bekümmernis” (My heart was deeply troubled).

Craig Smith describes this magnificent work and gives its background:

Several years into his tenure as music director to the court of Weimar, Johann Sebastian Bach was instructed to write one cantata a month for the chapel services. Near the beginning of this series Bach wrote what was to be his largest sacred Cantata, “Ich hatte viel Bekümmernis,” BWV 21. Not only was this work written to go with the readings for the third Sunday after Trinity, but it served as a farewell to the gravely ill Prince Johann Ernst of Sachsen-Weimar. The young prince, who had been one of Bach’s favorite and most talented pupils, was on his way to a spa in Swabia where he later died. Bach uses the main tune from a movement of Vivaldi’s D Minor Concerto, Opus 3 #11, as the theme for the opening chorus. The concerto had been a favorite of the prince and with its moving text describing a grave illness, the whole movement should be seen as an homage to the young prince.

The work itself covers many different styles. The second and last choruses probably date from very early in Bach’s career. The opening and the great chorale prelude “Sei nun wieder zufrieden,” were written in 1714. Many of the movements were extensively revised for Bach’s first Leipzig Cantata cycle in 1723. Certainly the work has a refinement and finish to it unknown in his early Weimar years.

I have chosen three pieces from this long, complex, two-part cantata that I think fit well together and provide a message that moves from the troubled soul to transcendent praise. May it move us all this Lord’s Day!

First, the final chorus from part one, which takes its text from Psalm 42, urging the troubled soul to wait upon God:

Why do you trouble yourself, my soul,
and are so restless in me?
Wait for God; for I will yet thank Him,
since He is the help of my countenance and my God.

Second, a sprightly tenor aria in which the believer encourages his soul to rejoice in the God who has come to him in Jesus “with heavenly delight.”

• • •

Rejoice, soul, rejoice, heart,
fade now, troubles, disappear, pains!
Change, weeping, into pure wine,
my aching now becomes a celebration for me!
Burning and flaming is the purest candle
of love and of comfort in my soul and breast,
since Jesus comforts me with heavenly delight.

• • •

Finally, an awe-inspiring chorale that lifts us into the heavenly realms of “praise and honor and glory and power.”

The Lamb, that was slain,
is worthy to receive power, and riches,
and wisdom and strength,
and honor and glory and praise.
Praise and honor
and glory and power
be to our God for ever and ever.
Amen, Alleluia!

• • •

Photo by Paul Gorbould at Flickr. Creative Commons License

The IM Saturday Brunch: July 1, 2017 – America First Edition

THE INTERNET MONK SATURDAY BRUNCH

”It is talk-compelling. It puts you in a good temper, it makes you satisfied with yourself and your fellow beings, it sweeps away the worries and cobwebs of the week.”

Providence River Sunset. Photo by Craig Fildes

Photo by Craig Fildes at Flickr. Creative Commons License

Greetings from New England! Let the fireworks begin!

If Robert Jeffress can set them off in church, well then why in the world can’t we have them at a Saturday Brunch?

“Worship” at First Baptist Dallas last Sunday

Today, as this nation prepares to celebrate Independence Day, we’re going to have a special “America First” edition of the Saturday Brunch.

By that, I mean I’d like all of the comments and discussion today to focus on your sense of the state of things in the good ol’ USA.

Let me explain:

As carefully and clearly as possible, give us some of your thoughts about what you see happening in our country today — good or bad, moving in the right direction or not, better off than before or worse off, things that give you hope or things that give you ulcers, etc.

I really don’t want this to become a piling on contest of criticism about any one particular aspect of American life today. So, for example, state your perspective on something, say, the state of the economy, your hopes and fears for young people growing up, what the present and future looks like for our rural areas/small towns/cities/different regions of the country, your thoughts about the health of churches, schools, the arts, civic organizations, and other institutions, what you have observed people of different races, ethnicities, language groups, cultural experiences, and lifestyle patterns are feeling and saying these days, and the role the U.S. is playing in the world or the role we should/should not play.

Statue of Liberty from Red Hook. Photo by Dan Deluca

You who live outside the U.S., please contribute your perspectives as well.

Let’s not focus our attention, say, on President Trump or another individual, or one specific piece of legislation, even one political party or group. I want this to be a more general exercise of observation and discussion about hopes and dreams, fears and anxieties, things you love and cherish and things that drive you crazy and make you feel like we’re driving off a cliff. Of course, we will certainly be drawn to mention some specifics, but do your best to use those to bring us back to the bigger picture you are trying to describe.

I will be in Providence, Rhode Island, accompanying a group of young people on a mission trip to serve some folks in the city today and throughout the week. I may not be as able to participate in the conversations much, and it may take a little longer to clear held comments from the filters. Please be patient.

The table is yours. Use your opportunity well.

Let the following anthem set our theme today. Note: in using this song, it is not my intention to draw attention to Bernie Sanders or his policies! ????

• • •

Statue of Liberty Photo by Dan Deluca at Flickr. Creative Commons License

Fridays with Damaris: Literature and Empathy

Literature and Empathy
By Damaris Zehner

In May of 1998, my husband, three daughters, and I – pregnant with our fourth – moved to Kyrgyzstan. We went with a non-denominational mission agency and planned to develop a business in one of the most remote areas. We had many reasons for taking our family overseas to a less developed country. I had grown up overseas myself, though in more comfortable circumstances, and my husband and I had met and got married in West Africa when we were in the Peace Corps. We wanted our children to have the experience of living abroad – to learn another language and have fun adventures, but more importantly, to see poverty intimately, face to face, not through the window of a car. We wanted them to try to communicate with people whose world view would continually surprise them and to know what it was like to be different.

By October of that year, we were living in a mud-brick house in the small but sprawling village of Ak Talaa – “White Field.” It was a good name. It stood on barren, dusty, high-altitude flatlands surrounded by mountains and dry blue sky. The weather was getting cold, and in early morning the streets smelled of burning camel dung – wood was scarce. At night the stars were a carpet of white, the only compensation for a chilly trip to the outhouse.

Our oldest daughter Katherine was eight years old. She was adventurous and plunged into the new culture with determination. Although she had been home schooled in the United States, she chose to go to a Kyrgyz school once we moved to Ak Talaa. Because we wanted her to learn the language and meet other children, we were willing to help her weather the adjustment.

It was harder than we anticipated. We made progress in the language and had a few relationships with neighbors, but on the whole the villagers’ attitude toward us was distrust, even hatred. We were cannibals, apparently – they told us this to our face, and nothing we could offer in response had any effect; our accusers shook their heads tensely and said we should just go away. A mentally ill man used to follow me through the market, muttering, “Are you Satan?” while I tried to find something to buy for dinner. The police and the village leadership were no more welcoming.

Katherine began coming home from school with footprints on the seat of her black uniform skirt. My husband talked to the school but wasn’t sanguine about anything changing.

“You can stay home, you know,” I offered.

“No, I have the right to go to school if I want to. I’m not going to quit.” We left it there but kept a close eye on her.

One chilly afternoon, Katherine came back from school, changed, and played in the dusty yard with her sisters until dusk. I was getting dinner ready, so I sent her to the pump with a bucket to fetch water. Our house didn’t have running water – none of the houses did – but every few blocks was a neighborhood pump, which was also a gathering spot for gossip and play. Water-carrying was Katherine’s regular chore, but today she came back with an empty bucket. Her face was tense and quivering, clenched between rage and tears.

“What happened?” I asked.

The rage won. “They wouldn’t let me get water.” She was fighting to keep her voice steady.

“Who wouldn’t?”

“Well, the kids mostly, but they’re always like that. But then there was an old woman there, too, and she . . .” My daughter struggled to speak. “I thought she would tell the kids to leave me alone.”

I paused. “She didn’t?”

“No!” Katherine burst out. “She laughed! She told the boys not to let me near the pump! She just watched when they pushed me. Why would she do that?”

How could I explain to an eight-year-old about the evil hidden in every heart? How could I make her understand the long generations of culture, the molding force of the family, and the individual struggle for rectitude behind every human choice? While I thought, I maneuvered my very pregnant form onto a low stool and pulled her down next to me, then scooped up the kitten for her to hold. There were several parts to her devastation, I thought: mild but still present was her sense of failure to do what she set out to do; then there was her frustration and fear in response to the bullies at the pump. But to see an adult being childishly wicked and delighting in injustice – that didn’t just hurt her, it undermined her view of the world.

I wasn’t good at lying to my children, especially to Katherine, passionately devoted to truth from the time she could talk. I couldn’t tell her that maybe she hadn’t understood what the woman said, because I knew that wasn’t the case. There was nothing I could say except that there were nasty people in the world, people who would hate her for the things that made her who she was, like her sex, her nationality, her religion, and her skin color. But I didn’t say it – she was learning it all by herself.

I left her huddled on the low stool in the kitchen, clutching her cat, and went to get the collection of poetry that I’d packed as one of the few essentials to bring overseas. I turned to a poem called “Incident,” by Countee Cullen and read it aloud:

Once, riding in old Baltimore,
Heart-filled, head-filled with glee;
I saw a Baltimorean
Keep looking straight at me.

Now I was eight and very small,
And he was no whit bigger,
And so I smiled, but he poked out
His tongue and called me, “Nigger.”

I saw the whole of Baltimore,
From May until December;
Of all the things that happened there,
That’s all that I remember.

And that’s when Katherine finally began to cry.

She cried for herself, as she should have. She also cried for a little boy she had never known, who had suddenly become her brother in adversity. And she cried for the unkindness of the world and the loss of her illusions.

I read her the poem because I had no other comfort I could honestly give her. Did she find comfort in knowing that she was not alone? I think she found a little. Even the measured phrases that gave shape to a shattering realization provided comfort. Not much, but some. The kitten helped, too.

We didn’t stay in Ak Talaa much longer, because our neighbors kept breaking our windows with rocks and we couldn’t keep the house warm. The police declined to interfere, explaining that there was really nothing they could do and it would probably be better if we just left. In November we moved to the regional capital city, where we made friends and found good work to do, although we occasionally still had people spit or throw stones at us.

Katherine lived in Kyrgyzstan until she was a teenager. She’s an adult now, generous, unprejudiced, and brave. She’s also a novelist, still turning to words to give shape to the complications of life and to assuage the loneliness of the human condition through the communion of literature. And she has two cats.

Minds, Brains, Souls, and Gods: A Conversation of Faith, Psychology and Neuroscience – Part 8, Chapters 15-19.

Minds, Brains, Souls, and Gods: A Conversation of Faith, Psychology and Neuroscience – Part 8, Chapters 15-19

We continue the series on the book, Minds, Brains, Souls and Gods: A Conversation on Faith, Psychology and Neuroscience . Today Part 9, Chapters 15-19, the rest of the book:

Does Neuropsychology Have Anything to Offer Pyschotherapy and Counseling?
Are Religious Beliefs the Twenty First Century Opium of the People? What About Placebo Effects?
What About Spirituality? Is It a Separate “Religious” Part of Me?
Can Science “Explain Away” Religion?
Where Next?

We’ll wrap up our discussion of this book this week.

• • •

In Chapter 15 Malcolm reveals he was trained as a natural scientist and so the whole idea that there is such a thing as “Christian psychology” seems bizarre to him. There is no such thing as “Christian physics” or “Christian chemistry”. Even accepting the Bible is replete with profound insights into human nature doesn’t mean you can construct a “Christian psychology” any more than the fact the Bible is replete with references to the sun rising and setting means you can construct a “Christian astronomy”. It should be obvious that astronomical science is a totally different venture from astronomical references in the Bible. What part of the firmament does NASA fire its rocket into?

Malcolm then makes the point that where modern psychology is based on sound science (not always a given) that it can offer useful insights to the pastoral ministry in their business of “soul care”. The dawning realization by evangelical ministers that mental health issues such as bipolar disorder and clinical depression have a physiological basis and that their congregants can benefit from medicinal treatment as much as their diabetic congregants benefit from their insulin treatment is real progress.

In Chapter 16, Malcolm has a good review of studies of the placebo effect in neurology. His student raises the question that if religious belief is nothing more than a kind of placebo effect, and that causes the reported better health among religious people, what does this do to our understanding that there’s something special about religious belief, about being grounded in a relationship with a God who really exists? Malcolm notes:

From the standpoint of neuroscience, beliefs are complex cognitive patterns that have both genetic and environmental causes. So, to the extent that the neural underpinnings of belief can, for example, be plausibly linked to the neural antecedents of healing, a biological connection between faith and healing becomes a scientifically testable issue. In the case of the placebo effect this is sometimes used to demonstrate, for example, how beliefs may help to relieve pain.

Malcolm’s student then asks, “Do demonstrated effects of beliefs, including belief that our prayers have an effect, serve as evidence that our beliefs are true and that therefore God must exist?” Malcolm answers:

It’s one thing to demonstrate, in some instances, the beneficial nature of religious faith, but whether or not that, in any sense, constitutes a proof of the existence of God is another matter. You cannot move from the description of what is the case, scientifically, to claiming it as a support for metaphysical explanations…

One thing is clear, however, there a great danger in public pronouncements, of oversimplifying an extremely complex research topic, perhaps motivated by wish for dramatic media headlines. As Christians we should have no part in this. I think it’s also clear that there is the constant temptation, perhaps especially for those not closely involved in the field, to feel threatened by such research either when it is presented as “explaining away” their religious beliefs or, equally mistakenly, when it is used by some to seek to bolster religious belief by putting it forward as some sort or proof that there must be a God who is acting through these beliefs. I do hope we can heed these warnings.

In Chapter 17, What About Spirituality, Ben and Malcolm contemplate Ben’s grandmother as she experiences Alzheimer. The progression of the disease has left her no longer able to pray or read the Bible. Malcolm brings us the case of Robert Davis, the Christian pastor who, at the height of his ministry at 53 began to suffer with Alzheimer’s dementia. With the help of his wife he wrote a remarkable account of his spiritual experiences well into the middle stages of the disease. It documents how his progressive brain disease affected his spirituality. He wrote:

My spiritual life was still most miserable. I could not read the Bible. I could not pray as I wanted because my emotions were dead and cut off. There was no feedback from God the Holy Spirit… My mind could not rest and grow calm but instead raced relentlessly, thinking dreadful thoughts of despair.

My mind also raced about, grasping for the comfort of the Saviour whom I knew and loved and for the emotional peace that he could give me, but finding nothing. I concluded that the only reason for such darkness must be spiritual. Unnamed guilt filled me. Yet the only guilt I could put a name to was failure to read my Bible. But I could not read, and would God condemn me for this? I could only lie there and cry, “Oh God, why? Why?

This type of thing is heart-rending. God’s inscrutable (and cruel?) silence/inaction in the face of the innocent suffering of his lambs is still the best argument for atheism there is. What good shepherd lets the wolves ravage the flock? Jeeves, to his credit, doesn’t try to answer with any triteness and condemns the triumphalist way that implies if you suffer like this you’ve “fallen away” or “gave place to doubt” or committed some undisclosed sin. I once had a good friend and pastor try to tell me that when Job said, “what I have greatly feared has come upon me”, his “negative confession” of fear is what “opened the door” to the disasters that befell him. Sheesh! Never mind the whole point of the book is that Job’s trials are explicitly said NOT to be due to any sin of his. My friend’s name wasn’t Eliphaz, Bildad, or Zophar, but it may as well have been. Jeeves concludes that these changes in our brain occur through no fault of our own, so they don’t affect our “spirituality” whatever that is anyway. Imonk readers should remember Chaplain Mike’s essay on “surd evil” . The Christian’s response can only be empathy, love, and all the practical support we can give.

Chapter 18 is, Can Science “Explain Away” Religion? Answer – NO, now move along, nothing to see here. Oh… you want to discuss it anyway (sigh) very well then. Linking evolutionary psychology with cognitive neuroscience to understand religion is a popular media trope. In 2009 the New Scientist ran an article titled, “Natural Born Believers”, with the sub-heading, “Why Religion Is Part of Human Nature”. Brains, it said, are primed for it. The National Academy of Science in America published a paper with the title, “Cognitive and Neural Foundations of Religious Belief”. At the end of November in the same year the journal Science published, “On the Origin of Religion”. All fascinating stuff.

The thing is, similar approaches could be taken to studying the origins of political beliefs, or ethical beliefs, or moral beliefs, or… or… (wait for it) SCIENTFIC BELIEFS (gasp!). Yes, scientists have pinpointed which areas of our brains are most active when we are undertaking scientific research!!! Researchers have shown that our scientific beliefs have evolved over the centuries from a primitive state to today’s highly sophisticated systems. Other researchers have shown how certain scientific beliefs were culturally conditioned and were social constructs of their time (eugenics, anyone?). Of course the cognitive structures of the brain are involved in religious thinking and an evolutionary path can be discerned or hypothesized. Cognitive structures of the brain and evolutionary development are involved in EVERY FRICKIN’ HUMAN ENDEAVOR! Would that mean that what we write in our scientific journals must be untrue? Of course not. New insights into the neural, evolutionary, psychological, or anthropological origins and underpinnings of beliefs could never tell us whether beliefs are true or false. That can only be decided by studying what is claimed to be the evidential basis for the belief and then carefully evaluating it.

For some devout Christians, any suggestion that their capacity to believe in God and express that belief in sincere faith can be put under the microscope of cognitive scientists and evolutionary psychologists is a step too far. It threatens the concept of imago Dei and the uniqueness of God’s creation of man. But committed Christian neuroscientists, like Justin Barrett and Matthew Jarvinen don’t believe so. In their book, The Emergence of Personhood: A Quantum Leap? they write:

For the sake of argument, let us suppose that the CSR-type (cognitive science of religion) account is broadly accurate. Does such an account, then, undercut or cast doubt on the theological claim that human personhood is specially marked as being Imago Dei, in the image or likeness of God.” “For example, many things we regard as good, including art and music; many things we believe are truth producing, such as your favorite branch of mathematics or philosophy; and many things we value as useful, such as clothing and fishing tackle, are evolutionary byproducts in a comparable respect.” Indeed they note that Noam Chomsky recognized modern science as a possible evolutionary byproduct. And they point out that philosopher Peter van Invagen has observed that an evolutionary by-product could very well be intentional and not an “accident” at all. Referring to van Invagen’s views, Barrett writes, “That is, God could have selected this universe out of any number of possible ones because it featured in one species a tendency toward theism as one (by) product of evolution.”

I’m down with this. Religious thinking serves adaptive functions. It fosters morality, social cohesion and group survival. That is why it is so widespread across humanity. If you think that explains away God, well you’re entitled to your opinion. My opinion is that God, through evolutionary processes, brought forth a creature able to reflect on Him, ponder His ways, suss out His secondary mechanisms, and ultimately relate to Him in love.

• • •

Previous Posts in This Series

Ordinary Time Bible Study: Philippians – Friends in the Gospel (2)

Mamertine Prison, Rome. Traditional site of Peter & Paul’s imprisonments

Ordinary Time Bible Study
Philippians: Friends in the Gospel
Study Two

This commentary takes the…view: that the letter as it has come down to us makes sense as a [single] letter, written by Paul, probably from Rome in the early 60s, to his longtime friends and compatriots in the gospel who lived in Philippi, a Roman military colony on the interior plain of eastern Macedonia.

• Gordon Fee

• • •

THE BACKGROUND OF PHILIPPIANS

Paul’s epistle to the Philippians is relatively uncontroversial with regard to background issues.

• Authorship: A great majority of scholars conclude that the apostle himself wrote it. However, it is possible that Paul used other materials in composing the letter, such as the “Christ-hymn” of 2:6-11.

• Integrity as a Single Letter: Some see “seams” in the letter and a lack of clear organization, which has led them to propose that Philippians is a composite document made up of two or three different letters. However, as Gordon Fee argues, the various parts of the letter can be easily understood as portions of one letter, and the thanksgiving section at the beginning anticipates material in all three of the alleged separate documents said to be patched together.

• Paul’s Circumstances: The other main question is where Paul was when he wrote the epistle. The three main theories are Rome, Ephesus, and Caesarea. It is traditional to think that Paul wrote from a Roman prison, and Gordon Fee accepts this as the best option. In his view the internal evidence favors Rome, and compelling reasons for rejecting it are lacking. The primary reason scholars question Rome is that it is about 800 miles from Rome to Philippi, and Paul seems to propose a number of journeys between the two cities that would have been difficult to achieve. For this reason, N.T. Wright favors Ephesus. Gerald Hawthorne favors Caesarea, even though it was farther from Philippi than Rome.

THE CITY OF PHILIPPI

Philippi was an important city in the Roman Empire. Located on the major east-west road, the Egnatian Way, it angled south from the city to the port of Neapolis. Two major battles had been fought on the nearby plain in 42 BCE: between Cassius and Brutus (who assassinated Julius Caesar) and Octavian (Augustus) and Mark Antony. Octavian, the victor named Philippi a “colony,” and its population thus became citizens of the empire. Over the years, he populated the town and surrounding areas with war veterans, ensuring a loyal citizenry. It is possible that the “sufferings” of the Philippian Christians mentioned in this letter had something to do with the fact that they bowed the knee before Jesus as “Lord” (2:9-11) in a community where Caesar was firmly revered as Lord.

Fee notes that “By the time Paul came to the city in 49 CE (Acts 16:11-15), Philippi was the urban political center of the eastern end of the plain.”

THE CHURCH IN PHILIPPI

The story of Paul coming to Philippi and founding the church there is one of the most familiar and beloved in the book of Acts (16:11-40). One interesting facet of that story is that it underscores the prominent place women played in Macedonian life and how that influenced the nature of the congregation from the beginning. In the light of this, Gordon Fee notes: “It is not surprising that the core group of first converts consisted of women, nor that the location of Macedonia’s house church was the home of a woman merchant. That Paul and his entourage also accepted patronage from Lydia, including becoming temporary members of her household, also is significant for some of the matters in our letter….”

One other text that shows something of the character of this group of believers and their relationship with Paul is found in 2Corinthians 8:1-5 —

We want you to know, brothers and sisters, about the grace of God that has been granted to the churches of Macedonia; for during a severe ordeal of affliction, their abundant joy and their extreme poverty have overflowed in a wealth of generosity on their part. For, as I can testify, they voluntarily gave according to their means, and even beyond their means, begging us earnestly for the privilege of sharing in this ministry to the saints— and this, not merely as we expected; they gave themselves first to the Lord and, by the will of God, to us

Note the same notes in this passage that we see in Philippians: affliction, joy, poverty, generosity, eagerness to give. Further evidence of their joyful willingness to serve involves Epaphroditus, the one who was carrying this letter from the apostle back to the church. He had apparently traveled to be with Paul and minister to him in prison. Paul is effusive in describing his appreciation for this man, calling him “my brother and co-worker and fellow-soldier, your messenger and minister to my need.” No wonder Paul had such a special place in his heart for these sisters and brothers.

The troubles in Philippi, mirrored in the letter, appear to have been threefold.

First, they were facing opponents (1:27-30) that were probably pagan opponents in the city. Paul notes that the congregation was facing “the same struggle that you saw I had and now hear that I still have.”

Second, Paul warns them to beware of certain “dogs” whom he describes in terms of Jewish opposition to Paul’s law-free gospel (3:1-4). But there is no indication that chapter three’s warnings are anything but general in nature and that the Philippian believers were actually being subjected to an assault of false teaching at the time of this letter.

Third, what Paul writes indicates that the congregation was showing some signs of growing internal strife. How this relates to their other circumstances is unclear, and the language Paul uses seems to imply that the conflicts had not become too severe. Nevertheless, the reports are troubling enough that Paul exhorts them in no uncertain terms, naming the kinds of attitudes that are deadly to harmonious relationships (2:3-4), and going so far as to call out some individual members of the congregation and urging them to “be of the same mind in the Lord” (4:2).

Even in the midst of these troubles, Paul expresses his absolute confidence in God’s work in these precious friends: “I am confident of this, that the one who began a good work among you will bring it to completion by the day of Jesus Christ” (1:6).

• • •

Ordinary Time Bible Study
Philippians – Friends in the Gospel

Study One: A Friendship Letter

The Revival of Civil Religion

Here is an announcement from the website of First Baptist Dallas. Their pastor, Robert Jeffress, has been one of evangelical Christianity’s prime cheerleaders for President Trump throughout the past election year and since.

• • •

President Donald J. Trump to Join Pastor Robert Jeffress in Honoring Veterans at the Kennedy Center for the ‘Celebrate Freedom’ Concert This Saturday

This Unforgettable Patriotic Evening Will Feature Music from a 500-Voice First Baptist Dallas Choir and Orchestra, a Tribute to Our Veterans from President Trump, and a Word from Pastor Robert Jeffress

DALLAS—President Donald Trump will join Pastor Robert Jeffress to honor our veterans at the “Celebrate Freedom” Concert at 8 p.m. July 1 at the Kennedy Center in Washington, D.C. The event, which is being co-sponsored by the First Baptist Church of Dallas and Salem Media, will be a night of hope, celebration and commemoration. President Trump will deliver a powerful address honoring our veterans, hundreds of whom will be coming from D.C. area to attend the event, including patients from the Walter Reed Medical Center.

“The Kennedy Center, known for presenting the greatest performers and performances from across America and around the world, is the perfect location for an unforgettable patriotic evening that honors our veterans, celebrates our country, and proclaims a message of hope,” said Pastor Robert Jeffress. “We are honored the president of the United States will be joining us, but we are not surprised. We have in President Donald J. Trump one of the great patriots of our modern era and a president who cherishes the sacrifice and service of those in our armed forces.”

Stirring patriotic music will come from the renowned choir and orchestra of First Baptist Dallas, under the direction of Dr. Doran Bugg. The First Baptist Dallas Choir & Orchestra is no stranger to our nation’s most prestigious concert halls, having been the first church music ministry invited to perform at the world-famous Carnegie Hall in New York City.

Dr. Robert Jeffress, pastor of the 13,000-member First Baptist Church in Dallas and host of the radio and television program “Pathway to Victory,” seen in 195 countries, will also bring a message of hope and encouragement.

The “Celebrate Freedom” Concert is free and open to the public, but tickets must be reserved in advance by going to http://www.ptv.org/washington.

The “Celebrate Freedom” Concert rally will be the capstone of a weeklong series of events Pastor Robert Jeffress will host through the nation’s capital including speaking at a Bible study for Congressional staffers in the Capitol, a tour of Washington highlighting our country’s Judeo-Christian foundation, and personal visits with various others numbered among our nation’s leadership.

“I’m grateful that President Trump has created an atmosphere in which Evangelical Christians feel at home once again in our nation’s capital,” said Pastor Jeffress.

• • •

I have no problem with the idea that devoted Christians can love our country and appreciate the influence faith, and Christian faith in particular, has had on our history and development. I’m also fine with Christian citizens working to pass laws and maintain governmental institutions that are just and beneficial for society.

I don’t believe, except in the broadest possible terms, that the U.S. is or ever has been a “Christian nation.” In their genius, our founding fathers separated church and state, rightly suspicious of allowing state-sponsored religion. This has allowed both political freedom and religion to flourish for much of our history.

I also understand that many Christians are sentimental for what they think was a more stable moral and prosperous period in our history in the mid-20th century. However, in my opinion, much of that is, in fact, only sentiment. There were no “good old days.” There were, however, days when certain forms of “Christian” morality held more rhetorical sway in the halls of power and the public square. In other words, many actually long for the day “when we were in charge” and “when the things we saw in public were more to our liking.”

Frankly, I don’t find this a particularly “Christian” attitude. No matter what kind of world and culture we live in, the Christian’s duty is to follow Jesus Christ. In the Bible I read, that means loving God, loving my neighbor, and indeed, loving my enemies. Nowhere do I see that it involves avidly promoting the civil religion of any particular nation or political party, seeking power at all costs, and triumphantly waving the flag and the cross in the face of fellow Americans who hold other views. I get the idea that a lot of people are saying, “Well, they (whoever they is) had their turn, now it’s ours. Let them sit back and see what it feels like.” What are we, in third grade?

In my view we must always beware the dangerous mixing of God and Caesar, no matter how “Christian” Caesar and his minions may appear.

I find it particularly appalling that Christian leaders like Robert Jeffress are so gung-ho over such a transparent snake-oil-selling president as the one we have now, who has adopted “white evangelicals” as an integral part of his base but who, by any account, shares nothing in common with them except the lust for power and control.

It is hard not to be completely cynical and despairing when observing the current situation.

Wisdom for Ordinary Time: Eugene Peterson on Leviticus 19:18

During Ordinary Time this year, I am reading and meditating on Eugene Peterson’s new book, As Kingfishers Catch Fire: A Conversation on the Ways of God Formed by the Words of God. This book captures sermons from Peterson’s twenty-nine years as a pastor in Bel Air, Maryland.

Today, Peterson’s sermon focuses on Leviticus 19:18 — “You shall love your neighbour as yourself” — and the Apostle John’s exposition of it in the letter of 1 John. Here is an excerpt.

• • •

Love is the most context-specific act in the entire spectrum of human behavior. There is no other single human act more dependent on and immersed in immediate context. A dictionary is worthless in understanding and practicing love. Acts of love cannot be canned and then used off the shelf. Every act of love requires creative and personal giving, responding, and serving appropriate to — context-specific to — both the person doing the loving and the person being loved. Because of the totally personal, particular, and uniquely contextual community dimensions and inescapably local conditions — there is a sense in which we cannot tell a person how to love, and so our Scriptures for the most part don’t even try.

Instead of explanations or definitions or generalizations, John settles for a name and the story that goes with it: Jesus. “We know love by this, that he [Jesus] laid down his life for us — and we ought to lay down our lives for one another” (1 John 3:16, NRSV). Then he lets us find the particular but always personal and relational way to do it in the Jesus way: “We love because he first loved us” (4:19, NRSV).

Friends, we are immersed in great and marvelous realities. Creation! Salvation! Resurrection! But when we come up dripping out of the waters of baptism and look around, we discover to our surprise that the community of the baptized is made up of people just like us: unfinished, immature, neurotic, stumbling, singing out of tune much of the time, forgetful, and boorish. Is it credible that God would put all these matters of eternal significance into the hands of such as we are? Many, having taken a good look at what they see, shake their heads and think not. But this is the perpetual difficulty of living a life of love in the community of the beloved. We had better get used to it.

…Every sentence in this elaborate pastoral exposition of the five-word command in Leviticus comes out more or less the same: God loves you. Christ shows you how love works. Now you love. Love, love, love, love. Just do it.

Amen.

• • •

Photo by Susanne Nilsson at Flickr. Creative Commons License

2nd Sunday after Trinity: Cantata & Pic of the Week

(Click on picture for larger image)

• • •

Internet Monk has often noted the absence of lament in much of American church culture. Today, we present an example of a Bach chorus of lament from his cantata “Ach Gott, vom Himmel sieh darein” (O God, Look Down from Heaven).

It seems, when lamenting, we humans are wont to return to basics, to strip away frills and embellishments, to simply fall on our knees and cry out to God. The opening chorus from this cantata exemplifies that impulse. In the words of Simon Crouch:

When Bach had to set a severe subject, as he has to here in this chorale cantata based on Luther’s paraphrase of psalm xii., he often reached for musical procedures that were considered archaic even in his own time. In the opening chorus here, he uses a style of choral motet that is associated with Pachelbel, where the accompaniment simply takes the form of a continuo. The result is austere beauty, the altos hold the cantus firmus in long notes while the other parts sing a fugue about them.

In like manner, Julius Mincham comments that, in this work, Bach “reasserts traditional values,” presenting a piece which is raw, bare, and fundamental.

The chromatic harmony induces a harsh and arid quality to this movement which, to the modern ear, may well invoke the cold, lifeless scene of a waterless and barren planet surface. It is reminiscent of the language of some of the later works such as the Musical Offering or the Art of Fugue. …Nevertheless, Bach’s immediate message is that when we live in an environment where God’s word is absent, life may be bare and sterile.

While this may not be the uplifting, delightful Bach, BWV 2 represents the essential, realistic Bach. God’s Word has come to the desert, to make it bloom again. But much remains barren, awaiting resurrection life.

Ah God, look down from heaven
and have mercy yet upon us!
How few are Your saints,
we poor ones are abandoned;
Your Word is not upheld as true,
and faith is also quite extinguished
among all mankind.