We read Philippians 2: 5-11 as the second lesson today, as we do most years on Palm Sunday. Why?
The short answer is: it is read to remind us of the central meaning of Christianity. That is, following the Nazorean messiah in humble service to others, a meaning which brings life to others and ourselves, a meaning to be pondered throughout Holy Week. That meaning is not, I might add, about whether or not the bones of Jesus and his family once existed in a few ossuaries in Jerusalem or not. It is also not about the ‘truth’ of Christian doctrine or belief (whether Jesus rose from the dead or not, or the objective, universal salvific nature of Jesus’ death on the cross). Such doctrines can always be argued about, dismissed, rejected out of hand by those who are not Christians or used by those who are Christians as bludgeons to beat other Christians into submission to their own egos and points of view.
To explain all that more fully there needs be a longer presentation.
This short section we read from St. Paul’s letter to believers in Philippi is in fact likely a hymn of praise about the (Nazorean) messiah. It may have been written by Paul and inserted into his letter. It may have been written by some one else whose text Paul immortalized by quoting it.
The whole hymn or poem is intriguing but there are some parts of it that are more so for our purposes than others. One theological perspective that has come out of it has been called the ‘kenotic’ theory. ‘Kenosis’ refers to the English words ‘emptied’ (himself). Paul and other early followers believed that the Christ/messiah was pre-existent, somehow ‘God’ or part of YHWH or in God, before he or it became the living man, Jesus of Nazareth. In this hymn, then, kenosis refers to the choice of the Nazorean messiah to abandon or empty himself of divine prerogatives and become a man. But it also refers to a self-emptying, of taking on the form of a servant, leading to death.
The writer has produced a theology of humbleness. He (she?) believes Yeshuah chooses to deny himself for the sake of humanity. Note that this notion of being a servant has nothing to do with the idea that a servant is a doormat or someone who allows himself or herself to be trampled. Nor is it about giving up one’s personal identity or individuality. Rather, it is about turning one’s self over to God, through messiah and ‘letting the same mind be in you that was in messiah’, rather than the mind and heart of the world around us. Elsewhere, Paul writes a complementary comment when he says ‘do not be conformed to this world but be transformed into the likeness of messiah’ (Romans 12:2).
So, someone might ask, what does this mean at a practical level, and how is it the very centre of Christian piety and trust? To answer that question we need to step outside the parameters of the reading and look at the words before and after the quoted hymn. What does Paul say? Some of the words before the hymn are these: ‘Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility regard others as better than yourselves. Let each of you look not to your own interests, but to the interests of others’. Some of the words after are: ‘Do all things without murmuring and arguing, so that you may be blameless and innocent, children of YHWH without blemish in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation’. One would think that Paul had written these words directly to any of us in the Anglican, Catholic, Lutheran, Baptist, Nazarene etc. etc. churches than to those few believers in Philippi two thousand years ago.
Paul’s concern about being like messiah, having ‘that same mind of messiah’ in each believer, that intent to be servants of others, that same sense of kenosis, of choosing self-emptying or self-denial over self- promotion is throughout Paul’s letters to Gentile believers. In one place he writes ‘Let love be genuine…’ In another he wrote, ‘Outdo one another in showing zeal…’ In Galatians he writes about ‘faith working through love’ being the only thing that counts. Elsewhere he writes ‘love does no wrong to the neighbour’; knowledge, words, reason, argument, all passes away, but not love. So, if the greater context of Paul’s quotation of this great hymn is the iteration to ‘have the mind of messiah’ as a servant of others and to act in humbleness for others, then I suppose the next question is: how is that done? Is it done through some sort of magical formula that only some have the wit, personal charisma, desire or will or (political mindfulness) grace to receive from God, or is it something more prosaic and difficult?
Let me answer that question by talking about an ancient theological/philosophical problem which often erupted in rather un-saintly disagreement. This was the problem of the freedom of human will versus YHWH’s sovereignty. It goes along in the following manner: if YHWH is sovereign or king, or omnipotent etc, etc, then what becomes of human freedom and therefore what becomes of human responsibility?
Saint Augustine died in 430 c.e. He is one of the most well-known of the early Christian philosophers/theologians. His opponent on this matter was a British theologian named Pelagius who argued that human beings can and do choose, in freedom, to either accept or oppose YHWH without any interference or aid from God. Augustine believed that no one can come to YHWH or even make a move in that direction without God’s grace impelling them and aiding them on the way. Augustine’s view was in part based on the idea that original sin made human beings incapable of freely choosing, that is without God’s support, the path of self emptying or giving for others, the path of the cross. Pelagius, being of a more Celtic and Hebrew-like disposition, did not accept such a negative view of humanity and believed that there was original goodness in human beings, as well as ‘original sin’ (a complex and irrelevant that cannot be discussed here.
I have to say that I agree with Pelagius on this issue for a number of reasons, biblical and theological, but I chiefly am on his side in the debate because of one sentence that Paul wrote immediately after the hymn in Philippians: ‘work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.’ Being a Christian, then, is a life-long task to achieve the humbleness of a servant, of a messiah figure who denies (at least part of the time) his or her own interests for those of others, one who self-empties for others, makes others first, one who sacrifices his or her love of self for love of the other. Here is a quote that summarizes Augustine’s rather extensive thought on this issue of love: “it is by the character of their wills, by the character of their dominant love, that men are ultimately marked.’
There is a Christian theology that is based upon magical thinking. It is the kind of thinking that states that ‘if we suffer now, we will reign later’, as the Anglican Lenten sentence for the breaking of bread implies. It is also seen in various hymns and other liturgical phrases. One hymn sung at this precise time in the year is Lift High the Cross. The standard refrain is, ‘Lift high the Cross/that all the world adore his holy name’. I propose a revision: ‘Lift high the Cross/that all God’s church, obey his sacred word’. It is also summed up in the idea that YHWH will take care of everything, with or without our own involvement, that YHWH has done it all (destroyed evil, secured salvation, etc, etc) in Jesus’ death on the cross and therefore you and I are only involved as Christians in a kind of mopping up exercise while we wait for Jesus to come back and the members of the church to be openly revealed as the true people of God. There are a number of concerns I have about such theology and one is that it is triumphalist and therefore the tendency has been for Christians to feel superior towards everyone else, or for some Christians to feel they are superior or better than other Christians (a direct contradiction to Paul’s words in this letter) but also because it does away with choice and therefore responsibility.
A better theology is this: that YHWH cannot force any human being to bend to YHWH’s will; else we would break and cease to be human. YHWH or God’s grace, to use an analogy, can lead us to the door but only we, of our free will can choose to walk through the doorway. And so we come to the reason why we read this hymn today on Palm Sunday: messiah chooses a mortal life and then once mortal chooses a path of self-denial, the role of a servant, so that other human beings might turn to the second of Augustine’s two loves: the love of YHWH and through the love of YHWH, the love of humankind. Christians, if they are true to the mind of messiah, choose precisely the same kind of path, not waiting or expecting that some magical act of YHWH will bring the kingdom into existence but instead use their freedom and their gifts to make choices that throughout their life’s journey lead to sacrifice of their will to YHWH’s grace for the sake of others. In this way we become either angels or devils, we choose the love of self which is only the instinct of our animal natures or we ultimately choose, ‘are marked by,’ as Augustine put it, the love of YHWH, which persuades us to turn to love other human beings.
If I were to sum all this up, it would be by means of the quip ascribed to St. Francis of Assisi: ‘preach the Gospel; if necessary, use words’.
It is here that the mystery of the cross and resurrection lies: that somehow in the death of this one man and his post-death life, his resurrection, we can find power/authority that leads to new life, both here and hereafter. But it can only be accessed by choice after choice after choice to put the other person first, to put another person’s interests first, or at least consider another’s welfare as important as one’s own and to be humble in service of others, to do all things without murmuring and arguing, as Paul put it.
If the Church, that is you, me, bishops, archdeacons, all of us, learnt how to do this, how to be Christians, so defined by Paul, then there is no argument or critique against the church that could possibly work because who can argue against goodness or love (chesed)? Who can argue against service? Who can argue against love of other? Self-denial? It is right here in this notion that lies the authority of the Christian tradition and the ability to change the world.