+Z’ev

I’ve just updated to WordPress 2.5 and I’m checking things out.

Today’s assigned readings:
Genesis 42:18-28, 1 Corinthians 5:9-6:8, Mark 4:1-20

Paul says in verse 9 that he’s written the Corinthians before, in an earlier epistle. Which, of course, makes this to be the second - and the one we call “2nd Corinthians” to be the 3rd! I wonder how many other ones we’re missing?

But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother or sister who is sexually immoral or greedy, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or robber. Do not even eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging those outside? Is it not those who are inside that you are to judge? God will judge those outside. “Drive out the wicked person from among you.”
1 Corinthians 5:11-13

In his commentary on this passage, John Chrysostom says,

“Put away from among yourselves the wicked person.” Paul used an expression found in the Old Testament, (Deut. xvii. 7.) partly hinting that they too will be very great gainers, in being freed as it were from some grievous plague; and partly to shew that this kind of thing is no innovation, but even from the beginning it seemed good to the Law Giver (Moses) that such as these should be cut off. But in that instance it was done with more severity, in this with more gentleness.

Chrysostom notes that “in that instance” (in the OT) in fact, it was stoning. Here it is “only” excommunication - driving “such a one” out from the community.

But, really Paul wasn’t being less severe at all.

All modern translations of this text into English agree: Paul was referring to “an evil person”. The Hebrew text that Paul citing only mentions “evil” - sweep the evil out from your midst.

The LXX, however, uses the Greek that Paul sites - and it adds a person to it. The Greek is more than a little awkward, using the word for “evil” the same way that Jesus uses it in the Lord’s Prayer where it means “the evil one”. In this passage from Paul, “the evil one” is made more explicit by telling the Corinthians not even to “eat with such a one.”

This passage annoys me.

Because Paul gets the Hebrew wrong.
Paul says *nothing* like what Jesus would say.
And conservative Christians - to this day - use this passage as a proof text when they want to avoid people who are different. Some (Catholics, Orthodox, Missouri Synod Lutherans) use this as support to avoid taking communion with others.

The Hebrew seems to imagine “the evil” as a a contagion within the community. (As later, the Rabbis will refer to “the evil inclination” and “the good inclination in people.) The LXX seems to personify “the evil” however, into “the evil one”. But even so it’s not clear if “the evil one” refers to someone committing a sin (that has just been stoned to death) or to the devil, as, again, an evil force or contagion in the community. Paul goes a step further and makes the implication clear: the evil is personified in the sinner.

So what I want to know is, how is this like Jesus - who even gave communion to Judas?

Again, Chrysostom says that Paul is being “more gentle” than Moses. But I’m not sure that kicking someone out of the community (where, to let Paul continue God will judge the “outsiders”) is very gentle at all.

How should we treat one among us who is “sexually immoral or greedy, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or robber”? Jesus was quite clear: let he among you who is without sin cast the first stone.

Right now the Anglican Communion is going through this over and over - with people on both sides of the Human Sexuality Debate trying to “not eat with” the folks on the other side.

And, having followed Paul to the letter through these first few verses, they are filing law suits in secular courts, going to the secular media, making a public outcry - denying Paul in the rest of today’s reading.

They will know we are Christians by our love.

Yup.

Much love,

Huw

Today’s assigned readings,
Genesis 41:46-57, 1 Corinthians 4:8-21, Mark 3:7-19a

I am not writing this to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children. For though you might have ten thousand guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers. Indeed, in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel. I appeal to you, then, be imitators of me.
1 Corinthians 4:14-16

Don’t you think it’s interesting that Paul says “Imitate me…” instead of “Imitate Jesus…”? Or even, “Look I’m trying to imitate Jesus, so you can follow me in trying to do so as well…”

One of the more-common accusation levelled against Christianity is usually along these lines: “Jesus was pretty cool, but Paul messed the whole thing up.” And there places where Paul says rather Christ-like things, to be certain. But this isn’t one of them.

In fact, reading this passage, I understand some things and so feel inclined to remind readers of a story.

When I joined the Orthodox parish in North Carolina, there was a Priest, a Deacon, a Sub-deacon and a Reader. We had the “full compliment” of the lower orders, as present in Orthodoxy. All of these other clergy were married, and their wives and children were also members of the parish. But by the time the parish closed all of them had left. Only one of them is involved in any church at all. The rest are not religious. Of the families that were left in the parish when it closed… none of them go to any church at all save me (and we know from the comments here, that I make a bad Christian at that)!

The reason is, I’m certain, because of a fetish that many - but not all - American converts to Orthodoxy have around this concept of a “Spiritual Father” which Paul is introducing right here.

And what has suddenly become clear to me, I think, is why it breaks down. Paul says, “What would you prefer? Am I to come to you with a stick, or with love in a spirit of gentleness?” And there is no way that can not be read but as a threat - a most un-Jesus like threat of “punishment” and anger and judgement. I say that - no matter what you might read in the same sentence - because of my experience at that parish: I’m thinking of spending 45 mins in confession because I voted the wrong way on the parish council and the guilt trip that was inflicted on me (I was crying by the end of the session)… and ultimately because *that’s* the only way some of these other people ever experience God at all.

I think it’s interesting that 100 years after this epistle is written St Clement, the Pope, is writing the Corinthians again, about the same problems. Why? Could it have something to do with Paul making threats and acting like an angry school marm or like that Nun who used to whip you in Catholic School?

There’s a good, solid, theological reason Paul doesn’t say, “Imitate Jesus…” Or even, “Look I’m trying to imitate Jesus, so you can follow me in trying to do so as well…” There a reason he says, instead, “Imitate me.”

Because Jesus isn’t there.

The only Jesus these Gentiles (and some Jews) in Corinth will ever see is Paul. The only gospel your friends may ever read is *you*. And someone who is waiving a stick around - or threatening to - doesn’t look very much like the man who said, “he who is without sin, cast the first stone”. Suddenly I understand why the Corinthians were still having their problems 100 years later, and suddenly I understand why all the clergy left - not only Orthodoxy, but any church at all. And when the only active and present Jesus someone sees turns into a royal putz… they loose all faith in God.

How do we act?

How do we embody the Gospel?

Jesus summed up the Torah as, “Love God, Love your neighbour as you love yourslef.” The ancient Rabbis said the Torah was summed up as “That which is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbour.”

Would you want someone threatening to come after you with a stick?

God is not there - save in your hands, your voice, your heart. Jesus is not present save in your body. How will God act in this situation - whatever situation you have in your life? Someone else’s life may depend on your choice.

Much love,

Huw

Today’s assigned readings:
Genesis 41:14-45, Romans 6:3-14, John 5:19-24

It is as I told Pharaoh; God has shown to Pharaoh what he is about to do. There will come seven years of great plenty throughout all the land of Egypt. After them there will arise seven years of famine, and all the plenty will be forgotten in the land of Egypt; the famine will consume the land. The plenty will no longer be known in the land because of the famine that will follow, for it will be very grievous.
Genesis 41:28-31

One thing that strikes me - over and over - about the prelude to the Exodus story (from Joseph’s slavery onward) is that everyone is sure God is acting, but no one knows why.

Later Joseph will be quite certain that God (and not Joseph’s brothers) brought Joseph to Egypt in order to save Jacob and his family. After that, however, when slavery has set in, it looks rather different. After that, however, when the Exodus comes, the entire picture changes again. Did God cause the famine in order to drive Jacob to Egypt exactly so that the people of Israel would be enslaved exactly so that God could rescue them with the Passover? Was all this planned from the very beginning?

Or does it just look that way?

Walking with my (then) housemate, Dan, along the West Side Highway in NYC, we ran into my friend Alex, coming from the other direction. We had a fun day that, ultimately, resulted in me getting a tattoo. Later that week, I wrote a story about all the things that had to happen in order to bring Alex into contact with Dan and I at that moment. Ultimately I was able to pin it on the Exodus of the Jews from Egypt: because Dan was Jewish.

In hindsight, everything is, really, 20/20.

Until the next thing happens.

And Alex commits suicide, and I’m left standing on a ladder in Borders Books (San Francisco) crying because I saw the Tattoo he gave me, wondering why there was nothing I could do about his sadness.

And for a while, everything seems clear until the next thing happens.

I recently picked up my entire life and moved to Buffalo, NY, in order to be closer to Brodie, my intended. Right now it all looks like chaos - and although I have the temerity to make plans for the future. Hindsight is 20/20 until the next thing happens.

I think that’s the way its supposed to be.

But does that mean that Joseph was right?
Or is saying “look what God has done” just a way to make sense out of things?

When I look at my life and say “look what God has done” is that just a way to bless what a mess I’ve made?

When the Telegraph was invented, it is said that the first message sent along the wires by Samuel F. B. Morse from Washington to Baltimore was “What hath God wrought?” (24 May 1844) Why blame God for this thing that, ultimately, has allowed me to post these messages on the internet for you to read? There is no way Morse could have guessed where his technology would lead: but I can now find you, via Google Maps, and, given the right access, I can get to most of you via CCTV. Most of you can find me on the internet or even via web cam. Is this a case of “What hath God wrought?” or more like “Look what we did?”

Is blaming God for the telegraph just a way to pin the blame on him for porn sites and identity theft?

An a couple of Generations, how will the Egyptians feel about magically knowing all about the famine? We’ll see.

Much love,

Huw

Sorry for the delays in posting. I’m preparing to move to Buffalo and posting will be sporadic until, probably, the middle of next month. I shall try to dash off brief posts for the readings as they strike me during the day.