Thursday, July 24, 2008

Wayne and Paglia Part II: The Saga Continues

Please read the first entry to get the full context of this.


Earlier I gave a brief synopsis about Batman’s pagan roots. Here I want to give two more illustrations. I do this not to bash Batman, it was a great movie, but as a commentary on society. I believe by analyzing culture we can see what the pervading thoughts and emotions of it are, and as such know what we are up against, what we are being sold, and the extent to which it has permeated our thought.

As already said, I am pulling some of this critique from a line of thought expressed by Camile Paglia in Sexual Persona. And will continue in this vein, mainly because I think her observations are valid, though her conclusions may be flawed. One of the observations she has noted in the forth chapter of the book is that in pagan literature there is always a return to the chthonian, the Dionysian. We came from chaos in the pagan world view, and try to put order to it. Eventually, though, that order is itself usurped by itself, and chaos is produced. We can se this in art. The very romanticized forms of Greece are Apollonian in design. They are solid, chiseled, hard. They are not round and soft. They point towards and ideal, rather than capturing real people. This is Apollonian. Identifying, quantifying, idealizing. But what happens? This ideal leads to all sorts of sexual debauchery. The ideal gives rise to chaos. Her modern equivalent is Pornography. It, like Greek art, is idyllic (I am not attaching value to this word here). It sells fantasy. The images are not reality. They only exist as Apollonian ideals. But what have they given rise to? Certainly not more organization and rational. They give rise to debauchery and lust, which by their very nature are Dionysian. They are chaotic, emotional, irrational. What begins as Apollonian becomes chthonian.

This is the pagan saga. We begin in chaos, find some order, and chaos again arises, albeit a different type of chaos. And the chaos is a direct consequence of the order. It only has life because the Apollonian changes the system so that the new chaos could exist. This is also Batman. The Joker can only exist because there is this new order. He says as much. Before there was disorder. Crime was the rule. Corruption king. And then Batman, our Apollonian hero, enters the stage. He systematically creates order. He fights the chaos. He destroys the Dionysian. The old chaos is no more. People feel hope, renewed trust in the system, in society. The old criminals see their time coming to a close. And there is no Joker yet. There wasn’t one before. There couldn’t have been. Chaos was already king, though not his brand.

Once Batman creates order though, once the Apollonian has conquered, the new chthonian can be birthed. What couldn’t exist in the old system can now find life in the new (or rather demise of it). The old Dionysian was defeated by the New Apollonian, and as such, only a New Dionysian can defeat it. The Joker can only exist because Batman does. This is in itself not fully Pagan (evil can only exist along side good in Christianity as well). But Batman couldn’t have existed without disorder before (this is pagan, where in Christianity good can exist by itself and apart from any one). He owes his existence, not to the Joker, but to the same principle that birthed the newest antihero. Had Gotham been working, had the Dionysian never taken control, Batman and his new Apollonian way would have no raison d’etre.

This is pagan mythology, pagan history, pagan psychology

One other quick observation. The Apollonian, as already stated is rational. It is also linear. What I mean by that is that it is not fluid. Look again at Greek art. It is masculine. There are defined muscles. There is geometry and shape. And it doesn’t change. The Dionysian is not this. It is fluid. It is malleable. It defies form. Dionysus changed sex as needed. He showed up in many different guised. Loki too takes many forms. The Dionysian is feminine. It is curvy. It is soft. It is watery.

I don’t know if there is a parallel in Christianity to this. God is male. He is called Father, and has male characteristics. But in imagery I can’t immediately find in it the lines that there are in Pagan art. I think this is a very pagan concept. And it is found throughout the Dark Night.

Batman himself is a masterpiece of Apollonian imagery. He is iconic looking. We know when we have seen him. His image does not change. When it is Batman’s silhouette we know it. This is part of what gives him his power. Criminals can see the Bat in the sky, and they know that Order is coming to Gotham. Just the sight of him makes chaos flee. His car is hard. His suit is hard. His image is hard. The body armor is well defined. It looks like Greek man. He has a perfect chest, abs, and arms. His image is the idealized man. His wings too tell the same story. They are not like a birds wing that is mutable and flowing. They have a shape, and they hold it. The shadow of them form a solid image to the spectators below. They know where he ends and the world begins. His ears are sharp and pointed. There is no curve in him at all. All edges are linear, defined, sharp, Apollonian.

His Bat Cave is just the same. It is no longer an actual cave, in fact he seals the cave up. The chaos that bore him must be controlled an subdued. His new headquarters is an underground Apollonian monument. It is rigid and boxlike. The lights themselves are rows of symmetric squares. There is no softness. His video screen, again rows of rectangles. These create the closest thing to round in his life, but this is only an illusion. They are boxes. Everything neat and ordered. Apollonian majesty.

Now this wouldn’t necessarily be pagan, except in its roots. Remember order is birthed out of Chaos. This is why it is pagan. From Natures chaos, attacks form bats, fear, raw emotion, we have the birth of a super rational, ordered, emotionless god. This is what makes his order pagan. It is a reaction to the disorder, to nature. Christian order comes first. It is the action, and nature the reaction. Not so in Batman, or any pagan drama. The chthonian must always come first. The hero is the hero because he conquers it.

Let’s turn our attention to the Joker. I said he is the antithesis of Batman. He is the Dionysian to Batman’s Apollonian. How does the Joker look. He is disheveled. His makeup isn’t where it is supposed to go. He allows it to melt form one place to the next. We see lipstick that goes half way up his face, eye shadow that tracks to his cheek. He doesn’t respect the borders of even himself. As the movie goes on, the makeup itself changes. He allows it to drip and run. Where once there was while, now there is skin. Where once there was black, now there is white. And this doesn’t bother him. And it doesn’t bother the viewer. It adds to his persona. He is chaos. He is the Dionysian. He can’t even be conformed to his own image. Even more than this, he regularly throws off his image to maintain it. When beneficial to him, he wears no makeup at all, or a clown mask. At one time he is dressed in a purple tux, and another he is in a nurse’s dress. He is as the situation calls. He is fluid. The very fact that he shows up in drag further proves the point that he is Dionysius, he is Loki. He is the god of chaos and disorder. The eternal prankster, the primordial chthonian. He has no identity except for mutability. He is Batman’s antithesis once again.

Batman is only who he is because of how he looks. The Joker is who he is in spite of how he looks. Batman always looks the same. The Joker never does.

The Joker uses what is around him. He adapts. At one moment all his goons wear clown masks to identify them, at another, only hostages wear them. The Joker even mocks the Apollonian city itself. He forces people to evacuate, not by bridge or tunnel (Apollonian attempts to create order), but by boat, forcing people to submit to the Dionysian demands of the sea. Nature is always part of the Dionysian, and water all the more. It is fluid. It is mutable. It has no form of its own, but assumes the form of its surroundings.

This is the pagan fight between Apollonian and Dionysian. It is the struggle that captures humanity in a pagan world view. In Christianity the chthonian is a byproduct. In the pagan it is the first. It is equal with the Apollonian. They are at odds with each other, but also need each other. They try to kill each other, but also birth each other. They are inseparable. Batman could not exist with out the chaos of both Gotham and his fear of bats, and the Joker could not have existed without the order and rules that Batman brings. The Apollonian gives birth to the Dionysian, the Dionysian to the Apollonian. The serpent is always eating its tail. The cycle continues. Pagan to the core.

Christianity stands in stark contrast to this. The chthonian is an invader. It is a parasite. It is a derivative. It has no life on its own. It can only live because God lets it. Good stands by itself, evil stands only in relation to good. Righteousness exists apart from sin, but sin exists only as the ruiner of righteousness. The serpent was not created in the garden with Man, he entered after creation. He is not coequal. His disorder only exists in relation to God’s order, but God’s order stands alone. More than this, God uses the very disorder that the serpent tries to destroy order with, to bring order once again. In the cross God brings ultimate order for apparent ultimate disorder.

The very “unplan” that evil has to undo creation, is the very plan God has to save it. In this act he takes disorder and banishes it once and for all. It is not a coequal. In Batman, The Joker is able to use disorder to undo good. He turns Two Face bad through chaos. The Dionysian takes over the Apollonian. This stands as anti-Christian. God does just the opposite. He takes chaos’s plan to create disorder and produced the ultimate order. He crushes chaos with itself, and us such ultimately crushes it. Chaos is shown to be order under God. It is not a force at all. It is a tool that God will eventually use to save humanity. Order and Chaos are not on equal footing. The Apollonian does not give rise to the Dionysian and the Dionysian to the Apollonian ad infitatum. They are not sides of the same coin. Chaos is decidedly other. It is not the rule, but the exception. Order, plan, control. These are the rule. They exist outside of creation, the chthonian only as an invader to it.

This then may be the fruit of post-modernity; revived paganism. We may see more universes that have a duality, and Apollonian and Dionysian, as coequals. Paglia would say as much. If cinema is the thermometer of culture then we surely are entering the most pagan time in history. TH gods and goddesses of Olympus will b exchanged for Super Heroes on the one hand, and the Actors that play them on the other. The cult of personality will grow and feed. We will see more Batmen, both on film and in real life. And I think we can safely say this is happening. Stars are notorious for super egos. They are given by far less harsh sentences for breaking society laws or norms- and if they are to be our gods, it must be so. Like Batman, they need the right to operate outside our conventions- and we are seemingly more than ready to give it to them. We have elevated them past star to hero and god.

We watch shows about heroes, like the show by the same name, or 24, or dozens like them. We read comics or at least see the movies based on them, about heroes. We cast the old gods in new forms, calling them superman, instead of Zeus, Joker instead of Loki, etc. Expect more Gotham universes, more gods to worship, more Apollonian and Dionysian struggles.

Bruce Wayne and Camile Paglia: Paganism Today


I just saw Batman the Dark Night a few days ago, and after processing the film for a while, feel like I can now speak on it. At the same time, the book club I am a part of has been reading Camile Paglia’s book Sexual Persona, and for good or bad, some of her ideas have snuck into my analysis of the movie.

Before I talk about Batman, I find it only fair to give you a brief look at the themes that I have found in Paglia’s book. One of here thesis is that we are in the midst of an extremely Pagan culture, that is climaxing in idol worship of stars. The cult of personality is real, and religion. She also has this idea that the two main driving entities in human existence have been the Apollonian and the Dionysian- which she will call the chthonian.

The Apollonian is male, Dionysian female. The Apollonian is conqueror, Dionysian rest. Apollonian is rational, categorical, visual, analytical. The Dionysian is chaotic, base, unknown, emotional. She gets here via many avenues (including the sex organs themselves) but that is not what concerns us for today’s purposes. What is important is that these two elements are always present in Pagan myth. There is always a god Apollo and Dionysus. Other traditions call them by different names, but their characteristics are the same.

The Apollonian Gods are knowable. They are rational. The Dionysian are not. Very often the Dionysian shown up as different sexes, or as cross dressers. They are tricksters not to be trusted. They revel in chaos, since it is their mother tongue. The Apollonian don’t. The gods of Olympus are rational and ordered. They don’t enter into the affairs of the Dionysus’. Apollo was the god of light, sun, truth, prophecy, healing, arts, etc. Dionysus was he god of wine, frenzy, orgy, madness, ecstasy. We can compare this to Norse mythology with Thor and Loki. Thor the protector, and Loki the god of mischief, lies, and chaos. There are always these opposing forces in Pagan mythology.

I tend to agree with Paglia on this point. I don’t always agree with what she says, and some of her assumptions and conclusions I find erroneous, but she is right on the mark with this one. (I intend to write more about the book and its assertions as I get into it, but right now I am only on chapter 4, and I want to talk about Batman). Which brings us to Batman. If Paglia is right and the cinema is the height of paganism, then I submit that Batman proves here thesis. In fact, I have not seen a more pagan movie in the general cinemas in my lifetime.

That is not to say that there is not pagan tendencies in other movies, but even then they pale in comparison to the Dark Night. Movies about vampires and the occult, even about pagan deities retain a distinctly Christian narrative, or the throw it completely off for nothing, in the very Post-Modern way. No Country for Old Men is the culmination of this post modern approach. There is no redemption, and even no code to live by. The criminals morality is just as good (if not better since he is consistent) as anyone else’s. This isn’t a return to paganism though, it is a casting off of Western Christian Thought, but it fails to replace it with something. If we look at Buffy the Vampire Slayer, a show which frequently depicts occult actions, and even more that this actual Pagan gods as characters, we still see it is Christian in origin. The slayer has to sacrifice herself (end of season 5) to save the world. There is good and evil, and they are named as such, they operate with in the human system (for the most part), and there is an eventual triumph of good over evil. This is the Christian world view.

Batman had none of this. It operates so ,much differently from all other hero movies, I think it is in class of its own. Let us explore Batman’s world. There is a definite morality (unlike post modern works). There is a right and a wrong, criminal and Samaritan, a good and a bad. Batman is fighting for the good. He is fighting for a good (almost) bigger than himself. He is fighting to protect his city. But unlike Christian morality he is bigger that it. There is right and wrong, and he is fighting for right, but he doesn’t have to answer for his actions. He is outside of the system he is trying to save. This is evident in the multiple crimes he commits to bring outlaws and criminals to justice.

If the movie has morality, but the main characters operate outside these rules, then the scene is ripe for Paganism. Now the Christian God is outside the system in some sense. He created it. But the way he saves his people is through submission to said system. He enters it as human and follows its rules, and through this is able to bring about salvation through self sacrifice. This is not Batman. He is above. He is Apollo who can watch and protect from afar, but never enters, never sacrifices (we will get to this in a moment). He is a savior who rises above the morality to rescue, not one who lowers himself to the people’s level. This is why it is pagan. Batman is a pagan god. He is the apollonian trying to create order. He is stable, unemotional, visual (as seen by his radar). He makes plans and has ideas. He is self control. He is Thor protecting another’s creation.

And here is the kicker, the Joker is no different. He is larger that the system as well. He is chaos, death, and destruction. He is the prankster, unpredictable. He is Dionysus, Loki, the chthonian. He doesn’t operate within the bounds. He burns his money and kills indiscriminately. Even the criminals fear him because he doesn’t follow their rules. HE is the absence o rules. He has no loyalties, no beginning (he gives multiple reasons for his scars, and we are left to decide how he really got them, although we lean toward a new, unspoken explanation) and nothing to lose.

He is Batman’s opposite, but also his compliment. Every Apollo ha a Dionysus. An the Joker knows this. He says throughout that he won’t kill Batman, that they are alike. And he is right. They are brothers. They are outside the system. One wants to save it, and the other destroy it, but they work the same way. Thy break the rules and don’t answer for it. They live by their own code, and don’t apologize for it. They are the Greek gods. They sit on Olympus and watch the humans. They intervene to enact their own ends, but they never intervene within the rules. Batman is not a cop or lawyer fighting for justice; he is a dark vigilante spying on people in the night. The Joker is not a mob boss, or crooked politician; he is something completely other.

And the battle, although talking place in the mortal coil, is more than it. It is the battle between the Olympians and Titans, the order and disorder, the Apollonian and the Dionysian. The Joker understands this, while Batman is lagging behind. The Joker is ready to assume his place as god, Batman is unaware he is one.

This is why the battles are so epic and yet so Pagan. This is why the Joker is so creepy, yet so captivating. This is why Batman is so “honorable”, and yet so stoic. This is why we can’t relate to either. They are above us, they are not of this world, they are gods. We can never be like them. The others who try in the movie die. They mimic the costume of the Bat and try stop fight crime, but he stops them, and the Joker hangs one. Neither want them to be. They can’t be. They are not gods. They are still forced to operate within the world, and when they don’t the gods have their justice. They won’t be mocked. This work is not for mortals. In the same way the crime bosses also die. They don’t understand why they can’t work with the Joker. He is not like them. They have to work with in the system. They need money to bribe, to pay their goons, to feed themselves. The Joker is above this. He is a god, the god they thought they wanted to worship, until he shows his face. They can’t work with him, he is to far other.

Only Batman, a fellow immortal understands him, can hope to understand him. It is Batman who figures out the Jokers schemes, and no one else wants to listen. The Joker can turn the system on itself because his is not part of it. His identity has nothing to do with the rest. All of ours does. In the final battle it is Batman who realizes that the hostages are the criminals and visa versa. It is Batman who has to fight both the cops and the Joker to preserve the good. Not because the swat team was evil, but they were not transcendent enough to know the Joker. They couldn’t be, they are human. They work within the system, they are not gods. Batman on the other hand is. He is larger. He can know the Joker, in part because they are of the same otherness. He can protect even the people with guns (who are actually the good guys) because he is not bound by society. He is outside the system as its protector, and as such is its god.

This is pagan salvation. The gods are always outside human affairs, though they do meddle in them. There are no consequences for the gods when the interfere, only their human followers. They follow their own code that is outside and above humanities, and as such can fight for justice. They perfect humanity (in Batman’s case) by being outside it and calling us to its ideals (though begging us to forget the means). They also destroy humanity (as in the case of the Joker) buy being outside it, and therefore independent of its rise and fall. They bring chaos and order, good and evil, the Apollonian and Dionysian. The pagan gods are create din our image, both light and dark, but better than us at both. They are not bound to struggle and rules. They are released to be pure. And they are only released by operating outside of us.

Pagan gods protect from afar. They are not dirty. They are other. They need not sacrifice. Christian God does. He not only creates humanity (and so in inherently above it) he enters it (and so becomes it). It is through this entrance into the system that He will save it. It is through death that He will live. It is through the apparent victory of Chaos that God will triumph.

Let me digress quickly to speak about creation. Pagan creation had chaos reigning first. The primordial chthonian is the rule. Order is hen brought by Apollonian gods. Chaos is always there under the surface though. Christian creation is different. Order is the rule. God creates orderly. He then puts man in a garden (which is by nature tame) and gives him duties. There is plan. The chthonian enters in though. Disorder was outside, against God’s plan, and is allowed to enter. It is not the first. Nature does not revolt against man until man revolts against nature. This is anti-pagan. The serpent brings chaos in, it is not inherent in mans creation. And so we have the seemingly triumph of chaos. But there is still plan. Redemption is still going to occur, and chaos can’t stop it. It tries many times, and when God is crucified it looks as though it has won, but God ultimately triumphs by making that part of the plan. Order wins. God’s sacrifice, although it appears a lose, is a win. It was what he wanted to happen. What seemed like chaos and evil was in fact order and good. This is the Christian redemption.

This is not Batman’s salvation. He doesn’t sacrifice at all. The argument can be made that he took a bullet by Two Face at the end to save the kid, but this is erroneous. First it doesn’t save anyone. His being shot doesn’t replace the execution of the Commissioner’s kid. What stops it is Batman recovering and killing Two Face. This is not sacrifice. More than this, we know, as does Batman that he is wearing body armor. There is not fear of death. It is a rouse. He is pretending to die so that he can stop Two Face. Again this is not sacrifice. Sacrifice is only true when there is a real possibility of death, or death itself. There also must be a shifting of blame in the act. The one being sacrificed must assume another’s guilt so that they go free. If this doesn’t happen, there is no sacrifice. This scene is Pagan salvation, not Christian. The god (still outside our rules) appears to operate with in them to trick the mortal. He then stops the threat by imposing his will upon the mortal, and as such saves the others. The Apollonian violently usurps the chthonian. The city is saved because our god forced the evil away. He embarked in battle, and comes back victorious.

The other possible sacrifice we see is that Batman, after Two Faces death assumes his guilt to spare the city the same of Two Faces transformation. But is this really sacrifice? First I claim it is Pagan because of the ideals it holds. It is okay to lie to maintain honor and glory. This is distinctly Spartan. If truth hurts the greater cause it is okay to withhold it. This is not sacrifice but deception. This is Pagan salvation. Humans need to be sheltered from reality. The gods decide hat is best for us against our wishes. Since they are outside the system, they can do this. They a e our betters. They have the better view. They protect by keeping us children.

I claim it is also not sacrifice because nothing changes. Batman still operates. He doesn’t give up anything. Sure some cops who once were on his side are now against him, but let us remember they should have been against him all the time (if he were human) because he constantly breaks the law. He is a criminal. This act of “sacrifice” doesn’t change his status, just people’s perception of it. Reality has not changed. This is not sacrifice. He is still Batman. He is still protector. He is still god of Gotham. Pagan worship has always been tenuous. People worship their god when he blesses them, and revolt when he doesn’t. This is no different for Batman, and one can assume that they will worship once again when the time calls for it. They don’t need him anymore, and so he is a threat. This is true of all pagan deities. They are always threats since they are outside out system. They never have to follow our rules. Sometimes we need them though, and so tolerate their presence. Once we have established order on our own though, it is too great a threat to keep those who are outside it. Batman will still be Batman. Nothing has changed. This is not sacrifice in the Christian sense. He is still watching from a distance, and will return when the need arises. He has succeeded in his mission, bring Apollonian order to Gotham, and now he can sit form afar until the Dionysian returns, at which point he will be there to stop it. Remember he was never to save the city from the inside.

His assuming blame for Two Face’s murders is much more akin to a mother Bear driving her offspring away when it is time for them to grow up, then sacrificing himself. HE sees Gotham as fixed, or on the road to goodness in the very least, and needs it to depend less on him. He is thee to save it, not maintain it after. That is always the systems job. The Greek gods interfere at moments in time, content to let he humans decide their own fate. They occasionally steer the ship, but they are not the captain. So it is with Batman. He is needed to fight Chaos, bring about order, but once it exists, he needs to stop Gotham from suckling his tit. The threats are gone, and so must he. But he can not leave until Gotham realizes it no longer needs him, and so he criminalizes himself. Again this is pagan salvation, no Christian.

As you can see, the world of Batman is pagan to the core. It is set up to be the classic (pagan) struggle between chaos and order. Its agents are gods who operate outside of humanity, and are guided by higher principles. As such they are allowed to violate ours. They escape consequences in the conventional sense because they are ultimately other, and so can’t possibly be expected to conform. I intend to write more as I digest it.

If this is truly where cinema is going, or where our ideals lie as a nation, I feel we can say confidently with Paglia that we are a pagan culture. And I think this is where we are. Movies do well because they resonate. If Batman is resonating with people, it is because they believe what it is selling. And they are buying it hand over fist. We are pagan, not post modern, not Christian, not other, but pagan, and I also intend to write about this in the future as well. Stay tuned.

Friday, July 18, 2008

Sermon for July 20

“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way- in short, the period was so far like the present period, that some of its noisiest authorities insisted on its being received, for good or for evil, in the superlative degree of comparison only.

There were a king with a large jaw and a queen with a plain face, on the throne of England; there were a king with a large jaw and a queen with a fair face, on the throne of France. In both countries it was clearer than crystal to the lords of the State preserves of loaves and fishes, that things in general were settled for ever. “

Tale of Two Cites, Charles Dickens

After this iconic opening, Dickens goes on to introduce three characters; Darnay Evremonde, Carton, and Lucie. Both Carton and Darnay are in love with Lucie. There is something else that bonds these two, they are twins. Now they are not twins in the conventional sense. In fact Darnay is from France, and Carton from England, but they are almost identical in looks. The novel describes the times in both England and Franc during the revolution, or more precisely, the time immediately after known to us as the Terror. In the beginning of the book there is a crime, rape, that will be one of the driving plot point throughout. It is because of this crime that Darnay (although innocent) will later be rounded up and sentenced to death for being an enemy of the revolution.

Before this happens though, Darnay wins the prize of Lucie, and the have a child, little Lucie. Carton is still in love with her, and his now friend Darnay, when the novel comes to its dramatic conclusion. In the middle of the night, Carton is allowed to visit Darnay in prison, who is in the middle of writing his last words. As he is writing Carton pulls out a handkerchief that had been soaked in some sort of ether, and he gently puts it over his friends face. Darnay falls to sleep, and Carton then exchanges his clothes with the condemned man, who is going to visit La Guillotine in the morning.

Carton has men take Darnay out, who is now dressed as Carton, and brought to be reunited with his family. Carton then prepares to die in his friends stead. The next morning the prisoners are rounded up, and a woman who knew Darnay previously sees who she thinks to be him, and begins a conversation. She soon realizes that it is not whom she thought it was. Dickens writes:

“As he [Carton] stood by the wall in a dim corner, while some of the fifty-two were brought in after him, one man stopped in passing, to embrace him, as having a knowledge of him. It thrilled him with a great dread of discovery; but the man went on. A very few moments after that, a young woman, with a slight girlish form, a sweet spare face in which there was no vestige of colour, and large widely opened patient eyes, rose from the seat where he had observed her sitting, and came to speak to him.

"Citizen Evremonde," she said, touching him with her cold hand. "I am a poor little seamstress, who was with you in La Force."

He murmured for answer: "True. I forget what you were accused of?"

"Plots. Though the just Heaven knows that I am innocent of any. Is it likely? Who would think of plotting with a poor little weak creature like me?

The forlorn smile with which she said it, so touched him, that tears started from his eyes.

"I am not afraid to die, Citizen Evremonde, but I have done nothing. I am not unwilling to die, if the Republic which is to do so much good to us poor, will profit by my death; but I do not know how that can be, Citizen Evremonde. Such a poor weak little creature!"

As the last thing on earth that his heart was to warm and soften to, it warmed and softened to this pitiable girl.

"I heard you were released, Citizen Evremonde. I hoped it was true?"

"It was. But, I was again taken and condemned."

"If I may ride with you, Citizen Evremonde, will you let me hold your hand? I am not afraid, but I am little and weak, and it will give me more courage."

As the patient eyes were lifted to his face, he saw a sudden doubt in them, and then astonishment. He pressed the work-worn, hunger-worn young fingers, and touched his lips.

"Are you dying for him?" she whispered.

"And his wife and child. Hush! Yes."

"O you will let me hold your brave hand, stranger?"

"Hush! Yes, my poor sister; to the last."

She is now intrigued and strengthened by Cartons sacrifice, and goes proudly (but also innocently) to La Guillotine. After Carton’s (Darnay’s ) execution the crowd observes that there never was a more at peace person on the device. And while all this is happening, Darnay is on his way to another country, where he will live out his life with his family as a free man.

Very often the analogy is quickly drawn between Carton and Christ. The crucifix has changed to La Guillotine, and Carton is by no means “good”, but nonetheless, we can easily see the analogy to substitutionary atonement. But when we focus on Carton, we miss half of the picture. Not only did Carton die in Darnay’s (and his family’s place), but Darnay was set free. When Darnay is carried out of that jail cell, he is not only freed, but also pardoned. There is no condemnation for him any more. If he had only escaped, the jailers would have been looking for him, and he says as much in the cell with Carton, but that is not what happens. He is not escaped. A price is still paid, a head still roles, and because of this, and only because of this, can he live life fearlessly.

He need not worry about the Revolution hunting for him, for he is already dead. When he leaves France, he is no longer Darnay, Darnay was executed. He is given a new Identity, that of Carton, the very man who died in his place, and for this reason he is freed from condemnation.

And Paul proclaims the same in Romans 8:1-4. He says

1There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 2For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. 3For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, 4in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

He says there is now therefore no condemnation. Before we wrestle with the rest of this section, we must first ask what is the “therefore” referring. And it is clearly referring to something. We may be tempted to think it is just talking about the last words the Apostle wrote, and we wouldn’t be totally wrong, but we would also still be missing the mark. Although he is certainly referring to this last section, he is also talking about everything that came before, and at the risk of being redundant from week to week, we need to summarize what the text before this said.

If we remember the sermon last week, we will recall a few things. In Chapter 7 of Romans we have a brutally honest confession from the author. He tells us that he doesn’t do the good he wants, but the evil he doesn’t want to do he does all the time. He says that the law is good, but he is of the flesh, and as such, is evil. He tells us that the Law that promised life, brought to him death, since he could not follow any of it. He cries out and says, “What a wretched man I am.” And asks who will save him from this prison of death.

In the chapter before this one, chapter 6, Paul tells us to live not according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. That we should offer our members to God as instruments of righteousness. That we no longer need to be slaves to sin. And more than this, he tells us that we are either slaves to God or laves to death, and that we have the ability to choose whom to obey.

And he arrived at this point by asking a rhetorical question. In the very beginning of Romans 6 Paul asks if we can continue to sin so that grace may abound. This question is in context of the previous 5 chapters, in which Paul lays out the Christian Idea of Created, Fallen, Redeemed. In it he speaks of all humans knowing of God, either through the Law, which are first 5 books of the Bible, given to the Jews, or by their conscience, which gives all humanity knowledge of right and wrong. But we being broken, choose evil and forsook God. We choose to worship creature and creation rather that Creator, and as such were given over to our lusts and passions.

God decided to save us though, by sending his Son, to fulfill the Law, and all who faith in Him are saved. And the more one has sinned, the greater the grace, and this is all because God is good. But it raises the question that Paul answers in Chapter 6, that if more sin produced more grace, should we all not just sin a lot. And remember again, that Paul’s answer is an emphatic “No”. We are to offer our bodies to God as instruments of righteousness. And the reason Paul gives is that we are new creations. We have died to that old self, we are something completely other, how could we go back to that life.

He concludes the Chapter telling us that we are slaves to the one we serve, either God or sin, and more than this, God rescued us from having to serve sin. So we are to be righteous and holy and good and live this new life offered us.

Which brings us back to Chapter 7, where Paul says that he doesn’t do what he wants, but does what he doesn’t want. He confesses that the Law is good, but he is of the flesh. He desires to do good, but instead does evil. Again he says, “Oh what a wretched man I am!” But if you remember last week, that is not where he ended the section. He has one more, very important sentence. He says:

24Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? 25Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin.

He concludes with thanks be to God through Jesus Christ. He tells us that he then serves God with his mind, but his flesh serves the Law.

And so with all this previously written, he then boldly proclaims:

1There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 2For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death.

It is with the entirety of God’s plan that he proclaims that there is no condemnation. For most of the previous chapter we are in a hopeless place. We have been told to follow God, but know we can’t. We are told that the Law is Good, but we can’t live up to it. But at the very end there is hope. Remember Christ will save us from this death. And here the hope culminates. There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. We are not guilty anymore. Paul is telling us here that there is real freedom. We are not held responsible for what we do but don’t want to. When we struggle against the flesh, and the flesh wins, we are not to stand trial for it. There is no condemnation. Now this is a sticky passage, isn’t it? I just told you that you are not responsible for your sin. What will keep all of us from sinning since we are not guilty anymore?

I think this is why the previous 7 chapters were written first. Remember we are new creations, we have been freed from sin. But we also still have struggles. But just as previously Paul writes that we should not continue to sin so that grace may abound, so here do we not given a free pass to sin. But at the same time, know that we are not punished for our sin any more. Think back to the introduction. Darnay is freed from condemnation because of what Carton had done. Now I won’t tell you how to book ends, but do you think that Darnay went back to his French estate and began living his old life since he was not condemned anymore? The answer is No. He leaves his old life completely behind. He knows what has been given to him- new life- and he won’t forget it, neglect it, or abuse it.

Now, he is still French. He still has French blood, a French accent, French customs, but he is not French anymore. He has been set free. This is analogous to our situation. We have been freed. In a very real way La Guillotine was going to drop on us and we were given new life. We may still fall back into old habits, have an accent, if you will, but we are no longer French. We have been given a new Identity. It is after we have this truth firmly in our psyche that Paul tells us there is no condemnation. We are not brought back to La Guillotine because our “Frenchness” slips out against our will, there is no condemnation, but we also must not try to be the French Aristocrat we were. Remember that life lead to death.

And it is here that the second verse of Romans 8 clarifies our position. Paul says there is therefore no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, but that is not the end of the thought. He continues to say that the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the Law of sin and death. There is not just no condemnation anymore. We are not freed so that we are not under any law. We are freed from the law that condemned us, the law of sin and death, and brought under a new law- the law of the Spirit. We are not rogues or mavericks who now get to live by our own code and don’t answer to the law, we are citizens of a new kingdom. The reason we are not condemned is that the old laws no longer apply to us, not because no laws apply to us.

Again think back to a Tale of Two Cities. Darnay is freed from the Law of France. He is not condemned anymore, but he is going to another country. The reason he will not be condemned again to death is that he is not a citizen for France anymore. But he is also not under no law. He will move to a new country and be subject to a new set of laws. He has been freed from the law that condemns, but not freed from law in general. So it is with us. We too have been freed from the law that condemns. We are no longer under sin. As Paul writes 2 chapters previous we can offer our bodies to God. We are his slaves, part of His kingdom. We are not freed from law, but freed from one law to be ruled by another.

This is also one of the reasons we are not to just sin because we can. We are still under a law, the law of the Sprit, we are just not under the law of sin. We have been brought to a new kingdom, one where we stand condemned no more, but that isn’t a reason to sin again carte blanche; instead it is a reason to celebrate all the more. We are no longer under the Revolutions whims and laws, but under a new kingdom. As Darnay celebrated and vowed never to be French again when he was revived, so we too must celebrate our freedom and vow to never be our old selves. How could we?

And Paul continues. He says in the first part of the next sentence:

3For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do.

If we remember Paul told us that the Law was good. He even says that it offered life, but proved to be death. And the reason he gave in Chapter 7 for this was that he was of the flesh sold under sin. He said the Law is good, but he is not. As he sums up the previous 7 chapters of Romans in these 4 verses, he is going to clarify that thought a little.

He says God did what the law weakened by the flesh could not. Before we join Paul in the discussion of what God did, or how he did it, let us explore for a moment how the law, which is good, could not save. I could go into a big theological discussion here, but Paul did that and a much better job, (which if you know me and how prideful I am of my own writing, is saying a lot) so I will not embark on the same ship. Analogy is a better technique here I think, so that is what I will do.

Imagine yourself on an ocean liner, and suddenly it begins to sink. As it goes down, the Captain tells us that land is 10 miles east, and if we can make it there, we will be safe and live. Now that is kind of like the Law. It tells us what we need to do to live, and points the way. If we were to swim east for 10 miles and make it, we would survive. Here’s the thing though. We won’t. We can’t swim that far, especially in the open ocean. We are weakened by your flesh. It is not that the law is bad, it is in fact good. It is beneficial to know where land is, and how far. You know what you need to do. That is a good thing. The problem is that humans just cant swim that far in open ocean (some can, but that is not my concern, make it 100 mile if you like). The knowledge is good, but we are too weak to use it.

If you know anything about sea rescues, the rule of thumb is never swim. Almost 100 percent of people who try to make it to land, even when it is less than a few miles in open ocean are never found again. It is just to hard to swim in the currents, large waves, and to get ones bearings to know if one is really traveling in the right direction. What you are supposed to do if your ship goes down is stay with it and everyone else. This isn’t so you can all move as a group, or wait until the tide washes you ashore. The reason is so rescuers can find you. You can’t save yourself if your ship capsizes, even if you know exactly what to do, you need to be saved.

This is what Paul is saying here. The law is good, but it was weakened by the flesh. It meant to give us life, telling us where we need to go, and how to get there, but unless we are saved and brought to that place, there is no chance for us. We can not swim to shore, we need a Savior to bring us there. So then God did what the law was unable to do. He brings us to land.

And how does God bring us to shore? Paul tells us. He says:

By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, 4in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

And here Paul summarizes the entire book thus far. God does for us what we couldn’t by sending his own son in the likeness of sinful flesh. Here I do want to pause a moment and discus this phrase. It is a cornerstone of Christian belief that Christ was sinless. This is how he could be sacrificed as a spotless lamb for our transgressions. It is also a Christian assertion that he was human. If either of these two things are not true, among some others, then Christ’s sacrifice would not be what it is. He needed to be human to fulfill the Law. The same Law that Paul is talking about. He had to fulfill this so that he could die spotless and be a sacrifice for our sins.

Here it seems though that one or both of these things may not be true. Instead of saying he came in the flesh, Paul says in the likeness of sinful flesh. So, as in the past we have taken a break from the theoretical to talk about the practical, so here are we going to take a break from the practical to rise up to the theoretical.

What does Paul mean when he says he came in the likeness of sinful flesh, and does this agree with the rest of Scripture and theology? First, let’s examine a few other ways he could of phrased this statement, but didn’t.

He could have said that God sent his Son in sinful flesh. If he had said this, then certainly we would see that Christ was human, but it would also say that he was sinful. He would come in sinful flesh implies that there was sin in him. However if this was the case he could not have atoned for our sins. We are told throughout Scripture, beginning in the Law, that the way to be forgiven is to sacrifice a spotless lamb. The sacrifice must be pure to begin with. As the sacrifice is being offered the sin of the individual is transferred to the offering. If it was already stained, this would mess up the whole system. The sacrifice must be spotless. So if Christ was sinful, this would not fulfill the law.

Paul could have also said that Christ came in the likeness of flesh. This would certainly imply he did not have sin, but also that he was not actually human. He would only be in the likeness of a human, like a phantom or ghost is. And this is certainly the beliefs of some other world religions who deny Christ’s divinity. But then all of Christianity falls apart as well. If he was only a likeness, then we could not be like him. We are told he is a new Adam, a new Father of humanity. If he was not human, but only human-esque, or just wearing a costume of human, then we certainly wouldn’t be new humans with him. As Paul says through one man all sinned, and through one man all can be made righteous. Jesus can not be our prototype if he is not like us.

What Paul does say is that Jesus came in the likeness of sinful flesh. What he is here communicating is the Orthodox Christian teaching. Jesus came in the flesh. He was human. But he was also sinless. The likeness here refers not to Jesus humanity, but to his sinful flesh. He came in the likeness of sinful flesh means he came in the likeness of the rest of us. He looked like us, walked like us, talked like us. He was of the flesh, a full fledged human. The likeness refers to the sinful part. Since we had never really seen someone without sin, Jesus sinlessness looked like us. He came in the flesh, but came in sinless flesh to fulfill the law. But he looked like the rest of us, in our sinless flesh.

This can be seen most clearly I think when it wasn't true. In the book of Mark (and Matthew and Luke) we read of something called the transfiguration. The story is found in Mark 9

2 And after six days Jesus took with him Peter and James and John, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. And he was transfigured before them, 3and his clothes became radiant, intensely white, as no one on earth could bleach them. 4And there appeared to them Elijah with Moses, and they were talking with Jesus. 5And Peter said to Jesus, "Rabbi, it is good that we are here. Let us make three tents, one for you and one for Moses and one for Elijah." 6For he did not know what to say, for they were terrified. 7And a cloud overshadowed them, and a voice came out of the cloud, "This is my beloved Son; listen to him." 8And suddenly, looking around, they no longer saw anyone with them but Jesus only.

9 And as they were coming down the mountain, he charged them to tell no one what they had seen, until the Son of Man had risen from the dead.

At this moment Jesus was not in the likeness of sinful flesh anymore. And people noticed a difference. This wasn’t his default mode though, nor was it a turning point in his life. He didn’t change, and from that point on glow everywhere he went. When people looked at him they didn’t see this radiant figure, they saw someone who looked a lot like them. Now what happen at this time was not that Jesus became less human, his humanness, or flesh was not stripped away. The disciples still saw him as Jesus, the guy they hung out with. What happened was the likeness of sinful flesh was taken away. They saw what sinless man looked like.

When Paul writes that God sent his son in the likeness of sinful flesh, it is the likeness of sin he is referring to, not the likeness of flesh. And at the same time he is no way saying Jesus was sinful. He wasn't. This is why Paul writes this the way he does.

And what does God do with this. He condemns sin in the flesh. He says

he condemned sin in the flesh, 4in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

In the same way that someone had to be condemned in A Tale of Two Cities, so here does something get condemned. What is condemned though is not us, for we are not condemned, but rather sin. As Jesus came to our jail cell and took our place, he also took the punishment that was to come. He was going to be executed in our stead, so that we might go free and be given new life.

And as he does this, since he was in the likeness of sinful flesh, he condemns sin in the flesh. Let us go back to a Tale for a moment. The reason the Carton is able to take the place of Darnay is that he took his likeness. He assumed the likeness of Darnay’s flesh, and as such is able to substitute himself for him. And as he does this Darnay’s flesh is condemned- Darnay is not however because he has been set free. If Carton did not assume his likeness then the entire scheme would never have worked. The requirement of the law of France was that Darnay be killed for his “crimes”. And so when Carton assumes Darnay’s likeness the law was fulfilled.

This is us as well. Because Christ assumed the form of sinful man, took on the likeness of sinful flesh, he could died in it, and as such, condemn sin in the flesh. We read earlier that the death died he died to sin, but the life he lives, he lives to God. When Jesus died, when he assumed our sin, our guilt, our sentence, he died our death. He was fulfilling the Law. He came in the likeness of sinful flesh so that we could go free and have a new life, a new country, and new Identity.

There is one more deeply theological question raised in this section we need to look at before we end. Paul writes :

the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

What exactly does this mean? Are we now fulfilling the law? Are we now perfectly righteous? The answer to these questions is both yes and no. See, the law is fulfilled in us, but Paul doesn’t say we fulfill the law. Christ fulfilled the Law, and when we faith in him we are given a new life and a new law. Jesus tells us that he will send his Spirit on those who believe in him. When we faith in Christ we are united with him, remember, in his death, but also in his resurrection. The law is fulfilled in us because we have risen with Christ, have the Holy Spirit, and are given a new Identity. It is not because of anything we have done.

That being said, if we are not walking according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit, the requirements of the Law are fulfilled in us. We are truly righteous, we are holy, we are good, we are free.

Just as Darnay did nothing to earn his freedom, once he had it, it was his nonetheless. Just as Darnay could not free himself, but once Canton paid the price form him, he was given a new Identity. What Paul is communicating is something that is true and will always be true. Very often when we look at our selves in the here and now we see the picture that Paul painted in Romans 7. We are caught in a struggle that we can not win. We see a wretched, wicked, rebellious person. We see the battles, and the loses. Paul is reminding us here of what God sees. There is now therefore no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. The righteous requirements of the Law have been fulfilled in you. Where we see demon, God sees deity. Where we see that we sometimes speak French, God sees that we are no longer a Frenchman.

Think back to the sinking ship. To survive all you have to do is make it to shore. But you can’t. Without a savior you are going to die. And then the rescue crew arrives and a helicopter takes you into itself, and flies you to land. The requirement of the law was fulfilled- you are on land, but it was not you who fulfilled it, but rather your rescuer. That doesn’t make you any more or less alive though. When others look at you they don’t see a corpse, but rather someone who has been brought from death to life.

This then is our standing. When God looks at us, he does not see that old corpse, but rather the survivor whom he saved. He does not see in us Darnay, but rather Canton. And this is our comfort. When Paul cried out in the last chapter, and we along with him that were wretched, sinful, and broken; that we were drowning and could not swim to shore; that we were prisoners on our way to be executed, God saw it different.

He saw a man coming to take our place, a rescuer who will do for us what we can’t do on our own, a new, righteous, sanctified person.

When we unite with Christ in his death, accept the sacrifice he is offering us, something happens. Like Darnay who exchanges places with Canton, we are set free. There is no condemnation over us anymore. We are given a new life and a new Identity. We are no longer under the old laws that sentenced us to death, but under a new king, part of a new kingdom.

We may sip back into our old French accent, but it isn’t us anymore. We are no longer Monsieur Darnay. We have been given a completely new life. The flesh may rebel. We may do the very evil we hate, and the good we want to do, we may not do, but it not us anymore. We are something different. There is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. If we unite with him in his death, then surely we will unite with him in his resurrection.

Let us rejoice with Paul in this hope, in this promise, in this new life. Like Darnay when he awoke, let us truly feel this new life we have been given. As one brought from life to death, as one who was sinful, and who is now righteous, as one who was once broke, but now is whole, let us rejoice. Know that someone else has died that you might live, and as such has utterly condemned sin in the flesh that you may be freed from condemnation.

Let us rejoice in our new identity. Let us rejoice in our new freedom. Let us rejoice in our new life.

All we need do is accept it. Jesus is in our cell, asking us to switch places with him. He is there willing to pull you to shore, if you would only let him. He is asking you to let him die that you might go free.

If you are here and not a Christian and want this new life, just ask. He is waiting for you. He has your clothes on, he has come in your likeness, all you need do is put on his. He is willing to make the sacrifice if you are willing to accept it. Accept it and be free. Move to a new kingdom, one where sin and death reign no more, but rather goodness and life.

If you are drowning and want to be rescued, crawl into the life raft. You can’t reach shore on your own. He knows this. He is here to do for you what you can’t do for yourself. He is here to rescue you, if you would only accept it. The shore is too far for you to reach, but I tell you can be there if you want.

If you are a Christian, know again, know in your inner most soul that there is no more condemnation. You are a new creation. You have been given a new life. The righteous requirements of the law have been fulfilled in you. Know that you are on shore now. You can not die any more. This life that was given you is truly yours, now go and live it. As one who was a prisoner, but is now free, use your freedom. As one who was sinful and is now righteous, claim your new identity. As one brought from death to life, go live.

Here the words of Paul one last time.

1There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 2For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. 3For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, 4in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

Friday, July 11, 2008

Sermon For July 12

I don’t have a joke for you this week, nor do I have a special rant as a few weeks ago. What I do have is a warning for all of us today. The warning is that most of us are breaking the law right, and we don’t even know it. Now in the United States, ignorance is not an excuse for breaking the law, so I am going to help all of you to become better, more law abiding citizens. Let me ask a question first. Are any of the men carrying a fire arm today? No, well then I must inform you that you are in fact in violation of Massachusetts state law that a rifle must be carried to church on Sundays. Goatees are also illegal unless you first applied for a permit and paid a special license fee for the privilege of wearing one, and snoring is illegal unless all bedroom windows are firmly closed and locked. Now that you are not ignorant anymore, I hope you will make the necessary changes to your behavior to begin to obey the laws of this fine Commonwealth. Why on earth would I tell you all of this, well it sort of relates to today’s text.

Turn with me to your programs. We read in Romans 7:

5For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. 6But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code.

7What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin. For I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, "You shall not covet." 8But sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness. For apart from the law, sin lies dead. 9I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died. 10The very commandment that promised life proved to be death to me. 11For sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me. 12So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.

Paul is continuing his thoughts from the previous chapter, and it behooves us to revisit his main ideas for a moment. What he says in Romans 6 is that we are not under Law anymore, but under grace. He says we died to our old selves, and were raised with Jesus to live a new life, and this new life is not by the Law, but by the Spirit. But, it almost seems from his argument that it was the law that was the cause of sin. So here he begins to refute that assertion.

Paul clearly states in verse 5 that while we were living in the flesh, in that old life, our sinful passions were aroused by the Law, and I think we need to look at this closely before we move on. It would seem by this statement that the law does in fact cause sin, but not 2 verses later we read that the law is not sin. How can this be the case? Let me ask the guys a question- do any of you now want to grow a goatee simply because I told you it was illegal to do so? Some of you do, I am sure. How many of you are familiar with the internet? Most of us. Well have you ever been forwarded, or found on your own something called the “Don’t Push the Red Button Game”. You can find it a variety of places. All the game is, is a red button that says “Don’t push” on it. If you push it, the saying changes to “Really don’t push it”, “I am serious, don’t push it”, “Are you listening”, etc. It goes on like this for hours. Now I submit that to win, all you need to do it not push the button, but everyone pushes it. Most simply because it tells us not to. See, our sinful passions were aroused by a law. Now it is not evil of the game to say don’t push the button, it is simply the rule to win said game. We though, having our passions peaked, push it.

I want to give one more example, but since I really like following rules, I have to use my wife for this. Some of you may not know it, but my wife is the rebel of the family. Really. If you tell her not to do something, she usually want to do it to spite you, and if you tell her to do something, she doesn’t want to do it, even if she was going to do it already. Let me tell you how this plays out in her life. By the way I am not gossiping since she is in the room, I am poking fun- it is completely different.

As most of you just experienced, it is commonplace in MERCYhouse to stand while we sing worship songs. While it is common, it is not the rule. Typically after the sermon, and especially after communion, people don’t stand unless they are told to by the worship band. This is quite a social phenomenon worthy of study, but that is not what we are concerned with at present. See, my wife does like to stand right after the sermon, and especially after communion. She is usually praying and gearing up to stand, when the worship leader will say something like, “Would you all stand,” or “Let stand for the last song,” and something in Sarah snaps. She was on her way to stand of her own free will, and after hearing these words sits down defiantly. She sure showed that worship leader, she is not going to stand simply because they said so. The best part of it all is that she actually wanted to stand, and may have been upset that others weren’t standing, but once it becomes a command, well that is an affront to her, her liberty, and her God, and so she sits. Now I know that you all will be watching her later, so really guilt her into standing, even if we are told to.

What has changed in the seconds that she wanted to stand, and then didn’t? She was simply told she should stand. She was given a rule, a law, if you will, and it aroused her passions. I want us to notice something though, she is not actually trying to actively be defiant. She does not premeditate this. In fact, being a woman who is seeking after God, she is actively trying to stop this reaction. She recognizes it for what it is, sinful, and tries to stop it. The verbs Paul uses here are also passive. They reflect much more the passions over taking us, being aroused almost, dare I say, against our will, rather than we fanning the flames. The law is used by our sinful nature in very much the same way as the stupid internet game, or my wives defiance.

And Paul attributes this to our flesh. The reason we want to push the button is because we were told not to, and for no other reason. I know we can all relate to this. In Confessions, Augustine talks about how, as a youth he stole fruit from a local vendor, not because he wanted the fruit, (he actually ended up feeding it to animals) but because he was told not to. This is our flesh. It is defiant and crooked. This is why chapter 6 is so important. It reminds us that we have died to the flesh. We are no longer under law.

Paul writes we can serve under the Spirit. But it still seems like the Law could be called evil, especially when viewed through the lens of laws today. In my introduction I told us about a few crazy laws in Massachusetts. There are actually worse one other places, like Florida, par example, where it is actually illegal to give a donkey a bath in your tub. What you do when your pet donkey gets dirty, I don’t know, but you don’t give it a bath, that’s for sure, unless you’re a felon. But the objection can easily be raised that it is only illegal to do this because it was written down, and if the law was never put on the books, everyone who loves their Donkey and gives it a bath would not be a felon, but rather a great owner. It seems then, that the Law is what produced the crime. And this is a reasonable objection for US laws. Things are not illegal until we make them so. In the early 1920’s my grandfather started what would become an illustrious career. He was 12 at the time, and was driving a delivery truck all around Boston. And he did it all legally. He was a law abiding citizen. This was possible because there was no law in 1920 demanding that one must be over 16 year old and licensed by the state to drive. You could just hop in and go, assuming you knew how to operate a stick shift. Today that is not the case, but no one would say my grandfather should have been arrested for driving so young. It became illegal to drive at 12 after they made the law.

What should we say then, is the law sin? Does this Law of the Old Testament operate under the same system as the laws in this country, or any, for that matter? Well Paul tells us by no means! The law is not sin. But Paul does concede that if it were not for the Law we would not know sin. If it is only by the law that we know sin, how does the law not produce the sin? That is a very subtle metaphysical question, and it has equally as subtle an answer. This is where the previous chapters of Romans come in real handy. We may remember a few weeks ago I gave a brief synopsis of those chapters. One of the strands of thought that Paul follows is that both Jews, who have the Law, and gentiles, who don’t, are guilty and condemned before God.

The Jews stood condemned because of the Law, and the Gentiles because of their conscience, for they know what is right and wrong, but don’t follow it. See, it may not have been illegal to murder someone before that became a law, but it was certainly wrong. In this case the law was there before the written code. Cain is punished for murdering his brother even before the Law was given. Now what the Law does is call wrong doing something different, it calls it sin. Wrong was wrong before the Law was given, but under the Law, wrong also becomes sin. The Law lets us know what Gods standard are, and how we have failed. This is evident in Paul’s example. Paul chooses to prove his point using the tenth commandment. Now this commandment only deals with the condition of the heart. While the others certainly deal with conditions of the heart as well, they also have outward actions. The command not to covet has no immediate outward actions associated with it. It is only an internal desire. And Paul says he wouldn’t have known what coveting was had he not been told. Once the command was given though, something happened. Sin now had an opportunity to strike. When Cindy or Scott or Ethan or Eric tells us to stand, it is a good thing. We are brought together in our worship and reminded of our relation to God, but with this command comes an opportunity for sin. We can become defiant and rebellious and not want to stand out of spite.

In the same way the command to not covet can produce covetousness. But it is not the commandment that is sinful, but rather sin. And sin uses what ever it can. By having the Law, we have even more ways to be rebellious, and since we are of the flesh, we rebel. We rebel against laws, authority, God, and so the flesh produces in us all manner of sin.

And then Paul takes a brief digression. He says:

9I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died. 10The very commandment that promised life proved to be death to me. 11For sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me.

After reading some commentaries and meditating on these verses I have come to the following conclusion about these verses. What Paul is doing is giving us a personal glimpse into the moment he knew his own fallenness. Remember that Paul lived in Israel and was a Pharisee, so it is hard to imagine a time in his life that he was without the law. However, I can imagine Paul going through the same transition in life that so many others have gone through. How many of us have grown up with the Law? We are raised to believe in right and wrong, etc. And most of us for a while thought ourselves, at the very least, decent people. I would imagine most people consider themselves, “good”, and polls back me up. But something happened to most of us in this room. We were confronted with Gods standard and we were ashamed. At some point in our life we knew that we were not in fact good people, but hopelessly broken and sinful. Our sin came alive, so to speak. We finally saw it for what it was, it became known, and at his very moment we died. We knew we could not measure up, that we were condemned, and rightly so. This is what I believe Paul is communicating here. These commandments that promised life, when he really got it, understood it in his heart, actually proved death because he realized he had not kept a single one.

So then Paul concludes that the commandment is holy. It is not like these other human laws. It is good, it is we who were evil, and as such turned a positive in to a negative. But does that mean this good law brought death? Paul states it like this

13Did that which is good, then, bring death to me? By no means! It was sin, producing death in me through what is good, in order that sin might be shown to be sin, and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure. 14For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin.

And Paul again answers his rhetorical question with, “By no means!” It was sin that produced the death, not the commandment. It was through the commandment that we knew we had died, but this is no fault of the commandment, it is the fault of sin. What the commandment does is call sin, sin. It reminds us that it isn’t our personal ideas of what right and wrong are, but that there is a standard we are called to live up to. When our conscience condemned us, the commandment tell us why. It is because there is sin. There is a standard. So then sin kills us, and the commandment simply brings this to life.

And then Paul throws this line in:

14For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin.

And with this he is going to change his train of thought slightly. We have been in this theological realm once again with Paul. He is asking and answering rhetorical questions in an attempt to build an argument. He has been talking about the Law in this kind of Platonic Idea sense, and he has been doing all this to answer objections to his earlier arguments. Remember that there are Jewish converts who are concerned about the Law, and gentiles who want to throw the baby out with the bath water. In the entirely of this last section he has been trying to marry the idea of the Law with this new revelation of life by the Spirit. He is reminding us that the Law is both good but not sufficient. We are not to live by it anymore, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t have a purpose. It brought death, but that doesn’t mean it is evil. He is trying to answer objections from both sides, and he ends with this: That the law is spiritual but he is of the flesh, sold under sin, and presumably, not just him, but all of us. The Law then is good, but he is not, is the conclusion.

He continues in this vein, but we need to have Romans the larger book in the back of our minds as we read this next section. He is here going to join this latest diatribe with what has just been said in chapter 6. And what exactly was that? If we remember, Paul writes in those chapters that we are dead to sin, and as such can offer our bodies to God as instruments of righteousness. He tells us to not let sin reign in our mortal bodies, but rather be free of sin and slaves to God. Now with these commands in mind, as well as Paul’s confession that he is not spiritual, but of the flesh, Paul writes the following:

15For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. 16Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. 17So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. 18For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. 19 For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. 20Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.

He says that he can’t do what he wants to do. More than this, he can’t even understand himself. He does what he hates, and can’t do what he wants. Let me pick on my wife a little more. If you ask her about her contempt for forced standing, she will tell you she knows it is ridiculous. More than this, she will tell you that she knows it is wrong. But she can’t help it. She tells herself to not feel this way, but it comes anyway. If you tried to convince her that her feelings are wrong (which guys I don’t ever recommend telling a woman), she would agree with you. So she then agrees with the law.

To use Paul’s example of coveting, we can see this even more clearly. We know coveting is wrong because we have been told, but how many of us covet. I know I do almost all the time. I covet others cars and houses and shirts. And I also know it is wrong. I know I shouldn‘t be doing this, but sometimes it seems like the harder I try not to, the more I covet. I see the consequences of coveting: not being content with what God has given me, trying to think of ways to get what others have by less that admiral means, getting cranky at my wife when I can’t buy what I want when I want. So I agree with the Law, that it is good. Coveting produces bad behaviors and shouldn’t be done, but I can’t follow the commandment.

Now Paul says that if I agree with the law, but don’t keep it, it can’t be me any more. Who ever heard of a person not doing what they want? If I want to walk over here I do it, if I want to go over there, I do it. If I wanted to go over there at this moment and couldn’t, but in fact went over here instead, then it must not be me or my will moving me. The best example I have of this is in the arena of sports. There are a few sports I have played, football and wrestling, mainly, where I was not always in charge or my own actions. During one wrestling match I desperately wanted to move my arm under the guy I was wrestling. He was pinning me, and my intent was to flip him. He, however, was stronger and more skilled than I, and as such moved my arm to where he wanted it to go. As he did this, I was caught in a move called a double chicken wing, which is painful and humiliating. I didn’t want to be in this position, in fact, my entire will was against it, but I was there anyway. I don’t believe anyone on my team thought, “That was stupid of Nate, he should have never chosen to be there.” They knew it was not my will. And so it wasn’t my will, but the other guys.

In the same way, many times while playing football I have had others will imposed upon me. I have been tackled or blocked, and I assure you I did not choose this. Therefore we know it wasn't me, but someone else’s will that threw me to the ground. This is Paul’s argument as well, albeit at a much higher level.

He tries to do good, but fails. He tries to not do evil, but does it. So it is not him anymore. He finishes this thought, repeating what he just said.

For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. 19 For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. 20Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.

And I don’t think this was meant to give us an insight into only Paul’s struggles. This text applies to all of us, does it not? I know myself and my wife have uttered these very words many times. I don’t do what I want to. I know what I should do, but I just can’t do it. I know that what I am doing is wrong, but I just can’t stop. Does this sound familiar to anyone else?

This is the human condition, is it not? Both for Christians and non-Christians. One of the ways I know this, is that it is a common theme in movies and literature throughout the ages. How many of you have seen The Incredible Hulk - not the old movie that was terrible, but the good one that is out right now? What is Bruce Banners problem? He has a monster in him he can’t control- at least not in the beginning. He tries all sorts of methods to keep the monster locked within, finding some success with breathing techniques, until circumstances out of his control release the inner beast once again. This resonates with us. It has resonated with us for decades. And why, because people understand this inner monster that they can’t control. They get that occasionally, against their entire will a beast comes out. No matter how hard they try, or what they do, eventually a creature that is part of us, that lives in our inner most being, comes to the surface and takes control of us.

And don’t think this story is new to the post 1970 comic book world. It is far older than that. If we were to look at a list of must read literature of the English language, chances are that a book by Robert Louis Stevenson would be on that list. The book? The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. I am not here going to give a summary of the entire book, but rather a quick over view and summary of the end. First there is Dr. Jekyll. He believes that there is both a good side and dark side inside himself. He sets about to separate the two, and after drinking many potions finds one that works. He transforms into Mr. Hyde, an evil, vile, monster devoid of morality. For a while he turns only when he drinks the potion, but soon he is transforming in his sleep involuntarily. He resolves to not change anymore, and get the monster under control- and for a while he is successful. Until a fateful night when the urge to become Mr. Hyde becomes to strong and he changes into the beast once again, who then roams the streets and kills Sir Danvers Carew. The grief from this event over takes Dr. Jekyll and he is even more resolved to never become Mr. Hyde again. And all seems well until, with no prodding, and completely alert he turns into Mr. Hyde for the very first time. This becomes the norm, Mr. Hyde now being in control more that Dr Jekyll, who now needs potions to remain himself. Does this sound familiar to anyone in the room? And I don’t mean have you read the book.

This plot of an inner monster that is uncontrollable is the human experience. We all cry out with Paul that what we want to do we don’t do, and hat we don’t want to do we continue to do. And all this from a man who told us not 3 paragraphs earlier to put to death the body, not be a slave to sin, stop obeying its lust and commands, and instead offer our bodies as instruments for righteousness. He concludes this thought as follows:

21So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. 22For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being, 23but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members.

There, it would seem, are two persons- a real Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. He delights in the law of God, but can’t carry it out. He is waging a war against himself. The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak. What are we to do then? If this is us, we want to please God, but can’t. We see the Law as good, but it gets used for evil. We desire to live a righteous life, but instead find only death and sin. What are we to do? How can we survive if we are waging war against our very selves?

And this is a real problem, is it not? For the past two weeks we have been told to be good. I told us that we are no longer slaves to sin, but to God; that we had the ability to follow God and be righteous. Last week Patrick told us that there are two spirals, one of righteousness leading to life, and the other of sin leading to death. All we have to do is follow the spiral of righteousness. Let me ask, though, how many of us tried to follow this spiral? How many of us tried to put ourselves to death and unite with Christ in his death so we could be united with him in his resurrection? How many of us failed, and failed miserably? I know I did. What are we to do then? Paul cries out with this question too. He finishes the chapter saying:

24Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? 25Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin.

Who will deliver me? What am I to do? Wretched man that I am! He sees this death all around him, and also sees that he can not do anything about it. He can not even control his own will, how then can he live. And his answer?

Thanks be to God, through Jesus Christ our Lord! Thanks be to God. Again, go back to all the previous chapters of Romans. The theme isn’t what we have to do, but what God has already done. The death He died he died once for all. We get to unite with him in this through faith, but that is all. We need not do anything else. Yes, sin through the Law brought death, but God brought life. And we are not part of this world anymore. We have died to all that, if we unite with Christ. And more than this, we don’t only die, but are given new life. We are given new life. Who will deliver us from our bodies of death? Jesus.

And we only need to faith in him to be delivered. We no longer need to follow the Law, but the Spirit. That is not to say we are not still going to have struggles. Paul clearly does. I know I do. A Hyde still lives in all of us, and it is called many things: sin, the flesh, sin nature, humanity. But it is not who we need bow to anymore. Paul says, “so therefore I myself serve the Law of God”. That other thing, it is not who we are anymore, it is not us. This is our solace. That monster is still there, but where before we were the monster, now we are new creations.

Where before Mr. Hyde was our true self, now he is something altogether other. That is not to say he doesn’t control us now and again, but just as it was not me who pinned myself wrestling, it was my competitor, so too is it not truly us when we are controlled by our flesh, but the sin that lives in us.

And although we don’t read it specifically at this moment, in other places we are assured that the victories of sin over us can and will become less frequent. As we continue to die to our old self, and become renewed perpetually, being guided by the Spirit, we have assurance that an eventual victory has already been won. Paul doesn’t end this section in despair, but rather in praise. Yes he was continually beaten and his will usurped, but God has rescued him anyway. Yes, he was unrighteous and sinful, and at times a monster, but God has set him free in spite of this. Who will rescue me? It is not I, but God. We have been set free from sin and death. We are no longer under Law, but under grace.

This is the conclusion we must come to as well. We are not under law, but grace. If we have been united with Christ in his death, then surely we will be united with him in his resurrection. We don’t need to rescue ourselves, God has already rescued us!

As we hear sermons about holiness and righteousness, the tendency in my experience, is to try to be good in our own power, and if we are honest with ourselves, we realize that we fail. We don’t do what we want, and we do what we don’t want to. What are we to do then? And here, in this chapter is the solution.

We are to morn our inequities. We are broken. We are sinful. We can’t keep the law. It seems like there is a monster inside us who controls us almost all of the time. But we mustn’t end there. We begin at trying to be righteous and move to what a wretched man I am. But that is not where we end. We end with “Praise be to God through Jesus” who has saved us from this prison. We don’t end at despair, but rather at hope.

Sin wants us to end earlier. It wants us to end at death. It wants us to despair. It wants us to forget our Identity. But grace wants us to move past this. We died with Christ and can now live with him. That is where we need to end. We realize that we are in the flesh now; we have opposing natures, but the old self, the sin nature is not who we are anymore. We must never forget this. We can serve God with our mind, even while our old selves try to rebel. We can be united with Christ in his resurrection. We can be guided by the Spirit.

This is the application for today. Know who you are. You are not that monster anymore. God has saved you. Rest in this truth- rest in His Truth.

Oh wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord. Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord.

If you are here today, whether a Christian or not, and this describes you, I tell you, you are not unique. If you try to do good, but can’t, or try to stop doing bad, but can’t, I tell you, you are not alone. This is the human condition. There is freedom though. Christ can set you free. That monster that lives inside and tries so hard to control you can be killed. You can claim this new identity that God has for you. He is the one who can save you. If you would unite with him in his death, know that you will also unite with him in his resurrection.

If it feels like you are living in a prison at times, I tell you, you are. We are cursed to live with this flesh that constantly tries to kill us. There is life though. Where sin brings death, Jesus offers us life. I am not saying that there won’t be struggles, that you wont fail at times, but you can take solace in the fact that it is not you anymore. You can be freed from bondage, even while having to stay in this prison.

There is noting you need to do- nothing you can do. What God is offering, he is offering for free. He has already done it all. The death he died, he died once and for all, but the life he lives, he lives to God. We are told we can unite in this with Jesus. We can be given new life. Yes you will fail. Yes there will be inner turmoil and pain, but we need not stop there. Take the next step, and ask God to save you from all of this.

Don’t stop short of what this life can be. Don’t give into the lies and control of the flesh. Cry out with Paul, that yes, we too are wretched. We too can not save ourselves. We too are broke. Who will save us? But don’t end there. Take the next step along with Paul. Who will save us from this body of death? Thanks be to God, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Join with Paul in thanksgiving and praise. Take this next step and cast off the despair on hopes of something more. Who will save us- God himself.

In a few moments we will be taking communion. We do this as a way to unite in both Jesus death and resurrection. I encourage you to use this time to cry out to God. Cry out with Paul. Confess that you do what you don’t want to, and what you want to you don’t do. Tell him about your monsters, about your Hydes. Ask him to save you from this body of death. Ask him for this new life he has promised.

On the Night he was betrayed, Jesus took bread and he broke it, and said,” This is my Body, broken for you, do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way he took the cup and said, “This cup I the new covenant of my blood. Do this as often as you drink in remembrance of me.”

In a few moments I am going to pray and the band is going to come up and lead us in a time of worship. If you are a follower of Christ, I invite you to come to this table and eat and drink. Use this time to commune with the God ho has saved you. If you are not a follower of Jesus, I would encourage you to use this time to think about what you heard, to pray, to seek God.

Let us Pray.