I really didn’t like the delivery or the incoherence of this sermon, but anyway here is what it would have been (more or less) had it been delivered word perfect -

*** ***

Community through Love, and Love through Humility

Good morning.  We’re going to start today’s sermon a little differently.  We’re going to watch a scene from a movie, 300, which is about how 300 Greek soldiers turned away a much larger enemy which was trying to invade their city.

I apologise for all the bloodshed.  What you have just seen is a very violent movie with 300 men carrying spears and shields, and wearing very little else. 

You’ve also just seen the phalanx, a military formation used by the Greek and Roman armies at work.  In this formation, the soldiers stand should to shoulder, shields interlocked, to form a wall to protect each other against the enemy.  This wall would be impassable so long as every soldier stood firm in his position, even in the face of death, and if every soldier as one pushed together against the enemy. 

However, if someone chickened out, there would be a hole in the “wall”, and the enemy would be able to break through.  Also, most of the armies during these times were not professional armies, meaning that these were often not paid soldiers.  The “soldiers” in a phalanx could therefore be anyone and everyone from society – it did not matter whether you were rich or poor, a politician, a businessman, a farmer, or a teacher – if the city was under attack, everyone would take up a shield and stand side by side to defend their city.

By now you must be wondering what this has got to do with the message today.  So let’s turn our Bibles to Philippians 1 : 27 -

“… stand firm in one spirit, contending as one man for the faith of the gospel, without being frightened in any way by those who oppose you.”

Philippians is a letter written by the apostle Paul to the church in Philippi.  And in the passage we just read, Paul used the phalanx to illustrate a principle in spiritual life to his readers.

All of us have an individual relationship with God.  But Paul says that there is also a part of Christian life that is to be lived as part of a larger community.  And like the phalanx, the ideal community is one in which Christians, regardless of background, stand together in one spirit, striving together as one, in which no one turns back because he is afraid or discouraged.

Here Paul is also putting into words our inner desires.  As humans we long be part of and loved by a community.  God did not create us to live alone, but as social beings.  In our successes, we don’t want to celebrate alone but with friends.  And when we struggle or when we are hurt, we appreciate friends who stand by our side, and walk with us and cry with us.  We need a community to watch out for us, encourage us, affirm us and advise us.

In Christian life as well as life outside the church, we desire to be part of a community.

The obstacle to community though, and that is our humanness.  Humans are by nature proud and selfish. We are proud because we like to compare and compete; we don’t like to associate with people who are different, or who we consider “lower class”.  We are selfish because we don’t like to share with others.  And so over time even the most perfect community will start to see pride and selfishness creep in, and people will start to feel resentful or unwanted.

So how can we build a community that lasts ?  Secular organizations have attempted to get around our humanness is several ways.

North Korea, a communist country, tries to build a community around a mythology.  It tells its people stories about the country and its leaders, hoping that the North Koreans will stick together based on a shared belief.  But the country lives in fear because it is built on lies.  In other places, leaders are afraid of going to war or a poor economy.  The leaders of North Korea are afraid that the leaflets with truthful information floated across the North-South Korea border – of all things – will instigate the North Koreans to defect.

Other organisations attempt to build community by creating rules which are strictly enforced, like in the military.  But that only creates a false sense of community, because people don’t like to follow rules.  So when the military authority is gone, discipline starts to fall apart.

Democracy is the other way that organisations try to create community.  The idea is to give everyone a chance to vote, to decide for themselves how the community should turn out.  However, this still can result in a divided community, because there will always be a minority who voted the other way, and who feel resentful and unhappy.

So how can we build a genuine and lasting community ?  Fortunately, Paul offers a fourth and more perfect solution in Philippians 2, which I will summarise in one phrase, as

“Community through love, love through humility”

Let’s turn our Bibles to Philippians 2 -

1 Therefore if you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any common sharing in the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, 2 then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and of one mind. 3 Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves, 4 not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others. 5 In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:

6 Who, being in very nature God,
   did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
7 rather, he made himself nothing
   by taking the very nature of a servant,
   being made in human likeness.
8 And being found in appearance as a man,
   he humbled himself
   by becoming obedient to death—
      even death on a cross!

I mentioned just now that because of the pride and selfishness in human nature, a community no matter how perfect will become divided over time.  And it was no different in the case of the church at Philippi.

The church at Philippi was the first church that Paul established in Europe.  Now being the first is something to be proud of – imagine if you had the honour of being the first group of Christians in Singapore or Asia !  Even then, things started to fall apart after the early years of excitement as a new church.  In other parts of Philippians, you read about believers who were quarreling with each other, believers who feel discouraged, and believers who went back to their previous way of life.

And Paul’s solution, which you just read in Philippians 2, is love.  Have the same love, he says.  But what is love – what does it mean to love?  Talk is easy.  You don’t need an expert tell you that the answer to a perfect marriage is love.  So what does it mean to love ?  Does it mean -

 Giving each other flowers ? 
 Giving each other hugs ? 
 Celebrating birthdays together ?

When Paul writes about love here he did not have in mind romantic love.  Philippians was written in Greek, and the love which Paul wrote about is known in Greek as “agape” love.  Agape love appears many times throughout the New Testament, and is used to describe the selfless, sacrificial, unconditional love that Jesus has for us.  But what I find surprising on reading Philippians 2 is that Paul says, agape love is expressed through humility.

3 Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves, 4 not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others.

What has love got to do with humility ?  When we think of love we usually think of giving something to someone that we love.  Or not doing something that would hurt someone that we love.  But to think of humility as a show of love is unusual. 

And what is humility ?  Paul says -

 Do nothing out of selfish ambition
 Do nothing out of pride (vain conceit)
 Value others above yourself
 Look out for the interests of others

So maybe from this I can draw up a checklist against my own life -

 I am not interested in doing anything in church, whether as a leader or otherwise (no ambition)
 I think that my singing is quite lousy, but I help with the backup vocals anyway (no pride)
 I think the worship leader today sounds a lot better than I do (value others above myself)
 I will save some leftovers for the worship leader (look out for the interests of others)

One of the changes that we see in Singapore recently are more “humble” political leaders and here, I clarify that I’m not referring to any political party.  So we see and read about leaders who, for a change, take the MRT and public transport and who eat at coffeeshops, when in the past you would rarely see them mingling with the man in the street.  All these are picked up by the media and you see pictures of these politicians in the news and on the Internet, with people commenting that the politicians are “waaah … so humble”. 

Sometimes I wonder if politicians have a “humility” checklist -

 Mon                          Take MRT
 Tues                         Eat at coffeeshop
 Wed                          Take bus
 Thu                           Use public toilet
 Fri                             Make my own coffee

So is humility a checklist of “to do” items?  When you read Philippians 2 carefully, it is more than that.  Paul calls it a mindset and more specifically, the mind of Jesus Christ.

5 In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus

Humility is not just about doing.  It is about a change of heart, a change of values, a change of mind.  And Paul tells us to imitate Christ in this regard.  But what does it mean to have the humility of Christ ?

6 Who, being in very nature God,
   did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
7 rather, he made himself nothing
   by taking the very nature of a servant,
   being made in human likeness.
8 And being found in appearance as a man,
   he humbled himself
   by becoming obedient to death—
      even death on a cross!

Have you ever asked the question – why did Jesus have to become a human in order to point us to God?  He could have appeared as a supernatural being, maybe like an angel.  He could have spoken through a burning bush or thunder and lightning.  Even if He wanted to become human, He could have chosen to be born as a king or prince or at least into a rich family.

But the standard of humility that Jesus demonstrated was not a checklist-type, single-act-type, of humility.  It was not a I’ll-appear-through-a-burning-bush-on-Monday, I’ll-take-an-MRT-train-on-Tuesday, I’ll-speak-through-the-lightning-on-Wednesday, I’ll-inspect-the-public-toilets-on-Thursday, and I’ll-make-my-own-coffee-on-Friday type of humility.  It was not a I’ll-do-something-humble-today-and-go-back-to-heaven-tomorrow type of humility.

Rather, Jesus went all the way, and made himself nothing.  He chose to become totally human, born as a helpless baby into a simple family, experienced poverty, hunger, sickness, pain, rejection, suffering and finally death.  He chose to identify Himself with the full range of human experience, when He could have done something less drastic. 

The passage also tells us that Jesus also became a servant, and submitted Himself to death on the cross.  Mark 10 : 45 says that Jesus “did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life as a ransom for many”.

By this, Jesus shows us that the humility in love, and the love that builds community, means standing by the people that you love, identifying with their struggles, and not turning your back on them.  Jesus also demonstrated that humility results in service to one another, and a willingness to give up even our lives in that service. 

Wow, tall order.  What does this mean in practical terms ?

In this lifetime, we as a church will not be able to solve every problem.  We may not have the money to help every bankrupt person, we can pray for but will not be able to cure every disease, we certainly cannot stop people from dying or resurrect every dead person, and we cannot intervene in matters beyond our control, such as a boss’ decision on whether to promote you. 

In the same way, in His earthly lifetime, Jesus did not rescue every bankrupt person, heal every sick person, feed every hungry person, resurrect every dead person, or otherwise intervene in the personal life of every person.  But what Jesus offered was fellowship and compassion – He walked with the poor, the hungry and the hurt, crying with the people who were sad, identifying with their pain.

And that is what we too, can do as Christians.  We humble ourselves by offering our fellowship, empathy and time to others who are struggling or hurting.  We encourage each other through our service, whether by sharing a testimony or a song up here, or one to one, or through other acts of love.

I have to confess that I have mixed feelings whenever I am asked to share or teach, whether up here in the pulpit, or in Sunday school, or in small groups at my workplace. 

After a long and difficult day or week at work, what I long for is to chill, switch off the brain, read about some scandal in the news – there’s a lot recently - type some rubbish into my Facebook, go to bed, and – because I am quite vain and want to stay slim – wake up for an early morning run.  The last thing I want to do is disrupt this routine, by having to listen to someone else’s problems – I have enough of my own – or to plan for Sunday School class or a sermon. 

One of my friends recently joked to me – “life is too short to be deep”.  Which perfectly sums up what I want to do – I want to live for myself, I don’t want to be deep and have to care about other people. 

However, the love of Jesus Christ compels us to do otherwise, such that we no longer live just for ourselves, but for the community of believers and of the people around us.

Finally, you should also know that the radical love and humility that is inspired by Christ, which comes from a changed heart and mind, is not confined to the church.  You can’t be this wonderful, loving, humble person in church, but a monster at home or in your office.  There will be a noticeable change in how you relate to people at all times, and they will be attracted to the life that you lead in God.  In Philippians 2 : 15, Paul tells the church that they can “shine like stars in the universe” for God.

God will also honour your love and humility.  In the case of Jesus, Paul writes in Philippians 2 that -

9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
   and gave him the name that is above every name,
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
   in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

James 4:6 says that “God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble”.  Just as Jesus is glorified for His love and humility, God will honour your love and humility, so press on.

“Community through love, love through humility”

Today we started with a bit of conventional wisdom, which is “begin with the end in mind”.  What is the end which we want ?  We want to build a community.  To begin with the end in mind, means to know our purpose – community – and focus all our efforts towards the goal.

We want community so we will love
We want to love so we will be humble

There is nothing wrong with this conventional wisdom, but in closing I want us to look at things unconventionally, in reverse order. 

I believe that a lot of the things that we want to do or change, whether it is in our personal life, in our community of believers, or even in the workplace or Government, are superficial if there is no change of heart.  And when we follow conventional wisdom and begin with the end in mind, we tend to focus on the external – what new procedures and processes can we put in, to reach our goal?

But today we understand from Paul that a genuine love and humility that transforms communities, comes from a transformation of the heart and mind, so that we will have the heart and mind of Jesus.  That is why 1 John 4 : 19 says that “we love, because He [ Jesus ] first loved us”.

So when you go home, hopefully with a renewed desire to build community, as you start to draw up a checklist of things “to do”, put at the top of your checklist, a desire to understand the depth and breadth of Jesus’ love and humility.  We will be able to love as Jesus did, and establish the ideal community, only when we understand how much He loved and humbled Himself for us. 

The National University of Singapore law school recently announced that it would be reviewing the admission criteria for students, primarily to allow for "greater diversity in the backgrounds, abilities and interests of its undergraduates", instead of having students drawn from a small number of schools.  This has caused some discomfort, and led to questions of fairness as it appears to be a deviation from the principle of meritocracy.

Comments that the revised admission criteria will be substantially less meritocratic than the current system are for now, I suppose, somewhat speculative.  However, even if substantially more discretion is built into the revised admission criteria, to admit students on bases other than just grades, a question worth pondering is whether it is desirable in the long term interests of certain professions and maybe even Singapore society and the economy, to have students from only certain schools form the majority of undergraduates in certain "highly desirable" professional courses (by Singapore standards), such as law, medicine and dentistry.

I have no figures to support what I am going to say.  But just for the purposes of discussion, suppose -

(a) that 700 out of the top 1,000 "A" level students end up studying in two top institutions every year;
(b) that there are 3,000 applicants for 500 places in "highly desirable" professional courses every year;
(c) that out 700 top students studying in two top institutions at (a), 500 apply to study the "highly desirable" professional courses while the remaining 200 apply for other courses or study overseas;
(d) that out of the other 300 top students who did not choose to study in the two top institutions at (a), 100 apply to study the "highly desirable" professional courses while the remaining 200 apply for other courses or study overseas.

I suppose we will find that, year after year, the students from the two top institutions at (a) above forming the majority of undergraduates in the "highly desirable" professional courses, and very few of these top students in "less desirable" courses such as, maybe, engineering, the general sciences, business, mass communications, and the arts.  Would there be a critical mass of top minds in engineering, the general sciences, business, mass communications, and the arts, to form the next generation of engineers, scientists, businessmen, journalists, writers, political scientists and teachers ?

Perhaps not.  And for this reason (amongst a myriad of others), this revision in admission criteria for law school may not be such a bad thing.

Perhaps it should be extended to other "highly desirable" courses as well.

In another "freak" weather event which must have brought the Singapore national water agency (ie. the PUB) officers close to cardiac arrest, there was an unexpected storm at about 4.30 pm yesterday, followed by floods which affected several areas of Singapore including my backyard, which is Eunos.

Then, after about an hour, the rain eased up, and one or more rainbows appeared over Singapore. 

We don’t often get rainbows in Singapore (though I won’t be able to say it occurs more frequently than the international average), and soon every other Singaporean that was outdoors was snapping photos of the rainbow(s) and uploading it onto Facebook (including me).  This prompting one of my Facebook friends to comment, amusingly -

"Gosh! I’ve just seen three postings on rainbows in Singapore, each one right after the other! Perhaps 2012 shall be a great year after all!"

Maybe because rainbows appear after a rain, we associate rainbows with the hope that things will get better.  So in addition to being a breathtaking display of nature / creation, rainbows have been used to represent a multitude of issues or movements such as LGBT rights, mysticism, and new age spiritualism, in which people look for something better.  For hope. 

And I think that such hope is not entirely misplaced.

In Genesis 6 to 9 of the Bible is an account - familiar to most Christians and maybe non-Christians as well - of a great flood.  All but Noah and his family and the animals which get into a huge boat, referred to as "the ark", are destroyed by the flood.  A rainbow appears after the waters subside, and God tells Noah that the rainbow will be a sign of His promise never to bring about such a massive flood in judgement of evil again.

This is, interestingly, a unilateral promise. 

When we think of religion we often think of an exchange of promises - a "contract" maybe - between man and god.  For example, that if I am good and / or if I obey what the religion directs, I’ll receive a divine reward or avoid divine punishment.

But here, in conduct untypical of what we expect of God, there is no exchange of promises.  There is no demand that man do anything or conduct himself in any particular way.  Rather, notwithstanding that "every inclination of [ man's ] heart is evil from childhood" (Genesis 8:9), God unilaterally promises that there will not be total destruction through flood again. 

I see in this the first of a consistently recurring theme in the Bible, grace.  Of God unilaterally extending forgiveness and friendship to man (ultimately through Jesus Christ), because there is nothing a person can do on his own to overcome imperfection, and earn such fellowship with God. 

Not that humans are like animals or pets, but if I may draw a poor analogy - if you have a pet dog or cat, there is nothing the pet can do to deserve your care and affection.  There can be no "contract" or exchange of promises between a human and an animal to speak of, because humans and animals exist at two entirely different levels.  The only way an animal can meaningfully relate to a human, is for the human to unilaterally initiate that relationship.

And it is in such grace, unilaterally provided by God, that I see hope.

Sometimes I think, to our shame as Singaporeans, we treat our foreign domestic workers (or "maids") as modern day slaves.

Today I had a slight run in with a close relative - rare given that as a good Asian (boy) I try to be deferential to the feelings of my elders - who told me that she was upset with her maid who was unwilling to give up her off day next Sunday, and stay at home to help with the Chinese New Year reunion dinner preparations.

Relative : "Why can’t she stay at home ?  There is so much preparation to do for the dinner.  This only happens once a year."

Me : "She’s not Chinese.  You can’t expect her to understand how important this is to us."

Relative : "But she’s a maid you know.  How can she give me a black face when I ask ?"

Me : (Right, not only must maids obey your commands, they can’t have feelings) "She’s also human.  You must understand, she expects to have her usual Sunday off.  If you were her, you would also feel upset."

Relative : "This happens only once a year.  She’s a maid.  Why can’t she give in ?  Why must she give me a black face ?"

Me : "She’s also human.  If you want her to stay, you should at least offer some compensation."

The conversation ended with the relative saying that she couldn’t understand young people (me young ?  ha ha).

*** ***

This request / demand that a foreign domestic helper give up a Sunday off to help with the Chinese New Year reunion dinner preparations might not be abusive or unreasonable in a physical sense, but if it were one of us or one of our sons who had to stay in military camp over a weekend or the Chinese New Year to perform guard duty, how would we feel ?  We’d feel that that sucks, and we can be sure that that’s how a foreign domestic helper would feel too.

But neither the relative, nor anyone in the conversation, seemed to feel that way.

So to me the above conversation is symptomatic of how we (Singaporeans) have failed to place ourselves in the shoes of the foreign domestic helpers in our midst, to look at them as our equals as human persons.  Even if we don’t physically abuse them — and unfortunately many employers do, what we read in the news of employers being prosecuted for abuse are only the most egregious cases — we don’t treat them very differently from modern day slaves, expecting them to comply with our every directive, regardless of how unreasonable such demands may be.

(Continued from the last post).

The next part of the conversation was even weirder.  He asked me which church I was attending and I told him.

Friend : "Charismatic or non-Charismatic ?"

Me : (Oh God - which era are we in ?  Why are we still drawing these lines ?)  "Charistmatic"

Friend : "Is it a family church ?"

Me : (Is there such a thing as a non-family church ?  Maybe an alternate or animal family church somewhere that I’ve not heard about ?)  "Family"

Just ended one of those somewhat odd conversations with, I suppose, an old friend.  The topic was jobs and he asked what I wanted to do with life now that we’re in our mid-30s.  I replied in all sincerity - "I don’t know.  I suppose what matters right now is not to screw up and somehow get to heaven."

"Why ?"

"I’m a pessimist."

I think that -

 who we admire, and the qualities in the person that we admire,

 who we select as our role models, and the qualities in the person that we seek to model in our lives,

reflect what we value in life.

So I was somewhat impressed by a friend who said that in the field of international relations, he idolised Dag Hammerskjold, the Second Secretary-General of the United Nations, as someone who remained humble despite his achievements and exemplified what a public servant should be.

(And, as a sweeping comment partly in jest, if you do not believe in role models but in burning your own trail in life, it may be that you are just an over-inflated narcissist).

In Philippians 2, the apostle Paul calls on the Christians in Philippi to imitate Jesus Christ’s humility.  But it struck me, on reading Philippians 2 and Henri Nouwen, et al’s Compassion recently, how un-valued and counter-intuitive humility appears to be in this day and age.

I recall that one advice dispensed to me shortly before I left my previous job, was that I should not under-estimate my capacity to do a good job, or be afraid to take credit for a job done well.  To me this demonstrates the value that the workplace ascribes to personal ambition and self-promotion (which, to clarify, I think is not improper if there is no dishonesty, backstabbing or other unethical conduct involved).  Humility, on the other hand, is not regarded as a particularly meaningful virtue, at best to be admired from a distance.

Consequently, while many of us admire humble people, we are less likely to hear a person say that he / she would like to imitate the humility of a humble person.

So while we may admire Mother Theresa for her humility in working with the poor and sick in India, and while we may even aspire to have a similar impact on society (not necessarily through the same means because Mother Theresa’s methods were unfortunately somewhat controversial), few of us would aspire to imitate her humility, in how she lived and worked amongst the people that she served.

I have also heard many positive things about opposition politician Chen Show Mao.  One of the things that Singaporeans admire about him, is the humility which he demonstrates by taking public transport and eating at coffeeshops, proving his ability to connect with the common man.  Now while many of us may even aspire to imitate his dedication to political service, do we also aspire to imitate his humility in taking public transport and eating simply ?  Or would we rather drive a nice car and eat extravagantly ?

Perhaps humility, for most of us, is a by-product of something else that we seek to achieve, and never an end in itself.

If charity or social work requires that we humble ourselves in order to achieve a particular charitable objective such as cleaning up a polluted beach or taking care of a disabled person for a day, we will roll up our sleeves to do that, for that day.

If a political objective requires that we humble ourselves to understand the issues faced by the common man or to show that we can relate to the common man, we will roll up our sleeves, for that purpose.

But to give up a relatively comfortable position in life and do something humble, for no other purpose than to perhaps identify with the struggles of the person whom we are serving, seems almost unthinkable (at least to me).

Which is why I find the humility of Jesus Christ as described in Philippians 2, and the apostle Paul’s exhortation to imitate that humility, so radical. 

Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves, not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others. In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:
Who, being in very nature God,
   did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
rather, he made himself nothing
   by taking the very nature of a servant,
   being made in human likeness.
And being found in appearance as a man,
   he humbled himself
   by becoming obedient to death—
      even death on a cross!

When Jesus took the form of a human person, He was not performing a day’s worth of charitable work or going on a two week mission trip .  He chose an option which did not allow Him to turn back in His earthly lifetime - He was born as a baby and progressed from childhood through adolescence to adulthood to death as we do, and experienced poverty, hunger, sickness, suffering, pain and death as we do. 

He chose to immerse Himself in the full gamut of human experience. 

On the one hand, this seems to be about "humility" in the sense of Jesus refusing to equate Himself with God (although Jesus is God), and taking a form that would appear relevant to our human experience. 

The foregoing need not mean that Jesus should have reduced Himself to "nothing", become a "servant", and died a cruel death on the cross. 

But Jesus did.  At a deeper level, therefore, I see this as a radical "humility" in the sense of Jesus reducing Himself to "nothing", becoming a "servant", accepting a cruel death on the cross —- standing and identifying with us in our human experience.

The radical humility of Jesus, therefore, was an end in itself.  It was not a by-product of a process by which He demonstrated His relevance to our experience, so that we would listen to Him.  It was Jesus bringing Himself down and serving at our level, for the purpose of standing and identifying with us in our human experience in itself.

So what does this mean for Christians ?  It is 2 am in the morning and this is the best that the mind and spirit can muster …

… I think that Christians need to place a greater value on humility, than society does.

… I do not think humility means that everyone will have to sell everything that they have, give it to the poor, and then live as a poor person amongst the poor in order to identify with the poor (though some of us may well be called to do that).

… I think humility means having to go beyond superficially giving in to each other in disputes, or superficial acts of charity, to trying to understand and identify with what a person or community is going through.  Sometimes this may allow us to offer solutions, and at other times it may be for no other purpose than walking with someone for a part of the journey of life.

… other than that, I have to say, I do not (yet) know.

(Originally posted on Facebook but I think this merits repeating.  This version has been slightly edited).

The often repeated statement that "ministerial salaries requires a political answer" is not, in my opinion, very meaningful at all.  It simply means that the will of the majority, or the perceived will of the majority, will dictate what ministerial salaries look like.  So if there are enough of us pressing for ministers to be paid nothing, they will be paid zero.  And if there are enough of us pressing for ministers to be paid billions, that is what they will be paid.  Either outcome may result regardless of what is in the best interests of the country and its people.

So maybe the question we should ask is - what salary may be offered to potential ministers, so that we achieve an outcome which is reasonably in the best interests of the country ?  The answer clearly lies at neither the extreme of zero, or in plundering the country’s coffers.  While there is still substantial subjectivity in what is in the "public interest", I think it is more meaningful than just groping about based on the emotional sentiment of the public, which is what I sense many of us are doing now.

The apostle Paul was a fiery intellectual and no-nonsense go-getter.  When the early Christians first got in his way, he had them arrested and executed.  This included the execution of the Stephen (Acts 7).  Then, after a life changing encounter with Jesus (Acts 9), he converts to Christianity, undertakes three missionary journeys in which he preaches and establishes numerous churches throughout the Roman empire, including the first church in Europe, at the city of Philippi.  In the process, Paul writes half of the New Testament (13 out of 27 books), publicly rebukes with Peter (yes, the first "Pope" no less, in Galatians 2), and dumps a young protege (John Mark) and a friend (Barnabas) who wanted to give Mark a second chance, when Paul deems John Mark unreliable (Acts 15).

Strong-headed, ambitious, self-confident, impatient, disciplined, hot-tempered and intellectually brilliant, the apostle Paul was someone who would take control and take a bull by the horns, and someone not to be trifled with.

"Tender" is therefore the last word I would use to describe the apostle Paul.  But on reading Paul’s letter to the church at Philippi (ie. Philippians) again recently, I notice - unusually perhaps - a tenderness to Paul’s tone.  Unlike the harsher exhortations in epistles like Romans or Corinthians, parts of Philippians read to me like a deep sigh.

*** ***

Philippi, interestingly, was the city where Paul miraculously "escaped" from prison after an earthquake broke open all prison doors and chains (Acts 16).

At the time Paul wrote Philippians, Paul was again in prison (or possibly house arrest) for his faith, this time for anything above 4 years since his arrest in Jerusalem (Acts 21).  If Paul was expecting another miracle to lead to his release from prison, it had not materialised.  (In fact it never did, and Paul would be executed in Rome a few years later).

The man who once used to go wherever he wanted, do whatever he wanted, and preach to whoever he wanted, had his freedom frustratingly restrained.

Paul was also old.  Probably above 50 by this time, his physical body was battered from the multiple times that he had been abused, beaten up, and imprisoned for his faith.  Paul was no longer as young, strong or energetic as he once was.

In this backdrop, Paul is told that the church he helped establish in Philippi was not doing too well.  The early excitement of the faith had faded.  In the absence of strong leadership, disunity and materialism crept in.  Paul’s long absence had caused some believers to doubt his sincerity.  Other believers, discouraged by Paul’s imprisonment and the opposition from outside the church, questioned if God was in control.

It is in this context that Paul wrote with unsual tenderness to the church, the words which I have distilled below (amongst many others).

(1)  Don’t Know

Have you ever heard someone say, out of frustration or depression, "I am so tired I feel like dying" ?  Well, Paul the super-apostle says it here, though not in quite as negative a way.

"For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain.  If I am to go on living in the body, this will mean fruitful labour for me.  Yet what shall I choose?  I do not know!  I am  torn between the two …".  (Philippians 1 : 21, 21 - 23, emphasis mine).

In his letter, Paul exposes with unusual candour a vulnerable side of him, and says "I’m tired, and I don’t feel like living anymore".  (The difference between Paul and a more typical depressed person, however, is that Paul is looking forward to an eternity of rest in Christ after death, whereas the typical depressed person may simply be seeking to escape from his current situation).

And just as we often feel that we are not in control of the situation around us, Paul goes on to admit that he is not as much in control of life as he would like to be.  I want to visit all of you again, but I don’t know I will have a chance to.  "Whatever happens [ to me ]", Paul writes in Philippians 1 : 27 as if he is about to die soon, keep pressing on.

(2)  Don’t Know how to Quit You

In Philippians, Paul also affirms his love and friendship for the believers in Philippi.  I have not forgotten and have not quit you, he says. 

"I thank my God every time I remember you.  In all my prayers for all of you, I always pray with joy … my brothers, you whom I love and long you, my joy and my crown …".  (Philippians 1 : 3, 4 and 4 : 1).

And more importantly, Paul tells the believers that God has not forgotten and would never quit them.

I am confident of this, Paul writes, that God who began a good work in your life, and see it through until it is completed when Christ returns (Philippians 1 : 6).

(3)  Don’t Look Back, Don’t Stop Loving and Don’t Give Up !

Especially at the turn of the year, it is typically human to look at the past — what has happened and what we have achieved (or not) — and find ourselves held back by past, no-longer-existing glories, or past, painful experiences, or past habits.

But Paul tells the believers at Philippi, now that you know Jesus Christ and have confidence in the future, don’t look back!

"Whatever [ in my past ] was to my profit I now consider loss for the sake of Christ … forgetting what is behind and straining to what is ahead, I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus."  (Philippians 3 : 7, 13 and 14).

Because we have hope and encouragement in Jesus Christ, Paul also writes, continue to love one another, in the same way that Jesus loved you. (Philippians 2 : 1 - 11)

And because we can look forward to the transcedent, our "citizenship in heaven", Paul encourages us to press on.

"… I [ Paul ] press on to take hold of that which Christ Jesus took hold for me … forgetting what is behind and straining towards what is ahead, I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus … join with others in following my example … and take note of those who live according to the pattern you gave you".  (Philippians 3 : 12 - 17).

*** ***

It is currently the seventh day of 2012.  The year is still young, but the future is uncertain given the economic crisis in Europe, the tensions in the Middle East and the Korean peninsula, and the upcoming elections in major world players such as the United States.  We are not in any more control of our lives and future today, than the church was at the time Paul wrote his letter to the church at Philippi.  But regardless of our present circumstances, regardless of our past (whether shameful or honourable), and regardless of the uncertain future, God promises that He will not give up on us, that the good work He has started in our lives, He will finish.  With this confidence and hope, we press on, fulfilling hopefully our call as individual Christians and collectively to "shine like stars in the universe" (Philippians 4 : 15) in these hard times.

I found some time today to finish two chapters of a new book, "Compassion" by Henri Nouwen, Donald McNeill and Douglas Morrison.  Although written in 1982, its words are still amazingly refreshing.

The authors first suggest that compassion is more than general kindness or tenderheartedness; it means "to suffer with".  It means

"going to where it hurts, to enter into places of pain, to share in brokeness, fear, confusion, and anguish … to cry out with those in misery, to mourn with those who are lonely, to weep with those in tears … to be weak with the weak, vulnerable with the vulnerable, powerless with the powerless.  Compassion means full immersion in the condition of being human".

Reflecting on one of Jesus’ names, "Immanuel" or "God with us" (Matthew 1 : 23) — something which should be fresh on most of our minds given that Christmas has just only passed — the authors say

"God is a compassionate God.  This means, first of all, that our God has chosen to be God-with-us. …

When do we receive real comfort and consolation?  Is it when someone teaches us how to think or act?  Is it when we receive advice about where to go or what to do?  Is it when we hear words of reassurance and hope?  Sometimes, perhaps.  But what really counts is that in moments of pain and suffering someone stays with us.  More important than any particular action or word of advice is the simple presence of someone who cares.  When someone says to us in a midst of a crisis, ‘I do not know what to say or what to do, but I want you to realise that I am with you, that I will not leave you alone,’ we have a friend through whom we can find consolation and comfort. …

… [ so ] when we say that God is a God-with-us [ we mean ] a God who came to share our lives in solidarity.  It does not mean that God solves our problems, shows us the way out of our confusion, or offers answers for our many questions.  God might do all that, but the solidarity of God consists in the fact that God is willing to enter with us into our problems, confusions, and questions.  That is the good news of God’s taking human flesh [ in the person of Jesus Christ or ' Immanuel', God-with-us ]."

I think as Christians we sometimes feel disappointment with God because we live with the expectation that God will intervene supernaturally, to change our lives, the people around us, or our difficult circumstances, but God does not. 

However, the opening chapters of this book remind me that God is a personal God, more interested in walking in compassionate companionship with us, rather than solving immediate physical problems while leaving the human heart calloused and unchanged.  When Jesus was physically present on earth, He did not heal every sick person, or eradicate hunger and poverty, or overthrow unjust rulers.  Rather He lived and walked amongst the people as a common and humble citizen of Jewish society under a Roman government, interacting and teaching and healing people at a mostly individual or small group level.  His most expansive miracle, in fact, was to multiply food to feed 7,000 hungry people who had listened to Him teach till it was too late for dismiss them so that they could get their own dinners.  But that hardly came close to eradicating hunger and poverty throughout the Roman empire.

It is this personal, compassionate God which Christians must seek and seek to emulate in their lives, and not the more popular but somewhat distorted idea of an instant noodles type, just-add-water god and naive religious faith.