Author: BrJames

St. Mark, the gospel writer, noted that when Jesus died:

Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost.
And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom.

(Mark 15: 37-38)

In three of the four accounts of Jesus’ crucifixion, we have a mention of the curious fact of the rending of the temple veil, or curtain. The curtain in view here is probably the barrier that guarded the entrance to the “holy of Holies”, the most sacred part of the Hebrew Tabernacle (and later, the Temple in Jerusalem). Within this chamber resided the Ark of the Covenant (until it became lost to history). This chamber represented the presence of God. No one was allowed to enter except the High Priest, and even he could only enter once a year on Yom Kippur (the great “Day of Atonement”). The barrier was for the protection of the people, who could not survive a direct encounter with the presence of God.

Ancient Jewish tradition would suggest that this barrier was formidable (though debate about the thickness exists; see a full discussion by Baptist seminarian Charles Bumgardner at his blog). It is unclear whether the veil was a single thick panel, or a single panel hung in such a way as to create a maze. It may even have been two panels. (For a lengthy discussion, see the article “The Veil of the Temple in History and Legend” by Daniel M. Gurtner).

According to a 2014 news report, a group of women in Israel are struggling with the challenge of recreating the Veil: “The women of the veil chamber,” as they call themselves, have founded a little workshop in the biblical Samarian community of Shiloh that is filled with weaving devices and wool. . This curtain is no thin wisp of cloth: The size of the veil itself, a single rag-like object measuring 20 meters high, 10 meters wide and 10 centimeters thick, is a project of immense complexity in and of itself.
(From Israel Today. I have not found any follow up reporting on their progress).

I might pause to note that some debate also exists also as to which curtain was torn. Some early theologians, such as St. Thomas Aquinas, believed that the torn curtain was not the one protecting the Holy of Holies, but a more visible and external curtain, hanging in front of the outer courts. There would have been two curtains in the temple, since the temple followed biblical blueprints initially given for its predecessor, the mobile Tent of Meeting (or Tabernacle): “You shall make a screen for the entrance of the tent, of blue and purple and scarlet yarns and fine twined linen, embroidered with needlework.” (Exodus 26:36, English Standard Version)

In his Commentary on St. Matthew, Aquinas noted that the deepest mysteries still remain hid from us:

And these two veils signify a twofold veiling, because the inside veil signifies the veiling of heavenly mysteries, which will be revealed to us: for then we shall be like to Him, when His glory shall have appeared. The other veil, which was outside, signifies the veiling of mysteries which pertain to the Church. Hence, the outer veil was rent, but the other one was not, to signify that mysteries which pertain to the Church were made known by Christ’s death; but the other veil was not rent, because heavenly secrets still remain veiled. Hence, the Apostle says: “But when Israel shall be converted to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away” (II Cor. 3, 16). Hence, by the Passion, all mysteries, which were written in the Law and the prophets, were opened, as it is stated: “Beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded to them in all the scriptures the things that were concerning him” (Lk. 24, 27).
(St Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on St. Matthew, available online).

The important point for us isn’t the nature or location of the curtain, but rather the deeper meaning and symbolism behind its rupture. Even this may have multiple layers of possibilities. As I was preparing this article, I discovered one blog article that linked the tearing of the veil to the Jewish custom of tearing one’s clothes at a time of great distress, such as grief from the death of a loved one. The idea is that God was tearing His clothes at a moment of deep anguish.

A more common interpretation would be something like this:

The rending of this veil means that access into the presence of God is no longer limited to the high priest; in the era after Christ’s death, all believers may boldly come before the Almighty’s throne. … Clearly, with the death of Jesus a cataclysmic change happened in the way we approach the Father, as well as with God’s relationship to the temple. It was, John Calvin writes, “an opening of heaven, that God may now invite the members of his Son to approach him with familiarity.” (R.C. Sproul, Ligonier Ministries).

Jesus’ death has accomplished something wondrous. God has destroyed the barrier that separates us from His presence.

An article by Glenn Stanton in the Federalist cites new research calling into question the near dogma that Christianity in America is dying amid a relentless tide of secularization–That the gates of science and progressive politics are doing what the gates of Hell could not, namely prevailing against the Church. It turns out that this is only partly right; It is progressive politics from within the churches, not outside it, that has taken down many of the once great Protestant denominations.

Yes, these churches are hemorrhaging members in startling numbers, but many of those folks are not leaving Christianity. They are simply going elsewhere. Because of this shifting, other very different kinds of churches are holding strong in crowds and have been for as long as such data has been collected. In some ways, they are even growing.

The Stanton article points out growth in nondenominational churches that are Evangelical in outlook, and states that these groups gain five new congregants exiled from the liberal churches for every one they lose for any reason. “They also do a better job of retaining believers from childhood to adulthood than do mainline churches.”

Over time, even as the “nones” increase their share of the population, at the expense of weakly affiliated religious people, the “strongly affiliated” have not only held steady but even grown slightly, and currently number about 40% of U.S. adults. One third of American adults pray multiple times a day, and believe that The Bible is God’s actual word. Stanton points out that church attendance today is higher than at the time of the founding of our nation.

The 2017 study in question is “The Persistent and Exceptional Intensity of American Religion: A Response to Recent Research “ by Landon Schnabel of Indiana University, and Sean Bock of Harvard (Sociological Science, 4, 686-700).

Holy Week is upon us, as Christians celebrate Palm Sunday. This day recalls the triumphal entry of Jesus into Jerusalem, as adoring crowds waved palm branches and shouted “Hosanna to the son of David!” One of my favorite parts of Palm Sunday is the singing of the hymn, “All Glory, Laud, and Honor”, while (at least in one of my old churches) children march around with palm branches. The hymn is rendered beautifully in the following recording by the Choir of King’s College, Cambridge:

This hymn is based on “Gloria laus, et honor” by St Theodulph of Orleans, a ninth century poet and bishop, who died in 821. It was translated to English by John Mason Neale (1818-1866):

Refrain:
All glory, laud and honour,
To Thee, Redeemer, King,
To Whom the lips of children
Made sweet hosannas ring.

Thou art the King of Israel,
Thou David’s royal Son,
Who in the Lord’s Name comest,
The King and blessed One.

The company of angels
Are praising Thee on High,
And mortal men and all things
Created, make reply.

The people of the Hebrews
With palms before Thee went;
Our prayer and praise and anthems
Before Thee we present.

To Thee, before Thy passion,
They sang their hymns of praise;
To Thee, now high exalted,
Our melody we raise.

Thou didst accept their praises;
Accept the prayers we bring,
Who in all good delightest,
Thou good and gracious King.

The eminent physicist Stephen Hawking has died at age 76, and his death is being mourned throughout the world, even as his contributions to theoretical physics are celebrated. He struggled valiantly against a neurodegenerative disease that robbed him of just about everything but his mind.

He was also one of the more prominent atheists of our time. His bold pronouncements often garnered a lot of attention. He famously dismissed philosophy as out of date with respect to science and therefore having nothing more to add to our understanding of the Universe. He made the criticized statement that universes can spontaneously come onto being: “because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing.”

About death and the afterlife, he stated in 2011:
I have lived with the prospect of an early death for the last 49 years. I’m not afraid of death, but I’m in no hurry to die. I have so much I want to do first. I regard the brain as a computer which will stop working when its components fail. There is no heaven or afterlife for broken down computers; that is a fairy story for people afraid of the dark.”(The Guardian).

He is noted to have challenged contrary beliefs with some grace (Jude Smith in Christian Today). His ex-wife, Dr. Jane Hawking, who was then (and is currently) a practicing Christian, reported on this in a recent interview with Christian Connection. “…at first we lived in harmony each respecting the other’s point of view – and because he had been giving such a damning diagnosis I could well understand why he would not be inclined to believe in a loving God, let alone given how complex his researches into the origins of the universe were. He has to be able to see the proof of everything in mathematical terms.”

She recalls him as having great energy and a sense of humor. In one mirthful exchange, Hawking admitted to his wife that science is often a faith based enterprise.
I remember once asking him how he knew which theory to work on, to which he replied: ‘Well you have to take a leap of faith in choosing the one that you think is going to be most productive.’ I said: ‘Really? I thought faith had no part to play in physics?’ (Jane Hawking, in The Telegraph).

Although this marriage would unravel, they eventually were able to remain on good terms. Jane’s faith gave her great help and comfort, in the midst of his diagnosis and subsequent disability.

“Faith was my rock and a blessing because I believed that there was help and support for me in all the challenges I faced and that things would resolve themselves eventually.”

Her determination early on prevailed and gave him back a will to live at a crucial moment when he had lost it. Though not acknowledged as such, it seems that in the midst of his deepest darkness, he was given a gift of grace from God, that supported him and enabled his later contributions.

On 5 March 1953, the brutal Stalin era of the Soviet Union came to an abrupt end, as the dictator died of a hemorrhagic stroke (the presence of gastrointestinal and cardiac hemorrhage has led to the credible theory that he may have been poisoned with warfarin by his own associates). His daughter, Svetlana, was present, and gave an eyewitness account:

My father died a difficult and terrible death. It was the first and only time I’ve seen someone die. God grants an easy death only to the just.

The hemorrhaging had gradually spread to the rest of his brain. Since his heart was healthy and strong, it affected the breathing centers bit by bit and caused suffocation. His breathing became shorter and shorter. For the last 12 hours the lack of oxygen was acute. His face altered and became dark. His lips turned black and the features grew unrecognisable. The last hours were nothing but a slow strangulation. The death agony was horrible. He literally choked to death as we watched. At what seemed the very last moment, he suddenly opened his eyes and cast a glance over everyone in the room. It was a terrible glance, insane or perhaps angry, and full of the fear of death and the unfamiliar faces of the doctors bent over him. The glances swept over everyone in a second. Then something incomprehensible and awesome happened that to this day I can’t forget and don’t understand. He suddenly lifted his left hand as though he were pointing to something above and bringing down a curse on us all. The gesture was incomprehensible and full of menace, and no one could say to whom or at what it might be directed. The next moment, after a final effort, the spirit wrenched itself free of the flesh.

(Source: Alliluyeva, Svetlana, Twenty Letters to a Friend, 17. New York, Harper, 1967.)

“The Last Jedi” reminds viewers that even a fictional secular religion will likely reflect the spiritual economy of its time. (Chaim Saiman)

Months ago, in anticipation of the release of “The Last Jedi”, I wrote a blog post on the “Star Wars” universe as a significant modern parable that can connect to a number of the themes and ideas of Christianity. The latest movie has been interpreted by many as repudiating some of the tenets of the preceding movies.

Two recent articles reflect further on the religious themes of “Star Wars.” Writing in CNN, Daniel Burke observes,

“Star Wars” is, at heart, a story about the rise and fall of an ancient religion.

That religion was intended to be a space-age version of Zen Buddhism. This reflected the interest in eastern religions becoming popular in the California of the 70’s.

Suffice it to say, “Star Wars” borrows quite a bit from Buddhist symbols, teachings and practices. One writer calls it “Zen with lightsabers.” …
Throughout “Star Wars,” the Jedi talk often about mindfulness and concentration, attachment and interdependence, all key Buddhist ideas. Two — mindfulness and concentration — are steps on the Eightfold Path, the Buddha’s guide to spiritual liberation.

Irv Kershner, director of “The Empire Strikes Back”, once said that the character of Yoda was created to evangelize for Buddhism.

Mushim Patricia Ikeda, a Buddhist teacher and social justice activist, said Yoda reminds her of the monks she studied with in Korea: wise, cryptic and a little impish.

“The Last Jedi”, the most recent movie, on the other hand, seems to have turned against the religion of the Jedi. After trekking to Luke’s remote hideaway, bearing his old light saber as a relic, Rey is a supplicant to the religion that has died down to one. Luke stares blankly for a second, then tosses the thing over his shoulder and walks away. As she pursues him, he rather grumpily tells her that the Jedi order is finished, and he won’t train her. Later he and Yoda’s glowing spirit hold a conversation about the sacred Jedi books that Luke possesses: “Page-turners they were not,” opines Yoda.

Writing in The Atlantic, Chaim Saiman notes that

From A New Hope through The Force Awakens, learning to master the Force required faith, ritual, and ancient wisdom—all of which are hallmarks of institutionalized religion. But in The Last Jedi, a grizzled Luke Skywalker dismisses the Jedi mythos, and presents a more modern take on theology that accords with the “spiritual but not religious” trend that finds younger Americans to be less interested in organized faith but more open to spiritual experiences.

Both articles are quick and entertaining reads.

In the last few decades a new debate has emerged among historians, in light of revelations obtained from Communist Archives, the Mitronin Archives, and the Venona Project. The debate centers upon the extent to which in the 20th century the U.S. was facing an existential threat from Communist infiltration in all levels of government and society. Was McCarthy right?

McCarthyism arose during dark times, following the Soviet theft of the secrets of the U.S. atomic bomb, the Communist takeover of China, and the fall of Eastern Europe under the “iron curtain”, seemingly with the complicity of the Truman administration. McCarthy exploited the unease.

Senator Joe McCarthy was an ambitious senator from Wisconsin, from 1947 to 1957. He rose to national fame after a February 9, 1950 speech in West Virginia, in which he claimed to have in his hand a piece of paper that contained a list of Communist spies in the U.S. government. Four years later, he was disgraced. His downfall was heralded by withering criticism from famed journalist Edward R. Murrow, and by a fiery retort on the Senate floor by Army counsel Joseph Nye Welch: “Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?” Writing in 2003, senators Collins and Durbin wrote, “Senator McCarthy’s zeal to uncover subversion and espionage led to disturbing excesses.” (Collins, Susan and Levin, Carl (2003). Preface (PDF). Executive Sessions of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee On Investigations. U.S. Government Printing Office). McCarthy personally flamed out spectacularly; consumed by addictions to heroin and alcohol, he died of liver failure at Bethesda Naval Hospital in 1957. He was only 48.

McCarthy’s name lingers on as a dirty word, as Harvey Klehr notes:
To accuse someone of McCarthyism or to label a person a McCarthyite is not to issue a compliment. The implication is that a person so named has made scurrilous and unwarranted accusations and is engaged in unethical and sleazy maneuvers. The late Senator from Wisconsin even gave his name to the period. The McCarthy era is commonly depicted as one where America, consumed by a paranoid and irrational fear of domestic communism, went on a witch-hunt. (Harvey Klehr in Frontpagemag.com).

An article in The American Prospect” notes the following:
McCarthy’s claims were ultimately discredited, of course—along with the senator himself. But today the story is taking a new turn. A growing number of writers and intellectuals are beginning to argue that for all McCarthy’s bluster and swagger, he may have been right after all. And I don’t just mean writers on the right. Editorializing in the Washington Post in 1996, Nicholas Von Hoffman concluded that “point by point Joe McCarthy got it all wrong and yet was still closer to the truth than those who ridiculed him.” Still more dramatically, the London Observer opined that historians who had vilified McCarthy for two generations “are now facing the unpleasant truth that he was right.”. In his book Blacklisted By History, M. Stanton Evans writes: “The real Joe McCarthy has vanished into the mists of fable and recycled error, so that it takes the equivalent of a dragnet search to find him.”

The Venona Papers are one of the sources of information shedding new light on Communist espionage. Venona was a secret counterintelligence program conducted by the National Security Agency and its precursors from 1943-1980. The program, so secret that even Harry Truman was in the dark, intercepted and decoded thousands of messages from the Soviet Union’s secret police (NKVD).

As the Washington Post reported:
The recent publication of a batch of Venona transcripts gives evidence that the Roosevelt and Truman administrations were rife with communist spies and political operatives who reported, directly or indirectly, to the Soviet government, much as their anti-communist opponents charged.

… The sum and substance of this growing body of material is that: Ethel and Julius Rosenberg, executed in June 1953 for atomic espionage, were guilty; Alger Hiss, a darling of the establishment was guilty; and that dozens of lesser known persons such as Victor Perlo, Judith Coplon and Harry Gold, whose innocence of the accusations made against them had been a tenet of leftist faith for decades, were traitors or, at the least, the ideological vassals of a foreign power.”

In response to McCarthy’s attack John E. Peurifoy, deputy undersecretary of state, said that in the previous three years the government had investigated over 16,000 of its employees and had failed to find a communist. “If I can find a single one, he will be fired by sundown,” Peurifoy declared. The Venona transcripts contain the code names of about 200 persons, although some of these were clearly persons who had unwitting contact with Soviet agents. The Venona documents indicate that there were perhaps a dozen Soviet agents in the State Department alone. It is now clear that the Truman administration wasn’t looking very hard.”

Further reading:
The Washington Post.

Manning Johnson (1908-1959) was an African American who was introduced to Communism by way of a front organization called the American Negro Labor Congress, and saw in Communism a possible redress to ills suffered by his people. An ambitious member of the Communist Party in America in the 1930s, he rose to the highest ranks, gaining a seat on the National Committee, and becoming a candidate for the ultra-elite Politburo. He ran for the U.S. Congress in New York as a Communist in 1935.

He became disillusioned with things when he realized that minorities were being exploited and controlled by white leaders of the party:

“These white communists wielded more power than the nominal Negro heads of the Commission. In a word, they are like white overseers. Every Negro member was aware of the fact that these white overseers constituted the eyes, the ears and the voice of the Kremlin.”

He apparently also felt some remorse about the ruthless tactics employed by the party, including espionage, subversion of well intended “dupes”, and even assassinations:

“Thus, as a participant on the highest level of the communist conspiracy in America, I observed the cold, calculating, ruthless nature of red power politics and political warfare, stripped of all its illusory propaganda and idealistic cover. “

In his autobiography, Color, Communism, and Common Sense, he described shocking inside information about how Communists targeted the African American churches because of their centrality to community life. Moscow-based agents instructed the American Communists to cease denouncing the churches, which had so far failed, and to try to infiltrate them instead. Deception was to be the new policy: “The honeyed phrase replaced harsh words. The smile replaced the smirk. The velvet glove covered the mailed fist.” He stated that from 1934 on, the policy achieved successes:

White ministers acting as missionaries, using the race angle as bait, aided in the cultivation of Negro ministers for work in the Red solar system of organizations. Bribery through gifts, paid lectures, flattery through long applause at staged rallies, favorable mention in the red controlled press were not the only methods employed to corrupt the Negro ministers. The use of sex and perversion as a means of political blackmail was an accepted red tactic.

At the same time that all this was going on at the top, the comrades were building cells below in the church “to guarantee that decisions made at the top would be brought down to the congregation.”

Manning cited documents alleging that some youth organizations and a number of Alabama churches were under Communist control, and could therefore also be used as cover for illegal activities.

The irony is profound. While at the same time they were going about destroying churches and rooting out Christians in Soviet territories, the Kremlin pushed the following message in its efforts to woo American black churchgoers:

The new line went like this: Jesus, the carpenter, was a worker like the Communists. He was against the “money changers,” the “capitalists,” the “exploiters” of that day. That is why he drove them from the temple. The Communists are the modern day
fighters against the capitalists or moneychangers. If Jesus were living today, he would be persecuted like the Communists who seek to do good for the common people.

The end game was to “stir up race and class conflict”. The goal would be either to control a block of people who could be incorporated into a future communist regime or else, at the very least, to destabilize and harass the existing government.

Manning’s book, Color, Communism, and Common Sense, is available at the Internet Archive.

Later sources, such as the Venona files and KGB archives, have corroborated much of Johnson’s testimony about the inner workings of the CPUSA and the concerted efforts at subterfuge and espionage conducted against the US by the Soviet Union in the 1940s-1970s. We are fortunate that there was little chance of success for a full blown Communist revolution in our country. In the subsequent decades the communists would become never more than a dwindling fringe. Yet it is also a marvel what an enormous influence this tiny fringe had in energizing and galvanizing workers, intellectuals, pastors, academics, journalists, and other “fellow travelers.” They planted seeds that we are still reaping. They helped fill the sails of our ship of state and culture with a leftward breeze that is still blowing hard.

February 23 traditionally marks the death of the early Christian bishop and martyr, Saint Polycarp.  Being a “lesser” feast, his day is often suppressed during the season of Lent.

Saint Polycarp

Polycarp (69 – 155) was a follower of the Apostle John, and later a bishop of Smyrna.  As such, he forms an important bridge between the time of the apostles, and that of subsequent notable Christians, such as his own pupil, the gifted theologian Irenaeus.  He is noted to have been an opponent of the Gnostic heresy.  His lone surviving work is a letter to the Phillipians, available online here, in a traditional language translation.

An account of his death is preserved.  At the age of 86, he was dragged from his estate to appear before the magistrate.  He was offered an opportunity to escape death by renouncing Christianity:

But when the magistrate pressed him hard and said, ‘Swear the oath, and I will release thee; revile the Christ,’ Polycarp said, ‘Fourscore and six years have I been His servant, and He hath done me no wrong. How then can I blaspheme my King who saved me?’ 

He was sent to burn at the stake, but when the fires seemed not to touch him, was finished off by sword.

Forthwith then the instruments that were prepared for the pile were placed about him; and as they were going likewise to nail him to the stake, he said; ‘Leave me as I am; for He that hath granted me to endure the fire will grant me also to remain at the pile unmoved, even without the security which ye seek from the nails.’ So they did not nail him, but tied him. Then he, placing his hands behind him and being bound to the stake, like a noble ram out of a great flock for an offering, a burnt sacrifice made ready and acceptable to God, looking up to heaven said;

‘O Lord God Almighty, the Father of Thy beloved and blessed Son Jesus Christ, through whom we have received the knowledge of Thee, the God of angels and powers and of all creation and of the whole race of the righteous, who live in Thy presence; I bless Thee for that Thou hast granted me this day and hour, that I might receive a portion amongst the number of martyrs in the cup of [Thy] Christ unto resurrection of eternal life, both of soul and of body, in the incorruptibility of the Holy Spirit. May I be received among these in Thy presence this day, as a rich and acceptable sacrifice, as Thou didst prepare and reveal it beforehand, and hast accomplished it, Thou that art the faithful and true God. For this cause, yea and for all things, I praise Thee, I bless Thee, I glorify Thee, through the eternal and heavenly High-priest, Jesus Christ, Thy beloved Son, through whom with Him and the Holy Spirit be glory both now [and ever] and for the ages to come. Amen.’

When he had offered up the Amen and finished his prayer, the firemen lighted the fire. And, a mighty flame flashing forth, we to whom it was given to see, saw a marvel, yea and we were preserved that we might relate to the rest what happened. The fire, making the appearance of a vault, like the sail of a vessel filled by the wind, made a wall round about the body of the martyr; and it was there in the midst, not like flesh burning, but like [a loaf in the oven or like] gold and silver refined in a furnace. For we perceived such a fragrant smell, as if it were the wafted odor of frankincense or some other precious spice. So at length the lawless men, seeing that his body could not be consumed by the fire, ordered an executioner to go up to him and stab him with a dagger. And when he had done this, there came forth [a dove and] a quantity of blood, so that it extinguished the fire; and all the multitude marvelled that there should be so great a difference between the unbelievers and the elect.

A Prayer for the Feast Day of Saint Polycarp: “O God, the maker of heaven and earth, who gave to your venerable servant, the holy and gentle Polycarp, boldness to confess Jesus Christ as King and Saviour, and steadfastness to die for his faith: Give us grace, following his example, to share the cup of Christ and rise to eternal life; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever.” (Anglican)

The following quotation from Billy Graham went viral, being retweeted an average of every 20 seconds yesterday on Twitter:

Someday you will read or hear that Billy Graham is dead. Don’t you believe a word of it. I shall be more alive than I am now. I will just have changed my address. I will have gone into the presence of God.”

Graham, who was an admirer of the evangelist Dwight L. Moody, founder of the Moody Bible Institute in Chicago, borrowed and adapted an older quote by Moody.  Christianity Today has an interesting article on this.  It notes their common faith, and ends:

Though Moody and Graham have both left this world, their legacies live on. Indeed we can be confident they are “more alive” now that they have “gone up higher” and rest in “the presence of God.” And thanks be to God, through their ministries countless others, who now joyfully join them, can say the same.