Category Archives: Saints

Fools for Christ

Posted on by
Reply
The church which is popularly known as St. Basil’s Cathedral on Red Square in Moscow is associated with St. Basil, the fool-for-Christ, who dared to rebuke Ivan the Terrible. It was built in the 1550s. Actually, only one of the chapels is dedicated to St. Basil.

For it seems to me that God has displayed us apostles at the end of the procession, like prisoners appointed for death. We have become a spectacle to the whole world, to angels as well as to men. We are fools for Christ, but you are wise in Christ. We are weak, but you are strong. You are honored, but we are dishonored. To this very hour we are hungry and thirsty, we are poorly clothed…. (1 Cor. 4:9-11)

St. Paul says that he and those who support him are fools for Christ. He mocks his Corinthian opponents who claim to be wise and strong and much more honorable or respectable. St. Paul is happy to be considered a fool if that means he is being faithful to Christ.

Many saints, especially among the Eastern Christians, have also embraced the appearance of foolishness–i.e. craziness–in order to remain faithful to Christ. Some of these saints might have been people that we would now consider mentally ill. Others were not ill but so devoted to following the Gospel that they looked crazy to everyone around them.

Fidelity to Christ and the Gospel does in fact demand that Christians look at least a little bit crazy. The word for blessed in Slavonic is the same as the word for crazy. So Jesus’ words, “Blessed are the peacemakers…. Blessed are those who hunger and thirst after righteousness…. Blessed are the meek…,” can also be understood as “Crazy are the peacemakers…. Crazy are those who hunger and thirst after righteousness…. Crazy are the meek….”

Many of the most famous fools-for-Christ were the saints who were crazy enough to rebuke vicious secular rulers, such as Ivan the Terrible, who committed mass atrocities against their people. Others were ascetics who renounced social norms to such a degree that they seemed crazy to their contemporaries.

See the essay on “Foolishness for Christ” in Wikipedia here.

Demonstrative Proof

Posted on by
Reply
Adam and Eve, a mosaic in the Basilica of San Marco in Venice, Italy, was created between 1200 and 1250. On the left, the Word of God (the Last Adam) prepares to fashion Eve from the first Adam’s rib; on the right, Adam knows his wife Eve.

And I came to you, brothers and sisters, not with the advantage of rhetoric and wisdom …. not with persuasive words of wisdom but in the demonstrative proof of the Spirit and power. (1 Corinthians 2:1, 4)

St. Paul reminds the Corinthians that he did not preach to them and among them with fancy words and Greek philosophy but simply, relying on the Spirit of God to demonstrate the power and truth of his words. His sermons wouldn’t win an oratory prize, he says. But his sermons did win their hearts.

A third-generation Christian bishop, Irenaeus of Lyons, wrote a Demonstration of Apostolic Preaching to accomplish the same thing that St. Paul was aiming for: teaching or reminding new converts the basic Christian understanding of the world and how to relate to it from a Christian perspective. His other famous work, Against Heresies, refutes the teachings of several different heretical sects that claimed to be Christian; in both works, St. Irenaeus establishes fundamental principles of theology and biblical interpretation that still guide Christian readers and thinkers.

Irenaeus was born in Smyrna. He was taught the Faith by St. Polycarp, who had been taught by the Apostle John. In the Demonstration, St. Irenaeus reviews salvation history in the Old Testament and then cites several Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah, explaining how Christ fulfilled them. St. Irenaeus writes

This, beloved, is the preaching of the truth, and this is the manner of our redemption, and this is the way of life, which the prophets proclaimed, and Christ established, and the apostles delivered, and the Church in all the world hands on to her children. This must we keep with all certainty, with a sound will and pleasing to God, with good works and right-willed disposition.

One of St. Irenaeus’ most interesting ideas is that of “recapitulation,” in which he teaches that Christ and his mother summarize and set right everything that went wrong with Adam and Eve; he points out that Christ is the Second (Last) Adam and Mary is the Second Eve:

For in what other way could we have partaken in the adoption of sons, unless we had received from him [God the Father] fellowship with himself through the Son? Unless his Word, having been made flesh, had entered into fellowship with us?

For this reason, he also passed through every stage of life, restoring fellowship with God to all [stages of life]….

The human race fell into bondage to death by means of a virgin, so is it rescued by a virgin; virginal disobedience having been balanced in the opposite scale by virginal obedience. For in the same way the sin of the first created man received amendment by the correction of the First-begotten, and the coming of the serpent is conquered by the harmlessness of the dove, those bonds being unloosed by which we had been fast bound to death.

St. Paul and St. Irenaeus both want to demonstrate how God has acted in the past to save his people and how God continues to act in the lives of his chosen. Those who have experienced God’s acts of deliverance are called to demonstrate this by responding appropriately. Most of the rest of the first letter to the Corinthians is about what this demonstrative response to God appropriately looks like.

“Was Paul Crucified for You?”

Posted on by
Reply
A Byzantine style icon of Christ crucified, with Adam’s grave in the hill beneath the Cross as St. John the Divine and the Mother of God stand on each side of Christ. The sun, moon, and angels are aghast at what they see happening on Golgotha. Christ’s eyes are closed, his body slumped against the Cross, and the footrest beam twisted diagonally which all indicate that Christ is already dead.

…each of you says, “I am of Paul,” or “I am of Apollos,” or “I am of Cephas,” or “I am of Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? (I Cor. 1:12-13)

The parish in Corinth was torn apart by various factions, each claiming to be faithful to a different Christian teacher who was prominent or famous in one way or another. How did these factions differ? What did they teach that put them in opposition to each other?

The names of the teachers that each faction claimed to be faithful to are probably familiar. “Cephas” was the Apostle Peter. Apollos was a well-educated Jewish man from Alexandria (Egypt) who was “mighty in the Scriptures” (Acts 18:24) who knew something of Christ but was really taught everything he knew about Christianity by Priscilla at Ephesus (Acts 18:26); he was eventually made the first bishop of Crete (Titus 3:13).

We know that Peter and Paul had intense disagreements about how much of Jewish practice should be embraced by Gentile converts to Christianity. Priscilla and Apollos were dear co-workers with the Apostle Paul; how much could they have disagreed with each other?

If we read the New Testament carefully, we discover that there was not a simple dichotomy between “Jewish Christianity” vs. “Gentile Christianity.” There seem to have been four distinct styles of Christianity with four differing sets of what should be expected from Gentile converts.

Group One insisted that Gentile converts observe the whole Mosaic Law, including circumcision. The missionary work of this group (the “false brothers” of Galatians 2:4) was deeply antagonistic towards St. Paul.

Group Two did not insist on circumcision but did require Gentile converts to keep certain practices of the Mosaic Law (esp. kosher food). We see this reflected in the council described in Acts 15. This group looked to the Apostle Peter [Cephas] and St. James, the “brother of the Lord,” as their leaders.

Group Three did not require circumcision or other practices of the Mosaic Law (kosher food) but did see them as having a certain ongoing value, nevertheless. This seems to have been the group most reflective of the Apostle Paul’s own attitude.

Group Four did not require circumcision or other practices of the Mosaic Law (kosher food) and saw no abiding significance or value in Jewish cult or feast days. These views were more radical than those of the Apostle Paul and seem to be reflected in the sermon of St. Stephen (Acts 7), who insisted that God does not dwell in the Temple and refers to Mosaic Law as “your law” and “their law.”

The factions in Corinth seem to reflect these basic distinctions. As St. Paul discusses the problems in Corinth, we see how the factions are rooted in these differing attitudes toward Jewish practice and expectations of Gentile converts to the Church.

For more about these differing groups of “Jewish Christianity” see Antioch and Rome: New Testament Cradles of Catholic Christianity by Raymond E. Brown and John P. Meier. (Paulist Press. 1983, 2004)