"Looking After Number One"
Of makeovers, Muhammed Ali and monks
Sermon Preached by
The Rev. Dr. Andrew Stirling
Sunday, October 19, 2003
Text: Philippians 1-11
The title of my sermon this morning, “Looking After Number One,” has caused considerable consternation on the part of passers-by on the street who have seen it advertised on our sign last week. One person actually phoned me and wondered if I was going to be talking about myself throughout the whole of the message. Another one called to enquire whether in this day of narcissism it was responsible to have a sermon about looking after Number One. And a third person had the grace to simply enquire how precisely I was going to develop such a contentious topic.
It's amazing that all of these callers pointed to the essential question that I wanted to raise in the first place. The concept of looking after Number One is predicated on whom you consider to be Number One. If you think that looking after Number One implies, as is most often done in our own culture, just looking after yourself, then you would be right to assume that this sounds like an awfully narcissistic and self-loving type of sermon. Indeed, it is fair to say that our culture is dominated by self-love and self-centredness. The things that we read and see that promote selfish behaviour are so dominant that I'm sure most people driving by would think that the title implies self-improvement.
Indeed, who of us cannot turn on a television program and find that looking after Number One is the number-one priority in life? Self-betterment, self-advancement is de rigeur. Who cannot find programs giving you advice on how to look more beautiful and less mature? (For me this has become very important because I have a birthday this coming Thursday.) Other programs show how to present yourself so that you can appear powerful before your peers and be treated with respect.
I watched another one (and I'm always fascinated by them) of the makeover shows - how to make yourself look beautiful and young and appealing to others. I tried all that was suggested and I looked like some sort of doll by the time I was finished! There is always advice on self-improvement - getting ahead, being more powerful, being better received - looking after Number One. But surely, my friends, in a Christian service, in a church, we need to ask ourselves whether that is the true meaning of looking after Number One.
As those who say that we follow the teachings of Jesus Christ, of those who see Christ as our norm, our guide, our inspiration and as our Lord, surely we need a richer and deeper appreciation of who constitutes Number One..
The Gospel of Jesus Christ, I would suggest to you, is radically different from our culture. It teaches a different orientation towards life as a whole than that which is popular in our culture. The words of Jesus and the words of the Gospel are as radical today as they were when they were first heard in Galilee and first echoed by His apostles after His death and resurrection.
It seems to me that if you read our passage today from the Book of Philippians, Number One is in fact not ourselves. Number One, according to the passage that we've heard this morning, is in fact, the “other.” Paul goes to great length to tell the Christian community in Philippi that looking after the “other” is the principal mandate of the Christian community. He does so in response to a problem in that congregation and in that city.
Last week we looked at Philippians chapter four, when Paul urges Euodia and Syntyche to agree - two powerful individuals who had clearly collided and were causing a schism within the congregation and the church. Paul pleads with them to make sure that what they do is in keeping with the good of the whole community, and not just to stand out from the crowd.
In chapter three, verse two, Paul also gives a warning: “Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil workers, beware of those who mutilate the flesh.” Clearly Paul is using tough language. But he is concerned that there are those to whom he refers as dogs and evil-doers, who want to turn the tide back to the celebration of the law rather than the freedom of the Gospel. Paul is saying “watch out” for there are those within the congregation who are purporting to put forward their own views and in so doing are causing division.
Paul makes a distinction between thinking about these things with a human mind and thinking about these things with a spiritually enlightened mind. In other words, people looking after Number One, i.e. themselves, are thinking in natural human terms as to how things should go, rather than seeking the wisdom and the guidance of the Spirit as to what makes the greater good. So, I want to look at this text. I do so my friends, not because I'm addressing any particular issue at Timothy Eaton Memorial Church or because I'm pointing at any one of you specifically. I just believe that as Christians we need to hear this message on a regular basis.
First, Paul sees a problem and provides a cure. The problem he addresses with these bold words from Philippians chapter two: “Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility regard others as better than yourselves.” How counter-cultural these words are today. How totally disorienting in a world that thinks Number One is actually ourselves. Here Paul suggest humility and looking after the “other.” And he does so on the basis of his faith and also on his understanding of human nature.
The great Muhammed Ali now admits that at the time of his greatest performances he was very conceited, and that his conceit would often get in the way of building good relationships with those around him. He tells the story of how one day he was humbled. He got on a plane flying to Kansas, I think it was. As he boarded the flight attendant came up to him and said: “Mr. Ali, you must buckle your seatbelt.”
And Muhammed Ali replied: “Superman don't need no seatbelt.”
And the flight attendant said: “Superman don't need no plane, but you're in this one.”
Muhammed Ali said “I felt like I woke up all of sudden. I had really been thinking that I was Superman until she put me in my place. My conceit had so driven me to see myself as the centre of everything that I wasn't even seeing what was around me with the proper perspective.” He said that he needed to become wise to understand that the things that he did had an impact on others.
Some of you might be saying, “Well, isn't the same true of the Apostle Paul? Are there not passages here within the Book of Philippians where Paul seems to be pretty conceited and close to the line?” There are moments when he says, “I wish you would be like me, I wish you would follow my example. If only you would do these things you would make my joy complete.”
But that would be an incorrect reading of the Apostle Paul. whenever he pointed to himself, he did so in order that the others might see who he sees as his Lord, that they might venerate him only insofar as he is the first to acknowledge that he needs the power of Christ in his life. So even when Paul talks about himself as an example, unlike Muhammed Ali, he is not doing it for the purposes of self-aggrandizement, but to point to the source of help: Jesus of Nazareth.
What is obvious is that Paul saw conceit, self-centredness and selfishness as a source of schism. Any student of the history of the Christian church would have to acknowledge that many of the schisms that have taken place over 2,000 years of history have been on the basis of the egocentrism of many of the leaders who have put their own case forward at the expense of the church. There have been popes and bishops and leaders, there have been reformers and wisdom-seekers who have pushed their own agendas forward at the expense of the rest of the body of Christ, because in their conceit and selfishness they have looked to their own good rather than to the good of others.
It is true to say that if you look at the heart of cults nearly all are based on the egocentrism of their individual leaders. Those individuals, by definition conceited, have caused others to break away and leave the body of Christ, not on a matter of principle or noble theology, but on the basis of their own self-centred desire for power. We can see that Paul was right. Conceit, selfishness and not looking out for the good of others or for the good of the body of Christ can cause division.
A number of years ago when I was a student of international relations, there was a very popular theory often revisited by modern professors of international relations. The theory is called the three levels of analysis. The first level is the macro level, the relations between nations, the struggle of ideologies and powers at a high level.
Any good student must look secondly at domestic issues and politics. Many politicians are moved by the influences within their own country, and domestic needs often cause them to do things in an international arena on the basis of what benefits them at home - remember the movie Wag the Dog?
The third level of analysis, one that is often overlooked, is the selfish desires of the political leaders who make the decisions. What motivates them, what empowers them to make the decisions they make is often at that psychological level, and even that personal commitment and spiritual level where many great decisions are made in international relations. And if you don't look at that level of analysis you don't see the perspective beyond the boundaries of the person or nation.
That is why what a person believes and how self-centred and conceited they are can often have a profound impact on the world around them. Paul saw this within the church. He knew that the greatest threat to the church was those who, out of conceit, were looking not to the good of others but to themselves.
So what was his cure? It was simple. He repeated an early hymn of the Christian church that speaks in the following terms: “Jesus Christ emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond- servant.” Another translation of this is that Jesus Christ humbled Himself.
The very ministry of Jesus was a ministry of self-giving love. It was a ministry of laying down itself for others. How then, possibly, can the true disciple of Jesus Christ be selfish and conceited when the very Lord that they worship is the exact opposite? That's Paul's simple argument.
You can see this as being true in the life of Jesus Himself. Nowhere is this more obvious than in John's gospel when we read of Jesus washing the disciples' feet. John said this:
Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he had come from God and was going to God, got up from the table, took off his outer robe, and tied a towel around himself. Then he poured water into a basin and began to wash the disciples' feet and to wipe them with the towel that was tied around him. He came to Simon Peter, who said to him, 'Lord, are you going to wash my feet?' Jesus answered, 'You do not know now what I am doing, but later you will understand.'
You see, the cure was in the ministry of Jesus Himself - in His self-giving love. For Paul the ultimate symbol of this was the cross, and by virtue of the cross Jesus was glorified. By His submission and humility and His love for others, Jesus was lifted up, but He was lifted up insofar as He had done what He had done for others not for Himself. For Paul there was no question: The cure to conceit and selfishness was keeping your eyes fixed on Jesus.
There is another phrase in here that is equally powerful. It deals not so much with selfishness and conceit as with being self-centred. In other words, only doing what is in your own best interests. Paul wrote, “Do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others.” It's not just an attitude, it's the way you actually live - it's what you do for others.
Now, is there any suggestion here that Paul thinks we should not care for ourselves? No. He said “Do not merely look after yourself.” In other words, it is right to look after ourselves, but to do that we truly need to also look after Number One, and Number One is the “other.”
When we do that, we find that we have to put aside a number of things. The first thing we have to put aside is pride. I once read that pride is like a dandelion seed that gets into a crack in the pavement. As it grows the crack widens and it feeds on goodness. As it feeds on goodness it perpetuates itself until we have more cracks and more dandelions. Pride is like that in a church. Pride is like that in a workplace. Pride is like that in a nation. When we allow the seeds of pride to grow, the cracks widen and divisions form. To get away from being self-centred, we need to focus on reducing our pride.
It is also true to say that being self-centred causes us to grumble and complain when we are not getting our own way. This was illustrated in a story I read some time ago of a monastery that practised silence, except that every five years a monk was allowed to say two words. A young novice joined this particular monastery. After the five years he said his two words and they were: “Food bad.” Another five years went by, and he uttered his two words: “Beds hard.” Another five years passed, and he said: “I quit,” to which the superior said, “Well, it's no wonder: You've done nothing but complain since you got here.”
The problem with the monk, of course, was that he had made himself the centre of everything and all his comments were about himself. This is one of the great dangers that exist in the church - people grumble because they have their own views, which are fine but when they become the absolute views, they become destructive. The other problem is that when we become self-centred we see the other person as a rival.
Not long ago I read a passage in the New York Times about a man whom you might have recently read of named Stephen Glass, who was fired from The New Republic five years ago for making up dozens of articles, none of which had any basis in truth. (This came out at the same time that the New York Times was dealing with its own reporter, Jayson Blair, who made up the news as he went along.)
Glass eventually published a very interesting novel reflecting a writer who had done similar things. The writer in the book confesses the following: “For me lying has become more than a vice or a comfort or a habit or the easiest thing to do. It has become vital.” He then explained why he wanted to bring people down with his lies. “I saw it suddenly: They were all successful, all people who were loved and respected. They have actually done what I aspire to do and at some subconscious level I must have wanted to bring them down to prove that we weren't so different after all.”
In other words, when we become self-centred we see others - even within the church - as rivals, as people who might, if esteemed, bring others down. This is the cancer, the deadly fruit of being self-centred.
So what was Paul's response to this? How are Christians to address it? Again, he goes back to Christ. He said, “Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, although he existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped.”
In other words, even Jesus put aside being self-centred for the sake of fulfilling His Father's cause. Even the very Son of God was willing to give of Himself completely and put Himself literally to one side - to move over - for the sake of the purpose of the grace of God in Jesus Christ. My friends, surely that is the cure to our self-centredness. It is to keep our eyes firmly rooted on the person and the ministry and the nature of Jesus of Nazareth. When we don't, and when we think of the church as an institution rather than as a place of worship, when we think of the church as a structure rather than a place that is filled with the Holy Spirit, when we see it as a place for our self-aggrandizement rather than the fellowship in the body of Christ, then we have lost sight of Jesus. But when we keep our eyes on Him, then all selfishness, conceit and self-centredness evaporate and we realize that the Number One is the “other” for whom Christ gave His life.
A final point, and this is not in the text of the Bible, it's just simply what I think: Is it really so bad for Number One, i.e. yourself, to live a life that is given for the sake of others? Is not the richer life the life that is lived in self-giving love? Is not the true pleasure found in seeing the response of those whom you help? Is not the most glorious moment in one's life, the moment that you give life and you give yourself for the sake of the “other?” Is it not also true that there is not one of us, no matter how able, no matter how powerful, no matter how wealthy, no matter how strong, no matter how healthy, who hasn't at some point received a helping hand from another?
Alex Hailey, the great author of Roots, once put up a poster in his office. On it was a turtle on top of a fence post. The caption under it said: “If you see a turtle on the top of a fence post, then you know he must have had help in getting there.” No matter who we are, it is the “other” who has made what we are possible. So, does it not follow that looking after the “other” is ultimately the looking after of Number One? Is that not what the church of Jesus Christ is all about? Should we not be the others who help put the turtle on top of the fence post whereby they can see the glory of God in Jesus of Nazareth
This is a verbatim transcription of the original sermon.