It scarcely seems congruous with the tone of the rest of this letter
that the preachers whom Paul so scathingly points out here had obtained
any firm footing in the Philippian Church, but no doubt there, as
everywhere, they had dogged Paul's footsteps, and had tried as they
always did to mar his work. They had not missionary fervour or Christian
energy enough to initiate efforts amongst the Gentiles so as to make
them proselytes, but when Paul and his companions had made them
Christians, they did their best, or their worst, to insist that they
could not be truly Christians, unless they submitted to the outward sign
of being Jews. Paul points a scathing finger at them when he bids the
Philippians 'beware,' and he permits himself a bitter retort when he
lays hold of the Jewish contemptuous word for Gentiles which stigmatised
them as 'dogs,' that is profane and unclean, and hurls it back at the
givers. But he is not indulging in mere bitter retorts when he brings
against these teachers the definite charge that they are 'evil workers.'
People who believed that an outward observance was the condition of
salvation would naturally be less careful to insist upon holy living. A
religion of ceremonies is not a religion of morality. Then the Apostle
lets himself go in a contemptuous play of words, and refuses to
recognise that these sticklers for circumcision had themselves been
circumcised. 'I will not call them the circumcision, they have not been
circumcised, they have only been gashed and mutilated, it has been a
mere fleshly maiming.' His reason for denying the name to them is his
profound belief that it belonged to true Christians. His contemptuous
reference puts in a word, the principle which he definitely states in
another place, 'He is not a Jew who is one outwardly; neither is that
circumcision which is outward in the flesh.'
The Apostle here is not only telling us who are the truly circumcised,
but at the same time he is telling us what makes a Christian, and he
states three points in which, as I take it, he begins at the end and
works backwards to the beginning. 'We are the circumcision who worship
in the Spirit of God'--that is the final result--'and glory in Christ
Jesus'--'and have no confidence in the flesh'--that is the
starting-point. The beginning of all true Christianity is distrust of
self. What does Paul mean by 'flesh'? Body? Certainly not. Animal
nature, or the passions rooted in it? Not only these, as may be seen by
noting the catalogue which follows of the things in the flesh, in which
he might have trusted. What are these? 'Circumcised the eighth day, of
the tribe of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of the
Hebrews'--these belong to ritual and race; 'as touching the law a
Pharisee'--that belongs to ecclesiastical standing; 'concerning zeal
persecuting the church'--that has nothing to do with the animal nature:
'touching the righteousness which is in the law blameless'--that
concerns the moral nature. All these come under the category of the
'flesh,' which, therefore, plainly includes all that belongs to
humanity apart from God. Paul's old-fashioned language translated into
modern English just comes to this--it is vain to trust in external
connection with the sacred community of the Church, or in participation
in any of its ordinances and rites. To Paul, Christian rites and Jewish
rites were equally rites and equally insufficient as bases of
confidence. Do not let us fancy that dependence on these is peculiar to
certain forms of Christian belief. It is a very subtle all-pervasive
tendency, and there is no need to lift up Nonconformist hands in holy
horror at the corruptions of Romanism and the like. Their origin is not
solely priestly ambition, but also the desires of the so-called laity.
Demand creates a supply, and if there were not people to think, 'Now it
shall be well with me because I have a Levite for my priest,' there
would be no Levites to meet their wishes.
Notice that Paul includes amongst the things belonging to the flesh this
'touching the righteousness which is in the law blameless.' Many of us
can say the same. We do our duties so far as we know them, and are
respectable law-abiding people, but if we are trusting to that, we are
of the 'flesh.' Have we estimated what God is, and what the real worth
of our conduct is? Have we looked not at our actions but at our motives,
and seen them as they are seen from above or from the inside? How many
'blameless' lives are like the scenes in a theatre, effective and
picturesque, when seen with the artificial glory of the footlights? But
go behind the scenes and what do we find? Dirty canvas and cobwebs. If
we know ourselves we know that a life may have a fair outside, and yet
not be a thing to trust to.
The beginning of our Christianity is the consciousness that we are
'naked and poor, and blind, and in need of all things.' Men come to
Jesus Christ by many ways, thank God, and I care little by what road
they come so long as they get there, nor do I insist upon any
stereotyped order of religious experience. But of this I am very sure:
that unless we abandon confidence in ourselves, because we have seen
ourselves in the light of God's law, we have not learned all that we
need nor laid hold of all that Christ gives. Let us measure ourselves in
the light of God, and we shall learn that we have to take our places
beside Job, when the vision of God silenced his protestations of
innocence. 'I have heard of Thee by the hearing of the ear, but now mine
eye seeth Thee; wherefore I abhor myself and repent in dust and ashes.'
That self-distrust should pass into glorying in Christ Jesus. If a man
has learned his emptiness he will look about for something to fill it.
Unless I know myself to be under condemnation because of my sin, and
fevered, disturbed, and made wretched, by its inward consequences which
forbid repose, the sweetest words of Gospel invitation will pass by me
like wind whistling through an archway. But if once I have been driven
from self-confidence, then like music from heaven will come the word,
'Trust in Jesus.' The seed dropped into the ground puts out a
downward-going shoot, which is the root, and an upward-growing one,
which is the stalk. The downward-going shoot is 'no confidence in the
flesh,' the upward-going is 'glorying in Christ Jesus.'
But that word suggests the blessed experience of triumph in the
possession of the Person known and felt to be all, and to give all that
life needs. A true Christian should ever be triumphant in a felt
experience, in a Name proved to be sufficient, in a power which infuses
strength into his weakness, and enables him to do the will of God. It is
for want of utter self-distrust and absolute faith in Christ that
'glorying' in Him is so far beyond the ordinary mood of the average
Christian. You say, 'I hope, sometimes I doubt, sometimes I fear,
sometimes I tremblingly trust.' Is that the kind of experience that
these words shadow? Why do we continue amidst the mist when we might
rise into the clear blue above the obscuring pall? Only because we are
still in some measure clinging to self, and still in some measure
distrusting our Lord. If our faith were firm and full our 'glorying'
would be constant. Do not be contented with the prevailing sombre type
of Christian life which is always endeavouring, and always foiled, which
is often doubting and often indifferent, but seek to live in the
sunshine, and expatiate in the light, and 'rejoice in the Lord always.'
'Glorying' not only describes an attitude of mind, but an activity of
life. Many things to-day tempt Christian people to speak of their
religion and of their Lord in an apologetic tone, in the face of strong
and educated unbelief; but if we have within us, as we all may have, and
ought to have, the triumphant assurance of His sufficiency, nearness,
and power, it will not be with bated breath that we shall speak of our
Master, or apologise for our Christianity, but we shall obey the
commandment, 'Lift up thy voice with strength; lift it up, be not
afraid.' Ring out the name and be proud that you can ring it out, as the
Name of _your_ Lord, and _your_ Saviour, and _your_ all-sufficient
Friend. Whatever other people say, you have the experience, if you are
a Christian, which more than answers all that they can say.
We have said that the final result set forth here by Paul is, 'We
worship by the Spirit of God.' The expression translated worship is the
technical word for rendering priestly service. Just as Paul has asserted
that uncircumcised Christians, not circumcised Jews, are the true
circumcision, so he asserts that they are the true priests, and that
these officials in the outward temple at Jerusalem have forfeited the
title, and that it has passed over to the despised followers of the
despised Nazarene. If we have 'no confidence in the flesh,' and are
'glorying in Christ Jesus,' we are all priests of the most high God.
'Worship in the Spirit' is our function and privilege. The externals of
ceremonial worship dwindle into insignificance. They may be means of
helping, or they may be means of hindering, the 'worship in the Spirit,'
which I venture to think all experience shows is the more likely to be
pure and real, the less it invokes the aid of flesh and sense. To make
the senses the ladder for the soul by which to climb to God is quite as
likely to end in the soul's going down the ladder as up it. Aesthetic
aids to worship are crutches which keep a lame soul lame all its days.
Such worship is the obligation as well as the prerogative of the
Christian. We have no right to say that we have truly forsaken
confidence in ourselves, and are truly 'glorying' in Christ Jesus,
unless our daily life is communion with God, and all your work
'worshipping by the Spirit of God.' Such communion and worship are
possible for those, and for those only, who have 'no confidence in the
flesh' and who 'glory in Christ Jesus.'