Anyone who has ever gone to school or college for very long must be familiar with the idea of grading on a curve. This is a grading system in which students are graded relative to each other, and not necessarily by an objective grading scale in which one percentage of right answers always earns an A, and another a B, and so on. With a curve, what otherwise might have been a C or a D on a test might be turned into an A or a B if the whole class did relatively poorly. Just last semester, I had an accounting class in which I would have received at the most a B (or more likely a C) if I had been graded on my actual percentage of available points earned. But since the curve in that class turned out to be rather generous (it was a pretty difficult course), I got an A (and of course I didn’t complain one bit).
It’s nice to be graded on a curve once in a while when we’re in school, but once we head out into real life, we aren’t guaranteed those kinds of breaks. If we fail at something, we fail, and we don’t always get a second try or special consideration because we gave it our best or because we did better than some or even most. I suppose in some ways a curve can help us get through college but doesn’t really prepare us for some of the harsh realities of life.
But this gets me to thinking about an even bigger test than any semester final – and one bigger even than real life. It’s the test that comes after our life is over. That there is such a test is clear from God’s Word, the Bible. Hebrews 9:27 says, “And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment”; and again, in Romans 14:10, 12, we read “For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ…so then each of us shall give account of himself to God.”
Let’s take a moment and consider what this “ultimate final exam” might be like. What do you think God’s grading criteria are? Perhaps He has a great ledger or scale, on one side of which is heaped all of the bad things we’ve ever done, and on the other is gathered all of our good deeds. If the good deeds outweigh the bad deeds, then we get to go to heaven, but if it’s the other way around, we would then be thrown into hell.
But perhaps it’s not that simple. Maybe it’s more complex than that. Maybe more good works than bad aren’t enough. Maybe God also weighs our good works relative other people’s; perhaps He expects our good works to not just outweigh the bad ones, but to be exceptionally good. Maybe only then will He let us into heaven. Or maybe God will give us second chances or “bonus points”. Maybe if our good works are good, but not quite enough to get us in on the first try, He will send us back to earth in a reincarnation of sorts to complete what was lacking; or maybe He will send us to some place in between heaven and hell until we are completely purified from what was keeping us from getting into heaven at first. Perhaps it may be that God only lets an exclusive group into heaven, like members of a certain religion or denomination, or those who were baptized as infants, or those who walked down an aisle and said a prayer.
On the other hand, maybe God has lower standards than we may think; perhaps He will let in everyone who’s at least tried very hard to keep the Ten Commandments, or everyone except murderers, or maybe even, in His great goodness, everyone!
What would you say if I told you that, according to the Bible, none of these hypothetical scenarios are true? They couldn’t be, if what the Bible says is true. God teaches us in His Word that His standard for passing is a perfect 100% score. Habakkuk 1:13 says of our Creator, “You are of purer eyes than to behold evil, and cannot look on wickedness.” Jesus said in Matthew 5:48, “Therefore you shall be perfect just as your Father in heaven is perfect”, echoing God’s Old Testament command to “Be holy, even as I am holy.” That doesn’t leave much room for error, does it? Perfect is perfect, and holy is holy – spotless and without blame.
You may say to this, “God doesn’t expect anybody to really be perfect. I keep the Ten Commandments – don’t I get credit for that?” But do we really keep the Ten Commandments? Have you ever told a lie, even once? Have you ever put anything in your life before God in importance? Have you ever stolen (or just coveted) something that belonged to someone else? Jesus Himself drove past the “letter” of these commandments and penetrated to the very spirit of them. In Matthew 5, in His Sermon on the Mount, Jesus said these things – “You have heard it said, ‘You shall not murder…but I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment” and “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery’, but I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” If the Ten Commandments are looked at in this way, we are all guilty of breaking at least one of them. And James 2:10 tells us bluntly, “For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all.” 1 John 3:4 sums it up this way – “Whoever commits sin also transgresses the law; for sin is the transgression of the law.”
But you may reply, “Yes, but God knows that nobody is perfect! That’s just the goal, and if we try our hardest to get there, He will understand.” Consider what Jesus says in Matthew 7:21-23 – “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord’, shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.’”
How can this be? How can Jesus cast out from His kingdom those who had done such wonderful works – and in His name, no less? Perhaps this is puzzling because we are looking at heaven and how to get there the wrong way, and perhaps if we looked at it the way the Bible teaches us, much of the confusion would vanish.
You see, according to the Bible, heaven is not a reward for good people. Heaven is the dwelling place of Almighty God. We saw a verse earlier that says that God is of purer eyes than to look upon sin; 1 John 1:5 adds, “God is light, and in Him is no darkness at all.” Sin is darkness, and ever since our first forefather Adam sinned, and since each of us have followed in his footsteps, God cannot allow sinful man into His presence. Jeremiah 17:9 gives us a bleak diagnosis – “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked; who can know it?” This applies to all people, no matter how good we think we may be compared to others. Isaiah 64:6 tells us how our personal “righteousness” compares with God’s standard, the only one that counts – “But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.” Psalm 14:3 adds to the bleak picture – “They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy; there is none that does good – no, not one.”
You may choose to disagree with the Bible’s assessment of the human condition, but God has said all of these things in His Word, and He cannot lie. Proverbs 20:9 says, “Who can say, ‘I have made my heart clean, I am pure from my sin’?” And 1 John 1:8 bluntly states, “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” Sin is not merely a matter of “nobody’s perfect”; it is a matter of life and death. God has no choice but to assess on all of us, regardless of what we may believe our merit is, the penalty due our sin. Isaiah 59:2 says, “But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid His face from you, so that He will not hear.” Romans 6:23 says, “For the wages of sin is death.” Sin is the reason why our earthly lives are cut short by death in the first place, and the reason why we are separated from our Creator both in this life and the next.
It is vitally important for us to understand that we cannot get to heaven by our good works. The Apostle Paul writes in Romans 3:20 – “Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in His sight; for by the law is the knowledge of sin.” Paul was referring to the Law given to the nation of Israel, which included the Ten Commandments. His point is that no amount of our trying to keep God’s rules can make us righteous before Him, because the very reason for the Law was to show us that we cannot keep it – and therefore we cannot become truly righteous by our effort.
Is there any hope, then? Ah, but there is, and that is the greatest news of all! The same just God that cannot look upon sin and must punish it is the same God who loves the people He created and does not want any of them to perish. So what can He do? He will not – cannot – turn a blind eye to our sin. Therefore, God made a way so that His perfect justice could be satisfied while at the same time making a way for us to be saved. How? By sending His Son Jesus to earth to be a man, live a perfect sinless life, and die on a cross for your sin and mine. Christ accomplished what none of our works could ever do by taking on Himself the punishment of death that we rightfully deserved. In return for taking our “failing grade”, Jesus transferred His perfect righteousness to our behalf! 2 Corinthians 5:21 says, “For He (God) made Him (Jesus) who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him.” Three days after Jesus died, God raised Him from the dead, proving to all of the universe that His work of redeeming mankind was complete and fully accepted by a holy God.
There remains only one thing that each of us can do. John 3:16, perhaps, the most familiar of all Bible verses, tells us what it is – “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes on Him should not perish but have everlasting life.” Our part is simply to put our faith in what Christ has already done for us. Romans 10:9 says, “If you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart man believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.”
Consider what Jesus said in John 5:28-29: “Then they said to Him, ‘What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?’ Jesus answered and said to them, ‘This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent.’” This “belief”, however, is not merely a head-knowledge or an assent in the same way that you believe very strongly and sincerely that Barack Obama is the President of the United States. It is a belief that changes your very life. It is an agreement with God about your own lost condition without Him and a full faith and trust that what Jesus did on the cross for you is in and of itself the only way for you to be reconciled to God and be set free from sin and its wages.
So you see, salvation can never come by our effort. On the contrary, we are never closer to salvation than when we see our own utter sinfulness in God’s sight, our inability to please Him, and our helplessness and need for a Savior. God has supplied that Savior for us, and our part is only to turn from the sin that separates us from God and place our faith wholeheartedly in what God has done for us. God does the rest, as Titus 3:5 says, “Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit”; and as Ephesians 2:8-9 proclaims, “For by grace you have been saved, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.”
All of this is why Jesus could say to those who were religious (they did good works in Jesus’ name) and did good works “I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.” You see, sin separates us from a right relationship with God. The only way we can “know” God in any way is to be reconciled with Him, and the only way to be reconciled to God is through Jesus and His redeeming work on the cross. Jesus said in John 14:6, “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life; no man can come to the Father except through Me.” We can do many things we believe are good enough to get us into heaven, and we can even do them in God’s name, but if we have not trusted in the Way that He has provided for us to come to Him, then He will have no choice but to say to us, too, “I never knew you.” If we do not come to God His way, we are still in our sin and separated from God. But when we come to God through faith alone in Jesus alone, our sins – past, present, and future – can be fully and rightfully forgiven and our relationship with our Creator will be restored forever. Then we can truly have a personal relationship with the One who created us and gave all to save us.
You may say to all of this, “I just can’t believe that good people can’t get to heaven. Are you saying that good works are worthless? Are you saying that a serial killer can be saved by trusting in Christ on his deathbed, but someone who has tried all of their life to do good will never make it to heaven?” This is exactly what I am saying. God does not save people based on works, but based on His own mercy and grace. The very definition of “mercy” is “not getting what we deserve”, and “grace” means “getting what we do not deserve”. As I have attempted to show, God’s standards are very different from ours, and to be saved we must first come to the understanding – given only by God – that we cannot make it on our own. Because of what Christ did, God can justly spare us the eternal death we deserve because of our sin, and give us the eternal life with Him that we could never deserve by our own merit.
This does not mean that good works are of no value at all, nor that once a person has been saved he or she becomes perfect. God commands us throughout the pages of His Word – and shows us how – to live righteously and to turn from sin; furthermore, He gives those who are saved His Spirit to live with them and enable them to keep God’s ways (and to notify them and help them correct their ways when they do not). However, the key is in the understanding of what saves us, and the realization that our own effort is not enough for salvation in God’s sight. Only Jesus alone – not Jesus plus our good works, or Jesus plus anything else – can save. The good works that we do are not done to obtain salvation or God’s favor, but to show our love for and obedience to the One who paid it all for us.
So, in closing, the answer is no, God does not grade on a curve. He demands 100% from all of His “students” in order for them to pass – which, of course, they can never do. The good news is that God has made a way for those students to pass by taking on Himself their failing grade and giving them the perfect one He has purchased for them. Have you placed your trust in Jesus? “For there is no other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12); “Believe on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and you shall be saved” (Acts 16:31).
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Saturday, March 13, 2010
My Testimony
Today, March 13, is my 16th spiritual birthday. It is the anniversary of the Sunday night in 1994 on which I asked God to save me from my sin and to make me His child. And I know that He did, because “whoever calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Acts 2:21).
I had begun to understand salvation before that evening, and I certainly have come to a far richer understanding of it in the years since. However, it was on that night at church that I decided to make a public decision to follow Christ. My testimony is not nearly as dramatic as that of many Christians, who testify that when they were saved their life was dramatically changed from one of sin and deep pain to one of joy and righteousness. I was only days shy of my tenth birthday when I became a Christian, so there was hardly that kind of drastic outward change in my life. But to deny any profound change at all would be wrong.
You see, the Bible promises that anybody who believes on the Lord Jesus Christ, no matter what their age, has “passed from death into life” (John 5:24). It may not have been visible, but on that day my entire spiritual destiny was changed from eternal separation from God (guaranteed by the fact that I had sinned against Him) to eternal life (guaranteed by the fact that Jesus had died to pay the penalty for my sin). It also meant that, even though my testimony may not have been as dramatic as some, I had a chance that not all Christians receive – the chance to truly know God and walk with Him from an early age.
Ever since that evening, I have grown stronger in my faith and in the knowledge of Jesus. That doesn’t mean I never struggle in life or never fail to please God in living according to His ways. But I also have come to understand that spiritual salvation was never my doing, and it is not my effort that keeps me saved. Jesus said that all who come to Him are drawn by God Himself (John 6:44), and Paul wrote, “It is God who works in you both to will and to do according to His good pleasure” (Philippians 2:13). I can no more be saved and stay saved by my own good works than a person can become a car by sitting in a garage. It took God to work in my heart to show me my sin and need for a Savior and to draw me to respond to that revelation by placing my full faith and trust in Him to cleanse me from all unrighteousness. Once I am saved, I will always belong to Christ, because Jesus promised, “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me; and I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never perish – neither shall any man pluck them out of My hand” (John 10:27-28).
So today is a day of rejoicing and thanksgiving for me. I shall be eternally grateful to God for giving me new life in Christ. My goal now is to please Him in every area of my life and to fulfill His will for me while I live on this earth. Part of His will is that I tell others about what He has done for me.
Perhaps you are reading this and do not understand what I am talking about. I would love nothing more than to know that, even if nothing else that I ever write encourages or ministers to anyone, this piece has helped just one person to understand personally the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ.
This knowledge is good news, but it starts with very bad news. Why do we have to be saved in the first place? The Bible says that each one of us has sinned against God’s perfect laws – we have lied, or stolen, or cheated, or hurt someone else, or been prideful and selfish. All these attitudes and actions are sins, and God cannot allow any sin – not even the least bit – into His presence. John writes that “God is light, and in Him is no darkness at all” (1 John 1:5). This means that our sin, which is darkness, can do nothing except separate us from God – not only from fellowship with Him while we live on earth, but also from being in His presence in heaven after we die. What is more, we cannot reverse our condition by trying to live good lives, because the Bible also says that even our best efforts at righteousness “are like filthy rags” (Isaiah 64:6. In other words, those efforts, even at their very best, cannot begin to meet God’s holy and perfect requirements.
What hope is there, if we cannot possibly save ourselves from our own sin even if we wanted to? What is impossible with humans is possible with God (Matthew 19:26). God loves the people that He created, and He does not want their situation to be as it is. He loved us so much that He sent Jesus Christ, His own Son, who is equal with God Himself, down to earth to be a human and to die for them so that they might truly live. How could Jesus’ death save us? Jesus, being divine, lived a sinless life on the earth even while confining Himself to the imperfect constraints of humanity (2 Corinthians 5:21). At His death, God poured out on Jesus all the sins that humans had and would ever commit – and Jesus bore them all in His own body as He died as a sacrifice for us. Thus God’s wrath was satisfied, having been taken out on His own Son, who deserved none of it. Three days after He died, God raised Jesus from the dead, proving that He accepted this wonderful sacrifice. This made it possible to transfer Jesus’ own perfect righteousness to the sinful people who simply believe on Him with all their heart.
Do you see that Jesus has done it all for you? All that He asks is that you believe that He died for your sins and rose again the third day (Romans 10:9). He wants you to confess that you have sinned against Him, and to be truly willing to turn from your sin and to Him; He calls you to trust that His sacrifice alone is sufficient to save you completely and to make you His child. If you ask Him to save you in this way, and mean it with all your heart, He will do it. Jesus Himself promised – “Him that comes to Me I will by no means cast out” (John 6:37). He also said that all of heaven rejoices when just one person comes to be saved (Luke 15:7). Christ’s Spirit will come into your heart and life forever and help you to live in a way that pleases Him (John 16).
Thank you for reading about the greatest subject any writer could write about – and I pray that you will truly take what I have written to heart. I will close with the words of one of my favorite hymns:
“And can it be that I should gain
An interest in the Savior’s blood?
Died He for me, who caused His pain;
For me, who Him to death pursued?
Amazing love, how can it be;
That Thou my God shouldst die for me?
He left His Father’s throne above,
So free, so infinite His grace;
Emptied Himself of all but love,
And bled for Adam’s helpless race.
‘Tis mercy all, immense and free,
For O My God it found out me!
Long my imprisoned spirit lay,
Fast bound in sin and nature’s night;
Mine eye diffused a quickening ray,
I woke, the dungeon flamed with light;
My chains fell off, my heart was free;
I rose, went forth, and followed Thee.
No condemnation now I dread;
Jesus, and all in Him, is mine;
Alive in Him, my living Head,
And clothed in righteousness divine.
Bold I approach the eternal throne,
And claim the crown through Christ my own.”
I had begun to understand salvation before that evening, and I certainly have come to a far richer understanding of it in the years since. However, it was on that night at church that I decided to make a public decision to follow Christ. My testimony is not nearly as dramatic as that of many Christians, who testify that when they were saved their life was dramatically changed from one of sin and deep pain to one of joy and righteousness. I was only days shy of my tenth birthday when I became a Christian, so there was hardly that kind of drastic outward change in my life. But to deny any profound change at all would be wrong.
You see, the Bible promises that anybody who believes on the Lord Jesus Christ, no matter what their age, has “passed from death into life” (John 5:24). It may not have been visible, but on that day my entire spiritual destiny was changed from eternal separation from God (guaranteed by the fact that I had sinned against Him) to eternal life (guaranteed by the fact that Jesus had died to pay the penalty for my sin). It also meant that, even though my testimony may not have been as dramatic as some, I had a chance that not all Christians receive – the chance to truly know God and walk with Him from an early age.
Ever since that evening, I have grown stronger in my faith and in the knowledge of Jesus. That doesn’t mean I never struggle in life or never fail to please God in living according to His ways. But I also have come to understand that spiritual salvation was never my doing, and it is not my effort that keeps me saved. Jesus said that all who come to Him are drawn by God Himself (John 6:44), and Paul wrote, “It is God who works in you both to will and to do according to His good pleasure” (Philippians 2:13). I can no more be saved and stay saved by my own good works than a person can become a car by sitting in a garage. It took God to work in my heart to show me my sin and need for a Savior and to draw me to respond to that revelation by placing my full faith and trust in Him to cleanse me from all unrighteousness. Once I am saved, I will always belong to Christ, because Jesus promised, “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me; and I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never perish – neither shall any man pluck them out of My hand” (John 10:27-28).
So today is a day of rejoicing and thanksgiving for me. I shall be eternally grateful to God for giving me new life in Christ. My goal now is to please Him in every area of my life and to fulfill His will for me while I live on this earth. Part of His will is that I tell others about what He has done for me.
Perhaps you are reading this and do not understand what I am talking about. I would love nothing more than to know that, even if nothing else that I ever write encourages or ministers to anyone, this piece has helped just one person to understand personally the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ.
This knowledge is good news, but it starts with very bad news. Why do we have to be saved in the first place? The Bible says that each one of us has sinned against God’s perfect laws – we have lied, or stolen, or cheated, or hurt someone else, or been prideful and selfish. All these attitudes and actions are sins, and God cannot allow any sin – not even the least bit – into His presence. John writes that “God is light, and in Him is no darkness at all” (1 John 1:5). This means that our sin, which is darkness, can do nothing except separate us from God – not only from fellowship with Him while we live on earth, but also from being in His presence in heaven after we die. What is more, we cannot reverse our condition by trying to live good lives, because the Bible also says that even our best efforts at righteousness “are like filthy rags” (Isaiah 64:6. In other words, those efforts, even at their very best, cannot begin to meet God’s holy and perfect requirements.
What hope is there, if we cannot possibly save ourselves from our own sin even if we wanted to? What is impossible with humans is possible with God (Matthew 19:26). God loves the people that He created, and He does not want their situation to be as it is. He loved us so much that He sent Jesus Christ, His own Son, who is equal with God Himself, down to earth to be a human and to die for them so that they might truly live. How could Jesus’ death save us? Jesus, being divine, lived a sinless life on the earth even while confining Himself to the imperfect constraints of humanity (2 Corinthians 5:21). At His death, God poured out on Jesus all the sins that humans had and would ever commit – and Jesus bore them all in His own body as He died as a sacrifice for us. Thus God’s wrath was satisfied, having been taken out on His own Son, who deserved none of it. Three days after He died, God raised Jesus from the dead, proving that He accepted this wonderful sacrifice. This made it possible to transfer Jesus’ own perfect righteousness to the sinful people who simply believe on Him with all their heart.
Do you see that Jesus has done it all for you? All that He asks is that you believe that He died for your sins and rose again the third day (Romans 10:9). He wants you to confess that you have sinned against Him, and to be truly willing to turn from your sin and to Him; He calls you to trust that His sacrifice alone is sufficient to save you completely and to make you His child. If you ask Him to save you in this way, and mean it with all your heart, He will do it. Jesus Himself promised – “Him that comes to Me I will by no means cast out” (John 6:37). He also said that all of heaven rejoices when just one person comes to be saved (Luke 15:7). Christ’s Spirit will come into your heart and life forever and help you to live in a way that pleases Him (John 16).
Thank you for reading about the greatest subject any writer could write about – and I pray that you will truly take what I have written to heart. I will close with the words of one of my favorite hymns:
“And can it be that I should gain
An interest in the Savior’s blood?
Died He for me, who caused His pain;
For me, who Him to death pursued?
Amazing love, how can it be;
That Thou my God shouldst die for me?
He left His Father’s throne above,
So free, so infinite His grace;
Emptied Himself of all but love,
And bled for Adam’s helpless race.
‘Tis mercy all, immense and free,
For O My God it found out me!
Long my imprisoned spirit lay,
Fast bound in sin and nature’s night;
Mine eye diffused a quickening ray,
I woke, the dungeon flamed with light;
My chains fell off, my heart was free;
I rose, went forth, and followed Thee.
No condemnation now I dread;
Jesus, and all in Him, is mine;
Alive in Him, my living Head,
And clothed in righteousness divine.
Bold I approach the eternal throne,
And claim the crown through Christ my own.”
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
State of the Union
All the Constitution says – and it says so in Article II, Section 3 – is, “He (the President) shall from time to time give to Congress information of the State of the Union and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.” That sounds simple enough. And for a long time, it was simple. Before 1913, the custom was for presidents to send Congress a written such report. After 1913, they customarily delivered it verbally in person, and since 1966, such an oration has been televised in the evening. And it has increasingly become more complicated since then in our Age of Television, until it has become one of the most hallowed of American political customs.
It has also become one of the silliest. We just had the annual observance of this event*, and at that time I humorously (at least I thought it was humorous) called it the “State of the Onion Address”. Now I shall peel back each of its layers for you, not unlike an onion. If you don’t laugh, you may cry, because we are all doomed by these goons in Washington. But I’m getting ahead of myself. Let’s proceed from the beginning.
In the first place, the State of the Union address, as it’s currently done, is probably the most bone-headed idea imaginable from a national security standpoint – and the people in Washington know it. Why, everyone in our government’s line of succession (with the possible exception of the last guy on the list**) is gathered in one building at one time. I still have not figured out why no evil-hearted personage has yet tried to take out all of those very important people at once.*** But it is just this possibility that has given them the bright idea of telling at least one person in the line of succession to stay home that evening just in case something goes boom. And then they hope the person they selected would make a competent, if not quite popularly elected, replacement president.
But let’s turn now to the actual plan of attack on such evenings when the President gives his report to a joint session of Congress. The members of Congress and the distinguished guests (which can range from the Supreme Court judges and the Joint Chiefs of Staff to the Vice-President’s third cousin twice removed or the little boy who sent the President a letter last Tuesday) all get there first and mill around for a while. Then the awaited moment arrives – the Sergeant-at-Arms opens the big double doors to the House Chamber, steps forward, cups his hands around his mouth, and screams, “Mr. (or Madam) Speaker – The President of the United States!” This is always my favorite part, partly because I’ve always found it a touch humorous and partly because it’s the only true thing spoken all evening. But I digress. When this vociferous announcement is made, all the members of Congress and the distinguished guests abruptly stop their hob-knobbing and milling about and erupt into a huge cheer as the leader of the free world walks in. Now is the time for the members of Congress and the distinguished guests to hug, kiss, hand-shake, back-slap, and generally chew the fat with the most powerful person in the world. And such is what happens as the President makes his long way up the aisle to his podium.
Once he reaches the podium, behind which sit the Vice President and the Speaker of the House, the President stands, smiles benevolently, and, still amid the hubbub, awaits the next step – which just happens to be that of the Speaker announcing, “I have the honor of presenting to you (or some such thing like that) the President of the United States!” At this the members of Congress and distinguished guests erupt anew into a huge roar for their featured speaker. This I have never understood. The members of Congress and distinguished guests must have a short attention span or ADHD, or both, because the Sergeant-at-Arms just said basically the exact same thing not ten minutes ago. The President ought to be a man who needs no introduction – but on this night, of all nights in the year, he apparently needs two. But as redundant and inefficient as that may be, that is the custom of our hallowed Republic, and I shall do nothing to disturb it out of its place, or we’re all doomed.
Once the roaring has stopped, the President now has a chance to begin his speech. Strangely enough, he does not begin by introducing himself directly, for apparently another such introduction is not needed. Rather, he gets right to the point – and he can’t afford not to, for he has much to say on a night like this. Customarily, he not only describes what he believes to be the state of our Union, but he also delivers to Congress a long laundry list of things which he hopes they can help him accomplish in the coming year. This is never without controversy, and it is always an interactive process, as I shall describe to you at once.
You see, our government has always been composed of at least two competing parties, and all of them are accounted for in the chamber on such a night like this. Very often the competing parties never agree on anything, including the weather, and their passions don’t take a back seat just because the President is speaking. In fact, the State of the Union speech represents a unique avenue for each party to collectively express itself to the other (and the two viewers by television usually join them, albeit in a more vicarious fashion). Invariably, as the President speaks, the party to which the President belongs, with very few if any exceptions, will agree with what he is both stating and proposing. To show their solidarity with their leader, all the members of the party stand as one and cheer loudly whenever the President makes a point which they consider to be particularly strong, and they also hand-shake, back-slap, and generally congratulate one another in the process for the particularly rare form that their dear leader seems to be in tonight.
While this is going on, there is always a competing and contrasting party, who also must give voice to their opinions and emotions. While the President’s party stands and celebrates a potent zinger, the opposing party usually sits on its hands, with each member wearing an expression suggestive of that which they would wear if their mother-in-law announced (unexpectedly or otherwise) a two-month visit. The emotional divide between the two opposing parties is thus completely evident to all viewers, and it makes for entertaining theater, depending on which party you sympathize with. The only exception to this is when the President makes some more neutral but praiseworthy remark on which it would be simply ghastly for any red-blooded American of any party to sit and not cheer; in a case like this, all members and guests present rise and cheer as one. The two reactions can also switch around on each other, as in the case when the opposing party cheers sarcastically when the President makes some statement or other which they feel strengthens whatever opposing argument the opposing party maintains.
Any reasonable American watching this will quickly come to conclusion that it is quite annoying to listen to a speech that is cut short by applause every two minutes, if not more often than even that. And so it is. But I have come to the conclusion that such applause is quite needful. After all, if there were no applause until the end, the time of the speech would be cut in half, and everyone present or watching via television would probably fall asleep as if the President were telling a bedtime story in a monotone. And since we simply can’t have that, we must have something to keep us awake and engaged.
Is it really necessary, now that we have discussed the general format of a State of the Union speech, to discuss the actual substance of such a speech? If so, only a general mention is in order. The truth is that there is often very little truth in such a speech. The President will often claim that the “state of our Union is strong”, even though in his very speech he proposes to pile on as much massive debt to the already unpayable national debt as he possibly can, in the process endangering the very fiscal health of the Union he claims to serve. If that weren’t enough, the proposals contained in the speech are usually nothing more than idealistic pipe dreams that, more often than not, get cut down to a more pedestrian size once they meet the realities of real life and the legislative process. Still, on this night of all nights, it is the right and privilege of the President and his supporters to dream big dreams, and of his and their detractors to guffaw smugly at the very thought. And so it happens year after year.
The speech, contrary to what some may believe, actually does end, after which the President shakes some more hands as he makes his way back whence he came. It is at this point that my least favorite part happens. It has nothing to do with the President or any member of the halls of government. Rather, it has everything to do with the network news anchors, who feel it is their duty to repeat what we just heard, as if we did not hear it at all, after which they try to tell us what we are supposed to think about what we just heard, even though we were asleep through half of it and didn’t really enjoy or agree with any of it. Perhaps for some a review would be good, since they may have just been awakened by the sudden absence of a lulling monotone, but for the rest of us such commentary quickly amounts to nothing more than more needless hot air.
At least in recent years, it has been a custom with the opposing party to send out one of their own to give a formal response to the President’s speech. Now, this response is indeed a speech, but quite miniature in comparison with the one that was just given. It has to be, for if it were not, the Union would not be able to bear up under the strain of not one but two of these events in one night. Usually it is given somewhere other than in the House chamber, sometimes in an entirely different state. But it is still given, and very few people besides the obligatory news people even bother to tune in. After all, we reason, if the responding politician and his party were such hot stuff, wouldn’t he and they have given the speech we just witnessed?
And thus we have taken a short jaunt through the spectacle that is the State of the Union address. I hope it has been for you a few minutes of your time well-spent. But I’m not betting on it.
*Author’s Note: Nit-picky readers may retort that, in fact, we did NOT “just” have a State of the Union address, that it was in January and this is now March, and that, if we were to go by the author’s sense of time, we will likely be reading soon about last Christmas as if it were last weekend. The author retorts back (just as firmly, if not quite as smart-alecky) that he did in fact begin this article when the event in question was still fresh in everyone’s mind, but that, due to other pressing duties, he has not gotten around to finishing his original idea until now. However, he adds with a significant tone that he possesses, among other things, a rather longer attention span and memory than some in today’s society. The author sincerely hopes that his offering can still be considered sufficiently relevant.
**Author’s Note: I may have to look it up, but I’m pretty sure the last guy on the list of the line of succession is the head janitor at the National Museum of Natural History. I’ve been there before, and I can vouch for the fact that there are a lot of ordinary-looking employees there who look like they know far more than they’re telling. I may be wrong – but I’m just sayin’.
***Author’s Note: Some readers may be of the opinion that this would not be a bad thing to attempt, as it would clear out the halls of government and allow us to start afresh. But I am not of this cynical turn of mind, and I am not here to participate in such ugly and partisan thinking.
It has also become one of the silliest. We just had the annual observance of this event*, and at that time I humorously (at least I thought it was humorous) called it the “State of the Onion Address”. Now I shall peel back each of its layers for you, not unlike an onion. If you don’t laugh, you may cry, because we are all doomed by these goons in Washington. But I’m getting ahead of myself. Let’s proceed from the beginning.
In the first place, the State of the Union address, as it’s currently done, is probably the most bone-headed idea imaginable from a national security standpoint – and the people in Washington know it. Why, everyone in our government’s line of succession (with the possible exception of the last guy on the list**) is gathered in one building at one time. I still have not figured out why no evil-hearted personage has yet tried to take out all of those very important people at once.*** But it is just this possibility that has given them the bright idea of telling at least one person in the line of succession to stay home that evening just in case something goes boom. And then they hope the person they selected would make a competent, if not quite popularly elected, replacement president.
But let’s turn now to the actual plan of attack on such evenings when the President gives his report to a joint session of Congress. The members of Congress and the distinguished guests (which can range from the Supreme Court judges and the Joint Chiefs of Staff to the Vice-President’s third cousin twice removed or the little boy who sent the President a letter last Tuesday) all get there first and mill around for a while. Then the awaited moment arrives – the Sergeant-at-Arms opens the big double doors to the House Chamber, steps forward, cups his hands around his mouth, and screams, “Mr. (or Madam) Speaker – The President of the United States!” This is always my favorite part, partly because I’ve always found it a touch humorous and partly because it’s the only true thing spoken all evening. But I digress. When this vociferous announcement is made, all the members of Congress and the distinguished guests abruptly stop their hob-knobbing and milling about and erupt into a huge cheer as the leader of the free world walks in. Now is the time for the members of Congress and the distinguished guests to hug, kiss, hand-shake, back-slap, and generally chew the fat with the most powerful person in the world. And such is what happens as the President makes his long way up the aisle to his podium.
Once he reaches the podium, behind which sit the Vice President and the Speaker of the House, the President stands, smiles benevolently, and, still amid the hubbub, awaits the next step – which just happens to be that of the Speaker announcing, “I have the honor of presenting to you (or some such thing like that) the President of the United States!” At this the members of Congress and distinguished guests erupt anew into a huge roar for their featured speaker. This I have never understood. The members of Congress and distinguished guests must have a short attention span or ADHD, or both, because the Sergeant-at-Arms just said basically the exact same thing not ten minutes ago. The President ought to be a man who needs no introduction – but on this night, of all nights in the year, he apparently needs two. But as redundant and inefficient as that may be, that is the custom of our hallowed Republic, and I shall do nothing to disturb it out of its place, or we’re all doomed.
Once the roaring has stopped, the President now has a chance to begin his speech. Strangely enough, he does not begin by introducing himself directly, for apparently another such introduction is not needed. Rather, he gets right to the point – and he can’t afford not to, for he has much to say on a night like this. Customarily, he not only describes what he believes to be the state of our Union, but he also delivers to Congress a long laundry list of things which he hopes they can help him accomplish in the coming year. This is never without controversy, and it is always an interactive process, as I shall describe to you at once.
You see, our government has always been composed of at least two competing parties, and all of them are accounted for in the chamber on such a night like this. Very often the competing parties never agree on anything, including the weather, and their passions don’t take a back seat just because the President is speaking. In fact, the State of the Union speech represents a unique avenue for each party to collectively express itself to the other (and the two viewers by television usually join them, albeit in a more vicarious fashion). Invariably, as the President speaks, the party to which the President belongs, with very few if any exceptions, will agree with what he is both stating and proposing. To show their solidarity with their leader, all the members of the party stand as one and cheer loudly whenever the President makes a point which they consider to be particularly strong, and they also hand-shake, back-slap, and generally congratulate one another in the process for the particularly rare form that their dear leader seems to be in tonight.
While this is going on, there is always a competing and contrasting party, who also must give voice to their opinions and emotions. While the President’s party stands and celebrates a potent zinger, the opposing party usually sits on its hands, with each member wearing an expression suggestive of that which they would wear if their mother-in-law announced (unexpectedly or otherwise) a two-month visit. The emotional divide between the two opposing parties is thus completely evident to all viewers, and it makes for entertaining theater, depending on which party you sympathize with. The only exception to this is when the President makes some more neutral but praiseworthy remark on which it would be simply ghastly for any red-blooded American of any party to sit and not cheer; in a case like this, all members and guests present rise and cheer as one. The two reactions can also switch around on each other, as in the case when the opposing party cheers sarcastically when the President makes some statement or other which they feel strengthens whatever opposing argument the opposing party maintains.
Any reasonable American watching this will quickly come to conclusion that it is quite annoying to listen to a speech that is cut short by applause every two minutes, if not more often than even that. And so it is. But I have come to the conclusion that such applause is quite needful. After all, if there were no applause until the end, the time of the speech would be cut in half, and everyone present or watching via television would probably fall asleep as if the President were telling a bedtime story in a monotone. And since we simply can’t have that, we must have something to keep us awake and engaged.
Is it really necessary, now that we have discussed the general format of a State of the Union speech, to discuss the actual substance of such a speech? If so, only a general mention is in order. The truth is that there is often very little truth in such a speech. The President will often claim that the “state of our Union is strong”, even though in his very speech he proposes to pile on as much massive debt to the already unpayable national debt as he possibly can, in the process endangering the very fiscal health of the Union he claims to serve. If that weren’t enough, the proposals contained in the speech are usually nothing more than idealistic pipe dreams that, more often than not, get cut down to a more pedestrian size once they meet the realities of real life and the legislative process. Still, on this night of all nights, it is the right and privilege of the President and his supporters to dream big dreams, and of his and their detractors to guffaw smugly at the very thought. And so it happens year after year.
The speech, contrary to what some may believe, actually does end, after which the President shakes some more hands as he makes his way back whence he came. It is at this point that my least favorite part happens. It has nothing to do with the President or any member of the halls of government. Rather, it has everything to do with the network news anchors, who feel it is their duty to repeat what we just heard, as if we did not hear it at all, after which they try to tell us what we are supposed to think about what we just heard, even though we were asleep through half of it and didn’t really enjoy or agree with any of it. Perhaps for some a review would be good, since they may have just been awakened by the sudden absence of a lulling monotone, but for the rest of us such commentary quickly amounts to nothing more than more needless hot air.
At least in recent years, it has been a custom with the opposing party to send out one of their own to give a formal response to the President’s speech. Now, this response is indeed a speech, but quite miniature in comparison with the one that was just given. It has to be, for if it were not, the Union would not be able to bear up under the strain of not one but two of these events in one night. Usually it is given somewhere other than in the House chamber, sometimes in an entirely different state. But it is still given, and very few people besides the obligatory news people even bother to tune in. After all, we reason, if the responding politician and his party were such hot stuff, wouldn’t he and they have given the speech we just witnessed?
And thus we have taken a short jaunt through the spectacle that is the State of the Union address. I hope it has been for you a few minutes of your time well-spent. But I’m not betting on it.
*Author’s Note: Nit-picky readers may retort that, in fact, we did NOT “just” have a State of the Union address, that it was in January and this is now March, and that, if we were to go by the author’s sense of time, we will likely be reading soon about last Christmas as if it were last weekend. The author retorts back (just as firmly, if not quite as smart-alecky) that he did in fact begin this article when the event in question was still fresh in everyone’s mind, but that, due to other pressing duties, he has not gotten around to finishing his original idea until now. However, he adds with a significant tone that he possesses, among other things, a rather longer attention span and memory than some in today’s society. The author sincerely hopes that his offering can still be considered sufficiently relevant.
**Author’s Note: I may have to look it up, but I’m pretty sure the last guy on the list of the line of succession is the head janitor at the National Museum of Natural History. I’ve been there before, and I can vouch for the fact that there are a lot of ordinary-looking employees there who look like they know far more than they’re telling. I may be wrong – but I’m just sayin’.
***Author’s Note: Some readers may be of the opinion that this would not be a bad thing to attempt, as it would clear out the halls of government and allow us to start afresh. But I am not of this cynical turn of mind, and I am not here to participate in such ugly and partisan thinking.
Monday, March 1, 2010
Two Centuries of Chopin
If you are a lover of classical music, as I am, you may be aware that today is a rather notable day. It is the 200th anniversary of the birth of one of the great composers, Frederic Chopin. Now, whenever there is a milestone anniversary of the birthday of one of the great composers, it’s a big event, and there are usually a lot of big concerts and releases of recordings in that composer’s name in the classical music world. In fact, we had such an event in 2006 when we celebrated the 250th birthday of Mozart. This year, we have not only Chopin’s 200th to celebrate, but also Robert Schumann’s 200th as well.
Frederic Francois Chopin (or Fryderyk Franciszek Chopin, which is the Polish version of his name) was born on March 1, 1810, in the little town of Zelazowa Wola, Poland, which is not far from the capital of Warsaw. You may be thinking that the non-Polish version of his name sounds rather French, and in this you would be correct, for Chopin’s father was a Frenchman who had moved to Poland and married a Polish wife. Chopin showed considerable musical talent from a young age, and music quickly became his career, from which he was able to make a comfortable living. The composer was driven from his homeland by unrest between the Poles and their Russian occupiers, and he never returned, eventually settling in Paris. Still, Chopin remained loyal to his native country his entire life, especially in the music he wrote.
Chopin was a virtuoso pianist, although he was never as flashy in public performances as was his contemporary Franz Liszt. In fact, he is unique among the great composers in that he wrote most of his music for only one instrument, his own, the piano. He never even attempted a symphony, as did most of the great composers, and even the few works he wrote for orchestra contained a major role for the piano, as in the case of his two fine piano concertos. He never wrote much chamber music (which is music for small groups of instruments) or any operas.
Chopin’s entire body of major musical expression can be found in piano works, and many of them are small pieces. He wrote preludes in every one of the 24 musical keys. He perfected and put his own mark on the forms of the nocturne (a “night-time” piece) and the etude (usually a technically demanding piece for students). Some of his other short works are specifically Polish in nature – the mazurkas and the polonaises are patterned after actual Polish national dances, and Chopin was able to make his sound more authentic and original than those composed by many others, Polish or not, before or after him. Other examples of Chopin’s genius came in the form of the waltzes, ballades, and scherzos. More lengthy works for piano include his three piano sonatas and both of his piano concertos, which are regular concert-hall favorites.
One must listen to Chopin in order to understand his music in greater detail than this overview conveys. Some of his pieces might be familiar to ears that do not know classical music well, thanks to the universal popularity of some classical works. Among these well-known works are the “Minute Waltz”, a very fast waltz that, despite its name, has never been played in less than a minute and a half. There is also the famous Funeral March, which is contained in the second piano sonata and is actually followed by a remarkably quick and strangely eerie, but far lesser-known, final movement. There are the upbeat “Heroic” and “Military” polonaises. Two of his etudes are well-known to piano players. The “Revolutionary” Etude is fiery and dramatic, actually a bitter and spontaneous patriotic work written just after the uprising that drove Chopin from Poland failed; and the “Black Key” Etude is just that – a piece played only on the black keys of the piano. The “Raindrop” Prelude (one of the longest of Chopin’s twenty-four in that genre) is quite a descriptive piece – the constant, rhythmic repetition of one note throughout the entire piece suggests steady raindrops to the listener, as the name implies.
All of Chopin’s music, in general, is expressive of a wide range of human emotion. It can be angry and defiant, daring and dramatic, quiet and thoughtful, playful and fanciful, or even tragic and profoundly sorrowful. Some of these emotions can be heard conflicting with each other within the same piece, and by his skillful use of the piano, Chopin was able to convey his meaning in a far deeper and more intimate way than he might have had he attempted to use the most powerful of orchestras to do it. But as I said, one must really listen to and get to know this composer (as is true with any of the others, too) in order to see exactly what I mean.
Chopin’s health was never very strong, and he died of tuberculosis at the age of 39 on October 17, 1849. We can only guess how much more he would have added to his mighty catalog of music had he lived a longer life. Chopin is buried in Paris, but, interestingly, his heart was literally placed in an urn and returned to his native Poland, where it remains today.
Today Frederic Chopin retains his reputation around the world as being among the very greatest of classical composers, and in Poland he is regarded as one of that country’s heroes. He is among my personal favorite composers, and his piano works rank at the top of my favorites for that instrument. In fact, his “Raindrop” Prelude was the first classical piano piece that I ever learned to play, though most of his more difficult pieces remain out of my skill range. I plan to celebrate Chopin’s bicentennial all this month by listening to as much of his music as I can. Whether or not you are a classical music fan, I hope I have helped you learn some interesting things or perhaps inspired you to explore the world of this beautiful music some more on your own.
Frederic Francois Chopin (or Fryderyk Franciszek Chopin, which is the Polish version of his name) was born on March 1, 1810, in the little town of Zelazowa Wola, Poland, which is not far from the capital of Warsaw. You may be thinking that the non-Polish version of his name sounds rather French, and in this you would be correct, for Chopin’s father was a Frenchman who had moved to Poland and married a Polish wife. Chopin showed considerable musical talent from a young age, and music quickly became his career, from which he was able to make a comfortable living. The composer was driven from his homeland by unrest between the Poles and their Russian occupiers, and he never returned, eventually settling in Paris. Still, Chopin remained loyal to his native country his entire life, especially in the music he wrote.
Chopin was a virtuoso pianist, although he was never as flashy in public performances as was his contemporary Franz Liszt. In fact, he is unique among the great composers in that he wrote most of his music for only one instrument, his own, the piano. He never even attempted a symphony, as did most of the great composers, and even the few works he wrote for orchestra contained a major role for the piano, as in the case of his two fine piano concertos. He never wrote much chamber music (which is music for small groups of instruments) or any operas.
Chopin’s entire body of major musical expression can be found in piano works, and many of them are small pieces. He wrote preludes in every one of the 24 musical keys. He perfected and put his own mark on the forms of the nocturne (a “night-time” piece) and the etude (usually a technically demanding piece for students). Some of his other short works are specifically Polish in nature – the mazurkas and the polonaises are patterned after actual Polish national dances, and Chopin was able to make his sound more authentic and original than those composed by many others, Polish or not, before or after him. Other examples of Chopin’s genius came in the form of the waltzes, ballades, and scherzos. More lengthy works for piano include his three piano sonatas and both of his piano concertos, which are regular concert-hall favorites.
One must listen to Chopin in order to understand his music in greater detail than this overview conveys. Some of his pieces might be familiar to ears that do not know classical music well, thanks to the universal popularity of some classical works. Among these well-known works are the “Minute Waltz”, a very fast waltz that, despite its name, has never been played in less than a minute and a half. There is also the famous Funeral March, which is contained in the second piano sonata and is actually followed by a remarkably quick and strangely eerie, but far lesser-known, final movement. There are the upbeat “Heroic” and “Military” polonaises. Two of his etudes are well-known to piano players. The “Revolutionary” Etude is fiery and dramatic, actually a bitter and spontaneous patriotic work written just after the uprising that drove Chopin from Poland failed; and the “Black Key” Etude is just that – a piece played only on the black keys of the piano. The “Raindrop” Prelude (one of the longest of Chopin’s twenty-four in that genre) is quite a descriptive piece – the constant, rhythmic repetition of one note throughout the entire piece suggests steady raindrops to the listener, as the name implies.
All of Chopin’s music, in general, is expressive of a wide range of human emotion. It can be angry and defiant, daring and dramatic, quiet and thoughtful, playful and fanciful, or even tragic and profoundly sorrowful. Some of these emotions can be heard conflicting with each other within the same piece, and by his skillful use of the piano, Chopin was able to convey his meaning in a far deeper and more intimate way than he might have had he attempted to use the most powerful of orchestras to do it. But as I said, one must really listen to and get to know this composer (as is true with any of the others, too) in order to see exactly what I mean.
Chopin’s health was never very strong, and he died of tuberculosis at the age of 39 on October 17, 1849. We can only guess how much more he would have added to his mighty catalog of music had he lived a longer life. Chopin is buried in Paris, but, interestingly, his heart was literally placed in an urn and returned to his native Poland, where it remains today.
Today Frederic Chopin retains his reputation around the world as being among the very greatest of classical composers, and in Poland he is regarded as one of that country’s heroes. He is among my personal favorite composers, and his piano works rank at the top of my favorites for that instrument. In fact, his “Raindrop” Prelude was the first classical piano piece that I ever learned to play, though most of his more difficult pieces remain out of my skill range. I plan to celebrate Chopin’s bicentennial all this month by listening to as much of his music as I can. Whether or not you are a classical music fan, I hope I have helped you learn some interesting things or perhaps inspired you to explore the world of this beautiful music some more on your own.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)