THE ENIGMA OF MAN FEBRUARY 6, 1972
- PSALI #8 JOHN M, BUCHANAN
ROMANS 7:21-25

I am fascinated by the fascination of the Amertean people with the comings
and goings of Howard Hughes. A11 things considered, it's really not very
essential for my life to know Iir. Hughes' personal habits, his whereabouts, his
affairs, or even whether or not his biography is authentic. In fact. I couldn't
care less. And yet, it has taken a super-human effort recently not to become
informed about Mr. Hughes because he’s on the front page of the paper every day,
his presumed biographer makes a nightly appearance {n the news, and Time
Magazine whose taste I usually trust donated a full cover article to him.

From all that I have reluctantly read Mr. Hughes is a grim, lonely,
eccentric who wants nothing in life so much as to be left alone. Yet he is a
hero - a celebrity - a household word. And the reason, I think, is that he is
the embodiment ~ the fulfillment - the incarnation of the American Dream.

He has, literally, so much money he can't spend it all. Howard Hughes, the
American people seem to be saying, is what life is all about.

Abraham Heschel, famous Jewish Scholar tells a little story to illustrate
how the American definition of man is cash oriented. "A baby was born in the
hospital, and the father's first chance to see his firstborn child was after
it was brought home and placed in the crib. His friends saw how he leaned over
the crib and an expression of extreme bewilderment was in his face. Why do
you look so bewildered? Impossible, he answered: how can they make such a
fine crib for $29.50?" (James Angill, Put Your Arms Around the City, P 151)

I'm fascinated with our obsession with Howard Hughes and the dollar and
cents definition of man.

I'm fascinated by the curious public fascination with a man by the name of
Duane Thomas. Now, some of you know that name and some do not. Duane Thomas
is a black man who doesn't say much to anyone, and when he does it usually
sounds mean. Duane Thomas is a running back for the Dallas Cowboys, a master
at his trade, some think the best in the business. But Duane Thomas doesn't

sign autographs, or give interviews, or talk to reporters or sell raza blades.

ii
He just runs the football and guards his privacy. And we're fascinated. For
here is another fulfillment of the American Dream - the ultimate athlete, the
strong indestructable man, who can slow our other men better than anybody else.
And we just have to know what he eats for breakfast, and what he thinks about
civil rights and what he does with his liesure time. Because, for many people
Duane Thomas is what human life is all about.

I'm fascinated by the fascination of the American people with a man by the
name of Hugh Heffner. ilr. Heffner publishes a magazine called Playboy, and
writes a little adolescent philosophy on occassion and owns a black DC-9 and
lives in what used to be the Palmolive building on Chicago's ilichigan Avenue,
from which he rarely emerges,and in which he apparently sleeps all day and stays
up all night being cool and drinking Pepsi-Cola. And we're fascinated. We've
got to know more about this man who is surrounded by beautiful women, good booze,
fancy cars and airplanes, good food and the freedom to do whatever he wants,
whenever he wants it. Because he fulfills another American dream: another
definition of man - the ultimate Playboy.

"What is fian?", the Psalmist asked, and tho composite answer out of conten-
porary American culture looks like a rich, athlete who is a swinger. And for "%
life of me I can think of no one who combines the three more completely - who is
the American Holy Trinity incarnate - than Joe Willie Namath. Which, by the way,
may be the first time Joe has ever been used as a sermon illustration.

Every age in history, every culture has had its model - its image - its
definition of man. I have suggested three part model that seems to be ours.

In ancient Egypt the Pharohs were portrayed as Gods and the resto the people
as ants. The Greeks saw the image as a philosopher - king - athlete. In the
book entitled "Bibilical Witness and the World" the authorssuggest that the
Sherlock Holmes was the prototype for the Victorian age, with his cool, cool,
gentlemanly logic. And as a counter proposel to my rich-athlete-swinger, the
authors suggest that James Bond is really the model of manhood today: he moves

easily in all levels of society, he is modern: his escapades with women are

aM
wide-ranging but never entangling: but most of all hé is efficient: against
fantastic odds, he gets the job done. ;

Whatever it is, every age, every culture, and every individual has some
definition of man: some model of what human life ought to be, And that model,
that definition - in turn - influences our goals, our hopes, our dreams, and
the style of life we live ourselves. "What is fian?" The only question older
than that, James Angill suggests is, "What's for dinncr?" And it is a question that
needs to be asked over and over again -particularly in the context of religion.
The goal of religion, one writer observes, is to come to grips with the meaning
of life: "Who arn I?" Nhat does my life mean?", which are simply other ways
Of asking, "What Is ilan?"

The Bible is authoritation for us, so let's apply the question and see
what happens. There is, of course, no index with an entry entitled "Man".

There is no neat 1 page definition. But there is a very precise doctrine of man
that runs through the Bible, both Old and “ew Testaments: and I believe that
doctrine may be reduced to three Simple ideas.

One: ‘an is exatted: the last thing Sod created.

Two: flan is miserable: the worst thing God created.

Three: flan is not really man until he resolves tho obvious conflict between

one and two, and to do that he needs help, namely God.

Let's begin with number one: man is exalted: the best thing God created. In
the Genesis story,man is the Nighest order of creation: tho crowning glory,
unlike anything else in creation, made in the very image of God. Man is given
the earth as his home, and the whole natural order as his environment. flan is
given dominion,that is power and authority, over the rest of creation: he
becomes a partner with God in the management of the world. flan is given freedom
and responsibility: man is accountable for his behavior as no other creature is!
man is free to make choices in light of the categories of right and wrong.

The ancient Israelites had a hold of man's exalted status. In one of their

night festivals, held out of doors, a priest would ask “What is man that thou

-4.
are mindful of him?" and a choir would answer

"a little less than God, crowned with glory and honor, given dominion
over the works of thy hands:"

lan is a creature of inestimable worth in the Bible, given honor and
dignity by the God who created him.

nakespere once wrote:

“Wat a piece of work is man;

How noble in reason,

How infinate in faculty,

In form and moving how express and admirable,

In action how like an angsl,

In apprehension how like a god"

Shakespere was being ver’ Piblical in that, for the Bible holds up a better
picture of man than any other religion, a better picture in fact than most of us
can accept.

That's the first thing the Bible says about us. But it's not the whole
story: not by any stretch of the imagination. As a matter of fact, after having
made us feel good about ourselves the Bible turns right around and pulls the rug
out and says the precise oppositg. As soon as the story of creation gets to a
stopping point, man begins to get out of line: ‘an can't seem to play by the rules:
Eve eats the apple, and Adam allows himself to follow suit. Cain kills Abel his
brother and it's all down hill through the town of Babel, Sodom and Gomorrah,
Hoah and the flood.

The writers of Biblical history and the prophets took a very skeptical
view of man and man's ability actually to be the exalted creature God created
him to be. Even the heroes in the Bible - the best men in the book - are por-
trayed honestly with all their faults and frailties and dishonesty and sin
exposed to public view. That's really significant. The Bible isn't full of
plastic saints even though Sunday School curriculum is. Rather the men of the

Bible are men ~ good and bad: honest and dishonest. Moses after all got his

ajo
start when he murdered an Egyptian in a fit of anger. David, the king, the
forerunner of the “essiah, turned a corner when he committed adultery with one
of his officer's wives and then arranged for the officer to be killed. Peter,
St. Peter, upon thom Christ built the Church, got angry, petulant, and when the
chips were down shoved himsclf to be not only a coward, but a liar.

Tne Bible deals with man bluntly at times: such as Romans 3 - all men have
sinned and fallen short of the Glory of Sod. St. Paul struggled with that one -
that ancient paradox of man's dignity and worth and yet his obvious sinfulness.
And in a confessional mood poured out the agony of his own soul I can will
what is right, but I cannot do it...'rotched man that I am! Who will deliver me
from this body of death?"

he Bible finally portrays man as a creature so terribly wrong - headed:
So disobedient and self centered, that God's own son, at the hands of man, ends
up stretched out on a cross.

The first two things the Bible says about us then are opposites: we are
good and not so good: we are made in God's image, but capable of indescribable evil.
The two do not negate each other: rather in the Bible they are held in tension:
both are true: both accurately describe us.

Our problem, I believe, is that we don't take either one of thom very
seriously. We don't, I would propose, think niguly enough of ourselves, or
badly enough of ourselves. And we must learn to do both - at the same time.

First, we have real difficulty thinking highly enough of ourselves - and,
of course, of others. The two go together.

We know that there is nothing so psychologically destructive as the lack
of self esteem; feeling of worthlessness and inadequacy. We know that human
love is not possible until we learn something about loving ourselves. And in the
realm of inter-personal relationships I think all of us know what it feels
like to be regarded as an object, a thing, a tool, and not a person of dignity
and worth,

It's no accident that those forms of religion that focus entirely on man*s

-§-
Sin, tnat beat thc believer down with a load of guilt too heavy to bear, are
just those forms that arc least interested in netpine and serving others out
in society. The twa go together: you can't feal Toveuntil you fecl loved:
you can't regard another as a person of dignity and worth until you feel the
Sane way about yourself.

So I think we need to take very seriously the first thing tho Bible says
about us: we are worthful: we are loved of God and that gives us and cvary man an
indellible dignity. There was an ufiforgetabic picture publishes in the ncws-
papers of 4 black man marching in a demonstration. The Sign he carried said it
att: "Toan a man’.

and yet, in tension with that wo must teke seriously the other word the
Bible says about us, and I'm not sure we do, or that es: rcally want te. The
Philosophy of classical liberalism is very appealine: namely, that man's condition
can be bettered by improving the environment: that given good schools, good
houses, good communities, and good homes, a1] of mankind's historical problems
WITT vanish. iow I vould not vant to be misinterpreted at this crucial point,
ily deen conviction is that we are called by our Lord ninself to better the
welfare of our brotiier man, and that we will be measured by the degree to which
we do it. But i don't bolieve that better housine is salvation. I think we
need to honestly asscss our capacity for cvil. I think we need to confront
the truth .about oursches as men - in view of next year's defense budget, and a
continuing sonsiess war. I think we ncad to look honestly at what happened in
Bangladesh and Jtorthorn [roland and lew York City and be ready to say that
ve'rc all in this mess together: that we are all brothers - victums and perpetra-
tors alike. I think we need to be honest with ourselves about our own smal}
contribution to evil in the world, in terms of our orn dishonesties and unkind-
nesses. 1 think we nced to corifess that none of us measures up: none of us
becomes what God created us to ba: al? of us settle for less: all of us - in
onc form or another buy an image, a definition, Howard Hughes, Hugh Heffner, Joe

damath - or somc other. All of us break the heart of our father God in a

-7-

nungred ways every day.

Whe, in Paul's words, will deliver us? Paul lad experienced the resolution
of the tension in is own lifc, and so answored Ais ovm question: "Thanks be
ta fod througn dusus Christ our Lord". And thats the third thing the Bible
says about us. "le necd help. We need God. Ye aro not fully human - fully man -
without him.

Every man who ever lived aceds to be in relationship with the God who
created tim: a God “hose perfection keeps our ovm inperfection in perspective:
a God whosc perfect Tove forccs our hatos and unlove out into the open--But
ne is also a Fathcr 3od weoso intimate love for us heals our wounds, forcives
our sin and accapts us - just as he ercatod us - crowned with glory and honor.

“nat is man? God provided a model. Sod dave one who vas man as man was
created to be. desus Christ is his name, and Acre ve Sec wnat it is to be truly
numan. In nim ew. sense how far vc are from God's model. But in him, in dis
life and teaching and death we expertence ta best thing that can be said about
us: we are loved and accented by God.

Maat is dan? An enigma? fot really. A child of God, whose decpest need

is simply to knot that. ANEW

Father, keep us from those daily compromises that provent us from being human.
lelp us to sce ourselves, and each other, in the lignt of your love - expressed

most clearly in Jesus Christ our Lord. AVE"!