Postlogue - Tobit

Tobias and Azarias
Salvator Rosa
Phillip Medhurst Collection

The painting  above by Salvator Rosa is included in the text book for our religious education class of first and second grade girls.  The text uses beautiful artwork instead of that cartoonish stuff most dumbed-down curriculums have settled for and this particular picture, which occasioned not a small bit of curiosity on the part of the class, corresponded to a chapter dealing with the body and soul and guardian angels.  The lesson could have been conveyed without the picture but there were repeated requests, almost a clamor, for an explanation of the fish, the angel and so I managed to recount the tale.  The enchanting story in the Book of Tobit  lends itself to telling anyway.

Our catechists, though young, could readily understand that after seven failed marriages, Sarah would be "lonely," "sad, " "disappointed," and "heart-broken."  They were indignant at the notion that she might have done away with herself out of despair and were relieved that she decided to put her life in God's hands instead.  They appreciated the mystery and intrigue in that the true identity of Tobias's travelling companion was known only to us, the readers.  Though initially put off by Raphael's instruction to Tobias to kill the fish ("he must really be a bad angel"), they were back on board by the time Tobias had dispersed the demon Asmodeus, and they cheerfully anticipated Tobias's return to his father because they now knew he would apply the fish gall to Tobit's eyes.  All would end happily.

The first and very immediate question at the conclusion of the telling was Did this really happen?  Is this story real? Interesting that such questions cross the boundary of age. My sentiments exactly after reading half the books of the Bible! Even at their tender age, the girls wanted to be able to separate fact from fiction.  Is this the truth?  Can we hang our hat on this? Will God deliver us from demons, despair and blindness?  Will God really heal our broken hearts? 

The short answer to Did this really happen? is no. The Book of Tobit, which I knew and know to be part of the Apocrypha,  is not considered to be historical.  This of course is not what the girls were asking and so I didn't give (exactly) this answer.  They wanted to know the category in which memory should store this tale for them--really happened and so Tobias was real like George Washington was real or fairy tale fantasy and so Tobias was not real like Prince Charming is not real?    If the story isn't "real," then what makes it any different from other fairy tales they know?  If guardian angels and prayers to God are just storybook shenanigans, why come to religious education class.  Why believe in God at all?  (Which, curiously, is how the class began when one among the group reported that her friend had told her today that he didn't believe in God. Perhaps he had gone to the "bad side" was their reasoning.)  

The answer as I tried to construct it is that the story is true even if there's no Tobias, no Sarah and no  fish.   We do have guardian angels, though they may be as unapparent to us as Raphael in his angelic embodiment was unapparent to Tobit and Tobias.   If we have faith, if we praise God as did Tobit, Tobias and Sarah, we'll have hope and with hope we'll be able to carry on even in the face of being as our one young catechist said,  heart-broken.

I tried to leave the girls with the admonition to pray without ceasing, to always trust in the power of God and their guardian angel to help them.  Hopefully, they'll at least never look at a fish the same way again.  That cold, scaly creature has a heart, a liver and a gall.  It might jump right up and grab you.  If it does, and if you get the feeling that you should hang on, well maybe you should.  Do as Tobias did and listen for your guardian angel to guide you.

End Note

Two years, five months and thirteen days later, I've finished reading the Bible from Genesis to Revelation and everything in between,  no skipping around.  It's only taken me from May 16, 2011 to October 29, 2013.  I have no idea how people read the Bible in one year or ninety days or whatever else they claim to do.

Perhaps some are looking for a more general overview or maybe they have more of a foundation to begin with.  In any case, there's no way I could have completed the reading in one year, and, even with my extended-stay style of reading,  I'm not sure that I don't have much more than simply a general overview now that I've finished.  Alas!  Two and a half years of reading!  However, it's the Bible, an account of more than  2,000 years of  God's interaction with his creation.  There's no reason to expect that it should be an easy read. 

What can now follow is a different type of reading.  I would not opt for going through and re-reading the Bible again as one might do with a long-ago-read favorite novel although over the past two years I have had to do that, particularly with the book of Genesis.   I had thought of re-reading the particular books as they correspond to the daily lectionary readings.  It would be a perfect time to begin that because Year C is ending and Year A is just about to begin.  But that approach may be a bit of hop-scotching that could lead to confusion.  Garrison suggests re-reading according to themes of sin, salvation, fear, grace.  He suggests using biographies, an idea I like.  It seems neat and manageable.  Historical time periods is another possibility.  There are other guides as well.  I attempted to use this one briefly.

Revelation

Book Written:   Both HC and Baker link the time of writing to periods of religious persecution.  One such period is during Nero's reign  (54-68 A.D.) 68 A.D. and a later possibility is during Domitian's reign  (81-96 A.D.) in 96 A.D.

Time Period/Setting:   The author writes to seven Christian communities in Asia Minor:   Pergamum, Thyatira, Smyrna, Sardis, Philadelphia, Ephesus and Laodicea.  Yet, these communities would not likely have been being actively persecuted at the time Revelation was written.  HC notes that the persecution under Nero affected mostly Christians in Rome.  HC says the evidence is scant that Domitian promoted any kind of official persecution of Christians in Asia Minor. Both HC and Baker remind that the book may be a warning of things to come.

HC refers to the author of Revelation as a member of the Johannine community, but certainly not the apostle John.  Here, Baker agrees that authorship is uncertain, perhaps attributable to a disciple of John, if not the apostle himself.  The author does identify himself as having been on Patmos, Ch. 1, 9.

Title:  From the Greek apokalypsis meaning 'revelation,' 'the revealing or disclosure of something hidden' as in Ch 1, 1 "the revelation of Jesus Christ." 

I've written a bit here about apocalyptic literature but here are a few helpful reminders concerning such literature since we're on this page.  Apocalyptic literature: depicts a conflict between Satan and God or between a present evil time vs. a better time to come; is told in the first person; is abundant in symbolism; may present an "interpreting angel."   Regarding symbolism, Baker reminds us that "almost every material thing mentioned stands for something else."  Definitely.  Babylon is Rome.  The 'great whore' is Rome.   The beast is the Roman empire.  The 'little scroll' is revelation. A lampstand is this, a dragon is that.  The number 7 is mentioned 57 times.   Baker also admonishes that we not presume the book of Revelation refers to or predicts present-day struggles.  The message of the book is specific to its historical time period.  

Letter of Jude

Book Written:  Baker says the date  is around 70 A.D.  HC only notes that this book could be among the earliest NT writings.

Time Period/Setting:  Where Jude writes from or to whom is a bit murky, but HC places Jude in Palestine as a leader of Jewish Christians. 

Title:  Jude seems to be the agreed-upon author.  He is held to be the brother of James, author of the letters and the leader of the church in Jerusalem, and so a cousin of Jesus.

Jude is warning the Christian community (probably Gentile Christians according to Baker, but see above) of the dangers of giving in to "certain intruders" (v.4) who distort the gospel.   These "waterless clouds," these "trees without fruit" are "blemishes on your lovefeasts, while they feast with you without fear, feeding themselves" (v. 12).  Pretty damning language.

This book includes the beautiful doxology:

Now to him who is able to keep you from falling, and to make you stand without blemish in the presence of his glory with rejoicing, to the only God our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, power and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen.

Letter of John, 1, 2 and 3

Book Written:  For all three letters, HC places the date at 100 A.D., Baker at 90 A.D.

Time Period/Setting:  HC believes these three letters to have been written in Ephesus.  For the audience, the "little children," see below.  The "elect lady" of  2 John is a particular church, though which one is not known. 3 John is addressed to Gaius whom Baker identifies simply as an important person in the church to which the letter is addressed.

Title:  Once again and no surprise, HC calls into question John the apostle and author of the fourth gospel as the writer of these chapters.  He identifies the author as perhaps the "elder" in letter 2 or a member of the same early Christian community of the fourth gospel.  Baker has no such qualms and identifies the apostle as author of all three letters.   Both Baker and HC agree that 1 John is not an actual letter but 2, 3 John are. 

Concerning 1 John, HC explains that this speech or sermon may have been written to counter those in the Christian community who were claiming that Jesus was pure spirit and not a physical human being.  Baker says the theme in 2 John is remaining faithful to the early teachings of the apostles.  The theme of 3 John, a very short letter,  discusses administrative matters.  All three letters echo the language of the fourth gospel.

Letter of Peter, 2

Book Written:   Baker gives the date as around 70 A.D. (though how that could be if Peter is thought to have been killed in 64 A.D. see below).  HC puts the date considerably later in the 80s or 90s A.D.

Time Period/Setting:  Peter is writing to all Christians of the time, no particular group intended.

Title: Though Baker notes that authorship of this book is controversial, he recognizes its author as Peter.  HC does not.  He attributes authorship to someone who wrote in Peter's name as, again, HC rather categorically places Peter's martyrdom in the year 64/5 A.D.  Baker says this is not actually a letter.

Peter reminds his audience not to revert to pagan ways (HC explains that Christians of this time were caught in a "twin transition from a Jewish to a pagan environment. . .. " He also writes of the Parousia.  And the author, whoever he may be, emphasizes the truth of his message because he is one of the "eyewitnesses of his majesty"  (Ch.1, 16-18).

Letter of Peter, 1

Book Written:  Baker simply gives a date of 64 A.D. while HC explains that the letter has to be written after Paul traveled through Asia Minor in the 60s, but before the 90s because there's no mention of Roman officials charging Christians with disobedience to the emperor.

Time Period/Setting:  Peter is writing to Christians in five Roman provinces in Asia Minor:  Asia, Bithynia, Cappadocia, Galatia and Pontus.    HC explains that these Gentile Christians faced considerable animosity towards them on the part of the Greco-Roman society in which they found themselves.

Title:  Written by Peter, the apostle and first bishop of Rome though HC calls that into question by saying that the fine quality of the Greek may mean otherwise.  HC also says (2 Peter) that Peter was martyred in 64/5 A.D. so HC would conclusively be saying that this letter couldn't have been written by Peter if in fact the letter was penned between 70 A.D. and 90 A.D.   The format is considered to be an actual letter.

Peter is urging his readers to be faithful and good servants of Christ and not to revert to their earlier, heathen ways.  Just to make things perfectly clear I suppose, Peter enjoins his readers not to consort with those lousy Gentiles whom he denounces as immoral low-lifes in  Ch. 4, 3-5.  Such riff-raff lives in "licentiousness, passions, drunkenness, revels, carousing and lawless idolatry."  Can't get much worse than that!