felix hominum

sermon notes Pentecost 18 (Year A): Matthew 18: 21-35

Matthew 18: 21-25

Then Peter came and said to him, “Lord , if another member of the church sins against me, how often should I forgive? As many as 7 times?”  Jesus answered him, “Not 7 times, I tell you , but 77 times.”

For this reason the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who wished to settle accounts with his slaves.  When he began the reckoning, one who owed him 10,000 talents was brought to him;  and, as he could not pay, his lord ordered him to be sold; together with his wife and children and all his possessions, and payment to be made.  So the slave fell on his knees before him, saying, “Have patience with me, and I will pay you everything.”  And out of pity for him, the lord of that slave released him and forgave him the debt.  But that same slave, as he went out, came upon one of his fellow slaves who owed him a hundred denarii, and seizing him by the throat, he said “Pay what you owe.”   Then his fellow slave fell down and pleaded with him, “Have patience with me, and I will pay you.”  But he refused; then he went and threw him into prison until he should pay the debt.   When his fellow slaves saw what had happened, they were greatly distressed, and they went and reported  to their lord all that had taken place.   Then his lord summoned him and said to him “You wicked slave, I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me.   Should you not have had mercy on your fellow slave, as I had mercy on you?”   And in anger his lord handed him over to be tortured until he should pay his entire debt.    So my heavenly Father will also do to every one of you, if you do not forgive your brother from your heart.

This is part two from last week:  first we had how seriously Jesus takes sin, and now we see how seriously Jesus takes forgiveness.  So I haven't quite figured it all out yet, but it's only Wednesday...

You will remember from last week that this section of the gospel is part of Jesus’ sermon on forgiveness.  Peter wants to know how often we should forgive others.  And he figures that 7 times is about enough,  After that, maybe I am justified if I get fed up and decide, “That's is, I'm going to write you off”  After all, that sounds pretty reasonable.  How much can one person put up with?  Jesus answers him, “Not just seven times, Peter, but 77 times.”  And I believe that Jesus wouldn’t stop there either.  He would keep on forgiving. 

Jesus wants to tell us how important it is for us to forgive others:

Look at the story Jesus tells.  It is a parable.  Like all parables, it is meant to get across a few simple ideas.  It is not meant to be analyzed to death trying to find an exact correspondence  for everything.  It is meant to make us think about something.

The first idea is how much we owe God, and how willing God is to forgive us.  In the story the slave owed his lord a whole lot of money – more than he could ever hope to repay.  In fact, it’s probably true that the lord loaned him all this money knowing that he would never get repaid.  So when it was time for the debt to be paid, what does the lord do?  He forgives the debt entirely.  The lord gives an example to the slave:  I’ve forgiven you everything.  Look at how much you owed me and yet I am going to set you free and you don’t have to pay me a thing. 

God is first and foremost a great forgiver.  That is the example he sets.  If you still think that God is looking for a way to get you, then you don’t really know Him very well.  He is really looking for a way to forgive you, not to condemn you.

It is said that we learn by example, but this is not often the case when it comes to God.  What does the slave do next?  Instead of taking his lead from his lord, he goes out and finds some other slave who owes him a little bit.  What does he do?  Instead of following his lord’s example, he decides that he is going to get payment from his fellow slave.  It’s like having someone write off your 100, 000 dollar mortgage and then you decide that you are going to sue your neighbour for the 25 cents he borrowed for the pay phone last year.

This points out the second idea in this parable.  Our tendency is to apply one standard to ourselves, and another standard to everyone else.  I deserve special treatment, but you sure don’t.  I might not say that like the ungrateful slave did, but I sure will act that way.  I’m sure glad when they catch speeders going through my neighbourhood where my kids play, but if I’m trying to get through traffic on my way home, I’ll gladly speed through your neighbourhood.  Somebody should pick up the slack when it comes to paying the bills for the church, but well, our family budget is really tight this month and we need a few things fixed up.  When I yell it’s because I was really tired and stressed and you should understand all that and make me feel better right away, but how dare you have a bad day and expect me to be kind and helpful and considerate to you and patient with you when you lose it.  It happens all the time, in big ways and in small ways.    One standard for me, and another one for you.  I’m allowed to mess up, but you’re not.

This leads us to the third idea

We choose how God will treat us.  You see, we sometimes think that God just sits up there.    God gives us the choice:  how do you want me to treat you? And our choice is made by our actions towards others.  How do you want God to treat you?  Show Him by example.  Show Him by the way you treat others.   What attitude do you want God to have toward you?  Let Him know by your attitude towards others.  The ungrateful slave learned this lesson.   It’s a rather frightening thought – Jesus is suggesting here that it is within our power to determine/ contribute to how God is going to treat us. 

sermon notes Pentecost 17: Matthew 18: 15-20

Pentecost 17, Year A

Matthew 18:15-20

If another member of the church sins against you, go and point out the fault when the two of you are alone. If the member listens to you, you have regained that one.

But if you are not listened to, take one or two others along with you, so that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses.

If the member refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if the offender refuses to listen even to the church, let such a one be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.

Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.  Again, truly I tell you, if two of you agree on earth about anything you ask, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven.  For where two or three are gathered in my name, I am there among them.

The first thing to note is that this passage is really of one piece with next week's reading.  There Peter will ask Jesus how many times a person must exercise forgiveness.  And so together they form a short discourse on sin and forgiveness.  But divided up as they are for the lectionary reading, one might say that this week's reading talks about the seriousness of sin, while next week concentrates on the seriousness of forgiveness.

If another member of the church sins against you, go and point out the fault when the two of you are alone. If the member listens to you, you have regained that one.

I think one of the great mistakes made in reading this section is to think of it in terms of the modern notion of "conflict management".  Many look at this passage and say that it is an example of Jesus giving his disciples (or Matthew giving his community) some guidelines on how to deal with conflict in the church.  I am going to suggest that it is not about conflict.  At least not in the sense in which we often use that word.

There can be various causes of conflict in any organization, including the church.  Conflict can arise when there are two equally valid points of view on a particular matter.  Or it can arise when there are two apparently equally valid course of action to be pursued.  We might have conflict over whether to use this music or that music, or to use this style or that style, when both options may be perfectly reasonable.  "Conflict management" can come into play when there is no underlying fault, no underlying sin.  Jesus is not talking about managing conflict;  he is talking about dealing with sin.  And those are two different things.  Jesus is talking about a situation where a member of the church sins against you.  Indeed there may be no conflict whatsover;  you might in fact choose to turn the other cheek.

However, this passage shows us that Jesus takes two things in consideration:  the presence of sin in the church, and the seriousness of how to deal with it.  Those who have been reading along with my study in Cyprian have already seen that the early church dealt with this same problem:  what do we do when members of the church have obviously fallen in sin?  Jesus does not seem to assume that the members of the church will be free from sin, nor does he assume that we will immediately know how to deal with such situations.  I think it wise to see this passage in light of Jesus' entire ministry of reconciliation:  Jesus takes both sin and forgiveness (reconciliation) seriously.  It might be said that we contribute the first part, and Jesus contributes the second part.

So what do you do when a member of the church sins against you?  Why not simply turn the other cheek and suffer in silence?  Why confront such a sin in a fellow member of the church?  Because sin harms the one who commits it.  If I sin against you, I may or may not actually be harming you, but I am certainly harming myself.  And so the loving thing for you to do would be to come to me and confront me with the behavior which harms me - even if I am the author of that behavior.  What parent would not confront a child who is about to do something which knowingly or unknowingly, will result in harm to that child?  So we come to a practice which might seem odd to modern ears:  sometimes love means confronting sin.

Jesus is not interested in public humiliation;  he is interested in reconciliation.  And so the first step is private.  Speak privately, not publicly.  What does this mean?  It means first off all that we don’t start off complaining to our friends or family or neighbours about so and so.  There may be more wisdom in this than we imagine:  perhaps when we come to the person whom we need to speak to, we find that we ourselves are mistaken about the sin.  Perhaps I thought John took my wallet, but upon speaking with John in private I somehow discover that it was actually Peter.  A private encounter can prevent a lot of public embarrassment. [Those who are partial to the ancient shame/honour codes can see how this angle fits into the process Jesus describes].

But if you are not listened to, take one or two others along with you, so that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses.

Now who are the two or three others?  This is not about taking your friends to whom you have already complained about John.  Yet Jesus is firm:  there is a next step.  And why?  Because there are many instances in which a person’s fault, a person’s sin, is not simply a private affair.  Most, if not all types of sin, have an effect.  Like the outward ripple of a wave after a stone has been thrown into still water, so is the effect of sin in the life of a community.  Just as the sin moves outward, so the circle attempting reconciliation grows larger.  There may also be sdome further wisdom that in going to the 2 or 3 others, I will discover that perhaps I am mistaken about my accusation.  Or, the one who has committed the offense may simply reply in private that "It's just my opinion."  And so having a few others who are (we hope) trusted and respected by both parties might help the offender to see the truth of the situation.

If the member refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if the offender refuses to listen even to the church, let such a one be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.

Some years ago in the Anglican Church of Canada there were people who abused children in the residential schools.  Would things have been different in the lives of many people if such a sin was dealt with in a different manner?  Was anything covered up, hushed up and hidden?  It’s hard to say, but one thing might be certain:  Jesus' guidelines for dealing with sin do not seem to have been followed.

And so Jesus tells them that if the person will not listen to the two or three, then the whole community must be informed.  Why is this?  Well, we might be persuaded that we are in the right if we are confronted by just one.  And we might even be persuaded that we are in the right when we are confronted with two or three.  But then the case can be evaluated by the community as a whole:  in that process there might be some further wisdom.  Also, the sin might be of such seriousness that it requires the whole community to know about it.  And of such seriousness that the community cannot tolerate it continuing.

Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

Again, truly I tell you, if two of you agree on earth about anything you ask, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven.  For where two or three are gathered in my name, I am there among them.

A few of these verses have echoes in other passages.  We have already heard something of the binding and loosing themes.  We see that things on earth are in fact connected with things in heaven.  Or perhaps it is better to phrase it the other way around.  In any event, I have seen these kinds of sayings taken out of context more than once.  Jesus is telling us about the business of being reconciled, about the serious matter of sin, and the ways in which forgiveness is extended, and fellowship restored.  It is in those situations when we are to ask as the church (two or more) for the gift of reconciliation and restoration.  In particular, when we gather for the purpose of reconciliation, Jesus is there among us.

sermon notes Pentecost 16; Matthew 16: 21-28

From that time on, Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and undergo great suffering at the hands of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised.

And Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him, saying, "God forbid it, Lord! This must never happen to you."

But he turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; for you are setting your mind not on divine things but on human things."

Then Jesus told his disciples, "If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me.  For those who want to save their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake will find it.  For what will it profit them if they gain the whole world but forfeit their life? Or what will they give in return for their life?

"For the Son of Man is to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay everyone for what has been done.  Truly I tell you, there are some standing here who will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom."

Last week we had "Peter's confession" that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of the living God.  Remember that reading ended with Jesus sternly warning his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah.  Well, Peter's subsequent comments might give us a bit of insight into that.  We may not know exactly what kind of Messiah Peter thought that Jesus should be, but we clearly see what kind of Messaih Peter thought Jesus should not be.

Jesus lays out before the disciples the basics of Messiahship;  Jesus must 

go to Jerusalem and undergo great suffering at the hands of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised.

That's Messiahship 101, but Peter will have none of it. [side note:  if you haven't read any of Rene Girard's works, they are really fasicnating on the whole suffering/violence theme]  I suspect (though I cannot of course prove) that Peter really did not understand what Jesus was talking about.  More than that, I suspect that Peter (like many who look at the suffering Christ) heard only the first part of what Jesus was saying.  Jesus' description of what must happen in Jerusalem seems to focus only on his suffering and death.  And perhaps Peter had some selective hearing - he either did not hear or did not understand what Jesus ended with:  "be raised on the third day".  And note that the passage ends with a description of Christ coming in his glory and a reference again to "life".  But initially, Peter will have none of it:

And Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him, saying, "God forbid it, Lord! This must never happen to you."

Gotta give Peter credit for looking out for Jesus' best interests.  The only problem is, Jesus wasn't looking out for his own best interest - he was looking out for ours.  There are several routes one can take with this rebuke from Peter to Jesus.  Perhaps Peter's idea of Messiahship was nationalistic or idealistic.  These things don't happen to Messiahs, so these things can't happen to Jesus.  Or Peter had no idea why such things should happen.  Or Peter had no inkling of what Jesus was opening up for humanity in being "raised on the third day."  At any rate, It is not just Peter's problem;  all of us tend to fashion our favourite kind of Messiah out of Jesus.  And then we tend to ignore or dismiss the bits of Jesus which don't fit into our idea of what Messiahship should be.

But he turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; for you are setting your mind not on divine things but on human things."

Or, as the prophet wrote, "My ways are not your ways, nor are my thoughts your thoughts".  It is at this point that one is confronted with the choice of humility.  Can I believe such a thing?  It is the essence of the old joke:  God made man in His own image, and we've been trying to return the favour ever since.  There is much more to work out here, but how do I set my mind on divine things, instead of on human things?  What does this look like?

Then Jesus told his disciples, "If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me.  For those who want to save their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake will find it.  For what will it profit them if they gain the whole world but forfeit their life? Or what will they give in return for their life?

I suppose it is the greatest counter-intuitive thing to proclaim that the road to resurrection must go by the way of the Cross, and that we must lose our lives to save them, and that we are called to take up our cross and follow Jesus on the way of sacrifice and suffering.  If I had any further wisdom on this, I would add it here.  But I don't, really.

A fellow blogger recalls saying from his dad.  People treat Christianity like they treat vaccines.  They inject themselves with a little bit of it in order to prevent themselves from getting the real thing.

"For the Son of Man is to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay everyone for what has been done.  Truly I tell you, there are some standing here who will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom."

The passage ends not with death and suffering, but with glory and life.  That's the pattern of Jesus' Messiahship.  That's all for now.

sermon notes Pentecost 15: Matthew 16: 13-20

[notes for Pent 16;  Matt 16: 21-28 are here]

Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, "Who do people say that the Son of Man is?" And they said, "Some say John the Baptist, but others Elijah, and still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets."  He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?"
Simon Peter answered, "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God."

And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven.
And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it.  I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

Then he sternly ordered the disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah.

Caesarea Philippi was located about 30 kms north of the Sea of Galilee in what is now the Golan Heights.  It has an interesting religious history:  used as a cultic center for Baal worship in Canaanite times, then it was part of the Panion (you might see it called Paneas) during Hellenistic times.  The reference is to the god Pan.  Herod the Great built a temple to his patron Emperor Augustus there, and then Philip the Tetrarch dedicated it also to the Emperor Tiberius, and decided to lend his own name to the town as well.  Hence Caesarea Philippi.  Just to add to the charm of the place, Josephus (Jewish War 3.9.7.) tells us that Vespasian had a few gladiatorial games with Jewish victims there after the fall of Jerusalem.

An interesting place in which to pose the question: "Who do you say that I am?"  Now it is also worth considering that Jesus does not directly jump to this question.  Instead, he asks what the people say about him.  And in giving their various answers, the disciples show that they are at least a bit conversant with popular opinion "out there".  It is an approach worth considering - rather than jumping straight to the second question, do we need to become conversant with what the culture says about the Son of Man?  The stereotype of evangelism is to jump to a direct question, rather than take the slightly roundabout route that Jesus takes to get there.

“Some say John the Baptist, but others Elijah, and still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”

Now who are these people and why do the people think that Jesus is one of these characters?

John the Baptist was very austere – living in the wilderness on locusts and wild honey, dressed up so that he would stand out from the crowd.  If you read the accounts of John the Baptist in the gospels you’ll see that his main ministry was calling people to repent of their sins.  In fact, sometimes he was pretty harsh – he called the Pharisees a brood of vipers – a nest of snakes.  So perhaps people saw in Jesus the continuation of the tradition of John the Baptist.

But Jesus is not John the Baptist.  He’s more than John the Baptist.  John's baptism of repentance is fulfilled in Jesus' authority to forgive.  And John's ministry of preparation is fulfilled in the arrival of the Lamb of God.  Jesus was surely like John in the call to repentance, but Jesus also delivers something which John could not:  divine forgiveness and absolution.

Next, some people say that Jesus is Elijah. In Jewish tradition, Elijah was the greatest prophet and miracle worker of the Old Testament.  When Elijah prayed, God listened.  Elijah could do anything:  he could cure the sick, he could raise the dead, he could make food miraculously multiply, he could control the weather, he could control the outcome of battles and armies and wars.  He was the greatest miracle worker that ever lived.  He could solve the problems of people, cities, even kingdoms with his miracles.

But Jesus is not Elijah.  One of the small things we forget when we see the various miracles is that the miracle does not solve the problem, it merely postpones it.  Consider Elijah's miracles around death.  'Nuff said.  The problem was postponed, not solved. And like John the Baptist, Elijah had a preparatory role (as seen elsewhere when Jesus replies that 'Elijah must come first').  But Jesus is more than Elijah;  Jesus is not preparatory - he is the event.

Next, others say that he is Jeremiah or one of the prophets.  Now who is Jeremiah?  There are two main writings in the Old Testament about Jeremiah.  The first is the book of Jeremiah, and the second is called the Lamentations of Jeremiah.  The lamentations of Jeremiah are just that – a collection of laments. Songs and stories of woe;  unhappiness at how badly things are going for us.  Jeremiah was the best at saying – “Look God, things are just terrible, life is hard and all my enemies are beating up Israel, and things just aren’t fair and won’t you do something about it?" Okay, that might be a very loose translation, but you get the picture.

The prophets were also known for their zeal in calling Israel back to Yahweh from worship of other gods, for their zeal in defending the cause of justice and their condemnation of those who offended God through injustice and oppression.  Perhaps by this time Jesus had a reputation in this area.  But Jesus is not Jeremiah or one of the prophets.

He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?"
Simon Peter answered, "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God."

And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven.

For now I want to focus on that little word "revealed".  Here, I think, is the crux of the matter.  Knowing Jesus is not something we achieve by our own cleverness, but it is something revealed.  Many can and have argued over just what is meant by the phrase "Messiah, the Son of the living God."  But I sense that there comes a point when argument will not gain anything - there must be revelation - the divine work of  God breaking in on our notions of Jesus as wise man, prophet, miracle worker, whatever - - and then we come to know Him as the Son of the Living God. 

More on this later, and for the sake of Roman Catholic dialogue, I'll skip over the whole Peter thing.  An interesting early discussion of these verses can be found in Cyprian's Unity of the Church (ch 4).  Pelikan (The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition, 159, 250) has some good summaries of the interpretation of these verses in the early church. 

Then he sternly ordered the disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah.

Let me just half lightly say that this is the one command of Jesus that many Christians are only all too happy to keep. 

 

Thoughts on the Feast of the Transfiguration

Today is the Feast of the Transfiguration.  It is a feast which is, I have read, more widely celebrated in the Eastern churches than in the West.

Now about eight days after these sayings Jesus took with him Peter and John and James, and went up on the mountain to pray. And while he was praying, the appearance of his face changed, and his clothes became dazzling white.  Suddenly they saw two men, Moses and Elijah, talking to him. They appeared in glory and were speaking of his departure, which he was about to accomplish at Jerusalem.

Now Peter and his companions were weighed down with sleep; but since they had stayed awake, they saw his glory and the two men who stood with him. Just as they were leaving him, Peter said to Jesus, "Master, it is good for us to be here; let us make three dwellings, one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah" -- not knowing what he said.

While he was saying this, a cloud came and overshadowed them; and they were terrified as they entered the cloud.  Then from the cloud came a voice that said, "This is my Son, my Chosen; listen to him!"  When the voice had spoken, Jesus was found alone. And they kept silent and in those days told no one any of the things they had seen.  (Luke)

The Feast of the Transfiguration is a wonderful thing.  Moses and Elijah (the law and the prophets) bearing witness to Jesus.  Transfiguration taking place in the context of prayer (he went up to the mountain to pray).  Seeing Jesus for who He really is.  Each of the Gospels which record the event has a slightly different detail added here or there.

There are two significant mountains in Scripture where God speaks.  In the southern part of the Sinai penninsula rises a mountain which has been known to the local Bedouin tribe for centuries as “Jebel Musa” – the mountain of Moses.  The landscape, like all of the Sinai, is harsh.  Ancient red granite rock greets the visitor to Sinai.  What is not rock is sand, and what is not sand is dust.  There are 2 main paths up to top. There is the main route which is used by the Bedouin, a series of switchbacks wide enough for a camel to walk upon.  There is another, rather less trodden path – it is comprised of hundreds of steps carved into the rock by monks many centuries ago.  The second path is appropriately named “The steps of repentance”.  It was designed as a form of penance for the monks of the Monastery of St Catherine, which has been part of the mountain for almost 1700 years.

When you finally get to the top of Sinai, there is a spectacular view of the desert landscape for miles around. It is a jagged and rough place – a fitting spot for human beings to experience the majesty and, yes, even the terror of coming into the presence of God.  It is the mountain of the giving of the Law – the commands which Moses gave to the people of Israel. 

9 KM west of Nazareth rises another mountain – Mount Tabor. It commands a view of fertile valleys, the villages around the sea of Galilee, and it’s slopes are covered with lush greenery and gardens.  It is the traditional site of the Transfiguration.  There is only one route up to the summit:  and though it is steep it is worth the climb.  As opposed to camel, you can take a Mercedes Benz stretch limo for about 30 shekels.  By the way, like the camel handlers in the Sinai, the taxi drivers are also Bedouin tribesmen.  When you get to the top you see the variety of greenery – Mount Tabor receives that rare commodity – “rain”.  Just as God spoke one set of words on the top of Mount Sinai, so he also spoke another set of words on the top of Mount Tabor.

If Sinai is the mountain of the Law, then let us think of Tabor – the mount of Transfiguration - as the mountain of grace.  Law can only restrain us – but grace transfigures us.  We are invited in the Transfiguration into a new vision of God in the person of Jesus Christ.  Perhaps you are still living on Mount Sinai – thinking that faith is only about following the laws – seeing God merely as the one who rewards or punishes.  Or you are thinking that keeping yourself “good” in God’s eyes is impossible. 

And maybe like Peter our first reaction to being invited into a new vision of God in Jesus is to turn our attention elsewhere. Then Peter said to Jesus, "Lord, it is good for us to be here; if you wish, I will make three dwellings here, one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah."  Peter represents here an all too common experience in the 'church'.  When God is doing something spiritual, we turn our attention elsewhere.  In this case it seems that Peter thinks what is required is a building project, as if walls and wood could contain God.

It doesn't of course have to be a building project, but when God in Jesus makes his presence known, that is what we should pay attention to.  If God is at work, don't get bogged down in other things.  We can be like Peter when we spend our time and energy only on the "externals" - the mere trappings of church - and then we can miss out on the presence of Jesus in our midst.  Or we get so caught up in the institution of 'church' that we can't see the Kingdom of God.

While he was still speaking, suddenly a bright cloud overshadowed them, and from the cloud a voice said, "This is my Son, the Beloved; with him I am well pleased; listen to him!"

When the disciples heard this, they fell to the ground and were overcome by fear.  But Jesus came and touched them, saying, "Get up and do not be afraid."

The voice is like that which was heard at Jesus’ baptism.  Only this time there is an addition:  “Listen to Him.”  But when the disciples hear this voice, they are afraid. And so are we.  Because this also promises us something wonderful and terrifying at the same time.  God calls us to be, well, not exactly transfigured, but rather transformed.  He calls us to be his beloved, and he calls us to "share" in the transfiguration of Jesus.  And that means change. God invites us to take a look at ourselves and see where we need to change: a habit, an action, an attitude.  We are often afraid of change – but the change which God has in mind is to make us more fully into the beloved children he has called us to be.  He calls us to be “Christ-like”.  As we learn to see Jesus, we begin to see who God calls us to be.

sermon notes for Pentecost 10, Matthew 13:24-30, 36-43

rough notes:

July 20 2008 Sermon Notes:

Matthew 13:24-30, 36-43
He put before them another parable: "The kingdom of heaven may be compared to someone who sowed good seed in his field; but while everybody was asleep, an enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and then went away. So when the plants came up and bore grain, then the weeds appeared as well.  And the slaves of the householder came and said to him, 'Master, did you not sow good seed in your field? Where, then, did these weeds come from?'  He answered, 'An enemy has done this.' The slaves said to him, 'Then do you want us to go and gather them?'  But he replied, 'No; for in gathering the weeds you would uproot the wheat along with them.  Let both of them grow together until the harvest; and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, Collect the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn.'"

Then he left the crowds and went into the house. And his disciples approached him, saying, "Explain to us the parable of the weeds of the field."  He answered, "The one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man;  the field is the world, and the good seed are the children of the kingdom; the weeds are the children of the evil one,  and the enemy who sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are angels.  Just as the weeds are collected and burned up with fire, so will it be at the end of the age.  The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will collect out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and they will throw them into the furnace of fire, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.  Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Let anyone with ears listen!

This week Jesus wraps ups his parables about the seeds, the sowers and the harvest.  In this passage we hear Jesus talk about some rather difficult things.  We have a  farmer who sowed good seed only to have an enemy come and sow bad seeds in among the crop.

Then we have the problem of what to do with the weeds – should they be ripped up or allowed to grow?  And then we have the separation of the harvest:  there is the separation of the wheat from the weeds, of the good harvest from the bad.  And then the imagery Jesus uses is one of stark contrast: 

The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will collect out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, 42 and they will throw them into the furnace of fire, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Let anyone with ears listen!

How do we begin to understand what Jesus is getting at?  At the root of this parable is the fact that God takes seriously the difference between good and evil, and therefore, so should we.  This is what the parable is getting at.  Jesus makes known in this parable something that we already know:  that both good actions and bad actions have consequences.

Let’s look at the first part of the parable:  The farmer sows good seed in his field.  God’s intentions for us are good.  But then, Jesus says, an enemy came and sowed bad seed in the field.  And then the good and the bad grow up together.  Now we can take this parable on two levels.   The first level is that there has always been, and will continue to be, a mix of both people who prefer good, and people who prefer evil.  If you doubt that this is true, just spend some time reading newspapers, or history.  Our world has its “Mother Teresa’s” and it has its “Robert Mugabe’s”.  Those are perhaps most obvious kinds of examples.  But the same is true of every kind of community:  there is conflict between good and evil, with people and organizations choosing one or another.

And that brings us to another point which needs to be remembered when we hear the parables:  Jesus consistently tells his followers that good and evil are not somehow forced upon us, rather we make choices one way or another.  The separation of the weeds from the rest of the crop is not an arbitrary decision on the part of the farmer.  Rather, God tells us that we can choose to be with Him, or we can choose not to be with Him.  That is the consistent message of the stories of Scripture and of Jesus in the Gospels:  God never decides to leave us, but we are free to leave God, and if we choose to leave Him, He will not force us to stay.  But if we do choose God, as Jesus said  “Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Let anyone with ears listen!” 

An often overlooked part of this parable is that the farmer allows the weeds and the crop to grow up together, and does not instruct his servants to immediately go out and pull out the weeds.  The farmer is not too hasty to dish out judgment, and so neither should we.  Sometimes Christians can be a bit to focused on “rooting out evil persons”, where God would rather have us show patience and mercy. 

On another level, the weeds and the good crop is a parable of our own hearts.  We can see in our own lives both good actions and bad actions;  both wise choices and unwise choices; both weeds and wheat.  So how do the words of Jesus, this parable of the difference between good and evil, play out in our own lives?  Jesus gives us an invitation to examine our own hearts.  We all have times when we have chosen to follow God, to make a choice for good, and we have, in the long run, seen the good consequences – either in our own lives in the lives of those we have helped.   And we can all look back to times when we have made unwise choices, when we have chosen the thing which is not good.  Are we willing to allow him to uproot in us that which is not of God?

sermon notes for Pentecost 9, Matthew 13:1-9, 18-23

rough notes:

Matthew 13:1-9, 18-23

That same day Jesus went out of the house and sat beside the sea.  Such great crowds gathered around him that he got into a boat and sat there, while the whole crowd stood on the beach.  And he told them many things in parables, saying: "Listen! A sower went out to sow.   And as he sowed, some seeds fell on the path, and the birds came and ate them up.  Other seeds fell on rocky ground, where they did not have much soil, and they sprang up quickly, since they had no depth of soil.   But when the sun rose, they were scorched; and since they had no root, they withered away.  Other seeds fell among thorns, and the thorns grew up and choked them. Other seeds fell on good soil and brought forth grain, some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty.  Let anyone with ears listen!"

Hear then the parable of the sower.  When anyone hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what is sown in the heart; this is what was sown on the path.  As for what was sown on rocky ground, this is the one who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy;  yet such a person has no root, but endures only for a while, and when trouble or persecution arises on account of the word, that person immediately falls away.  As for what was sown among thorns, this is the one who hears the word, but the cares of the world and the lure of wealth choke the word, and it yields nothing.  But as for what was sown on good soil, this is the one who hears the word and understands it, who indeed bears fruit and yields, in one case a hundredfold, in another sixty, and in another thirty.

The parable of the sower and the seeds is one of Jesus’ best known images.  And I suspect at least one of the reasons it is so well known is that Jesus does us the favour of giving us an interpretation of it himself.  With many of his parables he simpy leaves us wondering what exactly he might have meant, but with this one he calls his disciples together and gives them a private tutorial in at least one meaning.  I say “at least one meaning” because parables are often designed to make us think a bit more – sometimes we get a new insight out of an old parable after we have spent some time meditating on the imagery.  But at least in this case, Jesus himself gives us a place to start.

First we can start with the sower.  Now this sower is fairly generous, some might even say foolish.  He casts his seeds everywhere.  Not just on ground where there is a likelihood of success, but on ground that others might say is just not suitable.  God does not give up on anyone.  And neither should we.  God offers his good news to everyone – regardless of what we think the outcome might be.

Jesus turns our attention however, away from the sower, and away from the seed, to the kinds of soil on which the seed lands.  And Jesus gives his disciples an interpretation of the 4 kinds of soil.  Let me give you a hint as to why I am saying “an interpretation” rather than “the interpretation”.  Parables are stories which Jesus uses to prod us a bit, and they are the kinds of stories and sayings which give us a bit more insight, the more time we spend with them. 

Jesus first gives us a way of seeing what the parable is about:  it is about the ways in which we receive, or do not receive, the good news of the kingdom.  He lays out for us 4 different scenarios:

First there is the seed that falls on the path.  We might, Jesus says, fail to understand what the Gospel is, and therefore it is snatched away from us by the evil one.  What is Jesus saying?  He is simply saying this:  we might mistake other things, even religious things, for the gospel itself.  We may never have really heard what the good news of the kingdom is all about, or why it is even supposed to be “good news”.  Many religious people in Jesus’ day did not understand his Gospel.  And so there are those who do understand what Jesus is about, and so the seed does not grow.

Second, we have the seed falling on rocky ground.  When this happens, Jesus tells us, there is some initial growth and maybe the seed will take and grow, but unfortunately it does not last all that long.  What happens?  Well, Jesus says, as soon as this person realizes that it is not always easy to be a Christian, well, then the enthusiasm wavers, and the seed will die again.  Jesus tells us that the roots were not very deep, and so when anything difficult came along, the plant simply withered.  What is this about?  It is about the depth of our faith.  Shallow faith will not endure.  It might last while conditions are perfect, but when conditions are not perfect, a shallow faith will not stand up.  So Jesus is encouraging us to grow some depth to our roots, some depth to our faith, some depth to our discipleship.

Third, we have the example of the seed which, we are told, seems to take root, and perhaps even looks like it is growing well, but in the end there is too much competition from the weeds, and it gets “choked” out.  What Jesus says about this situation is that it “doesn’t yield anything”.  That is, there may be a plant, but it is producing nothing.  Kind of like having a fruit tree which has nice green leaves, but produces no fruit.  There is life, and some growth, but it does not come to maturity – it does not bear fruit.

The last image is of the seed that completes its intended life-cyle.  It comes to maturity and then itself produces fruit.  It is, I think, worth considering that this section of Matthew is concerned with maturing in discipleship;  I see a bit of this theme in the chapters that follow the mission discourse in Matthew.  Jesus has told his followers about the beginning of discipleship, and now he wants to give them a fuller picture of mature discipleship.

There is another thought we can be entertained in this parable.  In addition to looking at the 4 kinds of ground as 4 “types” of persons (sounds like a Myers Briggs personality test!) there is a sense in which each of us might, at different times and at different stages, be identified with one or another of the situations Jesus describes in the parable.  We may not understand, or we way wither under cares and concerns, or we may have our love for Jesus in competition with other things, or we may find, through no apparent merit of our own, that we somehow have come to a fruituful season in our lives.

sermon notes Pentecost 7: Matthew 10: 40-42

Matthew 10:40-42

10:40 "Whoever welcomes you welcomes me, and whoever welcomes me welcomes the one who sent me.

10:41 Whoever welcomes a prophet in the name of a prophet will receive a prophet's reward; and whoever welcomes a righteous person in the name of a righteous person will receive the reward of the righteous;

10:42 and whoever gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones in the name of a disciple -- truly I tell you, none of these will lose their reward."

I want to try to convince you, gentle reader, that this is not a descending order.  It is an ascending order.  Let me put it this way.  I find it more likely that one might recognize and welcome a prophet or a righteous man, than go out of one's busy way to do such an insignificant task as offering water "to one of these little ones."  But I have a sneaking suspicion that in the upside down structure of the Kingdom, we have more difficulty realizing that such small acts actually have eternal significance.

A prophet, a righteous person, and a little one - sounds like the beginning of a joke.  I have sometimes wondered about this passage from Matthew's Gospel.  Is this a descending order?  Do these actions and people start at the top, as it were, and then work their way down?   Or are they on equal footing?   Or is this an inversion; building up to the point where you can see the glory in giving a cup of cold water to one the little ones as actually the highest point?

I think one of the inversions of the Kingdom of God is that the greatest glory is found in unexpected places.  You can perhaps easily recognize a prophet or a righteous person as someone whom God 'favours' (don't take that the wrong way).   But when do we stop to see the eternal value in offering the cup of water to the "little ones"?   We naturally seek the "great and the glorious" - because there is something in us that pulls us toward glory. I recall the buzz for tickets when Desmond Tutu came to speak at the U of A Human Rights Lectureship.  The same committee had a member who expressed "absolutely no interest"  in having Jean Vanier come and talk about, well, the little ones.  Our perception has been skewed, and mistake importance for glory.  But enough on that theme for now.

This section comes as part of the missional discourse in Matthew's gospel.  There are themes of "welcoming" and "sending".  Jesus has just finished talking about the sending part in last week's reading.  You know - some will like you and some will really, really, not like you.  So we have heard about sending, and we have heard about the negative welcomes, and now we are going to hear about the "positive welcomings".

It is a rather staggering claim that Jesus is making in v 40.  The welcome of a disciple in mission is a welcoming of Christ, which is a welcoming of the Father.  It is marvellous that Jesus puts us in the same position as himself so many times: as He has been sent, so He sends us.

Well, it's time to move on to other tasks; we'll pick it up again in a day or two.

The latte has now been ordered, so a few more thoughts will be posted in a while. For those who find such things helpful, some takes on the patron/client relationship of representation to which Jesus could be alluding.  This is nothing particular to the ancient culture in which Jesus is speaking - it is a widespread political norm.  As St Paul says,  "We are therefore Christ's ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us".[2 Cor 5:20]  To welcome the representative is to welcome the one represented.  And as the last part of the missionary discourse in Matthew, we are finally reminded that we are sent as representatives of Christ, and Christ of God.

That word "welcome" comes up so many times that it would also seem an obvious choice for the focus of a sermon.  I suspect their are two basic approaches:  welcoming others and welcoming Christ.  Various leanings in the church might tend to emphasize one over the other;  I think that the two are necessarily connected, like the two great commandments.  We love God and we love our neighbour.  We welcome Christ and we welcome even the "little ones" in his name.  A few of us were chatting earlier today about this passage, and we got around to that old topic of how welcoming we are as a church.  The passage speaks to the whole ministry of hospitality which Christians need to practice.  It also predicates this ministry upon our own "welcome" to Christ:  how do we invite Him into our lives?

One other thing which keeps coming back to my mind is the notion that the giving of the cup of cold water - the "small act" - is the stuff of which a holy life is made.  Growth in discipleship and holiness is not to be found in a few occasional spurts of encounters with prophets, but in the thousands of small acts and decisions which make up the bulk of our lives. These are the daily acts of "giving the cup of cold water" which , practiced over the course of a lifetime, make up Christian character.

sermon notes Pentecost 5, Matthew 9:35-10:8, (9-23)

I'll be updating through the day, as time and caffeine allow...

For those who see the assigned texts each week, it is interesting to note the parentheses.  Now without looking for trouble, it is worth just thinking for a moment about what part of the reading is "optional":  the part in which Jesus speaks about the difficulties and persecutions of those who are involved in the mission described in the first part of the reading, and of the judgment against those communities which decide against receiving the "kingdom" which "has come near".  It is certainly understandable why some would not want such sayings included in the reading.  They are difficult to stomach for many.  Yet it is worth thinking about:  are such things truly optional?  Can we conveniently place parentheses around such things, as if they either are relegated to the past (perhaps they are specifically contextual to the setting) or that such difficulties should no longer be expected on this side of the Resurrection?  There are a whole host of questions and thoughts simply around the themes of judgment against "that town" which rejects the mission of the kingdom, and the persecution of those who proclaim the kingdom.

If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake off the dust from your feet as you leave that house or town. Truly I tell you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.

‘See, I am sending you out like sheep into the midst of wolves; so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves. Beware of them, for they will hand you over to councils and flog you in their synagogues; and you will be dragged before governors and kings because of me, as a testimony to them and the Gentiles. When they hand you over, do not worry about how you are to speak or what you are to say; for what you are to say will be given to you at that time; for it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you. Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child, and children will rise against parents and have them put to death; and you will be hated by all because of my name. But the one who endures to the end will be saved. When they persecute you in one town, flee to the next; for truly I tell you, you will not have gone through all the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes.

But back to the beginning of this week's reading. 

Then Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, and proclaiming the good news of the kingdom, and curing every disease and every sickness. When he saw the crowds, he had compassion for them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd. Then he said to his disciples, ‘The harvest is plentiful, but the labourers are few; therefore ask the Lord of the harvest to send out labourers into his harvest.’

Then Jesus went about... - What's with the "then"?  What has just happened before this reading?  Well, he has just called Matthew, done a few healings, and had spent some time in his own home town.  So now he goes to "all the cities and villages".  Even though Jesus will instruct his followers to go first to the towns of the Jews, there is a sense here that the mission of Jesus is expanding outward:  from his own town to all the cities and villages.  And remember as well that at the end of Matthew we have the greater expansion, from Jerusalem outward to all the nations.  There are a few things worth noting:  the good news is the kingdom;  it is accompanied by signs (the cures and healings which we have already seen in Matthew).  Jesus' compassion on the crowds is understood in the context of the lack of good shepherds to guide them.  In fact, Matthew tells us that they were "harassed and helpless".  The one terms makes us think in the active sense, the other in the passive.  Who is harassing these sheep?  Is it the false shepherds?  Or is it that they are in this state because there is a lack of shepherds, hence the call to ask for more labourers?  Bit of a mixed metaphor, but we get the picture.  For those who see that last verse as primarily a "call to action" (which it undoubtedly is), I would suggest that the primary action is that of "asking".  That is, our first action, prior to mission, is prayer.

Then Jesus summoned his twelve disciples and gave them authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to cure every disease and every sickness. These are the names of the twelve apostles: first, Simon, also known as Peter, and his brother Andrew; James son of Zebedee, and his brother John; Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax-collector; James son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus; Simon the Cananaean, and Judas Iscariot, the one who betrayed him.

Here we have a great pool of saints' names for various Anglican churches, although "Judas Iscariot" has gone out of style for some reason...  Oh yes, "the one who betrayed him", which Matthew adds just to make sure we know.  But perhaps he adds that line in anticipation of the  verses which end the reading:  betrayal, persecution, "brother handing over brother".  I think it is a rather subtle rendering on Matthew's part.  Why should we be surprised about the persecutions and betrayals in 10: 9 ff?  We have already been reminded that even one of the 12 is capable of betrayal.  Shows Matt's cohesion, thought and style as a writer.  On a more positive note, we see that Jesus gives authority to his 12 disciples (including, at this point, we must include Judas).  The disciples are equipped for the mission which Jesus gives.

These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: ‘Go nowhere among the Gentiles, and enter no town of the Samaritans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. As you go, proclaim the good news, “The kingdom of heaven has come near.”

sermon notes Matthew 7: 21-29; Pentecost 3

Matthew 7:21-29

[21] "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven. [22] On that day many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many deeds of power in your name?'  [23] Then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; go away from me, you evildoers.'

[24] "Everyone then who hears these words of mine and acts on them will be like a wise man who built his house on rock.  [25] The rain fell, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on rock.  [26] And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not act on them will be like a foolish man who built his house on sand.  [27] The rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell--and great was its fall!"

[28] Now when Jesus had finished saying these things, the crowds were astounded at his teaching, [29] for he taught them as one having authority, and not as their scribes.

For obscurity or detail sake, you could have a look at "Broken Parallelism in Matthew’s Parable of the Two Builders" (Direction, 2004).  Most English translations render an exact parallelism, instead of rendering the difference between verbs in v 25 and 27.

Sort of starting in the middle, I am struck by the imagery of the rain and the flood coming.  I think that what Jesus is getting at in train and flood imagery is the flash flood which can hit in the late winter rainy season.  Here's a brief bit of news on a recent flash flood near the Dead Sea:

The body of a Jewish American cantor who drowned in a flash flood near the Dead Sea on Monday was set to be flown back to the U.S. on Tuesday for burial, police said.

The man, David Tauber, was killed near the Dead Sea on Monday when floodwaters raced down the riverbed where he was hiking with his wife, according to police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld. His wife, Heather Tauber, survived and was treated by medics on the scene...

"[The downpour] was a minor event until it suddenly turned tragic," Merav Ayalon, a spokesperson for Kibbutz Ein Gedi said.

News story here.

That last quote is telling.  There is a suddenness to the floods with which Jesus' audience would have been familiar.  Not like our idea of flood - we have a few days forecast, we watch rivers rise, we can predict the rate at which things will happen.  Anyway, just a little food for thought before I get my caffeine fix and work on the rest of the reading.

 

sermon notes Pentecost 2; Matthew 6: 24-34

What with the early Easter and Pentecost and all that, we are going with: Isaiah 49:8-16a;  Psalm 131;  1 Corinthians 4:1-5;  Matthew 6:24-34.  Things will be filled in over the next couple of days...  For now I have to call someone about a small leak in one of the rads in the sanctuary.

Matthew 6:24-34
[24] "No one can serve two masters; for a slave will either hate the one and love the other, or be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and wealth.  [25] Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink, or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing?

Remember that just a few few verses before this, Jesus has told his hearers that there heart and their treasure seem to share the same geography - where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.  So on one level he is following up on this.

While there is a tendency to think primarily in terms of trusting (trusting God vs trusting wealth), Jesus begins by talking about serving.  The language used to set the scene is one of servitude or slavery.  Trust involves choice, but slavery involves no choice - it is forced upon you.  What we are faced with is not a decision as to whether or not we will serve a master, but only what kind of master we will serve.  And Jesus wants to prod the fence sitters:  "a slave will either hate the one and love the other, or be devoted to the one and despise the other."  There does not seem to be much middle ground there.  Can God and wealth be so opposed?  Well, perhaps not, but serving God and serving wealth certainly are.

do not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink

Someone I read pointed out that we can trust Jesus to take away our sins and give us eternal life, but we have trouble trusting him for the next sandwich.  Says a lot, doesn't it?

Jesus gives us a roundabout question:  of course we are supposed to agree with him that "life is more than food, and the body more than clothing".  But we are then faced with the question:  what is the "more"?  What the "more" is will be told in verse 33.  But for now we are told what we are to avoid:  worrying about life in terms of food, drink and clothing.  In a society whose financial (at least retirement) industry is built on the foundation of worry, this is either a frightening or a freeing message.  Makes me think of the collect for morning prayer (BCP): "whose service is perfect freedom". 

[26] Look at the birds of the air; they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they?  [27] And can any of you by worrying add a single hour to your span of life? [28] And why do you worry about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they neither toil nor spin, [29] yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not clothed like one of these.  [30] But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which is alive today and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will he not much more clothe you--you of little faith?

Jesus turns our attention not to the negative characteristics of "wealth", but to the positive characteristics of God.  It is interesting how his persuasion proceeds.  He does not preach here against the evils of wealth or possessions.  Instead, Jesus asks us to consider the character of God, our "heavenly Father."  This is the true starting point, and a good lesson in apologetics:  begin with the goodness of God, rather than with the fault of that which you are trying to condemn. 

Secondly, we are invited to consider ourselves in terms of realizing that we are worth something to God - are you not of more value than they? We might tend to slip over this verse, perhaps out of a fear of  - oh I don't know -  thinking too highly of ourselves or something like that.  Fair enough;  there is more than enough back-patting in Christian circles;  why do we need an affirmation or mini-course in self esteem at this point?  I'm not really sure, but for some reason Jesus asks us to consider, really consider, that we have value in God's eyes.  I wonder if this is more connected with the preceding thought:  our value in God's eyes is due to the goodness of His character, rather than of ours.

[31] Therefore do not worry, saying, 'What will we eat?' or 'What will we drink?' or 'What will we wear?'  [32] For it is the Gentiles who strive for all these things; and indeed your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things.  [33] But strive first for the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.  [34] So do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will bring worries of its own. Today's trouble is enough for today."

There is a good deal of food for thought when this gospel passage is heard alongside Isaiah:

They shall feed along the ways, on all the bare heights shall be their pasture;  they shall not hunger or thirst, neither scorching wind nor sun shall strike them down, for he who has pity on them will lead them, and by springs of water will guide them...But Zion said, "The LORD has forsaken me, my Lord has forgotten me." Can a woman forget her nursing child, or show no compassion for the child of her womb? Even these may forget, yet I will not forget you.  See, I have inscribed you on the palms of my hands.

The question about what we shall eat and drink takes can take on a new meaning when heard in the context of communion.  With what do we feed our souls?  There is a marvellous answer to that question for those who hold to a higher view of the sacramental grace offered to us in the Eucharist.

Will continue tomorrow...

Tent dwelling; near Bergama, central west Turkey (May 2008)

sermon notes Easter 4: John 10: 1-10

[in progress - I'll update it over the course of the next two coffees - was looking for some specific pics I took over the last several years which give us a good illustration of this saying:  basically you have a rock wall enclosure, and the shepherd lays down in the opening as the "gate" - vivid image]

All the other readings this Sunday also deal with the theme of shepherding.  The reading from 1 Peter and Ps 23 are both obvious, but the reading from Acts 2: 42-47 also deals with shepherding. It might not be obvious what the connection is between the Acts reading and the reading from John's Gospel, but I believe there is one.  In this part of John's Gospel, Jesus does not refer to himself as a shepherd;  rather he is the the gate and/or the gatekeeper.  In this way he is the one by whom true 'shepherd' (as opposed to bandits and thieves) come in and take care of the sheep.  So Jesus points also to the other 'shepherds' of the flocks - those whom God has called to serve that ministry for the flock.  They are not to 'climb over the wall'.  That is, they need to go through the gate/keeper, who is Jesus, in order to have an authentic ministry among the sheep.  It is here that the reading from Acts comes in.  It gives us a model of what authentic ministry of the shepherds of the flock looked like.  Acts gives us a snapshot of early ministry among the 'sheep' of those shepherds who have come in by way of Jesus.

In the sermons I've preached and heard about passages which deal with the whole shepherd/sheep thing, I have found what I think are two errors of approach.  The first is the tendency to make the passages more about the character of the sheep than about the character of the shepherd. No doubt there is room for looking at both, but I think we need to look more at the character of the shepherd first, and then look at the character of the sheep.  Why start with ourselves, why not start by asking what it is that a shepherd of the people is supposed to do?  Shepherd was a term used of both religious and politic al leaders in the ancient world.  We all see that the image has a long history in the Old Testament.  The leaders of Israel were referred to as shepherds.  We have of course the familiar story of David, the shepherd who was to become King;  we have the story of Moses, who was tending the flocks when he received his calling.

Which brings me to the second thing:  what do we think about being called sheep?  I got into a conversation a few days ago at a local café about the question – what do you think Jesus means when he refers to his people as sheep?  That is, why are we considered sheep?  There was the usual “dumb animals” bit, you know, how we are simply in need of shepherds and how we tend to wander.  This line of interpretation, while it has some value, also has its deficiencies.  There are two better places to start.  First is that it is not so much about the character of the sheep, as the character of the shepherd.   

Throughout the scriptures we can tend to forget that sheep were valuable animals.  A man’s wealth was indicated by the number of flocks he had.  Sheep, from the point of view of the shepherd, are valuable.  That is why we hear parables in which Jesus tells us that the good shepherd lays down his life for his sheep, that he will leave the 99 who are safe and go after the one who is lost.  If you are a sheep, you are worth something, you are valued, you are sought after.

10:1 Very truly, I tell you, anyone who does not enter the sheepfold by the gate but climbs in by another way is a thief and a bandit. 2 The one who enters by the gate is the shepherd of the sheep. 3 The gatekeeper opens the gate for him, and the sheep hear his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out.

Somewhere I have some pics of this rural village scene.  It's on my other computer.  I'll post it if I find time tomorrow.  Gives you a good physical image.  The old stone-walled sheep pen, shepherds (all rather young, by the way)...

While Jesus is referred to as the good shepherd later in this section of John, in this reading he is the gate or the gatekeeper, and it appears that he is able to subcontract shepherding out to others.  Well, okay, he calls others to act as shepherds.  So this passage speaks of Jesus as the way by which those called come to be among the flock.  It is an image of the shared ministry which God has given to Jesus and to his Body, the Church.  There will be those who are more than happy to fill in specific names for thieves and bandits, but let's leave that alone for now.

It is interesting to note that the way the "figure of speech" is told in one order here at the start, and then told in reverse order in the explanation (vv 7ff).  Here Jesus begins with the negative:  there is a history of bandits and thieves who were supposed to shepherd Israel, but didn't.  The image here is one of access to the sheep.  How does one get in among the sheep?  The way to get in is through Jesus.  On one level this addresses issues of leadership.   If someone in the sheepfold did not get in by the gate (who is Jesus), then that person is up to no good.

Question:  "The gatekeeper opens the gate for him, and the sheep hear his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out."  To whom is the pronoun referring?  [A] The gatekeeper opens the gate for the shepherd. The sheep hear the voice of the shepherd, and follow it.  [B] The gatekeeper opens the gate for the shepherd.  The sheep hear the voice of the gatekeeper, and follow it.  Only when we get to the verses following this reading (11 ff) do we definitely identify Jesus as the shepherd.

4 When he has brought out all his own, he goes ahead of them, and the sheep follow him because they know his voice. 5 They will not follow a stranger, but they will run from him because they do not know the voice of strangers."

6 Jesus used this figure of speech with them, but they did not understand what he was saying to them.   7 So again Jesus said to them, "Very truly, I tell you, I am the gate for the sheep.  8 All who came before me are thieves and bandits; but the sheep did not listen to them. 9 I am the gate. Whoever enters by me will be saved, and will come in and go out and find pasture. 10 The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly."

One of the key words in John's Gospel is "life". Just google it and you will see what a dominant theme this is for Jesus in John's Gospel.  I have a sense that only those who have come to encounter the risen Christ will begin to grasp what this abundant life is.  Not "what it means", but what it is. There is a difference.  And perhaps for some who come to our churches, sing a few songs, echo a few prayers and go away asking themselves "Is this all there is?", we need to point them to this.

What is it to have abundant life?  Those who have never read Walter Bruggeman's work on the liturgy of abundance and the myth of scarcity might find it an interesting read. 

The language Jesus uses is imagery of overflowing, of excess.  We spend our lives crying out “not enough”, while Jesus offers us abundant life. We spend our time – of which there is never enough, making money – of which there is never enough, so that we can live in our house (which is never big enough) and drive our car (which is never new enough) and spend our free time (of which there is never enough) relaxing, only to repeat the cycle, sometimes in the company of a spouse (who is never-fill in the blank- ___ enough, children (who are never well behaved enough), and the constant cry is never enough.  We are asked to give to the Church – but we live in such an attitude of “never enough” that we are afraid to take even the simplest risk of faith.

One of the temptations here is to impose our own notion of 'abundance' on the words of Jesus.  One form can be the prosperity Gospel (God loves you and wants you to be rich), but I don't think that is what Jesus had in mind.

sermon notes: Easter 3: Luke 24:13-35

The "road to Emmaus" story from Luke's Gospel is a favorite for many people.  There are so many things in it which resonate with us.  There is the theme of walking together, of Christ "coming alongside" us unawares, there is the mysterious "burning in our hearts" as Jesus explains the Scriptures, the theme of not/recognizing Jesus, knowing Him in the breaking of the bread, we have two disciples walking away from Jerusalem only to return to Jerusalem.  It's a start, at which I will pick away over the next day or two.

13 Now on that same day two of them were going to a village called Emmaus, about seven miles from Jerusalem, 14 and talking with each other about all these things that had happened.  15 While they were talking and discussing, Jesus himself came near and went with them, 16 but their eyes were kept from recognizing him.

The opening of the story shows two disciples walking away from Jerusalem.  It is a great image with which to begin.  After all the events of the past several days (let alone years), we have these two walking away, perhaps more than a bit disillusioned about the whole Jesus project.

One of the most puzzling, but most consistent features of the resurrection appearances of Jesus is the fact that so many of his followers did not recognize him when he first appeared.  On Easter Sunday we heard the story of Mary, who mistook him for the gardener, and now today we have two disciples who also fail to recognize him at first.

They are walking along and discussing the recent events in Jerusalem.  And in the midst of their walking, Jesus himself just sidles in and joins the group.  That in itself is an interesting feature:  Jesus comes along, without making a particular announcement about his arrival.  And like so many others, “their eyes were kept from recognizing him.”  Now before you jump to any conclusions, perhaps we need to ask why their eyes were kept from recognizing him. 

Some have supposed that Jesus – God – had done something to prevent them from recognizing him, as if their “tunnel vision” was something imposed on them from the outside.  But a closer look at the story reveals that it was they themselves who kept their eyes from recognizing Jesus.

17 And he said to them, "What are you discussing with each other while you walk along?" They stood still, looking sad.  18 Then one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answered him, "Are you the only stranger in Jerusalem who does not know the things that have taken place there in these days?" 19 He asked them, "What things?" They replied, "The things about Jesus of Nazareth, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people, 20 and how our chief priests and leaders handed him over to be condemned to death and crucified him.

Jesus' question to them has an arresting quality - it stops them in their tracks.  Imagination can fill in the blanks here with several possibilities.  "They stood still, looking sad."  Perhaps they are absorbed in their grief and disappointment or confusion over what they thought would turn out differently.  It is interesting to compare their description of Jesus with the declaration of Thomas from last week.  Do they have a limited understanding of (or faith in) who Jesus is?

21 But we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel. Yes, and besides all this, it is now the third day since these things took place.  22 Moreover, some women of our group astounded us. They were at the tomb early this morning,  23 and when they did not find his body there, they came back and told us that they had indeed seen a vision of angels who said that he was alive.  24 Some of those who were with us went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said; but they did not see him."

"But we had hoped..."  And here I think we can all fill in the blank with our own personal disappointment or disillusionment.  We had hoped God would do this or that, we had hoped that Jesus would do this or that.  It is such a common experience - we had hoped for this or that, but we are disappointed in our hope.  The two disciples had heard the testimony of the women (but it seems that testimony was dismissed).  It is really quite ironic - the two disciples telling Jesus about some key events in His life, and then telling Him about their own expectations of what they hoped the Messiah would be.  And of course, He is the One who redeems Israel, but not in the way they think He does.  This misunderstanding of the kind of "Messiah" Jesus is sets up Jesus' response to them:

25 Then he said to them, "Oh, how foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have declared!  26 Was it not necessary that the Messiah should suffer these things and then enter into his glory?" 27 Then beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them the things about himself in all the scriptures.

Now it is Jesus' turn to talk about Himself.  The disciples' explanation is inadequate, and we have Jesus explaining His own life and ministry.  Jesus' words here probably strike us as a bit of a dressing down for these two grieving disciples.  Not a terribly "pastoral" way of engaging these two!  While we don't have specific footnotes on Jesus' exegetical interpretation of the Old Testament, we have an image of Jesus telling us that the Hebrew Scriptures tell us about the Messiah.  Specifically, Jesus gives us the images of "suffering" and then "entering into glory".  When Jesus "begins with Moses" we can take that to mean the whole of the Torah - the 5 books of Moses at the beginning of our Bible.

As a connecting note, we might want to jump ahead to where Jesus is "known in the breaking of the bread", but we also come to learn that their hearts were "burning" while Jesus opened the Scriptures to them.  Word and Sacrament go together. 

28 As they came near the village to which they were going, he walked ahead as if he were going on. 29 But they urged him strongly, saying, "Stay with us, because it is almost evening and the day is now nearly over." So he went in to stay with them.  30 When he was at the table with them, he took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to them.  31 Then their eyes were opened, and they recognized him; and he vanished from their sight.  32 They said to each other, "Were not our hearts burning within us while he was talking to us on the road, while he was opening the scriptures to us?"

Jesus is quite a character in this story.  First he comes up alongside them unawares, then gives them a lesson with saying that He himself is the object of the lesson, and now it seems he gives the impression that he intends to go on ahead of them.  Maybe he really was going to go on ahead.  Maybe He was giving them an opportunity to show love by offering Him hospitality.  The image here is a reversal of Jesus' call to the disciples to watch with him even one hour only a few nights ago.  A million sermons revolve around the breaking of the bread as a "eucharistic" kind of image - which is not an entirely bad thing in and of itself.  But the disciples' words about their hearts burning while He opened the Scriptures is the necessary prelude to recognizing Him in the breaking of the bread.  Word and Sacrament.

It is also interesting to note that while they invite Jesus to stay with them, it is actually Jesus who performs the duty of the host:  it is Jesus who offers them hospitality by breaking the bread and giving it to them.  Even when the disciples think they have something to offer Jesus, it is really Jesus who is offering something to them.

33 That same hour they got up and returned to Jerusalem; and they found the eleven and their companions gathered together.  34 They were saying, "The Lord has risen indeed, and he has appeared to Simon!"  35 Then they told what had happened on the road, and how he had been made known to them in the breaking of the bread.

And now the physical imagery changes direction.  Instead of heading away from Jerusalem, they are now returning.  (I keep thinking of the Neoplatonic exitus-reditus theme, but somehow I don't think I will work that into a sermon...)  At any rate, the disciples now return with joy and a sense of urgency - "that same hour".  And they join the other witnesses of the Resurrected Christ:  both what had happened "on the road" and at the "breaking of the bread."

sermon notes - Lent 1 Matthew 4: 1-11

[these are year A readings, for year B readings, click here]

At the beginning of the Lenten season we look at the story of Jesus’ temptation in the wilderness.  A story like our own, and yet unlike.  It is like our own in that we are all tempted; it is unlike our own in that we, unlike Jesus, fall short.  In this story from Matthew’s Gospel, we see Jesus being “tempted’ or tested by the devil – the spiritual being who is the representation of all that wishes to oppose God.  Jesus faces three temptations – each one somewhat different, and each one having something in common.

4:1 Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil.  4:2 He fasted forty days and forty nights, and afterwards he was famished.

Before we begin, let’s just set the context a bit:  Jesus has just come from his baptism, where God has declared:  “this is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased”.  The Spirit has descended upon him, and it is said that he was “led up by the Spirit” into this wilderness place.

The First Temptation:

4:3 The tempter came and said to him, "If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread."

What is this temptation about?  Jesus is, quite naturally, probably a fair bit hungry after a time of fasting in the wilderness.  Fasting is a difficult spiritual discipline to practice because we are so accustomed to taking care of our physical needs. To intentionally deny our physical selves is at best, (we tend to think), counter intuitive, and often downright unnatural.   There are really two parts to this temptation:  first is just the temptation for Jesus to break his discipline of fasting – after all, to satisfy our physical selves is the first thing we often think of.  The second part of the temptation is to “command” the stones to instantly become bread – to force it to happen, to take a shortcut from the spiritual discipline of fasting and just give in and eat.  But there are no shortcuts in the spiritual life.

4:4 But he answered, "It is written, 'One does not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.'"  Of course Jesus answers by quoting the Scriptures:  What we have in Matthew’s gospel is only the first part of the quotation from Deuteronomy.  The full quote, as I’m sure you remember (or you can google like I did), goes like this:

“He humbled you by letting you hunger, then by feeding you with manna, with which neither you nor your ancestors were acquainted, in order to make you understand that one does not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of the Lord”

What kind of answer does this give?  There is some stuff to flesh out in the full text of the quote, which I’ll probably pursue later.  But for now, Jesus is reminding us that we have physical needs (which certainly are important) but we also have spiritual needs.  We are body and soul – we are physical and spiritual creatures.  To feed only our bodies, without feeding our spirits, is a temptation.  This season of Lent invites us to consider how we nourish our hearts, how we “live by every word that comes from the mouth of God”.  It invites us also to listen – it is hard to hear the word of God until we still the background noise in our lives.  On what do we live?:  bread alone, or by the word of God?

The Second Temptation

4:5 Then the devil took him to the holy city and placed him on the pinnacle of the temple,
4:6 saying to him, "If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down; for it is written, 'He will command his angels concerning you,' and 'On their hands they will bear you up, so that you will not dash your foot against a stone.'"

Now the story gets a little more complicated.  The devil takes Jesus up to the Temple, and while there are there he decides to throw in some passages of Scripture as well.

If we consider just the setting for this temptation, it should give us pause.  For in the progression of these three temptations, the last is the one about the place of worship.  The Temple was the particular place of ancient worship, the place of the Holy of Holies – and yet at the very pinnacle of the Temple, there is temptation.  I suspect that things have not changed all that much in the last 2000 years.  There is as much temptation in the church as there is on any streetcorner on the Vegas strip – and maybe more.  One can always want to use the things of God for one’s own purposes.  The church is not immune from temptation, and its offspring – sin.  Temptation can take place in the ancient temple and in the sanctuary of the contemporary church.  Temptation to both of the other things:  failure to pay attention to the matters of the heart, and the desire for power – to have things my way.  The church is not immune from all the temptations which beset any other group of individuals who gather together.

But what is the particular form of the temptation here in Matthew’s gospel?  Prove that you are who you say you are, and prove something about this “word that proceeds from the mouth of God”.  After all, it is written that God will do these things for you.

4:7 Jesus said to him, "Again it is written, 'Do not put the Lord your God to the test.'"

The Third Temptation:

4:8 Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor;
4:9 and he said to him, "All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me."

Next we have a temptation to power and authority over others for one’s own purposes, and through wrong means.  Power in and of itself is not the temptation.  The temptation comes in when one asks:  how will this power be gained?  What price am I willing to pay to get that power over others, and all the temporary glory that comes with it?  “All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me.”  The temptation here is told in its largest form – all the kingdoms of the world.  But we can all fall into this temptation in our own little worlds – the desire to use power and authority unjustly over anyone in our sphere.  The temptation to get and use power over others is of course the opposite of what Jesus exemplifies in his life – instead, as we follow the gospel story, we see that Jesus ends up “powerless” according to the kingdoms of this world, and one of his last acts is of servanthood – as he washes the feet of his disciples.  It doesn’t matter how big or small our kingdom is – it might be an empire, it might be an office, it might be a living room – we all are tempted to have unjust power over others.

There is, as well, a second part to this temptation:  do we assume that the devil is telling the truth in this story? and he said to him, "All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me.

Is that true?  Is it really the devil’s to give away?  “The earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof”, says the psalm.   And Jesus reminds Pilate “you would have no authority over me had it not been given you from above”.  So what we have in this temptation is a lie, masquerading as truth.  The world is God’s – God is the one in charge here, not the devil.  It is a lie – a false promise.  And this lie is at the heart of every temptation.  You see, temptation promises to deliver something that it actually has no power to deliver.  Like the first story of temptation in the garden of Eden, when they were told – you will not die, you will be like God.

4:8 Jesus answered him, "It is written, 'Worship the Lord your God, and serve only him.'"  In Jesus’ answer two things are linked together:  worship and service:  whatever or whoever we worship will not be told by our words, but by our actions:  whatever we serve, that is our god.

sermon notes - Transfiguration, Matthew 17:1-9

Updated version for 2011 Year A is found here

(see also Mark 9 transfiguration comparison here)

This week's option for the last Sunday after Epiphany will be the feast of the Transfiguration.  The story occurs in all 3 synoptic Gospels, with some variation of details.  See Luke 9:28 ff and Mark 9.  A coupling can easily be made with the other readings this week.  Exodus 24:12-18 tells us the story of God giving the Commandments (lit 'words') from Sinai.  A comparison of the words from the two mountains can make a good start.  The new word from the mountaintop is that Jesus is the Beloved, and to listen to him is the key to the new commandment.  2 Peter 1:16-21 makes reference to the transfiguration "on the holy mountain" (this is the new Sinai?), and the letter says something of the nature of revelation.

Here's a start, will do more after lunch...

Matthew 17:1-9

1 Six days later, Jesus took with him Peter and James and his brother John and led them up a high mountain, by themselves. 2 And he was transfigured before them, and his face shone like the sun, and his clothes became dazzling white.

We have a setting like that of Sinai - a sort of divine revelation on a mountaintop.  A note on the geography.  Tabor, the traditional site of the Transfiguration, is lush, (Mt. Hermon is a strong possibility, and it is a source for the Jordan...streams of water).  The traditional site of Sinai (or any other site you might want to suggest as plausible) is mountain desert.  I find it an interesting geographic contrast to think about - both Tabor and Hermon are so geographically different from anything in the Sinai, north or south...   What exactly goes on when Jesus is "transfigured"?  It is not merely the same as what we think of as being "changed".  Essentially, who Jesus is on the "inside" is made physically manifest on the "outside".  His physical appearance tells us something about his identity.

Most of us want "change" on the outside;  God wants change on the inside.  Remember that when Moses came down from the mountain, "his face shone".  This is rather like a spiritual sunburn - Moses reflected God's glory.  It was not something which came from within, but something that came from without.  In the person of Jesus, the glory that was hidden within is now made manifest.

3 Suddenly there appeared to them Moses and Elijah, talking with him. 4 Then Peter said to Jesus, "Lord, it is good for us to be here; if you wish, I will make three dwellings here, one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah."

Moses and Elijah - representing the law and the prophets bearing witness to who Jesus is.  Meanwhile, Peter does what too many of us tend to do:  when God is doing something amazing, we focus on building projects.  Now it doesn't of course have to be a building project, but when Jesus makes his presence known, that is what we should pay attention to.  If God is at work, don't get bogged down in the wrong things.  We can be like Peter when we spend our time and energy on the "externals" - the mere trappings of church - and then we can miss out on the presence of Jesus in our midst.

5 While he was still speaking, suddenly a bright cloud overshadowed them, and from the cloud a voice said, "This is my Son, the Beloved; with him I am well pleased; listen to him!"  6 When the disciples heard this, they fell to the ground and were overcome by fear.

7 But Jesus came and touched them, saying, "Get up and do not be afraid." 8 And when they looked up, they saw no one except Jesus himself alone. 9 As they were coming down the mountain, Jesus ordered them, "Tell no one about the vision until after the Son of Man has been raised from the dead."

Church of the Transfiguration/ Mt Tabor/ Israel/ 2007

UPDATE:  lunch is now well finished.  Now where was I?  Oh yes, the Transfiguration.  There is something to be said for learning to see the glory in Christ.  Parallel to this is learning to see the glory in each creature made in the image of God.  To see Jesus for who he really is should have a profound effect.  Likewise, seeing every other human being as a creature made in the image of God should also have a profound effect.

The voice from the cloud is an echo of the voice heard at Jesus' baptism.  It speaks not only of Jesus' identity, but also of his relationship to the Father.  And then there is that little addition:  "Listen to him."  If the Israelites were to listen to Moses and the revelation from the old mountain, how much more are to listen to Jesus, and the revelation from the new mountain. 

The phrase "this is my beloved..." connects the two episodes of baptism and transfiguration in the person of Christ.  And I suppose that we are to see the connection in ourselves:  as we are called in baptism to be beloved of God, so we are also called to be, well, not exactly transfigured yet, but changed.  And there is a pointing forward in the reference to the resurrection to the renewed body, the resurrected life, the fully transfigured life which will be given to us in God's grace.  It is only after death and resurrection that the final transfiguration takes place. 

That whole fear thing throws people for a loop, eh?  The disciples fear simply the sound of the voice; I wonder if they comprehended at the time what the words were actually saying? 

All too often we castigate these expressions of fear on the part of humans as some sort of divine bullying - as if the disciples' fear was God's fault.  It is entirely possible, and I think more likely, that human fear at the manifest presence of God is rather an indication of problems within ourselves, rather than in God.  Jesus touches and reassures:  do not be afraid.

This passage is a fitting end to the Epiphany season - we have followed Jesus from birth, to early childhood, to baptism - all events which gave us insight into who he is.  The Transfiguration gives us a "final" glimpse of who he is.  The season of revelation is complete.

sermon notes: Epiphany 2; John 1:29-42

This is as far as I've gotten on this week's lections.  I've got a wedding on Saturday, so I've devoted most the sermon prep time this week to that event.... so here's the plan (if it works):  leave a comment with an idea or point and then check back and the sermon will have been written by collaborative effort... :^)

29 The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him and declared, "Here is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! 30 This is he of whom I said, 'After me comes a man who ranks ahead of me because he was before me.' 31 I myself did not know him; but I came baptizing with water for this reason, that he might be revealed to Israel."

As we continue along in the epiphany season, we see more of who Jesus is.  After his birth and baptism, we have another testimony as to who Jesus is.  John the Baptist begins with a simple declaration:  Here is the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world.  In our own church we repeat this sentiment every week when we say (or sing) the Agnus Dei.  What does it mean that Jesus is the “Lamb of God”?  One can immediately make associations with the Passover Lamb, and see in this statement of John a connection to the larger narrative of Scripture. The statement by John the Baptist tells us both who Jesus is (lamb), and also what he does (takes away the sins...).  It may be helpful initially to think of these two things as separate, but of course who Jesus is and what he does are intimately linked.   Who he is leads to what he does. 

There is an echo of the intro to John’s Gospel when the Baptist says that “he was before me”.

Last week’s readings spoke to us of “revelation”, and this week the theme continues.  Twice John says “I myself did not know him”, and yet John baptized that Jesus “might be revealed to Israel.”  There is a sense in which we are to understand that, like John the Baptist, we do not “naturally” know who Jesus is.  We all begin like John – not knowing Jesus.  But then comes this idea of Jesus being “revealed”. Hmmm…

32 And John testified, "I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it remained on him. 33 I myself did not know him, but the one who sent me to baptize with water said to me, 'He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain is the one who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.' 34 And I myself have seen and have testified that this is the Son of God."

John the Baptist continues his testimony.  The pairing of water and Spirit is introduced, which will come up again in the conversation with Nicodemus and the woman at the well.  You can find the rest yourself.  There is also that curious notion of the Spirit remaining.  John’s gospel has themes of remaining, staying, abiding.  It seems that this is one way in which Jesus is distinguished from OT prophets.  The Spirit does not come and go in Jesus’ case.  The Spirit remains.  There is also a contrast between the baptism of John and the baptism which Jesus gives.  Everything Jesus touches, he changes:  this is like water into wine.  Jesus transformed the baptism of water into baptism with the Holy Spirit.

35 The next day John again was standing with two of his disciples, 36 and as he watched Jesus walk by, he exclaimed, "Look, here is the Lamb of God!" 37 The two disciples heard him say this, and they followed Jesus.

Quite remarkable that you can just see the lamb of God walking around.  Even more remarkable is that John the Baptist doesn't seem to mind that two of his disciples have started to follow after Jesus. "Don't be afraid to lose people to the Kingdom."

38 When Jesus turned and saw them following, he said to them, "What are you looking for?" They said to him, "Rabbi" (which translated means Teacher), "where are you staying?"  39 He said to them, "Come and see." They came and saw where he was staying, and they remained with him that day. It was about four o'clock in the afternoon.

The basics of evangelism:  invite people to come and see.

40 One of the two who heard John speak and followed him was Andrew, Simon Peter's brother. 41 He first found his brother Simon and said to him, "We have found the Messiah" (which is translated Anointed). 42 He brought Simon to Jesus, who looked at him and said, "You are Simon son of John. You are to be called Cephas" (which is translated Peter).

sermon notes - Baptism of the Lord, Matthew 3: 13-17

[13] Then Jesus came from Galilee to John at the Jordan, to be baptized by him.
[14] John would have prevented him, saying, "I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?"
[15] But Jesus answered him, "Let it be so now; for it is proper for us in this way to fulfill all righteousness." Then he consented.
[16] And when Jesus had been baptized, just as he came up from the water, suddenly the heavens were opened to him and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting on him.
[17] And a voice from heaven said, "This is my Son, the Beloved, with whom I am well pleased."

The first thing that strikes me about this passage is simply this: we do not baptize ourselves.  Even Christ submitted to baptism by John.  This was not only a recognition of John's ministry. In the process, Jesus transformed John's baptism of repentance into something greater.

John echoes a common sentiment:  I need something from God, and yet God comes and asks something of me?  What John says is very true.  He needs the baptism of Christ (which is baptism with the Spirit), and yet Jesus comes to him.  Jesus uses the plural in his response - "it is proper for us in this way to fulfill all righteousness".  What is this all about?  Jesus says neither "it is proper for you", nor does he say "it is proper for me".  Instead he initiates a model for Christian ministry.  God deigns to ask our cooperation in making his grace known and expressed in the world.  We should avoid the two-fold trap of thinking it's all up to us or thinking it's all up to God and that we have nothing to do but sit back and watch. "It is proper for us".

Then we have the visual sign - the Spirit of God descending and alighting on him.  Often, Christians have seen in the baptismal stories signs of the Trinity - Father, Son and Spirit all present.  The presence of the Spirit and the voice are the beginnings of further confirmation of Jesus' identity.  This identity and the signs which confirm it, are also the topic of Peter's message as recorded in Acts 10:

...beginning in Galilee after the baptism that John announced:  how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power; how he went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him.

We are witnesses to all that he did both in Judea and in Jerusalem. They put him to death by hanging him on a tree;  but God raised him on the third day and allowed him to appear, not to all the people but to us who were chosen by God as witnesses, and who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead.

He commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one ordained by God as judge of the living and the dead.  All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name."

It is the fullness of Jesus' identity which makes this feast fitting for the Epiphany season - the manifestation of who Jesus is.

gotta go, will resume later this pm.

speaking of the ridiculous:

The story is told about the baptism of King Aengus by St. Patrick in the middle of the fifth century. Sometime during the rite, St. Patrick leaned on his sharp-pointed staff and inadvertently stabbed the king's foot. After the baptism was over, St. Patrick looked down at all the blood, realized what he had done, and begged the king's forgiveness. Why did you suffer this pain in silence, the Saint wanted to know. The king replied, "I thought it was part of the ritual."

quote via Our Hearts Are Restless

Now where was I?  Put in the context of a liturgical calendar, the baptism of the Lord is part of the manifestation of who Jesus is.  At Christmas we celebrated the Incarnation, and in the reading from Acts we see Peter telling giving us a Cole's notes version of Christ's ministry and work on earth.  You can see the seeds of a "creed" in the words reported by Luke.  We are getting a fuller portrait of who Jesus is.

The primary identity of Jesus is one of "love".  He is the Beloved Son.  One of the themes which I think I will develop is the notion that we, our in our baptisms, are also called into an identity.  The truth of who we are, the full reality of who and what we are can only be realized when we are known as God's beloved, and as we in turn respond to God in love.  We tend to look for identity in a variety of idols, but Christ calls first and foremost, to find our identity in God's love.

sermon notes for Epiphany: Matthew 2: 1-12

The progression of the Christmas season began not only with Advent, but many months before.  With the Annunciation it was the angel Gabriel who spoke directly and clearly to Mary about the child who would come.  And throughout the Gospel stories leading up to the Nativity, angels and direct revelations were prominent – they figured in the stories of Elizabeth and Zechariah as they waited for the birth of John the Baptist.  On Christmas eve, too, we remember that there was a revelation to the shepherds in an unmistakable and sure fashion:  the glory of the Lord shone round them, a heavenly chorus filled the skies, and they were told in certain terms to go to Bethlehem, and they would find the child Jesus.

Then we celebrate Epiphany – the coming of the Magi to adore and worship the newborn King, the revelation of Christ to the Gentiles.  If Christmas is about the shortest route from here to Bethlehem (as the Shepherds discovered), then Epiphany is about a longer, ‘pilgrim’ road to Christ.

Instead of angels and visions, we have the image of the magi following a sign in the skies – in nature – and for a longer period of time.  The magi see the intentions of God in the skies.  This is not new:  Psalm 19 tells us that the heavens themselves declare who God is, and that his handiwork is seen in created nature.  But still with a tinge of the “Christmas miraculous”, it is a peculiar kind of sign – “we observed his star at its rising”.  The magi know that there is something significant happening.  In a way we might in all likelihood hazard a guess that they even believed in the divine.  But the whole story of Epiphany reminds us that a general belief in God is a beginning point, not the end point.

The magi have a general idea of this God and this King of the Jews, but they don’t know how to find him.  The general revelation that God gives us are evident everywhere, and the wise pay attention to God’s hints about Himself that he has placed in the world.  Traveling by starlight is a wonderful thing, it got the magi to the right country.  But God does not want us to come to a country – to a merely general idea of God.  He wants us to find Jesus.

In the Epiphany story there are several characters who have the opportunity to find Jesus, but refuse.  First we have “Herod, and all Jerusalem with him”.  Matthew says that they both had the same reaction – “They were frightened”. They are afraid of something new – a new power that they have no control over.  Herod is frightened because the new king of the Jews is a threat. Herod  is the ruler and there is room on his throne for no other.  The people are afraid because they are afraid of Herod -= anything that upsets him, upsets them.  They know Herod is a bit of a tyrant – and anything that makes him upset is a threat to their peace and well being.  At all costs – don’t get Herod agitated.

I need to avoid the temptation of reacting like Herod:  I am threatened that God wants to somehow be King in my life, ‘rule’ my life.  Who is on the throne of my life?  Is it Jesus, or is it me?  There can be only one ruler, one king.  Is it Jesus, or is it me?  Herod decided that there was no room for Jesus in his world.  I am in charge of my life, and no one else.  Self sufficient, self determined, and in the end, self centered.

The people who make up “all of Jerusalem” in the story are frightened like Herod, but for different reasons.  They are perhaps a step ahead of Herod.  They have not placed themselves on the throne of their lives.  They do not say “I will rule my own life”.  Instead, they have let someone else rule their lives.   But they have picked the wrong person.  They have decided to let Herod rule their lives.  Why does Matthew say “Herod, and all of Jerusalem with him, was frightened”?  Jerusalem is frightened because Herod is frightened.  They have thrown their lot in with Herod their ruler, instead of with God, their true Lord.    Whatever Herod thinks, they think, whatever Herod says, goes.  If Herod is scared, then we better be scared, or at least act like it.

We are like “all Jerusalem” when we are controlled by someone else’s reactions and someone else’s opinions.  The people of Jerusalem were afraid of Herod – he controlled how they felt.  They were really at his whim.  It is a very subtle, but very powerful, form of fear.  “All Jerusalem”  is  like someone who is constantly waiting for someone else’s reactions, someone else’s approval or disapproval, someone else to tell them how to act, what to do, someone else to tell them how to live.  The only problem is, they picked the wrong king.  They picked Herod instead of God.  We don’t need to pick Herod, as long as we don’t choose God, it doesn’t matter who controls.

So Herod does a smart thing.  He calls together the chief priests and the scribes of the people, and finds out exactly where the new king is going to be born.  He knows where to go – find the people who know the scriptures – the chief priests – the professional clergy are supposed to be paid to know these things.  Herod does not go to the Temple or to the Scriptures to get closer to God; he goes for his own purposes.  He wants information for his own purposes.  He wants the Temple and the Scriptures to serve his own ends, not God’s purposes.  If we approach the Temple (the Church) and the Scriptures in the spirit of Herod; we will have missed the point.  Both the Church and the Scriptures are God’s, and are intended to serve his good purposes.

So the chief priests and the scribes read the scriptures – they know the Scriptures well – it does not take long before they give Herod the answer to his question.  The new King will be born in Bethlehem.  But chief priests do not themselves have any personal interest in going to see the new King.  Amazing.  They had all the information from God right in front of them, and they don’t bother to do anything with it.  Maybe Herod did not tell them that the wise men had come.  But no matter, they were blind to the presence of the star, which the wise men had followed all the way from the east, and they are blind to the importance of their own scriptures.  At any rate, they were too busy playing church to actually take the time to find God.  They have no love for the object of which the scriptures speak.  They know the King will be found in Bethlehem, yet they do not bother to go.

So how does the story proceed?  Herod calls the wise men secretly.  That alone is a warning sign.  Why secretly?  He sends them on their way with a bit of a false promise.  Go and find the child, and then let me know so that I may do him homage as well.  As the wise men head out – there ahead of them is the star – it’s still there, but no one is paying any attention.  God gives us signs, but often we are blind to their presence.  Herod is looking at his throne, the scribes are looking at their scriptures, the people are all looking at Herod, and only the wise men still recognize that the star is still there.

The wise men do what the others do not – they actually make the effort to get to where Jesus is.

2:9 When they had heard the king, they set out; and there, ahead of them, went the star that they had seen at its rising, until it stopped over the place where the child was. 2:10 When they saw that the star had stopped, they were overwhelmed with joy. 2:11 On entering the house, they saw the child with Mary his mother; and they knelt down and paid him homage. Then, opening their treasure chests, they offered him gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh. 2:12 And having been warned in a dream not to return to Herod, they left for their own country by another road.

So the magi have finally found Jesus.  And what is their response?  Their first response is joy – “they were overwhelmed with joy”.  That is what happens when we find Jesus.  That is what awaits us at the end of the journey.  Next, they paid him homage – they worshiped him and acknowledged Him as King.  After the joy comes the worship.  That means acknowledging Jesus as King.  Jesus as the center.  Jesus as Lord.  And then, after joy and after worship, comes offering of their gifts.  In response to who Jesus is and the joy He gives, we offer ourselves and our gifts to Him.

Where do we go with this Epiphany story?  It is about us paying attention to the signs of God around us:  the visions, the dreams, the stars and the Scriptures.  It will be a pilgrim story:  it took the magi up to two years to find the destination they were looking for.  Patience in God’s work is not always appreciated in our instant world.

Ephesians 3:5 “In former generations this mystery was not made known to humankind, as it has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit”. While I haven't yet connected the Ephesians reading to all of this, it is certainly there with its theme of "revelation", and mystery becoming known.  If I get around to it, I'll tidy it all up, or do something completely different.

sermon notes Pentecost 17; Luke 16:1-13

The parable of the "shrewd manager" is probably one of the more difficult readings for us to make sense of, which fact is unrelated to the fact that the curate ended up on the preaching schedule this weekend...  But we will try to post something later today.

You could also check out Millionaires for Jesus.  Lots of err, interesting stuff. 

Matt has a great quote in the comments.

Hmm...  Well, there is always the question of whether or not a parable works like an allegory - X stands for person Y. 

The manager might be commended by us if we think that he is viewing wealth as a means, rather than an end in itself.  Money functions as a tool (albeit in his case for selfish ends).  I wonder as well if we had the same attitude which the manager has toward our possessions.  After all, the manager is free with the goods because the goods are not really his - so why not be rather free with the accounting?  The goods belong to his boss.  It is interesting to think as to whether or nto we have the same freedom with our material possessions as the shrewd manager has with his boss's wealth.  I mean, if we really saw ourselves as "managers" of what we have, rather than presuming to be the outright "owners".  The manager certainly exhibits a freedom with material wealth which I find difficult to do.  The difference is that I see all my wealth as primarily MINE, and not really belonging to God.

The manager came to see that his master's wealth was a tool which could be used to gain (temporal) "friends".  Jesus challenges his disciples to have the same freedom with wealth.

Steve London has some thoughts here.

ps.  If we think this set of teachings is troublesome, then the next few weeks bring up the questions again.  Although there is stark contrast between Lazarus and the rich man (comes up a few verses later) , there is also the question of when we move from simply having enough, to a form of gluttony.

Update:  since I don't have to preach tomorrow, what I've really been trying to work on today is this.
What I need to do next is see the sol cafe web guy, since I have a domain name, but the site just hasn't pointed in the right direction yet.  Been using iweb and Forklift.  We'll see how it goes.  Now there is this, which seems to be up and running.  Which brings us around to what I have really been thinking about lately, which is evangelism.  I would like for us to have a website which is helpful for present members of the parish, but is also inviting and comfortable for others, unchurched, non Christians - without being over the top.

You know, no one uses the Yellow Pages anymore to find a church...

 

Update:  since it turns out I am preaching on this text this coming Sunday, I'll fill it in and update it for September 2010

preliminary sermon notes for Maundy Thursday

13:1 Now before the festival of the Passover, Jesus knew that his hour had come to depart from this world and go to the Father. Having loved his own who were in the world, he loved them to the end.  The devil had already put it into the heart of Judas son of Simon Iscariot to betray him.

What we need to know about Jesus is told to us in the first few lines of this gospel reading.  “Having loved his own who were in the world, he loved them to the end.”  Jesus is about loving us, and loving us to the end.  What does it mean to love someone to the end?  Maybe it will help us to think about Judas. Judas is already planning to betray Jesus.  And yet Jesus invites even Judas to share in this last supper with him.  Jesus even loves Judas while he is betraying him.  Jesus  even loves Judas to the end.  Jesus loves Judas enough to give Judas the freedom to betray him.  Jesus does not stop him from doing this.  Neither will he stop you.  He gives you the freedom of choice to accept or reject, just as he gave that choice to Judas.  Jesus will love you to the end.  Even when we betray him, he loves us.  God never leaves us, we leave him.  Tomorrow on Good Friday we will see just how much we turn our backs on God.

And during supper, Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he had come from God and was going to God,  got up from the table, took off his outer robe, and tied a towel around himself.  Then he poured water into a basin and began to wash the disciples' feet and to wipe them with the towel that was tied around him.

How do you picture Jesus?  We all have images in our minds of people that we know.  The way we imagine them when we think about them.  What is Jesus doing in your picture of him?  We have seen many pictures of him in our lives  - from Sunday School to Christmas cards.  There He was – in a manger, while Angel choirs sang around him, and wise men from the east offered him gold and frankincense and myhhr.  During Epiphany we saw him doing miracles – healing, feeding,  changing water into wine – amazing the crowds and the disciples with his feats of power.   He came into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday with shouts of joy.  He has performed every miracle there is  - he made the blind see and the lame to walk - he showed his power in walking on the water in the midst of the storm.  He is the Son of David – the Messiah – the King of Israel – the very Word of God who created the universe and everything in it –  He was with God the Father and the Holy Spirit from before time existed – from all eternity. He will come again as the Judge of the World.  How does HE want us to picture Him?

And during supper, Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he had come from God and was going to God,  got up from the table, took off his outer robe, and tied a towel around himself.  Then he poured water into a basin and began to wash the disciples' feet and to wipe them with the towel that was tied around him.

What would I do if God had put all things into my hands,  what would I use all that power for?  Would I use it for the sake of others, or would I use it for myself?

The gospel tells us that Jesus knew that the Father had given all things into his hands, that he had come from God and was going to return to God.  Jesus knew where he came from and where he was heading – he knew who he was.  It was not a threat to him to get down on his hands and knees and get dirty.  He wasn’t embarrassed, or ashamed, or self conscious.  He didn’t care what he looked like, or what other people thought of him. He wasn’t afraid of doing the right thing, even if it made him look  - well -  look stupid.  He was free from other peoples’ opinions of him.  If you know you are from God and you are going to God – you will live freely.

Jesus knew where he came from and where he was going – do we?  Jesus knew who he was;  it wasn’t a threat to him to serve others.  How could he show them one last time what his message was, what God was like, how we should live?  By serving in a very humble way.

He came to Simon Peter, who said to him, "Lord, are you going to wash my feet?"  Jesus answered, "You do not know now what I am doing, but later you will understand." Peter said to him, "You will never wash my feet."  Jesus answered, "Unless I wash you, you have no share with me."

Why does Peter want to refuse Jesus’ request?  Why would any of us refuse this request from Jesus?

A    Peter is perhaps embarrassed.   After all, if someone tells you that you need a wash, it’s not usually taken as a compliment.  And it’s even worse if it is in front of your friends.  We don’t like to have attention drawn to those parts of us that need to be washed.  We don’t like attention drawn to those parts of our hearts and lives that need to be washed by Jesus.  We don’t like to have God say to us “You’re dirty there” – especially if we are afraid that someone else is watching.    We prefer to keep those things secret.  Our private sins – our angers, or jealousies, our private lusts and desires,  our pettiness, our selfishness, our greed.

Jesus says “Unless I wash you, you have no share with me.”   We tend to forget two things – number one:  Jesus only points out our dirtiness so that he can clean us;  and number two:  everyone else is dirty too.  Peter was not the only disciple at that table who needed to have his feet washed;  and neither are you.  It’s actually freeing to admit that we are all on equal ground here – we all need Jesus to wash us.  Nor is it any good pretending.  It’s better to admit that we are all sinners and get on with the job of letting Jesus make us into saints.

B    Perhaps Peter thinks that this is somehow “beneath” Jesus.  After all, washing feet is a slave’s job.  Jesus is supposed to be doing something big and spectacular, not something ordinary and lowly.  Peter doesn’t understand what Jesus is doing.  Of course he doesn’t, and neither do we most of the time.  Peter objects to what Jesus is doing.  “Wait a minute Jesus, you are supposed to be God’s Son, this stuff is for other people.  This is not important work, this is menial labour for slaves to do.  Let one of the servants do this kind of thing.”  I want you, Jesus, to do something big and impressive.

Too often we say to God, “don’t do that, do something else, do something magnificent and glorious, do something wonderful that will make us all oohh and ahhh.  Don’t do something so lowly and paltry and foolish.  Do something big!!! “

    How often we want God to do something big and glorious in our lives, or in the lives of others, and instead he disappoints us with the lowly and mean and ordinary.  Before Sarah Joy was born – we wanted a miracle – something big and impressive from God.  Instead we got more of the ordinary -  more nights spent in the hospital with countless other ordinary people – parents, husbands, wives -  who did not receive a miracle.  It is God’s gift to us to give us someone who requires more of the ordinary everyday care than usual.  Someone who needs more help with ordinary things like sitting in a high chair learning to use a spoon,  more help with ordinary chores like putting on a simple piece of clothing.  More chances for us practice what Jesus was trying to teach his disciples about love.   – about becoming like him in the day to day.

    We want Jesus to show up in a big way, and do something glorious and amazing.  We forget that what God thinks is glorious and amazing is performing simple acts of love for one another in our day to day lives.   

C    Perhaps Peter had a bit too much pride to accept this act of service from someone else.  Most of us don’t know how to accept a compliment, let alone someone like Jesus getting down and washing our feet.

We live in a “self-help” culture.  Be self sufficient, don’t rely on anyone or anything else – all you need is within you.  Jesus tells us that we need to learn to accept his help.  And we need to learn to accept help from one another.  God has designed his church so that we grow by learning to accept the gifts and help that we can bring to each other.  Each of us is here to give, but before that,  each of us is here to receive.

We have to learn how to accept help from others, we have to learn how to accept God helping us, we have to learn how to accept Jesus getting down and washing our feet.  Too often we would rather say, “No thanks, I can do it by myself.”  I can fix my own problems.  I don’t need your advice, I don’t need your prayers, I don’t need your pity.   I don’t want you to know that I have my weak spots.  Pride.

If you don’t know how to accept help, chances are you really don’t know how to offer it.  That is part of the lesson that Jesus is teaching his disciples.   Learn to accept help from God – he wants to serve you.

Update:  one the other hand, I was thinking of scrapping all of the above and going with another theme I had been toying with:  the contrast between the command in Genesis not to eat the fruit (in the day you eat of it, you shall surely die) and the command to eat and drink at the Lord's table - the eating of which gives life.  But we'll see...

turning palms into crosses

sermon thoughts for palm sunday, or, I have a newborn and now a four year old with a broken collar bone and you expect me to come up with something original to post today?

Every year we try our best to take these long strips of palm branch and by some feat of engineering, we turn them into crosses.  We sometimes don’t fully understand what exactly we are doing.  We take these things which are supposed to be instruments of joyfulness and praise for Jesus, and we turn them into crosses, forgetting that this is the very thing on which Jesus was crucified.  We usually never consider that strange custom that has evolved in the church over the years.  The very same things that are supposed to praise God, are turned against Jesus.  How does this palm branch turn into a cross? 

It is easy to forget, as we wave a little cross, that it is an instrument of death.  We see that palm branch, we turn it into an empty cross, and we conveniently pass over the suffering and death in between.  The cross was not always empty. 

This is the beginning of Holy Week. Today we started with shouts of Hosanna.  Next Sunday is Easter - the day of resurrection and shouts of Alleluia.  But we are not there yet.  Between the shouts of Hosanna and the shouts of Alleluia there is another shout:  “Crucify him, Crucify him.”  "’Why, what evil has he done? I have found in him no ground for the sentence of death; I will therefore have him flogged and then release him.’ But they kept urgently demanding with loud shouts that he should be crucified; and their voices prevailed.”

We have had two sets of readings this morning, each set painting a picture before us.  We started off the morning with a parade and shouts of joy.  The first picture is the “Palm Sunday” picture.  It is all about the crowds welcoming Jesus into Jerusalem with shouts of Hosanna.  The second picture we have today is the “Good Friday” picture.  It is about the same crowds shouting “Crucify Him” and about how Jesus endures the suffering of the Cross.

What do we learn when we see these two pictures side by side?  We learn about love.  In the first picture we learn about how the crowds, and we, love Jesus.  Let’s call that “Palm Sunday” love.  In the second picture we learn about how Jesus loves the crowds – and us.  Let’s call that “Good Friday” love.  These two kinds of love – Palm Sunday love and Good Friday love, show us the difference between how we love, and how God loves. 

Palm Sunday Love:

First there is the love which the crowds show to Jesus on Palm Sunday.  It is exciting, it is loud and it is a big show.  They welcome Him into Jerusalem with palm branches and songs and shouts of joy:  “Hosanna to the Son of David”.  They are welcoming Jesus as their King into the throne of David.  But within a few days that same crowd turns on Jesus.  When Pilate asks them what they want to do with this Jesus, this King of the Jews, they reply – “Crucify Him”.  What is wrong with this picture?

It is not lack of enthusiasm.  They were enthusiastic when they shouted “Hosanna to the son of David”.   Yet they were just as enthusiastic when they shouted “Crucify Him”.  If we think love is about putting on a big show, or just being enthusiastic, we need to think again.   The crowd was pretty enthusiastic when things were going well for Jesus.  Palm Sunday love is like that.  It loves when there is a good time to be had, and it stops loving when there are bad times to be had.  This way of loving changes with the weather, or with the circumstances. Status, appearance, health, reputation – all these things matter to Palm Sunday love.  Loving a person – any person, including Jesus, means you love them regardless of their circumstances.   You can love the person, or you can love the things around the person.   The crowds didn’t love the person of Jesus.  They loved the show, the power, the miracles, the idea that this man would be their king. 

It is a test of our love for any person – including God – whether we love them just for who they are, or we love them because of the stuff around them.  Not many people were left loving Jesus when he was being crucified, when everything glamorous and exciting was gone from him.  Jesus died alone.

Is love about being “happy”, whatever we think that word means?  The Palm Sunday crowd is very happy to have Jesus around.  But they are also just as happy to have Him crucified.  This is the more difficult part of the problem.  Love is not about the crowds being happy.  And love is not about me being happy.  Too often we think that it is.  We think that love is supposed to be there for my sole benefit – that love is there to make me happy.  Palm Sunday love is self-serving.  It says “I don’t care what happens to you, as long as I am happy – that is what matters.”  It says “I will love you as long as I get something out of it.”  My happiness is the supreme goal of life.  And this kind of love says – “I will love you for as long as it is convenient for me, for as long as I am getting something out of it, as long as you make me happy – I will love you.”

It is a test of our love for God and for each other.  Do we still love when we are not “getting something out of it?”  Do I love only when it makes me happy?  Am I more concerned about my own happiness than the happiness of the person I am supposed to be loving?  Love is not self-centered or self-serving.

Good Friday Love.

Now let us think about the Good Friday picture.  What do we think we are seeing when we get a picture of the crucifixion of Jesus?  Do we think we are seeing a man suffering?  Yes, but more than that.  Do we think we are seeing the fulfillment of prophecy?  Yes, and more than that?  We are seeing a picture of love.  On Palm Sunday we see a picture of our love for God, on Good Friday we see a picture of God’s love for us.

How is Jesus’ love for us, different from our love for Him?

Commitment

Six centuries before Jesus was born, the prophet Isaiah wrote some words describing the Messiah that God was going to send.  Here are the words Isaiah wrote about the Messiah who would come, and what that Messiah would be like:

I gave my back to those who struck me, and my cheeks to those who pulled out the beard; I did not hide my face from insult and spitting.  The Lord GOD helps me; therefore I have not been disgraced; therefore I have set my face like flint.

“I have set my face like flint”.   

What does that tell us about Jesus’ character? About his love?  It tells us about his determination.  He has a strength of willpower that says – I will do what I need to do.  Jesus shows us that the foundation of love is commitment.  He set his face like flint – against everything that will come his way. 
We get enthusiastic – but Jesus gets determined.  Good Friday love means commitment.  It means commitment regardless of the  circumstances.  Jesus is committed to us when the circumstances change.  He loves us when we are shouting “Hosanna” and he loves us when we are shouting “Away with this man.”  Jesus loves us when that love is not returned.  He loves us regardless of how we treat him.  He simply loves us.  He is not merely enthusiastic about loving us when things are great; he is committed to loving us when things are darkest, for us and for him.  He loves us when we shout “Crucify Him, Crucify Him.”   That is not only the darkest moment for Jesus.  It is also the darkest moment for us – when we cry out in rebellion against God.

How does Jesus react to our treatment of him?  How did he react then?  “I gave my back to those who struck me, and my cheeks to those who pulled out the beard; I did not hide my face from insult and spitting.”   How does God react to our treatment of Him?  He puts up with it; he endures it – remember Jesus prayed while he was being led away for crucifixion – “Father forgive them, they do not know what they are doing”.  What happens when love faces a challenge?  That is when love is tested.  That is when we see what love is really made of  - is it Palm Sunday love, or is it Good Friday love?   That is when Jesus is tested.  Jesus prays forgiveness. 

Self sacrifice, rather than self service,

Whose happiness is Jesus concerned about as he is being crucified?  His own, or someone else’s?   Jesus is willing to endure suffering, and insults, and even death, for the sake of someone else’s happiness – yours and mine.  He did not turn back from suffering because he loved us.  Good Friday love is willing to endure the wrongs of others, to put its own happiness second place, for the sake of someone else.  We have nothing that we can give to God.  God is not in this for what “He can get out of it”.  He is “in it” because He loves us. 

Jesus’ attitude and his actions are not changed by other people’s reactions to him.  Our love is often changed by other people’s attitudes and reactions.  It is part of the “what do I get out of it” syndrome.  Jesus’ love for us does not depend on how well we treat him.  Look at what happens to him.  And look how he reacts.

How do we get this new kind of love?  At best, most of us are caught between the two kinds of love – we perhaps admire the Good Friday love, but more often than not we practice the Palm Sunday love.  Good Friday love is great to see – in other people.   How do we grow in our love and move from one to the other?   Not by struggling to be better, or by making new resolutions to be a better person, or through he myriads of self help books that line the shelves of secular and sacred book shops.  It is a gift, as everything from God is.  It is the highest and best gift of all the gifts of the Spirit – and it is the only gift which will last. For that gift, let us pray.

a short Good Friday sermon

Greetings, fellow Christians.

I was recently involved with a ministry at the “Edmonton Max” prison.

I was given the opportunity to speak to a room full of  murderers.

(glancing to the cross, and then out over the congregation)
I did not think that I would have the chance to repeat the experience so soon.

Amen.