Have you ever played the telephone game? You know, where a story is passed on verbally through a chain of persons and is substantially altered by the time it reaches the last person. Our resurrection narratives are the result of such a process. The first gospel, Mark, was written around the early 70's CE, some forty years after the end of Jesus' earthly ministry, with roughly another decade between those that followed. Stories and traditions about Jesus were passed along verbally, and eventually written down in communities of faith. It is not surprising, then, that the four resurrection narratives contradict each other in virtually every detail, with the last gospel, John, having a radically different character. In John, the story rotates around three characters -- Mary Magdalene, Peter and John.
In the first act, Mary Magdalene sees the stone rolled away from Jesus' tomb, she believes his corpse has been stolen, and runs to tell Peter and John. The two then engage in a footrace to the tomb, but John arrives ahead of Peter and is the first to believe in resurrection. And, of course, it's his gospel!
In the second act, Mary Magdalene comes to the tomb and, when Jesus appears, she assumes he is the gardener and enquires after Jesus' body. When he calls her by her name, Mariam, she recognizes him and calls him Rabbouni, teacher. When she gets clingy (as if it were possible to continue their old earthly relationship), Jesus tells her that cannot be because he is ascending to the Father. Now the Magdalene goes to clue in the others, so in John's version a woman is the first evangelist!
There are two points on which all the gospel Easter accounts agree: that Jesus died, and that Jesus was experienced by his followers as alive and still leading his Movement. He appeared in various forms at various times to various people. The Risen Christ is described in Scripture variously as a zombie, a resuscitated corpse, a shape-shifter, and a "glorified body." He was experienced differently by different people, and he still is. The point is that he appeared and continues to be with us as we make our life journey together.
There is a wonderful, ancient story in the tradition of the Eastern Church which relates that Mary Magdalene was summoned by the emperor to explain Christianity. She brings an egg to illustrate the concept of resurrection. Tiberias tells her a man can no more return from death than that egg could turn red. At that very moment the egg in her hand turns red. This is why Christians of the Byzantine Tradition exchange red eggs at Easter.
On Good Friday I ended my homily by asking whether God will allow the Dark Side to prevail, and saying to stay tuned for the rest of the story. Today's gospel is the beginning of the rest of the story. God did not leave Jesus to hang on his cross and perish, but raised him up, and us with him. That means that God also will not "leave us hanging" -- hanging on a cross of fear, shame or despair; hanging on a cross of abuse or addiction, a cross of oppression or depression. No. If we trust in God, God will raise us to new and eternal life. Alleluia, Christ is risen!
Monday, March 28, 2016
Saturday, March 26, 2016
Good Friday: The Plot Thickens
The readings for Good Friday are powerful. First, the Hebrew Scripture reading of the Suffering Servant in Isaiah. Originally being a metaphor for the whole Jewish people, the depicted servant was later quite appropriately applied by Christians to Jesus. The lengthy gospel reading from John's late, reflective work, is a masterpiece of dramatic writing, emphasizing the grand elements of conspiracy, betrayal and abandonment, and all within the primary metaphors of dark and light. Jesus is the Light, while his opponents are the darkness. It is in that context that the Jewish role was overplayed, clearly reflecting the growing anti-Semitism in the Johannine community. The gospel antedates the divorce of church and synagogue. John's passion account is a masterful combination of a little fact and a lot of fiction. It must be read, not as history, but as a theological saga in which we validly discern two great themes.
The first theme is that Jesus perfectly conformed to the will of God and, therefore, was killed by forces of wealth and power, opportunism and imperialism. In short, Jesus died because of human sin. We fast on this day because we all participate in human sin. Thus, as the hymn says, "I have denied him. I crucified him."
The second theme is that Jesus' death on the cross is an act of reconciliation of man to God. God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself. That is what the Church calls the Mystery of salvation. Over the last two millenia more than a dozen theories of the atonement have been articulated. They are human attempts to explain the Mystery in language of a particular era and culture, to help people understand and appropriate the message. For example, the "theory of shame" is customary amongst Japanese, for whom none of the Western theories make any sense. That's perfectly OK. In reality, there can be no perfect or final theory of the atonement; and it is sad that one of those theories, the penal substitutionary atonement theory, has been imposed by fundamentalist Christians as though it were the only, or even the best, way to read the cross and Easter. In my opinion, it is the worst. I believe it misreads God, Jesus and humanity.
All theories of the atonement would acknowledge that Jesus' death was the necessary consequence of leading a life perfectly aligned to the divine will, and that through radical trust in Jesus we come into new and right relationship with God, eternal life. That is the news that makes this Friday good.
We stand tonight with our Blessed Mother at the foot of the cross. We see the love of God shining forth in the crucified Jesus. Now the big questions form on our lips: Is this all there is? Will God allow the Dark Side to prevail? Stay tuned.
The first theme is that Jesus perfectly conformed to the will of God and, therefore, was killed by forces of wealth and power, opportunism and imperialism. In short, Jesus died because of human sin. We fast on this day because we all participate in human sin. Thus, as the hymn says, "I have denied him. I crucified him."
The second theme is that Jesus' death on the cross is an act of reconciliation of man to God. God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself. That is what the Church calls the Mystery of salvation. Over the last two millenia more than a dozen theories of the atonement have been articulated. They are human attempts to explain the Mystery in language of a particular era and culture, to help people understand and appropriate the message. For example, the "theory of shame" is customary amongst Japanese, for whom none of the Western theories make any sense. That's perfectly OK. In reality, there can be no perfect or final theory of the atonement; and it is sad that one of those theories, the penal substitutionary atonement theory, has been imposed by fundamentalist Christians as though it were the only, or even the best, way to read the cross and Easter. In my opinion, it is the worst. I believe it misreads God, Jesus and humanity.
All theories of the atonement would acknowledge that Jesus' death was the necessary consequence of leading a life perfectly aligned to the divine will, and that through radical trust in Jesus we come into new and right relationship with God, eternal life. That is the news that makes this Friday good.
We stand tonight with our Blessed Mother at the foot of the cross. We see the love of God shining forth in the crucified Jesus. Now the big questions form on our lips: Is this all there is? Will God allow the Dark Side to prevail? Stay tuned.
Friday, March 25, 2016
Maundy Thursday: Eucharist in Scripture
On this day when we commemorate the institution of the Lord's Supper, all I want to say is found within the bounds of holy scripture. Let's take a tour in chronological order. An initial reference is found in Saint Paul's first letter to the Corinthians, penned around 54 CE. He passes on what has been revealed to him, namely that Jesus instituted the Eucharist on the night before he was betrayed, with the intention that the ritual be perpetuated. But then Paul also makes the remarkable statement that the person who receives the consecrated bread and wine without perceiving the presence of the Body and Blood of Christ commits sacrilege. And, dramatically, he says that those who have treated this rite only as a memorial meal have become ill, and some have even died, from trivializing of the Sacrament! This is a strong early statement on the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
Next we find the narratives of institution in the three synoptic gospels -- Mark, Matthew, and Luke. Varying in detail, they nonetheless are in agreement as to the ritual. Jesus takes bread, blesses it, declares it to be his Body, and gives it to his successors. Then he takes the chalice of wine, blesses it, declares it his Blood, and gives it out. Then he empowers those present to repeat the ritual exactly as he has performed it. I and priests all over the world, ordained in the Apostolic Succession, still do that every Sunday, almost two thousand years later.
By the time John's late, reflective gospel is written, the Eucharist has long been established and so the institution narrative is omitted. What we have instead are two significant passages. First, in the sixth chapter Jesus delivers a long, detailed sermon about his Real Presence in the Eucharist. The language could not be clearer: "My flesh is real food. My blood is real drink. The one who eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him." (v. 55) At the conclusion of this vignette, the crowd (representing mainstream Judaism) simply can't wrap their heads around the concept and abandon the Jesus Movement. Second, the Lord's Supper narrative picks up after the meal, with Jesus taking on the role of a slave by washing the apostles' feet. The message is clearly that the Eucharist is divine fuel giving us the strength to go out to do and support Jesus' servant ministry in the world.
Next we find the narratives of institution in the three synoptic gospels -- Mark, Matthew, and Luke. Varying in detail, they nonetheless are in agreement as to the ritual. Jesus takes bread, blesses it, declares it to be his Body, and gives it to his successors. Then he takes the chalice of wine, blesses it, declares it his Blood, and gives it out. Then he empowers those present to repeat the ritual exactly as he has performed it. I and priests all over the world, ordained in the Apostolic Succession, still do that every Sunday, almost two thousand years later.
By the time John's late, reflective gospel is written, the Eucharist has long been established and so the institution narrative is omitted. What we have instead are two significant passages. First, in the sixth chapter Jesus delivers a long, detailed sermon about his Real Presence in the Eucharist. The language could not be clearer: "My flesh is real food. My blood is real drink. The one who eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him." (v. 55) At the conclusion of this vignette, the crowd (representing mainstream Judaism) simply can't wrap their heads around the concept and abandon the Jesus Movement. Second, the Lord's Supper narrative picks up after the meal, with Jesus taking on the role of a slave by washing the apostles' feet. The message is clearly that the Eucharist is divine fuel giving us the strength to go out to do and support Jesus' servant ministry in the world.
Sunday, March 20, 2016
Palm Sunday: Hosannas are Dangerous
Our service began with the traditional blessing and distribution of palms to the faithful, followed by a procession in song in which "glad hosannas ring." This simple parish celebration is simply a kind of imitation of something Christians have done for more than 1700 years: pilgrimages, principally to the Holy City but also sometimes to other sites, like the shrine of Our Lady of Walsingham in England.
The great pollster George Gallup once quipped that early Christians came to Jerusalem like Muslims come to Mecca and Baptists to Tulsa! Today's liturgy is based on those early pilgrimages to the city of Jerusalem. What our reading of the biblical text often misses is the fact that "Hosanna," besides being a religious profession, was also a revolutionary cry on the lips of an oppressed people; the one who accepted messianic accolades signed his own death warrant.
As we live into the story of salvation this week, we do well to reflect that Jesus stood against political oppression, religious opportunism, economic exploitation, and imperialism, without any regard to the consequences. As his followers, we are called to do the same.
The great pollster George Gallup once quipped that early Christians came to Jerusalem like Muslims come to Mecca and Baptists to Tulsa! Today's liturgy is based on those early pilgrimages to the city of Jerusalem. What our reading of the biblical text often misses is the fact that "Hosanna," besides being a religious profession, was also a revolutionary cry on the lips of an oppressed people; the one who accepted messianic accolades signed his own death warrant.
As we live into the story of salvation this week, we do well to reflect that Jesus stood against political oppression, religious opportunism, economic exploitation, and imperialism, without any regard to the consequences. As his followers, we are called to do the same.
Sunday, March 13, 2016
Lent V: Evolution of the Word
My friend the late Dr. Marcus Borg published a book entitled "Evolution of the Word." This simple volume consists of the New Testament, New Revised Standard Version, with the books in the order written. Traditional Bibles contain books by type and length. Surely this is a first, as the reader can now begin with I Thessalonians (50 C.E.) and read through to the final book, II Peter (120 C.E.) One can see how Christian thought developed and changed, and how stories were altered to accommodate the agendas and concerns of the communities authoring them. Many Christians are unaware that all of Saint Paul's letters were written years before there was a first gospel, that the first gospel did not appear until forty years after the earthly ministry of Jesus, and that the contents of the New Testament were not even finalized until 397 CE.
To illustrate the value of this unique volume, I am sharing how one story travelled through time, the tale in today's gospel reading, John 12: 1-8, the anointing story which all gospels agree took place in Bethany, though they disagree as to when. In Mark, the earliest version of the story, an unknown woman comes to a dinner party at the house of Simon the Leper, bringing costly ointment, and she anoints Jesus' head. In Matthew, the woman uses her hair to apply the perfume to Jesus' head. In Mark the dinner guests criticize the cost of the ointment which could have been sold to help the poor. In Matthew, only the disciples are critics.
When we arrive at Luke's gospel, the venue is a Pharisee's house. The woman with the perfume is a well-known sinner who weeps and anoints, not Jesus' head, but his feet. Jesus tells a story and then forgives her sins, to the dismay of those at table. Finally, in John's gospel the venue is the home of Lazarus, Martha and Mary; and the party is being thrown in Lazarus' honour. His sister Martha is preparing the meal as Mary anoints Jesus' feet with her hair. The question about the cost of the perfume is raised by the mysterious figure Judas (the name means 'the Jew' as he represents all the Jews who didn't convert to Jesus.) When he complains, the reader is told that Judas the betrayer is also an embezzler and would like to convert the money that could be realized from the sale of the perfume.
What do we hear in John's tale? First, the woman is violating several taboos. Women were not permitted to touch a man other than the husband. Women were never to let their hair down in front of anyone but the husband. A woman was not permitted to talk to an unrelated male, especially a rabbi, except indirectly through the husband or, if widowed, male next-of-kin. But Jesus doesn't flinch. He seems to see women as more than the property of men and baby-making machines. In fact, our Lord is treating her as the equal of any man and accepting her incredibly humble ministry. Usually only slaves washed feet. To me that confirms the rightness of the decision of the Episcopal Church to open all offices and all ministries to women, including the office of Presiding Bishop. We have consciously chosen not to be a church of us and them. With Jesus there is only an us. We are beloved brothers and sisters, regardless of our gender, race, nationality, opinions or sexual orientation.
Second, we see in the portrayal of Judas the immense anger of the Johannine community at the failure of mainstream Jews to convert to the Jesus Movement. Some scholars believe that Judas is actually a fictional character made up to symbolize the greed and duplicity that community wanted to impute to all Jews. His name is not even mentioned in the writings of Paul, and he first appears in a text forty years after the death of Jesus. Luke is also anti-Semitic. Consider the Lukan account of Judas in Acts where he is a greedy businessman who spends his betrayal money (thirty pieces of silver, based on Zechariah 11:12) to buy land and then dies of a stroke. That is a very different 'Judas' from the pathetic figure who, in Matthew's gospel, returns the betrayal money, repents, and in his grief commits suicide. We resist all stereotyping and hatred of the Jewish people, as well as prideful supersessionism which asserts that God lies or goes back on God's covenant promises. In fact, we are not to judge anyone. Instead, we must focus on our commission, which is to build the Reign of God. We commit to respect, love, and serve all in that process.
To illustrate the value of this unique volume, I am sharing how one story travelled through time, the tale in today's gospel reading, John 12: 1-8, the anointing story which all gospels agree took place in Bethany, though they disagree as to when. In Mark, the earliest version of the story, an unknown woman comes to a dinner party at the house of Simon the Leper, bringing costly ointment, and she anoints Jesus' head. In Matthew, the woman uses her hair to apply the perfume to Jesus' head. In Mark the dinner guests criticize the cost of the ointment which could have been sold to help the poor. In Matthew, only the disciples are critics.
When we arrive at Luke's gospel, the venue is a Pharisee's house. The woman with the perfume is a well-known sinner who weeps and anoints, not Jesus' head, but his feet. Jesus tells a story and then forgives her sins, to the dismay of those at table. Finally, in John's gospel the venue is the home of Lazarus, Martha and Mary; and the party is being thrown in Lazarus' honour. His sister Martha is preparing the meal as Mary anoints Jesus' feet with her hair. The question about the cost of the perfume is raised by the mysterious figure Judas (the name means 'the Jew' as he represents all the Jews who didn't convert to Jesus.) When he complains, the reader is told that Judas the betrayer is also an embezzler and would like to convert the money that could be realized from the sale of the perfume.
What do we hear in John's tale? First, the woman is violating several taboos. Women were not permitted to touch a man other than the husband. Women were never to let their hair down in front of anyone but the husband. A woman was not permitted to talk to an unrelated male, especially a rabbi, except indirectly through the husband or, if widowed, male next-of-kin. But Jesus doesn't flinch. He seems to see women as more than the property of men and baby-making machines. In fact, our Lord is treating her as the equal of any man and accepting her incredibly humble ministry. Usually only slaves washed feet. To me that confirms the rightness of the decision of the Episcopal Church to open all offices and all ministries to women, including the office of Presiding Bishop. We have consciously chosen not to be a church of us and them. With Jesus there is only an us. We are beloved brothers and sisters, regardless of our gender, race, nationality, opinions or sexual orientation.
Second, we see in the portrayal of Judas the immense anger of the Johannine community at the failure of mainstream Jews to convert to the Jesus Movement. Some scholars believe that Judas is actually a fictional character made up to symbolize the greed and duplicity that community wanted to impute to all Jews. His name is not even mentioned in the writings of Paul, and he first appears in a text forty years after the death of Jesus. Luke is also anti-Semitic. Consider the Lukan account of Judas in Acts where he is a greedy businessman who spends his betrayal money (thirty pieces of silver, based on Zechariah 11:12) to buy land and then dies of a stroke. That is a very different 'Judas' from the pathetic figure who, in Matthew's gospel, returns the betrayal money, repents, and in his grief commits suicide. We resist all stereotyping and hatred of the Jewish people, as well as prideful supersessionism which asserts that God lies or goes back on God's covenant promises. In fact, we are not to judge anyone. Instead, we must focus on our commission, which is to build the Reign of God. We commit to respect, love, and serve all in that process.
Wednesday, March 9, 2016
What is Truth?
In John,'s gospel, the monster Pontius Pilate is said to ask Jesus the hard question, "What is truth?" Jesus gives the best possible answer to that query: silence. Some religionists claim to have captured all truth, and the spectrum of absolute certainty stretches from Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, to some churches of the Campbell Movement, the Mormons and many others. That is really problematic because what people know, or think they know, is subject to diverse and fallible interpretation. Moreover, in our modern era new knowledge is expanding at a geometric rate, so today's "complete" truth will be incomplete next year.
I just read an article by an official of a large protestant denomination in the U.S.. He speaks of the need to clarify the term "evangelical" after our current election cycle. What he clearly means by clarification is submission to his denomination's narrow theological views as comprehending all of religious truth. It is clear that he believes that only evangelicals are actually Christian and that only those who follow his tenets are actually evangelical. The word itself refers to promoting the evangel, or good news, of Christ. I try sincerely to do that and, in that sense, can be considered evangelical. Those who know everything tend to specialize in judging and correcting everyone else.
We know that the fundamental meaning of the biblical term for faith in Greek, pistis, is radical trust and reliance on God. The key is repentance in turning from mere self-reliance to God-reliance.. Yet, the author rejects this definition as inadequate, stating that faith also requires assent to "the truth of God's revelation in the Bible" (read: belief in complete biblical literalism and infallibility) and acceptance of the penal substitutionary atonement theory as the only way to understand the Cross and Easter. In fact, there have been more than a dozen principal theories of atonement through the two thousand years of Christian history and no denomination or spokesman has authority to declare one of those mandatory for all believers.
The author also discusses fundamentalism as though a good thing, and defines it as the literalistic interpretation of key Christian Scriptures. First, I would respectfully deny that such perspective is required to be a faithful Christian and that, in fact, literalizing what was intended as symbolic simply drives thinking people away from Christianity. Second, I would point out that the Christian Bible was not even defined and promulgated until 397 CE. The Bible is the product of the Church, not the other way round; and the Church did fine without it for centuries. The apostolic Church is guided by the Holy Spirit, not someone's interpretations of the Bible.
There are tens of thousands of protestant affiliations because they cannot agree on interpretation of holy writ. A single affiliation should not claim to have truth figured out and locked up for everyone.
I just read an article by an official of a large protestant denomination in the U.S.. He speaks of the need to clarify the term "evangelical" after our current election cycle. What he clearly means by clarification is submission to his denomination's narrow theological views as comprehending all of religious truth. It is clear that he believes that only evangelicals are actually Christian and that only those who follow his tenets are actually evangelical. The word itself refers to promoting the evangel, or good news, of Christ. I try sincerely to do that and, in that sense, can be considered evangelical. Those who know everything tend to specialize in judging and correcting everyone else.
We know that the fundamental meaning of the biblical term for faith in Greek, pistis, is radical trust and reliance on God. The key is repentance in turning from mere self-reliance to God-reliance.. Yet, the author rejects this definition as inadequate, stating that faith also requires assent to "the truth of God's revelation in the Bible" (read: belief in complete biblical literalism and infallibility) and acceptance of the penal substitutionary atonement theory as the only way to understand the Cross and Easter. In fact, there have been more than a dozen principal theories of atonement through the two thousand years of Christian history and no denomination or spokesman has authority to declare one of those mandatory for all believers.
The author also discusses fundamentalism as though a good thing, and defines it as the literalistic interpretation of key Christian Scriptures. First, I would respectfully deny that such perspective is required to be a faithful Christian and that, in fact, literalizing what was intended as symbolic simply drives thinking people away from Christianity. Second, I would point out that the Christian Bible was not even defined and promulgated until 397 CE. The Bible is the product of the Church, not the other way round; and the Church did fine without it for centuries. The apostolic Church is guided by the Holy Spirit, not someone's interpretations of the Bible.
There are tens of thousands of protestant affiliations because they cannot agree on interpretation of holy writ. A single affiliation should not claim to have truth figured out and locked up for everyone.
Sunday, March 6, 2016
Laetare Sunday: The Prodigal's Brother
Jesus continues to receive, and eat with, sinners -- both those who are objectively immoral like con artists and serial fornicators, but also those whose professions are considered inherently dishonourable. Those include tax agents, shepherds, donkey drivers, peddler, and tanners!
As Son of God, Metaphor of God, Rabbi Jesus must act out God's unconditional love and forgiveness, which are the roof of all real change. and he does in personal hospitality.
When the scripture literalists and religious professionals criticize Jesus's openness towards the marginalized and despised, he responds like a good rabbi by telling an illustrative story. The story of the Prodigal Son.
Most of us know the basic details well, The progidal can't even wait until his father is dead to get his half of the inheritance. He inappropriately asks for it in advance, and the father agrees. Then that younger son goes to out and blows the money on hookers and high times. Soon he is broke and has to get a job herding pigs, which no respectable Jew would ever do. Finally coming to his senses, he decides to go home and ask to be a hired hand. The father, seeing him in the distance, runs to him, accepts him and calls for a party. No oriental patriarch ever ran, for any reason. But the text reflects God's unexpected, insane, lavish love for the lost and his joy when an errant person returns to him.
But there is another character in the tale: the elder brother who thinks he has never screwed up, is always right and is angry because his dad never gave him a party. At times in our lives we probably have acted somewhat like the prodigal, but we are at risk of being like his brother. First of all, his brother thinks of himself as not being a sinner and he won't forgive his younger brother. If he were convinced of his own sin, the elder would know that God will "forgive our sins as we forgive those who sin against us." There is a terrible manifestation of pride, lack of self-awareness, and self- centring in the elder brother. We can be like that. Yet God disguised as the patriarch in our story, begs his son to join the party. No patriarch would do that either. God is crazy in love with us.
When I did clinical pastoral education at Austin State Hospital, on one occasion I had to preach on this text. My audience could only relate to the elder brother. As mentally ill people they had lost touch with themselves and with grace. We must not make that mistake.
The philosopher Simone Weil talks about the "soft side of belief." In the cosiness of church we can settle in and not be challenged. We forget that our God "comforts the afflicted and afflicts the comfortable." We can get too comfortable. The great Anglican theologian C. S. Lewis stated on occasion that if one is looking for solace, he would not recommend Christianity. Yet in our own community there is a "Solace Church." It is an interesting concept to put first in the life of a faith congregation. Let us be dedicated to being uncomfortable and accept the challenge to get out of our comfort zone, out of the pew and go forward to being Christ in the world, especially ministering to those on the margins.
As Son of God, Metaphor of God, Rabbi Jesus must act out God's unconditional love and forgiveness, which are the roof of all real change. and he does in personal hospitality.
When the scripture literalists and religious professionals criticize Jesus's openness towards the marginalized and despised, he responds like a good rabbi by telling an illustrative story. The story of the Prodigal Son.
Most of us know the basic details well, The progidal can't even wait until his father is dead to get his half of the inheritance. He inappropriately asks for it in advance, and the father agrees. Then that younger son goes to out and blows the money on hookers and high times. Soon he is broke and has to get a job herding pigs, which no respectable Jew would ever do. Finally coming to his senses, he decides to go home and ask to be a hired hand. The father, seeing him in the distance, runs to him, accepts him and calls for a party. No oriental patriarch ever ran, for any reason. But the text reflects God's unexpected, insane, lavish love for the lost and his joy when an errant person returns to him.
But there is another character in the tale: the elder brother who thinks he has never screwed up, is always right and is angry because his dad never gave him a party. At times in our lives we probably have acted somewhat like the prodigal, but we are at risk of being like his brother. First of all, his brother thinks of himself as not being a sinner and he won't forgive his younger brother. If he were convinced of his own sin, the elder would know that God will "forgive our sins as we forgive those who sin against us." There is a terrible manifestation of pride, lack of self-awareness, and self- centring in the elder brother. We can be like that. Yet God disguised as the patriarch in our story, begs his son to join the party. No patriarch would do that either. God is crazy in love with us.
When I did clinical pastoral education at Austin State Hospital, on one occasion I had to preach on this text. My audience could only relate to the elder brother. As mentally ill people they had lost touch with themselves and with grace. We must not make that mistake.
The philosopher Simone Weil talks about the "soft side of belief." In the cosiness of church we can settle in and not be challenged. We forget that our God "comforts the afflicted and afflicts the comfortable." We can get too comfortable. The great Anglican theologian C. S. Lewis stated on occasion that if one is looking for solace, he would not recommend Christianity. Yet in our own community there is a "Solace Church." It is an interesting concept to put first in the life of a faith congregation. Let us be dedicated to being uncomfortable and accept the challenge to get out of our comfort zone, out of the pew and go forward to being Christ in the world, especially ministering to those on the margins.
Tuesday, March 1, 2016
The Business of Forgiveness
The readings for third Tuesday in Lent make a strong case for the power of forgiveness. The Old Testament passage is Daniel 3: 25-27, 34-43. Sadly it is not in the protestant version of the Bible; nevertheless it is the text of the remarkable "Song of the Three Young Men," in which they invoke God's covenant commitment to his people and ask God to forgive and redeem them.
In the New Testament pericope, Matthew 18: 21-35, Saint Peter asks Jesus how many times he is required to forgive someone and posits seven times. Jesus says no, make that seventy-seven times. In other words, he is counselling unlimited forgiveness. What is no so apparent is that Jesus uses play on a Torah passage in Genesis 4 which speaks of avenging Cain seven times and avenging Lamech seventy-seven times. So Jesus is upending that passage and saying we do not need to be vengeful, we need to be forgiving.
Then Jesus tells the story of a debtor who can't repay his master, pleads for forgiveness, and then receives it. He in turn throttles another person who is indebted to him and refuses to forgive the debt. The owner then punishes that first servant. Translated in 2016 Americanese, the first debt owed was about $1 billion, and the second debt was approximately $10,000. If we have been the recipients of forgiveness, divine forgiveness, we must pay it forward.
The saint-du-jour is Saint David, the Patron of Wales.of the fifth century. He founded a monastery, then became its abbot. His manner of ruling the convent so impressed the Prelate of Wales that he chose David as successor bishop. The reason was David's loving demeanour in his treatment and correction of wrongdoers in that community. He followed Jesus' prompt.
In the New Testament pericope, Matthew 18: 21-35, Saint Peter asks Jesus how many times he is required to forgive someone and posits seven times. Jesus says no, make that seventy-seven times. In other words, he is counselling unlimited forgiveness. What is no so apparent is that Jesus uses play on a Torah passage in Genesis 4 which speaks of avenging Cain seven times and avenging Lamech seventy-seven times. So Jesus is upending that passage and saying we do not need to be vengeful, we need to be forgiving.
Then Jesus tells the story of a debtor who can't repay his master, pleads for forgiveness, and then receives it. He in turn throttles another person who is indebted to him and refuses to forgive the debt. The owner then punishes that first servant. Translated in 2016 Americanese, the first debt owed was about $1 billion, and the second debt was approximately $10,000. If we have been the recipients of forgiveness, divine forgiveness, we must pay it forward.
The saint-du-jour is Saint David, the Patron of Wales.of the fifth century. He founded a monastery, then became its abbot. His manner of ruling the convent so impressed the Prelate of Wales that he chose David as successor bishop. The reason was David's loving demeanour in his treatment and correction of wrongdoers in that community. He followed Jesus' prompt.
Lent III: Gospel according to Bob Dylan
A long time ago a young man named Robert Allen Zimmerman of Duluth, Minnesota took up the guitar and took up the name Bob Dylan. He was a prophetic voice of protest at a time of cultural transition for our nation. In 1964, he penned a poem, later released asa song, entitled "My Back Pages," in which he reassessed a few assumptions of his earlier life. It ends in the haunting refrain: "I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now."
As I read this dense poem, I seem to find three key messages. First, don't take yourself too seriously. Second, don't preach too much, as you don't know everything. Third, the problems of the world are very complicated and should not be seen in simplistic or black-and-white terms. I believe these are three excellent messages for Lenten reflection.
In the gospel pericope today (Luke 13: 1-9), Jesus discusses two reputed incidents not corroborated by secular historians, but both quite believable. In one case, Pontius Pilate who, despite the attempts of the latest gospellers to rehabilitate him, lived and died a monster, is credited with murdering a group of Jews during worship. In the other case, a water tower -- likely the one that fed the Pool of Siloam featured in John's gospel -- collapsed, killing bystanders. The crowd obviously believe in the tired old notion that God is a micromanager; that when good happens, he is showing his preference for certain people and that when bad happens, he is punishing somebody. They could have taken to heart poin three of Dylan's advice and not been so cocksure about the ways of God. Jesus says those killed were no worse than anyone else!
Jesus then uses these stories to point out the obvious, that death can come at any time and that people need to be prepared for their end. I am reminded of another rabbi's message, that of Eliezer the Great. He told his disciples that the appropriate time for repentance is always the day before one dies. For obvious reasons that principle requires daily repentance and return to God. And a part of that could be living out some of the principles enunciated in the Dylan poem, so that we too can say, "I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now."
As I read this dense poem, I seem to find three key messages. First, don't take yourself too seriously. Second, don't preach too much, as you don't know everything. Third, the problems of the world are very complicated and should not be seen in simplistic or black-and-white terms. I believe these are three excellent messages for Lenten reflection.
In the gospel pericope today (Luke 13: 1-9), Jesus discusses two reputed incidents not corroborated by secular historians, but both quite believable. In one case, Pontius Pilate who, despite the attempts of the latest gospellers to rehabilitate him, lived and died a monster, is credited with murdering a group of Jews during worship. In the other case, a water tower -- likely the one that fed the Pool of Siloam featured in John's gospel -- collapsed, killing bystanders. The crowd obviously believe in the tired old notion that God is a micromanager; that when good happens, he is showing his preference for certain people and that when bad happens, he is punishing somebody. They could have taken to heart poin three of Dylan's advice and not been so cocksure about the ways of God. Jesus says those killed were no worse than anyone else!
Jesus then uses these stories to point out the obvious, that death can come at any time and that people need to be prepared for their end. I am reminded of another rabbi's message, that of Eliezer the Great. He told his disciples that the appropriate time for repentance is always the day before one dies. For obvious reasons that principle requires daily repentance and return to God. And a part of that could be living out some of the principles enunciated in the Dylan poem, so that we too can say, "I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)