This sermon was delivered at the First Presbyterian Church in Berryville Arkansas on September 30, 2007, the 26th Sunday of Ordinary Time.
Jeremiah 32:1-3a, 6-15
Psalm 91:1-6, 14-16
1Timothy 6:6-19
Luke 16:19-31
May the words of my mouth and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable to you, O Lord, our rock and our redeemer. Amen.
One of the problems with preaching parables is the richness of their imagery. It’s hard to take the words of Jesus through the brushstrokes of Luke’s words and do anything that is more than a pale reflection. And this parable of the rich man clothed in purple is a dramatic example of the way Luke frames the wonderful words of Jesus. Hopefully one thing I can do is point out some echoes that we have lost in the translation.
The contrasts in this story are just one element that makes it so wonderful. We begin with a man who is very rich, a man who has everything this life can offer. Then we have another who is poor, destitute. This difference between the two is the root of the other distinctions between them. The rich man is dressed in purple and in fine linen. The other’s clothing is without description. We know that one is clothed in the finest cloth of the day. The color of his clothes showed that he was a very important man, a man of regal stature. Purple linen could not be worn by just anyone. It was the law. There were actually laws about who could wear purple, and how much of it they could wear, and the rich man in the parable could wear it enough that he was the purple Johnny Cash of his day. He was the “Man in Purple.”
As for the other man, the parable doesn’t even say he was covered with clothes, he was covered in sores.
One feasts daily while the other one sits hungry. Different translations color this differently. One says feasted sumptuously, another says lived in luxury, and a third says he was living in splendor. Each of these translations says he lived like this everyday. The rich man is the first guy on “Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous.” Robin Leech could have followed this guy looking for pointers everyday.
The other man, he is laid at the gates of the rich man’s home. He is shown with out food, longing for scraps from the rich man’s table. Even worse, not only is he without food for himself, he is a source of food for the mongrel dogs who come and lick his sores.
What does seem a little strange is that while the rich man seems to have everything, he doesn’t have a name. The poor man, Jesus tells us his name is Lazarus. When Jesus tells a story of layered contrast, he isn’t shy about pouring it on so we get the message. But the contrasts have only just begun.
The rich man dies, and he was buried. The rich man is buried and by his stature and his wealth, tradition would mandate an incredible funeral. By the description of his clothes, the “Man in Purple” may have even been accorded a state funeral.
So Lazarus dies. And when he does, he is carried away by the angels and he rests in the bosom of Abraham. Oh, rock-a-my-soul in the bosom of Abraham. By the way, this may be one of those weird little questions of the bible, like “Where did Cain’s wife come from?” Where’s Lazarus’ body? Was it carried away? Was it put in a pauper’s grave? Was it eaten by the dogs that licked his sores? Was it miraculously lifted to the bosom of Abraham? Scripture says he was lifted, but whether he was lifted bodily or spiritually is not specified, though hearers of this parable would have heard this as being carried spiritually. But, if he was raised bodily after his death, and made whole so to rest in the bosom of Abraham, that would be some kind of miracle, wouldn’t it?
The rich man is in Hades while Lazarus is with Abraham. This is not just another contrast, but a stunning reversal of fortune. The man who was resting on a cold stone portico of a rich man’s estate is now feasting at the table of eternity while resting in the bosom of Abraham. The man whose every whim was catered on earth is now the one who is being tormented in what the Jews called Sheol the Greek called Hades, and we call hell. The one whose sores were being licked by dogs is now resting in a place anyone would long to be while the one who feasted sumptuously every day now lives in fiery torment.
“Father Abraham,” the tormented man cries out. Even in the pain of the fires he remembers his earthly status and cries not to just anyone, he cries to Father Abraham. He cries out as a Jew to the great patriarch of the faith. “Send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water to cool my tongue.” Send Lazarus. Even in the pain of the fires he remembers his earthly status and cries out to Father Abraham; send me Lazarus that he might do me this service. That he might do me this service.
But Abraham said, “Child,” acknowledging the tormented man’s status as a member of the chosen people of Israel, “Child, too bad, so sad, what you once enjoyed Lazarus now enjoys. What Lazarus once endured you now endure. Where once the distance between you and Lazarus was nothing, now there is a chasm so great that no one can cross from one side to the other.” The stunning reversals of fortune continue. And as they continue the tormented man sees there is no hope for him. But perhaps it is not too late for others.
Well then Father Abraham, send Lazarus like a lackey and have him warn my brothers so they won’t be forced to face this horrible fate of fire and torment. Still from the torment, for the second time, the tormented man asks Abraham to treat Lazarus in the same way he treated everyone else while he was alive, like Lazarus’ greatest purpose in life, and now in death, is to do his bidding.
“Nope,” Abraham says, “they have the word of God recorded by Moses and the prophets. That is enough, they should listen to them.”
“No, no, no, Father Abraham, if Lazarus goes, if anyone from the dead goes to them, then they will repent.”
Father Abraham ends this discourse telling the tormented man, “If they don’t listen to Moses and the prophets, neither will they be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.” Now there’s a little dig for the end of the story. If they don’t pay attention to the words of Moses and the prophets they won’t pay attention to anyone else who is sent, even if they have risen from the dead. I read this with the none-too-subtle foreshadowing of someone who celebrated Easter twenty-four weeks ago.
Send them Lazarus. Send him well fed and healed. Send him with word of my torment and my status in the afterlife. Let them hear what happened to me. Even in the torment of the fires of hell, it’s still all about him. My brothers will repent if they hear about me and my fate. I never paid any mind to the frail, lifeless, sore ridden body of Lazarus while he was alive. Now that he is perfect and at your side have him run an errand for me. If he does this chore, my brothers will be saved, they will repent.
Father Abraham just says no, if they don’t hear and heed the words of my children while they are alive; surely the voice of one more, even one from the dead, will be without consequence. You think one more miracle will help, surely I tell you that one more miracle, even one as grand as the redemption of Lazarus, will not change your brothers. Even something so wonderful as and appearance from beyond the grave will not cause them to turn their lives, to repent.
The life of the rich man clothed in purple was all about him. He was dressed in purple and in fine linen. He feasted sumptuously every day. Even after he died his body was handled in the most extravagant of ways. And now in death, it is still all about him. Send Lazarus to quench my thirst. Send Lazarus to tend to my family. In life and in death, it’s all about him. He tells Abraham, “If you do this one miraculous thing, all will be good in my death. My family will be saved.”
I don’t think there is contempt in the voice of Father Abraham, but a simple acceptance of life its own self when he replies, “No, they have their miracles. Let them learn from that. Let what has been done be their salvation.”
I began by saying parables are difficult to preach because of the richness of their imagery, and the images of this parable are over the top. There is luxurious living and there is abject poverty. There is cloth of purple and fine linen and a coating of sores. There is then a stunning reversal of fortune where the outsider is suddenly the insider covered in the bosom of Abraham and the insider left to the woes of his torment unhappily ever-after. What else can be said about this? All the man has to say is “Have Lazarus take a message and save my brothers.” Then Abraham responds, “Moses and the prophets have given them all the message they need.”
When folks seek a word from the Lord, seeking guidance or direction, often we ask for a miracle, signs and wonders that will cause us to change the way we see life. Miracles and signs and wonders that will cause us to change the way we live life. But as Father Abraham tells the rich man dressed in purple whose fate was reversed to become the man clothed in the torment of Hades, the miracle is there in the words of Moses and the prophets. The miracle is with you, pray your brothers seize it that they may escape your fate.
What size miracle is the tormented man looking for? The tormented man hopes for Lazarus, the miracle of Lazarus, whether in body or spirit, to appear to his brothers. As I said a moment ago, this is some miracle, isn’t it?
What size miracle are you looking for? We have the answer to that question; we are looking for the most wonderful miracle imaginable. What we have is a miracle that is even grander than that. The miracle we have been given is that God proves his love for us in that while we still were sinners Christ died for us.[i] For us the miracle is not a what, it is who. We have been given the miracle who is able to do abundantly far more than all we can ask or imagine,[ii] the miracle of the Word of God come to life in Jesus Christ.
And through this miracle, now we are to be the miracle. We are called by the Lord to take and share the miracle of the Lord Jesus Christ, not only with one another but with the world, the world that begins immediately outside the doors of this sanctuary.
Much has been written and said lately about evangelism in the Presbyterian Church. There are some congregations where when you say the word “evangelism” you are confronted with the imperial sins of the church that once took the word to the world with a bible and a gun. But in truth evangelism is sharing the Good News of God, life in Jesus Christ here and now, and for eternity. Evangelism is loving God and saying it out loud.
Christ lived for us. This is a miracle. Christ died for us. This is a miracle. Christ rose for us. This too is a miracle. Now, we are called to live for Christ, by Christ, through Christ. This is how we are to be the miracle. We are called to share the Good News of Jesus Christ and what God has done and continues to do through the power of the Holy Spirit.
[i] Romans 6:8
[ii] Ephesians 3:20
Duke, Paul Simpson, The Parables, A Preaching Commentary. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2005, pages 57-66.
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Sunday, September 23, 2007
Apology
This sermon was delivered at the First Presbyterian Church in Berryville Arkansas on Sunday September 23, 2007, the 25th week of Ordinary Time.
Jeremiah 8:18-9:1
Psalm 79:1-9
1Timothy 2:1-7
Luke 16:1-13
May the words of my mouth and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable to you, O Lord, our rock and our redeemer. Amen.
There is an organization of about 200 New Testament scholars who refer to their studies as the Jesus Seminar. The seminar’s objective is to use historical methods to determine what Jesus may or may not have said and done as a historical figure. Through this, the seminar popularizes research into what is known as the Quest for the Historical Jesus.[1] Theologians speak of Jesus as being fully human and fully divine. The Jesus Seminar is interested in uncovering the words and acts of the fully human Jesus of Nazareth.
The Jesus Seminar has caused controversy among biblical scholars of all stripes for many reasons. Perhaps the most controversial aspect of these studies is the method they use to make a final determination about the probable authenticity of a “Jesus saying.”
They assign a color to the text based on the probability that it is genuine. They use red for sayings they consider to be indisputably the words of Jesus and black for those they deem almost certainly not. Of course, there are also pink and gray designations awarded because in this life, little is black and red. In the end, the recommendations for the color of a text are tallied like votes, and the winning color determines the seminar’s decision on the authenticity of the saying.
As unusual as this method is for evaluating scholarship, one of the more distressing outcomes of the Jesus Seminar is the swath of black—or at least gray—that their investigations are cutting in some of the most cherished gospel texts. The flash of red appears all too infrequently for the comfort of those who still hope to find glimpses of the human Jesus on the pages of their Bibles.
Today’s gospel reading is unusual in many respects, not the least of which is its glorious red color in the eyes of most of the Jesus Seminar scholars. At least the central core of the so-called “parable of the dishonest manager,” Luke 16:1 through the first half of verse 8, is considered to be authentic to more than 75% of Jesus Seminar members.
But our delight in this assertion quickly dissipates when we realize that we have just declared one of the oddest, most unsatisfying, and consequently, most controversial and ignored parables, to be the genuine thoughts and words of Jesus.[2]
Among scholars, there are nearly as many variant interpretations of the parable of the dishonest manager as there are articles written about it. Here’s my two cents on the debate. I believe that the first part of our reading, verses 1 through 8a is the meat of the parable and the remainder is commentary, an explanation of the parable added to help the listener understand it.
There are two things to note about the comments on the parable, verses 8b through 13. First is that the comments that follow the parable are very important lessons, all four of them.
The first comment is that the children of this age are more shrewd than the children of light in dealing with other children of this age. There is a certain something that those willing to lie, cheat, and steal bring to negotiations with others willing to lie, cheat, and steal that the children of light, the children of God do not bring. And since the children of light choose not to bring lies and so on, this isn’t a bad thing. It’s also not as much a lesson as it is an observation.
The second interpretation tells the listener to make friends by means of dishonest wealth so that when it is gone, others of dishonest wealth will welcome us into the eternal homes. That’s what it says and it makes no better sense in Greek. There is no little nuance missing that makes this any more satisfying. I only hope it is an eternal home for those the prior verse calls the children of this age, not the children of light. Earn ill-gotten gains so that should you ever go broke you will be welcomed into eternal homes built on ill-gotten gains. All right, good to know, I don’t know for what, but it’s good to know.
The third lesson comes in several variations over the next three verses. These explanations deal with being trustworthy. If you are faithful in one thing, you will be faithful in all things and if you are unfaithful in one thing, you will be unfaithful in all things. It doesn’t matter whether you are honest or not, it doesn’t matter whether the gains are ill-gotten or not, and it doesn’t matter whether the things are yours are not. If you are responsible with little, you will be responsible with much and likewise if you are irresponsible with little, you will be irresponsible with much. Good lesson here for both a manager and an employer.
The fourth lesson is that nobody can serve two masters, one will be loved and the other will be hated; so it is impossible to serve both God and wealth. This is so very true.
These four comments are important lessons. But this leads us to the other thing about these explanations of the parable of the dishonest manager: Most of the lessons don’t really apply to the parable and those that do aren’t the ones we want to emulate and teach our children.
The first two lessons, the lessons of the shrewdness of the children of this age and friends of dishonest wealth aren’t really great lessons. As true as they are, in the eternal life they aren’t that valuable. Yes, the master does commend the dishonest manager for his shrewd actions, but that doesn’t really mean we want our children to abandon seeking to be the children of light in favor of becoming the children of this age. And I really hope it doesn’t mean we should encourage anyone to earn dishonest wealth so they will be welcome into eternal homes built by more dishonest wealth.
As for the others, they are wonderful lessons to teach, but they don’t especially flow from the parable. Here the parable is a lesson focused around an unrighteous manager and the lessons that follow here are if you are faithful with little you will be faithful with much. The lesson of the two masters doesn’t really jibe with the parable, especially the master’s commendation of the dishonest manager.
It’s not that I don’t think these lessons don’t belong in the bible. In fact, parallels of these sayings can be found in the Gospels of John and Matthew. The “friends of dishonest wealth” lesson matches the saying in John 12:36-43 where we are warned against loving human glory more than glory that comes from God. The lessons of being trusted with little and much are found in Matthew 25 in the parable of the talents. Finally, Matthew 6:24 contains the saying about serving two masters, but in Matthew’s gospel it stands alone.[3] These are good lessons; it just looks like Luke tacked them somewhere they really don’t belong.
I think Luke was trying to explain this odd parable to later generations of listeners. Being an odd little parable, I know I want some interpretation and so I imagine others did too; so Luke added these. But this is just a little more proof that interpreting a parable is like trying to put a tux on a pig, and this hog isn’t ready for his fraternity formal.
Again, this is my opinion: one of the problems with these interpretations being tacked onto this passage deals with the original intent of the parable and the original intent of the interpretations. Our reading begins, “Then Jesus said to the disciples…” The intent of this parable is to inform the disciples. The commentary that follows was added to inform later readers. This distinction is actually very important. There are two different ways to teach theology, one way is called dogmatics and the other is called apologetics.
Dogmatics are intended for those who all ready believe and seek to learn more. Apologetics are for those who do not believe and those who are new believers to the faith. In a way, the parable which was intended for the disciples was dogmatic and the interpretations that followed were apologetic. I think that this mixing of messages is why this is so confusing.[4]
So what’s the difference? There are some things you would say to disciples who have been following you for a couple of years that you wouldn’t say to people you have just met. There are things you try to teach someone who has an expertise in a subject that you wouldn’t try to teach to a novice. There are things you would teach in a graduate school theology seminar you wouldn’t say in a children’s sermon. So when the dogmatic lesson to the disciples is combined with apologetics meant for the masses, they come together in very poorly. And so it is here. We have an odd parable with even odder interpretation.
Years ago, I heard the story of a grade school student who was rather lazy with his homework.[5] Because of his laziness, he was failing social studies. Come the end of the semester, his teacher was adamant that he turn in his final project, so were his parents for that matter. So he asked the question, “What grade am I getting in this class?” His teacher replied, “An ‘F.’” So he asked another question, “And if I turn in my final project, what will I get in this class?” His teacher replied again, “An ‘F.’” The boy shrugged. After that, there was nothing his teacher or his folks could say to get him to lift a finger on the project.
When I heard this story, I had to give the boy credit. He was not even ten years old and he had figured out the principle of this parable. He doesn’t do the work, he gets an “F,” he does the work; he gets an “F.” What’s the difference? So I give him credit, just like Jesus commended the dishonest servant, but here’s the rub: This boy can explain his actions using commendable earthly wisdom all he wants, but if this boy never changes his ways, I would not trust him with anything of value, nor do I believe Jesus trusts an unfaithful servant of the age with his age to come.
In a theological context, the word apologetics means explanation. And from the same root we get the word apology, an expression of regret or remorse. I do not think that Jesus wants our explanations or remorse, our apologies. The all knowing, living Lord of life sees our actions. An explanation is not in order. Grief and sorrow are not very productive either. Instead, what we are called to do, something the unrighteousness servant in the parable never does, is confess. Only through confession can there be forgiveness. Explanation is not enough. Sorrow is not enough. We are called to confess our sins against God and against each other. And every Sunday, we confess our sins together. And together we are called to change, to repent.
We need what we can never achieve on our own. We need God’s forgiveness through Christ’s intercession. We pray that we will be filled anew with the Holy Spirit so that we may faithfully obey God’s will. Only through confession of our vengeful, resentful, angry, deceitful, selfish desires can we receive the Lord’s forgiveness. And only through this forgiveness can we be reconciled to God and one another. Only through Jesus’ sacrifice is our relationship with God and with one another redeemed.[6]
Give the dishonest manager credit for what he has done. He has proven himself untrustworthy and unrepentant. He is shrewd and he is sly, but he is not wise and he is not among the children of light. Only when he comes to terms with the fact that he needs more than just his wits will he become wise. Only then will he be able to hear the small still voice of God that goads him toward leaving the eternal home of the unrighteous and through confession and repentance lead him into eternal life.
Beware the shrewd manager. He has much to teach that is not worth learning. His teachings take us away from life and toward something that only resembles life. Instead, let us confess our sins against God and against one another, and with that, exchange signs of God’s peace and love with one another. May the grace and peace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. And also with you. Amen.
[1] Jesus Seminar, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_Seminar, accessed September 22, 2007
[2] Much of this section is directly and indirectly taken from HomileticsOnline.com, Commentary Section for “The Truth of Love,” http://www.homileticsonline.com/subscriber/commentary_display.asp?installment_id=2976&item_id=25562, accessed August 20, 2007.
[3] These references were found consulting the column index apparatus in: The United Bible Societies and Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft Stuttgart, The Greek New Testament. Aland, Black, Martini, Metzger, and Wikgren, editors in cooperation with the Institute for New Testament Textual Research. Fourth Edition, Münster: Westphalia, 1966, 1968, 1975 (by the UBS) and 1993, 1994 (by the DBS)
[4] This is my opinion and hypothesis. I found no commentary that forwarded this particular argument. It may be worthless, but it may also begin some discussion.
[5] True story, the names are withheld to protect the guilty.
[6] This paragraph is based on the Confession of Sin found in Kirk, James G., When We Gather. Louisville, KY: Geneva Press, 2001, page 343.
Jeremiah 8:18-9:1
Psalm 79:1-9
1Timothy 2:1-7
Luke 16:1-13
May the words of my mouth and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable to you, O Lord, our rock and our redeemer. Amen.
There is an organization of about 200 New Testament scholars who refer to their studies as the Jesus Seminar. The seminar’s objective is to use historical methods to determine what Jesus may or may not have said and done as a historical figure. Through this, the seminar popularizes research into what is known as the Quest for the Historical Jesus.[1] Theologians speak of Jesus as being fully human and fully divine. The Jesus Seminar is interested in uncovering the words and acts of the fully human Jesus of Nazareth.
The Jesus Seminar has caused controversy among biblical scholars of all stripes for many reasons. Perhaps the most controversial aspect of these studies is the method they use to make a final determination about the probable authenticity of a “Jesus saying.”
They assign a color to the text based on the probability that it is genuine. They use red for sayings they consider to be indisputably the words of Jesus and black for those they deem almost certainly not. Of course, there are also pink and gray designations awarded because in this life, little is black and red. In the end, the recommendations for the color of a text are tallied like votes, and the winning color determines the seminar’s decision on the authenticity of the saying.
As unusual as this method is for evaluating scholarship, one of the more distressing outcomes of the Jesus Seminar is the swath of black—or at least gray—that their investigations are cutting in some of the most cherished gospel texts. The flash of red appears all too infrequently for the comfort of those who still hope to find glimpses of the human Jesus on the pages of their Bibles.
Today’s gospel reading is unusual in many respects, not the least of which is its glorious red color in the eyes of most of the Jesus Seminar scholars. At least the central core of the so-called “parable of the dishonest manager,” Luke 16:1 through the first half of verse 8, is considered to be authentic to more than 75% of Jesus Seminar members.
But our delight in this assertion quickly dissipates when we realize that we have just declared one of the oddest, most unsatisfying, and consequently, most controversial and ignored parables, to be the genuine thoughts and words of Jesus.[2]
Among scholars, there are nearly as many variant interpretations of the parable of the dishonest manager as there are articles written about it. Here’s my two cents on the debate. I believe that the first part of our reading, verses 1 through 8a is the meat of the parable and the remainder is commentary, an explanation of the parable added to help the listener understand it.
There are two things to note about the comments on the parable, verses 8b through 13. First is that the comments that follow the parable are very important lessons, all four of them.
The first comment is that the children of this age are more shrewd than the children of light in dealing with other children of this age. There is a certain something that those willing to lie, cheat, and steal bring to negotiations with others willing to lie, cheat, and steal that the children of light, the children of God do not bring. And since the children of light choose not to bring lies and so on, this isn’t a bad thing. It’s also not as much a lesson as it is an observation.
The second interpretation tells the listener to make friends by means of dishonest wealth so that when it is gone, others of dishonest wealth will welcome us into the eternal homes. That’s what it says and it makes no better sense in Greek. There is no little nuance missing that makes this any more satisfying. I only hope it is an eternal home for those the prior verse calls the children of this age, not the children of light. Earn ill-gotten gains so that should you ever go broke you will be welcomed into eternal homes built on ill-gotten gains. All right, good to know, I don’t know for what, but it’s good to know.
The third lesson comes in several variations over the next three verses. These explanations deal with being trustworthy. If you are faithful in one thing, you will be faithful in all things and if you are unfaithful in one thing, you will be unfaithful in all things. It doesn’t matter whether you are honest or not, it doesn’t matter whether the gains are ill-gotten or not, and it doesn’t matter whether the things are yours are not. If you are responsible with little, you will be responsible with much and likewise if you are irresponsible with little, you will be irresponsible with much. Good lesson here for both a manager and an employer.
The fourth lesson is that nobody can serve two masters, one will be loved and the other will be hated; so it is impossible to serve both God and wealth. This is so very true.
These four comments are important lessons. But this leads us to the other thing about these explanations of the parable of the dishonest manager: Most of the lessons don’t really apply to the parable and those that do aren’t the ones we want to emulate and teach our children.
The first two lessons, the lessons of the shrewdness of the children of this age and friends of dishonest wealth aren’t really great lessons. As true as they are, in the eternal life they aren’t that valuable. Yes, the master does commend the dishonest manager for his shrewd actions, but that doesn’t really mean we want our children to abandon seeking to be the children of light in favor of becoming the children of this age. And I really hope it doesn’t mean we should encourage anyone to earn dishonest wealth so they will be welcome into eternal homes built by more dishonest wealth.
As for the others, they are wonderful lessons to teach, but they don’t especially flow from the parable. Here the parable is a lesson focused around an unrighteous manager and the lessons that follow here are if you are faithful with little you will be faithful with much. The lesson of the two masters doesn’t really jibe with the parable, especially the master’s commendation of the dishonest manager.
It’s not that I don’t think these lessons don’t belong in the bible. In fact, parallels of these sayings can be found in the Gospels of John and Matthew. The “friends of dishonest wealth” lesson matches the saying in John 12:36-43 where we are warned against loving human glory more than glory that comes from God. The lessons of being trusted with little and much are found in Matthew 25 in the parable of the talents. Finally, Matthew 6:24 contains the saying about serving two masters, but in Matthew’s gospel it stands alone.[3] These are good lessons; it just looks like Luke tacked them somewhere they really don’t belong.
I think Luke was trying to explain this odd parable to later generations of listeners. Being an odd little parable, I know I want some interpretation and so I imagine others did too; so Luke added these. But this is just a little more proof that interpreting a parable is like trying to put a tux on a pig, and this hog isn’t ready for his fraternity formal.
Again, this is my opinion: one of the problems with these interpretations being tacked onto this passage deals with the original intent of the parable and the original intent of the interpretations. Our reading begins, “Then Jesus said to the disciples…” The intent of this parable is to inform the disciples. The commentary that follows was added to inform later readers. This distinction is actually very important. There are two different ways to teach theology, one way is called dogmatics and the other is called apologetics.
Dogmatics are intended for those who all ready believe and seek to learn more. Apologetics are for those who do not believe and those who are new believers to the faith. In a way, the parable which was intended for the disciples was dogmatic and the interpretations that followed were apologetic. I think that this mixing of messages is why this is so confusing.[4]
So what’s the difference? There are some things you would say to disciples who have been following you for a couple of years that you wouldn’t say to people you have just met. There are things you try to teach someone who has an expertise in a subject that you wouldn’t try to teach to a novice. There are things you would teach in a graduate school theology seminar you wouldn’t say in a children’s sermon. So when the dogmatic lesson to the disciples is combined with apologetics meant for the masses, they come together in very poorly. And so it is here. We have an odd parable with even odder interpretation.
Years ago, I heard the story of a grade school student who was rather lazy with his homework.[5] Because of his laziness, he was failing social studies. Come the end of the semester, his teacher was adamant that he turn in his final project, so were his parents for that matter. So he asked the question, “What grade am I getting in this class?” His teacher replied, “An ‘F.’” So he asked another question, “And if I turn in my final project, what will I get in this class?” His teacher replied again, “An ‘F.’” The boy shrugged. After that, there was nothing his teacher or his folks could say to get him to lift a finger on the project.
When I heard this story, I had to give the boy credit. He was not even ten years old and he had figured out the principle of this parable. He doesn’t do the work, he gets an “F,” he does the work; he gets an “F.” What’s the difference? So I give him credit, just like Jesus commended the dishonest servant, but here’s the rub: This boy can explain his actions using commendable earthly wisdom all he wants, but if this boy never changes his ways, I would not trust him with anything of value, nor do I believe Jesus trusts an unfaithful servant of the age with his age to come.
In a theological context, the word apologetics means explanation. And from the same root we get the word apology, an expression of regret or remorse. I do not think that Jesus wants our explanations or remorse, our apologies. The all knowing, living Lord of life sees our actions. An explanation is not in order. Grief and sorrow are not very productive either. Instead, what we are called to do, something the unrighteousness servant in the parable never does, is confess. Only through confession can there be forgiveness. Explanation is not enough. Sorrow is not enough. We are called to confess our sins against God and against each other. And every Sunday, we confess our sins together. And together we are called to change, to repent.
We need what we can never achieve on our own. We need God’s forgiveness through Christ’s intercession. We pray that we will be filled anew with the Holy Spirit so that we may faithfully obey God’s will. Only through confession of our vengeful, resentful, angry, deceitful, selfish desires can we receive the Lord’s forgiveness. And only through this forgiveness can we be reconciled to God and one another. Only through Jesus’ sacrifice is our relationship with God and with one another redeemed.[6]
Give the dishonest manager credit for what he has done. He has proven himself untrustworthy and unrepentant. He is shrewd and he is sly, but he is not wise and he is not among the children of light. Only when he comes to terms with the fact that he needs more than just his wits will he become wise. Only then will he be able to hear the small still voice of God that goads him toward leaving the eternal home of the unrighteous and through confession and repentance lead him into eternal life.
Beware the shrewd manager. He has much to teach that is not worth learning. His teachings take us away from life and toward something that only resembles life. Instead, let us confess our sins against God and against one another, and with that, exchange signs of God’s peace and love with one another. May the grace and peace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. And also with you. Amen.
[1] Jesus Seminar, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_Seminar, accessed September 22, 2007
[2] Much of this section is directly and indirectly taken from HomileticsOnline.com, Commentary Section for “The Truth of Love,” http://www.homileticsonline.com/subscriber/commentary_display.asp?installment_id=2976&item_id=25562, accessed August 20, 2007.
[3] These references were found consulting the column index apparatus in: The United Bible Societies and Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft Stuttgart, The Greek New Testament. Aland, Black, Martini, Metzger, and Wikgren, editors in cooperation with the Institute for New Testament Textual Research. Fourth Edition, Münster: Westphalia, 1966, 1968, 1975 (by the UBS) and 1993, 1994 (by the DBS)
[4] This is my opinion and hypothesis. I found no commentary that forwarded this particular argument. It may be worthless, but it may also begin some discussion.
[5] True story, the names are withheld to protect the guilty.
[6] This paragraph is based on the Confession of Sin found in Kirk, James G., When We Gather. Louisville, KY: Geneva Press, 2001, page 343.
Sunday, September 16, 2007
Lost and Found
Jeremiah 4:11-12, 22-28
Psalm 14
1Timothy 1:12-17
Luke 15:1-10
May the words of my mouth and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable to you, O Lord, our rock and our redeemer. Amen
I don’t often do this, but I would like us to reconsider where we begin reading our gospel story today. I want us to begin with the last part of Luke 14:35, the verse that immediately precedes our gospel reading today: “Let anyone with ears to hear listen!” This is a wonderful command of Jesus, and a favorite of several of my seminary professors. I imagine those of you who have been teachers have used a variation of this in class. When I was in high school, my teachers would say “this will be on the test” to mean the same thing. “Pay attention” is another variation, though my French teacher used to say “faite attention.”
What follows in the gospel is a reaction to that very command, “Now all the tax collectors and sinners were coming hear to listen to him. And the Pharisees and the scribes were grumbling and saying, ‘This fellow welcomes sinners and eats with them.’” Now, there is no way for us to know whether in first century Palestine these two events immediately followed one another or not. The way that the gospel is structured and the events are reported, we can’t know, a time frame is missing from these readings. But one thing is certain, the readers and listeners of this gospel were most certainly intended to connect these dots: “Jesus says ‘listen,’ sinners come, the temple leaders grumble.” Jesus then uses three parables to enlighten his listeners. The first is the parable of the missing sheep, followed by the parable of the lost coin, and finishing with the parable of the prodigal; which we read a couple of weeks before Easter.
There’s a problem inherent to preaching parables. It begins when parables literally dare preachers to create a sermon around them.[1] Preaching often takes familiar bible stories and tries to interpret them for the congregation by means of illustration and allegory. As you know, I often tell stories that tie, or at least try to tie, the Word of God into something meaningful for us, for this community of Christ, for this congregation. The problem with trying to do this with parables is that in a parable, Jesus is all ready making a point and using stories with more layers of illustration and allegory than a piece of baklava to make a point for his community, for his listeners. Frankly, trying to preach a parable is like trying to tell a story twice removed. It’s like trying to explain a joke. Trying to reinterpret a parable is often like trying to put a tuxedo on a pig. It ruins the tux and annoys the pig.
So today, rather than beginning by focusing on the parables, I want us to focus on what surrounds the parables. We have all ready begun with Jesus’ command to listen and the reaction of those around him. What follows next is amazing.
Jesus begins by telling anyone with ears to hear that there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance. He ends this group of sayings by telling anyone with ears to hear that there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents.
Joy; wonderful, glorious, bountiful joy! When there is repentance, joy follows in heaven and is experienced by the angels. This is what Jesus is trying to teach anyone with ears to hear, through repentance there is joy in heaven.
So trying to relate these parables to these conclusions are where they get a little weird. In the New Testament, the word repent means “change of mind”[2] or perhaps “change of heart.” In neither of these parables does the object of the parable, the sheep or the coin, change its mind or heart. A sheep doesn’t have the faculties to change its mind in a repenting way. For a coin, repenting is impossible unless silver has some special ability I’m not familiar with. So if heaven rejoices when repentance abounds, and the objects of these parables are not able to repent, then what’s the use of telling them?
Here is, in my opinion, the distinction. In parables, we listeners often try to put ourselves into the parable. I think this is a mistake in these two parables. Rather, let’s consider the subjects of the parables instead of their objects.
Hold on, I’m about to try to get a pig ready for prom.
We begin with the shepherd. In the ancient of days, the shepherds were often young boys who were trusted with tending the flocks. They often had to put their lives on the line to protect the sheep from predators. The hours were long and the times were difficult. And because the sheep were so valuable, one missing was important to the community. It is the shepherd who takes the risk of going to find the lost. It is the shepherd who takes the time to find the lost. It is the shepherd who walks through I don’t know what to find the lost. And I can just imagine, if a sheep is lost, missing the call of its mother, it is undoubtedly in a place it shouldn’t be.
The shepherd risks what we cannot imagine to find one sheep whose relative value is one percent of the flock. It’s just a little thing, and yet the shepherd risks his life and his flock to retrieve the one. And when he does there is great rejoicing.
The parable of the woman and the coin also has its share of cultural history that is lost on us. In the day, when a woman left her parent’s home to be married, she received a dowry of ten silver coins. Since a silver coin, the denarius, was the going wage for one day’s work at the time, it would take quite a while to save that much. A significant sacrifice is needed to save enough to provide this dowry. Also, it was the possession of the woman. The coins were usually given attached to a chain which was worn across the forehead as a sort of a headband. If she were ever put out of the home by her husband, she would have at least these ten coins to start a new life. It was a savings account. It was a form of financial security. But if one of the coins was missing, it was not good. Her financial security would be less and since it was worn as jewelry, everyone in the community would know the coin was missing. And why it was missing would be fodder for gossips for generations to come.
So she lights the lamp and turns her household inside out looking for the missing coin. And when she does find it, she calls her friends together and says, “Rejoice with me for I have found the coin that I had lost.”
Both of these stories feature as its subject a person who has found what was lost, and in finding the one and returning it to the group calls the community together to rejoice. As I said, often as listeners we try to plug ourselves into the parable to see who we are in the Word of God. In this case, in these parables, that’s not appropriate. These parables are not about who we are. These parables are about who God is.
God is the one who seeks the lost. God is the one who scours the countryside to find the one who has lost its way. God is the one who risks all to return the one to the fold. God is the one who goes where angels fear to tread to find the one who had gone astray. God is the one who lights the lamp. God is the one who scours the home. God is the one who sweeps the dust to find the one of great value and sacrifice.
God is the one who makes the sacrifice in the first place that we may be one of the hundred or one of the ten.
God is the one who celebrates with the angels in heaven. Amazingly, the shepherd and the woman invite neighbors over to celebrate the return of the one to the others. It is entirely possible that the celebration that follows will cost more than the value of the one that was lost. If the lamb or the coin are worth in our money say $100.00,[3] it would be very easy for us to spend far more than that having the neighbors over to celebrate. In our economy, this isn’t a very good return on investment. But in God’s economy, only in God’s economics of plenty and extravagance, this makes sense. The ruler of the universe is willing and able to finance such a celebration and does it rejoicing because what was once lost is now found. What is once lost is returned to the community God created for us in the first place.
There is no better way to explain these parables. This is why the only things I have done to “explain” these parables are to help us better understand first their historical context and that they are not about us. There is no way I can retell them that doesn’t lessen them. My words, my stories, my allusions can only detract from the wonderful and glorious word of God as God tells anyone with ears to hear who he is, and what he expects in return.
My only hope is that I didn’t ruin the tux too badly or annoy the pig too much.
Jesus preceded these parables with the instruction: “Let anyone with ears to hear listen!” Listening has a special meaning in the original language of scripture that the English language doesn’t. In scripture, in Hebrew and in Greek, the definitions of the words for “listen” include the special element of responding to the word, not just hearing it. The words of life are to do more than wash over us like the breeze on a spring day; they are to soak through us like a shower. The words or life are to become a part of us like water is vital for our survival.
It is these very words we need to seek. The word of God written in scripture tells those with eyes to see the story of who God is and what God has done in the world. It is up to us to continue to seek the living word of God in Jesus Christ. It is up to us to seek the word revealed to us through the work and word of the Holy Spirit who was sent to walk with us and reveal God to us still. He is the God who seeks us when we are in places we shouldn’t be; the God who seeks us where we are. He is the God who scours the house to find us. He is the God who rejoices when he does, and celebrates this with the heavenly host.
We are to use our prayer and worship tuned senses to experience who God is and what God continues to do. Through the word and work of God we are to change and continue to be changed by it; to be neither the sinners nor the hypocrites surrounding Jesus at the beginning of this passage. And it is up to us to take these experiences in the word and share them with a world that longs to hear them.
Jesus tells those with ears to hear who he is. Jesus tells us to use our voices to share the good news of his extravagant grace of God with a world that thirsts for the word. Our instruction is simple: come to the Lord our God, listen to the Word, be changed by the Good News, share his overflowing grace with the world, and rejoice—rejoice with the Lord and the entire heavenly host. Listen, share and rejoice.
[1] Duke, Paul Simpson, The Parables. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2005, page 97.
[2] Repentance in the NT, Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible. 21st Printing, 1992, Buttrick, George A., Editor. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1962, electronic version 2002.
[3] I come up with this figure for the coin based on an income of $30,000 over 300 working days per year. This is a low-ball salary average divided by a first century work year. As for the price of a whole lamb, I have no idea.
Psalm 14
1Timothy 1:12-17
Luke 15:1-10
May the words of my mouth and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable to you, O Lord, our rock and our redeemer. Amen
I don’t often do this, but I would like us to reconsider where we begin reading our gospel story today. I want us to begin with the last part of Luke 14:35, the verse that immediately precedes our gospel reading today: “Let anyone with ears to hear listen!” This is a wonderful command of Jesus, and a favorite of several of my seminary professors. I imagine those of you who have been teachers have used a variation of this in class. When I was in high school, my teachers would say “this will be on the test” to mean the same thing. “Pay attention” is another variation, though my French teacher used to say “faite attention.”
What follows in the gospel is a reaction to that very command, “Now all the tax collectors and sinners were coming hear to listen to him. And the Pharisees and the scribes were grumbling and saying, ‘This fellow welcomes sinners and eats with them.’” Now, there is no way for us to know whether in first century Palestine these two events immediately followed one another or not. The way that the gospel is structured and the events are reported, we can’t know, a time frame is missing from these readings. But one thing is certain, the readers and listeners of this gospel were most certainly intended to connect these dots: “Jesus says ‘listen,’ sinners come, the temple leaders grumble.” Jesus then uses three parables to enlighten his listeners. The first is the parable of the missing sheep, followed by the parable of the lost coin, and finishing with the parable of the prodigal; which we read a couple of weeks before Easter.
There’s a problem inherent to preaching parables. It begins when parables literally dare preachers to create a sermon around them.[1] Preaching often takes familiar bible stories and tries to interpret them for the congregation by means of illustration and allegory. As you know, I often tell stories that tie, or at least try to tie, the Word of God into something meaningful for us, for this community of Christ, for this congregation. The problem with trying to do this with parables is that in a parable, Jesus is all ready making a point and using stories with more layers of illustration and allegory than a piece of baklava to make a point for his community, for his listeners. Frankly, trying to preach a parable is like trying to tell a story twice removed. It’s like trying to explain a joke. Trying to reinterpret a parable is often like trying to put a tuxedo on a pig. It ruins the tux and annoys the pig.
So today, rather than beginning by focusing on the parables, I want us to focus on what surrounds the parables. We have all ready begun with Jesus’ command to listen and the reaction of those around him. What follows next is amazing.
Jesus begins by telling anyone with ears to hear that there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance. He ends this group of sayings by telling anyone with ears to hear that there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents.
Joy; wonderful, glorious, bountiful joy! When there is repentance, joy follows in heaven and is experienced by the angels. This is what Jesus is trying to teach anyone with ears to hear, through repentance there is joy in heaven.
So trying to relate these parables to these conclusions are where they get a little weird. In the New Testament, the word repent means “change of mind”[2] or perhaps “change of heart.” In neither of these parables does the object of the parable, the sheep or the coin, change its mind or heart. A sheep doesn’t have the faculties to change its mind in a repenting way. For a coin, repenting is impossible unless silver has some special ability I’m not familiar with. So if heaven rejoices when repentance abounds, and the objects of these parables are not able to repent, then what’s the use of telling them?
Here is, in my opinion, the distinction. In parables, we listeners often try to put ourselves into the parable. I think this is a mistake in these two parables. Rather, let’s consider the subjects of the parables instead of their objects.
Hold on, I’m about to try to get a pig ready for prom.
We begin with the shepherd. In the ancient of days, the shepherds were often young boys who were trusted with tending the flocks. They often had to put their lives on the line to protect the sheep from predators. The hours were long and the times were difficult. And because the sheep were so valuable, one missing was important to the community. It is the shepherd who takes the risk of going to find the lost. It is the shepherd who takes the time to find the lost. It is the shepherd who walks through I don’t know what to find the lost. And I can just imagine, if a sheep is lost, missing the call of its mother, it is undoubtedly in a place it shouldn’t be.
The shepherd risks what we cannot imagine to find one sheep whose relative value is one percent of the flock. It’s just a little thing, and yet the shepherd risks his life and his flock to retrieve the one. And when he does there is great rejoicing.
The parable of the woman and the coin also has its share of cultural history that is lost on us. In the day, when a woman left her parent’s home to be married, she received a dowry of ten silver coins. Since a silver coin, the denarius, was the going wage for one day’s work at the time, it would take quite a while to save that much. A significant sacrifice is needed to save enough to provide this dowry. Also, it was the possession of the woman. The coins were usually given attached to a chain which was worn across the forehead as a sort of a headband. If she were ever put out of the home by her husband, she would have at least these ten coins to start a new life. It was a savings account. It was a form of financial security. But if one of the coins was missing, it was not good. Her financial security would be less and since it was worn as jewelry, everyone in the community would know the coin was missing. And why it was missing would be fodder for gossips for generations to come.
So she lights the lamp and turns her household inside out looking for the missing coin. And when she does find it, she calls her friends together and says, “Rejoice with me for I have found the coin that I had lost.”
Both of these stories feature as its subject a person who has found what was lost, and in finding the one and returning it to the group calls the community together to rejoice. As I said, often as listeners we try to plug ourselves into the parable to see who we are in the Word of God. In this case, in these parables, that’s not appropriate. These parables are not about who we are. These parables are about who God is.
God is the one who seeks the lost. God is the one who scours the countryside to find the one who has lost its way. God is the one who risks all to return the one to the fold. God is the one who goes where angels fear to tread to find the one who had gone astray. God is the one who lights the lamp. God is the one who scours the home. God is the one who sweeps the dust to find the one of great value and sacrifice.
God is the one who makes the sacrifice in the first place that we may be one of the hundred or one of the ten.
God is the one who celebrates with the angels in heaven. Amazingly, the shepherd and the woman invite neighbors over to celebrate the return of the one to the others. It is entirely possible that the celebration that follows will cost more than the value of the one that was lost. If the lamb or the coin are worth in our money say $100.00,[3] it would be very easy for us to spend far more than that having the neighbors over to celebrate. In our economy, this isn’t a very good return on investment. But in God’s economy, only in God’s economics of plenty and extravagance, this makes sense. The ruler of the universe is willing and able to finance such a celebration and does it rejoicing because what was once lost is now found. What is once lost is returned to the community God created for us in the first place.
There is no better way to explain these parables. This is why the only things I have done to “explain” these parables are to help us better understand first their historical context and that they are not about us. There is no way I can retell them that doesn’t lessen them. My words, my stories, my allusions can only detract from the wonderful and glorious word of God as God tells anyone with ears to hear who he is, and what he expects in return.
My only hope is that I didn’t ruin the tux too badly or annoy the pig too much.
Jesus preceded these parables with the instruction: “Let anyone with ears to hear listen!” Listening has a special meaning in the original language of scripture that the English language doesn’t. In scripture, in Hebrew and in Greek, the definitions of the words for “listen” include the special element of responding to the word, not just hearing it. The words of life are to do more than wash over us like the breeze on a spring day; they are to soak through us like a shower. The words or life are to become a part of us like water is vital for our survival.
It is these very words we need to seek. The word of God written in scripture tells those with eyes to see the story of who God is and what God has done in the world. It is up to us to continue to seek the living word of God in Jesus Christ. It is up to us to seek the word revealed to us through the work and word of the Holy Spirit who was sent to walk with us and reveal God to us still. He is the God who seeks us when we are in places we shouldn’t be; the God who seeks us where we are. He is the God who scours the house to find us. He is the God who rejoices when he does, and celebrates this with the heavenly host.
We are to use our prayer and worship tuned senses to experience who God is and what God continues to do. Through the word and work of God we are to change and continue to be changed by it; to be neither the sinners nor the hypocrites surrounding Jesus at the beginning of this passage. And it is up to us to take these experiences in the word and share them with a world that longs to hear them.
Jesus tells those with ears to hear who he is. Jesus tells us to use our voices to share the good news of his extravagant grace of God with a world that thirsts for the word. Our instruction is simple: come to the Lord our God, listen to the Word, be changed by the Good News, share his overflowing grace with the world, and rejoice—rejoice with the Lord and the entire heavenly host. Listen, share and rejoice.
[1] Duke, Paul Simpson, The Parables. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2005, page 97.
[2] Repentance in the NT, Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible. 21st Printing, 1992, Buttrick, George A., Editor. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1962, electronic version 2002.
[3] I come up with this figure for the coin based on an income of $30,000 over 300 working days per year. This is a low-ball salary average divided by a first century work year. As for the price of a whole lamb, I have no idea.
Monday, September 10, 2007
God's Little Instruction Book?
I was not in the pulpit this weekend. This is a sermon I delivered three years ago on the 23rd Sunday of Ordinary Time, September 5, 2004, at Genesis Presbyterian Church in Austin, Texas.
Scripture: Luke 14:25-33
Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart be acceptable to you, oh Lord, my rock and my redeemer. Amen
Over the last ten weeks of Ordinary Time we have been on the road with Luke as Jesus travels from Galilee to Jerusalem. In this time Jesus has been welcomed and rejected. He has commissioned and he has welcomed back the commissioners. We have been with Jesus as he has taught and healed in the synagogue and in homes. He has welcomed the outcast and rebuked the powerful. We have seen humility and hypocrisy. We have joined Jesus for meetings with Pharisees, publicans, and prostitutes. We have heard him speak of love, grace, and forgiveness. We have seen Jesus in action and we have heard him teach with authority. So by this time it is no wonder that there is a large crowd following him.
Because of the way Jesus turned and spoke to the crowd I will make two assumptions about it. First, I suspect that there were true believers in the crowd, those who believed they were ready, come what may, when they reached Jerusalem. But I am just as sure that there were people who followed because it was a great crowd.
Sensing the time was right; Jesus turns to the mass of followers and announces what it takes to complete the journey, what it takes to be his disciple. He begins by telling the crowd that to be his disciple they must hate their families and their own lives. And he ends by telling the crowd that to follow him they must give up all of their possessions. I can only imagine this must have come as quite a shock to the crowd.
When I entered the seminary, one of the supplementary textbooks for Introduction to the Old Testament was Michael Joseph Brown’s, “What They Didn’t Tell You, A Survivor’s Guide to Biblical Studies.” This book offers twenty-eight “rules of thumb” for seminarians. Some of the information was useful, some wasn’t. But one of the rules has stuck with me like a stone in my shoe. Rule number ten says, “The Bible means what it says, and says what it means. Except when it doesn’t.” Luke’s discourse on hating family proves the value of this rule of thumb.
The original language of the text is an idiom, an expression unique to the culture. Fortunately for us, the parallel in Matthew’s gospel expresses what Jesus said in a way we can better understand. The disciple records Jesus saying “Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me.” While it is probable that Jesus said what was written in Luke’s gospel, its meaning is better expressed in English the way it is rendered in Matthew’s.
Either way, Jesus calls for a radical realignment of priorities. What has been acceptable in the past… is no longer. Anyone who is not ready to make the sacrifice Jesus demands… follows at their own peril. The law isn’t changing, but its interpretation in Christ is new and different.
This is an example of scripture meaning what it says, except when it doesn’t. It’s not that we have to hate, loathe, despise, and scorn, our families and our lives. Rather it’s that to follow Christ we must love the Lord our God more than we love our families and our lives. In its place, Jesus put discipleship above all other obligations. We knew all along that Jesus did not abolish the law; but it is difficult to understand that from this passage.
The last sentence in this lesson was difficult for many in the crowd to hear then, and to us may seem even tougher for our culture. Jesus tells the crowd none of them can become his disciple if they do not give up all their possessions. Jesus doesn’t offer any wiggle room here, this is not an idiom. Just as we are called to put Jesus above all human relationships we are called to part from all things for the sake of discipleship. This reading points to a renunciation of all possessions as a part of the radical realignment of our lives. To be a disciple of Jesus, we must put Him above everything.
Jesus goes on in this lesson to warn us about what will happen should we fail. If we cannot bear the cost of discipleship, we stand to be mocked just as the builder is ridiculed when unable to finish building a tower. Downtown, across the street from Republic Square, at the corner of Fifth and San Antonio, stands the skeleton of what was a major construction project. Austinites know this corner; some know it more personally than as just an urban eyesore. It is technically known as AN-2. Locals know it as the “Intel Shell.” What was to be a major player on the city’s high tech scene is now a carcass, an icon for the bursting of the high tech bubble.
But its incompletion is more than a cautionary tale of what can happen when economic conditions go bad. It’s an example that Jesus was right, those who can’t finish what they start will be ridiculed. To make this point, the Austin Chronicle held a contest for what should be done with the empty shell. My favorites include a bird and bat sanctuary/guano factory with observation area. The simplest suggestion came from a man who wants to raise a banner covering the north and east sides of the building, overlooking what would have been a lovely courtyard—overlooking what is now a field overgrown with weeds—a banner announcing “No Intel Inside.”[1] Builders who are unable to finish will loose money and face, but this is not the end of the world.
The other cautionary tale, the one about waging war, is even more dire. Jesus warns that those unable to wage war successfully against another should send ambassadors to discuss terms of peace. While the first example is embarrassing, the results of this one are grim. If peace cannot be made, the advancing force will wreak havoc devastating life and property.
But I skipped one verse, and this sentence is the hinge pin between the two parts of this section. “Whoever does not carry the cross and follow me cannot be my disciple.” We know we have to put Jesus first, above all other people and things. And we are warned about the results of following without being fully engaged in the way. But what does it mean to carry our cross?
Theories abound. Some New Testament language scholars see bearing the cross as the beginning of discipleship. We do in our lives as Jesus does on this journey. Others compare this to taking on a yoke, its mantle representing the horizontal piece of the crucifix. Others attribute this phrase to a popular expression which was originally applied to the zealots and later to Jesus’ followers; perhaps as a sort of curse or rallying cry. Some believe it has militaristic characteristics.[2] But there is one theory I find most interesting.
In ancient Israel, the Greek letter “Tau”, our letter “T.” was worn by some as a cultic marking, a sign of protection and possession. After the crucifixion, the Tau was related to the historical cross of Jesus as a seal of possession in Christ.[3] While scholars do not think that this was in the mind of Jesus, perhaps it was in the mind of the community that wrote this gospel. Now, don’t worry, this is not a call for tattoos for the people of Genesis and the body of Christ. The Tau is a sign, a symbol. Symbols communicate action; they do not perform the action.[4] We use another symbol to communicate this action.
We carry the cross in the waters of our baptism. As some took the Tau was a symbol, we accept the water and living wet as the sign that we rise and die and rise again with Christ. As Jesus called the followers to take up the cross daily, we are called by our confessions to improve our baptism.[5] In our baptism we accept Jesus’ call to faithfulness, rebirth, and covenant into the body of Christ.[6]
This year on a rainy Easter Sunday, the Reverend Doctor Ellen Babinsky began the service of the Lord’s Day by saying that it was a damp Easter morning and that in our baptism we are called to live wet. The morning was rainy and sloppy. We were never promised that living wet would be tidy; on the contrary, living wet is frequently sloppy. It calls us to forsake people and things that we might otherwise be attracted to. But if we do not fully commit to the life of discipleship in the water and the cross we stand to inherit the dangers of ridicule and worse.
In 1993, Honor Books published “God’s Little Instruction Book, Inspirational Wisdom on How to Live a Happy and Fulfilled Life.” What the book does is couple little insights with scripture. I got to admit, a lot of it bothers me. (To repeat one of my professors, “I don’t do cute.”) For example, they write, “There is a name for people who are not excited about their work—unemployed.” This isn’t a pastoral thing to say, especially to someone whose livelihood depended on the completion of the “Intel Shell.”
Another is “the best way to forget your own problems is to help [solve someone else’s].” While this is not inappropriate in many circumstances, this advice would be a disaster for people with mental health issues. Sometimes, trying to help solve someone else’s problems could make matters worse for both.
When the authors remind us “If at first you don’t succeed, try reading the instructions,” I just hope the instructions don’t contain an idiom that has to be interpreted first. This is the problem with aphorisms. These guides to a “happy and fulfilled life” are so glossy that when forced to bear the weight of the cross they dissolve like sand castles. The way of the discipleship is more dear than these simple sayings.
Last weekend in the Olympic Marathon, Cornelius Horan, a defrocked Irish Priest, entered the marathon course in its twenty-third mile and pushed race leader, Vanderlei de Lima, into the crowd. Mr. Horan was wearing a sign which said, “The Grand Prix Priest, Israel fulfillment of Prophecy says the Bible.”
Horan calls himself the Grand Prix Priest because in July 2003 he ran onto the course of the British Grand Prix; staying on the track for more than 20 seconds, nearly being hit by several cars which had to swerve dramatically to avoid hitting him. Eventually he meandered close enough to the edge of the track for an official to grab him and take him away. That day Mr. Horan was carrying a sign saying, “Read the Bible—The Bible is always right.”[7]
As for me, I believe that the bible is always right; it’s me that gets things wrong. There are things we don’t understand and there are things we won’t understand. What we must understand is that we are called to live in community, in the assembled body of Christ, living wet, and bearing the cross.
Fortunately, we have the perfect role model for this relationship. We have the example of Jesus who as a person teaches us how to relate to one another with humility, love, grace, and forgiveness. We have the example of a God who models the perfect relationship; existing as one in three in an eternal dance of being in community. When we live wet, when we bear the cross of Christ, then we are able to follow and be his disciple. Amen.
[1] Intel Building Design Contest Winners, Austin Chronicle, May 11, 2001
[2] Kittel, TDNT, Vol. VII, page 577-578
[3].Ibid.
[4] Lewis, C. S., Screwtape Letters, The, page 125.
[5] Book of Confessions, 7.277
[6] Book of Order, W-2.3004
[7] ESPN.com
Scripture: Luke 14:25-33
Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart be acceptable to you, oh Lord, my rock and my redeemer. Amen
Over the last ten weeks of Ordinary Time we have been on the road with Luke as Jesus travels from Galilee to Jerusalem. In this time Jesus has been welcomed and rejected. He has commissioned and he has welcomed back the commissioners. We have been with Jesus as he has taught and healed in the synagogue and in homes. He has welcomed the outcast and rebuked the powerful. We have seen humility and hypocrisy. We have joined Jesus for meetings with Pharisees, publicans, and prostitutes. We have heard him speak of love, grace, and forgiveness. We have seen Jesus in action and we have heard him teach with authority. So by this time it is no wonder that there is a large crowd following him.
Because of the way Jesus turned and spoke to the crowd I will make two assumptions about it. First, I suspect that there were true believers in the crowd, those who believed they were ready, come what may, when they reached Jerusalem. But I am just as sure that there were people who followed because it was a great crowd.
Sensing the time was right; Jesus turns to the mass of followers and announces what it takes to complete the journey, what it takes to be his disciple. He begins by telling the crowd that to be his disciple they must hate their families and their own lives. And he ends by telling the crowd that to follow him they must give up all of their possessions. I can only imagine this must have come as quite a shock to the crowd.
When I entered the seminary, one of the supplementary textbooks for Introduction to the Old Testament was Michael Joseph Brown’s, “What They Didn’t Tell You, A Survivor’s Guide to Biblical Studies.” This book offers twenty-eight “rules of thumb” for seminarians. Some of the information was useful, some wasn’t. But one of the rules has stuck with me like a stone in my shoe. Rule number ten says, “The Bible means what it says, and says what it means. Except when it doesn’t.” Luke’s discourse on hating family proves the value of this rule of thumb.
The original language of the text is an idiom, an expression unique to the culture. Fortunately for us, the parallel in Matthew’s gospel expresses what Jesus said in a way we can better understand. The disciple records Jesus saying “Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me.” While it is probable that Jesus said what was written in Luke’s gospel, its meaning is better expressed in English the way it is rendered in Matthew’s.
Either way, Jesus calls for a radical realignment of priorities. What has been acceptable in the past… is no longer. Anyone who is not ready to make the sacrifice Jesus demands… follows at their own peril. The law isn’t changing, but its interpretation in Christ is new and different.
This is an example of scripture meaning what it says, except when it doesn’t. It’s not that we have to hate, loathe, despise, and scorn, our families and our lives. Rather it’s that to follow Christ we must love the Lord our God more than we love our families and our lives. In its place, Jesus put discipleship above all other obligations. We knew all along that Jesus did not abolish the law; but it is difficult to understand that from this passage.
The last sentence in this lesson was difficult for many in the crowd to hear then, and to us may seem even tougher for our culture. Jesus tells the crowd none of them can become his disciple if they do not give up all their possessions. Jesus doesn’t offer any wiggle room here, this is not an idiom. Just as we are called to put Jesus above all human relationships we are called to part from all things for the sake of discipleship. This reading points to a renunciation of all possessions as a part of the radical realignment of our lives. To be a disciple of Jesus, we must put Him above everything.
Jesus goes on in this lesson to warn us about what will happen should we fail. If we cannot bear the cost of discipleship, we stand to be mocked just as the builder is ridiculed when unable to finish building a tower. Downtown, across the street from Republic Square, at the corner of Fifth and San Antonio, stands the skeleton of what was a major construction project. Austinites know this corner; some know it more personally than as just an urban eyesore. It is technically known as AN-2. Locals know it as the “Intel Shell.” What was to be a major player on the city’s high tech scene is now a carcass, an icon for the bursting of the high tech bubble.
But its incompletion is more than a cautionary tale of what can happen when economic conditions go bad. It’s an example that Jesus was right, those who can’t finish what they start will be ridiculed. To make this point, the Austin Chronicle held a contest for what should be done with the empty shell. My favorites include a bird and bat sanctuary/guano factory with observation area. The simplest suggestion came from a man who wants to raise a banner covering the north and east sides of the building, overlooking what would have been a lovely courtyard—overlooking what is now a field overgrown with weeds—a banner announcing “No Intel Inside.”[1] Builders who are unable to finish will loose money and face, but this is not the end of the world.
The other cautionary tale, the one about waging war, is even more dire. Jesus warns that those unable to wage war successfully against another should send ambassadors to discuss terms of peace. While the first example is embarrassing, the results of this one are grim. If peace cannot be made, the advancing force will wreak havoc devastating life and property.
But I skipped one verse, and this sentence is the hinge pin between the two parts of this section. “Whoever does not carry the cross and follow me cannot be my disciple.” We know we have to put Jesus first, above all other people and things. And we are warned about the results of following without being fully engaged in the way. But what does it mean to carry our cross?
Theories abound. Some New Testament language scholars see bearing the cross as the beginning of discipleship. We do in our lives as Jesus does on this journey. Others compare this to taking on a yoke, its mantle representing the horizontal piece of the crucifix. Others attribute this phrase to a popular expression which was originally applied to the zealots and later to Jesus’ followers; perhaps as a sort of curse or rallying cry. Some believe it has militaristic characteristics.[2] But there is one theory I find most interesting.
In ancient Israel, the Greek letter “Tau”, our letter “T.” was worn by some as a cultic marking, a sign of protection and possession. After the crucifixion, the Tau was related to the historical cross of Jesus as a seal of possession in Christ.[3] While scholars do not think that this was in the mind of Jesus, perhaps it was in the mind of the community that wrote this gospel. Now, don’t worry, this is not a call for tattoos for the people of Genesis and the body of Christ. The Tau is a sign, a symbol. Symbols communicate action; they do not perform the action.[4] We use another symbol to communicate this action.
We carry the cross in the waters of our baptism. As some took the Tau was a symbol, we accept the water and living wet as the sign that we rise and die and rise again with Christ. As Jesus called the followers to take up the cross daily, we are called by our confessions to improve our baptism.[5] In our baptism we accept Jesus’ call to faithfulness, rebirth, and covenant into the body of Christ.[6]
This year on a rainy Easter Sunday, the Reverend Doctor Ellen Babinsky began the service of the Lord’s Day by saying that it was a damp Easter morning and that in our baptism we are called to live wet. The morning was rainy and sloppy. We were never promised that living wet would be tidy; on the contrary, living wet is frequently sloppy. It calls us to forsake people and things that we might otherwise be attracted to. But if we do not fully commit to the life of discipleship in the water and the cross we stand to inherit the dangers of ridicule and worse.
In 1993, Honor Books published “God’s Little Instruction Book, Inspirational Wisdom on How to Live a Happy and Fulfilled Life.” What the book does is couple little insights with scripture. I got to admit, a lot of it bothers me. (To repeat one of my professors, “I don’t do cute.”) For example, they write, “There is a name for people who are not excited about their work—unemployed.” This isn’t a pastoral thing to say, especially to someone whose livelihood depended on the completion of the “Intel Shell.”
Another is “the best way to forget your own problems is to help [solve someone else’s].” While this is not inappropriate in many circumstances, this advice would be a disaster for people with mental health issues. Sometimes, trying to help solve someone else’s problems could make matters worse for both.
When the authors remind us “If at first you don’t succeed, try reading the instructions,” I just hope the instructions don’t contain an idiom that has to be interpreted first. This is the problem with aphorisms. These guides to a “happy and fulfilled life” are so glossy that when forced to bear the weight of the cross they dissolve like sand castles. The way of the discipleship is more dear than these simple sayings.
Last weekend in the Olympic Marathon, Cornelius Horan, a defrocked Irish Priest, entered the marathon course in its twenty-third mile and pushed race leader, Vanderlei de Lima, into the crowd. Mr. Horan was wearing a sign which said, “The Grand Prix Priest, Israel fulfillment of Prophecy says the Bible.”
Horan calls himself the Grand Prix Priest because in July 2003 he ran onto the course of the British Grand Prix; staying on the track for more than 20 seconds, nearly being hit by several cars which had to swerve dramatically to avoid hitting him. Eventually he meandered close enough to the edge of the track for an official to grab him and take him away. That day Mr. Horan was carrying a sign saying, “Read the Bible—The Bible is always right.”[7]
As for me, I believe that the bible is always right; it’s me that gets things wrong. There are things we don’t understand and there are things we won’t understand. What we must understand is that we are called to live in community, in the assembled body of Christ, living wet, and bearing the cross.
Fortunately, we have the perfect role model for this relationship. We have the example of Jesus who as a person teaches us how to relate to one another with humility, love, grace, and forgiveness. We have the example of a God who models the perfect relationship; existing as one in three in an eternal dance of being in community. When we live wet, when we bear the cross of Christ, then we are able to follow and be his disciple. Amen.
[1] Intel Building Design Contest Winners, Austin Chronicle, May 11, 2001
[2] Kittel, TDNT, Vol. VII, page 577-578
[3].Ibid.
[4] Lewis, C. S., Screwtape Letters, The, page 125.
[5] Book of Confessions, 7.277
[6] Book of Order, W-2.3004
[7] ESPN.com
Saturday, September 01, 2007
Table Etiqutte
This sermon was delivered on the 22nd Sunday of Ordinary Time, September 2, 2007, at the First Presbyterian Church in Berryville, Arkansas.
Jeremiah 2:4-13
Psalm 81:1, 10-16
Hebrews 13:1-8, 15-16
Luke 14:1, 7-14
This sermon is rated PG-13
May the words of my mouth and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable to you, O Lord, our rock and our redeemer. Amen.
When I was in college, one of my jobs was as a houseboy at a sorority. This meant I worked as a cook’s assistant, waiter, bus boy, and dishwasher for ten meals a week. The sisters had a way of coming to dinner every evening. They would all assemble at the south end of the dining room. Then the house mother would lead the procession to her table at the north end of the room, escorted by the head houseboy.
There were about a dozen round tables, each seating six women. As the gathering stretched out and became a line, they would begin to separate into smaller table groups. So after Mom’s table would fill, the ladies would go to the second and so on until everyone was at their seat. Each table had a head spot, which was usually taken by one of the officers.
Special dinner guests were no trouble for the women; the guests were always escorted by a houseboy and seated to the right of the housemother.
After everyone had reached a seat, the chaplain would begin the grace from wherever she was in the room. After the Amen, Mom would sit down first and the rest would follow. This was the cue for me and the other houseboys to serve the meal.
The process was pretty easy, the new initiates were shown how the procession worked and there was soon little chance of anyone taking an inappropriate seat. If someone did, there was a gentle reproach and she would move to another spot.[1]
It’s pretty easy to connect this story to today’s gospel reading. In fact, I think you will easily see the similarities between this illustration and the gospel’s parable. But there is a more recent story that illuminates a deeper meaning in this parable.
I don’t have to tell you that this week's news has been overwhelmed by United States Senator Larry Craig of Idaho. Senator Craig is a conservative Idaho Republican who believes strongly in national defense, balancing the federal budget, and striking a balance between conserving the land and developing natural resources. He is also in favor of firearms rights for law-abiding citizens, accessible affordable healthcare, and tax reform. [2] He wants to get government out of our hair and to improve life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for his Idaho constituents and for all American citizens. He is also in favor of upholding traditional family values, holding the line against liberal social initiatives including gay marriage.[3]
Whether you agree with Senator Craig’s politics or not, you might admire his strong stance on issues. It is this strong stance that brought him to the head of the congressional table in leading the push toward a legislative platform based on politically and socially conservative values. And given the news of the last week, it seems right now that Senator Craig has taken the place of the man in the gospel who took the parable’s honor seat at the banquet. And this week when the banquet master showed up with police reports from the Northstar Crossing in the Lindbergh Terminal of the Minneapolis Airport, he was told to get up and move.
Senator Craig has taken a defiant tone in his public comments on the incident. He has vehemently denied being a homosexual. He has claimed he was entrapped by a sting operation. He claimed pleading guilty to a charge of disorderly conduct was a mistake.
What I know from police reports is that Senator Craig stood outside of a bathroom stall looking at the man sitting there. When Senator Craig entered the adjacent stall he made gestures consistent with someone seeking an illicit sexual liaison. When the man in this stall showed his police identification, the Senator said, “No.” And when asked to provide his driver’s license for proof of identification, he offered his Senate business card and said, “What do you think about that?”[4]
Well, I guess that’s the question all of us have to answer, isn’t it: “What do you think about that?”
Here is what I think about that. The Senator pleaded guilty to charges less severe than the initial charges. The charges he plead guilty to are not ones that reflect well on a law-and-order socially-conservative Senator from a conservative state during a contentious election cycle. And there are so many piranhas swimming in Senator David’s waters that the Log Cabin Republicans, a group of Gay Republicans, don’t want anything to do with him.[5]
Lest you think I hold Senator Craig to a standard I don’t hold others to, let me say no one is without fault. No one is without sin. The list of political scandals, sexual and otherwise, is long and extensive. It includes people from both sides of our political aisles and extends from time immemorial. Names like Bill Clinton, Gary Hart, Strom Thurmond, and Thomas Jefferson, should not be forgotten as Senator Craig’s is mentioned. And lest you think I am directing my comments toward the same-sex aspect this incident; I believe the casual and extramarital qualities of this encounter is the scandal, not its homosexuality.
Ultimately, Senator Craig’s mistake was that he stood on his own two feet. And like all human feet, they are made of clay, while seemingly solid, are in truth brittle. His ultimate sin is one of hypocrisy, saying one thing and doing another.
To quote an old song:
If you should go skating
On the thin ice of modern life
Dragging behind you the silent reproach
Of a million tear stained eyes
Don't be surprised, when a crack in the ice
Appears under your feet.[6]
Senator Craig lived by the ways of a conservative Republican agenda, and now he will be taken down by it. Former House Majority Leader Tom Delay said on the Today Show, “There are scandals that need to be addressed. Republicans address them, Democrats re-elect them.”[7]
The Senator had exalted himself by his political positions, and by these same positions he has been humbled. The ice has cracked and Senator Craig has felt the cold water rush around his ankles. Yesterday he announced that he will resign from the Senate effective September 30th.[8]
But what do we need to take from this story of public disgrace? How does the Senator’s story illustrate this parable? In Luke’s parable, the host does not remove the unseated guest from the banquet. This guest, while disgraced and embarrassed, is still welcome to take and eat. The Lord our God does not dismiss him or anyone else from the banquet because of indiscretion. Disciplined yes, dismissed no.
Where Senator Craig’s public scandal has separated him from people he has loyally served for over 25 years in Congress, he has been abandoned by them in a moment of personal crisis. Based on the Log Cabin Republican’s actions and Congressman Delay’s comments, Senator Craig should be cast aside as quickly as possible for the good of the party.
Dare I say, based on this parable, this is not what Jesus would have done. Take, eat, do this in remembrance of me, this is Jesus’ command. As the disgraced man was invited to come and to stay at the table, we are all are invited to the table Jesus sets, none are turned away. We are not worthy to come to the table. By virtue of who we are and what we do, we have no place at the table. We only have a place because of who Jesus is. Because he is the host and he invites us.
On Friday February 13, 2004, Austin, Texas received about three inches of snow, a huge amount for central Texas. The temperatures hovered at about thirty degrees all day long, and the winds gusted as high as 15 miles per hour. The humidity was high, the dew point was low, and the chill was biting. [9] A good friend and I volunteered for “Freeze Night” at Central Presbyterian Church in downtown Austin. “Freeze Night” is a program where homeless people are able to get a couple of hot meals and a place to sleep out of the wind, the cold, and the snow.
That night I did not sleep well, so at about midnight; I went out to where people were sleeping. There I felt a draft against my legs. Someone had gone outside for a cigarette and left a blanket in the door so they would not get locked out. Having been a smoker, I understand the urge. The smell of the smoke gave me the melancholy smile of someone who hasn’t had a cigarette in about twenty years. But it also reminded me of something from my prior career in Higher Education.
Fifteen years ago, I was the Coordinator of Residence Life at a small community college in rural southeast Colorado. While there, I constantly told residents not to leave the outside doors propped open. The residents would prop the doors open so that they could sneak something or someone into the building. I told them that leaving the doors open made them vulnerable to dangers from the world coming into the building.
As I smelled the smoke and considered the open door; a thought occurred to me: When I was in Colorado these homeless people were the people I was locking out. And that night they were the people I was locking in. I was humbled that the people I once rejected from shelter and protection were now the people I was charged with sheltering and protecting. Responding to the needs of all the children of God is what Jesus calls us to do. That chilly night in Austin, we invited the people to come and share the banquet God provides. They could not repay us, not in any tangible way. Rather the payment that I have received was a glimpse of the inbreaking of the kingdom of God through the presence of homeless people on a cold, cold winter’s eve.
And we continue to experience this inbreaking as we celebrate the Lord’s Supper; a feast that provides benefits that no earthly meal will ever match.
God gives us grace as through faith. Jesus shows us grace through the meal he shared with us that night long ago. The Holy Spirit shows us grace as the church called to celebrate this supper until Jesus comes again. The sovereign triune God shows us the grace that we are called to share with the world. In this relationship, there is truth that in Jesus’ freely given self-emptying we must remember that we are empty and can only be filled by the risen Lord. And we are called to share what we have received, the only thing which is worth sharing, the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit.
[1] Alpha Sigma Alpha, Epsilon-Epsilon Chapter, Emporia State University, Fall 1983-Spring 1984. Yeah Apples!
[2] Senator Larry David Website, http://craig.senate.gov/priorities.cfm, accessed September 1, 2007.
[3] Ibid, http://craig.senate.gov/releases/pr110606a.cfm, accessed September 1, 2007.
[4] Senator Larry Craig Arrest Report, http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/070828_Craig_Police_Reprot.pdf , accessed August 29, 2007.
[5] Heard on ABC Radio News, August 29, 2007
[6] Waters, Roger, “The Thin Ice,” Pink Floyd, The Wall. Columbia, 1979
[7] Today Show, Thursday August 30, 2007. Transcript from http://www.tomdelay.com/ accessed on September 1, 2007.
[8] Addendum, September 4, 2007: This was reported by news agencies as “Senator Craig Announces Resignation (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20467347/, accessed September 1, 2007). In retrospect, I (and every other news agency that reported this story) should have paid more attention to the source documents as Senator Craig has announced that he may not resign, citing the phrase, “it is my intent to resign…” not necessarily meaning “I will resign” (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20593999/, accessed September 4, 2007).
[9] Weather Condition History for Austin, Texas for Friday, February 13, 2004, http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KATT/2004/2/13/DailyHistory.html?req_city=NA&req_state=NA&req_statename=NA, Accessed August 28, 2007.
Jeremiah 2:4-13
Psalm 81:1, 10-16
Hebrews 13:1-8, 15-16
Luke 14:1, 7-14
This sermon is rated PG-13
May the words of my mouth and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable to you, O Lord, our rock and our redeemer. Amen.
When I was in college, one of my jobs was as a houseboy at a sorority. This meant I worked as a cook’s assistant, waiter, bus boy, and dishwasher for ten meals a week. The sisters had a way of coming to dinner every evening. They would all assemble at the south end of the dining room. Then the house mother would lead the procession to her table at the north end of the room, escorted by the head houseboy.
There were about a dozen round tables, each seating six women. As the gathering stretched out and became a line, they would begin to separate into smaller table groups. So after Mom’s table would fill, the ladies would go to the second and so on until everyone was at their seat. Each table had a head spot, which was usually taken by one of the officers.
Special dinner guests were no trouble for the women; the guests were always escorted by a houseboy and seated to the right of the housemother.
After everyone had reached a seat, the chaplain would begin the grace from wherever she was in the room. After the Amen, Mom would sit down first and the rest would follow. This was the cue for me and the other houseboys to serve the meal.
The process was pretty easy, the new initiates were shown how the procession worked and there was soon little chance of anyone taking an inappropriate seat. If someone did, there was a gentle reproach and she would move to another spot.[1]
It’s pretty easy to connect this story to today’s gospel reading. In fact, I think you will easily see the similarities between this illustration and the gospel’s parable. But there is a more recent story that illuminates a deeper meaning in this parable.
I don’t have to tell you that this week's news has been overwhelmed by United States Senator Larry Craig of Idaho. Senator Craig is a conservative Idaho Republican who believes strongly in national defense, balancing the federal budget, and striking a balance between conserving the land and developing natural resources. He is also in favor of firearms rights for law-abiding citizens, accessible affordable healthcare, and tax reform. [2] He wants to get government out of our hair and to improve life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for his Idaho constituents and for all American citizens. He is also in favor of upholding traditional family values, holding the line against liberal social initiatives including gay marriage.[3]
Whether you agree with Senator Craig’s politics or not, you might admire his strong stance on issues. It is this strong stance that brought him to the head of the congressional table in leading the push toward a legislative platform based on politically and socially conservative values. And given the news of the last week, it seems right now that Senator Craig has taken the place of the man in the gospel who took the parable’s honor seat at the banquet. And this week when the banquet master showed up with police reports from the Northstar Crossing in the Lindbergh Terminal of the Minneapolis Airport, he was told to get up and move.
Senator Craig has taken a defiant tone in his public comments on the incident. He has vehemently denied being a homosexual. He has claimed he was entrapped by a sting operation. He claimed pleading guilty to a charge of disorderly conduct was a mistake.
What I know from police reports is that Senator Craig stood outside of a bathroom stall looking at the man sitting there. When Senator Craig entered the adjacent stall he made gestures consistent with someone seeking an illicit sexual liaison. When the man in this stall showed his police identification, the Senator said, “No.” And when asked to provide his driver’s license for proof of identification, he offered his Senate business card and said, “What do you think about that?”[4]
Well, I guess that’s the question all of us have to answer, isn’t it: “What do you think about that?”
Here is what I think about that. The Senator pleaded guilty to charges less severe than the initial charges. The charges he plead guilty to are not ones that reflect well on a law-and-order socially-conservative Senator from a conservative state during a contentious election cycle. And there are so many piranhas swimming in Senator David’s waters that the Log Cabin Republicans, a group of Gay Republicans, don’t want anything to do with him.[5]
Lest you think I hold Senator Craig to a standard I don’t hold others to, let me say no one is without fault. No one is without sin. The list of political scandals, sexual and otherwise, is long and extensive. It includes people from both sides of our political aisles and extends from time immemorial. Names like Bill Clinton, Gary Hart, Strom Thurmond, and Thomas Jefferson, should not be forgotten as Senator Craig’s is mentioned. And lest you think I am directing my comments toward the same-sex aspect this incident; I believe the casual and extramarital qualities of this encounter is the scandal, not its homosexuality.
Ultimately, Senator Craig’s mistake was that he stood on his own two feet. And like all human feet, they are made of clay, while seemingly solid, are in truth brittle. His ultimate sin is one of hypocrisy, saying one thing and doing another.
To quote an old song:
If you should go skating
On the thin ice of modern life
Dragging behind you the silent reproach
Of a million tear stained eyes
Don't be surprised, when a crack in the ice
Appears under your feet.[6]
Senator Craig lived by the ways of a conservative Republican agenda, and now he will be taken down by it. Former House Majority Leader Tom Delay said on the Today Show, “There are scandals that need to be addressed. Republicans address them, Democrats re-elect them.”[7]
The Senator had exalted himself by his political positions, and by these same positions he has been humbled. The ice has cracked and Senator Craig has felt the cold water rush around his ankles. Yesterday he announced that he will resign from the Senate effective September 30th.[8]
But what do we need to take from this story of public disgrace? How does the Senator’s story illustrate this parable? In Luke’s parable, the host does not remove the unseated guest from the banquet. This guest, while disgraced and embarrassed, is still welcome to take and eat. The Lord our God does not dismiss him or anyone else from the banquet because of indiscretion. Disciplined yes, dismissed no.
Where Senator Craig’s public scandal has separated him from people he has loyally served for over 25 years in Congress, he has been abandoned by them in a moment of personal crisis. Based on the Log Cabin Republican’s actions and Congressman Delay’s comments, Senator Craig should be cast aside as quickly as possible for the good of the party.
Dare I say, based on this parable, this is not what Jesus would have done. Take, eat, do this in remembrance of me, this is Jesus’ command. As the disgraced man was invited to come and to stay at the table, we are all are invited to the table Jesus sets, none are turned away. We are not worthy to come to the table. By virtue of who we are and what we do, we have no place at the table. We only have a place because of who Jesus is. Because he is the host and he invites us.
On Friday February 13, 2004, Austin, Texas received about three inches of snow, a huge amount for central Texas. The temperatures hovered at about thirty degrees all day long, and the winds gusted as high as 15 miles per hour. The humidity was high, the dew point was low, and the chill was biting. [9] A good friend and I volunteered for “Freeze Night” at Central Presbyterian Church in downtown Austin. “Freeze Night” is a program where homeless people are able to get a couple of hot meals and a place to sleep out of the wind, the cold, and the snow.
That night I did not sleep well, so at about midnight; I went out to where people were sleeping. There I felt a draft against my legs. Someone had gone outside for a cigarette and left a blanket in the door so they would not get locked out. Having been a smoker, I understand the urge. The smell of the smoke gave me the melancholy smile of someone who hasn’t had a cigarette in about twenty years. But it also reminded me of something from my prior career in Higher Education.
Fifteen years ago, I was the Coordinator of Residence Life at a small community college in rural southeast Colorado. While there, I constantly told residents not to leave the outside doors propped open. The residents would prop the doors open so that they could sneak something or someone into the building. I told them that leaving the doors open made them vulnerable to dangers from the world coming into the building.
As I smelled the smoke and considered the open door; a thought occurred to me: When I was in Colorado these homeless people were the people I was locking out. And that night they were the people I was locking in. I was humbled that the people I once rejected from shelter and protection were now the people I was charged with sheltering and protecting. Responding to the needs of all the children of God is what Jesus calls us to do. That chilly night in Austin, we invited the people to come and share the banquet God provides. They could not repay us, not in any tangible way. Rather the payment that I have received was a glimpse of the inbreaking of the kingdom of God through the presence of homeless people on a cold, cold winter’s eve.
And we continue to experience this inbreaking as we celebrate the Lord’s Supper; a feast that provides benefits that no earthly meal will ever match.
God gives us grace as through faith. Jesus shows us grace through the meal he shared with us that night long ago. The Holy Spirit shows us grace as the church called to celebrate this supper until Jesus comes again. The sovereign triune God shows us the grace that we are called to share with the world. In this relationship, there is truth that in Jesus’ freely given self-emptying we must remember that we are empty and can only be filled by the risen Lord. And we are called to share what we have received, the only thing which is worth sharing, the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit.
[1] Alpha Sigma Alpha, Epsilon-Epsilon Chapter, Emporia State University, Fall 1983-Spring 1984. Yeah Apples!
[2] Senator Larry David Website, http://craig.senate.gov/priorities.cfm, accessed September 1, 2007.
[3] Ibid, http://craig.senate.gov/releases/pr110606a.cfm, accessed September 1, 2007.
[4] Senator Larry Craig Arrest Report, http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/070828_Craig_Police_Reprot.pdf , accessed August 29, 2007.
[5] Heard on ABC Radio News, August 29, 2007
[6] Waters, Roger, “The Thin Ice,” Pink Floyd, The Wall. Columbia, 1979
[7] Today Show, Thursday August 30, 2007. Transcript from http://www.tomdelay.com/ accessed on September 1, 2007.
[8] Addendum, September 4, 2007: This was reported by news agencies as “Senator Craig Announces Resignation (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20467347/, accessed September 1, 2007). In retrospect, I (and every other news agency that reported this story) should have paid more attention to the source documents as Senator Craig has announced that he may not resign, citing the phrase, “it is my intent to resign…” not necessarily meaning “I will resign” (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20593999/, accessed September 4, 2007).
[9] Weather Condition History for Austin, Texas for Friday, February 13, 2004, http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KATT/2004/2/13/DailyHistory.html?req_city=NA&req_state=NA&req_statename=NA, Accessed August 28, 2007.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)