This sermon was heard at the First Presbyterian Church in Berryville, Arkansas on Sunday September 28, 2008, the 26th Sunday in Ordinary Time.
Exodus 17:1-7
Psalm 78:1-4, 12-16
Philippians 2:1-13
Matthew 21:23-32
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’m a big sports fan, gee, you didn’t know, right? Growing up in the suburbs of Kansas City I cut my sports fan teeth rooting for the Royals and the Chiefs, loving their glory years and mourning their down years. I remember the Kansas City Spurs Soccer club from the late 1960’s; the Scouts hockey team, who are now the New Jersey Devils; the NBA’s Kings who are now in Sacramento; and even various and sundry incarnations of indoor soccer Comets.
I watch a lot of ESPN, “The Worldwide Leader in Sports.” I love watching SportsCenter, the highlights show. Just a glimpse of the home team helps me through the day. But there’s a guilty pleasure too, I love the banter. Some people say they tell too many jokes, make too many puns, but that’s just fine with me. Each announcer has at least one phrase that is theirs alone, a tag line. It is a way for the audience to identify the announcer. And they can hang on for years.
One of my favorites belonged to a man named Larry Beil who hasn’t been on the network in ten years. I still remember the way he would talk as a basketball player drove to the hoop, rising above the rim, slamming the ball down “with authority.” The way he said “with authority” became so popular that it was even mocked by the creators of the cartoon “South Park” in the voice of Eric Cartman. Cartman often tells other characters “Respect my authori-tie!”
The authority of a basketball player driving the lane or a cartoon third grader is one thing, but the authority challenged by the chief priests and the elders is another. Authority is one of the points of our gospel reading today. As Jesus is in the temple teaching the people, the chief priests and elders come in to challenge him. They asked “by what authority are you doing these things, and who gave you this authority.” These are good questions and deserve good answers.
In the ancient sense, authority is the ability to do something “to the extent that there are no hindrances in the way.” [1] We mustn’t confuse this with the concept of power. Power is the intrinsic ability to do something where authority is having the right to use that power. So authority comes when there is nothing in the way of using power.
Before we answer the chief priests’ and elders’ questions, let’s answer the question about their authority to ask their questions. When the chief priest[2] enters the sanctuary, he bears the names of the twelve tribes of Israel on his breastplate. This shows that he represents the whole people of Israel.[3] Only the chief priest can enter the Holy of Holies, and only on Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, to make recompense for the nation's sin. The Chief Priest is important to the people and the temple. Representing the people, the entire nation, he has the power and the authority to ask Jesus “what in the name of all that’s holy are you doing, and by what authority.”
As for the elders, while they had their own power and authority, in this situation, I see them as the faithful entourage behind the chief priest. They were a Greek chorus if you will echoing the words and sentiments of their leader.
Sure, the priests, the elders, the scribes, and the Pharisees get a bad rap, often deserved, but we must remember they have the authority to ask these questions. When we ask the chief priests who they are, they are the ones with the authority to ask Jesus who he is. If they don’t they neglect their responsibilities and their duties.
So now that we have established that the chief priests, with the elders in tow, have the authority to ask, let’s answer their question, “By what authority are you, Jesus, doing these things, and who gave you this authority?”
Authority comes from someone who is greater. The Lord of the Manor is granted authority from the King. The head of a corporation receives authority from the shareholders. The chief priest receives his authority from the Lord established in Exodus. What is the source of Jesus’ authority? The joy of this answer is that the authority of Jesus is the authority the Father freely gives his Son.
The Father gives the Son the authority over all things in heaven and on earth. The Son is no junior partner; he has the full power and authority of the Father and the Holy Spirit. He does what he sees the Father doing. He works where he sees the Father working.
Jesus receives no single commission, no focused ministry. Jesus doesn’t run the “earth-and-humanity-division” of God’s good creation. His authority is his own rule in free agreement with the father.[4] The Father endows the Son to do the work.
To quote the Presbyterian Church’s Book of Order, “All power in heaven and earth is given to Jesus Christ by Almighty God, who raised Christ from the dead and set him above all rule and authority, all power and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age but also in that which is to come.”[5]
There is a reason Jesus doesn’t say all of this though. This story, as it hinges on authority isn’t about authority. This is the first of a group of five stories in Matthew’s gospel where Jesus’ opponents try to trap him, but are bested by him in public debate. Yes, the chief priests and the elders have the authority to ask, to challenge Jesus, but they had bad intentions. They sought to trap and kill Jesus, but this was not the time for that. That time won’t come until Good Friday. By the reckoning of time in Matthew’s narrative, that time comes in less than one week.
Given in freedom, not surrendered under coercion or taken by force, the Father gives the Son all that is His and trusts the Son with the Word and the work. Continuing in freedom, Jesus imparts his authority to the body he leaves on earth, the Church. As the Head of the Church to whom all power is given, he gives it to the disciples in his age and in every age.
We are the stewards of God’s creation; we are the body of Christ on earth. We are called to continue his ministry empowered by the Holy Spirit. This is a solemn responsibility we are called to follow. As I say it like this, it sounds weighty, nothing we can do on our own, but this is the glory of God, we are not on our own. Continuing the previous quote from the Book of Order, “God has put all things under the Lordship of Jesus Christ and has made Christ Head of the Church, which is his body.”[6]
Christ calls the Church into being, giving it all that is necessary for its mission to the world, for its building up, and for service to God and all creation. Christ is present with the Church in both Spirit and Word.
But what does that mean? What are we called to do as the body of Christ? If you will, what is the scope of our authority?
One of the ways the church describes itself is by something called The Great Ends of the Church. The Great Ends have been a part of American Presbyterianism for over 100 years. The great ends of the church are the proclamation of the gospel for the salvation of humankind; the shelter, nurture, and spiritual fellowship of the children of God; the maintenance of divine worship; the preservation of the truth; the promotion of social righteousness; and the exhibition of the Kingdom of Heaven to the world.[7]
This congregation, this part of the body of Christ has its own description of how we show Christ to the world. Our Mission Statement says we gather and welcome the broken people of the world and through God’s love make us one. I love this and believe it is a mission we follow in our lives inside and outside these walls.
Still, the Great Ends and our mission statement may seem a little wordy. That’s the problem with mission statements is that they are heavy on intention, but light on execution. They are great for saying what we want to do, but not so much on how we are going to do it. So how is authority imparted to this part of the body of Christ? How do we exercise it?
The Session, which is the Minister and the Elders, the Session is responsible for the mission and government of each individual congregation.[8] For this congregation, within these seven people, with Christ as the head of the Church, is all power and authority vested to do the work of God on earth.
This includes opportunities for evangelism to be learned and practiced in and by the church so that members may be better equipped to articulate their faith, to witness in word and deed to the saving grace of Jesus Christ, and to invite persons into a new life in Christ.[9] This includes receiving members into the church.[10] This includes leading the congregation in participation in the mission of the whole Church in the world.[11] This includes ordering worship;[12] including preaching the word, celebrating the sacraments, and praying in song and silence.
Oh, the Session does much. There are a lot of duties in nineteen sections plus subsections found in the Book of Order. Some of these are specifically administered by the Minister of Word and Sacrament, others are not. Some are reserved and others are delegated.
But the rubber meets the road where each member of the church exercises their authority as the children of God. Again, this comes from the Book of Order:[13] We accept Christ’s call to be involved in the responsibly in the ministry of his Church by:
Proclaiming the good news,
Taking part in the common life and worship,
Praying and studying Scripture and the faith of the Christian Church,
Supporting the work of the church through the giving of money, time, and talents,
Participating in the governing responsibilities of the church,
Demonstrating a new quality of life within and through the church,
Responding to God’s activity in the world through service to others,
Living responsibly in the personal, family, vocational, political, cultural, and social relationships of life,
Working in the world for peace, justice, freedom, and human fulfillment.
This is what we have all been called to do. We have the power and we have the authority. By the power and authority of the Triune God these are our responsibilities with the authority to exercise them. The power has been demonstrated for us by God incarnate, our Lord Jesus Christ. The authority has been given through his Lordship to his body which is the church. After his death and resurrection, we became empowered to continue his work by the presence of God’s Holy Spirit.
Finally, this authority has been given to us with the assumption that we will be good stewards; exercising good use of the authority we have been given. It is essential that we pursue the ends and goals of the Church in the nature of Christ.[14] As the Apostle Paul told the Philippians, we are to be of the same mind, acting in the interests of others, not ourselves. We are to be in the same mind as was in Christ Jesus. A mind not shared by the chief priests and elders.
As the church, we are called to God’s continuing work on earth. We are called to worship and praise. We are called to service and mission. We are called to extol his name in evangelism. In the words of St. Francis we are all called to “preach the gospel, and if necessary use words.” And through the power of our Lord we can, with authority.
[1] Kittel, Gerhard, “Theological Dictionary of the New Testament.” Geoffrey Bromiley, translator and editor. Volume II, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1964, pages 562.
[2] Priests and Levites, Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible
[3] Exodus 28:29
[4] Kittel, page 568
[5] PC(USA) Book of Order, G-1.0100a
[6] Ibid.
[7] Ibid, G-1.0200
[8] Ibid G-10.0102
[9] Ibid G-10.0102a
[10] Ibid G-10.0102b
[11] Ibid G-10.0102c
[12] Ibid. G-10.0102d
[13] Ibid. G5-0102a-i
[14] Kittel, page 568
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Amazing Grace
This sermon was heard at the First Presbyterian Church in Berryville, Arkansas on Sunday September 21, 2008, the 25th Sunday in Ordinary Time.
Exodus 16:2-15
Psalm 105:1-6, 37-45
Philippians 1:21-30
Matthew 20:1-16
May the words of my mouth and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable to you, O Lord, our rock and our redeemer. Amen
First published in 1945, George Orwell’s “Animal Farm” is a satirical allegory reflecting events leading up to and during Stalin era in Russia before World War II. The story uses the setting of a farmer, a farm, and the livestock to portray the Czars and the Bolsheviks. At first, all animals are equal; this becomes the Seventh Commandment of Animal Farm. However, class and status disparities soon emerge between the different animal species.
The novel describes how a society’s ideologies can be manipulated and twisted by those in positions of social and political power, including how a utopian society is made impossible by the corrupting nature of the very power necessary to create it. By the end of the book, the pigs have learned to walk upright and started to behave similarly to the humans against whom they revolted in the beginning. [1]
The famous quote “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others” is a proclamation by the pigs that control the government. This proclamation becomes the revised version of the Seventh Commandment of Animal Farm. The new commandment is a comment on the hypocrisy of governments that proclaim the absolute equality of their citizens but give power and privileges to a small elite.
By now, I imagine you are wondering how I am going to connect “Animal Farm” to this parable. Oddly, it’s easier than you think.
This is one of Jesus’ kingdom of heaven parables found only in Matthew’s gospel. It is a story of the amazing grace of God that extends to all persons in the kingdom of heaven equally. Of course, in our dog-eat-dog world, this parable seems more outrageous than amazing. And it was that way to the parable characters too.
You know how this parable works. Early in the morning, the landowner goes to the village marketplace to find day workers. Let’s start right here. This very sentence is a sign that the kingdom of heaven is different from the world we know. The landowner goes to the village marketplace. Not the manager, not the foreman, not even the personnel director; the landowner goes to find day workers. The big man goes to hire the workers and negotiate with them.
Everyone agrees on the daily wage, a denarius. It’s a living wage, it won’t make a farm worker rich, but it will keep a roof over the family’s head, food on the table, and gas in the truck.
The landowner repeats this process at nine, noon, three in the afternoon, and five. These workers are promised they will be paid “whatever is right.”[2] This is where we are being set up; we know what is right, or what is usual. They will be paid for either a portion of the day or per bushel harvested. Per hour or piecemeal, this is the way we would expect to be paid. Either way, the daybreak folks will get more, it’s only fair. But these workers weren’t promised what was fair; they were promised what is right.
So at the end of a long day, a day longer for some than others, the owner told his manager to call the laborers together for their pay with the last coming first and the first coming last. Sound familiar?
They were paid in order, the five o’clock shift, then the three o’clock, the noon, the nine, and finally the daybreak shift. And they all received the usual daily wage. Every one of them received a denarius whether they were there an hour or all day. This ticked off the folks who had been there all day long. The hours are long, the day is hot, the work is hard, and everyone walked out with the same pay. And just to add what they considered insult to what they felt was injury, they had to wait around to watch everyone else get a full day’s pay first. They had to watch the short-timers get paid the exact same amount they earned, what they felt they alone deserved.
Then one of them said what the rest of them were thinking, “These last worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the day and the scorching heat.”
There it is. He didn’t say “you paid them the same,” he said “you have made them equal to us.” There it is, merit. They didn’t deserve the same thing because they aren’t like us. They didn’t work all day. They could have been with us in the field, but they weren’t and you have made them equal to us.
This is our world. Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of independence, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.” Our world promises that all men are created equal. What we do with our God given equality is up to us.
In the kingdom of heaven, all men-and women-are equal. Not created equal, in the kingdom of heaven we are equal. This is the difference between merit and grace. On earth, we earn what we get. In the kingdom of heaven, we receive without earning, and we receive more than we could ever merit.
This is actually harder for the church to understand than we might think. If it were not, Jesus would not have said anything about it.
But in this time where Gentile God-fearers are crashing the church of the Jewish Christians, this is a real concern. In a later time when the church sold golden tickets to absolve sins called “plenary indulgences,” this is a real concern. Still in a later time when people argue about who are the true believers and who are the unfaithful leading the church down the wrong path, this is a real concern. Shoot, in this time when people argue and churches divide over what music is sung to what accompaniment, this is a real concern.
Perhaps Jesus knew that human beings would cause divisions in the church and he wanted us to know that all people are equal.
And nobody is more equal than anybody else. Nobody.
Still, this causes a real crisis in the church. No one phrased it better than Jürgen Moltmann:
The Christian life of theologians, churches and human beings is faced more than ever today with a double crisis: the crisis of relevance and the crisis of identity. These two crises are complementary. The more theology and the church attempt to become relevant to the problems of our present day, the more deeply they are drawn into a crisis of their own identity. The more they attempt to assert their identity in traditional dogmas, rights and moral notions, the more irrelevant and unbelievable they become.[3]
Moltmann calls this the identity-involvement dilemma. If we become too involved in the world we are drawn into a crisis of identity as the people of God. If we hold too tightly to who we are as the church, the church loses sight of the world it has been called to serve doing God’s reconciling work. It’s a Catch-22, but as Joseph Heller wrote; Catch-22 is the best catch there is.
Upon Moltmann’s observation, theologian Shirley Guthrie asks, “whether and how we can maintain Christian identity and faithfulness in a pluralistic church and society without becoming exclusive, intolerant, and irrelevant; and whether and how we can be an open inclusive, relevant community of Christians without losing our Christian identity and authenticity.”
And this isn’t a new problem; it has been going on since the Gentiles started fearing God and following Jesus. The only thing that is new is the way we describe the problem. The issues are new; but the problems they bring, whether recent or aged, are not. The problems are loss of identity and loss of relevance.
But here’s the crux of the matter; all of these problems are ours, they aren’t God’s. God never loses identity, and in the same breath never loses relevance. God is in the world. God walked the face of the earth sharing our joys and concerns, sharing everything except for our sin. That would come upon him at the cross. Jesus tells us of his simple amazing grace and the overwhelming breadth of his promise of equality in the kingdom. So the people who are harmed by our problems are us.
Shakespeare’s “Romeo and Juliet” is the story of two families that don’t get along. In fact, Shakespeare doesn’t even say what their argument is about, only that “theirs is an ancient grudge.”[4] And in the end, when the ancient grudge fuels the deaths of the star-crossed lovers, the Prince tells the crowd, that as Capulet and Montague have lost children, so too the Prince has “lost the brace of kinsmen. All are punished.”[5], [6]
Let us know that if we lose our way in the Lord, we are punished. When we fail to know that in the kingdom of heaven all are equal, we are punished. When we fail to treat others as equals in the kingdom of heaven, we are punished. We are punished as we lose the brace of kinsmen. And while the Lord never looses the brace of kinsmen, the Lord grieves as we cause ourselves to be punished when we reject others.
In his book “Santa Biblia: The Bible through Hispanic Eyes,” Justo Gonzales notes that this parable elicits surprisingly different reactions when read to typical, middle-class audiences in America compared to Hispanic audiences.
Most people are perplexed that someone who had worked for only an hour should be paid the same as someone who has worked for eight hours. It seems patently unfair. Moreover, most people don't understand the fuss. The logic is so clear, typical Americans cannot understand on what grounds one could argue the fairness of Jesus’ approach.
When the story is read or studied by a Hispanic audience, however, the reaction is quite different. These are people, Gonzales says, who identify with the problems of the field workers. They understand the laborer who travels in his pickup truck trying to find work with little success, or, even if he finds work, he is standing around waiting until the job materializes.
At the end of the parable when the landowner pays the wages, the Hispanic congregation applauds when the laborers who worked for only one hour get paid a full day's pay. They are not confused by this, but understand that the people looking for work and who have been waiting for work need a day's pay to survive. They rejoice, then, at the grace that is not contrary to justice, but that flows with justice. They are paid what they need and deserve rather than the wages they might have been paid had society's concept of justice prevailed.[7]
This parable of the kingdom of heaven is a story of the amazing grace of God that extends to everyone in the kingdom of heaven equally and abundantly. In the kingdom of heaven, all are equal. This parable understands that in the kingdom of heaven, justice is served when all receive the full measure of grace without regard to merit. It’s the story of grace being extended fully and extravagantly to all who need God’s grace.
It understands that Orwell’s Animal Farm is a human society, and that God’s grace and power cannot be corrupted like we are. The kingdom of heaven is greater and more grace filled than any human utopia could ever hope to be.
Of course, in our dog-eat-dog world, this seems more outrageous than amazing. This is the world we as the Church of Jesus Christ must reach beyond. There is alone the Son Jesus Christ, our head, our brother, our pastor, and the great bishop of our souls, the one through whom we are elect;[8] through whom we are the church, his body on earth. Hence when we fail to recognize the equality of all persons through the amazing grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, we are all punished.
[1] Animal Farm, Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Farm_(book), retrieved September 20, 2008.
[2] Matthew 20:4
[3] Moltmann, Jürgen, “The Crucified God.” New York: Harper and Row, 1974, page 7.
[4] Shakespeare, William, “Romeo and Juliet.” Act 1, Scene 1, Line 3.
[5] Ibid, Act 5, Scene 3, Line 294.
[6] Pronounced “punish-ed”
[7] Gonzales, Justo, “Santa Biblia: The Bible through Hispanic Eyes.” Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996, pages 62-63. Found in Homiletics Online, http://www.homileticsonline.com/subscriber/printer_friendly_installment.asp?installment_id=3125 retrieved September 16, 2008.
[8] From the Scots’ Confession, Chapter VIII, Paragraph 2
Exodus 16:2-15
Psalm 105:1-6, 37-45
Philippians 1:21-30
Matthew 20:1-16
May the words of my mouth and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable to you, O Lord, our rock and our redeemer. Amen
First published in 1945, George Orwell’s “Animal Farm” is a satirical allegory reflecting events leading up to and during Stalin era in Russia before World War II. The story uses the setting of a farmer, a farm, and the livestock to portray the Czars and the Bolsheviks. At first, all animals are equal; this becomes the Seventh Commandment of Animal Farm. However, class and status disparities soon emerge between the different animal species.
The novel describes how a society’s ideologies can be manipulated and twisted by those in positions of social and political power, including how a utopian society is made impossible by the corrupting nature of the very power necessary to create it. By the end of the book, the pigs have learned to walk upright and started to behave similarly to the humans against whom they revolted in the beginning. [1]
The famous quote “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others” is a proclamation by the pigs that control the government. This proclamation becomes the revised version of the Seventh Commandment of Animal Farm. The new commandment is a comment on the hypocrisy of governments that proclaim the absolute equality of their citizens but give power and privileges to a small elite.
By now, I imagine you are wondering how I am going to connect “Animal Farm” to this parable. Oddly, it’s easier than you think.
This is one of Jesus’ kingdom of heaven parables found only in Matthew’s gospel. It is a story of the amazing grace of God that extends to all persons in the kingdom of heaven equally. Of course, in our dog-eat-dog world, this parable seems more outrageous than amazing. And it was that way to the parable characters too.
You know how this parable works. Early in the morning, the landowner goes to the village marketplace to find day workers. Let’s start right here. This very sentence is a sign that the kingdom of heaven is different from the world we know. The landowner goes to the village marketplace. Not the manager, not the foreman, not even the personnel director; the landowner goes to find day workers. The big man goes to hire the workers and negotiate with them.
Everyone agrees on the daily wage, a denarius. It’s a living wage, it won’t make a farm worker rich, but it will keep a roof over the family’s head, food on the table, and gas in the truck.
The landowner repeats this process at nine, noon, three in the afternoon, and five. These workers are promised they will be paid “whatever is right.”[2] This is where we are being set up; we know what is right, or what is usual. They will be paid for either a portion of the day or per bushel harvested. Per hour or piecemeal, this is the way we would expect to be paid. Either way, the daybreak folks will get more, it’s only fair. But these workers weren’t promised what was fair; they were promised what is right.
So at the end of a long day, a day longer for some than others, the owner told his manager to call the laborers together for their pay with the last coming first and the first coming last. Sound familiar?
They were paid in order, the five o’clock shift, then the three o’clock, the noon, the nine, and finally the daybreak shift. And they all received the usual daily wage. Every one of them received a denarius whether they were there an hour or all day. This ticked off the folks who had been there all day long. The hours are long, the day is hot, the work is hard, and everyone walked out with the same pay. And just to add what they considered insult to what they felt was injury, they had to wait around to watch everyone else get a full day’s pay first. They had to watch the short-timers get paid the exact same amount they earned, what they felt they alone deserved.
Then one of them said what the rest of them were thinking, “These last worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the day and the scorching heat.”
There it is. He didn’t say “you paid them the same,” he said “you have made them equal to us.” There it is, merit. They didn’t deserve the same thing because they aren’t like us. They didn’t work all day. They could have been with us in the field, but they weren’t and you have made them equal to us.
This is our world. Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of independence, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.” Our world promises that all men are created equal. What we do with our God given equality is up to us.
In the kingdom of heaven, all men-and women-are equal. Not created equal, in the kingdom of heaven we are equal. This is the difference between merit and grace. On earth, we earn what we get. In the kingdom of heaven, we receive without earning, and we receive more than we could ever merit.
This is actually harder for the church to understand than we might think. If it were not, Jesus would not have said anything about it.
But in this time where Gentile God-fearers are crashing the church of the Jewish Christians, this is a real concern. In a later time when the church sold golden tickets to absolve sins called “plenary indulgences,” this is a real concern. Still in a later time when people argue about who are the true believers and who are the unfaithful leading the church down the wrong path, this is a real concern. Shoot, in this time when people argue and churches divide over what music is sung to what accompaniment, this is a real concern.
Perhaps Jesus knew that human beings would cause divisions in the church and he wanted us to know that all people are equal.
And nobody is more equal than anybody else. Nobody.
Still, this causes a real crisis in the church. No one phrased it better than Jürgen Moltmann:
The Christian life of theologians, churches and human beings is faced more than ever today with a double crisis: the crisis of relevance and the crisis of identity. These two crises are complementary. The more theology and the church attempt to become relevant to the problems of our present day, the more deeply they are drawn into a crisis of their own identity. The more they attempt to assert their identity in traditional dogmas, rights and moral notions, the more irrelevant and unbelievable they become.[3]
Moltmann calls this the identity-involvement dilemma. If we become too involved in the world we are drawn into a crisis of identity as the people of God. If we hold too tightly to who we are as the church, the church loses sight of the world it has been called to serve doing God’s reconciling work. It’s a Catch-22, but as Joseph Heller wrote; Catch-22 is the best catch there is.
Upon Moltmann’s observation, theologian Shirley Guthrie asks, “whether and how we can maintain Christian identity and faithfulness in a pluralistic church and society without becoming exclusive, intolerant, and irrelevant; and whether and how we can be an open inclusive, relevant community of Christians without losing our Christian identity and authenticity.”
And this isn’t a new problem; it has been going on since the Gentiles started fearing God and following Jesus. The only thing that is new is the way we describe the problem. The issues are new; but the problems they bring, whether recent or aged, are not. The problems are loss of identity and loss of relevance.
But here’s the crux of the matter; all of these problems are ours, they aren’t God’s. God never loses identity, and in the same breath never loses relevance. God is in the world. God walked the face of the earth sharing our joys and concerns, sharing everything except for our sin. That would come upon him at the cross. Jesus tells us of his simple amazing grace and the overwhelming breadth of his promise of equality in the kingdom. So the people who are harmed by our problems are us.
Shakespeare’s “Romeo and Juliet” is the story of two families that don’t get along. In fact, Shakespeare doesn’t even say what their argument is about, only that “theirs is an ancient grudge.”[4] And in the end, when the ancient grudge fuels the deaths of the star-crossed lovers, the Prince tells the crowd, that as Capulet and Montague have lost children, so too the Prince has “lost the brace of kinsmen. All are punished.”[5], [6]
Let us know that if we lose our way in the Lord, we are punished. When we fail to know that in the kingdom of heaven all are equal, we are punished. When we fail to treat others as equals in the kingdom of heaven, we are punished. We are punished as we lose the brace of kinsmen. And while the Lord never looses the brace of kinsmen, the Lord grieves as we cause ourselves to be punished when we reject others.
In his book “Santa Biblia: The Bible through Hispanic Eyes,” Justo Gonzales notes that this parable elicits surprisingly different reactions when read to typical, middle-class audiences in America compared to Hispanic audiences.
Most people are perplexed that someone who had worked for only an hour should be paid the same as someone who has worked for eight hours. It seems patently unfair. Moreover, most people don't understand the fuss. The logic is so clear, typical Americans cannot understand on what grounds one could argue the fairness of Jesus’ approach.
When the story is read or studied by a Hispanic audience, however, the reaction is quite different. These are people, Gonzales says, who identify with the problems of the field workers. They understand the laborer who travels in his pickup truck trying to find work with little success, or, even if he finds work, he is standing around waiting until the job materializes.
At the end of the parable when the landowner pays the wages, the Hispanic congregation applauds when the laborers who worked for only one hour get paid a full day's pay. They are not confused by this, but understand that the people looking for work and who have been waiting for work need a day's pay to survive. They rejoice, then, at the grace that is not contrary to justice, but that flows with justice. They are paid what they need and deserve rather than the wages they might have been paid had society's concept of justice prevailed.[7]
This parable of the kingdom of heaven is a story of the amazing grace of God that extends to everyone in the kingdom of heaven equally and abundantly. In the kingdom of heaven, all are equal. This parable understands that in the kingdom of heaven, justice is served when all receive the full measure of grace without regard to merit. It’s the story of grace being extended fully and extravagantly to all who need God’s grace.
It understands that Orwell’s Animal Farm is a human society, and that God’s grace and power cannot be corrupted like we are. The kingdom of heaven is greater and more grace filled than any human utopia could ever hope to be.
Of course, in our dog-eat-dog world, this seems more outrageous than amazing. This is the world we as the Church of Jesus Christ must reach beyond. There is alone the Son Jesus Christ, our head, our brother, our pastor, and the great bishop of our souls, the one through whom we are elect;[8] through whom we are the church, his body on earth. Hence when we fail to recognize the equality of all persons through the amazing grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, we are all punished.
[1] Animal Farm, Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Farm_(book), retrieved September 20, 2008.
[2] Matthew 20:4
[3] Moltmann, Jürgen, “The Crucified God.” New York: Harper and Row, 1974, page 7.
[4] Shakespeare, William, “Romeo and Juliet.” Act 1, Scene 1, Line 3.
[5] Ibid, Act 5, Scene 3, Line 294.
[6] Pronounced “punish-ed”
[7] Gonzales, Justo, “Santa Biblia: The Bible through Hispanic Eyes.” Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996, pages 62-63. Found in Homiletics Online, http://www.homileticsonline.com/subscriber/printer_friendly_installment.asp?installment_id=3125 retrieved September 16, 2008.
[8] From the Scots’ Confession, Chapter VIII, Paragraph 2
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Heart of the Matter
This sermon was heard at the First Presbyterian Church in Berryville, Arkansas on September 14, 2008, the 24th Sunday in Ordinary Time.
Exodus 14:19-31
Psalm 114
Romans 14:1-12
Matthew 18:21-35
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 my favorite novels is John Irving’s The Hotel New Hampshire.[1] Set from the beginning of World War II to the current day. It’s the story of a couple named Win and Mary, their children, and their truly odd, often bizarre, sometimes dangerous adventures. The author creates a family that is so off-center, these adventures pale next to their personal adventures of self-discovery.
Near the beginning of the book, Freud, an old Viennese Jewish circus performer, prophesies that the two main characters are going to marry soon, have a family, and live some interesting adventures. As Freud leaves America, returning to Vienna before the war begins in Europe, he offers one piece of advice to the young woman. He bids her come close and says, “Forgive him.” “For what?” she asks. “Just forgive him” he says again. This advice becomes very useful to her. Throughout the book, she is forced to forgive him time and again.
“Forgive him.” “For what?” “Just forgive him.”
“Forgive him,” Jesus says. “Forgive her,” Jesus says. “Forgive them,” Jesus says. “Forgive yourself,” Jesus says. “How often?” Peter asks, “Seven times?” Seven is a generous number, the Pharisees told the people three times is enough, and seven is more than twice that. In the day, seven was the perfect number. So it’s the perfect number of times to forgive.
“Seventy-seven times” Jesus replies. Seventy-seven! That’s more times than I can keep track. I can’t imagine how long it would take to forgive someone that many times either. How long does it take to go through the Trust-Betrayal-Forgiveness-Repeat cycle? I can’t imagine living long enough to give someone seventy-seven chances to betray me.
And that’s the point. Not that we won’t live long enough, but that counting is futile. If we’re keeping track we haven’t forgiven. When we count the number of sins someone commits against us, it’s like we are biding our time until the seventy-eighth so we can tell the offender what we really think of them. This isn’t forgiveness; this is revenge being best served very cold.
To make his point about forgiveness, Jesus shares a parable with the disciples; the story of a Gentile king reconciling accounts with his subjects. In comes a slave who owes his master 10,000 talents. When the disciples heard this sum they would have been aghast. This is more money than they can imagine. It would be worth more than the revenue of Herod’s taxes against Syria, Phoenicia, Judea, and Samaria combined for eleven years.[2]
To us, these numbers seem outrageous, but they don’t really speak to us culturally. In figures we can understand, by my estimation 10,000 talents comes to just short of $72 million.[3] Frankly, this number is so big I have an idea what it is, but I have no idea about how much it really is. Bankers know. Some Lotto winners know. I don’t. This is the sort of awe struck feeling Jesus gave the disciples.
When the slave told his master he didn’t have $72 million on him, his lord ordered him to be sold, together with his wife and children and all his possessions, and payment to be made. This is how we know this is the story about a Gentile king; this restitution would not have been allowed under Jewish law.[4] “Then the slave fell on his knees before him, saying, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you everything.’” Jesus finishes this part of the story saying, “Out of pity for him, the lord of that slave released him and forgave him the debt.”
After leaving, this slave found one of his fellow slaves who owed him a debt of 100 denarii. This is a debt we can understand; the denarius was the day’s wage for a laborer. To us, this would be 20 weeks pay; not cheap, but we have a handle on this.
“The man seized his debtor by the throat, he said, ‘Pay what you owe.’ Then his fellow slave fell down and pleaded with him, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you.’” You gotta love how Jesus makes a point; the two requests for patience are nearly identical. After the man refused; the slave who had owed 10,000 talents went and threw the one who owed him 100 denarii into prison until he would pay.
When the remainder of the fellow slaves heard of this, they went to the king to tell him what had occurred. The king was outraged with what had happened and was ready to pass judgment. “You wicked slave!” You know when the king leads with that it isn’t going to get any better for you. “I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me. Should you not have had mercy on your fellow slave, as I had mercy on you?” With this, in anger his lord handed the wicked slave over to be tortured until he would pay his entire debt.
Now, it is important for us to remember that this is a kingdom parable. This parable begins with the phrase, “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to…” This isn’t a parable that tells us to go and do likewise. So when we look at the characters, there is the Gentile King, the lord of the land, and all the slaves.
The king is generous, very generous. He gave one of his servants $72 million. Then he removed the debt. This is a generosity we cannot match, we just don’t have the resources either to give or to forgive so extravagantly. As for us, the debts we owe against one another don’t compare to the debts we incur against the lord of the land, or the Lord of our lives.
When we consider our forgiveness upon one another, there is something important right on the surface of this parable. Simply, we learn that when we fail to forgive one another, we are the ones that get hurt. The parable makes this clear, the man who was thrown in jail to be tortured was not the one who owed a debt; he was the one who did not forgive a debt. When we fail to forgive, when we hold a grudge, we get hurt.
In the kingdom of heaven, when we ask the Lord for forgiveness, we are forgiven. This is grace; this is the gift of unmerited favor we gain, not earn but gain, when we receive Jesus Christ as Lord. The Lord forgives us our debts, whether it be three times, seven times, or seventy-seven times. Whether our debt is 100 days wages or $72 million worth of sin, the Lord forgives.
We don’t earn the Lord’s forgiveness by forgiving either. But when we fail to forgive one another, we hurt ourselves. The Lord forgives our transgression; when we don’t, we have to do the work of holding a grudge. We have to invest time and energy, emotion and bile in clinging to something which can be released through the love of God.
Please don’t misunderstand this; forgiveness does not excuse hurtful behavior. Forgiveness is not an invitation for someone to treat you like a doormat. It’s not the reopening of a cycle of betrayal. I believe whoever said forgive-and-forget had it wrong. Forgive-yes, forgetting just means we didn’t learn the lesson. So yes, forgive, but forgiveness doesn’t mean get abused again. As there is grace in forgiveness, and there is also judgment and justice.
Eagles lead singer and drummer Don Henley wrote this song about the painful end of a relationship:
I'm learning to live without you now
But I miss you sometimes
The more I know, the less I understand
All the things I thought I knew, I'm learning again
I've been tryin’ to get down to the Heart of the Matter
But my will gets weak
And my thoughts seem to scatter
But I think it's about forgiveness
Forgiveness
Even if, even if you don't love me anymore[5]
Henley sings that even after the relationship is over, even after the lover has gone to be with another, he knows the heart of the matter is forgiveness. The song doesn’t say what happened with the relationship. There are no lyrics about who did whom wrong. But in the end, he knows that anger is wrong, bitterness is wrong, begrudging is wrong. The heart of the matter is forgiveness.
Even if—especially if the person whom we are to forgive doesn’t love us, the heart of the matter is forgiveness.
Earlier in worship, we made confession of sin against God and against one another. We confessed, “We are quick to anger when we feel we’ve been wronged. We do not hasten to seek reconciliation even when we would rather things were less stressful and tense.”
And through God’s grace, we receive the assurance of pardon, “‘Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord of both the dead and the living.’ To be at one with Christ is to live in assurance that our sins are forgiven!”[6]
“Forgive him,” Jesus says. “Forgive her,” Jesus says. “Forgive them,” Jesus says. “Forgive yourself,” Jesus says. In this, we are at one with Christ living in assurance that our sins are forgiven.
[1] Irving, John, “The Hotel New Hampshire.” New York: Dutton, 1981.
[2] The New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. VII, Nashville: Abingdon Press, page 382.
[3] Actually, $71,818,337.69. This figure presumes the talent is valued at 20.4 kilograms of silver per talent (according to the New Interpreter’s Study Bible, page 382) and the kilogram weighs 2.679229 pounds troy. The price of silver was found at Goldline.com, http://www.goldline.com/d/index.php?id=186&term=silver%20price&gclid=COmBj9O62ZUCFRJxxwod5mdVYA, retrieved September 13, 2008.
[4] Ibid, New Interpreter’s Bible
[5] Henley, Don, “The Heart of the Matter.” Track 10—“The End of the Innocence,” Geffen Records, 1989.
[6] Kirk, James G., “When We Gather, A Book of Prayers for Worship, Revised Edition, For Years A, B, and C.” Louisville: Geneva Press, 2001, pages 109-110. At First Presbyterian in Berryville, we use prayers from this book for Call to Confession, Confession of Sin, Assurance of Pardon, and Offering Dedication.
Exodus 14:19-31
Psalm 114
Romans 14:1-12
Matthew 18:21-35
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 my favorite novels is John Irving’s The Hotel New Hampshire.[1] Set from the beginning of World War II to the current day. It’s the story of a couple named Win and Mary, their children, and their truly odd, often bizarre, sometimes dangerous adventures. The author creates a family that is so off-center, these adventures pale next to their personal adventures of self-discovery.
Near the beginning of the book, Freud, an old Viennese Jewish circus performer, prophesies that the two main characters are going to marry soon, have a family, and live some interesting adventures. As Freud leaves America, returning to Vienna before the war begins in Europe, he offers one piece of advice to the young woman. He bids her come close and says, “Forgive him.” “For what?” she asks. “Just forgive him” he says again. This advice becomes very useful to her. Throughout the book, she is forced to forgive him time and again.
“Forgive him.” “For what?” “Just forgive him.”
“Forgive him,” Jesus says. “Forgive her,” Jesus says. “Forgive them,” Jesus says. “Forgive yourself,” Jesus says. “How often?” Peter asks, “Seven times?” Seven is a generous number, the Pharisees told the people three times is enough, and seven is more than twice that. In the day, seven was the perfect number. So it’s the perfect number of times to forgive.
“Seventy-seven times” Jesus replies. Seventy-seven! That’s more times than I can keep track. I can’t imagine how long it would take to forgive someone that many times either. How long does it take to go through the Trust-Betrayal-Forgiveness-Repeat cycle? I can’t imagine living long enough to give someone seventy-seven chances to betray me.
And that’s the point. Not that we won’t live long enough, but that counting is futile. If we’re keeping track we haven’t forgiven. When we count the number of sins someone commits against us, it’s like we are biding our time until the seventy-eighth so we can tell the offender what we really think of them. This isn’t forgiveness; this is revenge being best served very cold.
To make his point about forgiveness, Jesus shares a parable with the disciples; the story of a Gentile king reconciling accounts with his subjects. In comes a slave who owes his master 10,000 talents. When the disciples heard this sum they would have been aghast. This is more money than they can imagine. It would be worth more than the revenue of Herod’s taxes against Syria, Phoenicia, Judea, and Samaria combined for eleven years.[2]
To us, these numbers seem outrageous, but they don’t really speak to us culturally. In figures we can understand, by my estimation 10,000 talents comes to just short of $72 million.[3] Frankly, this number is so big I have an idea what it is, but I have no idea about how much it really is. Bankers know. Some Lotto winners know. I don’t. This is the sort of awe struck feeling Jesus gave the disciples.
When the slave told his master he didn’t have $72 million on him, his lord ordered him to be sold, together with his wife and children and all his possessions, and payment to be made. This is how we know this is the story about a Gentile king; this restitution would not have been allowed under Jewish law.[4] “Then the slave fell on his knees before him, saying, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you everything.’” Jesus finishes this part of the story saying, “Out of pity for him, the lord of that slave released him and forgave him the debt.”
After leaving, this slave found one of his fellow slaves who owed him a debt of 100 denarii. This is a debt we can understand; the denarius was the day’s wage for a laborer. To us, this would be 20 weeks pay; not cheap, but we have a handle on this.
“The man seized his debtor by the throat, he said, ‘Pay what you owe.’ Then his fellow slave fell down and pleaded with him, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you.’” You gotta love how Jesus makes a point; the two requests for patience are nearly identical. After the man refused; the slave who had owed 10,000 talents went and threw the one who owed him 100 denarii into prison until he would pay.
When the remainder of the fellow slaves heard of this, they went to the king to tell him what had occurred. The king was outraged with what had happened and was ready to pass judgment. “You wicked slave!” You know when the king leads with that it isn’t going to get any better for you. “I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me. Should you not have had mercy on your fellow slave, as I had mercy on you?” With this, in anger his lord handed the wicked slave over to be tortured until he would pay his entire debt.
Now, it is important for us to remember that this is a kingdom parable. This parable begins with the phrase, “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to…” This isn’t a parable that tells us to go and do likewise. So when we look at the characters, there is the Gentile King, the lord of the land, and all the slaves.
The king is generous, very generous. He gave one of his servants $72 million. Then he removed the debt. This is a generosity we cannot match, we just don’t have the resources either to give or to forgive so extravagantly. As for us, the debts we owe against one another don’t compare to the debts we incur against the lord of the land, or the Lord of our lives.
When we consider our forgiveness upon one another, there is something important right on the surface of this parable. Simply, we learn that when we fail to forgive one another, we are the ones that get hurt. The parable makes this clear, the man who was thrown in jail to be tortured was not the one who owed a debt; he was the one who did not forgive a debt. When we fail to forgive, when we hold a grudge, we get hurt.
In the kingdom of heaven, when we ask the Lord for forgiveness, we are forgiven. This is grace; this is the gift of unmerited favor we gain, not earn but gain, when we receive Jesus Christ as Lord. The Lord forgives us our debts, whether it be three times, seven times, or seventy-seven times. Whether our debt is 100 days wages or $72 million worth of sin, the Lord forgives.
We don’t earn the Lord’s forgiveness by forgiving either. But when we fail to forgive one another, we hurt ourselves. The Lord forgives our transgression; when we don’t, we have to do the work of holding a grudge. We have to invest time and energy, emotion and bile in clinging to something which can be released through the love of God.
Please don’t misunderstand this; forgiveness does not excuse hurtful behavior. Forgiveness is not an invitation for someone to treat you like a doormat. It’s not the reopening of a cycle of betrayal. I believe whoever said forgive-and-forget had it wrong. Forgive-yes, forgetting just means we didn’t learn the lesson. So yes, forgive, but forgiveness doesn’t mean get abused again. As there is grace in forgiveness, and there is also judgment and justice.
Eagles lead singer and drummer Don Henley wrote this song about the painful end of a relationship:
I'm learning to live without you now
But I miss you sometimes
The more I know, the less I understand
All the things I thought I knew, I'm learning again
I've been tryin’ to get down to the Heart of the Matter
But my will gets weak
And my thoughts seem to scatter
But I think it's about forgiveness
Forgiveness
Even if, even if you don't love me anymore[5]
Henley sings that even after the relationship is over, even after the lover has gone to be with another, he knows the heart of the matter is forgiveness. The song doesn’t say what happened with the relationship. There are no lyrics about who did whom wrong. But in the end, he knows that anger is wrong, bitterness is wrong, begrudging is wrong. The heart of the matter is forgiveness.
Even if—especially if the person whom we are to forgive doesn’t love us, the heart of the matter is forgiveness.
Earlier in worship, we made confession of sin against God and against one another. We confessed, “We are quick to anger when we feel we’ve been wronged. We do not hasten to seek reconciliation even when we would rather things were less stressful and tense.”
And through God’s grace, we receive the assurance of pardon, “‘Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord of both the dead and the living.’ To be at one with Christ is to live in assurance that our sins are forgiven!”[6]
“Forgive him,” Jesus says. “Forgive her,” Jesus says. “Forgive them,” Jesus says. “Forgive yourself,” Jesus says. In this, we are at one with Christ living in assurance that our sins are forgiven.
[1] Irving, John, “The Hotel New Hampshire.” New York: Dutton, 1981.
[2] The New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. VII, Nashville: Abingdon Press, page 382.
[3] Actually, $71,818,337.69. This figure presumes the talent is valued at 20.4 kilograms of silver per talent (according to the New Interpreter’s Study Bible, page 382) and the kilogram weighs 2.679229 pounds troy. The price of silver was found at Goldline.com, http://www.goldline.com/d/index.php?id=186&term=silver%20price&gclid=COmBj9O62ZUCFRJxxwod5mdVYA, retrieved September 13, 2008.
[4] Ibid, New Interpreter’s Bible
[5] Henley, Don, “The Heart of the Matter.” Track 10—“The End of the Innocence,” Geffen Records, 1989.
[6] Kirk, James G., “When We Gather, A Book of Prayers for Worship, Revised Edition, For Years A, B, and C.” Louisville: Geneva Press, 2001, pages 109-110. At First Presbyterian in Berryville, we use prayers from this book for Call to Confession, Confession of Sin, Assurance of Pardon, and Offering Dedication.
Sunday, September 07, 2008
The Disciplined Disciple
This sermon was heard at the First Presbyterian Church in Berryville, Arkansas on Sunday September 7, 2008, the 23rd Sunday in Ordinary Time.
Exodus 12:1-14
Psalm 149
Romans 13:8-14
Matthew 18:15-20
May the words of my mouth and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable to you, O Lord, our Rock and our Redeemer. Amen
Let’s get in the way-back machine and take a trip to the Year of Our Lord 48. Some men had come from Judea teaching the brothers, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” And after Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and debate with them, Paul and Barnabas and some of the others were appointed to go up to Jerusalem to discuss this question with the apostles and the elders. So they were sent on their way by the church, and as they passed through both Phoenicia and Samaria, they reported the conversion of the Gentiles, and brought great joy to all the believers. When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and the elders, and they reported all that God had done with them. But some believers who belonged to the sect of the Pharisees stood up and said, “It is necessary for them to be circumcised and ordered to keep the Law of Moses.” [1]
This narrative from the Acts 15 describes the first great conflict of the church. In the day there were two kinds of Christians, Jewish believers and Gentile converts. Since Jesus was himself a Jew, the Christian faith has roots in the temple and the law, not Gentile shrines and customs. Yet there was a school of thought that believed that Judaism and the Hebrew customs were not prerequisite to faith in the risen Lord Christ. As usual, leave it to the Pharisees to hold the hard line saying that being circumcised and keeping the Law of Moses were necessary for salvation.
Without going into much detail, the Council of Jerusalem was called by church leaders to discuss this issue. The council made three important decisions about the church and its requirements. First, circumcision would not be an entry requirement for gentile Christians. Second, Jewish Christians would continue to practice circumcision. Finally, traditional Jewish dietary regulations were to be maintained by all Christians.
In the end there was compromise, and even this could not be kept. The resolutions of the Jerusalem Council could not be easily sustained in the scattered communities of Christians, communities which were a combination of Jewish and Gentile Christians. The clashes which arose out of these disputes about behavior were a constant threat to the survival of the church.[2] Eventually Paul could not and did not maintain support of the dietary regulations very long. In the end, had the pro-Jewish perspective been maintained, Christianity might well have remained a reform movement within Judaism.[3]
Matthew’s system of conflict resolution from chapter 18 is sound. It begins: If another member of the church has sinned against you, go alone and point out the fault. If the member listens to you, you have regained that one. If that doesn’t work, then the situation escalates. Next, go with one or two others so that every word may be confirmed. Finally, if another member of the church has sinned against you and either they continue to sin against you or your grievance was not resolved by the first two steps or if the offender continues to refuse to listen, then put the offender out.
It’s a good system, beginning with one-on-one contact with repercussions if the offender continues to offend. My study bible says, “These instructions emphasize the responsibility of community members rather than leaders focusing on the goal of reconciliation.”[4] But I don’t get that sense from the reading; I sense something going on under the text.
Historically, when we read Matthew’s discourse in conflict resolution, in a way we read about conflict resolution from what was ultimately the losing side of the Council of Jerusalem. While the actions of the Council affirmed what the Jewish Christians believed, much of what they taught and how they behaved, the tide of history would ultimately leave the substance of this council and their specific brand of Jewish Christianity behind.
These were a people who held tight to their Judaism and the Judaism of their Messiah Jesus. We know that Matthew’s audience was specifically Jewish believers, the children of Moses and Jesus.
From this morning’s text, we are told that “if the offender refuses to listen even to the church, let such a one be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.” In Matthew’s words, there doesn’t seem to be much of a distinction between Gentile believers and the run-of-the-mill Gentile. Gentiles are Gentiles and whether they are believers or not, they are not the same as real believers, those who adhere to the Law of Moses and the restrictions and distinctions set long ago. Surely, tax collectors were collaborators with the Roman overseers. Reading this passage, I feel like someone ought to follow it saying “and some of my best friends are Gentiles and tax collectors.”
My study bible says that the worshiping community is to treat Gentiles and tax collectors as objects of mission. They are to be included as members of the assembly.[5] They may be the object of mission and they may be a part of the community, but I get the sense Mathew is saying they aren’t like us.
After 2,000 years of disagreements in the church you would think we would learn a thing or two about conflicts and resolving them. All we have to do is change a few words here and there and this description from Acts would be applicable to every church conflict. “Gentiles and tax collectors” can be changed to any one of a number of other proper nouns or adjectives and the reading would remain very familiar.
In fact, today we would all be known as Gentile Christians. We might even be members of Matthew’s refuse pile.
As a community, the bar of people who offend us has moved. I assume we welcome the uncircumcised, at least there’s nothing in the Book of Order. I had Canadian bacon for breakfast and would eat bacon at any meal. These two thousand year old scandals have been replaced by dozens of others; some so arcane we would not understand the issue in the first place. Recent Presbyterian scandals are just another drop in the bucket, and a young drop at that.
So what does this have to do with conflict resolution? I believe it has to do with the root of conflict. Returning to the Jerusalem Council, the pro-Jewish Christians insisted that because the church was the true Israel, converts must be circumcised before they were admitted into the community while Paul insisted that with Christ believers were freed from the works of the Law and were justified by grace through faith. The orthodox Jewish believer agreed with the Pharisees. The Gentile believer didn’t know the difference.
So here’s my question; what would have happened if a Gentile believer had been dragged before Matthew’s community for discipline. Then we have to ask what would have happened if one of Matthew’s community had been dragged before the Gentiles. If conflicts are resolved by individual communities, there will be only community justice. We have to find something broader than our communities, than our lives to resolve conflict. We have to follow the example of our Lord Jesus, the Messiah, the Christ.
To do this, we Christians must return to the root of our faith, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; the God in three persons. To do this we must return to the Word of God, the Holy Scripture which is the first source of what we know about God. And once we return to the Word, each of us must become interpreters of the Word, doing as it commands.
We must do more than follow rules, we have to follow commands. God saves through the redemptive work of Jesus Christ, but we are transformed not only when we hear and respond to the Gospel’s narrative. Truer, fuller, more complete transformation happens when we participate in the human connectional community of the church. The symbolism and story of redemption reach the depths of our very being when we interpret and reinterpret the word in our world.[6] We do not live into our place in the community, we do not live as active followers of Christ until we both read and interpret the word.
Looking at today’s reading from Matthew, it tells us what to do with the offender. I say let’s be careful whom we call “offender.” It is important to look at the people of God, who we are as the people, who we are in the word, and who we can be before we go to another and say, “You have sinned against me.” I have to beware because I might have sinned against you first.
If true, there is one thing to remember, Jesus expected more out of those who knew him. He expects more out of those who read and interpret the word. He expects more out of those who lead the church. He expects more out of us than he does those who do not know him. He expects more out of the community called in His holy name, bearing his holy word.
We talk about those who sin against us, so let us remember the words of Paul to the church at Rome, Love your neighbor as yourself. Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore, love is the fulfilling of the law.” Paul commands the Romans to love, this is fulfillment of the Law and our command now and forever.
[1] Acts 15:2-5. See Acts 15 for details.
[2] 1Corinthians 8, Galatians 2:11ff
[3] Rev. Dr. Ellen Babinsky, Course pack, unpublished. Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary, Theology 100-Church History through 1650. Chapter 2, page 6, 2001.
[4] New Interpreter’s Study Bible, note to Matthew 18:15-20.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Farley, Edward, “Theology in the Life of the Congregation.” Theology and Worship Occasional Paper No. 17, Office of Theology and Worship, PC (USA), Louisville, 2003, page 5. (This publication is a reprint of the first chapter of Farley’s “Practicing Gospel: Unconventional Thoughts on the Church’s Ministry.” Louisville, Westminster John Knox Press, 2003.”
Exodus 12:1-14
Psalm 149
Romans 13:8-14
Matthew 18:15-20
May the words of my mouth and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable to you, O Lord, our Rock and our Redeemer. Amen
Let’s get in the way-back machine and take a trip to the Year of Our Lord 48. Some men had come from Judea teaching the brothers, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” And after Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and debate with them, Paul and Barnabas and some of the others were appointed to go up to Jerusalem to discuss this question with the apostles and the elders. So they were sent on their way by the church, and as they passed through both Phoenicia and Samaria, they reported the conversion of the Gentiles, and brought great joy to all the believers. When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and the elders, and they reported all that God had done with them. But some believers who belonged to the sect of the Pharisees stood up and said, “It is necessary for them to be circumcised and ordered to keep the Law of Moses.” [1]
This narrative from the Acts 15 describes the first great conflict of the church. In the day there were two kinds of Christians, Jewish believers and Gentile converts. Since Jesus was himself a Jew, the Christian faith has roots in the temple and the law, not Gentile shrines and customs. Yet there was a school of thought that believed that Judaism and the Hebrew customs were not prerequisite to faith in the risen Lord Christ. As usual, leave it to the Pharisees to hold the hard line saying that being circumcised and keeping the Law of Moses were necessary for salvation.
Without going into much detail, the Council of Jerusalem was called by church leaders to discuss this issue. The council made three important decisions about the church and its requirements. First, circumcision would not be an entry requirement for gentile Christians. Second, Jewish Christians would continue to practice circumcision. Finally, traditional Jewish dietary regulations were to be maintained by all Christians.
In the end there was compromise, and even this could not be kept. The resolutions of the Jerusalem Council could not be easily sustained in the scattered communities of Christians, communities which were a combination of Jewish and Gentile Christians. The clashes which arose out of these disputes about behavior were a constant threat to the survival of the church.[2] Eventually Paul could not and did not maintain support of the dietary regulations very long. In the end, had the pro-Jewish perspective been maintained, Christianity might well have remained a reform movement within Judaism.[3]
Matthew’s system of conflict resolution from chapter 18 is sound. It begins: If another member of the church has sinned against you, go alone and point out the fault. If the member listens to you, you have regained that one. If that doesn’t work, then the situation escalates. Next, go with one or two others so that every word may be confirmed. Finally, if another member of the church has sinned against you and either they continue to sin against you or your grievance was not resolved by the first two steps or if the offender continues to refuse to listen, then put the offender out.
It’s a good system, beginning with one-on-one contact with repercussions if the offender continues to offend. My study bible says, “These instructions emphasize the responsibility of community members rather than leaders focusing on the goal of reconciliation.”[4] But I don’t get that sense from the reading; I sense something going on under the text.
Historically, when we read Matthew’s discourse in conflict resolution, in a way we read about conflict resolution from what was ultimately the losing side of the Council of Jerusalem. While the actions of the Council affirmed what the Jewish Christians believed, much of what they taught and how they behaved, the tide of history would ultimately leave the substance of this council and their specific brand of Jewish Christianity behind.
These were a people who held tight to their Judaism and the Judaism of their Messiah Jesus. We know that Matthew’s audience was specifically Jewish believers, the children of Moses and Jesus.
From this morning’s text, we are told that “if the offender refuses to listen even to the church, let such a one be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.” In Matthew’s words, there doesn’t seem to be much of a distinction between Gentile believers and the run-of-the-mill Gentile. Gentiles are Gentiles and whether they are believers or not, they are not the same as real believers, those who adhere to the Law of Moses and the restrictions and distinctions set long ago. Surely, tax collectors were collaborators with the Roman overseers. Reading this passage, I feel like someone ought to follow it saying “and some of my best friends are Gentiles and tax collectors.”
My study bible says that the worshiping community is to treat Gentiles and tax collectors as objects of mission. They are to be included as members of the assembly.[5] They may be the object of mission and they may be a part of the community, but I get the sense Mathew is saying they aren’t like us.
After 2,000 years of disagreements in the church you would think we would learn a thing or two about conflicts and resolving them. All we have to do is change a few words here and there and this description from Acts would be applicable to every church conflict. “Gentiles and tax collectors” can be changed to any one of a number of other proper nouns or adjectives and the reading would remain very familiar.
In fact, today we would all be known as Gentile Christians. We might even be members of Matthew’s refuse pile.
As a community, the bar of people who offend us has moved. I assume we welcome the uncircumcised, at least there’s nothing in the Book of Order. I had Canadian bacon for breakfast and would eat bacon at any meal. These two thousand year old scandals have been replaced by dozens of others; some so arcane we would not understand the issue in the first place. Recent Presbyterian scandals are just another drop in the bucket, and a young drop at that.
So what does this have to do with conflict resolution? I believe it has to do with the root of conflict. Returning to the Jerusalem Council, the pro-Jewish Christians insisted that because the church was the true Israel, converts must be circumcised before they were admitted into the community while Paul insisted that with Christ believers were freed from the works of the Law and were justified by grace through faith. The orthodox Jewish believer agreed with the Pharisees. The Gentile believer didn’t know the difference.
So here’s my question; what would have happened if a Gentile believer had been dragged before Matthew’s community for discipline. Then we have to ask what would have happened if one of Matthew’s community had been dragged before the Gentiles. If conflicts are resolved by individual communities, there will be only community justice. We have to find something broader than our communities, than our lives to resolve conflict. We have to follow the example of our Lord Jesus, the Messiah, the Christ.
To do this, we Christians must return to the root of our faith, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; the God in three persons. To do this we must return to the Word of God, the Holy Scripture which is the first source of what we know about God. And once we return to the Word, each of us must become interpreters of the Word, doing as it commands.
We must do more than follow rules, we have to follow commands. God saves through the redemptive work of Jesus Christ, but we are transformed not only when we hear and respond to the Gospel’s narrative. Truer, fuller, more complete transformation happens when we participate in the human connectional community of the church. The symbolism and story of redemption reach the depths of our very being when we interpret and reinterpret the word in our world.[6] We do not live into our place in the community, we do not live as active followers of Christ until we both read and interpret the word.
Looking at today’s reading from Matthew, it tells us what to do with the offender. I say let’s be careful whom we call “offender.” It is important to look at the people of God, who we are as the people, who we are in the word, and who we can be before we go to another and say, “You have sinned against me.” I have to beware because I might have sinned against you first.
If true, there is one thing to remember, Jesus expected more out of those who knew him. He expects more out of those who read and interpret the word. He expects more out of those who lead the church. He expects more out of us than he does those who do not know him. He expects more out of the community called in His holy name, bearing his holy word.
We talk about those who sin against us, so let us remember the words of Paul to the church at Rome, Love your neighbor as yourself. Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore, love is the fulfilling of the law.” Paul commands the Romans to love, this is fulfillment of the Law and our command now and forever.
[1] Acts 15:2-5. See Acts 15 for details.
[2] 1Corinthians 8, Galatians 2:11ff
[3] Rev. Dr. Ellen Babinsky, Course pack, unpublished. Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary, Theology 100-Church History through 1650. Chapter 2, page 6, 2001.
[4] New Interpreter’s Study Bible, note to Matthew 18:15-20.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Farley, Edward, “Theology in the Life of the Congregation.” Theology and Worship Occasional Paper No. 17, Office of Theology and Worship, PC (USA), Louisville, 2003, page 5. (This publication is a reprint of the first chapter of Farley’s “Practicing Gospel: Unconventional Thoughts on the Church’s Ministry.” Louisville, Westminster John Knox Press, 2003.”
Wednesday, September 03, 2008
Eulogy for Elizabeth Beck
Eulogy is the Greek word for "Good Words." These good words were spoken at the Service of the Witness to the Resruuection for Martha Elizabeth Beck, age 100, at the Nelson Funeral Home in Berryville, Arkansas on September 3, 2008.
Psalm 121
Psalm 23
Asking about Miss Elizabeth, one comment took me back. One person told me, “She was a lady.” People my age don’t use that word; it’s outside of our vocabulary. But we who know Elizabeth know well what this means. She was a lady in every sense of the word.
She was a gracious woman, surely as a part of her upbringing as the daughter of a Methodist minister. Her manners were impeccable. Her demeanor was always polite. She was always personable, no more so than to people who she met late in life like Pastor French[1] and me.
But being reserved and lady-like never meant she was a pushover. She stood firm with her convictions. She stood by friends and family with a love and peace and grace which is the fruit of the Spirit of God.
She served her Lord and she served the people of God. She was a Pink Lady, active in the Hospital Auxiliary. She volunteered at Loaves and Fishes, and I mean the old semi-dangerous, poorly lit, overfilled site. She didn’t worry about how the place looked; she was worried about the people who came in the door. She was the curator of the museum. And she played the organ, an instrument she taught herself to play, at the First Presbyterian Church, refusing to accept pay.
Her sense of humor was glorious, and she was always welcoming when a visitor would drop in to share a word. Just a few weeks ago, a friend went to visit Miss Elizabeth and she asked how hot it was outside. When told it was 98 degrees she hushed her voice and said, “That’s darn hot.” Then giggled like a young girl sharing “bad words” with a girlfriend.
She was progressive, not the way we use the word today. She said that she was one of the first women ever who learned to drive an automobile. When she was a mere twelve years old, her father bought an early model automobile and taught her to drive it. It’s no wonder the Twenty’s were roaring.
Her independence and resolve remained with her. Until the age of 95 she still drove. Imagine the differences between a 1920 model vehicle and one from around 2000; this is just one benchmark of the life she led; of the world she saw.
She was a graduate of Hendrix College in Conway, and she loved Razorback football. Down to the comforter on her bed she loved them Hogs.
The 121st Psalm is a psalm of trust and confidence in God; assuring pilgrims on the way to and from Zion of God’s constant protection. The question raised in the first verse is answered in the remainder of the psalm.[2]
She knew and lived the words of the Psalmist through her life and her acts. She knew the Lord kept her, keeps all of us from all evil. The Lord keeps our lives from this time on and forevermore. And she responded to the gracious love and protection of the Lord our God in acts of boldness, love, and mercy.
She lived her life in confidence of the words of the 23rd Psalm which declares the Lord prepares a place for us at the table. Through this confidence, she opened herself to the promise of Emmanuel, God with us; God with her. Her response to this promise of life in Christ was a life fully lived with Him and fully lived with us.
By grace through faith in our risen Lord Jesus Christ, she rests with Him today in glory.
Martha Elizabeth Beck of Berryville, Arkansas was born August 9, 1908 to George Granville and Zora Mae (Bryant) Davidson. Mrs. Beck departed this life August 29, 2008 in Berryville, AR at the age of 100.
Mrs. Beck was an English teacher for nine years in Harmony Grove, Arkansas before they moved to Berryville and started the Ben Franklin Store on the north side of the square. She was a member of the First Presbyterian Church in Berryville. She and her husband Ray were very active in the United Methodist Church in Berryville for many years. She was also active in the St. John's Hospital Auxiliary and the Loaves and Fishes Food Bank. Elizabeth and her husband also loved to go floating with family and friends. They especially loved football and attending every Razorback football game they could.
Mrs. Beck is survived by one daughter, Patricia and husband Hugh McKinney of Berryville, Arkansas; four grandchildren, Barbara and husband Mike Newberry of Green Forest, Arkansas, Diane and husband Randy Wells of Gentry, Arkansas, Linda and husband Kevin Davis of Harrison, Arkansas and Jeff McKinney and wife Rayma of Kansas City, Missouri; eight great-grandchildren; six great-great-grandchildren; and a host of other relatives and friends.
On May 2, 1931, Elizabeth was united in marriage with Ray Owen Beck who preceded her in death. She was also preceded in death by her parents, one granddaughter, Ann McKinney and one brother, Charles Bryant Davidson.
[1] The Reverend James “Skip” French is Pastor of the Berryville United Methodist Church. At the request of the family, we shared the responsibility of celebrating this service.
[2] Study note for the 121st Psalm, New Interpreter’s Study Bible. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2006.
Psalm 121
Psalm 23
Asking about Miss Elizabeth, one comment took me back. One person told me, “She was a lady.” People my age don’t use that word; it’s outside of our vocabulary. But we who know Elizabeth know well what this means. She was a lady in every sense of the word.
She was a gracious woman, surely as a part of her upbringing as the daughter of a Methodist minister. Her manners were impeccable. Her demeanor was always polite. She was always personable, no more so than to people who she met late in life like Pastor French[1] and me.
But being reserved and lady-like never meant she was a pushover. She stood firm with her convictions. She stood by friends and family with a love and peace and grace which is the fruit of the Spirit of God.
She served her Lord and she served the people of God. She was a Pink Lady, active in the Hospital Auxiliary. She volunteered at Loaves and Fishes, and I mean the old semi-dangerous, poorly lit, overfilled site. She didn’t worry about how the place looked; she was worried about the people who came in the door. She was the curator of the museum. And she played the organ, an instrument she taught herself to play, at the First Presbyterian Church, refusing to accept pay.
Her sense of humor was glorious, and she was always welcoming when a visitor would drop in to share a word. Just a few weeks ago, a friend went to visit Miss Elizabeth and she asked how hot it was outside. When told it was 98 degrees she hushed her voice and said, “That’s darn hot.” Then giggled like a young girl sharing “bad words” with a girlfriend.
She was progressive, not the way we use the word today. She said that she was one of the first women ever who learned to drive an automobile. When she was a mere twelve years old, her father bought an early model automobile and taught her to drive it. It’s no wonder the Twenty’s were roaring.
Her independence and resolve remained with her. Until the age of 95 she still drove. Imagine the differences between a 1920 model vehicle and one from around 2000; this is just one benchmark of the life she led; of the world she saw.
She was a graduate of Hendrix College in Conway, and she loved Razorback football. Down to the comforter on her bed she loved them Hogs.
The 121st Psalm is a psalm of trust and confidence in God; assuring pilgrims on the way to and from Zion of God’s constant protection. The question raised in the first verse is answered in the remainder of the psalm.[2]
She knew and lived the words of the Psalmist through her life and her acts. She knew the Lord kept her, keeps all of us from all evil. The Lord keeps our lives from this time on and forevermore. And she responded to the gracious love and protection of the Lord our God in acts of boldness, love, and mercy.
She lived her life in confidence of the words of the 23rd Psalm which declares the Lord prepares a place for us at the table. Through this confidence, she opened herself to the promise of Emmanuel, God with us; God with her. Her response to this promise of life in Christ was a life fully lived with Him and fully lived with us.
By grace through faith in our risen Lord Jesus Christ, she rests with Him today in glory.
Martha Elizabeth Beck of Berryville, Arkansas was born August 9, 1908 to George Granville and Zora Mae (Bryant) Davidson. Mrs. Beck departed this life August 29, 2008 in Berryville, AR at the age of 100.
Mrs. Beck was an English teacher for nine years in Harmony Grove, Arkansas before they moved to Berryville and started the Ben Franklin Store on the north side of the square. She was a member of the First Presbyterian Church in Berryville. She and her husband Ray were very active in the United Methodist Church in Berryville for many years. She was also active in the St. John's Hospital Auxiliary and the Loaves and Fishes Food Bank. Elizabeth and her husband also loved to go floating with family and friends. They especially loved football and attending every Razorback football game they could.
Mrs. Beck is survived by one daughter, Patricia and husband Hugh McKinney of Berryville, Arkansas; four grandchildren, Barbara and husband Mike Newberry of Green Forest, Arkansas, Diane and husband Randy Wells of Gentry, Arkansas, Linda and husband Kevin Davis of Harrison, Arkansas and Jeff McKinney and wife Rayma of Kansas City, Missouri; eight great-grandchildren; six great-great-grandchildren; and a host of other relatives and friends.
On May 2, 1931, Elizabeth was united in marriage with Ray Owen Beck who preceded her in death. She was also preceded in death by her parents, one granddaughter, Ann McKinney and one brother, Charles Bryant Davidson.
[1] The Reverend James “Skip” French is Pastor of the Berryville United Methodist Church. At the request of the family, we shared the responsibility of celebrating this service.
[2] Study note for the 121st Psalm, New Interpreter’s Study Bible. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2006.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)