and Still Being Reformed

This sermon was heard at the First Presbyterian Church in Marshall, Texas on Reformation Sunday, Sunday October 30, 2011, the 31st Sunday in Ordinary Time.

Podcast of "and Still Being Reformed" (MP3)

Podcast Powered By Podbean

Joshua 3:7-17

Psalm 107:1-7, 33-37

1 Thessalonians 2:1-8

Matthew 22:34-46

May the words of my mouth and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable to you, O Lord, our rock and redeemer.  Amen

A few years ago, a friend of mine was an Associate Pastor at one of the big Presbyterian churches in Ann Arbor, Michigan. During a staff meeting one day, the Head of Staff was reminiscing and lamenting that the church, the denomination to which he was ordained fifty some years earlier just wasn’t the same anymore.

That would have been 1955. Since 1955 the Presbyterian Church has been a part of two reunifications and three splits. Women Elders had been around for 25 years, but the first women to be ordained as Ministers of Word and Sacrament were still a few months away. As this pastor reminisced, half of his Session was seated by women and close to half of the staff meeting were women.

On the cultural landscape “The Honeymooners,” “The Lawrence Welk Show,” and “The Mickey Mouse Club” all debuted that fall. There’s quite a difference between those shows and “The Apprentice: Martha Stewart,” “Nancy Grace,” and “How I Met Your Mother” wouldn’t you say?

Politically, it’s the difference between Presidents Eisenhower and George W. Bush. It’s the difference between the Soviet Union becoming the Soviet Union and the Soviet Union becoming Russia in an unwinnable war in Afghanistan. For the nation, it’s the difference between 48 and 50 states. We can lament or we can celebrate, either way the wind blows we must agree with this pastor, there have been a lot of changes in the last 50 years.

Simply, things change.

The gospel takes an interesting turn from what we have been hearing over the past several weeks. Jesus changes his audience from the temple leadership to the people assembled, and begins saying something that to our Christian ears sounds unlikely. “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in the Moses’ Seat. So you must obey them and do everything they tell you.”

After thoroughly trumping their every word, Jesus tells the people that the scribes and Pharisees are to be obeyed. After Jesus takes the wind from their sails, Jesus tells the people to do as they say.

Was Jesus saying that their regular teachings were good? Hardly likely. After telling the people to do as they say, he adds not as they do “for they do not practice what they preach.” Jesus tells the listeners that the teachers of the law and the Pharisees are in ministry for what it can get them. They sit high in the social order. They are given the places of honor at banquets. They are given the best seats in the synagogue, seats where people will see them. They are greeted in the square and treated with respect. Jesus makes them sound like the heads of the “Five Families” in “The Godfather” movies.

Jesus tells us that these men, in their positions of power and authority, are using the Moses’ seat for personal gain. They are using their position to exalt themselves. He warns the world that “whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.”

As I said three weeks ago, “Jesus was there to tell them that times were changing.” Jesus was telling the world that leadership was not top-down, nor was it really bottom-up. As followers of Christ, we are called to follow the Lord in all that we do. We are called to seek the way of God in all aspects of our lives. We are called not to follow someone because they are charismatic or because they hold an office. We are to follow him.

So Jesus doesn’t hold up these Pharisees, these specific leaders as men whose works should be considered model behavior. Rather, he holds the office in esteem, and by virtue of their positions they should be obeyed. In the words of singer and author John Michael Talbot: “Jesus rebukes the lifestyle of the religious leaders of His day, but He honors their position of authority as those who occupy the seat of Moses, and says we must therefore be obedient to valid religious leaders.”

They should be honored by following what they say, but in a world where actions speak louder than words; their actions should not be followed.

Something that doesn’t get enough play in our churches is that there were four basic schools of Judaism at the time of Jesus. We have heard of the Sadducees and the Pharisees. The Sadducees were the leaders of the temple. They oversaw all of its operations and most importantly its finances. The Pharisees were the rabbis who were in charge of the local synagogues and served as interpreters of the law. There were also the Essenes, a group of Jews who chose to live separate from the rest of society, maintaining the purity of the faith. The final group was the Zealots who wanted the immediate overthrow of the Roman authorities and return the Holy Land to its rightful owners. If this required violence, so be it.

I mention this because it reminds us that Judaism wasn’t a single faith held together in a lock-step of beliefs. Judaism itself had its own sects, denominations if you will. Each of these sects saw something as more important and focused on it for the good of the faith. There were power movements, there were political movements, there was a purity movement, and even a rebellious movement.

What Jesus was calling for was renewal. Jesus announced not the end of their faith but its fulfillment. The prophet they had anticipated for over four-hundred years was with them.

But the renewal, the reformation he promised was nothing like they expected. Frankly, the new life Jesus promises is like nothing any of us ever expects. This is just one piece of the wonder and the glory of God, the grace and peace that is beyond our understanding. It isn’t something that can be contained by any particular sect. It is beyond any of our denominations.

A couple of weeks ago I said this, “Ecclesia reformata, semper reformanda; the church reformed and always reforming. This has been the call of the reformed churches since the days of Luther, Calvin, Knox and dozens of others. These words are being shared still in Sunday Schools, pulpits, and in seminaries. These words are important to what we understand as our specific place in the Body of Christ, the universal Church.”

There is another way to translate this statement which I prefer. “The church having been reformed is always being reformed.” It’s longer and not nearly as catchy, but it’s important for us. This translation maintains the Latin verb forms which focus on God’s work on the church. The church is not an active participant in the kingdom, it’s passive. This is important, from a grammatical point of view, it’s passive not active.

On this Reformation Sunday this statement comes to full flower.

Several years ago, Presbyterians Today published an article about that saying “ecclesia reformata, semper reformanda.” One of the things this article says is that this statement has been “appropriated in times of disagreement and pressed into the service of our own agendas. It is even sometimes wielded as a weapon against those who differ from us, as if to say, ‘My position is more reformed than your position!” Shamefully, this phrase and this argument have been used recently in Presbyterian circles. It has been used to spread not so much fear, though surely that has been spread, but more it has been used to say “My position and I are reformed and you and yours aren’t.”

The article gives a couple of warnings to the church. The first is that newer is not always better and the second that the church cannot reform itself.

Luther, Calvin, and the reformers were not advocates of “newer is better.” It was in fact their goals to return to a more ancient, more pure form of church life that was centered in scripture alone. Among Luther’s Ninety-Five Theses about the state of the church was that the church was selling absolution for sin in exchange for cash money. This may have been nothing terribly new, but compared to being saved by grace alone, it was new and it was not welcomed.

Then again, Luther, Calvin, and the reformers were not believers that just because it was old it’s good. They also recognized that change was important, but more on that in a moment.

As for the church being able to reform itself, this too is not so. As I said a couple of weeks ago, the phrase “ecclesia reformata, semper reformanda” is filled with verbs in the passive voice. They knew that the church did not reform itself but would need to always be reformed. God is the great reformer and the church is always the object of that reform.

The article then reminds us of the two reasons for the church needing to always be reformed. They are because of who we are and because of who God is.

The church needs constant reformation because we are human. We sin. I don’t say this to say we are Charles Manson/Tim McVeigh evil. I say this because we are human and cannot know what is good without God. We are human, we sin, and because of that the church as a group of human beings will lean toward sin. This is why we need God to be with us and why we need God’s reforming work in the church.

The second reason, is who God is, a living God. The living Lord our God created and continues to create. Church historian Edward Dewey notes that reform has a backward reference and a forward reference. I mentioned the “returning to more biblical, purer worship” reference in the words Luther and Calvin a moment ago, but there is a forward reference too. They knew that the world was changing. They also knew that if the changes being made were not Godly they would not be worthy nor would they last.

The article ends with this:

Ecclesia reformata, semper reformanda. This motto calls us to something more radical than we have imagined. It challenges both liberal and conservative impulses and the habits and agendas we have lately fallen into. It brings a prophetic critique to our cultural accommodation—either to the past or to the present—and calls us to communal and institutional repentance. It invites us, as people who worship and serve a living God, to be open to being "re-formed" according to the Word of God and the call of the Spirit.

Last year when Lisa and Sissy were painting, one of the things they did was find a bunch of old pictures, wondering if I would want some of them for my study. One that has been important was a picture from 1985, 25 years ago. It’s a picture of the Deacons, what the Book of Order calls “Servants of Compassion.” Along with fifteen other men are Mr. Glen Newberg and Mr. Melvin Staggs. They are standing right up here in the chancel and on the floor below. Every one of them is wearing a suit. As I look at the picture I wonder what they would think today.

When the picture was taken, Ronald Reagan was president, today it’s Barack Obama. I won’t do a full comparison of the television shows but as racy as “Dallas” was in 1985, by today’s standards it’s pretty tame. Earlier this month, the Presbyterian Church intentionally ordained its first openly homosexual minister. I’m sure the denomination has ordained a homosexual minister before, but this is the first time it was intentional and public.

I wonder what they would think of a pastor wearing robes and a stole instead of a suit. I wonder what they would think of a pastor with a goatee instead of being as clean shaven as they were.

I wonder what the church will look like in 25 years when I’m 75 years old, and again in 50 when I’ll be an afterthought in this world.

I wonder now reading verse eleven, “The greatest among you will be your servant.” We often read this as our call and our vocation. Those who are the greatest leaders are servant leaders. Now I believe this is true. I do believe the greatest leaders are servant leaders. But something more has popped up in my imagination.

I now see when reading this verse that Jesus wasn’t just teaching us how leaders need to behave, he was teaching us that this is how he behaves. Jesus the Christ is the greatest among us, fully human he is more human than we can ever hope to aspire. Fully divine, he is the greatest who has ever walked the earth. He declares here the simple truth that he is the greatest among us and he is the servant of all.

This is what I say this morning. Jesus the Christ is the greatest among us and the servant of all. We have been reformed and continue to always be reformed. We aren’t changing for the sake of change; we aren’t throwing out the baby with the bathwater. But neither do we glorify our humanly past at the expense of God’s future.

By this, I pray these men of 25 years ago and the reformers of 500 years ago will look at us and pray we continue to live in the way we are called: Saved by grace through faith to live into the fullness of our creator-and still creating-God. Because it is only by God’s good grace that we, the church, the body of Christ, has been reformed and is constantly being reformed.

Divine Priorities

This sermon was heard at the First Presbyterian Church in Marshall, Texas on Sunday October 23, 2011, the 30th Sunday in Ordinary Time.

Podcast of "Divine Priorities" (MP3)

Podcast Powered By Podbean

Deuteronomy 34:1-12

Psalm 90:1-6, 13-17

1 Thessalonians 2:1-8

Matthew 22:34-46

May the words of my mouth and the meditations of our heart be acceptable to you, O Lord, our rock and our redeemer.  Amen.

In 2003, the British Broadcasting Corporation created a project called “The Big Read” to find the most popular novels among British readers.[1] You may have seen a version of this on the internet or on facebook.[2] Currently, I’m reading #25 on the list, J.R.R. Tolkien’s “The Hobbit.”[3] Written in the mid 1930’s for his children, “The Hobbit” is the story of the adventures of Bilbo Baggins. In one of his many adventures, Bilbo finds the ring which becomes the center of “The Lord of the Rings.” “The Lord of the Rings” by the way sits in the top spot on the Big Read.[4]

Bilbo finds the ring in a goblin cave where he has been taken prisoner. Eluding the goblins by the ring’s power of invisibility, Bilbo finds a scary character named Gollum while trying to find his way out. They meet at cross purposes. Bilbo wants Gollum to help him escape while Gollum wants to eat Bilbo where he stands. They decide to settle the matter with a game of riddles.[5] The one who asks the stumping riddle gets what he wants.

Gollum goes first asking:

What has roots as nobody sees,

Is taller than the trees,

Up and up it goes,

And yet never grows?

Bilbo gets that one quickly, a mountain. After several rounds of riddles Bilbo asks:

A box without hinges, key, or lid,

Yet golden treasure inside is hid.

Gollum gets that one, an egg. Bilbo finally catches Gollum asking “What have I got in my pocket?” Not a proper riddle, Bilbo gives Gollum three guesses, all of which are unsuccessful. This displeases Gollum of course, since he loses his meal at the expense of what is not a proper riddle he feels inclined to neither show Bilbo out of the caves nor take him from the lunch menu. As I’m sure you know by now, if for no other reason than he appears in “The Lord of the Rings,” Bilbo escapes and with him the ring.

Riddles have long been a test of wits, knowledge, reason, and wisdom. The Sadducees and Pharisees tried and failed to trip up Jesus with little tests, tests shaped like the riddles Bilbo and Gollum exchanged with one another.

The Pharisees riddled Jesus with questions about taxes. Jesus tells them to render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and render unto God what is God’s.[6] Jesus neither betrays the government nor the faith, a show of great wisdom.

Then the Sadducees asked Jesus a question about levirate marriage (which came straight out of Deuteronomy 25) and the resurrection (which didn’t) in an effort to trip him up on his knowledge of the law. Jesus tells them their riddle is ridiculous because they know neither the scriptures nor the power of God.[7] In addition, the Sadducees didn’t believe in the resurrection in the first place, so their question is a fool’s errand, an errand Jesus doesn’t go on.

So the Pharisees take another shot, this is what we hear today in our gospel reading. They ask, “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” Like I said a couple of weeks ago, we don’t know if the question is being asked as a trap or by a sincere follower of the faith seeking wisdom. Since I have called this a riddle you can see that I lean toward the trap, but in truth we don’t know.

What we do know is that he gives them more answer than they expected. “Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’” This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

As I said, this is more than the legal expert expected. The lawyer expected to hear what is known by Israelites since the days of Deuteronomy as “Shema.” The confession of Deuteronomy 6:4 is a prayer that goes, “Shema Israel, Adonai Eluhinu, Adonai echad.” In English we say, “Hear O Israel, the Lord is your God, the Lord is one.” What immediately follows in 6:5 is what Jesus says to the Pharisees, “You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength.”

What a lovely prayer! This is the sort of prayer we need in our lives everyday. “The Lord is our God, the Lord is one. We shall love the Lord our God with all our heart, and with all our soul, and with all our might.” This is as Jesus tells the Pharisees “the first and greatest commandment.”

Now for the bonus, Jesus tells the Pharisees “And a second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’” This is Jesus quoting Leviticus 19:18. This is a scathing indictment against his inquisitors. We talk of the Golden Rule, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” While not the intention, the Golden Rule can be met with benign indifference. “I’ll ignore you if you’ll ignore me.” Well, Jesus’ answer tells us differently, we are to love one another, never treating one another indifferently.

Something else that comes up missing in our English reading is that when Jesus says the second is like the first he is saying that they are equally important. Israel knew the Shema, and they knew how they were to love the Lord their God. But Jesus indicts them saying they have not fulfilled the requirements of the greatest commandment. They may know the first part, but they lack in the second.

These confrontations between Jesus and the temple leaders are called controversy stories. The controversy stories are the words of God that turned the world on its ear. These are the words where the Lord challenged the conventional wisdom of the temple and of the day and made the world take notice that God was doing something new in the person of Jesus the Christ, by the power of the Holy Spirit. It is no wonder that they are called controversies.

There is controversy in the Presbyterian Church USA too; the denomination I mean. One of these bru-ha-ha’s is whether we are a denomination that shares the word of God with the world making new disciples or whether we are a denomination that seeks to do God’s justice in the world. If you want to speak in the jargon of our denomination’s talking heads, they will say it’s the difference between being a missional church and being a social justice church. It is a serious question and one that has occupied the church for years and may for decades more. The people who ask these questions are quite serious about these questions and more serious seeking their answers.

It is the church seeking divine priorities.

Well, here’s my take based on what we have just read. There is no difference between loving God and doing God’s good works. There is no difference between loving the Lord our God and loving our neighbor as ourselves. One is as important as the other. To do one and not the other fails to carry the Word and work of God into the world. They must be done together.

Jesus has said that one is as important as the other. When one or the other is missing something very important is missing. The Epistle of James says faith without works is dead. I follow that saying good works without faith is rudderless. If we do as God desires without faith, it is by sheer luck. Neither is dependable. Neither helps fulfill the Great Ends of the Church.

According to the commentary, “Leviticus 19,” the source of the call to love our neighbors, “offers an extensive vision of a world marked by just human relations and practical care. Jesus has demonstrated this vision in his ministry and has criticized the leaders for failing to do so.”[8]

Jesus finishes saying “On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.” Jesus tells them that not only these two sayings together is the greatest commandment, he tells them that their entire faith is rooted here. Loving God and your neighbor; the essence of the written Word and the call of the Living Word, is the greatest commandment of all.

Riddles, riddles, riddles. To end our reading, Jesus asks his own riddle. He begins like a good baseball pitcher setting up the pitch. He asks, “What do you think about the Messiah? Whose son is he?” They said to him, “The son of David.” This is right, so far so good, but this is the set up, not the pitch.

Jesus reminds them David was speaking, singing filled with the Holy Spirit and the temple leaders nod. He asks them, “How is it then that David calls [the Messiah] ‘Lord’? For he says,

‘The Lord said to my Lord:

            “Sit at my right hand

until I put your enemies

under your feet.”’

Jesus focuses the question. Based on this Psalm, Jesus asks, “If then David calls [the Messiah] Lord, how can he be his son?”

Now, this isn’t a difficult question for Christians. With two-thousand years of scripture and interpretation and worship and theology and education; we say with great confidence that Jesus of Nazareth, son of Joseph, son of David, son of Judah is the long awaited Messiah. Jesus is the Christ.

Jesus challenges the Pharisees to say what we know, that Jesus is Lord. This son of David is the Son of God and the Son of Man. Lo, they cannot. It may be hidden from them, or perhaps it is revealed but denied. Maybe some want to sing Jesus is the Messiah while others would rather keep things as they were. It wasn’t perfect, but their situation in Roman controlled Palestine could be much, much worse. Regardless, Matthew’s gospel shows the result of this riddle. “No one could say a word in reply, and from that day on no one dared to ask him any more questions.”

Riddles are a test of wits, knowledge, reason, and wisdom. Guided by a wisdom that surpasses all understanding, Jesus wins this riddle game. The Light of the World answers the riddles in the dark. The Pharisees don’t have the imagination or the gumption or the wherewithal to follow Christ. We are called by God to use our imagination, our gumption, our wherewithal as well as our obedience to follow Christ in the power of the Spirit.

Jesus teaches us that we must love the Lord our God and our neighbor as ourselves. He teaches that loving God we are called to share the Word of God, the word written, living, and proclaimed, with all the world. He also teaches us this love is for the benefit of the community and the benefit of the kingdom.

We are called to proclaim that Jesus is the Son who sits at the right hand of the Lord. We are to proclaim that he is the Son of David from the line of Judah. He is the long awaited Messiah, he is the Christ.

We don’t have to wait. Our call is to make sure that nobody else has to wait for the Messiah either. We are to take Christ into the world in Word and deed. One without the other is not enough, we must do both. It is our choice, it is our call. We must decide not to follow one of these divine priorities; we are to follow the one divine priority.

As I said, I am reading “The Hobbit.” I’m about half-way though right now, but there are some things I know. For one, I now know how Bilbo came across the ring that plays such a central role in “The Lord of the Rings.” I also know that whatever adventures befall Bilbo he will survive. I know this simply because I know he has to get back to the Shire and his Hobbit hole one way or another.

As for what I know about the faith, I don’t know how the Triune God will use these words this morning, but I do know this: By the power of the Holy Spirit, they will be useful. I don’t know how Bilbo will make it home, but I know he does. I don’t know how God’s work will be done, but I know it will be. This I am sure.

To find out about Bilbo I have to read the book, one page at a time. To find out what God has in store for me, in store for us, I have to follow, one day, one moment at a time. In the book of life, may all glory be to the Lord our God. The Lord is our God, the Lord is one.

---

[1] BBC.com, “The Big Read.” http://www.bbc.co.uk/arts/bigread/top100.shtml, retrieved October 22, 2011.

[2] On a side note, the facebook version does not match the true 2003 BBC list. The facebook list includes some things that are collections or groups of books and do not meet the “book” criteria. The BBC list considered only individual titles. The facebook version includes “The Chronicles of Narnia” which is a collection of seven titles and not a single book; hence, it did not make the true BBC list. "The Works of Shakespeare" was also on the list, but it is not a novel but a collection of plays and poetry. Follow the link above to see the original list. I don’t know how this rates, but I’ve read 15 out of the top 100 and six out of the top ten.

[3] Purchased at Sow’s Ear Antiques and Books in Berryville, Arkansas. Thanks Dan. Support local businesses!

[4] While published as a trilogy, LOTR was conceived and meant to be published as a single book. Narnia was always a seven volume series of individual books.

[5] From Tolkien, J.R.R., “The Hobbit.” Chapter 5 “Riddles in the Dark.” New York: Ballantine Books, 1937, 1938, 1966, 27^th Ballantine Printing, 1989.

[6] Matthew 22:15-22

[7] Matthew 22:23-33

[8] New Interpreter’s Study Bible note for Matthew 22:39

Always Being Reformed

This sermon was heard at the First Presbyterian Church in Marshall, Texas on Sunday October 10, 2011, the 28th Sunday in Ordinary Time.

Podcast of "Always Being Reformed" (MP3)

Podcast Powered By Podbean

Exodus 32:1-14

Psalm 106:1-6, 19-23

Philippians 4:1-9

Matthew 22:1-14

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 joys of cable and satellite TV is that there are hundreds and hundreds of channels; and once someone finds a program that works it is copied and spun off until there is a channel devoted to it. Sports channels began that way, so did the Fox Reality Channel until it went off the air. I’m waiting for “The Wedding Channel.” Somewhere, with all of the shows devoted to one bit of the wedding industry or the other, there’s going to be one place where “Bridezillas” everywhere can hook up with the “Cake Boss” and then “Say Yes to the Dress.”[1]

It is the nature of the parable to have several different kinds of truth in its words, this parable about a wedding banquet is no exception. There is historical and cultural truth. Since we are not fully familiar with those times, we may not catch some of those references. There is literary truth, because the parable as a form of literature contains truth in that context. There is also the truth of interpretation since there is nearly 2,000 years of analysis behind Matthew’s gospel.

So, let’s begin with the setting of our parable, the king who gave a wedding banquet for his son. One of the historical things we need to know is that before a wedding celebration, days or weeks in advance, the guests would have received invitations delivered by the king’s slaves. This announcement would not have the precise time or day of the wedding feast though. Another bit of history we need to know is that at this time weddings were not the timed to the minute thing they are today. It would take some time for the king’s slaves to prepare the great banquet.

Our parable doesn’t say how many oxen and fatted calves were slaughtered and prepared, but as it was a king who gave our parable’s banquet, we can imagine the number was substantial. The language tells us it was absolutely plural, so the preparations took quite a while. The banquet master would get in touch with the priest to butcher the animals. Then they would need to be cooked. How long does it take to cook not an ox but oxen? Just consider how long it takes to smoke a brisket an go up from there.

He would have needed the people who provided bread, spices, and other foods. And don’t forget the wine merchant. Since so many were involved in its preparation, the kingdom and all who were invited would know the feast was coming, just not exactly when.

Since preparing a wedding banquet was a long and inexact process, there was a two-step invitation procedure. The first invitation was sent so that the guests would know something was coming. The first invitation also made it so they would not be surprised when the slaves came with the “day of event” invitation.[2]

Another important historical element to this piece is that when the people say, “we’re busy” to the king’s servants; it means more than “we’re busy.” To reject the king’s invitation, or more properly the king’s command, is an act of rebellion. To do it en masse is a sign of conspiracy.[3] Historically, no king would stand for this.

Parables are great, but these historical and cultural nuances that the chief priests, elders, and Pharisees would have known are lost on us until we learn them. There are elements of truth in the history and culture of this story, but there is truth beyond history and culture.

Another part of the truth comes from the literary qualities of the parable. One of the key concepts of the parable is that it is not a true story. Even though as we have just heard, there is historical truth mixed in, this story does not reflect an actual event.

So in our story, after the slaves return to the king mistreated and worse, the king wages war on those who reject him and his invitation. This part of the story should be a red flag that this is not a true story. I ask what king would delay his son’s wedding and let his supper get cold to go and wage war on a city, his city? This is wonderfully epic, filled with dramatic exaggeration, and highly unlikely.

As a nation, our recent experience with “shock and awe” warfare shows there is no way to wage war and be home for dinner in any age. So in the realm of factual events, the battle described in this story would not have happened. But in the parable we are given a clear lesson, we see that those who betrayed the king got what they deserved.

As literature, this parable brings us a broad epic sense of scope which the story misses without its literary elements. It’s not that all pieces of the parable add up, but as a story, there is truth within the exaggeration.

As for truth found in interpretation, there is much. This is the third of three parables Jesus spoke to the Pharisees, chief priests, and elders in the temple. Scholars say the first parable, the one of the two sons, focuses on John the Baptist and the people’s response to his ministry. The second, the parable of the vineyard, uses allegory to interpret Jerusalem’s fall as punishment for the leaders’ unfaithfulness. This third parable is a final warning to the church of Jesus Christ to remain faithful and not follow the footsteps of the Pharisees, chief priests, and elders.[4]

The history of interpretation gives us a chronological progression of stories warning the Pharisees, chief priests and elders who rejected John; then rejected the prophets and then the Son; and a final warning that the church might never reject Jesus and the vocation he has lain upon it.

Often, we speak of faith in terms of putting on new clothes. We talk of the church as being the bride of Christ. So a part of the history of interpretation leads us to be called to put on Christ as we join together with him as his bride.

The truth found in the history of interpretation is that while all are called, those who do not respond to this call are dealt with harshly. I am not saying that we are saved by works because we are saved by grace through faith. I am saying that there are dire consequences if we accept the Lord’s invitation and all we do is show up expecting to be fed.[5] This judgment was true in the days of the prophets, in the days of Jesus, and it is true for us today.

Ecclesia reformata, semper reformanda; the church reformed and always reforming. This has been the call of the reformed churches since the days of Luther, Calvin, Knox and dozens of others. These words are being shared still in Sunday Schools, pulpits, and in seminaries. These words are important to what we understand as our specific place in the Body of Christ, the universal Church.

There is another way to translate this statement which I prefer. “The church having been reformed is always being reformed.” It’s longer and not nearly as catchy, but it’s important for us. This translation maintains the Latin verb forms[6] which focus on God’s work on the church. The church is not an active participant in the kingdom, it’s passive. This is important, from a grammatical point of view, it’s passive not active.

This means that we can do nothing on our own, it is only by God in Christ, it is only by our salvation. It is only by our constant sanctification that we can make any difference at all. The church exists only to do God’s work shaped by God alone. The church does work, but only under the authority of Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit.

The chief priests, elders, and Pharisees seemed to have forgotten this. They thought they were the king, the mice and the cheese[7] and they thought they had the world by the tail. They knew their positions were precarious, the Holy Land was under Roman rule, but they had the system figured out… as long as nothing changed.

Jesus was there to tell them that times were changing. Using three parables of judgment, Jesus shows us, history teaches Jesus did not show them, Jesus shows us that there is peace and there is grace, but it is not cheap. God paid a great price, suffering death on the cross to give us what we could never earn.

So like the guests who came to the banquet, we are called to be transformed, reformed, and dressed in our own wedding robe. If we are not transformed by God’s invitation truly we are in no better shape than those who rejected Jesus 2,000 years ago.

Today Marla and Baby Elizabeth will put on that robe. Symbolically they will receive the sign of the beginning of Christian transformation in the waters of baptism. They have been called and they have chosen to answer. God honors the sacraments he institutes.

Our reading ends as Jesus says that many are called but few are chosen. While this sounds like a threat, it is actually a promise. It sounds like a warning, but it is a goal. It is up to us to live into our baptism. It is up to us to remember these promises, the ones we made when we were baptized. It is up to us to remember these promises when we were baptized as babes and someone made them for us. It is up to us to remember the promises we have made as elders, sponsors, and members of this part of the Body of Christ. This is how we begin to remember our baptism.

Now it’s up to us, do we remember and live into the promises of God or do we fade into the antiquity of the chief priests, elders, and Pharisees? Friends, let us go to the banquet and put on the wedding coat of the Lord. Let us remember the waters of our baptism. Let us approach God in joy and peace. Let us be reformed, and continue always being reformed.

---

[1] Actually, it has been done, a couple of times; at least once as a TV channel and more recently as in internet portal. So the idea’s out there, all it needs is a little more traction and then it’s off to the races.

[2] The New Interpreter’s Bible. Vol. VIII. Leander Keck, General Editor. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1995, page 417.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Ibid. pages 412-419

[5] Ibid. page 419

[6] “Reformata” is the Perfect Passive form of the verb. This denotes action performed with future implications. “Reformanda” is the Passive Present form which means action is taking place on it, not by it.

[7] Title of an old children’s book.

Bragging Rights

This sermon was heard at the First Presbyterian Church in Marshall, Texas on Sunday October 2, 2011, the 27th Sunday in Ordinary Time.

Podcast of "Bragging Rights" (MP3)

Podcast Powered By Podbean

Exodus 20:1-4, 7-9, 19-23

Psalm 19

Philippians 3:4b-14

Matthew 21:33-46

Let the words of my mouth and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable to you, O Lord, our rock and our redeemer.

There’s an inherent danger when preaching the parables. They seem like such well prepared self-contained sermons in themselves that most young pastors just take them at face value and preach them to the congregation. I get to tell you this is true not just because I read it in a book,[1] but because I have committed the same error. How could you not? The chief priests and Pharisees did. Verse 45 tells us that when they heard Jesus’ parables, they knew he was talking about them. Then again, I read it that way too.

They knew because they heard the story like an allegory. Allegories are special kinds of parables meant to be symbolic narratives where one thing in a story lines up with something in real life. This parable is almost always read like an allegory.

It begins with the landowner who represents God the Father. He plants a vineyard which usually represents the people of Israel. In this case it also represents the kingdom of God, but that comes when Jesus interprets the story. The things in the vineyard, the wall, winepress, and watchtower don’t point to anything particular, but it does show that it takes real work to set up a vineyard.

The landowner hires farmers; the New Revised Standard Version says these farmers were tenants. This points out that the farmers have no property rights; they work the land, but have no rights to the land or the crop.

When the harvest time approached, the farmer sent his servants to collect the fruit. This is different from Luke’s version where the land owner collects only his share. Luke’s version is more like the contracts negotiated with tenant farmers and share croppers everywhere. Matthew’s reflects that the entire crop belongs to the landowner. There is no share for the farmers until the landowner gives it to them. This is a nod to the sovereignty of God. As I say before the offering, “the earth is the Lord’s and all that is in it.”[2] This reading of the parable takes that very seriously.

The servants represent the prophets of Israel, and like these mythical servants, they were beaten, killed, and stoned.

The next verse is the fly in the ointment to a real allegory. “Last of all, he sent his son to them. ‘They will respect my son,’ he said.” While this thought works well for the story, I honestly don’t believe God the Father thought that for a minute.

The tenant farmers figure the land will be theirs if there is no one left to inherit it, so after throwing the son from the vineyard they kill him. This represents the ultimate death on the cross. Our reading takes place the day after Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem, a day after the cleansing of the temple and removing the moneychangers. We know how prophetic these words truly are; as do those who heard the gospel of Matthew, recorded some forty years after these events took place.

Jesus sets up the allegory, everything except for the discipline of the wicket tenants. How should they be disciplined? Jesus asks the chief priests and Pharisees for their input. “What will he do to those tenants?”

Harsh judgment seems to be the order of the day for Israel. Nathan and King David have a similar conversation about Uriah and Bathsheba. Nathan tells the story of a rich man who steals a poor man’s only lamb. When David says the rich man should repay the poor and repay dearly, Nathan tells King David, “You are the man.”

The temple leaders tell Jesus that those tenants are wretches who will be brought to a wretched end. Then the landowner should turn over the plot to folks who will take care of business and live up to the agreement. The New International Version says “tenants who will give the landowner his share of the crop at harvest.” Other translations leave out “his share” maintaining the integrity of the sovereignty of the landowner, the sovereignty of God.

Jesus tells them that in accord with the judgment they have proclaimed they have set their own punishment. The kingdom of God will be taken away from them and given to a people who will produce its fruit. On either side of this proclamation, Jesus indicts them using imagery from Psalm 118:

The stone the builders rejected

has become the capstone.

The LORD has done this;

and it is marvelous in our eyes.

In a wild twist, Jesus reveals himself as the stone the builders rejected who becomes the cornerstone. He tells them that they have two choices, fall on the stone and be broken or let the stone fall on them and be crushed.

Not much of a choice is it. I would love to say that Jesus is invoking Psalm 51 here, “The sacrifice acceptable to God is a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart.” I would love to tell you Jesus is telling them that they can either be broken by the gospel or crushed with it, but then I must also say that I can’t find any scholars who share that point of view.

Even if I am right, the chief priests and Pharisees heard it in the worst way. This is the moment in the Gospel that they decide once and for all Jesus must die, not for the sins of the people, but because he has rubbed the shine off of their apple.

In an allegory, my job would be done. If I were treating this like a simple “x=y” story then my job would be done, but to what end? There are a couple of good morals to take from this story, something like “Beware the judgment you pronounce, lest it fall upon you.” Jesus is a fan of discipline and mercy—and yes not only can this exist hand in hand but it must. The temple crowd would have nothing of that, they wanted blood. If this is what they want, then Jesus is able to give it to them.

But we must beware when we plug things in “x” for “y.” When some read verse 43, they read it as Jesus prophesies that the Jews will be cast from the church and the gentiles will be the new chosen people. There are some problems with this interpretation though, both having to do with audience.

We need to remember to whom Jesus is speaking at that moment. He is teaching in the temple, but like with last week’s reading, he is making his comments toward the leaders of the temple. He is directly addressing the chief priests, elders, and Pharisees. This message is not meant for the people of Israel, it is meant directly for the temple leadership.

Then the next thing we need to learn is that what we read as “the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit.” can also be rightly translated as “given to people who will produce its fruit.” It’s a subtle difference, but it’s important. I say Matthew is not identifying a different race of people who will receive the vineyard. He is saying “not these leaders” but “others” will be called to tend the Lord’s vines. This is important because of Matthew’s audience.

As we have said all year, the Gospel of Matthew was written to the Jewish Christians. Matthew specifically spoke to those followers of the Lord Jesus Christ who were educated in the synagogue. He wrote to people who grew up knowing the law and the prophets. Because of this, we can be sure that Matthew’s gospel would have never disinherited all Jews.

That would make another good moral to the story: Tread lightly, conventional wisdom may be neither conventional nor wise.

This then, as Al might say, reminds me of a story from the bible. As the gospel gnawed upon me this week, our reading from Philippians caught my attention. Preceeding this reading, someone was bragging to the Philippians about their status as a teacher. They boasted about their position in this life. Paul warns them this is not good.

Paul begins by telling the Philippian people that if anyone has a reason to brag, he has their trump card. He was a Hebrew of status among other Hebrews, as a follower of the law he was a Pharisee, as to his zeal he persecuted the church, as for legalistic righteousness he was faultless. But whatever that meant in the world, it means nothing compared what he gains as a follower of Christ.

Paul teaches there is nothing in this world that compares to being a follower of Christ. Everything else is rubbish. Everything else is slag. We have no righteousness on our own, the only righteousness we have is in Christ.

If we think we have bragging rights because of this or that or the other, we don’t. The only thing any of us has to brag about is righteousness in Christ.

To me, what is most important in our gospel reading is Jesus’ instruction to the leaders of the temple, in our day to the leaders of the Church. We must remember that this message was to the leaders, not the rank and file. This one is for the upper command officers, not those below full bird Colonel.

The farmers in the parable would have had slaves themselves to do the hard work of tending the vines. This parable wasn’t for them, it was for their leaders—the tenant farmers.

This parable wasn’t for the people who were at the temple bright and early to hear Jesus teach, it was for the chief priests, elders, and Pharisees who interrupted his regularly scheduled program.

Last month I ended a sermon[3] saying:

I don’t want anyone to think that I am indicting someone about a particular situation. I’m not. But let me say this, this sermon is not about you but it is for all of us. It is for the church. It is for the disciples. It is for the people of God. If that convicts each of us and all of us, that’s as it should be.

This sermon ends differently; this parable isn’t about all of us but it is for some of us. It is for the leadership, in our case it is for the Session, committee chairs, teachers, and especially me. It’s for the folks in the denominational offices and it’s for the people who lead groups that seek to influence the church. We must be wary when we approach situations with what we know, because like those temple leaders we may not know what we think we do. We must beware that what we think we know, what we are so proud of, is folly to Christ.

It is up to us. It is up to the leadership of the church to constantly seek the will of the triune God in everything that we do. It is not good for us to lean exclusively into the wisdom of what we’ve always done. It is not good for us to look to a glorious past alone as a model for the future. It is up to everyone here today to hold your leader’s feet to that holy fire.

If we could do as we have always done there would be no need for the Christ or the Holy Spirit, but we know better than that. It is up to us not to brag about what we have been, but what that moves us toward in the future, a future of life in Christ in the Spirit. Let me just add this, if you think I am pointing a finger at you, please know the other fingers point back at me. Paul’s message for the church is right, our bragging rights are in Christ alone.

---

[1] Long, Thomas, “Preaching the Literary Forms of the Bible.” Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1989, 87-106.

[2] Psalm 24:1

[3] Andresen, Paul, “This Sermon Is Not About You.” http://timelovesahero.blogspot.com/2011/09/this-sermon-is-not-about-you.html, retrieved .September 28, 2011