A Certain Man

“Now a certain man was ill. . .” Isn’t that a fascinating way to start the story???

A certain man? Just some guy.

A college professor of mine suggested that Lazarus was the “beloved disciple” of the Gospel of John. That sorta makes sense to me. At least I’ve always liked that suggestion (I doubt there’s ever any “making sense” of the Gospel of John.)

And so I suspect that John is setting us up here with that “certain man” stuff. 

This is the Beloved Disciple who is ill - sick unto death - and there will be conversation, there will be tears, and there will be resurrection (or at least a great foreshadowing of resurrection.) There will be the gifting of life, which will give rise to Jesus’ death. 

The Beloved Disciple. I think that - in the end - the Beloved Disciple is not to be determined as one or another guy. I think that the hearer - you and each person who hears the proclamation of these stories - is to see him or herself as the Beloved Disciple.

+  +  +

Three years ago, I preached on this text, and after worship, some members of our congregation joined with others in the community, to search for a beloved member of our Church who, in his dementia, had driven his car down a wrong road, gotten stuck in snow, and wandered off. It had been a few days, and the weather had been such that there was very little hope that we would find him alive. 

With the reality of death so close at hand, with such a sad loss in all its stark . . . death-ness . . . the story of Lazarus rang out.

+  +  +

I don’t know where I got this, but I preached it in a sermon, so it must be true. Lazarus might well mean “God Has Helped”

+  +  +

The Beloved Disciple.

YOU beloved by God.

You - who have known the entombment of your hopes, your dreams, your loves. 

You, who have been helped by God. 

You. Hear that call.

“Lazarus come out!”

You are the beloved disciple whom God calls out of death and into life. Whom God forgives and calls and sends. 

+  +  +

Our friends body was found later that day. It was terribly sad, and we had a very nice funeral. 

And, I believe, that wasn't the last word for him.

The One Campaign

No, I am not preaching on Sunday.
And, yes, I am gloating about that.
I think, that if I were proclaiming this text, I'd focus on that wonderful line
"One thing I do know. . . "

Who's Thirsty?

Woman at the Well - 

I wonder if that sort of title doesn’t cause us to miss the actual story. 

Simply writing that causes me to have to look at the story again. 

The longest conversation in the Gospels, there is much here, isn’t there. At the Festival of Homiletics 3 years ago, Tom Long preached on this text.

He did a nice thing - first asking if, when Jesus asked her to give him a drink - if he was asking a trick question. “Many of the commentators think that it was.” he says a number of times, a number of ways.

As he works through - he suggests that it is no trick question, but, instead, is Chrsit’s request for care - for his thirst - and the needs of the least and the lost in our world.

Finally - he reflects on how water figures prominently in the Gospel of John - with water of life gushing from Jesus’ side in the crucifiction.

One more thing. 

David Lose seems to be moving toward Martin Marty status, with so much published, one wonders if most every thought that occurs to him makes it to print.

On Huffpo - he has a column reflecting on Sunday’s text, and I liked it better than his piece on workingpreacher. It is titled “Misogyny, Moralism & the Woman at the Well” and it is a good read. 

He concludes with these paragraphs:

A second reason preachers cast this woman in the role of prostitute is that it plays into the belief that Christianity, and religion generally, is chiefly about morality. Treating the Bible as one long, if peculiar, Goofus and Gallant cartoon, we read every story we find in terms of sin and forgiveness, moral depravity and repentance. But this story is not about immorality; it's about identity. In the previous scene, Jesus was encountered by a male Jewish religious authority who could not comprehend who or what Jesus was. In this scene, he encounters the polar opposite, and perhaps precisely because she is at the other end of the power spectrum, she recognizes not just who Jesus is but what he offers - dignity. Jesus invites her to not be defined by her circumstances and offers her an identity that lifts her above her tragedy. And she accepts, playing a unique role in Jesus' ministry as she is the first character in John's gospel to seek out others to tell them about Jesus.

If preachers can rise above the misogyny and moralism that characterizes too much Christian theology, they have the opportunity to tell this woman's story for what it is: a story of the transforming power of love and the capacity to receive and live into a new identity. By doing so, preachers won't just be talking about this woman any more, they'll also be talking to and about us. And that's a sermon I, for one, would like to hear.

 Heck, that's a sermon I'd like to preach. Perhaps engaging in a conversation with this One, we might find our own identity transformed. Might be a good first step in proclaiming that sermon David would like to hear.

How God Will Be Known

John 3

hmmmmmm

I am not sure what to do with John chapter 3 (or pretty much anything in this Gospel), but as I consider it, I think of this line by Douglas John Hall in The Cross in Our Context (a great read in the theology of the cross, "the thin tradition.") 

Faith, if it is faith in the God reveled in "Jesus Christ and him crucified," is a journey toward the world; if it is said that such a definition confuses God with God's creation, confuses theocentrism with geocentrism, one must answer, as a Christian, that that confusion seems to have been introduced by God himself, who will be loved only as one who loves the world (John 3:16)." pg 55

Not Ideal

Matthew 4:1-11

After Jesus was baptized, he was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. He fasted forty days and forty nights, and afterwards he was famished. The tempter came and said to him, "If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread." But he answered, "It is written, ‘One does not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.’"

Then the devil took him to the holy city and placed him on the pinnacle of the temple, saying to him, "If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down; for it is written, ‘He will command his angels concerning you,’ and ‘On their hands they will bear you up, so that you will not dash your foot against a stone.’" Jesus said to him, "Again it is written, ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’"

Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor; and he said to him, "All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me." Jesus said to him, "Away with you, Satan! for it is written, ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve only him.’"

Then the devil left him, and suddenly angels came and waited on him.

Early in our marriage - seeing that many families waste a lot of time trying to decide who is to blame for this or that problem, I said to my beloved: “Let’s not do that. Let’s not argue over who to blame. Let’s not waste time trying to decide who is at fault for things. Let’s just blame you.” 

This has worked out well for me.

I was trying to read a piece with a promising title for this Sunday. Tempting Fate. Looks good. Too long.

Goes off for some time on the blaming of Eve - Paul leaving Eve out of the equation; which she suggests Eve might not mind. . . 

Probably. But can Adam handle it?

I always say that one thing about the temptations of Jesus in the desert is that they don’t seem that tempting. Was the Devil really going all out?

I have been looking at David Lose’s book - Making Sense of the Christian Faith - our class will meet at noon on Wednesdays during Lent, drop in if you are in the neighborhood - and I really like his take on “original insecurity.” 

He does a riff on this in his Dear Working Preacher piece this week. 

That the original sin flows out of a sense that one is incomplete, that one needs more than they have, that all questions must be settled that all must feel just so. This, is inviting to me. Understanding the core sin of human being as idolatry - we see that our idol might well be an image of a “perfect life.” Where all questions are answered, where everything is settled, and where we have absolutely no sense of needing ANYTHING. 

Lose quotes a line I’ve never seen by Luther (without telling us where Luther said or wrote it, but I’m not complaining) “Martin Luther. . . once said he thought “ideals were from the devil.”” (Making Sense of the Xian Faith - page 70)

It’s tempting to go from here with a sermon on this text.

Ash Wednesday - Already?

I’m not really one who reads and understands poetry. My appreciation of poetry is more like some beautiful sight you drive by regularly - and on rare occasions look over and notice. 
So I wonder, why Ash Wednesday is a day I do stop and look for a good bit of poetry for this day? 

Hmmmm

I found a “Lectionary Haikus” page. Not as funny as I hoped! One good thing about it, was that it didn't inspire me to try to write my own haikus. I can see that if I got started writing Ash Wednesday haikus - it would be, to quote Wormtongue from Lord of the Rings, an ill wind that blew no good.

On the non-poetry front - while still using words wonderfully BBT has a nice pice from Xian Century - 1996 titled: “Remaining Human”

here’s a few good lines

In many churches, Lent begins with a sooty forehead, as believers kneel for the Ash Wednesday reminder that we  are dust, and to dust we shall return. It is not meant to depress or frighten us, but simply to remind us who we are: human beings, mortals, not God. 

The second story has a different ending. It starts out very scary, with Jesus and the devil engaged in a verbal duel and the devil quoting scripture like a preacher. (Let that be a lesson to all of us: just because someone knows the Bible "chapter and verse" does not mean that person is up to any good.) 

These days we seem to believe that crossing over the line [that is, sin] is about doing things that make us less than admirable human beings. Lent comes along and we give up things that are bad for us or take on things that are good for us, as if the most serious temptations in life were to drink too much scotch or eat too much fat or stay in bed on Sunday morning. But I do not think that is what these stories are about. I do not think they are about the temptation not to be a good human being. I think they are about the temptation not to be a human being at all. 

As far as I can tell, what Adam and Jesus are both tempted by is the chance to play God. In Adam's case, it was the chance to break out of his dependence on God and know both good and evil for himself. In Jesus' case, it was the chance to feed every hunger, to be superman, to control all the kingdoms of the earth. God never offers those things, incidentally — Satan is the only one who offers them, with a thousand strings attached.  

And an Ash Wednesday poem for you. 

(you don’t have to understand it - I sure don’t)

Marked by Ashes - Walter Brueggemann

Ruler of the Night, Guarantor of the day . . .

This day — a gift from you.

This day — like none other you have ever given, or we have ever received.

This Wednesday dazzles us with gift and newness and possibility.

This Wednesday burdens us with the tasks of the day, for we are already halfway home

     halfway back to committees and memos,

     halfway back to calls and appointments,

     halfway on to next Sunday,

     halfway back, half frazzled, half expectant,

     half turned toward you, half rather not.

This Wednesday is a long way from Ash Wednesday,

   but all our Wednesdays are marked by ashes —

     we begin this day with that taste of ash in our mouth:

       of failed hope and broken promises,

       of forgotten children and frightened women,

     we ourselves are ashes to ashes, dust to dust;

     we can taste our mortality as we roll the ash around on our tongues.

We are able to ponder our ashness with

   some confidence, only because our every Wednesday of ashes

   anticipates your Easter victory over that dry, flaky taste of death.

On this Wednesday, we submit our ashen way to you —

   you Easter parade of newness.

   Before the sun sets, take our Wednesday and Easter us,

     Easter us to joy and energy and courage and freedom;

     Easter us that we may be fearless for your truth.

   Come here and Easter our Wednesday with

     mercy and justice and peace and generosity.

We pray as we wait for the Risen One who comes soon.

What's The Meaning of All of This?

TRANSFIGURATION

The Working Preacher sermon brainwave podcast was pretty dang good this week. Willimon sat in with the usual suspects. Good banter. Some great insights. Willimon made the nice point - that - in some ways - to ask what this story “means” is the wrong question. 

I am struck by the fact that so often this text gets read as “you can’t stay up on the mountain” sort of deal. But, interestingly, the experience on the mountain is not all that clear. What the heck does it mean? 

Nobody knows. . . 

It is - however - sorta cool - sorta odd.

I’ve preached a variation of “can’t stay up on the mountain top. It is that Jesus makes all of life holy - all of life lived in the presence and wonder of God and God’s life giving grace.

I think of the song by Peter Mayer - Holy Now

you can listen on youtube.

HOLY NOW by Peter Mayer

(there’s this really nice jazz version by some funky singer. . .)

The song opens with this verse

When I was a boy each week 

On Sunday we would go to church

And pay attention to the priest 

He would read the holy word

And consecrate the holy bread 

And everyone would kneel and bow

Today the only difference is 

Everything is holy now

Everything, Everything, Everything is holy now

Indeed, everything is holy. (Except for all the evil things that aren’t holy, I guess...)

Lilies Are Bad Enough at Easter

Matthew 6:24–34

No one can serve two masters; for a slave will either hate the one and love the other, or be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and wealth. Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink, or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing? Look at the birds of the air; they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? And can any of you by worrying add a single hour to your span of life? And why do you worry about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they neither toil nor spin, yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not clothed like one of these. But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which is alive today and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will he not much more clothe you — you of little faith? Therefore do not worry, saying, 'What will we eat?' or 'What will we drink?' or 'What will we wear?' For it is the Gentiles who strive for all these things; and indeed your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things. But strive first for the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.

So do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will bring worries of its own. Today's trouble is enough for today.

I miss the word Mammon. 

I think it helps keep Jesus’ words at arms length.

Don’t serve Mammon? 

Right, wouldn’t think of it. 

Mammon, sounds like a monster on Star Trek. 

MAMMON, ONE EYED RULER OF THE ZARONQ DYNASTY ON THE PLANET PHORTAK.

No, you can count on me, never will serve Mammon, the ugly brute.

Money?

Not so good.

I liked the suggestion of my Methodist colleague - that verses 24 and 34 seem key in interpreting this pericope. He, of course, did not use the word “pericope,” he’s well into his fifties, and such terminology is a bit elusive for him now. . . but I digress.

Mammon.

Money.

Two masters.

Serve one. 

Today’s trouble is sufficient.

A couple things:

1. How do we NOT worry?

What do we make of the fear mongering all around us.

I am struck that - for many years I have sought to not participate in the rampant fear mongering in our politics and our culture - probably since the fear mongering of a certain president who just turned 100. (Speaking of which, when he died, the day of his funeral was a state holiday in Wyoming. . . . hmmmmm) 

Here is what is striking - given that I’ve considered turning to fear a mistake for most of my adult life,
Why is it that I find myself thinking and saying “I’m afraid that. . .”

Why is it, that fear is our default setting when addressing our world???

I went to text study in another state yesterday. As we spoke, it seemed that folks were quite reluctant to name worry or fear as a sin. 

I guess I am too.

2. I’m thinking that this is one of those texts where one can preach themselves into a corner. I expect that there is homiletical fruit in messing with this part of Jesus’ words:

But strive first for the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.

We who know well that our membership in the Kingdom is a gift of God’s grace might want to run from this, but I wonder if that doesn’ t mean that this is exactly where we have to go with this text. 

I’m not sure what to do with it . . . but I think this striving might well need a gracious re-interpretation in the lives of our hearers. And perhaps our own.

We had a snowy Sunday - and thus lower attendance last week. (I wish I had remembered this line by Willimon - who said “I love preaching on snow Sundays because you weed out the idly curious from the truly committed.”) I kind of suspect that the truly committed, upon hearing this part of the Sermon on the Mount will have one of two reactions. 

Either 

a. wish they did a better job of striving for the kingdom

b. are exceedingly glad they do such a great job of striving for the kingdom

Sort of two different homiletical issues, isn’t it?

And what of the idly curious? Aren’t they going to hear this and wonder at how they can join in the striving?

I’m afraid that’s the homiletical issue for this Sunday.
Do not worry. . . 

He Can't Be Serious

MATTHEW 5:38–48

You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also; and if anyone wants to sue you and take your coat, give your cloak as well; and if anyone forces you to go one mile, go also the second mile. Give to everyone who begs from you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you.

You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be children of your Father in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet only your brothers and sisters, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

A text like this can seem sort of inviting for preaching. 

Or maybe not.

I’ve looked at some interesting - and not so interesting - stuff. . . had some good preaching ideas, and abandoned them. And most of all, wondered what to write for this post (which I planned to post DAYS AGO).

Looked at an article on M L King. (Wow he used big words in his speeches. Several syllables. Today he’d be called an elitist!)

I’ve wondered a bit at the significant events in the Middle East. 

Probably not a preaching subject, really, for the call to love your enemies. 

But then again, the way many in our communities construe reality. . . 

In a sort of interesting read, titled “Resisting the Human Need for Enemies, or What Would Harry Potter Do?” - Mary Hess speaks to our culture’s construction of an enemy centered way to live. In the opening paragraph, she suggests that: 

“from the advent of original sin we, as broken human beings, find ourselves continually turning away from our God by creating objects of hatred.” 

That, I think is nice. 

She goes on to name some realities in our world:

“a vast media landscape strewn with productions that create and depict enemies, and then proceed to "bring us along for the ride" as those enemies are confronted and overcome, thus giving us the vicarious pleasure of "victory over."” 

And, here, I think, is an interesting conclusion from this analysis. . . 

...more and more of our emotional experiences are being trained in these narratives to expect such resolutions, a training that becomes particularly harmful in contexts that are not so simple.

(One would probably have to like Harry Potter as much as I do to find this article all that profitable, but I did like it.)

I suspect that it might be important to note that it is in this context, where we have become a distressingly enemy centered people, that we are preaching this section of the Sermon on the Mount. 

And it seems here in Matthew, that Jesus won’t have it.

Loader says this: 

It is a travesty to read "love your neighbour" as implying: hate anyone else, or, at least, your enemy, but that was how some then took these words and the practice is alive and well and informs what gives us a buzz in much entertainment at all ages. Whether within the marriage, family, the street, the community, or internationally, choosing to write people off is destructive for us and others. 

How about this for a sermon title? Jesus as buzz-kill!!!

Willimon preaches on this text - and has a few things that make me think. This line speaks to how Jesus’ call is quite counter the siren song of regarding the enemy as one to be destroyed. . . 

If anyone thinks that Jesus' good news makes sense the way we make sense, that notion is destroyed by the time we arrive at Matthew 5:45-48, Jesus' command to love our enemies. 

The opening line of that paragraph sings.

Later in the sermon Willimon says an interesting thing

I heard the great scholar of world religions, Huston Smith, list what he considered to be the unique, distinctive characteristics of the various faiths. When he got to Christianity, Smith simply said, "Forgiveness. Forgiveness of enemies. This is the very strange notion that makes the teaching of Jesus distinctive." 

Distinctive. Adventuresome. And difficult. 

Yet, with God, all things are possible, even obedience amid a society of vengeful, violent, retributive people like us North Americans. Early Christian missionaries were clear, in their sermons, that Christians' miraculous ability to love their enemies and to pray for them was irrefutable proof of the power of Jesus and the truth of the Christian faith. 

I’m reluctant to speak of the “uniqueness” of Christianity, but perhaps, this is the place to bring it up? ! ?

I can’t find it, but someone I read spoke of how a number of recent writers, summing up Jesus - that none of them mentioned love your enemies. Makes sense to me.

(FOUND IT!)  Love Your Enemies by Warren Carter Word & World Winter 2008 “Given the saying's authenticity, what might the historical Jesus have meant by this instruction? Interestingly, while many assert the saying's authenticity, it often plays little role in reconstructions of the historical Jesus. Fine studies of the historical Jesus by John Dominic Crossan,11 John Meier,12 and William Herzog,13 for example, give it either little or no attention. Ben Witherington's survey of "the third search" for Jesus, covering the work of some twenty scholars of the historical Jesus, does not list either the Matthew or Luke reference in the index.” 

Let me conclude with a great story Willimon uses in his sermon - and an addendum, something I’ve heard him do with this story when he’s re-used it of late. 

One Sunday, after I had preached upon another text in which Jesus commands us to forgive, a person emerged from church and accosted me at the door with, "Do you mean to tell me that Jesus expects me to forgive my abusive husband who made my life hell for ten years until I finally had the guts to leave him?" 

I immediately moved into my defensive mode with, "Well, er, we only have twenty minutes for a sermon and I can't appropriately qualify everything here, and I do believe that spouse abuse is a terrible evil, but, er, this is the sort of odd thing that you would expect Jesus to say. He did say that we ought to forgive 'seventy times seven.' And that's a great deal of forgiveness. And he did say to forgive our enemies and I can't think of a worse enemy for you than your ex-husband, and...." 

She drew herself up to her full height, took a deep breath, and said, "Good, just checking." 

God give me the grace, as a preacher, not to try to protect others from Jesus. 

That’s how he ended that sermon in the journal Interpretation, January 2003.

I’ve heard him suggest this: 

That as that woman walked off, it was as if the Holy Spirit said to me: “you look at that woman and all YOU see is a victim.
I see someone with whom I’m going to change the world.”

Amen!

Tough Choice

Matthew 5:21–37

You have heard that it was said to those of ancient times, 'You shall not murder'; and 'whoever murders shall be liable to judgment.' But I say to you that if you are angry with a brother or sister, you will be liable to judgment; and if you insult a brother or sister, you will be liable to the council; and if you say, 'You fool,' you will be liable to the hell of fire. So when you are offering your gift at the altar, if you remember that your brother or sister has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother or sister, and then come and offer your gift. Come to terms quickly with your accuser while you are on the way to court with him, or your accuser may hand you over to the judge, and the judge to the guard, and you will be thrown into prison. Truly I tell you, you will never get out until you have paid the last penny.

You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery.' But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away; it is better for you to lose one of your members than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away; it is better for you to lose one of your members than for your whole body to go into hell.

It was also said, 'Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.' But I say to you that anyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of unchastity, causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

Again, you have heard that it was said to those of ancient times, 'You shall not swear falsely, but carry out the vows you have made to the Lord.' But I say to you, Do not swear at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God, or by the earth, for it is his footstool, or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make one hair white or black. Let your word be 'Yes, Yes' or 'No, No'; anything more than this comes from the evil one. 

I find our first lesson for Sunday has one of the interesting, interesting lines for preaching. 

“Choose life.” 

Seems pretty simple to me. 

What would you choose?

Of course, the real problem is in the follow through, isn’t it?

Pretty straight forward - “choose life.” Whoops, you’ve chosen something else. Doh!

Forgiveness, grace, invitation. Choose again.

Now, the Gospel text seems quite something else.

if you are angry. . . if you insult. . . if you say. . .  everyone who looks ...with lust has already. . . If your right eye causes you. . .  if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off But I say to you

He means it. He doesn’t mean it. He means it, he doesn’t mean it. Hemeansithedoesntmeanit. 

Does one need, first, to decide if Jesus does mean these exhortations? Sometimes the answer is more complex than yes or no, (which is sort of something one might well not want to say out loud, given verse 37 and all, but I digress)

Among the odder things that knock about in my brain lately, is the strange confidence I hear people express in the law. I have tried to think of a term for this. If antinomianism is lawlessness, what is a term for this strange love of the law? 

Philonomianism? - yes, I know, the law is good. I know, Psalm 119 says some pretty dang nice things about the law. . .  “Oh, how I love your law! It is my meditation all day long.” Let me respond with Galatians 5, “For the whole law is summed up in a single commandment, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” 

I also know that Luther had some pretty nice things to say about the law. If I remember correctly, he says something in Bondage of the Will, to the effect that apart from the Gospel, the law is the greatest of God’s creations. . . 

But Philonomianism - as I am naming it here- is a most perplexing ignorance at how the law so regularly gets out of hand, and sooner or later, the tail wags the dog. (among other things, HIPAA rules sort of show that, don’t they?) Is this part of what is going on here? 

“Hey, really go for it. Cut off your hand if it does something bad! Then notice that you are still no closer to the kingdom, though you are maimed."

I think it is possible to read the text this way.

I like David Lose’s take in his “Dear Working Preacher” article this week. It is sort of David’s signature move, it seems to me, to look at a text and say, “that looks like its about x, most think its about x, but really, its about GOD!”

Once again, that reading seems to work.

The law won’t do.

The law can’t.

It gets out of hand.

For that matter, so do you.

Don’t throw out the law. Don’t imagine you’ve followed it simply because you haven’t been thrown in jail this week. Follow the law. It is what you are to do. Do so better than anyone. 

Love God.

Love your neighbor.

Its as simple as that.

Choose life.

Doh!

Anybody Got a Light?

Matthew 5:13-20

“You are the salt of the earth; but if salt has lost its taste, how can its saltiness be restored? It is no longer good for anything, but is thrown out and trampled under foot. “You are the light of the world. A city built on a hill cannot be hid. No one after lighting a lamp puts it under the bushel basket, but on the lampstand, and it gives light to all in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father in heaven. “Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, will be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. 

Ever read the prayers that are posted by the Vanderbilt Divinity Library?

They can be nice.

Here's one for this week. . . 

     Perfect Light of revelation,

      as you shone in the life of Jesus,

       whose epiphany we celebrate,

      so shine in us and through us,

     that we may become beacons of truth and compassion,

   enlightening all creation with deeds of justice and mercy. Amen.

http://lectionary.library.vanderbilt.edu/prayers.php?id=17

I do wonder at what sort of Salt and Light we are to be. At how that might be lived. At why we're so much more often something quite less tasty than good spice, something quite less illuminating than clear light. 

Rolf Jacobson had an interesting comment last week on the workingpreacher podcast. He told of someone - their substitute organist - who came to their parish because a person had commented, I believe in a criticism - "those are the Lutherans, that's where they all think they're sinners." This sounded so honest, and different to the organist that (I think this was a woman) she started attending there. 

Salt. Light. 

Maybe not what people think it is.

Maybe the preaching task this week - is to announce it (AGAIN!) 

You ARE the light of the world

You ARE the salt of the earth

I attended a continuing ed event back in my youth, the late 80's I think.

The small group facilitator I was with would have us preach extemporaneously a bit on a story. 

He would say: "You are a Doctor of the Word!
                     Preach to me Doctor!"

And so, I say to you who are salt and light and are called to announce this saltandlight-ness to a congregation. 

Preach it Doctor!

Blessed? I doubt it!

 Matthew 5:1-12

When Jesus saw the crowds, he went up the mountain; and after he sat down, his disciples came to him. Then he began to speak, and taught them, saying:

"Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

"Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted.

"Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.

"Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled.

"Blessed are the merciful, for they will receive mercy.

"Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.

"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God.

"Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, 

  for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

"Blessed are you when people revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you."

A wonderful friend and colleague invited me to consider a couple articles from Christian Century - and they visit interestingly with one another, and with this text. 

“Faith, nice and easy” by Kenda Creasy Dean - 8/10/2010 and “Against Religion” under a heading “The case for faith” - 1/11/2011

Dean addresses the problem of youth being “taught a bland, banal version of Christianity.” I’m not exactly sure at her solutions to the problem of banal Christians - especially when I might well count myself one of ‘em...

Here’s a paragraph with a perhaps a too great confidence in generosity as a sign of  the presence of God - but hey - there’s some good lines here:

Catholic theologian Jean-Luc Marion says that “the ethic of giving” is the telltale sign that God’s image is under construction in us. The evidence that God’s image is being restored in individuals and in church is our giving - we give Christ, who established the church to bear his fruit in the world. We are flimsy boughs for such abundant fruit. Yet scripture repeatedly describes God’s preferential option for the unlikely. God calls people not for what they have but for what they lack. Empty hands receive, empty wombs are filled, empty tombs proclaim resurrection - and the unformed selves of adolescents make room for Christ in ways that are difficult for adults’ hardened formed egos. God does not ask us to give ourselves to others. God asks us to give Christ - who transforms us, dwells within us and fills us with his self-giving love. “It is no longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me,” says Paul (Gal 2:20)

The “flimsy boughs” phrase is great, but I am really struck by the notion of “God’s preferential option for the unlikely.” Isn’t that an interesting thing to say? Aren’t these blessings about as unlikely as unlikely can be? Except - I guess - for the cross. 

Hall’s Christian Century piece is quite a read.

He starts by quoting from a vocal atheist who, in the aftermath of  9/11, suggests that religion is not the harmless nonsense he and others have thought that it is. Rather, in his analysis, it is quite dangerous. Well, yes.

Hall then offers his own critique of N. American religion.

“Such Christianity, though it regularly basks in an aura of true-believing Bible faith, seems oblivious to the critique of religion that runs throughout the pages of both...testaments”

I am struck by Hall’s point in seeking to hold up faith over religion. It is interesting to me that the folks I’ve heard who’ve most clearly spoken for faith over religion - were actually quite obnoxiously religions. [Kinda like the only time you hear Reggae on local radio is in adds for some lame store or some stupid product.]

Let me share a quote of this article within which is a quote of Barth - 

“The Christian religion...stands under the judgment that religion is unbelief, and is not acquitted by any inward worthiness.” Religion, Barth declares

"is a grasping. . . . Man tries to grasp at truth [by] himself. . . . But in that case he does not do what he has to do when truth comes to him. He does not believe. If he did, he would listen; but in religion he talks. If he did, he would accept a gift; but in religion he takes something for himself. If he did, he would let God Himself intercede for God; but in religion he ventures to grasp at God.”

Hall drives to this conclusion:

"Probably faith - by which I mean awe and trust in the presence of the holy - will never be found in easy separation from religion - some religion; but the thoughtfully faithful will nevertheless be able to distinguish between what comes of faith and what comes of religion. And the greatest distinction of all in this contrast will always lie in the readiness of faith, unlike religion, to confess its radical incompleteness and insufficiency - indeed, its brokenness. How could it not do so?”

Those last two lines is why I’m sharing all this - I think.

That and “God’s preferential option for the unlikely.” 

The Beatitudes - as well as the Gospel itself - seem to fit that line pretty well

Blessings to you.

What’s your favorite color?

John 1:29-42

John saw Jesus coming toward him and declared, "Here is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! This is he of whom I said, `After me comes a man who ranks ahead of me because he was before me.’ I myself did not know him; but I came baptizing with water for this reason, that he might be revealed to Israel." And John testified, "I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it remained on him. I myself did not know him, but the one who sent me to baptize with water said to me, `He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain is the one who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.’ And I myself have seen and have testified that this is the Son of God."

The next day John again was standing with two of his disciples, and as he watched Jesus walk by, he exclaimed, "Look, here is the Lamb of God!" The two disciples heard him say this, and they followed Jesus. When Jesus turned and saw them following, he said to them, "What are you looking for?" They said to him, "Rabbi" (which translated means Teacher), "where are you staying?" He said to them, "Come and see." They came and saw where he was staying, and they remained with him that day. It was about four o’clock in the afternoon. One of the two who heard John speak and followed him was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother. He first found his brother Simon and said to him, "We have found the Messiah" (which is translated Anointed). He brought Simon to Jesus, who looked at him and said, "You are Simon son of John. You are to be called Cephas" (which is translated Peter). 

"Rabbi, where are you staying?"

That strikes me as quite an odd question.

Is that really what they asked?

Where are you staying?

Who cares?!?

What difference could that possibly make?

Not just an odd question. 

A stupid one

I think of the SNL comedian who would interview people “remember when you did that? That was awesome!” Then, whacking himself for asking such a stupid question.

Can’t you just see these two disciples busting on each other later?

“Duh,” “where are you staying?” 

“We’re real interested in whether it’s a duplex or an apartment. Or do you have one of those fancy new adobe jobs down by the Sea of Galilee?” 

“How could we be so ridiculous?”

Isn’t the real question: “Who are you?” or “Are you the Messiah?” 

Isn’t the question: “Is John right, are you really the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world?”

Isn’t THAT the question?

But since they asked this question, what might we do with it?

There’s a few things.

Where is Jesus staying?

. . . or, is Jesus staying anywhere?

Could it be, that Jesus is restlessly travelling the world, out there, amidst those who are lost and alone? 

What are you looking for? 

ME? The same as everyone else - I don’t really know how to answer that.

Interesting isn’t it, that these disciples of John - who dedicated their lives to looking for the Messiah, they, like most of us, were tongue tied when it came time to talk about their hopes and dreams, when it came time to give voice to their faith. 

Perhaps, as Lose suggests in his “Dear Working Preacher” piece this week, we could ask questions.

We had a great conversation at our Council meeting last night. The youngest member of the Council - still in his 20’s - spoke of conversing with some co-workers as they drove along. A conversation that lasted a couple hours. I don’t think it was overly eloquent, or deep theology, but he was able to give voice to why he went to worship, and what our Church was about. 

For him, the compelling thing for us is that we do not demand that everyone believe the same thing. To the one questioning him, that was remarkably different from his experience, and that sounded very good - truer than his own experience. 

Interesting. 

What are you looking for?

Where are you staying?

Doh!