Christmas

John 1:1-18

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being in him was life, and the life was the light of all people. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it.

There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. He came as a witness to testify to the light, so that all might believe through him. He himself was not the light, but he came to testify to the light. The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world.

He was in the world, and the world came into being through him; yet the world did not know him. He came to what was his own, and his own people did not accept him. But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God, who were born, not of blood or of the will of the flesh or of the will of man, but of God.

And the Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a father's only son, full of grace and truth. (John testified to him and cried out, "This was he of whom I said, 'He who comes after me ranks ahead of me because he was before me.'") From his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. The law indeed was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. No one has ever seen God. It is God the only Son, who is close to the Father's heart, who has made him known.

I am not the world's biggest fan of John. I'll admit it. For one, this gospel isn't as authoritative as the others. For another, it is distracting and depicts a very different vision of Jesus. But as I read this gospel for this past Sunday, I was struck by what it said.

Let's be honest: for the first Sunday after Christmas, this is a weird gospel lesson. There isn't childbirth or shepherds, there are no angels or wise men, and there certainly isn't any action or plot. In literary terms, this is only exposition. The writer is only describing the circumstances--not even the setting of the story. In fact, by even beginning with the famous opening sentence, this gospel is in danger of leaving us out--not making it easy for us to engage the text: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God..."

But take a step back and think about Christmas--everything about Christmas--and list all of the elements:

• Gift-giving: making, buying, wrapping, choosing, receiving, tasting
• Caroling: music, singing, hymns, Nat King Cole
• Characters: baby, Mary, angels, Santa, Rudolph, Charlie Brown
• Traditions: tree, ornaments, garland, mistletoe, stockings
• Food: ham/turkey, chocolates, sweets, milk and cookies, reindeer food
• People: family--parents, siblings, children; friends; strangers
• and many more...
  

All of those things that we associate with Christmas. And seemingly none of them have anything to do with the gospel we read on Christmas. Well, Jesus and Mary and the angels do, but that's it. We don't see wrapping paper and stockings in the Christmas story anywhere. And yet, they represent Christmas. They represent what Christmas means. We'll get back to John in just a minute more.

Despite what anybody says, Christmas isn't about a battle between the secular and the sacred (the world and the church). It isn't about putting Christ back into Christmas any more than having a manger scene outside of a public building makes a person want to be a Christian. It isn't about buying or receiving stuff you and your friends won't even use or buying lame gifts for your parents because you don't know what they would like. It isn't about 24 hours of A Christmas Story. It isn't even about the birth of a baby.

It is about Jesus. Who Jesus is and was. It isn't about celebrating the day Jesus was born, or the time when Jesus was a baby, but a celebration of Jesus as living life as a human being!

In the Nicene Creed, we sometimes bow during the words of the incarnation--when we say:

For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary,
and was made man.

We bow in recognition of this incredible thing, this most beautiful gift from God: that God wanted to be with us, in the flesh. To be among us, to live as we do, and deal with all of the annoying things that come along with it. We bow in recognition that this was done, not because we deserved it or because God was bored, but because we needed it. We needed God's presence among us.

Perhaps most astonishing about the John reading is that it reminds us that Jesus isn't a baby. At one point in time He was a baby. We tell stories about that time in the way that we tell stories about each other as babies and children. It is how we relate to one another: and to Jesus.

What are some of your stories about others? What are some of the stories your parents have about you? What do you think these stories tell us about ourselves and other people?

What stories do we tell about Jesus? What do you think those stories tell us about Him? About who He was as person and who He is now (as the Word)?

Christmas is about Jesus. All of Jesus. Our gospel from John demonstrates that a conversation about a Jesus that is born must also be about a Jesus that is killed. A conversation about Jesus as incarnate.

May you continue to give gifts and share in the love of friends and family as an expression of Jesus's love for each of us, and we to one another.

Sharing Talents

Matthew 25:14-30

Jesus said, "For it is as if a man, going on a journey, summoned his slaves and entrusted his property to them; to one he gave five talents, to another two, to another one, to each according to his ability. Then he went away. The one who had received the five talents went off at once and traded with them, and made five more talents. In the same way, the one who had the two talents made two more talents. But the one who had received the one talent went off and dug a hole in the ground and hid his master's money. After a long time the master of those slaves came and settled accounts with them. Then the one who had received the five talents came forward, bringing five more talents, saying, `Master, you handed over to me five talents; see, I have made five more talents.' His master said to him, `Well done, good and trustworthy slave; you have been trustworthy in a few things, I will put you in charge of many things; enter into the joy of your master.' And the one with the two talents also came forward, saying, `Master, you handed over to me two talents; see, I have made two more talents.' His master said to him, `Well done, good and trustworthy slave; you have been trustworthy in a few things, I will put you in charge of many things; enter into the joy of your master.' Then the one who had received the one talent also came forward, saying, `Master, I knew that you were a harsh man, reaping where you did not sow, and gathering where you did not scatter seed; so I was afraid, and I went and hid your talent in the ground. Here you have what is yours.' But his master replied, `You wicked and lazy slave! You knew, did you, that I reap where I did not sow, and gather where I did not scatter? Then you ought to have invested my money with the bankers, and on my return I would have received what was my own with interest. So take the talent from him, and give it to the one with the ten talents. For to all those who have, more will be given, and they will have an abundance; but from those who have nothing, even what they have will be taken away. As for this worthless slave, throw him into the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.' "

Over the last few weeks, we have had some pretty difficult depictions of Jesus. Last week was the parable of the bridesmaids where only half get to participate. The previous week showed a Jesus that was critical of leadership. In many ways, this week's gospel is the worst one yet! Jesus sounds like a jerk.

Jesus tells a story that involves three slaves. Each has been given "talents". When the master comes to account for those talents, each slave tells him what was done with it. For most of us, we can see the basic idea: don't squander your talents. Invest in what you have been given and all will be well.

But the way Jesus tells this story makes this conclusion hard to swallow. In most stories, Jesus (like any good storyteller) uses a formula. He has the first one get it wrong. Then the second one gets it wrong for a different reason. Lastly, the third one gets it right and proves himself worthy. Happy ending. For this story, Jesus flips this scenario on its head by showing the first two getting it right and the last one getting it wrong. Worse, that happy ending becomes eternal damnation.

Another thing that should bother us about this telling is the relationship to wealth. The slave with 5 talents has lots of options. S/He doesn't have to worry so much about losing one or two on bad investments, since there are more left behind! In fact, the one with 5 talents can take tremendous risks with what s/he has, recognizing big gain potential. The one with 2 talents, likewise, could take some risks, knowing that s/he has another upon which s/he could fall back. In the investing world, the ones that have the least risk are the ones with the most starting capital. It is the slave with a single talent that would actually take the biggest risk through investing. In an economic sense, his burying it was actually a pretty good choice.

Jesus, however, is not that kind of economist. He knows economic theory--quite well, in fact--he just isn't buying into Wall Street. His true economic theory isn't about what you get, but what you give.

Think about the numbers. Can you think of any place (other than a race track) where you could invest $1 and get $2? Is there any place that offers 100% interest on investments? The interest on my savings account for the year has been 14 cents. Jesus isn't talking about taking what you have (in money) and investing it in the bank, in a portfolio, or on Wall Street. Financial investments don't work like that.

What Jesus is talking about is giving of yourself. When you give to God something you're good at, God will double its impact.

What are you good at? Have you thought about using that talent for God? What do you think will happen?

The arrangement of this parable seems to emphasize what happens when we squander our talents. At the same time, it isn't that interested in how much the slaves made for the master: there's a big gap between the slave with 10 total talents and the one with 4 (two and a half times!). But the parable isn't about outcomes, it's about the initial action. It's about going out on a limb and trusting that God will help you. It is about using what you've got for God.

One of the coolest lessons I ever learned was about this very idea. Jesus teaches us that our character as being generous is more important than what we do with it. We learn elsewhere that when someone asks for your coat you give it to him/her, and your shirt also. It isn't your business to find out whether or not s/he already has a coat--it's your business to give it away.

Having a spirit of generosity is hard, especially when you live off of your parents. Especially when times are tight. Especially when you work hard for a low wage. It is hard to give. But Jesus is calling us to examine how we use our God-given talents, how we share those talents with others. How can you be generous with what God has given you?

The Coin and Ownership

Matthew 22:15-22

The Pharisees went and plotted to entrap Jesus in what he said. So they sent their disciples to him, along with the Herodians, saying, "Teacher, we know that you are sincere, and teach the way of God in accordance with truth, and show deference to no one; for you do not regard people with partiality. Tell us, then, what you think. Is it lawful to pay taxes to the emperor, or not?" But Jesus, aware of their malice, said, "Why are you putting me to the test, you hypocrites? Show me the coin used for the tax." And they brought him a denarius. Then he said to them, "Whose head is this, and whose title?" They answered, "The emperor's." Then he said to them, "Give therefore to the emperor the things that are the emperor's, and to God the things that are God's." When they heard this, they were amazed; and they left him and went away.

This gospel is no doubt familiar to you. You have probably heard or read it before, or at least know the line "Give therefore to the emperor the things that are the emperor's, and to God the things that are God's." You may also recognize it from the King James Version (an earlier translation): "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesars; and unto God the things that are Gods."

But there is a great deal more to this passage than this one line, and to get into it, we have to start at the beginning.

This passage takes place after Jesus has come to Jerusalem, after Palm Sunday, shortly before he is to be Crucified. He is standing at or near the Temple. Jesus has brought many followers with him and is becoming increasingly popular.

Also, the people that are used to being the ones that the people listen to are the Jewish leaders. Though traveling rabbis teach at the Temple, the Temple authorities usually command a certain respect. In other words, Jesus was moving onto their turf.

Take it further by recognizing how the Pharisees probably felt about Jesus in this situation. Since Jesus was proclaiming a vision of God that was compatible with theirs, but would remove their earthly power, you can start to see motive for their actions, right? They have it pretty good, and Jesus is suggesting that these things should all be taken away with His radical pronouncements of love and raising up the poor.

And who are these people? The Pharisees don't work in the temple (those are high priests) and don't work for the temple (the Sadducees) or transcribe the scriptures (the scribes). They might closely resemble the moralists, super-believers that "just can't help it" that other people "don't believe like they do". You know, the people today that make you feel like you aren't "enough of a Christian"? Those are the Pharisees. In this passage, they recruit the Herodians, who we can only assume are followers or supporters of King Herod. So they represent the government.

So these people harrass Jesus, first by giving him complements, but then trying to trap him with a question that can only be answered with a "yes" or a "no": "Is it lawful to pay taxes to the emperor, or not?" If he says yes, he will seem like a hypocrite and if he says no, he could be arrested for sedition (which they end up doing later). But Jesus chooses not to make it easy on them. He not only declines to answer their question, but he sets his own trap--a three-parter that makes them look stupid.

First, he gets one of them to pull out a Roman coin, a denarius, from his pocket. This is a visual signal to the crowd of the Pharisees' hypocricy, since they a) shouldn't have that coin at the Temple, b) they didn't need to even carry that currency, c) the question of taxes is made moot, since they visually demonstrate their loyalties.

Second, Jesus asks them a question about the coin, getting them to announce out loud that they possess a Roman coin, meaning the people that couldn't see the coin, could actually hear about it!

Third, Jesus speaks that favorite phrase: "Give therefore to the emperor the things that are the emperor's, and to God the things that are God's." A teaching that has sounded like he supports the paying of taxes, except when you pay attention to Jesus's view of "the things that are God's." God is the true owner of our land, our dwellings, and our food. We live in our homes and eat food as a gift of God. These aren't owned by people.

So what does this have to do with taxes? Perhaps Jesus is giving the OK to pay them. Or maybe not. Maybe he is taking the opportunity to talk about the One that is above the Emperor--the One whom the Emperor is exploiting. Maybe he is suggesting that the Emperor is gaining wealth that is neither his to take, nor is it the people's to give.

So how does this affect the way you see your own society, your own government? Should we interpret this literally (asking whether or not we should pay taxes) or metaphorically (asking ourselves about true ownership)?

Jesus humiliates the Pharisees in this passage, exposing them for the bullies they are. What do you make of this vision of Jesus? How does this compare with the vision of Jesus that is kind and compassionate?

Much of the early part of the Older Testament deals with ownership and property. One concept, described in Leviticus 25:9 is the "Jubilee" when all things are to be returned to their original owners because they are really on a sort of "loan" from God. What do you think it would mean to not only praise God for the things God provides in your life, but in removing the things that aren't from God?

Living like a tenant

Matthew 21:23-32

Jesus said, ‘Listen to another parable. There was a landowner who planted a vineyard, put a fence around it, dug a wine press in it, and built a watch-tower. Then he leased it to tenants and went to another country. ³⁴When the harvest time had come, he sent his slaves to the tenants to collect his produce. ³⁵But the tenants seized his slaves and beat one, killed another, and stoned another. ³⁶Again he sent other slaves, more than the first; and they treated them in the same way. ³⁷Finally he sent his son to them, saying, “They will respect my son.” ³⁸But when the tenants saw the son, they said to themselves, “This is the heir; come, let us kill him and get his inheritance.” ³⁹So they seized him, threw him out of the vineyard, and killed him. ⁴⁰Now when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those tenants?’ ⁴¹They said to him, ‘He will put those wretches to a miserable death, and lease the vineyard to other tenants who will give him the produce at the harvest time.’

42 Jesus said to them, ‘Have you never read in the scriptures:
“The stone that the builders rejected
has become the cornerstone; keystone');" onmouseout="return nd();">^*
this was the Lord’s doing,
and it is amazing in our eyes”?
⁴³Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people that produces the fruits of the kingdom. the fruits of it');" onmouseout="return nd();">^{* 44}The one who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; and it will crush anyone on whom it falls.’ 44');" onmouseout="return nd();">^*

45When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they realized that he was speaking about them. ⁴⁶They wanted to arrest him, but they feared the crowds, because they regarded him as a prophet.

Remember, the first thing to do when reading any text--whether it's the Bible, a novel, or the newspaper--is to look at who the intended audience is. This helps us understand the purpose of the message, and what is truly being communicated. In this way, we should recognize that Jesus is talkign to the religious authorities. The groups of authorities (chief priests and Pharisees) are less important than it is that Jesus is directing his attention at them.

Secondly, theis comes right after the question of authority, which means that the themes are related, or that we should be mindful of that teaching when working with this one.

This gospel seems to show Jesus using an allegory--a story symbolic of something else. Jesus uses a prior frame for this story as well: the landowner and the workers. This time, however, instead of revealing his understanding of God's economic philosophy, he is revealing humanity's. Let's look at it.

Jesus introduces the landowner who did a great deal of work, planting, fencing, building. He prepares everything--he did all of the heavy-lifting if you will--and "then leased it to tenants and went to another country." When the landowner sends his slaves to collect the produce of his hard work, the tenants kill them. So the landowner decides that a greater number of slaves will be more effective. They too are murdered by the tenants. So then the landowner decides to send his son--not just a representative of the landowner, but someone that is of the same person--he has the same DNA as the landowner. It is here that the tenants reveal their true motive: they want to steal control of the land for themselves, so they murder the son, too.

It doesn't take much for us to see that the landowner is God, the son is Jesus, and the tenants are the Jewish leaders. But what is Jesus trying to say in theis (besides foretelling his own demise)? He is criticizing the way the Jewish leaders have directed the faith. He is claiming that they are no longer doing the wishes of God, but fulfilling their own selfish desires: they have tried to steal the Kingdom.

It also seems to be a constant issue for us, as well. Can you think of an example of when your church does what it wants to do, as opposed to what God asks us to do? Do you even think about our actions as an expression of God's wishes?

The authorities unwittingly condemn themselves by suggesting what the landowner (God) will do with the tenants (authorities): kick them out and punish them. But Jesus reveals what matters: that God will recruit new tenants to work the land that God has provided. It matters less what happens to the wicked than the fact that they will be replaced.

Jesus tells us that God's promise is golden. If our leaders don't honor that promise, God will recruit new ones. This is truly awesome!

The implications in this, however, is that the earlier notion of authority is part of the problem. For the Jewish people 2,000 years ago, incredible power was being wielded by a select few over the people. So much of this was hereditary and the average Jew had no potential to be the one wielding that power. It was an impervious caste system. But Jesus came along and challenged that concept. He reversed the order of preference (remember?) and made the first last and the last first. The powerful are to be powerless and the powerless shall be powerful in God's kingdom.

So what do we do with this? It's simple: we're the new tenants. God is always kicking out the bad apples and trying to give each of us the opportunity. This isn't easy work, but it isn't slaver, either. Think about the job: someone else has tilled the land, planted the seeds, put up the fence, built the buildings; the landowner won't micromanage and watch over your shoulder; the work is pretty straightforward but there's enough flexibility to allow for creativity. All you have to do is work the land. This is what it means to do "Kingdom" work.

What are God's instructions for you?

Traps, Countertraps, and the Good People

Matthew 21:23-32

When Jesus entered the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people came to him as he was teaching, and said, "By what authority are you doing these things, and who gave you this authority?" Jesus said to them, "I will also ask you one question; if you tell me the answer, then I will also tell you by what authority I do these things. Did the baptism of John come from heaven, or was it of human origin?" And they argued with one another, "If we say, `From heaven,' he will say to us, `Why then did you not believe him?' But if we say, `Of human origin,' we are afraid of the crowd; for all regard John as a prophet." So they answered Jesus, "We do not know." And he said to them, "Neither will I tell you by what authority I am doing these things.

"What do you think? A man had two sons; he went to the first and said, `Son, go and work in the vineyard today.' He answered, `I will not'; but later he changed his mind and went. The father went to the second and said the same; and he answered, `I go, sir'; but he did not go. Which of the two did the will of his father?" They said, "The first." Jesus said to them, "Truly I tell you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are going into the kingdom of God ahead of you. For John came to you in the way of righteousness and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes believed him; and even after you saw it, you did not change your minds and believe him."

As you can see, there are two parts to this week's gospel. In the first, we have a confrontation between Jesus and the chief priests and the scribes. In the second, he uses an extended parable to explain himself. Let's take a look at the first part.

If we were to diagram the first part, it might look something like this:

A) Chief priests & elders (CP&E) ask a question.
B) Jesus grees to answer if they first answer his question.
A) Chief priests & elders refuse to give an honest answer to Jesus's question.
B) Jesus therefore does not answer the earlier question.

Another way to look at this interaction is to include the interesting requirements both have for each other. We might look at them like this:

CP&E ask:

1. By what authority are you doing these things?
2. And who gave you that authority?

Jesus responds:

1. Did the baptism of John come from heaven?
2. Or did it come from humanity?

CP&E:

1. If we say "heaven" we'll look like hypocrites.
2. If we say "humanity" then we'll be unpopular.
3. So they lie and say "We don't know".

Jesus:

1. If you won't be honest with me
2. I don't need to answer you.

In some ways, Jesus is coming off as being pretty tough on these church leaders, doesn't he? They weren't being as rude to him as he is to them, right? Well...not exactly.

They start by trying to trick him with their original question. Jesus then turns it around by laying his own trap. If they both speak the truth, then they could get into legal trouble: as they are doing God's work. But if either of them appealed to human authority, they would be alienating themselves from their followers.

What is further interesting is that Jesus not only recognizes the trap set for him and therefore sets an identical trap for them, but he also knows that they will be forced into a third option: not to answer. This does get Jesus off the hook, and is important for that, but there is something else, isn't there? These are the chief priests and elders: the highest and most respected people in the Jewish church. Jesus has not only set a verbal trap for them, but forces them to feign ignorance--to pretend that they don't know and don't understand. In some ways, this is actually more damaging for them than if they had answered Jesus's question. These are the people that are supposed to know this stuff and what do they say? "We do not know." Jesus's trap is sprung by their avoidance of his trap. They look like idiots or liars--equally damaging options.

Then Jesus actually piles it on, by using an illustration that is pretty interesting: A man has two sons that make statments and do something different. The first says he won't work in the field and then does while the second says and does the opposite. They then highlight that the former son is preferred by God. Jesus then says that prostitutes and tax collectors will go to heaven before them (still the chief priests and elders) because they don't claim to be perfect, but they are trying to do God's work, while these churchfolk are claiming to be perfect while misunderstanding God's work.

The beauty of what Jesus promises us is that God's grace is available when we are doing the right thing, regardless of how we think or feel about ourselves. In fact, when we feel the best about ourselves, when we get the most self-righteous, God is less interested in us. This isn't to say that God abandons us, but that God's first priority is to those that aren't perfect, that aren't always getting things right, and aren't in a position of authority to tell others what to do. God is there for those that represent imperfection.

In the first part of the gospel, Jesus sets a countertrap for the chief priests and elders.
How does this effect the way you see Jesus?
Does he seem any different?
Does Jesus as tricky say something about the way we should be?

The countertrap is sprung when the chief priests and elders claim to not know the answer to Jesus's question.
If you were one of the people watching this exchange, what would you be thinking about?
How would you see this stranger (Jesus) and the authorities (chief priests and elders)?
Is Jesus cool, a rebel? Or is he a vagrant who goes too far?

Lastly, when Jesus highlights who gets to be first in line (a familiar theme in this gospel), who does he refer to? He refers to prostitutes and tax collectors. These two represent those with low social standing--those with bad reputations. This doesn't necessarily mean economic poverty, since tax collectors were often quite wealthy. In both cases, however, the Jewish society shuns them. Prostitutes are ritually impure because of their sex practices while tax collectors were ritually impure for both the handling of money and for their place in supporting the Roman Empire. In this society, these people both represent the bad people, while the chief priests and elders were the epitome of good.
How does it feel to know that you don't need to be one of the "good people" as long as you are doing right by God?
When do you feel like one of those "good people" and when do you feel like one of the "bad" ones?
Do you ever feel like both?

Overcoming the evil eye

Matthew 20:1-16

(Here: 8-16)

When evening came, the owner of the vineyard said to his manager, “Call the laborers and give them their pay, beginning with the last and then going to the first.” When those hired about five o’clock came, each of them received the usual daily wage. Now when the first came, they thought they would receive more; but each of them also received the usual daily wage. And when they received it, they grumbled against the landowner, saying, “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.” But he replied to one of them, “Friend, I am doing you no wrong; did you not agree with me for the usual daily wage? Take what belongs to you and go; I choose to give to this last the same as I give to you. Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or are you envious because I am generous?” So the last will be first, and the first will be last.’

In this week's gospel, Jesus tells the disciples a parable or story. He tells them about a landowner that has a vineyard--a piece of land that grows grapes. And this landowner goes out into the marketplace to find some people to do the work. When he gets there, he finds some waiting for work, so he cuts a deal with them. He says if you work for me today, I will give you the normal day's wage--the going rate. They agree and the laborers head off to work.

Well, then a little while later, the landowner, looking for more workers, heads back into the marketplace. He finds more laborers hanging out, so he says to them "if you work in my vineyard, I'll pay you what you are owed." And they think that's a pretty good deal, so they go in, too. Then, with about an hour's time left before the end of the day, the landowner finds one last group of laborers hanging out in the marketplace. He asks them why they're just sitting around. And they say "nobody's hired us yet." So the landowner says "go inside; I've work for you."

All this takes place before the excerpt above. In this story, the landowner brings in a total of five different groups one early in the morning, one at 9:00, one at noon, one at 3:00, and one at 5:00. When the day ends at 6:00 pm, he flips around the expectations by suggesting that the crew that has only been there for one hour goes first, then the 3 hour crew, the 6 hour crew, the 9 hour crew, and the all day crew go last.

The landowner shows mercy on the last crew, justice to the middle crew, and fulfils the agreement with the earliest crew--giving each group what they were promised. The group that had been there all day think this isn't fair because they think they deserve more.

What do you think? Do people that work longer deserve more? What of mercy for those that weren't picked to go in at work at 7:00 am?

What experiences do you have with times you have put in a lot of effort and someone else gets the same? Have you ever been in a group in which you worked really hard and "carried" your team? How did you feel about your teammates? What do you think Jesus is trying to say about this?

According to the author, John Shea, a more direct translation of Jesus's question above ("Or are you envious because I am generous?") is "Is your eye evil because I am good?" That has something of a ring to it, doesn't it? Actually, what it suggests is the dichotomy between the emotion that laborer feels and the expressed emotion of the landowner. You can see that because of the use of evil and good; that the emotion expressed by the laborer is evil, while the landowner is going what is good.

Jesus seems to be telling us to alter our expectations. That we shouldn't compare ourselves in the ways that we do: how many presents we get at Christmas, what kind of affection we get from loved ones, how well someone else does in sports/drama/schoolwork, etc.. That we should be charitable and merciful as God is.

In what ways might you find the means of being merciful? Would it help to try out what they're going through (either figuratively or literally)? Have you ever tried to spend extended time doing tasks as if you were blind or forgoing dinner because many people will go to bed without eating today? What does that experience do to the way you feel you are treated?

What do you think this will do for the way you experience the blessings of your life?

A Turning Point

Text: Matthew 16:13-28

In Matthew, we have been following Jesus's teaching of his disciples: a common theme in all of the gospels. There is a definite arc during the middle chapters in which we see Jesus laying the groundwork for how we are supposed to live in community. How we treat each other.

In chapters 14 and 15 we have episodes of matters of faith and action. We have TWO feeding stories: the feeding of the five thousand and then a later feeding of four thousand. Jesus then uses these events to demonstrate how to listen to the authorities. There are also lessons of faith. One has Peter walking on the water (he has "little" faith) and the other has a woman who debates with Jesus about healing her daughter (she has "great" faith).

All of this brings us to chapter 16, which we covered a couple of weeks ago in the gospels. Peter reveals the nature of Jesus as "the Messiah, son of the Living God", for which Jesus rewards him with a new name and responsibility. Then Peter, newly entitled, chastises Jesus for suggesting that He was to go to Jerusalem to die.

This sequence, which may seem pretty theologically dense, is actually a turning point for us in the gospel and in the way we can approach our relationship to Jesus.

Peter (previously Simon) gets a new identity that doesn't elevate him or making him better or get him more power: he was already sort of the de facto leader of the disciples. Instead, Peter becomes the foundation of the church, the soul. He becomes the guy responsible for helping the church see who Jesus is. This is a much bigger and more profound responsibility.

It is also the moment that the church even enters the story. Up until this point, it was just a bunch of dudes (and the many men and women and children) that were following Jesus. They listened to stories and learned to act like him. From this point on, Jesus is also beginning to frame the church, the means of getting the message out and sustain it. For the first time, Jesus isn't looking like a random vagrant, living off of the gratitude of strangers, but a marketer and designer.

These paired gospels (Matthew 16:13-20 and 21-28) also highlight how easy it is to lose sight of what God asks of us and what we want to be doing instead. If we were in Peter's shoes, told that we are to be the soul of the church, told that we have done well, we would have felt justified in doing exactly as Peter does: he only intends to sustain this movement that will lead to the church over the next century. Who doesn't try to protect what s/he finds most important?

But this isn't what Jesus told him to do. It wasn't how Jesus identified Peter--how Jesus reveals Peter's identity--just as Peter revealed Jesus's. It wasn't what God wants of Peter. He is not a protector, but a nurterur, a feeder. Peter is to be the gardener, chef, and planner for God's banquet of sustaining food. This is Peter's identity.

There are many things that I would have us examine in this sequence. It shows us how easy it is to be fooled by our own understandings of things. How easy it is to ignore God's call to us in favor of the easy route. It shows us many things. But Jesus's identity and the church's identity are the two most important elements of these stories.

So who is Jesus to you? What is he? Can you even describe him?
And what about the church? What is it about? Who are we? What do we do?

These aren't intended to be easy questions, but if you find them too easy, then I would challenge you to probe a little deeper. Pretend that the person asking the question knows nothing about this stuff. Or better yet, pretend that s/he wants to know what's in your heart--who Jesus is beyond all of the churchey language.

Or if you find the questions too hard, step back and think about what it means to go to church or to even put your faith into words. What is stopping you?

Feeding Others

Matthew 14:13-21

Jesus withdrew in a boat to a deserted place by himself. But when the crowds heard it, they followed him on foot from the towns. When he went ashore, he saw a great crowd; and he had compassion for them and cured their sick. When it was evening, the disciples came to him and said, "This is a deserted place, and the hour is now late; send the crowds away so that they may go into the villages and buy food for themselves." Jesus said to them, "They need not go away; you give them something to eat." They replied, "We have nothing here but five loaves and two fish." And he said, "Bring them here to me." Then he ordered the crowds to sit down on the grass. Taking the five loaves and the two fish, he looked up to heaven, and blessed and broke the loaves, and gave them to the disciples, and the disciples gave them to the crowds. And all ate and were filled; and they took up what was left over of the broken pieces, twelve baskets full. And those who ate were about five thousand men, besides women and children.

For Jesus, food is important. In some ways, it is most important.

In Jesus’s time, food, or more specifically, bread, was an expression of power. The wealthy and well-fed would give tremendous banquets and feasts for other ‘important’ people, while slaves and those living on the street would often go without eating. For these people, bread represented the day’s meal (remember from the Lord’s Prayer: “give us today our daily bread”?).

That’s why Jesus takes every opportunity to eat with people. We know that he ate with ‘tax collectors and sinners’. Other gospel accounts have Jesus accepting numerous invitations to stay at someone’s house and eat with them. And of course, we should not forget the Last Supper.

This is why one of the most important stories in the gospels is this one: the feeding of the five thousand. It is held that the five thousand was only counting men. Since women and children were there too, the number is more than doubled. Think attendance at a Pistons game!

But the excitement and fascination that we have for this story isn't really about a miracle. It isn't that Jesus took two fish and five loaves of bread and was able to feed a stadium's worth of people with it. That's not really the point. What is important, however, is that Jesus was sharing food with a crowd of total strangers. He wasn't the one counting who was there and who wasn't. He didn't care who received the food: the point was that everyone was being fed.

A second aspect that is important to note is the role he has for the disciples. It is they who gather up the food. It is they that offer it to Jesus. It is they who distribute it to the crowds. It is they who collect up the crumbs and remainder. It is Jesus's role to provide for the people, but it is our role to do the leg work of collection and distribution.

Thirdly, the remainder fills twelve baskets, one for each disciple. Jesus calls his disciples not just to share the food among themselves, but that there would be plenty left over to distribute.

What Jesus demonstrates is something really hard: balancing how hard we work while also depending on God to provide. This is not only hard to do, but something with which we seem to be constantly struggling!

• How do you see God's call to minister to the needs of others playing out in your life?
  
• What can you do help Jesus feed the five thousand that surround you?
• How can you help feed others that aren't in church?
  

Person Matthew 14:13-21

Right click for SmartMenu shortcuts

The Kingdom of Heaven is like a simile...

Matthew 13:31-33,44-52

Jesus put before the crowds another parable: "The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed that someone took and sowed in his field; it is the smallest of all the seeds, but when it has grown it is the greatest of shrubs and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and make nests in its branches."

He told them another parable: "The kingdom of heaven is like yeast that a woman took and mixed in with three measures of flour until all of it was leavened."

"The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field, which someone found and hid; then in his joy he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field.

"Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant in search of fine pearls; on finding one pearl of great value, he went and sold all that he had and bought it.

"Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was thrown into the sea and caught fish of every kind; when it was full, they drew it ashore, sat down, and put the good into baskets but threw out the bad. So it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come out and separate the evil from the righteous and throw them into the furnace of fire, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

"Have you understood all this?" They answered, "Yes." And he said to them, "Therefore every scribe who has been trained for the kingdom of heaven is like the master of a household who brings out of his treasure what is new and what is old."

Continuing directly from last week's gospel, Jesus begins speaking in a different way. Instead of using parables, he uses allegories. He uses a format that says "The kingdom of heaven is like ______________." As you go through the list, you can draw some things out. In each, the image begins with something earthly and small (a mustard seed, yeast, treasure, a pearl, a net) which brings forth different responses. In the first two, the seed and the yeast lead to a great tree and bread. In the next two, the treasure and the pearl cause the finder to sell off everything to acquire it (the field and the pearl itself). In the last one, the net catches a great variety.

Each of these visual metaphors tries to tell us something about the kingdom of heaven: one of Jesus's primary focuses. The fifth metaphor makes another reference to angels participating in what we might call The Great Sort. But as in last week's gospel, I think we are less interested in what we are supposed to be doing, but in what we are supposed to value. Who we are to be. More than simply "good". I think we are to learn how to see value in the mustard seed and the yeast, act on the real treasures and pearls presented to us, and to use the nets for their intended purpose.

What strikes me most about this lesson is what happens after the fifth example. Jesus asks

"Have you understood all this?"

and the crowd said

"yes."

Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't know that I would have said "yes". Jesus doesn't tell the crowd what the kingdom of heaven is, just what it is like. And what it is like seems to be very different things that would mean different things to different people. Trying to reconcile the "pearl of great price" with the mustard seed for example mix up how we interpret the kingdom of heaven. And without knowing what Jesus intends when describing the kingdom of heaven, these analogies only evoke the appearance of a hazy intrepretation of something we wouldn't necessarily recognize when we saw it. It reminds me of the old saying about a set of three blind persons describing an elephant by their individual perspectives: one describing the tail, one it's legs, and one it's trunk.

Jesus's language, discussing the Kingdom of Heaven (like the Kingdom of God in Mark) is a description of something else (outside of this world), something that is coming, and something that is here: all at the same time! How confusing, anyway!

For a lot of us, we are looking for what this means: to us, to God, to those that heard it the first time. What does it mean? It means living in the world that God has been encouraging us to live in for over three thousand years, abandoning the culture, the national groupings, and governmental structures of the world: all of which prevent us from adopting God's.

How do you respond to this suggestion? Would you be willing to put God before not only obvious stuff, but those really important things: friends, career, patriotism? Would you support all people, especially those that are poor, sick, imprisoned, displaced? What about the stupid and willfully ignorant?

The Wheat and the Weeds

Matthew 13:24-30,36-43

Jesus put before the crowd another parable: "The kingdom of heaven may be compared to someone who sowed good seed in his field; but while everybody was asleep, an enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and then went away. So when the plants came up and bore grain, then the weeds appeared as well. And the slaves of the householder came and said to him, `Master, did you not sow good seed in your field? Where, then, did these weeds come from?' He answered, `An enemy has done this.' The slaves said to him, `Then do you want us to go and gather them?' But he replied, `No; for in gathering the weeds you would uproot the wheat along with them. Let both of them grow together until the harvest; and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, Collect the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn.'"

Then he left the crowds and went into the house. And his disciples approached him, saying, "Explain to us the parable of the weeds of the field." He answered, "The one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man; the field is the world, and the good seed are the children of the kingdom; the weeds are the children of the evil one, and the enemy who sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are angels. Just as the weeds are collected and burned up with fire, so will it be at the end of the age. The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will collect out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and they will throw them into the furnace of fire, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Let anyone with ears listen!"

Jesus’s favorite means of communication is through a parable, a story. The special thing about a parable is that the question of its historicity (did it really happen or is it made up?) is irrelevant. Jesus is telling a story as a metaphor, but only occasionally tells the crowd or his disciples what the metaphor is for. Even then, he is simply removing one layer of mystery.

This all seems easy enough, but we often get parables like this week’s gospel as told by the evangelist known to us as Matthew. These parables can distract us from what Jesus is really getting on about. He sets the stage by talking about the kingdom of heaven being “compared to someone who sowed good seed in his field”. Jesus then tells how “an enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat” while the people were sleeping. The slaves got up and realized that wheat and weed were mixed together.

What I find truly intriguing is that the slaves make the bold question of their master: “Master, did you not sow good seed in your field? Where, then, did these weeds come from?” Ouch!

The Master instructs his slaves to leave the weeds among the wheat and that the reapers will separate out the weeds from the wheat at the harvest. At that, Jesus stops talking to the crowd. When the disciples are alone with Jesus, they ask what it means. Jesus gives them the answer key to unlocking the parable, but it raises more questions about when, why, and how. It talks about the harvest as “the end of the age” and speaks in very apocalyptic imagery. I will get to this in a second.

I am interested in what Jesus is telling the crowd and his disciples by talking about the “weeds” and the “wheat”. It is easy enough for us to read this passage and think about the good people (usually suggesting that this means faithful Christians) are the wheat and that everyone else are the weeds. Or to simply say “good” people and “bad” people. This is easy enough. But what is Jesus telling us? In the parable to the crowd, he talks of the slaves wondering what to do with the weeds, and in Jesus’s explanation to his disciples, the slaves are not listed as representing anything, most especially zealous Christians. In fact, Jesus doesn’t appear to be instructing us to do anything here. In fact, over the question of the very nature of the field, it is not about us.

And this is where the apocalyptic talk comes in. Normally, I have a hard time figuring out the intentions of a passage like this one. In one way, it is quite explicit, almost too clear for the reader. At the same time, the vague terms such as Son of Man, kingdom, the evil one, the end of the age, and the furnace of fire. These terms give us clues to what Jesus was saying based on the Older Testament, but modern apocalypticists (such as John Hagee) are likely to put suggestions into Jesus’s mouth. This is the danger of apocalypticism.

But Jesus is using this “fiery” talk to comfort his disciples. We would see strange comfort in this, right? But it is not comfort for our intellects, but our base desires of retribution and separation. We are so worried that someone less good will get the same thing. It’s the proof that follows the “trust me”. It’s the part where Jesus says “Hey, good people have it great, bad people, well, let’s just say screaming and gnashing of teeth is only the beginning.” It’s the moment that gets the person to say “Got it, Jesus!”

So what do you make of this parable? Do you agree with my thoughts? What are your thoughts?

In a world that already separates each of us according to groups and designations, what are your thoughts about God separating us this way? Or is it a relief to know that it isn’t up to us to separate ourselves in that way?

Do you find comfort in this passage? Why or why not?

Sibling Rivalry

Text: Genesis 25:19-34

This week’s Older Testament lesson is the first story of Esau and Jacob.

Remember Abraham, father of the Jewish people? His son was Isaac, who, like Abraham, lived as the scion, the family leader. This concept comes from the place of the first-born male having a birth right. We recognize this in royal families, most famously the Tudor’s in England where Henry VIII’s pursuit of a male heir is legendary.

There is also a natural leadership position that comes from the first-born, male or female. Parents expect certain things from them, as do siblings. From my own family, I have watched as my father (the eldest of three) was given health responsibilities for his parents when they were too old to do it for themselves.

You can see how easily this can become abusive—and how girls can be rejected by this process. Regardless of your emotions about it, there is something special about all first-borns.

In this week’s reading, we get the ultimate sibling rivalry. Jacob and Esau are twins, born at virtually the same time. But Esau came through the birth canal first. Esau is the first born.

We also get a strange piece of scripture in the midst of this, when in verses 27-28 it says:

27: When the boys grew up, Esau was a skillful hunter, a man of the field, while Jacob was a quiet man, living in tents.

28: Isaac loved Esau, because he was fond of game; but Rebekah loved Jacob.[1]

It horrifies us to think that a parent could preference one child over another. This is an uncomfortable proposition.

These elements build to the story’s conclusion when Esau trades his birth rights for a pot of stew.

• From Jacob’s perspective, he is being cunning and Esau is being foolish.
• From Esau’s perspective, he feels that he is dying and Jacob is extorting him.

Soon after, Jacob, with the help of his mother, tricks his father into giving him Esau’s blessing. This leads to the heart-breaking scene in chapter 27 in which Isaac tells Esau, despite his objections, that “I have already made him your lord, and I have given him all his brothers as servants…” And Esau pleads and weeps. It is just awful!

In the far future, decades later, the brothers reconcile. We get Jacob’s story during the interim, and he is clearly of interest to the Hebrew people. The church has since often taken Jacob’s side, as their Jewish ancestors valued his “street smarts”.

I might suggest that we look at it from Esau’s perspective. He has been wronged, and his rage sends Jacob away. In fact, over the ensuing chapters we see how sorry Jacob becomes for his treachery and how Esau not only gets over his grief, but learns to love his brother again. Like Jesus’s parable of the prodigal son, we are to examine the story as the brother that stayed behind. That we are to learn how to forgive when things don’t go our way or how we expect them to.

Think of the last time a friend did something to wrong you. Maybe s/he stole from you or maybe s/he took credit for something you did. Maybe s/he was trying to look good in front of your friends at your expense.

How did this make you feel? What emotions rose to the surface? And do they rise now in thinking about it?

What are your feelings now? Have they changed since then?

What would it mean to try to see what drove him or her to this? Was it public approval? Was it greed? Was it jealousy (of you)?

What would it take for you to forgive him or her?

Jesus calls us to reconcile with others. Even Jacob and Esau eventually reconcile. What could you do to reconcile with this person?

---

[1] Translation is NRSV.

We aren't just children, we're infants

Text: Matthew 11:16-19, 25-30

Nothing quite makes a person feel like an outsider like being a teenager. Your parents either treat you like you’re too young to know anything or too old to “act like a kid”. For some, your behavior expected and for others it is scandalous. Not to mention that peer groups make you feel like you’re the only one who feels the way you do (even when everyone does).

In the early church, adults were adults and children were property. Now, teenagers were often considered adults. But families, which included children, unmarried offspring, and any slaves, were seen as the possession of the family’s leader: the father/husband. The early church never worried about a youth program because they weren’t full members anyway.

We have hopefully learned something from this, but it sets the stage for our gospel from last Sunday. In it, Matthew wrote that Jesus was talking to the crowd and uses this to insult them: he calls them children. He asks “To what will I compare this generation?” and his response is children. Jesus then says:

`We played the flute for you, and you did not dance;

we wailed, and you did not mourn.'

In calling the people children, Jesus is saying something about the people AND about children. He is saying that, like children, the people are selfish and self-centered. They expect others to dance for their own amusement and to care for them when they cry. It is this selfish expectation that Jesus is condemning.

But I can’t help but read the slight that is inherent to this suggestion. Jesus is suggesting that children are all selfish and self-centered; that children are the insult to which these people could be compared.

These suggestions are easy because children don’t have enough advocates or often a means to defend themselves or a voice in society. For Jesus to use age and personal development as an insult is cruel and mean-spirited.

Jesus throws us for a loop, though, because in the second half of the passage he is telling the crowd that they are children. He isn’t saying them that they should “act childish”, a euphemism for being self-centered and demanding, but that in relationship to God we are all children. That young or old, we are just as naïve and ignorant as when we are born. In fact, we aren’t just children, we are infants. We are small children, whose struggles are learning to walk and talk, to play and to share, to love and to reason. That our problems are that elemental.

In what other ways are we still infants? What are the things that we still need to learn from our parent (God)? What are some of the things that God has tried to teach us that we seem to have trouble getting?

In what ways are you still an infant? With which elements do you still struggle? With which parts of reading and writing (communication) do you struggle? And playing? And sharing? And loving?

Deplorable, despicable, and dastardly

Text: Genesis 22:1-14

I love Genesis. I find the first stories of our community so powerful. Reading the creation story, Noah, the tower of Babel, the journey of Abram and Sarai. I love these stories.

But not this one.

This one I hate. I hate in the same way that I love the others: in that purely emotional way. In that way that you reserve for things that confuse, irritate, and appall you. This story I despise.

This story is Abraham’s near sacrifice of his son, Isaac. It is the story in which we get exposition describing Abraham, leading his son up the mountain. Imagine that he’s telling him “Son, we’re going for a walk. Not just any walk, but a big adventure! We’re going to search for a temple full of gold!” while knowing what is really going to happen. Then when they get to the top, Abraham builds an altar and straps his son to it, all the while saying something akin to “Son, we’re only taking a break. The temple of gold is right around the corner.” Abraham grabs the giant knife, takes it behind his head and…he’s stopped by an angel. The scene is chilling—and seems straight out of a movie. But we are supposed to be grateful that God provides. We are to be thankful that God spared Isaac. We are taught to have that same devotion as Abraham’s—whatever that really means. But I don’t want that. I don’t want to be prepared to do such an obscene and abhorrent (and aberrant?) thing as to murder my own child. I refuse to do that.

If you take this story at face value, it is as small and petty as they come. In showing God as demanding the unthinkable (unspeakable?) from Abraham, it makes God into an abusive and emotionally stunted father, beating his favorite child. Read literally, this depiction of God is completely unlovable.

But as we see in the stories that surround it (Cain, Noah, Lot, etc.), and look at the ‘meta-narrative,’ we get a different view of God: a God that learns and loves as we do. God bargains with Lot and makes promises to humanity in the form of covenants. God endeavors to think, trust, argue, despair. We learn that God isn’t perfect if it means an absence of emotions. God isn’t perfect if it implies distance and cold analytical skills. What would it mean to simply say “God isn’t perfect”?

In our postmodern world, it is hard to read this story as its first hearers would have understood it. We think that there are certain things that are out of bounds—they depict poor taste, or are “cheap and tawdry”. But we often use extreme notions and hyperbole to approximate the intensity of our points [if you don’t believe me, watch Fox News and see who gets compared to Hitler and what government program gets described as “socialist”]. To say that our devotion to God must approximate willingness to murder just seems out of bounds today. In fact, it is just such an example that supports abuse and the worst of our evils.

For the intended audience, the story isn’t about Abraham or Isaac, but God. It is about how God loves, what God expects, and how small we are next to God.

What do you struggle with? What matters of faith drive you crazy? What keeps you from “getting” a piece of scripture?

Take some time to imagine what it means if God is a little bit jealous and a little bit weird. Does this change your feelings toward God? Does it worry you? Or does it comfort you?

Jesus and authenticity

Texts: Genesis 12:1-9 & Matthew 9:9-13, 18-26

We are greeted by a couple of interesting lessons for this Sunday.

At our Wednesday night service, I reminded the people assembled that they are church, not the building that is the meeting place. In fact, our church buildings seem to serve us as the Temple; as a means of distracting our attention.

How easy is it for us to look at the stuff of our worship? How easy is it to look at stained-glass, altars, vestments, and holy hardware as what makes St. David’s a church. But what makes it a church is the people gathered together, in at least twos and threes. In fact, the land that is considered 1519 Elmwood is a place marker: it is not holy land in and of itself, but a place where the holy meets humanity.

On the way out, I mentioned that I loved the passage from Genesis where Abram is wandering on his desert journey and makes an altar to God, as a place marker and as a show of faith for God. How coincidental that this should be our first reading! And how appropriate! For this same confusion is explored in the gospel (conceptually, not literally).

In the gospel, Matthew describes Jesus as “walking along” and finding a man named Matthew. Jesus says to the man “Follow me.” And the man does.

The way Jesus communicated was using two methods: words and actions. For Jesus, these are always in tension, but necessarily so. In this first example, Jesus speaks and the man acts. Next, he acts and then he speaks. He sits with the undesirables; when this is brought to his attention, he says “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick.” For Jesus, you do what is needed for those that need it. But even more, we don’t expect a doctor to perform a tonsillectomy on a person whose tonsils are fine, so why do we expect Jesus to spend his time with the righteous? (us?)

The last half of the reading is a wonderful demonstration of Jesus’s earlier words. I am not compelled to wonder about the miracle of healing that Jesus performs here as much as I am the obvious illustration of his earlier point. People are coming to him for healing who need it and he declares that “Take heart, daughter; your faith has made you well.” Healing is the appropriate response to a person who needs it.

We say that those who say one thing and do another are hypocrites. We say that a person who says one thing and does nothing about it is lazy or insensitive. But isn’t this the norm? Isn’t this how we behave normally? Isn’t this what you notice about your teachers, parents, public officials?

The word that describes what we long for is authenticity. We want Jesus to be the authentic savior. We want God to be authentic in the way we are treated. We want the Holy Spirit to be authentically present with us. It is precisely because we worry about that authenticity in our human souls.

What are some of the ways that you and I can be more authentic? How can we apply those things that we say we believe? What changes can we make to the injustices we witness? How can we treat others with the respect to which God invites us?

Rock, Sand, and Authority

Sunday’s gospel (Matthew 7:21-29) without its context may seem a bit strange. In Matthew 5, Jesus

“went up the mountain; and after he sat down, his disciples came to him. Then he began to speak, and taught them”.

Beginning what is known as the Sermon on the Mount: the most prodigious teaching of Jesus’s entire ministry. He begins with what we know as The Beatitudes with some of our most cherished teachings such as verse 5: “Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth”: and verse 9: “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God”.

This “sermon” dealt with how we ought to behave (more generous and joyful than pious) and what we should do (love God and show mercy). It represents the closest thing to Jesus speaking to us directly: it approximates the lives that all of us should lead.

Over the course of three full chapters, Jesus’s teachings go on until we get to the end of chapter 7. Here, in verses 21-27, we have the “so what now” part of the speech. It’s Jesus saying “Did you get all of that? I’m not messing around!” Then he suggests that any “who hears these words…and acts on them will be like a wise man who built his house on rock” as opposed to the fool who builds his house on sand. To Jesus, those ‘words’ were the three preceding chapters! He is finally concluding his sermon!

Then the writer gives us an interesting note at the end of the reading:

²⁸Now when Jesus had finished saying these things, the crowds were astounded at his teaching, ²⁹for he taught them as one having authority, and not as their scribes.

The scribes had a specific job at that time. They were among the only people that could read and write, so they copied the Bible by hand, often making notes in the margins and sometimes correcting mistakes they found or “improving” the language. They had a truly powerful job as a gatekeeper to the sacred Scriptures. It also meant that they were virtually the only ones outside of rabbis and rabbinic students that would even read the Scriptures! A scribe’s job, however, wasn’t interpreting Scripture or having a relationship with God; it was simply working with the text as it was written.

We come to the Bible like those scribes. Our understanding is limited—we haven’t gone through the strict rabbinic training—nor could we claim Jesus’s knowledge of God. Adults in your religious community, as well as priests and pastors have a lot more in common with the scribes than they do with Jesus.

Perhaps that is what those people recognized when they were “astounded at his teaching”. They saw Jesus as not just some guy that really “gets” the Scripture, but being well beyond those scribes: “as one having authority”.

Who do you see “as one having authority” in your life? How do you relate to her/him?

Read The Beatitudes in Matthew 5:3-12. What do you think Jesus was saying? These are the first words of the Sermon on the Mount. How do you think these statements affect all of the teachings that follow? What can you take out of this teaching for your life?

Safeguarding God's Children

We all know how important it is to keep our children safe. We also know that it is so often up to us to make their safety a priority. This training in "safe church" is for anyone that works with children and youth in a church setting. It is for teachers, leaders, and volunteers.

Safeguarding God’s Children

Saturday, June 28 (register by June 20)

St. Barnabas, Portage

Certification Workshop 9:00am-12:00pm

Train-the-Trainers Seminary 9:00am - 2:00pm

We are holding a Safeguarding God's Children Certification Workshop & Train-the-Trainers Seminar. This is a great time to have all of the teachers for your Vacation Bible School & fall Sunday School teachers certified.

Have you considered becoming a trainer for this program? We are looking for people who have a passion for children's safety to become trainers for the Diocese. Once trained, you will be able to have certification workshops in your parish (with a trained co-trainer). To become a trainer, you must have a recommendation from your rector (or senior warden if you are between rectors - or from the Bishop if you are a priest).

To see more information, please go here: http://www.edwm.org/myp/SafeguardingGodsChildren.htm

If you are interested in participating, I would encourage you to contact the church office at 517-323-2272 or by e-mail.

Camp Staff Still Needed

The Diocese of Western Michigan is looking for camp leaders. Here is their appeal:

The camper registration are flying in for the Episcopal Youth Camp 2008! The theme for the year is Light the Fire, and we will be looking at how God lights a fire in us & how we can bring it out into the world.

We are still looking for staff, especially men. The boys of our Diocese need male Christian role models, and we are looking for men who would like to serve in this way.

We are also looking for nurses & a musician for senior camp.

Senior Camp - August 3-9

Junior Camp - August 10-16

Qualifications? You must be age 18 or over (and out of high school) to serve at Junior Camp & 21 or over to serve at Senior Camp - but we are really looking for parent-aged people. We offer a "Pumpkin Patch", for parents who have children not yet old enough to be a camper. You also must be ready to have fun - go swimming or canoeing, go on hikes or do archery, play music or play games. We are looking for people that are ready to serve God. Without you, we will not be able to have a camp this summer!

To find out more information, please go to this website or contact Gennie Callard (269-381-2710 or gcallard@edwm.org): http://www.edwm.org/myp/camp/.

Pentecost is here!

My parents love A Prairie Home Companion, the radio show on NPR. It's an old-time variety show from Minnesota. I grew up listening to it virtually every Saturday night or Sunday afternoon of my childhood. I sometimes listen to it now and think that my parents are listening to it right then. It makes me feel close to them.

In one memberable show, the host, Garrison Keillor, suggested that spring makes us do stupid things. It's something about the warming temperature that makes our brains go all screwy. Well, he used that rationale to prove that his ancestors were smart in moving to Minnesota where it's cold, versus Florida, where they would be stupid all the time. It was a funny show--and has clearly stuck with me over the years. Mostly because there is one truth: warm weather does seem to make us stupid.

I think it has something to do with that long, cold winter we get in Michigan and the first time the temperature jumps into the 60's, we strip down and run around like sun-worshipers. We break out our sunglasses, shorts, t-shirts, and flip flops. We like to be seen loving the sun as much as we actually want to be out in it. And every year, I get that same urge.

For churches, they made some easy decisions well before there was a "summer vacation" by putting Advent/Christmas at the beginning of winter and Lent/Easter at the beginning of spring. But, as the summer expands to engulf the months of May and September, we are left uninspired for the one church day that is closest to directly affecting us: Pentecost. On this one day, we celebrate the Holy Spirit's interaction with the church. It has the vivid imagery of the tongues aflame! It has the vivid reds and the pomp of our greatest services in the church year. And yet...it sure is nice out. It sure is appealing to ignore the motivating and brilliant directions of the Spirit in the midst of our regrowing Eden around us. But come to church for this. Feel the electricity of Pentecost! Yes, it is also Mother's Day, but Mom's, share the celebration this time. Let us feel alive in the Spirit!

For a good, short discussion about Pentecost, take a look at the Presiding Bishop's letter about Pentecost. It is outstanding.

Vacation Bible School begins in June!

St. David's will once again be hosting a Vacation Bible School (VBS) beginning on Monday, June 9th.

For further information, check out the VBS website at here or type in the following address: https://www.groupvbs.com/webtoybox/myvbs/stdavids08.

Please join us!

Moving Through the Gate

for Fourth Sunday of Easter
Text: John 10:1-10

The readings for this Sunday all have to do with the Good Shepherd. We like to think of Jesus that way, leading the flock of sheep. This is an important image for us. We imagine him in the parable of the lost sheep, in which it is suggested that going after the one lost sheep is more important than protecting the other 99. A stained glass window from my childhood illustrates Jesus carrying a lamb around the back of his neck. This image is always with us. It comforts us because we often feel lost and confused as those sheep.

But our gospel from John tips this on its side. Jesus isn't the shepherd, but something else. He tells them "Very truly, I tell you, I am the gate for the sheep." and that "Whoever enters by me will be saved, and will come in and go out and find pasture." Jesus reveals that he is not a shepherd, but the instrument of containing and freeing. God is the shepherd. God leads his flock from danger into the safety of the fenced in area. God also releases that flock into the freedom of the field.

I was recently reminded of the difference between sheep herding in the West (Europe and North America) versus the East (Middle East and on) is this: in the West, we drive our sheep from behind (like cattle) with dogs. We direct through vocal and physical commands. In the East, the shepherd leads the flock from the front, giving the sheep a visual cue of where to go.

Sometimes we see our faith like that sheepdog, driving us into a fenced-in area that is barren--we've already eaten most of the grass and it is so confining! We long for that guidance--that visual sign that we are doing things right! But what does this really look like? What if we aren't really the sheep in the story? What if we don't have to be the stupid follower, but have the opportunity to do something much greater? Would you take the challenge of being greater?

Friday - Sunday

These two days, Good Friday and Easter, serve as an insuperable center for our understanding of who we are as Christians. We are at once informed by the actions of Friday and what they meant two days later because of that day's actions. Referring to one iwthout the other is not only useless, it is in many ways dishonest.

Several years ago, I defended Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ to my friends. I thought he had every right to make a movie that told only the story of Good Friday. Just because he told the first half of the story, however, that doesn't mean that he has told a sufficient story. It's like following the story of Frodo and the ring but ignoring the journey to Mount Doom, or talking about Spider-man in reference to the death of Uncle Ben, while ignoring his internal struggle of what to do with his new powers.

On Friday of Holy Week, Jesus died. He was executed in a rebel's way (crucifixion) and his body was laid in a tomb. That was the first day. On the third day (Sunday), he had left the tomb. Mary Magdalene and two other women had come to see him, but the stone had been rolled away and Jesus was gone. Jesus appeared to Mary and told her to go ahead and tell the disciples that he would be with them in Galilee (in Luke's gospel, he says he will meet them in Jerusalem).

What does this story mean to you? How does hearing it again affect/change the way you see Jesus? Do you ever think about what the death of Jesus meant to the disciples and the other followers (including Mary)?

Jesus was followed by many people, including women. His ministry was (and is) to help those that aren't seen in our society. This was very appealing to women, as they had little power in either the Jewish or Roman cultures. Who are people that you have seen that need your help? Who are the people that need to be heard? What can you do to make that happen?

Finally...the beginning

It is hard to think of Maundy Thursday as anything but the beginning of the story. Mostly because we fast forward through all of the important parts that are full of talking to get to the action. And as far as action goes, Thursday's got it.

On Wednesday, Jesus is annointed. Thursday, he gets up and tells two of his disciples to go find a good place to share the Passover meal. Then they all meet for Passover, the most important Jewish holiday. Jesus, in sharing what we know as the Last Supper provides us with such rich imagery and gives us the language we use in our Eucharist. Three of the gospels show Jesus comparing the bread and wine to his flesh and his blood. These have become such powerful images for us.

John's gospel has a unique element that isn't in any other book of the Bible: a footwashing. Jesus asks to wash the feet of the disciples, demonstrating the way he saw leadership: to lead, you must serve. He was their rabbi, their teacher. He was "supposed" to tell them to wash his feet, and they would have scrambled to be the one to do it. But instead, Jesus asks to wash their feet--showing the disciples, and us today--what it really means to do what God has called us to do.

Jesus also does a strange thing and points out that one of the twelve will betray him to the authorities. We know who that is to be: Judas. So that night, he brings some soldiers into the Garden of Gethsemane and has Jesus arrested. Jesus is brought before the high priest of the temple and condemned to death--not something that a Jewish high priest would ordinarily do. At the sight of the soldiers, the disciples run away and don't appear in the story again until Easter.

Maundy Thursday is tough day for us. It would be easy to pin the blame here on Judas and on Jewish leaders that had Jesus arrested and killed by the Romans the following day. This would make us feel better, but pulls us away from the truth.

We could take this as an opportunity to condemn ourselves, saying that we are all responsible for Jesus's death--not much of a better option, either--because it wasn't people that loved him that had him killed.

So what do we make of this time? What confusions do you have about this story? Where does this leave you for Good Friday?

I find it incredibly reassuring that Jesus celebrated the Passover meal with his disciples and friends. The meal, shared in that community, was Jesus's opportunity to 'hammer home', if you will, the ideas Jesus had for us. For how we are to live with one another.

In what ways can you show leadership by serving others? Do you have any experiences in which something you've done for someone else "caught on"? Sometimes it is opening a door for someone and sometimes it is much larger than that.

Lastly, how do you see yourself preparing for Good Friday?