Daniel Berrigan, Catholic Priest and peace activist one said that the major tasks of the church were to build community, foster spiritual dsiciplines and teach bible literacy.
The first task of reading the Bible is to ask why it was written. What was the experience of the authors that had moved them to write as they did ? And the second task is to ask what relevance it might have for us today.
It’s bible literacy that I’ve been thinking about as I’ve been listening to the first two chapters of Mark’s Gospel this week. Here is Mark chapter 1:40-45
40 A leper came to him begging him, and kneeling he said to him, ‘If you choose, you can make me clean.’ 41 Moved with pity, Jesus stretched out his hand and touched him, and said to him, ‘I do choose. Be made clean!’ 42 Immediately the leprosy left him, and he was made clean. 43 After sternly warning him he sent him away at once, 44 saying to him, ‘See that you say nothing to anyone; but go, show yourself to the priest, and offer for your cleansing what Moses commanded, as a testimony to them.’ 45 But he went out and began to proclaim it freely, and to spread the word, so that Jesus could no longer go into a town openly, but stayed out in the country; and people came to him from every quarter.
In verse 41, we read that Jesus was moved with pity. But in other, possibly earlier manuscripts, Jesus is moved with anger.
If that is so, then is it possible that those who were copying out the manuscripts thought that pity was more in line with who they though Jesus was ?
If the original meaning was that Jesus is somehow angry, then who is he angry with, and why. Many commentators are clear that a major theme (or maybe The Major Theme) of Mark’s Gospel is the conflict between Jesus and the authorities. The Scribes and the Pharisees. It’s easy to see this conflict building up as the Gospel account moves on.
So to suggest that Jesus is angry with the religious powers fits the narrative, and the idea that Jesus is angry here is very possible, even likely.
Why ? Because as the narrative moved on, we see that the priests enter the story. Ched Myers suggests that the man has already been to the priests to be delcared clean, and has been turned away. Jesus is effectively saying – the religious powers are not the only ones that have authority. They cling to their power for fear that anyone else might make a decision for themselves. If the priests can persuade the people that they (the priests) are the only ones that can declare someone clean, then they hold onto a great deal of influence over people’s daily lives.
Jesus will have none of that. A central part of his mission is to open up a way to God that does not rely on the power of a priest. His activity, out and about in the towns and the villages, far from the temple, is showing that God is working anywhere and everywhere, and God doesn’t need a priest to be the one who decides if someone can be accepted in the community.
Very soon after this incident in the Gospel, Jesus will send out the 12 with authority to announce the message and heal wherever they go. You can do this too!
And so can we.
Grace and Peace.
Category: Bible
No Room At The Inn ?
Some friends and I have some Iranian folk we have been getting to know over the last 8 months or so. They are here in the UK because they are Christians, and it’s not safe for them in Iran. Their stories are difficult to hear, as they have weighed up the cost of leaving and the cost of staying, and in the end, made the decision to come to this country.
So we had all been invited round to H and S’s for an early Christmas dinner to give our Iranian friends a taste of Roast Chicken and all the trimmings, yes, including sprouts, and with Christmas pudding to follow.
When we meet up each week we always spend some time looking at the Bible, and today we read parts of the accounts of Jesus’ birth from Luke and Matthew’s Gospel.
Luke 2 verse 7:
7 And she gave birth to her firstborn son and wrapped him in bands of cloth, and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the inn.
We were asked to consider why it was that there was nowhere for them to stay ? After all, we are told earlier in verses 3 & 4 that Joseph was returning to Bethlehem for the census, because that was where his family were from. He would almost certainly have had cousins, or uncles and aunts living in Bethlehem, or at least visiting for the purpose of the census.
So why were they having trouble finding somewhere to stay ? The popular idea, arising from a mistranslation, is that they went to try and stay at an inn, but had to sleep in the stable because there were no rooms available. Remember all those nativity plays where there’s an innkeeper who send them to the stable ?
The mistranslated word is the word ‘inn.’ There is another word that would have been used if the writer had actually meant ‘inn or hostelry.’ The correct translation would be more like ‘guest room.’
This makes much more sense than Joseph and Mary traipsing around Bethlehem looking for a pub with spare rooms. It’s more likely that they have gone to the house of a relative, and been told that although the guest room is already taken, they can sleep in that part of the house where the animals are kept.
But another question arises. Why would someone from your extended family make you sleep with animals when you are clearly heavily pregnant ?
To understand that, we need to look at Matthew’s account of the birth.
Matthew 1 verses 18 and 19
18 Now the birth of Jesus the Messiah[i] took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been engaged to Joseph, but before they lived together, she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit. 19 Her husband Joseph, being a righteous man and unwilling to expose her to public disgrace, planned to dismiss her quietly.
In Matthew’s Gospel, we read that there’s a problem with this pregnancy. Joseph and Mary are betrothed – promised to one another – but not yet married, and not yet intimate.
In a dream, Joseph is reassured that it will all be OK. He should take Mary as his wife, and bring the child up.
But even so, there was bound to be a stigma attached to the couple. here’s an unmarried couple, about to have a baby, and even worse, (if they are aware of the back story), Joseph is not the father !
So when they turn up on the cousin’s doorstep to be in Bethlehem for the census, there’s a dilemma for the cousin.
There’s the shame of giving house room to an unwed couple about to have a bastard child, but the cousin also has the strong family responsibility that will not allow him to just throw them out on to the street.
You can imagine the conversation:
1 Who is it ?
2 It’s cousin Joseph … come for the census
1 Well, invite him in then!
2 Ahh … I’m not sure we should.
1 Why’s that ?
2 He’s got someone with him – a young girl.
1 Oh. Did we know about that ?
2 I’m not sure … and there’s more …
1 Yes ?
2 She looks like she’s expecting a child.
1 So Joseph got married and didn’t tell us, or invite us to the wedding ?!
2 No, he’s not married, and he says the child is not his.
1 Hmm.
2 What shall we do ?
(Long pause and muttering that last a few minutes)
1 I suppose we’d better find a place for them to stay.
2 Yes, we should. After all, he’s family.
1 But where can they stay. The guest room wouldn’t be right.
2 No, I agree. What about with the animals ?
1 That sounds like a good idea.
2 But what about the neighbours and cousin Malachi ?
1 It’s a no win situation I’m afraid.
2 No. We can’t be seen to condone their situation …
1 But we can’t just turn them away ….
I know this is reading between the lines, but I’m guessing this is close to what was going on. Added to that – we don’t hear about family coming to visit. The first visitors were shepherds. They ranked very low on the social scale.
And the other visitors – magi (wise men) who came to visit the child probably came some time later, as it describes them coming to see a child, not a baby.
So two unlikely groups to visit the ‘new born king’ – a king who is born not in a palace, but in a humble home among animals.
So here’s the point of this blog post … better late then never.
We’re sitting there in H and S’s house, about to have our roast dinner, and we’re reading this story and thinking about it together ….
And there in front of us, in H and S’s living room, is a carved nativity set. Y, One of our Iranian friends had commented earlier, when he saw the Nativity set – Ahh, there are the Iranians …
I did a double take. Iranians ?
In Matthew’s Gospel, chapter 2, we read:
2 In the time of King Herod, after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea, wise men (astrologers) from the East came to Jerusalem, 2 asking, ‘Where is the child who has been born king of the Jews?
I know this verse well. Wise men from the East.
But what I hadn’t grasped is that these were most likely Zoroastrian priests from Iran, who had been reading the stars and seeing in them a prophecy about the birth of a new king.
It felt like a precious moment, as we remembered together that Jesus came for all in society, even to those disregarded and ignored by many.
And that Jesus came for all nations, shown to us by wise men from Iran, bringing gifts for the infant Jesus.
To be there in that room felt like an enormous privilege. As we met with 21st century Iranian Christians.
What is sobering to realise is that our Iranian friends have come to find refuge in our country, and are, like Joseph and Mary in the Gospel, often not treated with dignity, and find themselves in accommodation that is not suitable, and sometimes waiting years before their case is heard.
We pray for all our friends, and the many thousands in situation like theirs. And we pray for the nation of Iran. For peace, for an end to discrimination, imprisonments and killings. And for religious freedom.
New Wine In Old Wineskins ?
So today I wanted to try out an app I hadn’t come across before – Pray As You Go. I have been using Lection 365 for a while and wanted to see what else is out there. Pray As You Go seems to be Ignatian in style, inviting you to imagine being in the situation … today it was the Pharisees and their scribes criticising Jesus’ disciples for their eating and drinking. Before we think about the passage, just a thought about the app.
The way the app worked was very simple …
A song to listen to at the start; then the bible passage, and the invitation to imagine how you would feel if you were there, and heard what the Pharisees and their scribes said.
I felt cross with them for their attitude, but also wondered if I might agree with them ?
Then there was a short thought on the passage before another reading of the verses.
There was an invitation to imagine Jesus with you and what you might say to him.
Here’s the passage
33 Then thePharisees and their scribes said to him, ‘John’s disciples, like the disciples of the Pharisees, frequently fast and pray, but your disciples eat and drink.’ 34 Jesus said to them, ‘You cannot make wedding-guests fast while the bridegroom is with them, can you? 35 The days will come when the bridegroom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast in those days.’ 36 He also told them a parable: ‘No one tears a piece from a new garment and sews it on an old garment; otherwise the new will be torn, and the piece from the new will not match the old. 37 And no one puts new wine into old wineskins; otherwise the new wine will burst the skins and will be spilled, and the skins will be destroyed. 38 But new wine must be put into fresh wineskins. 39 And no one after drinking old wine desires new wine, but says, “The old is good.”’
Luke 5:33-39
My reflection on the passage
I was struck by the last verse … No one after drinking old wine desires new wine, but says, “The old is good.”
So what should we desire if the old wine is good ? The old wine or the new wine ?
A reasonably short rabbit hole
I thought I would look at some commentaries … You may have heard this passage preached on and heard the interpretation as follows.
The old wine is the Law, legalism, Old Covenant etc. The new wine is Jesus, grace, the Church … That is creating a clear break between Jesus and what went before.
The view that – The New Covenant Gospel of the Church Kingdom would be wasted if it was poured into the Old Covenant, Mosaic, legalistic religion of Judaism.
However, that doesn’t fit at all with verse 39 !
I fairly quickly came across this article, from Beth Immanuel Messianic Synagogue, which looked at the passage in a way I had not thought of before. Please check out the longer article there, which I will try and summarise now.
To understand this passage we need to look at it in the context of what is going on at this point in the Gospel. Jesus has just called the fishermen, and then Levi the tax collector, to follow him. Then in chapter 6, he will choose 12 apostles.
So we need to understand the incident in 5:33-39 in that light.
When the Pharisees and their scribes are critical of Jesus’ followers, they are not being critical of Jesus’ behaviour, only in his choice of followers.
In a sense, they are asking Jesus ‘Why did you pick this bunch of no-hopers, degenerates and collaborators?’
And what Jesus is saying to the Pharisees and their scribes is along the lines of:
‘If I had l called you to follow me, you wouldn’t have understood it. You are so steeped in the details of your Judaism that you would have resisted what I’m saying. The ones I have called aren’t like you. They are surely God fearing people, and many of them know the scriptures, but they’re not like you, they are open to what I’m teaching. They get it.’
It’s like this – You can’t teach an old dog new tricks.
You’re not able to hear what I’m saying because you love your traditions and your fixed way of doing things. The ones I’m calling are hungry to know God and to see God’s kingdom come, as I know many of you (Pharisees and scribes) are … but they are responding to my way of doing things and you just can’t see it … maybe one day you will.
I think we have to see these verses in the context of Jesus calling the disciples and why he chooses the ones he does. In chapter 6, when he chooses the apostles, it seems like that selection period is over and he has decided on the 12 who will take the message forward.
Old Wineskins – Those who can’t hear Jesus’ message.
Old Wine – Their ways of doing things
New Wine – Jesus’ teaching
New wineskins – Jesus’ disciples
let me know what you think …
Grace and Peace
We Step Outside The Text
My brain hurts!
I’m reading in Jeremiah … a short passage today (Jeremiah 43:1-7), raises some interesting and challenging questions.
Let me first summarise what’s happening and then think about the intent of those who wrote the text. I guess this is all about how we view scripture and how it comes to us.
Basically this is what’s happened: The forces of Babylon have finally overcome Israel and taken off most of the people into captivity in Babylon. However, there is a remnant who are still left and they are trying to decide whether to give in to The Babylonians or run to Egypt for help.
The prophet Jeremiah has been warning Israel that God’s way, and their only hope, was to surrender to Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon. (The defeat of Israel is God’s judgment for neglecting God’s commands to care for the weakest – the widow, the orphan and the stranger).
Two of the leaders of the remnant group, Azariah and Johanan, ask Jeremiah to pray to God for guidance.
Jeremiah’s answer is that God’s word is still the same. Stay in Jerusalem. If they truly want to learn to listen to God’s way, this is what they must do. But this is not what Johanan and Azariah wanted to hear.
Azariah son of Hoshaiah and Johanan son of Kareah and all the other insolent men said to Jeremiah, ‘You are telling a lie. The Lord our God did not send you to say, “Do not go to Egypt to settle there”’ ….
(In reality, they had probably already decided that they were going to lead the people to Egypt, whatever Jeremiah said, in the belief that they would be safe there).
The outcome of all this is that they ignore Jeremiah’s warning that going to Egypt will end in disaster. They decide to go to Egypt and take Jeremiah with them – possibly of his own free will, or maybe as a captive as he was against the plan – it’s not clear –
Johanan son of Kareah and all the commanders of the forces took all the remnant of Judah … everyone …. the men, the women, the children and the princesses, and came into the land of Egypt, for they did not obey the voice of the Lord.
Now … let’s step outside the text for a minute. The authors of Jeremiah are among those deported to exile in Babylon. It is during the years in exile that much of the Old Testament is written. They write from the point of view that the exile is indeed God’s judgment, and that they must use the years in exile to reflect on past failures and seek to be more faithful to God’s word.
So, as we think about the intent of the authors, it’s reasonable to suppose that they want to claim that they are the true remnant of Israel and not the group that ended up in Egypt. Their position is that they are the community that God has chosen to take forward.
So now … I’m thinking about the process that brought the text to us … a process that would have included some editing and in the end a decision that this was indeed God’s word to Israel.
Those who considered the book of Jeremiah as having authority, and included it in the Hebrew Scriptures have a particular point of view. That is … it is the voice of Jeremiah that needs to be heard.
We know that all reporting of an event is told from a point of view. There is no such thing as a totally impartial observer. In the same way, the text of Jeremiah witnesses to the conflict between Jeremiah and the Royal house of Israel, but it is not a neutral voice.
The account is presented as both political reporting and theological fidelity. No doubt there are times when political reporting is not faithful to God’s word. I would take the view that Christians who are determined to support the gun lobby, or the interests of oil and gas companies are not being faithful to the teaching of scripture.
The book of Jeremiah is presenting a political point of view and claiming that they are being faithful theologically. The authors are not neutral voices. They take up a particular standpoint. In this chapter it is that those who go to seek refuge in Egypt are being disobedient to God’s voice.
As we read it, we have a choice about what view we take. Do we trust the process that has resulted in the book as we have it ? Do we side with Jeremiah or Johanan and Azariah in this account ?
Perhaps the most important thing we can say is that the values Jeremiah holds are ones that we too want to follow. The word that comes up very often is ‘listen.’ The Hebrew word doesn’t just mean hear with your ears, it means pay attention and act accordingly. Listening is active and leads to being obedient to God’s word.
We might think that hearing God’s voice is tricky … In situations where we need guidance that might be true, but as far as understanding how we are to live, we have quite enough to go on. Perhaps the key is to make sure that we develop practices that lead to all being treated fairly and with compassion.
How To Avert The Crisis
There’s a passage I’ve been reading in the Old Testament book of Jeremiah:
The word that came to Jeremiah from the Lord, after King Zedekiah had made a covenant with all the people in Jerusalem to make a proclamation of liberty to them— 9 that all should set free their Hebrew slaves, male and female, so that no one should hold another Judean in slavery. 10 And they obeyed, all the officials and all the people who had entered into the covenant that all would set free their slaves, male or female, so that they would not be enslaved again; they obeyed and set them free. 11 But afterwards they turned about and took back the male and female slaves they had set free, and brought them again into subjection as slaves.
This story relates to part of the covenant that God had made with Israel. It concerned members of the community of Israel who for whatever reason had fallen on hard times. Maybe their crops had failed and they had been forced to sell their land to make ends meet. Or even worse, they had been forced to live as slaves to pay off a debt. Every 7th year, according to the law of Israel, their debt should be cancelled, they should no longer be slaves, and land that was forfeited should be returned to them.
The context for this passage from the book of the prophet Jeremiah is that Israel has strayed from God’s ways. They have gone after other gods to worship, and have neglected the laws concerning the care of the poor, particularly widows, orphans and foreigners.
God’s judgment on Israel is that they will suffer the consequences – and be invaded by Babylon and many of the population be taken into exile.
For much of the time, the leaders in Israel – the ruling elite of kings and priests, ignore these warnings.
But the crisis deepens. Invasion looks likely. It seems that Jeremiah’s dire warnings are true.
What to do in a such a situation. For the leadership in Israel this means trying a last ditch attempt to avert the crisis by obeying the law that God had given them and setting free the slaves that should have had their freedom in the 7th year of their slavery. It’s a cry to God to say -“OK, we’ll do as you commanded. Now please come to our help and stop this invasion.”
What happens next is that king Zedekiah reverses his decision and makes them all slaves again ! The reason is not given. It’s possible that the threat from Babylon went away, and Zedekiah thought he could get away with going back to business as usual – oppressing the poor.
Or maybe the economic situation got worse – so bad in fact that landowners needed slave labour to survive and put pressure on the king to reverse the decision.
Whatever it was, Jeremiah’s verdict is that once again the King and the ruling class have ignored God’s commands and will be judged.
That’s a long, but necessary preamble …
This incident makes me think of the Coronavirus crisis that we have lived through, and still are to some degree. In the early days, our government put in place measures to reduce the negative impact on the population by introducing the furlough arrangements, whereby the government would pay businesses to keep people on the payroll while they were not able to carry on trading. (Eg – restaurants that had to close completely in the pandemic).
Now the direct threat from Covid has reduced because of the success of the vaccination programme. It’s back to business as usual. In the immediate aftermath of Covid, the pressure was off … but the government needed to recoup as much of the financial outlay as possible. So …
We are seeing increases in National Insurance contributions, and other ways that the government are seeking to increase revenue.
Then comes another crisis … Ukraine and the consequent increases in oil and gas prices as well as effects from the grain harvests in Ukraine being disrupted.
What do we see from the government – a £150 rebate on council tax … with another sum – that will need to be paid back. For an average household, that £150 will go in two months in their increases in gas and electric bills.
Meanwhile we still read of massive bonus payments to some, while others are sitting with hot water bottles and blankets to keep warm, and relying on food banks for essentials.
Can you see the parallels ?
What happens to nations, businesses, organisations in general when those at the top are sitting pretty while the poorest struggle to survive. In the end those nations, businesses, etc will fall.
A settled social order relies on justice for the poor. Without economic justice, society eventually collapses.
What do we need ? Justice for the poorest. When do we need it ? Now !
The Last Shall Be First
I’ve been reading Jeremiah 31 today. The promise to Israel that they will return from exile.
The story of exile and homecoming is one of THE MAJOR THEMES in the Bible. A couple of things I noticed:
There are various literary devices used in scripture. Among other things, they are designed to make the message memorable, or emphasise certain aspects of the text.
For example – repeating an idea but using different words – sing, shout praise …
Or having a refrain as in Psalm 46 … ‘God is with us’
Another, perhaps less recognised literary device is to do with a mirror image structure called a chiasm
In a chiasm, you have a structure that goes something like this from Milton’s Paradise Lost:
A. Adam,
B first of men
B` to first of women,
A` Eve
There’s a nice chiasm in Jeremiah 31 that you can see here
One of the points about a chiasm is that the whole thrust of the passage is often to be found in the centre of the chiasm.
In the case of Jeremiah 31, the centre of the passage has these words.
8 See, I am going to bring them from the land of the north,
and gather them from the farthest parts of the earth,
among them the blind and the lame,
those with child and those in labour, together;
a great company, they shall return here.
9 With weeping they shall come,
and with consolations I will lead them back,
I will let them walk by brooks of water,
in a straight path in which they shall not stumble;
for I have become a father to Israel,
and Ephraim is my firstborn.
These words show us God’s heart and God’s intention for Israel. That is to restore them and bring them home. But the remarkable thing that struck me was those who are specifically mentioned as coming home. The blind and the lame, the pregnant and those in labour. That is, the most vulnerable.
God promises to become like a father to these most vulnerable of his people. They will be like the firstborn.
What an amazing thing to read and understand. God’s concern is for the weakest. As Jesus would himself demonstrate throughout his life – “the last shall be first and the first shall be last.” Or, as American priest and writer Robert Farrar Capon often wrote – God’s concern is for ‘the little, the lost, the least and the last.’
Are we able to see ourselves here in this company? Because we all need to find our way home. And maybe part of that journey home involves becoming vulnerable and surrendering our impulses to be strong and in control.
Wherever you are on this journey. Grace and Peace.
Resurrection Is The Last Word
I love it when things come together. To see God’s hand in even the smallest event.
For me, this has come in the last few days in my readings in the book of the Prophet Jeremiah.
We have just had two weeks that have been very rich with family time, but also full of travelling and busyness when there hasn’t been much time for quiet.
Now, as I write this, it’s Holy Saturday, that space between Good Friday and Easter Sunday when we remember Jesus in the tomb, and I’m hoping to capture some of the meaning of this season – moving from Lent into Easter.
I’ve been reading the book of Jeremiah since the beginning of the year, and now I’m up to chapter 30. In the last few days of my readings, there’s been a shift. From dire warnings of judgment for Israel for forsaking their God, a note of hope is creeping in.
That’s not to say that the judgment will not come.
It will.
Israel will still be sent into exile in Babylon.
Jerusalem will still be laid waste.
But God has a long term plan that involves restoration. In fact the time that Israel spends in exile will result in purification and a renewal of their faith. Read what God says to Israel in chapter 30:
Thus says the Lord:
I am going to restore the fortunes of the tents of Jacob, and have compassion on his dwellings; the city shall be rebuilt upon its mound, and the citadel set on its rightful site …… and you shall be my people, and I will be your God.
It feels so right to be reading this on the cusp of Easter Day.
Walter Brueggemann writes about this chapter of Jeremiah:
“This chapter speaks of a hope rooted in God’s own resolve and faithfulness; a hope addressed toward a people who are at the brink of despair. A hope issued in the face of their captivity in Babylon. A hope that would overcome even the utter failures of the past.”
Exile and Homecoming – A Commentary on the book of Jeremiah. page 270 (slightly amended)
The fix that we are in is essentially the same as Israel’s. We need hope in our places of despair, our sicknesses, our addictions, our slavery ….
We are tempted to respond with either blind optimism, or bleak despair. The message of Jeremiah is that there is a third way. The following verses from Jeremiah 24 tell us that hope is to be found because this renewal is a work of God, and not a human endeavour.
“I will give them a heart to know that I am the Lord; and they shall be my people and I will be their God,”
God promises that there will be a time when he will give them a new heart. God knows that on their own, Israel’s heart will not change. If they are to change, then it must be a work of God.
Jeremiah uses the image of sickness unto death in chapter 30:
For thus says the Lord: Your hurt is incurable, your wound is grievous. There is no one to uphold your cause, no medicine for your wound, no healing for you. (Jeremiah 30:12-13)
God’s people are terminally ill, beyond healing and sure to die.
But even in the face of this, God says:
“I will restore health to you, and your wounds I will heal, says the Lord” (Jeremiah 30:17)
In the end, God wills resurrection. Walter Brueggemann again:
“The future … is firmly under the rule of God … On the one hand, Israel must not deny its bleak present. On the other hand, however, it must not take the present with ultimate seriousness. God’s sure governance of the future stands as a powerful, palpable alternative to present despair.” Brueggemann p. 281
I remember nearly 20 years ago hearing Rowan Williams being interviewed. He had just been announced as the next Archbishop of Canterbury. He was asked what for him was the central message of the Christian faith. His answer was that change is possible. The resurrection of Jesus is the most powerful statement that it is possible to transform even the most hopeless situation.
It seems to me that the message of the book of Jeremiah is the same. On this Holy Saturday, as we wait for Easter Dawn, we pray for all those who are waiting and praying for change, and for God to work in resurrection power.
Grace and Peace.
Stories Of Pain And Possibility
This post is about two ways that the Christian Church typically responds to situations of pain, and how our default settings miss something vital.
Part 1: Mercy more than Justice.
In the fortnightly online discussion group that I’m a part of we’ve been thinking about ‘The Powers’ that are in play around us, and what a Christian response looks like.
In the New Testament, the powers that are at the forefront are:
1) The Jewish religious leaders and
2) Rome.
The way that Jesus responds to the power of religious leaders is something that you might be familiar with. The conflict is right there on the surface in the Gospels.
Iff we were to look a little deeper, we would see also how he challenges Roman imperialism.
(I’m just starting to read Ched Myers’ book – ‘Binding the Strong Man,‘ a political reading of Mark’s Gospel – more on that another time maybe.
It shouldn’t surprise us then that as Christians we are called to be aware of the powers around us – economic, social, political, organisational etc which are often working for the common good, but are just as, or more likely to be pursuing their own agendas.
Being aware of how the powers are at work is the first step, but if and when we judge that the powers are not aligned towards justice and peace there comes a point where some response is called for. This response could be expressed in protest, or resistance of some kind, but as I argue below, it’s more likely to be a response driven by compassion.
Just the other day, I came across this quote from Hannah Arendt, German thinker –
The antidote to evil is not goodness but reflection and responsibility. Evil grows when people “cease to think, reflect, and choose between good and evil, between taking part or resisting.”
The first part of that quote reminds us that when we see that the powers are not aligned with the Common Good, we have a choice how to respond – with goodness or responsibility.
For example, in line with the often repeated instruction in the Old Testament, we are called to look out for ‘The widow, the orphan and the stranger,’ but over the course of history I would guess that the most typical Christian response has been through acts of goodness, service and compassion – binding up the broken hearted, healing the sick and so on, rather than through a commitment to justice.
We see the compassion response in the foundation of hospitals, hospices and a host of other projects that are driven by a Christian impulse to serve – especially those who are suffering. I would argue that the mandate to justice as well as mercy has often been forgotten, because it’s easier to help people than to buck the system. It’s easier to patch things up than getting to the root of the problem.
Part 2: Individual more than Collective.
There’s a second emphasis in the usual Christian response that I want to point out, and that’s our fixation with the individual. Not only do we find it easier to be compassionate than to confront, we tend to focus on our individual responsibility to change and be a part of bringing about change rather than seek a collective way.
I refer here to an earlier post when I quoted Walter Brueggemann’s assertion that the foundational work of transformation is not to be found in individual action as much as in Liturgy and Organising.
That is the work that we do when we are bound together in action to resist the powers, together with the organising that makes that happen.
In the context of Christian worship, I’m trying to pay attention to the different ways that we use liturgy, and how we read the scriptures, and how that might speak into a discussion on ‘The Powers.’
So, for example, in the Anglican tradition, there is a prayer of confession, usually at the beginning of a service. Here’s an example that is used most often.
Almighty God, our heavenly Father,
we have sinned against youand against our neighbour
in thought and word and deed,
through negligence, through weakness,through our own deliberate fault.
We are truly sorryand repent of all our sins.
For the sake of your Son Jesus Christ,who died for us,
forgive us all that is past and grant that we may serve you in newness of life
to the glory of your name. Amen.
We are often encouraged to reflect on the past week, to call to mind the things we have done, thought or said that we regret, and those good things that we didn’t do. The prayer is all about getting ourselves ‘right with God’ before we continue in worship.
It’s all very individualistic. It tends to lead to a spirituality that is focussed too much on ‘sin’ and ‘me’ and the things in my life that need putting right. In the Bible, sin is a problem, but it’s not the only problem.
Two of the central stories in the Old Testament for example are:
The story of liberation from slavery in Egypt – that speaks to our bondage to the powers around us.
The story of exile and return – that speaks to our longing for home.
A suggestion put by Marcus Borg, in his book ‘Speaking Christian,’ is that we give less airtime to the prayer of confession, by using it maybe once every five weeks, and for the other weeks, replacing the confession of sin with images of our predicament as slavery, exile, blindness, sickness etc. “Imagine the absolution replaced by the proclamation that God wills our liberation from slavery, our return from exile, our seeing again, our healing and wholeness. Sin matters, but when it and the need for forgiveness become the dominant issue of our life with God, it reduces and impoverishes the wisdom and passion of the Bible and the Christian tradition.”
Speaking Christain p.152
In addition, when thinking about how we read scripture, I would suggest that in many (most ?) Christian worship services, the sermon will read the Bible through a very personal and also individual lens. Even the teaching about how we serve God will be likely focussed on what we as individuals can/should do.
This is of course tied to the point about confession made just now. If our obsession is with sin, and putting our personal relationship with God right, then it follows that the teaching in our churches will be aimed at keeping us on the right track with God, and serving God by ‘loving our neighbour.’
(This was brought home to me as I was listening yesterday to the Archbishop of Canterbury interviewing writer Stephen King. Stephen King talked freely about his faith in God, portraying it as a personal matter, that seemed to have little to do with what goes on in the world. He quoted Jesus saying ‘Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and the things that are God’s to God,’ as a way of justifying keeping religion separate from politics. Keep God out of politics).
In the time of the gospel writers, the power that was calling for total allegiance was Rome and the Emperor. When Jesus contrasts Caesar and God, he is setting before us two complete opposites. Are we to say ‘Caesar is Lord ?’ or ‘Jesus is Lord.’ To put God first will mean that Christians are called to engage the powers of the day.
Perhaps the way we go about ‘confession’ in our worship and the treatment of scripture can help redress imbalance, moving the focus from the individual to point us towards the more collective pains, ills and injustices in the world.
If you are a church goer, you might want to pay particular attention to the way that the prayer of confession and the use of scripture are experienced in your worship services.
To what extent, if any, do they address the questions of the powers, and issues beyond our individual response ?
How as communities can we resist and challenge those powers that call for our allegiance, rather than God’s ?
Praying For The Ukrainian People
Today I read these words from the Prophet Jeremiah chapter 11:
God told me what was going on. That’s how I knew. You, God, opened my eyes to their evil scheming.
I had no idea what was going on—naive as a lamb being led to slaughter!
I didn’t know they had it in for me, didn’t know of their behind-the-scenes plots:
“Let’s get rid of the preacher. That will stop the sermons!
Let’s get rid of him for good. He won’t be remembered for long.”
Then I said, “God-of-the-Angel-Armies, you’re a fair judge.
You examine and cross-examine human actions and motives.
I want to see these people shown up and put down! I’m an open book before you. Clear my name.”
The people of Anathoth, the home town of the prophet Jeremiah, want to silence him.
Jeremiah is unaware of this until God shows him the truth.
Then he realises their plan to get rid of him.
He appeals to God and God’s justice.
We were not unaware of Putin’s plan, but we did not want to think it would happen. Now it has.
This is my prayer, as we also appeal to God for justice.
The name Putin is derived from put – путь, the Russian word for ‘way.’
Pravda – Правда is Russian for truth
Zhizn – Жизнь is Russian for life
We pray to the LORD of hosts
The LORD-of-the angel-armies
Not to come against might with more might
But to raise up the people of Russia in resistance.
To reveal the bare pravda
To see false, fake rulers standing naked
Hands tied behind their backs
Their power and glory stripped.
We pray to the LORD of hosts
The LORD-of-the angel-armies
To raise up the people of the earth in solidarity
To reveal the Pravda and the true Put
To see the people of Ukraine delivered from evil
Once more able to live Zhizn openly and spontaneously
Not cautiously and warily.
Pray for the peace of Ukraine
Prosperity to all you Ukraine lovers
Friendly insiders, get along!
Hostile outsiders, keep your distance!
For the sake of my family and friends,
I say it again: live in peace!
(The last section is From The Message translation of Psalm 122 in the Jewish Scriptures)
A Boundary For The Sea
We’ve been watching ‘The Sinner’ in the last week. Series 4. It’s a crime drama set in Maine, USA, and stars Bill Pullman.
The main character, Percy Muldoon, is a woman in her 20’s and is very troubled by something in her past. Her uncle Colin is trying to help her recover her catholic faith and one scene shows them repeating these words together.
“I placed the sand as a boundary for the sea,
a perpetual barrier that it cannot pass …”
I didn’t recognise the words, but thought they were probably from the psalms.
Weirdly, I came across the exact same words the following day, as I came to the next section of Jeremiah in my daily prayers. (I’m reading through Jeremiah a few verses a day).
When I experience an extraordinary coincidence like this (serendipity), I try to be alert to what God might be saying. The conclusion I came to was to write a post about it in the hope that it might speak to someone.
In “Praying with the Prophets,” Eugene Peterson comments on this verse – “Oceans and lakes know and respect the boundaries set for them by God. Why will not human beings do the same ? But everywhere there are people who scorn and flout guidelines of justice and gratitude, compassion and generosity.”
The consequences of living outside the boundaries that God has given us are that our lives go out of alignment, and on a macro level, we see injustice spreading and the earth itself groaning.
Eugene Peterson’s prayer following his comment in this verse:
Dear God, I want to live in harmony with what you have created in and around me, not at odds with it. I want to increase in wisdom and stature, in favour with God and humanity. (Luke 2:52)”
Five Short Words 