Archive for the ‘Luke’s gospel’ Category

Newer Entries »

The wilderness of our hearts

February 16, 2013

Lent 1 – 2013

Luke 4:1-13

Marian Free

 

In the name of God who longs for us to see ourselves more clearly and having done so to submit ourselves to the transforming power of God. Amen.

‘Sugar and spice and all things nice, that’s what little girls are made of. Slugs and snails and puppy dog tails, that’s what little boys are made of.’ To think that many of us used to recite this silly, sexist rhyme! But what are we made of? Beyond the obvious skin and bones, do many of us really know what lies beneath? Do we really know our strengths and recognise our weaknesses? Do we know what triggers or events might lead us to act nobly and selflessly? Alternately, can we begin to imagine forces or situations which would lead us to behave basely or cruelly?

I suspect that it is impossible to know ahead of time how we will react in situations that demand courage, resilience or moral fortitude. Fear, timidity and an unwillingness to stand out from the crowd can prevent people from acting as they should or worse, they can cause people to behave in ways that are cowardly, cruel and self-serving. History is littered with instances of good people failing to act in the face of evil. The past is crowded with examples of a mob mentality leading otherwise reasonable people to behave in violent or rash ways. The world stood silent in the face of the Nazi gas chambers and still seems unable to act against oppressive or unjust regimes.  The insanity of the mob leads to disregard for law and order and the destruction of property as was witnessed in Brixton, in Cronulla and elsewhere.

After the event, those who were silent might say: “I was too afraid to speak out.” Those who were caught up with the crowd might respond: “I thought they would kill me if I didn’t join in.” There is always a reason or justification for such behaviour. No one likes to believe that they deliberately acted in a way that led to or contributed to another’s injury or harm or which saw another abased or killed because of their failure to act. No one likes to think that they could have a propensity for cruelty or indifference, that they would join in with the crowd or that they would stand silent in the face of grave injustice.

On the other hand, the past is equally populated with ordinary people who, in the face of danger, have exhibited extraordinary courage and who have risked their own safety to save the life of another – the by-stander who pulls a person from a burning car, the surfer who without thought rushes to the aid of someone attacked by a shark, the solider who exposes him or herself to enemy fire, to save another who is injured or dying. Every day, in a variety of different circumstances, people like you and I show what they are really made of. When asked about their heroic acts, such people often reply: “I didn’t think – I just did what needed to be done.” They don’t think of themselves as heroes because their action was so spontaneous. Until confronted with the situation they may not have known that they had such courage in them.

Some among us may have faced such challenges and may have confidence to know how they will respond in the face of danger or when someone is needed to speak out. Others of us can only imagine and hope that we would meet every difficulty and danger with grace, that even at the cost of our own lives we would challenge oppression, cruelty and injustice and that we would seek to heal and be healed, to understand and forgive (even if at first sight, healing, understanding and forgiveness is impossible to imagine).

The sad reality is that apathy, cruelty and lust for power exist side by side with integrity, compassion and selflessness in every human being and until we are tested we cannot be 100% sure how we will respond. Fortunately, it is not often that we are put to the test.

For Jesus it was different. Jesus had a very particular task. Jesus was called by God to serve God in the world and to bring about the salvation of humankind. This was a task that could only be achieved if Jesus was prepared to submit his life completely to God. Anything less would jeopardise the whole endeavour. His was a weighty responsibility. Jesus (and perhaps God) had to be sure that he was up to the task. He (and God) had to know that when it came to the crunch, he would not bow down to earthly authority, he would not waver in the face of opposition and he would not give up before the job was complete.

There was no opportunity for a dress rehearsal. Jesus only had one chance. When the moment came to be strong, to speak out or to suffer, Jesus had to know that he would not back down but would continue on the path that was set before him. So the spirit led him to the wilderness – to the emptiness and silence, to a place where there were no distractions, nothing to take his mind off himself, no social structures to ensure that his baser instincts were suppressed. In the desert then, Jesus came up against the darker side of himself. Deprivation and isolation brought to the surface ideas that may, until then, have been suppressed. He could do so much with the power that was his! Given who he was and the power that was at his disposal, it would have been easy for him to be self-serving (to use his gifts to enrich himself). Given God’s love and care for him, it would have been easy for him to take risks with his own safety, to force God to always be on the look out for him, protecting him and keeping him out of harm’s way. Then again, he could use his power for his own aggrandisement, he could force the world to bow to him and not to God.

Jesus heard the voice of his “other self”, the voice of temptation whispering in his ear – what he could do if he wanted to! He knew though, that this was not the self that he wanted to be – a self separated from and in competition with God. Using the words of scripture he pushed the other voice out of the picture and demonstrated that he could withstand every test and that he was ready to answer the call of God.

Finding out who we are and of what we are capable is one of the goals of Lent. Through fasting or prayer or giving up something that we thought we could do not without we create space in our lives. We make our own small internal wilderness and we can be surprised by what longings, what emotions, what insecurities rise to the surface.

In the stillness of this wilderness it is harder to escape from who we are. In the silence of this desert it is harder to quell thoughts we would rather ignore. In this place, without our usual distractions, we can come face-to-face with who we really are.

We can spend a lifetime running away from ourselves, avoiding our deeper issues, burying parts of ourselves that we wish were not there at all or we can take time out, have the courage to see who and what we really are and with the help of God dispel the demons that drive us and build up the character that we want to define us

Tags:, , , , , ,
Posted in Lent, Luke's gospel | Comments Off on The wilderness of our hearts

An Extraordinary story

February 9, 2013

Epiphany 5

Luke 5:1-10

Marian Free

 

In the name of God who calls us, imperfect though we are, to follow Jesus and to share the gospel with others. Amen.

Those among you whose enjoy puzzles will know the “Find the Difference” puzzles. Even those who do not enjoy puzzles may have had to find the difference between two pictures as part of their early schooling. If you don’t know what I’m talking about, the puzzle involves two almost identical pictures which are placed side by side. The observer is asked to find the differences. Usually, if there are say, ten differences, the first seven or so are relatively easy – the dog is black in picture (a) and white in picture (b), a cloud in picture (a) is missing in picture (b) and so on. However, the last couple of differences tend to be more subtle and are often overlooked. For example, the curtain in picture (a) has four pleats and in picture (b) it only has four.

It is a different exercise, but we can play “find the difference” using the gospels. Placing one or more gospel passages side by side allows us to note the different ways in which Jesus’ life and teaching is recorded by the different authors. For example, last week we noticed how differently Luke presents the account of Jesus in the synagogue and we made some educated guesses as to the reason for the differences. In his re-telling of the story, Luke is influenced by his social justice programme and his desire to demonstrate that the inclusion of the Gentiles was always part of God’s plan.

Having noted that Luke has a different agenda, it will therefore come as no surprise to note that Luke’s report of the call of Peter, Andrew, James and John is also quite different from that of Mark. This week we will have a look at the actual texts. (You might like to see how many differences you can spot.)

Mark 1:16-20 As Jesus passed along the Sea of Galilee, he saw Simon and his brother Andrew casting a net into the sea—for they were fishermen. And Jesus said to them, “Follow me and I will make you fish for people.” And immediately they left their nets and followed him. As he went a little farther, he saw James son of Zebedee and his brother John, who were in their boat mending the nets. Immediately he called them; and they left their father Zebedee in the boat with the hired men, and followed him.

Luke 5:1-10 Once while Jesus was standing beside the lake of Gennesaret, and the crowd was pressing in on him to hear the word of God, he saw two boats there at the shore of the lake; the fishermen had gone out of them and were washing their nets. He got into one of the boats, the one belonging to Simon, and asked him to put out a little way from the shore. Then he sat down and taught the crowds from the boat. When he had finished speaking, he said to Simon, “Put out into the deep water and let down your nets for a catch.” Simon answered, “Master, we have worked all night long but have caught nothing. Yet if you say so, I will let down the nets.” When they had done this, they caught so many fish that their nets were beginning to break. So they signalled their partners in the other boat to come and help them. And they came and filled both boats, so that they began to sink. But when Simon Peter saw it, he fell down at Jesus’ knees, saying, “Go away from me, Lord, for I am a sinful man!” For he and all who were with him were amazed at the catch of fish that they had taken; and so also were James and John, sons of Zebedee, who were partners with Simon. Then Jesus said to Simon, “Do not be afraid; from now on you will be catching people.”

In comparing the readings we note, as we might expect, that Luke has expanded and elaborated Mark’s account. Another obvious difference is that the sea is given a different name. In Mark, Jesus walks by the Sea of Galilee, in Luke, the crowds press in on Jesus at the lake of Gennesaret. In Mark Peter and Andrew are fishing from the shore, James and John are mending their nets. In Luke all four have left their boats and are washing their nets. Luke includes a miraculous haul of fish which is not in Mark and while Mark leaps straight into the call of the disciples, Luke precedes the account with a vast amount of material not considered necessary to Mark – the birth narrative and the genealogy.

Those are the obvious differences. A more subtle difference, but one which is important for our understanding of the Gospel of Luke is this: Peter now has a boat, he and Andrew are not standing on the shore casting their nets but are boat-owners. The comparison between the two families has been softened or obliterated. James and John are no longer set apart by the fact that their family owns a boat and has servants – both sets of brothers now have a boat. Finally, in Luke Peter’s response to the miracle of the fish is a significant addition, as is his designation for Jesus – “Lord”.

To understand the changes made by Luke it is important to understand something about him and why he is writing. For the purpose of today’s gospel, we need to note again to whom the gospel is addressed: “most excellent Theophilus”.  Luke’s re-telling is influenced in no small part by the person to whom he is telling the story. From his name and Luke’s form of address we suspect that Theophilus is a wealthy person of some status who lives a long way distant from the villages of Galilee. This means that Luke has to tell the story in such a way that it will not only make sense to Theophilus, but also in such a way that it will not offend him.

In order to do this, Luke makes some basic changes in the way he tells Mark’s account. He moves the gospel to the city, removes the poor, uneducated people and makes it clear from the very beginning not only that Peter is a leader in the church but that Jesus is “Lord” – a title used for a prominent person in the Empire. Luke changes Peter’s socio-economic status and his role in the early church is established. Peter recognises and names Jesus and Jesus is named in a way that would indicate Jesus’ significance to Theophilus. (A poor fisherman and an itinerant preacher may not have grabbed the attention of Theophilus, but he is able to recognise a boat owner and a “lord” as people worthy of his attention.)

Luke would have had no thought that by changing the way he told the story, he was changing the story. He would have thought that he was faithfully recounting the story of Jesus and the church, but that he was doing it in such a way as to ensure its reception not only by Theophilus, but also to the whole of the Roman Empire.

It is extraordinary to think that a man from a tiny village in a remote part of the Empire, who was executed as a trouble-maker, should have made such an impact that his story was told at all. It is even more extraordinary that four people thought it so important that the story be told that they told it in such a way that others would grasp its significance. And perhaps, most extraordinary of all, is that two thousand years later, we are still telling the story and are moved to faith by it.

Tags:, , , , , , ,
Posted in Luke's gospel, Mark's gospel | Comments Off on An Extraordinary story

A window into Luke

February 2, 2013

Epiphany 4

Luke 4:21-30

Marian Free

In the name of God, whose son Jesus is revealed to us in the gospels. Amen.

Over the course of this year you will notice that our gospel readings come predominantly from the Gospel of Luke. The reason for this is that we are in the third year of the lectionary cycle. Over three successive years we read, almost in full, Matthew, Mark and Luke. (John does not have a year to itself, but is read during Easter and Lent during those years.)

We do not know anything about the author of the gospel of Luke, but we can deduce some things from the gospel and the way in which it is written. Luke, as Matthew, follows the same order as Mark, however Luke leaves out information and text which he (we presume the author was a “he”) considers unnecessary. For example, he completely omits chapters 6 and 7 of Mark possibly because they contain a number of repetitions. On the other hand, Luke is a storyteller and with just a few details is able to create a comprehensive picture or tell a compelling story. Two of the most well-known and loved stories in the New Testament are told only by Luke – the Good Samaritan and the Prodigal son both of which say a lot very succinctly. So, despite Luke’s preference for brevity, his gospel is significantly longer than that of Mark.

For centuries, it was argued that the author of Luke was a physician. Scholars pointed to Luke’s interest in, and apparent knowledge of things medical. However, it has long since been observed that Luke has no more knowledge or interest in medicine than any other NT writer. It is clear, however, that Luke does have more interest in social justice. (In Acts we find the idea that members of the church should have all things in common and the Song of Mary states that God “has put down the mighty from their thrones and the rich he has sent empty away.”)

We know that Luke was the author of two books – the Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles – which, though separated by John in our Bibles, originally belonged together. That they have the same author is demonstrated by the fact that both books are addressed to the same person – Theophilus – and that similar themes play out throughout both books. One clear theme is that of journey and mission. The Gospel, concerned as it is with re-telling the life of Jesus, is focussed on Jerusalem and a large part of the book is taken up with Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem and its consequences. In Acts, the focus begins in Jerusalem, the centre of Judaism and the birth place of the church, and from there the story broadens out to include the Mediterranean and Rome, the centre of the Empire.

Luke’s gospel was probably written some time between the years 80 and 90. it cannot have been written before the sixth decade of the first century otherwise it would not have been able to include the details recorded at the end of Acts, nor can it have been written any later than the late second century which is the date of our earliest copy.

By the time that the gospels were written, the emerging church faced a crisis – the Jews to whom Jesus was sent had failed to respond to his message, whereas the Gentiles – who did not belong to the people of Israel – had come to faith. To some extent, all the gospel writers deal with this conundrum in some way, but the issue expressed most clear in Luke. The third gospel demonstrates both that God remains faithful to his promises – God has not abandoned the Jews – and that the inclusion of the Gentiles was always part of God’s plan. This is one reason that the author of Luke begins the story in the centre of Judaism and concludes the account in the centre of the empire.

Even though Luke is keen to demonstrate the movement of the faith throughout the whole world, he is equally keen to emphasise its Jewish roots. According to Luke, the story of Jesus and of the early church is nothing less than a continuation of Judaism and the fulfilment of the OT expectations. Unlike Mathew, who repeatedly alerts us to the fulfilment of the OT, “this was to fulfil what was written in the scriptures”, Luke makes the same point by repetition and allusion. So for example, the Song of Mary is almost identical to the Song of Hannah and Jesus’ life is portrayed in such a way that those who knew would associate Jesus with Moses. (Moses goes into the wilderness. In the desert Moses experiences a call from God. The people to whom Moses is sent do not understand and so on.) In fact it can be argued that Luke sees the account of John the Baptist as the conclusion of the OT era (the last of the prophets), and Jesus as the beginning of the new, God’s anointed one.

Today’s gospel reading is recorded in Matthew, Mark and Luke. Luke’s record is however, quite different from the other two. If you were able to place the three accounts side by side you would see that Luke provides new material that is not found elsewhere. All three report Jesus’ preaching in the synagogue. Only Luke quotes the passages that Jesus reads: “He has sent me to preach good news to the poor, to proclaim release to the captives.” Likewise only Luke has Jesus claim that the scripture is fulfilled in him. The former is consistent with Luke’s social justice emphasis and the latter with his fulfilment theme. Luke alone has Jesus insinuate that the crowd (like the Jews in the times of Elijah and Elisha) are unable to recognise one of their own whereas those from outside (Naaman) do. (The reader is not surprised – this is what is happening in their own time – Gentiles believe, those to whom Jesus was sent do not.)

The response of Jesus’ listeners in Mark and Matthew is relatively mild despite being impressed, they took offense at him because they knew him so well). In Luke the reaction to Jesus’ claim and to his insinuation about the lack of faith in his listeners is so powerful and negative that they try to kill him. (Luke, at the beginning of his account of Jesus’ ministry is already making it clear that it is not that God has abandoned God’s people, but that they have failed to recognise God in Jesus.)

Most of us think that we know what the Bible says so sometimes it comes as a shock to learn that passages and stories that we thought belonged to all the gospels belong only to one or that one writer makes what we consider to be radical changes or additions to a familiar story. It is also exciting to compare the three accounts. Our new knowledge encourages us to ask questions, to consider why Luke added so much to his source material, what he was trying to say about Jesus, who were the people who heard or read the Gospel, how did the early church develop and grow and so on? During the year we will discover the answers to some, if not all of these questions.

Scripture is fascinating, confusing, challenging and comforting, but above all, it is one way that God communicates with us and a way that we in turn communicate God to the world. Don’t we owe it to God and to the world to discover and to understand as much as we possibly can?

Tags:, , , , , ,
Posted in Epiphany, Luke's gospel | Comments Off on A window into Luke

Jesus’ baptism

January 13, 2013

Baptism of Jesus – 2013

Luke 3:15-18, 21-22

Marian Free

 

In the name of God who through our baptism anoints us calls us to serve. Amen.

You will have noticed that not only is this morning’s gospel brief, but that only two of the five verses specifically refer to Jesus’ baptism. Further, though this may not have been obvious if you were listening and not reading, the gospel consists of two sets of disconnected verses from Luke, chapter 3. Those who prepared our lectionary have joined a small section of John’s preaching with the actual baptism of Jesus. Though not linked by Luke, together these verses give us some insight into John’s understanding of Jesus.

In this context, John’s preaching focuses on three things: God’s wrath (associated with the final judgement), how to live (to avoid God’s wrath) and John’s predictions about the Christ (who is associated with God’s wrath). In response to the wondering of the crowd, John the Baptist makes it clear that he is not the Christ. He goes on to list a number of points to back up his claim – the one who is coming will be more powerful than he. He, John, is so far removed from the Christ that he would not even be able to perform the lowliest of tasks for him. He is baptizing with water, the Christ will baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire. John may be preparing the people for judgement, the Christ will carry out the judgement (the winnowing fork is in his hands). John expects that the ministry of the Christ, will in other words, be far superior to his own.

John’s preaching is addressed to “the crowds” – to those who have come out from Jerusalem to hear him and to be baptised. Interestingly, Jesus is not mentioned as one of their number nor even as someone who comes out to hear John. It is not until Luke has reported John’s imprisonment by Herod that we discover that Jesus was baptised though it is not clear by whom or why. If the gospel’s chronology is correct, John is already in jail when Jesus is baptised. This raises a number of questions. Why record the story at all? Was someone other than baptising and if there was why doesn’t Luke tell us who? Was Jesus baptised by one’s of John’s disciples. We will never know.

It has to be said that Luke’s account of Jesus’ baptism is tantalizingly stark. It provides some detail but gives no explanation or interpretation of the events. What we learn from Luke’s gospel is that Jesus was apparently baptised after everyone else (perhaps not by John whom Herod has locked up), he is praying when the heavens open, the Holy Spirit descends bodily as a dove and a voice from heaven declares Jesus to be God’s beloved Son. So much information is crowded into two sentences (one in the Greek)! Jesus’ reaction to the extraordinary occurrences is not recorded nor is that of the crowds who presumably witnessed something. Such dramatic events are reported in a matter of fact manner, completely lacking in commentary or explanation.

A comparison with Mark’s gospel (Luke’s source) reveals that some features of this account are unique to Luke – in particular the fact that Jesus is praying, that Luke omits to say from where Jesus came and implies that it is not John who performs the baptism of Jesus. Mark’s gospel identifies Jesus’ baptism as the moment at which it becomes clear who Jesus is. Luke does use the baptism as a transition to Jesus’ public ministry but he does not link the two events in Jesus’ life – one does not lead to the other. At this point in Luke’s narrative he has no need to explain Jesus’ call and mission. He has already established Jesus’ identity in his birth narrative. In contrast to Mark, in the first two chapters of Luke’s gospel Jesus has already been announced as “Saviour, Lord and Messiah and as Son”. The presence of the Spirit in his life has been plain since his unique conception. Jesus’ call is not new, as a teenager in the Temple, he seems very aware of who he is and of his relationship with God.

While Luke includes a report of Jesus’ baptism, his purpose is different from that of his source. It seems that in writing about the event, the author of Luke is concerned first and foremost to demonstrate divine approval of Jesus and of his ministry. When this reference to the events surrounding Jesus’ baptism are seen in the context of the rest of Luke’s gospel two other factors become obvious. One is the place of prayer in Luke’s gospel. Jesus prays before all his significant actions (before choosing the disciples for example). A second is this – there are two occasions in Luke’s gospel on which a voice from heaven affirms Jesus and reveals God’s approval of him and of his ministry. Both occasions mark a significant change of direction in Jesus life and ministry. After his Baptism Jesus begins his public ministry and after the second occasion – the Transfiguration – Jesus begins the journey to Jerusalem and to death.

Luke appears to use Jesus’ baptism as both a turning point in Jesus’ life, but also as an opportunity to inform the readers that Jesus is no ordinary person but one approved by, chosen by and set apart by God and that God is affirming his choice and his delight in the chosen one.

Each gospel is written with a particular audience in mind and each gospel tells us a little bit about the author. We honour the text best when we try to understand what is going on behind it. Often that is only our most informed guess, but if we try to get a sense of why the story was written as it was we get a deeper and richer understanding not only of the story, but of its development. A better comprehension of the different ways in which the evangelists understood and reported the accounts of Jesus’ life helps us to understand the differences, to realise that there is more than one way of looking at things and gives us the tools to enter into debate with those who are skeptical or have yet to believe.

The gospel writers did not just blindly write down what they heard from others. They considered the information at hand and reflected on the best way to share that with the world. We can do no better than to follow their example.

 

 

For the commentary on the Gospel I am heavily reliant on Fitzmyer, Joseph. The Gospel According to Luke I-IX. New York: Double Day and Company, 1979, though I take full responsibility for the way in which I have used the material and the conclusion drawn.

Tags:, , , , ,
Posted in Luke's gospel, Mark's gospel | Comments Off on Jesus’ baptism

The God-child, the child-God

December 22, 2012
Baby Jesus

Baby Jesus

Advent 4

Hebrews 10:5-10

Marian Free

 

In the name of God, who as Jesus, became fully human in order to fully redeem human beings. Amen.

There is a television programme which I do not watch, but which I have caught glimpses of in advertisements. It is called something like: Our embarrassing bodies. From what I can glean from the promotions it is about ghastly and disfiguring afflictions and, I presume, it is about ways to deal with them. It is a reminder that the human body is a fascinating and complex organism and it has many parts, functions and characteristics that we tend to consider unspeakable, embarrassing and even disgusting.

Somehow, it is much easier to believe that baby Jesus is a real baby than it is to accept that the adult Jesus was flesh and blood like us.  It is difficult to accept that God could really inhabit a human body, to believe that Jess really did experience all the bodily functions. It would be more palatable to imagine that Jesus, even as a human being somehow occupied a different plane form the rest of us, that somehow his humanity was tempered by a body that didn’t behave in the same way as ours – that Jesus had no primal urges, that he didn’t sweat or burp or do anything that might be considered improper or unbecoming.

The problem of Jesus’ humanity is not a new one. The early church was torn apart by controversy regarding the nature of Jesus. There were some who thought Jesus was just a supremely virtuous person whom God adopted as the “Son of God”. Others believed that Jesus remained God even though he appeared to be human. Still others thought that it was only when he was resurrected from the dead that the human Jesus became God.

In the fourth century matters were brought to a head by a popular preacher from Libya called Arius who denied the divinity of Christ. His ideas were so compelling that they convinced many of the bishops of the time. The Emperor, Constantine was so dismayed by the disunity in the church that he called the Council of Nicea and demanded that the bishops come to some agreement as to what Christians believed. The result was the declaration expressed in the Nicean Creed that:“ We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, light from light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one being with the Father through him all things were made … he was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became truly human”.

Jesus’ fleshly nature was already an essential component of New Testament theology – it was not an invention of the Council of Nicea. Writers as different as the apostle Paul, the writer of the gospel of John and the author of the book of Hebrews all attest to an early belief that Jesus truly inhabited human flesh, just as he was truly God on earth.

That Jesus was fully human, that he did really take on human flesh is important for a number of reasons which are different but complementary.

It was only as a human being that Jesus could work salvation for humankind. The obedience of the human Jesus’ was the only way to undo Adam’s disobedience. In the flesh, Jesus was able to redeem the flesh. By taking on human form, Jesus demonstrated that it is possible for human beings to be all that God created us to be. If Jesus as fully human can submit to God, we know it is not our flesh that prevents us from being obedient, but what we choose to do with it. Jesus’ humanity reminds us that, despite all the evidence to the contrary, human beings, inhabiting human flesh can be truly godly.

The fact that Jesus became fully human means that Jesus redeemed human flesh with all its weaknesses, its urges and its passions. Jesus’ humanity is evidence that our whole person is redeemed not just that part of us which might consider untainted and sinless. Our whole person is redeemed not just a part of it. Jesus’ being fully human demonstrates that God values our physicality as well as our divinity.

Jesus’ becoming human confirms that we cannot pay God off or placate God with sacrifices. God wants us – heart, soul and body not our deeds or our gifts. Jesus as a human being gave his whole self and showed that we should give nothing less.

As we come to the end of Advent and enter into the season of Christmas, we come face to face with the child in the manger. It is not difficult to identify the baby Jesus as a real baby.  The challenge that faces us year after year is to accept that the real child in the cradle grows into a real human being – a human being with longings and desires, weaknesses and strengths, just like us.

As Jesus became one with us, so we should strive to become one with him, and through him become agents of redemption in the world.

 

Tags:, , , , ,
Posted in Advent, Christmas, Humanity, Identity of Jesus, Luke's gospel | Comments Off on The God-child, the child-God

Paying attention to God

December 1, 2012

Advent 1 2012

Luke 21:25-38

Marian Free

In the name of God who was and is and is to come. Amen.

 When I was a child I remember being fascinated by a story my mother used to tell. It related to a time when she was a young mother. Apparently,  one of her friends who had recently given birth to her first child went off to the hairdressers at her regular time. When the hairdresser asked after the baby the woman realised that she had completely forgotten that she had a baby and had left the at home! Thankfully no damage was done and she never forgot again. She simply hadn’t adjusted to being a mother and presumably the baby was asleep when she was getting ready to leave the house.

Adjusting to a new situation is not always the reason that children get forgotten or neglected. In an interview aired during the week an Australian musician spoke about her father. She reported that he was both wonderful and unconventional. He did things like wake her up in the middle of the night to take her out and he treated her very much as an adult, sharing his passions with her. Those were the good times. There were times however when her father had become so drunk the night before that he couldn’t be woken in the morning to take her to school. It wasn’t that he had forgotten that he was a father, he had let other things in his life take precedence over that responsibility.

Alcohol and drugs do have the power to take over someone’s life to the extent that all other priorities – work, relationships and even children – take second place.  It is also true that it is possible to become so absorbed in something that other things get forgotten.  For example, someone might be having such a good time at a party that they don’t notice the time passing and forget to pick up their child or their spouse at the agreed time. Someone else might be so engrossed in the task that they are doing that they run late for their next appointment or commitment.

There are a number of things that distract us from more important or more central things in our lives – work, play, mind altering substances, anxiety, fear – the list could probably go on and on and of course, the potential distractions would be different for all of us.

Today’s gospel is concerned with distractions. There are three short sayings, all of which focus on Jesus’ coming  again. These are -holding our heads high, paying attention and not allowing our focus to wander.   Jesus describes the cosmic turbulence that will be associated with the coming of the Son of Man. – even the powers of the heavens will be shaken. These events will be terrifying, but Jesus urges his followers not to be anxious – to see the events for what they are. If Jesus is coming, then instead of cowering in fear, they should stand tall, confident that their redemption is near.

There may be dramatic signs of Jesus’ return but Jesus reminds his disciples that they are not to ignore the more subtle signs that he is near – signs as simple as the fig tree putting forth its blossom.  Then Jesus narrows the scene down even further – to a personal level.  He has encouraged his followers to notice the signs in the cosmos and the signs in the world around them. Last he reminds them that they need to look to their own lives and to ensure that there is nothing in the way that they live their lives that could blind them to or to take their attention away from Jesus’ return.

All three sayings deal with the theme of paying attention. The first two with what we need to attend to and the last a warning not to be distracted from these things.

The three themes are different and yet related – different in their focus, but related in their demand that we are alert at all times  to what God has done, what God is doing and what God will do.  The three sayings remind us that Jesus is going to return at a time that will not be of our choosing and that it may or may not come with a clear warning.  For this reason, Jesus says that it is essential that his followers be ready for his coming at any time. That said, Jesus cautions that our capacity to be prepared should not be compromised by fear – which would be a failure to trust God. Our capacity should not be limited by inattentiveness – which would demonstrate that we were not fully aware of God’s presence already in the world. Our capacity to be prepared should not be flawed by distraction or getting absorbed in things that take our focus away from what is important – which would demonstrate the weakness of our relationship with God.

Jesus doesn’t issue these warnings to keep us on our toes, or to have us live in a state of perpetual anxiety about the coming of the end.  Jesus will return as judge. However, to spend all our time and energy worrying and preparing for that day would in fact, be in direct contradiction of Jesus’ intention here. Being ready for Jesus’ return does relate to the future, but our readiness for that return is a task for the present.

It is in the present that we will see the signs of God moving and working among us. It is in the present that we need to hone our ability to recognise God. It is in the present that we need to be careful that we do not allow ourselves to be distracted by things which ultimately take our attention away from the reality of God in our lives. If we pay too much attention to what might or might not happen in the future, if we worry too much about how we will stand up in the judgement, if we become absorbed with trying to work out how to achieve a good outcome, then ironically we will be doing the very things what Jesus is warning against.  That is, instead of looking forward to God’s coming, instead of believing that we are among the redeemed and instead of focusing on Jesus we would actually be focussing on ourselves and living out of fear not joyful expectation – the very thing that Jesus is trying to discourage.

In our faith journey it is so important to find a balance – to be able to so trust in God, to pay sufficient attention to God’s presence in our lives, to be so confident in our relationship with God, that all else – our behaviour in the present and our expectations of the future simply fall into place. To do anything else leads us to rely on ourselves and our self absorption takes our attention away from what God is doing and what God plans to do.

During Advent we focus on Jesus’ coming into the world, Jesus’ presence with us now and Jesus’ coming again. As we reflect on this threefold coming of God among us, we are given the time to ask once again: Do we truly believe that we are redeemed? Do we pay attention to God in the little details of our lives? Do we allow ourselves to be distracted by things that ultimately do not matter?

The future is important, but if we allow it to dominate the present it will be the very distraction that causes us to miss the signs and be weighed down by the worries of this life that we do not raise our heads and recognise that our redemption is near.

Tags:, , ,
Posted in Advent, Luke's gospel | Comments Off on Paying attention to God

Raising up people to lead

October 27, 2012

Pentecost 22 (Simon and Jude)

Luke 6:12-16

Marian Free

 In the name of God, Creator, Redeemer and Sanctifier, one God in community. Amen.

From quite early on, readers of the Bible have noticed the differences between the four gospels and there have been a number of attempts to resolve the differences. Human beings do this for at least two reasons. Firstly, as the Bible is the holy text of the Christian faith, many people are uncomfortable with the idea that there is not ONE story about Jesus. (This is exacerbated by the fact that the existence of multiple accounts can be a source of embarrassment in the face of external criticism.) Secondly, it seems that the human mind is uncomfortable with and wants to resolve the differences.

One of the earliest responses to the “problem” was to conflate the four to create an integrated account, that is to use all four gospels to create one single version. The problem with this approach is that it doesn’t allow us to explore and value the different approaches of the writers. Other responses have been to come up with explanations for the differences between the gospels. For example, a popular explanation has been to compare the gospels writers with witnesses to say – a car accident. As each witness will remember and report in different ways, either because of what they saw or the perspective they brought to it, so it is with the gospels. The difficulty with this approach is that it doesn’t take into account the community which told and re-told the stories or the ways in which the stories were transmitted.

The gospels as we have them were not written down until about thirty years after the death of Jesus. In the meantime the community which formed in Jesus’ name repeated the stories of his life, the stories he told and the things that he did. Given that people met in separate groups and in different places it is more extraordinary that the accounts are so how similar than that they have differences.

What happened it seems is that each community told and re-told the stories that captured the imagination of its members or which were important for its communal life. So for example, a community that was experiencing persecution – as is sometimes supposed of the community for whom Mark wrote – may place different emphases on the stories from a community which is not experiencing persecution.

Today’s gospel comes from the Gospel of Luke. An important thing to know about the writer of Luke is that he wrote two books – the gospel and the book of Acts. Luke’s primary concern was to write a history of the church from tis beginning in Jerusalem to its reaching the centre of the Roman Empire. For Luke then, the Gospel is something of a prologue to the story of the early church. More than the other gospels then, Luke has his mind not on the life of Jesus but on the formation of the faith community which comes after his death and resurrection. This information is particularly important as background for today’s gospel – Jesus’ choice of the twelve apostles.

If you were to read the accounts of the choosing of the twelve apostles in Matthew, Mark and Luke you would discover some significant differences between the three. All are agreed that Jesus chose twelve from among those who were following him and  all precede the account with the call of Peter and Andrew, James and John and of Matthew (Levi). Mark and Luke  agree in situating the choice of the twelve on a mountain. However, while in Mark and Matthew the twelve are equipped for mission – authorised to proclaim the message, heal the sick and to cast out demons – in Luke they are not. Perhaps the most important difference is that in Luke Jesus chooses the twelve after spending a night in prayer.

By his placement of the account, his inclusion of Jesus’ prayer and his naming of the twelve as Apostles, Luke is setting the scene for his second book – the Acts of the Apostles. The Apostles are to play an important role not only as Jesus’ off-siders during his lifetime, but also as leaders of the early church. The second verse of Acts affirms this. Before Jesus is taken up into heaven he instructs, through the Holy Spirit the Apostles whom he had chosen. We are also told that the early community devoted themselves to the apostle’s teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and prayers. “With great power the Apostles gave testimony to the resurrection to the Lord Jesus.” Not only this but Acts tells us that the Apostles performed many signs and wonders among the community.

In the Gospel, Luke is establishing the authority of the twelve, making it clear that their role in the emerging community was conferred by Jesus himself. The Apostles are, in Luke’s mind, the direct heirs of Jesus’ and legitimate leaders in the early church. They will not only continue Jesus’ work and teaching, but will guide the believers through the difficult time of forming community, raising up leaders, facing persecution and imprisonment and working out how to respond to the increasing number of non-Jews who are moved to faith by the Holy Spirit. It is the seriousness of their task which causes Jesus to spend the night in prayer before setting the twelve apart. The teaching which follows their selection – the sermon on the plain – will provide guidance for the community. Jesus’ teaching will provide guidelines for living together and for relating to the world.

The choice of the twelve is a very serious decision. Their role, according to Luke, will be not only to carry on the mission of Jesus in his absence, but to build on it and to ensure that through those who come to believe, a community will be formed which will ensure the continuity of Jesus’ work and message.

Luke’s history may be idealized and formulaic, but whatever else it does, it places the Apostles firmly at the centre of the emerging church and as it does so ensures that the church is in safe hands – hands that have been chosen and set apart for the task by Jesus himself. Through the Apostles the emerging community was steered through its early difficulties and teething problems into a distinct and lasting expression of faith which became the church which exists to this day.

Jesus’ wisdom in sharing the burden of leadership and his vision and foresight in providing leaders for the future ensured that his message was not lost but continued to spread and grow. Let us pray that leaders continue to be raised up so that the gospel may continue to be shared, faith communities be formed and strengthened and individuals be encouraged and built up. Amen.

Tags:, , ,
Posted in Apostles, Luke's gospel | Comments Off on Raising up people to lead

How will they hear?

July 7, 2012

Pentecost 6

Mark 6:1-13

Marian Free

In the name of God whose word informs and enlightens our faith. Amen.

 

In his charge to Synod, the Archbishop spoke with passion about the Bible – the contradictions contained within it and the importance of studying it. (anglicanbrisbane.org.au) The reason that he spoke so strongly is that the Natural Church Development tool that is being used by many of the Parishes in the Diocese has revealed that one of the weaknesses in our Parish life is passionate spirituality – our reading and understanding of the Bible. We all know what we believe and some of us are able to articulate it to others, but when it comes to explaining the central texts of our faith we are on less certain ground.

There are at least two barriers to becoming more familiar with the Bible. One is that academic study of the Bible can be quite challenging, if not confronting. For many, it is a discipline that is demanding and difficult. A second barrier is that of time – in particular the lack of it. In past centuries, the services of Morning and Evening Prayer were designed to provide an opportunity for the Bible to be explained and expounded. Longer passages of the Bible were read during these services and it was expected that the sermon would be up to half an hour in length. In a less pressured world, in which there were fewer forms of entertainment, there was more leisure to spend time in church. Many people attended both Morning and Evening Prayer or Communion and Evening Prayer which provided a larger diet of Bible reading than is possible in the Eucharist alone. Longer readings and longer sermons on Sunday mornings might solve the problem, but would destroy the balance of Word and Sacrament which is central to the Eucharist and perhaps lead to fewer people attending church.

Not only do we have less time to spend expounding the Bible, it is also true that not all members of the clergy have had the confidence or courage to share the latest scholarship with their congregations. What this means is that few lay people have been given the opportunity to keep up with the research of the last 100 years and many are shocked and surprised when informed that scholars have made discoveries that change the way in which familiar stories have been previously taught and understood.

As you know, the Bible study group in this Parish has been studying the gospel of Luke using a commentary written by Brendan Byrne. Over the course of the study, I have become acutely aware of how complex much of Jesus’ teaching is and how difficult it is to understand unless one has the tools with which to interpret it. I think for example of the story of the dishonest steward who is praised by Jesus for acting in a way which will secure his future. At first glance it appears that Jesus is saying that God approves of dishonesty! Then there is the story of the widow who wears down the unjust judge through her persistence. Does this mean that God is like the unjust judge and will not act unless we wear him down with a constant repetition of our requests?

There is a lot more to the New Testament than the wonderful stories and adventures that we learn at Sunday School. Our understanding of our faith is enhanced and our appreciation of our texts is enriched if we take some time to grapple with and to try to understand what the more difficult passages really mean. For example, the story of the dishonest steward is, of course, not a story about God’s approving dishonesty but rather it is Jesus’ challenge to all of us that we make sure that we live our lives in such a way that we will be welcomed into heaven – that, like the dishonest steward, we make provision for our future salvation. The story of the widow and the judge is not about our wearing God down through endless prayer. Rather a reminder that God is not like the unjust judge and will hear our prayer. This means we should not allow ourselves to feel disheartened when times are difficult, but that we should remain confident that God will hear us. In both stories, Jesus is using unsavoury characters to shock us into paying attention to what he is saying.

During my week away I was able to read a book written by a friend of ours – Paula Gooder . In it she explores a wide variety of methods that are used by scholars to study the New Testament. What makes this book easy to read is that it is aimed at those who are new to biblical studies. Not only is each explanation brief but each is followed by an example of how the particular technique is used to interpret a passage of the bible. This means is that the reader not only learns all kinds of interesting things about the New Testament, but is also able to apply what they have learnt.

Today’s gospel consists of two discrete stories both of which contain puzzles for the modern reader. In the first section, Jesus is welcomed by the people of his hometown, but shortly afterwards they are scandalized by him. Why their change in attitude? Secondly, Jesus is identified as the son of Mary. This is quite unusual in first century Palestine – a person would usually be identified by their father’s name. The first puzzle is solved if we understand that the people attribute Jesus’ ability to work miracles not to God, but to some other – possibly demonic-force and so they treat him with suspicion. The second puzzle – that of his name may be a derogatory inference to the fact that his father is unknown. Put together these two explanations help us to make sense of why Jesus was rejected by his hometown.

The second story in today’s gospel relates the sending out of the twelve disciples. In itself, the account is reasonably straightforward unless we are familiar with the ways in which Matthew and Luke record the same account. Not only is Mark’s account briefer, but Matthew and Luke change at least three significant details. Whereas Mark’s Jesus sends the disciples two by two, Matthew and Luke send them out all together, Mark says the disciples may take a staff, Matthew and Luke expressly forbid the taking of a staff and finally, Matthew and Luke enlarge the disciple’s task by adding the healing of the sick to Jesus’ command to cast out unclean spirits. Among other things, these differences have led scholars to believe that Mark was written first and that Luke and Matthew used Mark to write their accounts but added to it details that were known to them.

Our scriptures provide us with an exciting and fascinating glimpse into the life and teaching of our Saviour, they give us insights as to how we should live as followers of Christ and they open doors into the way that Jesus was seen and understood by his contemporaries and those who followed after. Passages that at first seem difficult to understand are often easily explained and others that seem harsh and uncompromising are sometimes a means to shock us into action.How will we know what they mean if we don’t make time to read and understand them? We live in a world that is increasingly divorced from the church and from the teachings of Jesus.

If we don’t know and tell our story who will?

Tags:, , , , ,
Posted in Biblical interpretation, Luke's gospel, Mark's gospel, Paula Gooder | Comments Off on How will they hear?

Newer Entries »