Archive for the ‘Mission’ Category

Giving cups of water. Who is in and who is out?

July 1, 2023

Pentecost 5 – 2023
Matthew 10:40-42
Marian Free

In the name of God, who reveals Godself to us in many and varied ways. Amen.

If I am honest, I would have to say that these verses from Matthew have always troubled me, partly because I am not entirely sure what the author is getting at and partly because Matthew’s retelling of this saying is so different from the accounts in Mark and Luke.

There are only three verses in today’s gospel, but they are quite complex. What does it mean for example when it says: “whoever welcomes a righteous person in the name of a righteous person will receive the reward of the righteous?” The implication seems to be that the person doing the welcoming is themselves righteous and even that the one welcoming a prophet, does so at least on behalf of a prophet. If this is the case, Matthew is drawing a line that we do not find in Luke or Mark.

Matthew records these sayings in the context of Jesus’ sending the disciples out into a hostile world in which they risk being handed over to both the religious and civil authorities and in which families will be divided, “brother will (even) handover brother to death.” Jesus has warned the disciples that he has come not to bring peace but a sword and that whoever loves father or mother more than they love him, is not worthy of him.

It seems that in this context Matthew is using these sayings of Jesus to encourage believers to look inward – to protect and support their own. If the world is not a safe place, the believing community will have to pull up the drawbridge to protect themselves and at the same time they will have to ensure that they take care of each other. Certainly, in Matthew’s gospel the expression: “little ones”, used in connection with giving a cup of water, is a Matthean term for members of the community.

Understood in this way, Matthew’s language is inward looking not outward looking.

I don’t have to tell you that the authors of the Synoptic gospels tell the Jesus’ story very differently. Depending on their particular agenda, they arrange the material in a particular way and place their emphases in different places so as to give Jesus’ sayings a nuance that is relevant to their purpose. As I have studied and preached on Matthew over more than two decades, it has seemed to me that the author of Matthew presents the gospel as more exclusive – more inclined to define those who are “in” and those who are “out.”

Of course, we don’t know exactly when Jesus said what or where he was when he said it, but the sayings recorded by Matthew in this setting include two that are unique to him and two that occur in some form in Mark and Luke. Both Luke and Mark have the saying about receiving a disciple and Mark also has the saying about someone giving a cup of water. According to Mark (Chapter 9) the disciples have been arguing about who is the greatest. In response Jesus takes a child and says: “Whoever receives one such child in my name welcomes me, and whoever receives me receives not me but the one who sent me” (9:36). Immediately following this, the disciple John complains to Jesus that he saw someone (not a disciple) casting out demons in Jesus’ name. Jesus replies that anyone who is not against them is for them and “whoever gives you a cup of water to drink because you bear the name of Christ will by no means lose the reward.”

Mark’s memory or intention is to give the impression of an open community in which whoever acts in a Christ-like way cannot by definition, be against the community of faith, but rather is sympathetic. towards them and as such is entitled to be rewarded. Mark’s context for the sayings is one of chiding – not encouraging – the disciples.

In Luke (Chapter 9), the saying is reported in much the same way as in Mark – that is the first saying is Jesus’ response to an argument as to who is the greatest. Again, Jesus takes a child and says to the disciples: “Whoever welcomes this child in my name receives me, and whoever receives me receives the one who sent me; for the least among all of you is the greatest.” Again, the complaint about someone casting out demons follows, to which Jesus says: “Whoever is not against you is for you.”
Matthew does include the saying about receiving a child (18:1), but he leaves out the story about the non-disciple casting out demons thus forgoing an opportunity to demonstrate Jesus’ inclusivity, Jesus’ understanding that those who were not signed up members of the community were to be valued, not ostracised, and that those who were sympathetic to the movement were to be treated as if they were members. In other words, Mark and Luke seem to avoid the hard and fast boundaries that are beginning to appear in Matthew’s gospel.

That, I know is a lot to take in, especially when, unlike me, you cannot place the texts side by side. What is important to note is that the gospel writers are quite liberal in the way in which they use Jesus’ sayings, both in the actual wording and in the context in which they place them.

The choice of gospel today and the parallel texts in Mark and Luke provide a good example of the need to see scripture as a whole, rather than focusing solely on one passage. Our scriptures – the Old and New Testaments – were written at different times in history and for entirely different purposes. A close reading will throw up contradictions, multiple versions of one event and differing interpretations of the same. The Bible also contains a variety of forms of expression – history, prophecy, poetry, letters – which need to be read and understood in ways appropriate to their form.

None of this is intended to undermine the value of individual accounts, nor does it give us permission to neglect or dismiss those things that do not fit our idea of what the scriptures say. Studying scripture enables us to understand why differences exist, the contexts in which the differences arose and what they might have meant to those who first heard them. When we study the gospels, we are better able to understand the experience and the needs of the believing communities in the latter years of the first century and to allow that understanding to inform and shape our own practice and ministry.

When we compare the ways in which the Synoptic gospels have recorded the sayings that we heard from Matthew today, we might conclude that they first occurred in a missional context, in which Jesus is telling the disciples, that those who respond positively to them are already on their way to receiving Jesus, and that those who support them (be it simply with a cup of water) will be rewarded – even if they are not card-carrying believers.

Are these words that we need to hear and does it help us to be less anxious that people are not coming to church, and more willing to affirm and encourage the good will that they show and the good that they do?

One story or many?

December 31, 2022

The Naming and Circumcision of Jesus/The Epiphany of our Lord
Luke 2:15-21/Matthew 2:1-12
Marian Free

In the name of God who is always revealing Godself in new and unexpected ways. Amen.

The lectionary offers us two possibilities for this Sunday – the Epiphany of our Lord (the coming of the magi) or the Naming and Circumcision of Jesus. In some ways it is a shame that we cannot celebrate both today as together they give us an insight into the different ways in which Matthew (magi) and Luke (circumcision) approach their accounts of Jesus and provide a model as to how we might share the gospel today.

We believe that Matthew is writing for a largely Jewish audience. For this reason, he emphasises the ways in which Jesus fulfills scripture, has Jesus insist that the disciples go nowhere among the Gentiles and does not include encounters with, or parables about, Samaritans. Yet, it is very clear that Matthew writes with an understanding that Gentiles will come to believe in Jesus. At the Gospel’s beginning, John the Baptist reminds the Pharisees that God can raise up children of Abraham from the very stones and at its close the disciples are sent into all the world insinuating that God’s vision is broader than the people of Israel. Matthew’s inclusion of the account of the coming of magi – non-Jewish astrologers – is a further indication that he is softening up his readers for the idea that Gentiles will come to worship God’s anointed one and will therefore be included among the chosen people.

In comparison, Luke is writing for an audience that is primarily Gentile. He adapts his telling of the story to ensure a reception among those who do not come from a Jewish background. Luke does include stories about Samaritans – the parable of the Good Samaritan and the account of the Samaritan leper who returns to give thanks. It is important that Luke gives credibility to what appears to be a new religion. The Romans were reasonably tolerant of the national religions of the nations that they conquered, but they were less inclined to accept a new and novel religion. Indeed, any new belief was viewed as a superstition. A religion that had apparently appeared out of thin air would struggle to be taken seriously. This explains why Luke, though writing for Gentiles, goes to some length to present Jesus (and his family) as faithful Jews – observing the Jewish rituals of circumcision and Temple observance.

The ways in which the gospel writers configure their telling of the story of Jesus to ensure that it will be received by their audience is informative. Intuitively they knew that faith in Jesus did not depend on rigid adherence to a collection of dry historical “facts”, but that faith in Jesus was a living and vibrant relationship with the risen Christ. Indeed, a reading of the letters of Paul reminds us that from the very beginnings of the Christian mission different emphases were placed on, for example circumcision, depending upon the needs and backgrounds of those being addressed. In Corinthians, Paul goes so far as to say that he became all things to all people, that he might by all means save some (1 Cor 9:19 -23).

In many ways, Paul was passionate and uncompromising and yet he understood that accepting Jesus as Lord and Saviour was more important than the observation of ancient Jewish customs. In his letters he worked out a theology that addressed the tensions between those who came to faith from Judaism and those who came from Gentile backgrounds. In so doing, he did not believe that he was compromising the faith, but that he was making it accessible to all people.

Vincent Donovan, a Jesuit missionary, came to the same conclusion when he was working among Masai in Kenya . The Jesuits had been in Kenya for 100 years when an enthusiastic young Donovan descended on them. In that time, not one single person had embraced the Christian faith. Having received the blessing of his superiors and the permission of the local chiefs, Donovan began sharing the gospel according to Mark with the Masai. As he did so it became patently obvious to him that stories of sowing and harvesting would fall on deaf – if not hostile – ears. The Masai were pastoralists who at times found themselves contesting the use of land with others who were agriculturalists. As Jesus used imagery that was familiar to his audience so Paul, the gospel writers, and Donovan used imagery and ideas that enabled them to connect to their listeners and to draw them into a relationship with the resurrected Jesus.

In the 21st century, we have much to learn from our forebears in faith and in mission.

Sharing the faith does not mean rigid adherence to fixed statements of “fact”, but an openness to the Holy Spirit, an understanding of the central tenets of the faith and a willingness to listen to those with whom we would share the gospel. As Jesus listened to and reacted to the Canaanite woman – changing his mind about who does and who does not belong – so we should listen to those around us and allow ourselves to understand and to respond to those who are hungering to hear the gospel today.

(Donovan, Vincent. Christianity Rediscovered. Maryknoll, N. Y. :  Orbis Press, 1982.

A summary may be found here https://www.newcreationlibrary.org.au/books/pdf/284_ChristianityRediscovered.pdf)

Identity crisis

August 8, 2015

Pentecost 11 – 2015

John 6:35,41-51

Marian Free 

In the name of God, source of all being, giver of all that is good. Amen.

Our recent trip to Israel was incredibly rewarding, but also very disturbing. Among other things I was disillusioned by the presence of the Christian church, in particular the partisanship and the competition for the tourist dollar. The major denominations in particular the Catholics and Orthodox, having vied for their piece of the Holy Land, hold on to it for all their worth. I could give you several examples of stories that filled me with despair, but I will limit myself to just one. The Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem has no fewer than six custodians – the Greek Orthodox, the Armenian Apostolic, and Roman Catholic Churches as well as the Coptic, Armenian and Syriac Orthodox Churches. The church itself is divided between all six denominations with some shared areas. When we were there the Catholic Franciscans were preparing for Evensong, which they observe before the Russian Orthodox so as to be sure of a free run of the church. Had we stayed longer, we would have observed them scuffling with the Greek Orthodox whose procession was competing for the same space. It left me wondering what the church was really about and whether it really mattered who had the largest slice of the cake.

The experience confirmed something that I already thought – that today’s church, (and dare I say it, yesterday’s church) – has an identity crisis. It seems at times that we no longer really know who we are. We are not so sure of our place in the world or even in our communities. We are uncertain of our role and as a result we have no real direction. I wonder whether, like the church in the Holy Land, we too are concerned to protect and to hold on to what we have and whether we are struggling to preserve the institution of the church as much as we are trying to share the good news of Jesus Christ.

It used to be so much easier. There was a time when we didn’t have to struggle, a time when everyone knew who we were and what we stood for, a time when we were respected, a time when it was clear that we did some good in the world, a time when we didn’t have to explain or defend ourselves. Sadly today, in the eyes of many, the church is a spent force – at best an anachronism, at worst a laughing stock.

There are now at least two generations of Australians who have had little or no relationship with the church. Ask a class of nine year olds what happened at Easter and you are more likely to be told that Jesus was born (or died) than you are that Jesus rose from the dead.

Not only have we lost our place in the world, we seem to have lost our way. For centuries we were able to be complacent. We could take it for granted that most people knew whom we were and what we were about. Our children (even those who did not attend church) learnt the stories of the faith at school and Christianity provided some sort of moral compass for the world at large. During the colonial era there was a flurry of activity on the mission field as we sought to impose our beliefs on others, but at home we relied on the culture of the day to pass on the faith to others. We took for granted that we were part of the establishment and failed to reflect sufficiently on what it takes to share the good news.

So now we have an identity crisis. Others can now offer what we thought that we had to offer. Many of the services that used to be provided exclusively by the church are now equally the province of secular entities. The government can legislate for good behaviour and can provide social welfare, health care and education and non-government agencies can provide overseas aid. It begs the question: who are we, and what is our role? What do we have to offer that is unique and attractive to today’s world.

This morning’s gospel is in part about identity. Jesus’ listeners cannot get past the fact that Jesus is Joseph’s son. They can see and grasp Jesus’ earthly existence after all they know his mother and his father. Their problem is that they cannot begin to get a handle on his heavenly origins. How can the man whom they see before them have come down from heaven? For them, it is much easier to focus on the material and the physical than to grasp what Jesus is saying – that in his very person heaven has broken into the present, that the barriers the material and the spiritual have been destroyed and that the boundaries between the present and the future have been irrevocably broken for those who are able to comprehend who and what Jesus is.

I wonder sometimes if this is at the heart of our problem – if this is the reason why our churches are no longer full and why people no longer come to us for answers. I wonder if we have found it is easier to focus on the physical and the earthly, on things that can be observed and measured than to point to what cannot be seen and to direct others to realities that are beyond this existence. Yet this is the core of our identity – our understanding that faith in Jesus opens the door to a life beyond this, that for those who have faith the present is radically changed by the in-breaking of God into the world and that we no longer driven by hunger and thirst for something more, because we have found in Jesus all that gives life meaning and value. We do not have rely on the achievements of the past or worry about the uncertainty of the future, because we know that the past no longer has a hold on us and that our future is assured.

While we worry about the survival of the church, there are many in the world who hunger and thirst for meaning, who are looking for relationships that are more than superficial and searching for an assurance that their life has value. It is our responsibility to provide that meaning, our task to reveal the spiritual in the midst of the material and our role to demonstrate in our own lives what it means that the future has broken-in and radically changed our view of the present.

Jesus gave his life, that we might have life. In our turn, we are called to give our lives that others might know what it is like to be truly alive.