Swallowsrest

Pentecost 5

Luke 9:51-62

Marian Free

In the name of God who asks that we love him with all our hearts, our souls, our minds and our strength and that we love our neighbour as ourselves. Amen.

Three potential disciples, three unexpected, almost callous responses. What was Jesus thinking? What is going on here?

The first person offers to follow Jesus wherever he goes – a generous offer and, one would think, a sign of great faith. Instead of commending the person, or showing any gratitude, Jesus responds by pointing out that he has nowhere to go.  The second person is asked to follow Jesus. When he (quite reasonably) says: “first let me go and bury my father”. Jesus retorts: “Let the dead bury their own dead.” Lastly, another person offers to follow Jesus – after he has said ‘goodbye’ to his family. This time Jesus says: “‘No one who puts a hand to the plough and looks back is fit for the kingdom of God”.

It makes one wonder – does Jesus want anyone to follow him? He sets the bar so high and makes such unreasonable demands. Instead of welcoming, he berates those who want to be disciples and he questions how genuine their response to him is.

Does this mean that the only way to be disciples is to be homeless and to completely abandon one’s family and one’s responsibility? The latter almost certainly can’t be true as elsewhere Jesus criticises the Pharisees for neglecting their duty to their families.

It is possible that Jesus is just having a bad day. After all, Luke has just told us that the days were drawing near for him to be taken up. Jesus has set his face towards Jerusalem. He has begun a journey to what he knows will be his death. That alone would make anyone impatient with those who didn’t understand the implications of what he was doing. Jesus is making it clear that being his disciple is not going to be easy – it involves commitment, courage and single-mindedness. Discipleship is not comfortable and there are costs to be borne.

It is reasonable to assume that Jesus speaks so harshly because he is conscious of his own destiny, and because he wants these would-be followers to understand to what they are committing themselves. His demands are shocking because he wants these potential disciples to focus their minds on what they are doing. Are they acting on the spur of the moment, or are they truly committed to Jesus mission? Are they looking for short-term fulfillment, or are they interested in sticking with Jesus for the long haul?

Jesus is being confrontational to help these people be clear about what they are doing. Are they ready and willing to make the sacrifices that discipleship requires? Are they seeking the values of the kingdom or are they still bound by human institutions and human expectations? Do they understand that following Jesus means adopting a new set of values, measuring themselves and their actions against the expectations of God and not by human standards? Do they realise that following Jesus is a matter of all or nothing – one is either a follower or one is not.

Jesus asks the disciples to leave everything and follow him. Jesus asks the same of us.

The wonder of it all is this: if we make Jesus our first priority, if we value following Jesus above all else, if we seek first the kingdom of God; everything else will fall into place. Our relationship with the world, with our families and our friends will not be diminished but enhanced because it will be informed by our relationship with God. Our fathers can be buried, our familes farewelled, we do not have to feel guilty about a warm bed and a roof over our head, but all that we do will be seen from the perspective of faith and we will be the richer for it.

When we give our whole lives to God, we discover that we lose nothing and gain everything.

Pentecost 3 2010

Galatians

Marian Free

In the name of God who sets us free to live. Amen.

9 Charlton St

Hamilton 4007

13^th June, 2010

Dear X,

I am writing to set you straight on a number of matters………

Yours sincerely (or should it be faithfully?),

Marian Free

Rector

When Paul writes a letter, he does just that. Just as we have (or have had) standard forms for writing different sorts of letters – job applications, wedding invitations and so on – so too the Greeks had standard forms of letter-writing. A letter usually consisted of three parts – an address, body (which included the major theme of the letter) and farewell. The address generally consisted of the sender, the addressees and a greeting. These would be followed by a Thanksgiving, which would create a favourable reception for the letter.

The letter to the Galatians follows this pattern. Paul begins, “Paul an apostle—sent neither by human commission nor from human authorities, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead— ²and all the members of God’s family who are with me, To the churches of Galatia: 3 Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, ⁴who gave himself for our sins to set us free from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, ⁵to whom be the glory for ever and ever. Amen.”

This tells us that Paul claims the authority of an apostle and that he is writing to more than one church. The greeting gives us a clue as to what is to follow. Our attention is drawn to the fact that his apostleship comes directly from God, not from human authorities – what he has to say has divine imprimatur. We might also suspect that the letter will have something to say about Christian freedom.

Most notable is the absence of a thanksgiving. Apparently Paul has nothing about which to be thankful. Instead of saying: “I give thanks to my God always for you because of the grace of God that has been given you in Christ Jesus,” as he does in the letter to the Corinthians, Paul moves straight into the language of censure: “I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you in the grace of Christ”. Paul is disappointed to the point of fury with the members of the community in Galatia.

It is difficult to reconstruct a situation that relates to such a distant past, but we surmise that Paul went to Galatia to preach a law-free gospel. Some time later, another teacher insisted that only those who submitted to the law (as well as Christ) coul be saved. This teaching so convinced the Galatians that they were considering the drastic step of circumcision – proof that they are willing to live under the law. Paul was livid. He was so angry that he wrote: “I wish those who unsettle you would castrate themselves!” Paul’s depth of feeling is understandable; he was convinced that salvation was God’s free gift to those who believe. Circumcision implied faith in the law and not in God. Further, it was impossible to keep every aspect of the law. If a believer tried to keep the law they would fail. Worse still, the Galatians attempt to gain salvation by their own efforts would make a mockery of Jesus’ death which has achieved their salvation for them.

In both the letter to the Galatians and the letter to the Romans, Paul defends his conviction that those who believe in Jesus are justified by faith and not by anything that they do. The life of a believer is determined by the Holy Spirit and not by adherence to the law (which Paul associates with sin and death). This, Paul claims, is not a novel idea. In fact is as old as Abraham. Four hundred and thirty years before the law was given to Moses, Abraham was justified on the basis of his faith. This means, Paul tells us, that anyone who believes – Jew or Gentile – is made right with God. Abraham did not need the law in order to be justified, so the Galatians can be confident that their faith in God is sufficient for their salvation. Faith without the law leads to justification. The law, without faith, does not.

The gospel Paul preaches is a gospel of freedom – from the law, from sin and from death. “For freedom, Christ has set us free” (5:1), he exclaims. He cannot understand why when they have known the freedom he offered that the Galatians would submit themselves to slavery. The teachers who have followed Paul have unsettled the Galatians and undermined their confidence in the freedom Paul proclaimed.

It is easy to see how they could be seduced by the certainty and clarity of the law. Freedom is a difficult concept to grasp. Freedom doesn’t give guidelines on how to live; nor does it measure performance against some pre-determined guidelines. Freedom is too vague and illusive to be trusted. Like ourselves, the Galatians wanted to know what was right and what was wrong so that they had an assurance that they were doing what was right. Paul knows that this is a false assurance. Dependence on the law, leads to independence from God. The law is so far from being the answer that it crucified Jesus.

The cross shattered all the categories and definitions by which Paul had lived. He discovered that nothing was as he had thought it was. If the law, on which he had based his life and his behaviour, had led to the death of Jesus it could not be trusted. Paul was forced to place his trust solely in God rather than rely on human endeavour. He learned that, like Jesus, he had to submit his will to God’s – dying to self and allowing Christ to live in him. “It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me”. Paul had to leave behind his self-assurance and his independence. He had to die to everything that was not of God and open the way for the Holy Spirit (not the law) to direct and lead him.

On its own law will never be able to make us truly holy or perfect. We simply cannot legislate for love, joy, peace, gentleness. Laws can stop us from being bad, but they cannot force us to be truly good. True goodness, like true beauty comes from deep within. True holiness is part or who we are, not a veneer which we can use to cover up our imperfections. We cannot achieve true godliness simply by avoiding ungodliness. True godliness is achieved when we hand our lives over to God and allow God to take control of our lives. True holiness is gained when we let go of our egos and allow the Holy Spirit to determine how we live. We become Christ-like when we die to ourselves so that Christ may live in us.

For many of us, just as for the Galatians freedom from the law is an absolutely terrifying precept. Like the Galatians, many of us find it easier to obey rules than to be ruled by the Spirit. We are tempted to try to earn our own salvation, to rely on our own efforts rather than to trust God’s love for us and to have confidence that faith (not works) is all that it takes.

Faith or law, trust or independence – we can try to find our own way to God, or believe that God has already found us. Our salvation depends on the choice we make.

2nd Sunday after Pentecost – 2010

Luke 7:11-24

Marian Free

In the name of God who, in Jesus, brings healing, forgiveness and life to all. Amen.

During the week I watched a programme which followed the lives of a number of families who had broken free from a cult. The programme exposed the damage that can occur when controlling, judging and demanding leaders make the members of their congregations dependent on them. It also revealed the difficulty cult members had in letting go of a script in their head which says: “You are bad, if you don’t do what the cult says, you will go to hell.” At a special counselling centre, the cult members faced what had happened to them and tried to start thinking on their own again.

Their stories filled me with sadness. All of them had been made to feel that their only hope of heaven was to be obedient to the Pastor who was the only one who knew the word of God. At the same time, this obedience seemed always just out of their grasp. One woman says: “I always felt that I couldn’t do anything right.” The consequences for not conforming meant punishment in the present life as well as for eternity. Worse still was the punishment that was meted out to the children who were often beaten black and blue and who had their hands placed on a hot stove so that they would know what hell was like. The members of the cult had been drawn in by the authority of the pastor. They were no longer able to think for themselves – not even able to distinguish right from wrong. They lost confidence in their own powers of reason, in fact they had lost all confidence in themselves, and because, of the violence they had inflicted on their own children, they no longer felt fit to be parents.

At the centre, counsellors gently encouraged them to critique their situation and over time helped them to see that their experience had been one of abuse not of the practice of faith. A telling moment in the healing process came when a counsellor asked one woman: “According to your Christian viewpoint, what is faith supposed to produce?” The woman responded by listing the fruits of the spirit: “love, joy, peace, long suffering.” The counsellor asked: “Is that what your experience has produced?” “No”, she said. “It kills, it destroys. It doesn’t give life. It doesn’t produce fruit.” At that moment it became clear to her, that what the Pastor had been teaching was a distortion of the Christian faith, not the Christian faith at all. The Pastor’s power over her had been destroyed and she was set free to judge what faith was and what it was not.

In today’s gospel, Jesus encounters a funeral procession for the only child of a widow. Filled with compassion, Jesus raises the boy to life and restores him to his mother. He turns death to life, sorrow to joy and despair to hope.

On the surface, this is a simple miracle story demonstrating Jesus’ power to raise the dead and placing him in the line of the great prophets Elijah and Elisha (both of whom brought back to life the sons of widows). Luke’s intention in telling this story is much more complex. His goal here is to demonstrate just what sort of Saviour Jesus is and who it is who can be saved. Luke wants to demonstrate that, contrary to expectation, Jesus is not a king, not a leader of armies, not even a judge, but a healer and reconciler. He does not come only to save those who have achieved a certain standard of behaviour, or those who blindly follow sets of rules, or who think that they understand God’s word. Through his accounts of healing and raising from the dead, Luke reveals that Jesus’ ministry is extended to all and especially to those who least expect it, and those who on first impression seem to least deserve it.

In its broader context, the account of the widow’s son falls between the Sermon on the Plain and John the Baptist’s question: “Are you the one who is to come?” Earlier in the gospel, Luke has described a number of incidents in which Jesus demonstrates God’s saving love and compassion – lepers are healed, the paralysed man is forgiven. Immediately before the story of the raising of the widow’s son, Luke recounts Jesus’ healing of the slave of a Roman centurion. Together, these two accounts reveal that Jesus has a special concern with the poor and the marginalized and that God’s plan of salvation is going to be extended beyond the boundaries of Israel.

Jesus’ behaviour leaves John the Baptist bewildered. John had proclaimed the advent of someone more powerful than he, who will separate the wheat from the chaff which he will burn with unquenchable fire. In Jesus’ life, however, he is confronted with someone who announces God’s forgiveness and who, instead of condemnation, brings healing and hope. Jesus’ response to John’s question about who he is, shows that Jesus is the fulfillment of a different type of expectation. He says, ‘Go and tell John what you have seen and heard: the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, the poor have good news brought to them.”

The story of the raising of the widow’s son is part of Luke’s programme to reveal what sort of Christ Jesus is. Jesus knows nothing of the widow or her son. He doesn’t know how the son died, or whether the mother or the son were deserving of a miracle, he doesn’t ask that they have faith, or that they promise to amend their lives. Jesus sees someone in need and responds with love and compassion and in so doing brings the boy from death to life.

Jesus brings a message of liberation and hope to the poor, the marginalized and the vulnerable. He demonstrates God’s salvific love through the healing of the sick, the raising of the dead and the forgiveness of sins. His love and good will are not dependent on the previous good behaviour of the recipient, nor are they withdrawn when someone lets him down. He sets no preconditions for his love but extends it to all in need. Jesus’ healing, forgiveness, compassion and acceptance set people free to live. The message of the gospel is life-giving not life-denying. It doesn’t bind with guilt, or constrain with the threat of judgement. It doesn’t use force to restrict or confine, but gently liberates and expands our horizons. It doesn’t create self-doubt, but builds self-esteem. It relies on love, not fear, to draw out the best in everyone. As he raised he widow’s son, so Jesus will raise us to newness of life – often when we least expect it.

Pentecost 2010

John 14:8-17 , 25-27

Marian Free

In the name of God – Father, Son and Holy Spirit, Creator, Redeemer and Sanctifier. Amen.

Language is an interesting and powerful phenomena. It is interesting because it is fluid and alive. Words that meant one thing 100 years ago can, today, mean something quite different. For example, the word “let” which we use to mean “allow, permit”, once meant “prevent or hinder”. Pedantics among us moan about the misuse of language and grammar, but our complaints will make no difference as language continues to move and change around us. Language is powerful because it both describes and defines our realty. We need to be careful with our language for this very reason. On the one hand, we try to ensure that the language we use is adequate to describe the world around us. On the other hand we try to make sure that language that we use doesn’t confine and restrict. What we rather crudely call “political correctness” is, in fact, an attempt not to limit people by the language we use.

For example, few of us today would call someone a “spastic” not only because that became a derogatory term but also because it presumes that their physical condition is all that there is to be known about them. We would now refer to a person with “cerebral palsy” – indicating that they are an individual with a variety of gifts and limitations. They are a person first and their disability is only one part of who they are.

Religious language is not sheltered from these sorts of developments and changes. Many of you will remember that there was a time when we spoke of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. In fact if you were to take a look at the Athenasian Creed at the back of the Prayer Book, you would see that the third person of the Trinity is called the Holy Ghost. I can’t remember when that turned to Holy Spirit, but I can remember a young curate making a joke about Casper the friendly Ghost as he tried to explain that perhaps spirit was a better word for the third person of the Trinity. Somehow, with the passage of  the years, the expression ghost became associated with supernatural beings and therefore less respectable as a term to be used for God.

Ghost or Spirit, the third person of the Trinity is also known as the Paraclete or Advocate as we see in today’s gospel. The early church experienced the Spirit in a variety of ways. The Spirit descended on Jesus like a dove at his baptism but at Pentecost, the Spirit descended on the disciples as tongues of fire. It seems that in the early days the Holy Spirit acted in a variety of ways to empower the disciples and to speak through them and for them. The Spirit provided gifts of leadership, teaching and administration as well as the more dramatic gifts of speaking in tongues and prophesying and was to be known through its fruits. It is through the Spirit that the disciples were able to say “Abba, Father”, and the Spirit interceded with sighs too deep for words for they did not know how to pray as they ought. Paul told the Corinthians that their bodies were the temple of the Holy Spirit.

Language does not seem adequate to completely capture the nature of the Holy Spirit and the experience of the early church.

John’s gospel sheds some light on this problem. As we have seen, chapters 13-17 of John’s gospel form Jesus’ farewell speech to the disciples. Jesus is preparing the disciples for his death and for their life without him. In today’s reading from that gospel, Jesus is reassuring the disciples that they will not be left alone when he goes – he will send them another Advocate to be with them forever. The Advocate – the Holy Spirit was not necessary while Jesus was with them, but now that Jesus is departing, the Holy Spirit will take his place – teaching the disciples and reminding them of everything that Jesus has said to them.

Though Jesus is to depart from the world, he will still be present with and in the disciples in the third person of the Trinity – the Holy Spirit, another Advocate, the spirit of truth. Future generations will not know Jesus in his human form, but they will continue to be guided and taught by the Holy Spirit whom the Father sends. In this way, the Spirit represents “the ongoing presence of the revelation of God in the world[1].”

John’s formulation is very Trinitarian. Jesus in his human form reveals the Father. When he can no longer be present in this way, the Holy Spirit continues the work of empowering and enabling the disciples to do the works that Jesus has done. The Spirit will dwell in the disciples just as the Father dwelt in Jesus. The disciples, those who believe in Jesus, in some way become part of the relationship between the three members of the Trinity. The Spirit will be in them, they will do the works that Jesus did, Jesus and the Father will be revealed through them.

Jesus has radically changed how we understand God. In the Old Testament God was known to be present in the fire and in the cloud, God spoke to the prophets and entered into debate with Abraham and Moses. In Jesus, however, God physically entered into the world. In the Holy Spirit God remains not only in the world but in each one of us. Our relationship with God is personal and intimate because of the presence of God within us. If we open ourselves to that presence, we will be led by the Holy Spirit in all that we do and say. If we allow the presence of God to work within us, then God’s presence will continue to be known to the world.

At different times in our lives our experience of the Spirit may be dramatic or it may be restrained. There may be times when we are aware of our hearts burning within us, times when we know the deep peace that Jesus promised, times when we are forced to depend on the Spirit because we have no other source of strength and times when the Spirit impels us to do things we did not think we could possibly do.

Jesus says that has not left us orphans. Neither has he left us powerless. He continues to be with us and in us through the Holy Spirit and he has empowered us to do not only the works that he has done, but greater works beside.

Just imagine how different the world would be if each of us took Jesus’ promise seriously and gave the Spirit reign in our lives to continue Jesus’ work in the world.

Easter 7 – 2010

John 17:20-26

Marian Free

May God who is love dwell within us, Jesus who demonstrated God’s love inspire us, and the Holy Spirit who inspires us to love, unite us. Amen.

Today’s gospel concludes Jesus’ final discourse – the long speech which is designed to prepare the disciples for life without him and to equip them to build a community of faith. A key component of these last words is love. Jesus gives the disciples a new commandment: “to love one another, as I have loved you”. Jesus demonstrates this love by washing their feet and he will prove it on the cross. “No one has greater love than this, to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.” Jesus’ example of loving is to provide the basis for the new community – Jesus’ love for God, God’s love for Jesus, Jesus’ love for the disciples, God’s love for the disciples, their love for one another.

Love is crucial to the gospel, but it is a love which is more than relational. The love which Jesus commands is also missional. The love which Jesus shares with God makes God known. The love which the disciples share will make God known: “By this will others know that you are my disciples, that you have love one for another.”

Just as Jesus’ oneness with God is what makes God known to the disciples; the union between the disciples and Jesus is what will make Jesus known to the world – not only in the first generation, but to every generation yet to come. “that they may be one even as we are one, I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world my know that you have sent me.” Jesus repeats this theme three times in these seven verses. Love unites God to Jesus, Jesus’ love unites God to the disciples, the disciples love for one another will unite the world to God. The oneness of the Father and Son is to be mirrored in the life of the disciples so that just as Jesus revealed God, so too will they.

This is it, the one command that Jesus gives, the command to love, will ensure the continuity of his revelation. If the disciples can emulate Jesus’ self-effacing, self-giving love, the gospel will be spread throughout the world without any obvious effort on their part. If the disciples, through their love, seek union with God, God will be made known through them.  It is all too easy – the gospel summed up in one word: “Love”.

This is the only thing that Jesus asked us to do – to love God and to love each other. He did not burden us with dogma. He did not impose on us hundreds of laws to be remembered and kept. He did not establish elaborate rituals for us to follow. He asked only that we love.

It is so simple and yet so hard. Throughout all the centuries since we have failed miserably to live by that one command. The community which formed in Jesus’ name has spent endless Councils and Synods arguing over minute details of belief and practice. Throughout the centuries the church has created codes of behaviour by which we are to live and established standards of morality and goodness against which we can be measured. At the same time has developed a variety of missionary strategies to attract people to the faith and has worried endlessly about whether or not future generations will believe.

From the very beginning, the community discovered how difficult it was to live by love alone. Because Jesus did not give specific instructions the early church found itself ill-equipped to deal with the question of Gentile believers – should they or should they not become Jews? If they did not become Jews what was the very minimum that should be required of them? Because Jesus did not leave behind an institution with codes of practice, we have struggled ever since to know who to include and who to exclude.

The very human need for clarity and certainty has meant that from the beginning, the command to love has been the command that has most easily and most often broken. In comparison the commandments which do not refer to love are much simpler to obey. Do not steal is clear. Do not bear false witness – we know what that means. Do not murder – few of us would even consider breaking that one.

Love is quite a different matter. For one thing it is too vague – it does not tell us what to do. For another it is too easy – surely God wants more from us than that? Love doesn’t give instructions in good or bad. Love doesn’t tell us who is in and who is out. Love doesn’t provide assurance that we are getting it right. Love can’t be measured or weighed up or used to provide comparisons. And so throughout the centuries we have looked for different ways to express and to live our Christian faith – rules and regulations to make us secure in our place before God. Worse we have argued with each other about which of these are the best ways, about who among us has best interpreted Jesus’ teaching. Then we wonderwhy people have not flocked to belong.

The bottom line is that we do not fully understand and therefore do not trust God’s love for us. We are so used to the economy of exchange that it is almost impossible to believe that God would and does give us something for nothing. Somehow we have missed the message that even though we had done nothing to deserve it, God sent Jesus to effect our salvation. We fail to grasp that God’s love exceeds anything that we can even imagine. God took the risk of entering our world as a tiny baby because God loves us. God risked rejection and misunderstanding because God loves us. God suffered the humiliation and agony of the cross because God loves us. All that God asks in return is that we love God and that that love is extended to each other.

Extraordinary as it is – love is all that it takes. More extraordinary still is that when we love we are drawn into the relationship shared by the Father and the Son. More extraordinary even than that through our love, God is made known to the world.

In the words of the cartoonist Leunig: “Love one another it is as simple and as difficult as that. There is no other way”

Easter 6 – 2010

John 5:1-9

Marian Free

In the name of God who calls us into a new way of being in relationship, a new way of being. Amen.

Yesterday I opened an email that had been forwarded to me. It contained a series of very fine pencil drawing of animals and birds. While I admired the drawings, they were not particularly original. I couldn’t think why someone would gather them together and send them into hyper space. I am more used to forwards that are fun or that have a serious message – drawings was something new. I scrolled through the pictures until I came to a picture of the artist. Perhaps this was an advertisement I thought. I nearly closed the email, but curiosity got the better of me. Scrolling further I found the text which accompanied the email. The artist’s picture wasn’t an advertisement. These very detailed, very fine drawings had been created by someone who was only able to use his mouth to hold the pencil to execute the work. The accompanying text began: “We find excuses for not doing things ……”

Excuses come in all shapes and sizes and can be pulled out on almost any occasion – we are too young, we are too old, we haven’t had the right sort of education, someone will laugh at us, we have nothing to wear. We put things off until it is too late. We wait for other people to do things for us or for the time to be right. Some people are so good at making excuses for not doing things that they create arbitrary or fanciful limits on what they can do. They cage themselves around with indecision, self-doubt and uncertainty. They fail to trust, fail to venture. They procrastinate for so long that the opportunity to do what they wanted passes by. They expect the world to remake itself to suit them or at the very least expect others to remove the barriers for them.

Our reading today begins a new section in John’s gospel. In the first four chapters, the author has concentrated on the theme of belief or unbelief. From now until the end of chapter 10, Jewish feasts will provide both the background for Jesus’ teaching and the platform for a whole new way of interpreting God’s presence with God’s people. “A celebration of Jewish Feasts is called a zikkaron – a memory that recalled God’s active presence to the Jewish people[1]”. Passover, the Feast of the Tabernacles, the Dedication all reminded the people of God’s actions in the past and made those actions real in the present.

For Jews – those who believed in Jesus and those who did not – the destruction of the Temple and the defeat of the rebellion by Rome created a vacuum. Without the Temple the entire sacrificial system became redundant which meant that the relationship between God and God’s people had to be re-examined. The people were struggling to find a way to live their faith and to celebrate the Feasts which reminded them of God’s presence. The Jewish-Christian community for whom John wrote, were facing similar issues, exacerbated by their expulsion from the synagogues.

In telling the story of Jesus, John uses Jesus’ presence at the feast to demonstrate that God is present in the community, albeit in a new and unexpected way. Through a re-interpretation of the Feasts, Jesus is able to share with the community the knowledge that the Feasts (and consequently, the law) have been transformed or transcended in him. God’s presence is not to be sought in the law or the festivals, but in Jesus himself.  A believer’s relationship with God now occurs on a totally different plane. Believers relate to God through Jesus, not through the law or the festivals.

In this section of the gospel John also introduces Jesus’ confrontation with “the Jews” (in inverted commas). (“It is important to note here that when John’s gospel speaks of “the Jews”, it does not refer to the Jewish people who were contemporaneous with Jesus, but rather to those who, in the writer’s present continued to oppose the Johannine community, which itself had a Jewish identity. The conflict is not between two religions as you and I might imagine, but between two branches of the same family”. In John’s view “the Jews” are those who continue to hold to the law, the old way of understanding God’s intervention and presence, despite the fact that Jesus has revealed God to them. In contrast the Johannine community has been transformed by their relationship with Jesus and by a completely new view of the world and their relationship with God.

In this morning’s gospel, the point at issue is the observance of the Feast of the Sabbath as we can tell from the ominous ending: “Now that day was a Sabbath.” Jesus arrives in Jerusalem. In the north corner of the city is a pool which had a long history of being associated with healing – probably as far back as the Canaanites. John gives enough information for us to picture the scene for ourselves – there are five porticos filled with invalids. With the sort of prescience Jesus has shown before, – with Nathaniel, with the woman at the well,  he recognises a man who has been ill for 38 years!

Jesus asks the man a strange question: “Do you want to be made well?” The man responds with an excuse: “I have no one to put me in the water.” Clearly, he doesn’t know who Jesus is. What is more, like “the Jews”, he is looking at the world the wrong way. He is waiting for someone to physically put him in the pool. He doesn’t understand that what Jesus is offering is quite different. The old categories have been surpassed. Jesus offers something new and immediate, a relationship with God that does not require an intermediary. “Rise, take up your mat and walk.” This time the man offers no excuse.  In his obedient response to Jesus, the invalid finds that it is in his power to walk.

A simple miracle story turns out to be a lesson in understanding. The invalid’s horizon is broadened. He is no longer bound by the purely physical, or by the laws of the natural world. However, when we read further, we discover that the understanding of “the Jews” is reinforced and hardened by the event. They are not prepared to move away from tradition (in this case keeping the Sabbath) and their righteous self-control to recognise something new. They continue to look backwards, to seek authority in the law to rely on something other than themselves to achieve their relationship with God. They can not see that Jesus has exploded all the previous categories of expectation and relationship and has opened a new way of being the people of God that is not bound by ritual or circumscribed by law. They cannot accept that the God of their faith has now been revealed as the Father of Jesus and so they continue to find excuses not to believe and ways to prove to themselves that Jesus is not who he says he is.

In Jesus, God can be experienced in an immediate, direct and intimate way. We do not need anyone to help us to build a relationship. There are no excuses. We either risk opening our lives to Jesus and to the Spirit within us, or, like “the Jews” of John’s gospel, we can seek a refuge in formularies and laws, hoping that they will do the job for us. Jesus says: “Rise, take up your bed and walk” and the invalid responds. Jesus says: “Come, trust in me for your salvation” and all we need to do is believe.

Easter 5 – 2010

John 13:31-35

Marian Free

May God who is love give us love in our hearts and in our community. Amen.

“When he had gone out.” This is a strange place to begin a reading. Who has gone out and why? What is the context of this short reading? What has led up to Jesus’ triumphant statement: “Now has the Son of Man been glorified and God has been glorified in him”? Where is Jesus going and why can’t the disciples go with him? How does any of this relate to the command to love?

Chapters 13 to 17 in John’s gospel comprise what is known as Jesus’ Farewell Discourse. Set in the context of Jesus’ last meal with his disciples, these chapters record Jesus’ final teaching to his followers – teaching which is intended to prepare the disciples for Jesus’ departure and at the same time to establish some sort of grounding for the community which will be formed in his name. This teaching is presented to Jesus’ inner circle. It is not meant for the general public but is specific to those who will lead the community when Jesus has departed.

Within the New Testament context, these chapters are unique to John’s gospel. The other three provide a description of the meal, but do not include any teaching or final instructions. However, a final discourse is consistent with other Jewish literature in the time between the second century BCE and the third century CE in which are recorded the farewell speeches of a number of significant Jewish figures. Such speeches had a number of common elements – the prediction of the leader’s death and departure, predictions of attacks in the future on the leader’s followers, an exhortation to ideal behaviour, a final commission, an affirmation of and renewal of the never-ending covenant promises of God and a closing doxology. A number of these characteristics are recognizable in Jesus’ farewell speech in John’s gospel.

Today’s command to love belongs in this wider context of the gospel and concludes the introduction to the speech. The time is before the Passover, and Jesus is in Jerusalem with his disciples. They are having supper when Jesus leaves the table to wash his disciples’ feet – a service which Peter at first rejects because he does not understand. When Jesus sits down to the meal again, he explains his actions. His disciples are to model this style of servant leadership. In the new community loving service is to prevail. Not all is right however, Jesus is troubled. He knows the disciples so well, that he is aware that one of them will be unable to conform to this model of service. Judas’ treachery is exposed and he is forced to leave, which is where our reading began: “When he had gone out..”

Judas’ departure leads to a shout of triumph from Jesus: “Now is the Son of Man glorified.” The hour which Jesus has been predicting has come, Jesus will “be lifted up” in a final act of self-giving which will draw all people to himself. This is the moment he has been waiting for; this is the reason for which he came. He realizes however that the crucifixion will leave the disciples distressed and confused – they cannot go where he is going – at least not yet. Jesus’ concern for them is obvious. He addresses them as “little children” (an expression he will use again when he is on the beach the morning after the resurrection). They do not yet have the maturity or the faith to comprehend what is about to occur.

Finally, despite everything, Jesus entrusts them with the commandment which is to form the basis of the new community – the command to love one another with the same love with which he has loved them (a love, which from the context, will involve them in the self-gift which leads to death).

In the three chapters which follow, Jesus expands on this key theme of love – the Father’s love for Jesus, Jesus’ love for the Father and Jesus’ love for the disciples. It is this love which he commands them to perpetuate in their love for one another. Jesus’ expectation of and hope for the disciples is an extraordinary one given that he “knew whom he had chosen” (13:18). He knew that Judas would hand him over to the authorities; he knew that Peter would betray him; he knew that the disciples would abandon him. In full knowledge of his disciples’ ignorance, failure, misunderstanding, their lack of nerve, betrayal and denial, Jesus asserts his love in word and action and asks them to follow his example.

Love is central to the future of the community. Those who love Jesus will be loved by the Father. Jesus will reveal himself to those who love him and he and the Father will come to them. Over and over again, Jesus repeats the commandment to love one another and, using the image of the vine alerts them to the costly nature of this love: “This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you. ¹³No one has greater love than this, to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.” If they so love, the disciples will be set apart from those around them. Jesus prays that the disciples “may be one, so that the world may know that he is sent by God and that God loves the disciples even as he has loved Jesus” (17:21). He prays that God’s love for himself may be in his disciples in order that they might be one even as he and the Father are one. The community formed and commissioned by Jesus’ farewell speech is to be a community united by servant leadership and by self-sacrificial love.

The love which Jesus models and teaches is the love we are called to show to one another. It is a love which reverses the expected patterns of behaviour. It is a love so radical that it cannot help but make the world sit up and take notice – ^35”By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another”. Jesus models and envisages a community in which service not competition is the model and in which self-giving love takes precedence over self-serving ambition. The community which Jesus asks his disciples to be is a community which reflects that love between the Father and Son, a love so complete that they are indistinguishable one from another.

It has been millennia since anyone said: “Look at those Christians, see how they love one another.” The question that we must ask ourselves over and over again is this: Does our love for one another set us apart from the world around us in such a radical way that people notice? If not, why not and what are we doing about it?

Easter 3 – 2010

John 21:1-19

Marian Free

In the name of God who in Jesus demonstrates that God’s love is never withdrawn. Amen.

At the end of chapter 20 in John we read: “Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book. 31But these are written so that you may come to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that through believing you may have life in his name.” These words seem to indicate that the gospel has reached its conclusion. There are many scholars who believe that the original gospel ended at this point. This view is supported by other evidence which is found in chapter 21 For example, the use of language is different in this last chapter, the wrong number of resurrection appearances is recorded. Chapter 21 provides the only mention of the sons of Zebedee in the gospel.

At the same time, the chapter contains characteristics which are consistent with the authorship of the first twenty chapters. Most notable of these is the author’s use of a variety of terms to express the same thing. For example, three different Greek words are used for “fish”, Simon is asked to “tend” or “feed” “Jesus’ sheep” or his “lambs”. Much has been made of Jesus’ use of two different words for “love” – “agaph” (agape) and “filoV” (philos), however there is little significance in the language other than the author’s wish to avoid repetition. Also consistent with the author of John’s gospel is the refusal to name the Beloved Disciple.

Not only is it difficult to determine whether or not the chapter belongs to the gospel, but there are also a number of puzzles in it to which we may never have an answer. For example: Where does Jesus get the fish which he is cooking? Why is the exact number – 153 – of fish mentioned? Perhaps most puzzling is why the disciples – who not only have seen the risen Jesus, but who have received the Holy Spirit and been commissioned for ministry – return to their previous way of life?

Whether or not chapter is original to the gospel it does contain many elements of the Jesus’ tradition and is beautifully crafted with allusions to events in the rest of the gospel for example the bread and fish of the account of the feeding of the five thousand. Further more, it helps the readers to understand Peter’s rehabilitation.

The chapter consists of five parts. First of all the author sets the scene – seven disciples are by the Sea of Tiberias. Next comes a short account of a miraculous catch of fish (a miracle with which we are familiar from other gospels). This section includes the recognition of Jesus. When the boat reaches shore Jesus invites the disciples to share a meal. Finally, after the meal Jesus has a conversation with Simon which leads to a revelation about the Beloved Disciple.

 Within the story are a number of allusions to earlier parts of the gospel which round out the account. Peter’s enthusiastic response to the Beloved Disciple’s recognition of Jesus is reminiscent of his racing into the tomb when the other disciple had simply looked in. The miraculous catch and the precise number of fish reminds the reader that the disciples elsewhere have been called to fish for people.

However it is the reference to the charcoal fire which is most evocative. Fresh in the minds of the readers is Peter’s three-fold denial of Jesus – while he was warming himself at a charcoal fire. There is no mention here of the past, but the charcoal fire and Jesus’ threefold question and commissioning brings it clearly to mind. Here in the final section of the story and indeed of the gospel, the author makes us witnesses to Simon’s restoration and his re-commissioning as the future shepherd of Jesus’ sheep.

There is no confession, no act of repentance on Peter’s part and there is no remonstrance or offer of absolution on the part of Jesus. Jesus simply seeks to be assured that Peter loves him (Jesus) more than he loves the other disciples. Then, without any demand but that of love, Jesus re-instates Peter as the one who will take his place as the shepherd of the sheep.

From a human perspective, this is an extraordinary thing for Jesus to do. We know that when Jesus needed Simon the most, Simon turned his back. He demonstrated that when the going gets tough, he gets going. He publicly let Jesus down, made out that he didn’t even know him and abandoned Jesus to his fate. It would not be unreasonable for Jesus to express disappointment or disapproval. In fact, we would not be in the least surprised if Jesus were angry with Simon. We might think that Jesus would ask for an explanation of Simon’s behaviour, but the past is not even mentioned. On the other hand, it is only reasonable to expect an articulation of shame and guilt from Peter or a request for forgiveness, yet neither are forthcoming. Without having to do anything except affirm his love, Peter is restored not only as Jesus’ friend, but as the leader of the community which will be formed in Jesus’ name.

Simon’s behaviour is equally extraordinary. Instead of skulking guiltily behind the other disciples – filled with guilt and shame, as soon as he knows it is Jesus on the shore Simon leaps into the water to be the first to reach him. It is as if nothing had happened between them. Somehow Simon knew what Judas did not – that Jesus’ love for him was unconditional, that it would survive his betrayal. Simon didn’t need to take his own life in despair, because he knew that despite his abandonment of Jesus and Jesus’ disappointment, Jesus would not abandon him.

This does not mean that he gets off scot free. He has let Jesus down and Jesus needs to be sure that he will not fail him again. So Jesus seeks an assurance of Simon’s love. Three times he asks him: “Do you love me?” Three times Simon has to respond that yes he does. Only then is Jesus satisfied that Simon is ready to submit himself completely to the will of God and to go wherever that call may lead him, even if that means death. Simon has learnt, through his failures what it is that is most important to him. 

In this lifetime, we will let God down and we will let ourselves down, but we can learn from Peter that God’s love is never withdrawn and that if we trust in that love and learn from our failures, not only will we be fully restored, but as we submit ourselves completely to God’s love, we will find that God will use even us for good.

Easter 2 – 2010

John 20:19-31

Marian Free

In the name of God who accepts our frailty, respects our desire for proof and blesses us with faith. Amen.

In 2000, Pope John Paul II issued a formal apology for all the mistakes committed by some Catholics in the last 2,000 years of the Church’s history. Included in the apology was the trial of Galileo. Galileo, who changed how we see the world, was at the time, pilloried, charged with heresy and placed under house arrest for a large part of his life.  From a twentieth century perspective, the church’s treatment of Galileo seemed to be unnecessarily harsh – especially as Galileo’s theories were not even new.

Earlier in the 16^th century Copernicus had used mathematics to develop a theory that the sun was the centre of our galaxy and that the earth and all other planets revolved around the sun. This view completely contradicted a view held for 14 centuries that the earth was the centre of the universe and that all else revolved around it. Copernicus did not publish his work, but news of his theory began to circulate after his death.

Galileo began his teaching career expounding this earlier view, but based on his own observations soon became convinced of Copernicus’ research and incorporated these theories into his lectures. The church was not particularly perturbed by the theory, or by science as a whole. The problem for the church was that Galileo’s theory could not be conclusively proven. Furthermore, the theory contradicted scripture – After all, didn’t Joshua make the sun stand still and the Psalmist say that the earth was set firmly in its place?

Even though Galileo was a devout and committed Catholic and a brilliant physicist, but he could not confine himself to the limits of the time. As well as spreading his new theory as if it were proven, he attempted to demonstrate how scripture should be interpreted so that there was no contradiction between his theory and the bible. In so doing, he entered the territory of scriptural interpretation and theology – areas reserved for the church. The church of the time was not un-scientific. It was a church of the age, a church of reason not of guesswork. Galileo broke the rule by presenting theory as fact.

Theory vs fact, imagination vs confirmation, fantasy vs reality, fact vs fiction, faith vs doubt. To accuse the church of Galileo’s age of being unscientific is to misrepresent the facts. It was not afraid of knowledge, but it was concerned that knowledge be backed by reason.

The early disciples have a lot in common with the church of the 16^th century. They were people of reason and fact. Even an unscientific age knew that the dead did not rise. They needed proof before they could believe. Their faith did not come all at once. In fact they took some convincing. To them empty tomb was just that – an empty tomb. On its own it was not sufficient to convince the disciples that Jesus had risen. Neither were the words of the angels proof enough. And reports that the women had seen Jesus were not sufficient to convince them.

Initially all the disciples were uncomprehending. For them it was impossible that the man whom they saw crucified could be anything but dead. They needed evidence. They needed to see and touch for themselves before they believed. Why then does John separate out Thomas for special mention? Thomas asks for no more than the others have sought and received. The women have seen, and the disciples have seen. Thomas would like to see and feel. Why then is he censured?

In order to understand the account of Thomas we have to understand when and why John was writing. John’s is the last of the gospels to be written and it is written at a time when there are no longer any eye-witnesses to the earthly Jesus or to the resurrection. He is writing for those who have not, and probably will not, see the risen Christ. The generation for whom he writes believe according to what they have heard. Whereas Luke is concerned to prove that the risen Jesus was a physical reality and not merely a vision, John is concerned to emphasise that the resurrection does not require palpable proof and that faith alone is sufficient.

Both Luke and John record Jesus’ appearance behind locked doors on the day of the resurrection. Only John records a second appearance. According to John, Thomas, absent on the first occasion, cannot believe the accounts of the disciples (just as they could not believe Mary Magdalene). He is adamant that he requires concrete proof. Jesus second appearance allows John to make the point that those who believe without seeing are in no way inferior to those who have seen. He is thus able to affirm the faith of those for whom he is writing. He quotes Jesus is as saying: ‘Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have come to believe.’ John’s readers then are among the blessed. They are the true Christians – they believe without ever having seen the earthly or the risen Jesus. They are the Christians of the future, the model of all those who are yet to come. Faith does not belong to the first generation, but to every succeeding generation.

Today’s physicists are less dogmatic and certain than Galileo. They recognise that we do not and may not have answers to all the questions of the universe and that theories are just that – ideas about the nature of things. They are more willing to live without absolute certainty. Every age sees the world through a different lens. The age of miracle and superstition gave way to the age of science and reason. Now an age of certainty is giving way to a willingness to live with uncertainty.

If Jesus was really displeased with Thomas he would not have returned, nor would he have invited him to touch his hands and his side. The story is important not because of its censure of Thomas, but because it affirms the faith of all who have not seen.

We count ourselves among blessed, because we have not seen and yet we believe.

Easter Day – 2010

Luke 24:1-11

Marian Free

In the name of God who opens our eyes to a new reality in Jesus Christ. Amen.

Why do you seek the living among the dead?

C.S. Lewis, author of the much loved children’s books the Chronicles of Narnia, as well as numerous books on popular theology, was for much of his life a committed atheist. His journey to the Christian faith came about through a search for joy. He discovers in a round about way that his objectifying of joy makes it allusive and always beyond his reach, or at least, when he reaches it, it is not what he is looking for. “All his waitings and watchings for joy, all his vain hopes to find some mental content on which he could lay his finger and say: “this is it” had been a futile attempt.

Having lost any faith in his early teens, and having lost interest in Christianity, Lewis did not look for joy in faith. Faith catches him almost unawares, and when it does he stops looking, in part, because it has lost the importance he once attached to it.[1]

Why do you seek the living among the dead?

There are many who spend their lives searching because they are dissatisfied with the world as they know it. For many of them the search takes them on a wild goose chase which has little chance of bringing them the peace of mind which they seek. Their lives are littered with “if only’s”. If only I had a better job, if only my wife/husband understood me, if only my house were bigger, my children smarter, if only my parents had done this or that, if only my boss recognised my talents. The search never comes to a conclusion because they will never find satisfaction in external circumstances, but will only be happy and at peace if they can comes to terms with who and what they are. The search fails because they are looking for the wrong things in the wrong places.

Why do you seek the living among the dead?

Despite the fact that Jesus has spent three years with his closest friends they still have not understood what he is about. Despite Jesus’ teaching and example, they have not understood that he is opening the way to a new form of reality, that he is breaking down the barriers between heaven and earth and trying to establish a whole new way of being. His followers, limited by their human understanding do not comprehend when he challenges the earthly notions of power and competition and replaces them with service and mutuality. They have not fully grasped the implications of unconditional love and forgiveness. Jesus has tried to encourage them to live by different standards and be guided by different principles than those of this world. He lives and demonstrates kingdom values.

Why do you seek the living among the dead?

Worst of all Jesus’ disciples haven’t really grasped who he is and what his purpose is. To them the crucifixion is the end – not only of Jesus’ life but of all the hopes and dreams they had built around him. So on the day after the Sabbath, the women go to the tomb to anoint his lifeless body. He is dead and they are grief-stricken, confused and perhaps even disappointed, but they will still do what is necessary and say their last “good-byes”.

Despite all that Jesus has said and done, they expect to find him there in the tomb – the life drained out of him. He is not there. In fact, he was never going to be there. They are searching for the wrong thing, in the wrong place.

Why do you seek the living among the dead?

Having not understood in the first place, the women and, in turn the disciples, are still operating according to earthly values and expectations. It takes some time, and according to Luke, further explanation before they really grasp the full implication of all that has happened. The crucifixion did not represent the failure of Jesus’ mission and the resurrection confirmed and affirmed all that Jesus had said and done.

In his life, his death and now his resurrection, Jesus has opened the door to a new way of living, a new reality and a new way of seeing the world. He has exposed the limitations of human thinking and the frailty of human behaviour. Now the resurrection explodes all of our notions of what is real and challenges our narrow frames of reference – if death is not the end, then anything is possible. Most importantly, the resurrection breaks through the barrier between this world and the next making it possible for us to live both in this world and in the world to come, free from the strivings and disappointments of this existence.

Why do you seek the living among the dead?

The resurrection challenges us to consider where our true values lie, in what we place our hopes and what brings us true contentment. Do we seek happiness in material things or worldly success which are ultimately transitory and unsatisfying, or do we seek the deep peace and joy which come from a relationship with the living God? Are we looking for short term gains, or long term solutions to life’s complexities? Are we firmly rooted in this world, or are we already participating in the benefits of the next?

Jesus reveals to us a different way of being. He demonstrates that it is possible to live in a way which recognises that the barriers between heaven and earth have been broken down. He shows us what it is to live according to the values of the kingdom and through his crucifixion and resurrection; he shatters our fear of death.

Why seek the living among the dead, why strive for things which do not satisfy? The resurrection is guarantee of life – resurrection life in the future and resurrection life in the present – peace, joy and contentment. In Jesus the dead have been raised, and in him we find that we have all that we need.