Unsung heroes

November 3, 2012

Listening outside the church at Gunbalanya – Lois in pink

All Saints 2012

A Reflection

Marian Free

In the name of God who alone can judge the secrets of the heart. Amen.

Today I’m going to do something a little different. I’m going to speak from the heart. I think most of you know that I spent the first week of my holidays in Darwin. It was my first time there and it was a marvelous experience. Two particular experiences were very confronting and challenging and relate to what are perhaps the most difficult and divisive social issues of our time. So please be clear, I’m sharing how these events touched me, not trying to provide answers, or to tell you how to think.

One experience was this. I was sitting in the Cathedral waiting for the service to begin when the a bus-load of Iranian asylum seekers arrived – five of whom were to be baptised. The issues surrounding asylum seekers are complex and I don’t want to argue the rights and wrongs or even to suggest that I have made up my own mind on the issue. What struck me was that when someone is sharing your pew, it is hard to think that when you are going home, they are going to jail.

The second profound experience occurred during a visit to Kakadu. The Bishop had organized a local priest to take three of us out for the day. After a visit to some rock art, we drove to Oenpelli (Gunbalanya) – that part of Kakadu over which the indigenous people have Native Title. Our purpose there was to meet with the local priest – Lois and some of her congregation – Hagar Lois’s sister who is a teacher at the local primary school, Marlene her sister-in-law and a young woman named Leandra.

Lois’s story is that her family come from a place near Katherine, but they moved to Gunbalanya when she was quite young. Among other things this meant learning another language and a dislocation from her family’s spiritual home.  Despite numerous difficulties in her lifee Lois’s faith remained strong and she was the obvious person to lead the church in her community and is now their priest.

From our host for the day I learned that a major issue confronting Lois in her ministry was the occasional visits to the community by people from a Pentecostal expression of Christianity. These people are very enthusiastic and make wild promises about such things as healing from alcohol dependence. As a result they gather a following from among the residents of the community. When they leave, those they have left behind often discover that the promises had no substance, that they are unable to stay away from drink, that they are not healed of their ailments. As a result, they return to their former ways with the one difference being that now they are disillusioned with the Christian faith. As a priest Lois must do what she can to pick up the pieces and, if she can, restore their faith.

Lois and her friends talked a lot about sharing the Good News and very little about any problems in their community. It was only as we were leaving that Hagar, Lois’s sister grabbed my arm and said, “This is what we need to do more of – talk to each other.” I could only agree. We hear so much about indigenous communities through our media, the problems with alcohol and petrol sniffing, the endemic sexual abuse, the violence and the hopelessness but few, if any, of us have been into these communities or spoken to people who live in them. If we don’t make connections, if we don’t sit down and talk how can we have opinions about policies and decisions that affect their lives?

I often feel helpless in the face of such suffering, especially as I live in a part of Australia in which my contact with aboriginal Australians is so rare as to be almost non existent. I left Gunbalanya feeling incredibly privileged to have shared time, be it ever so brief with Lois and her friends and wondering what if anything I could do to make a difference. In particular I wondered how I could respond to Hagar’s plea.

Saints come in all shapes and sizes, and by far the majority are the unsung heroes who simply get on with their lives no matter how difficult they are. Women like Lois, Hagar and Marlene are Anglican women who remain strong and positive in the face of considerable difficulty and all they asked of me and of you is that we listen to their story. It is hard to know how to help, but, if you look at the envelop that you would have received in your pew sheet last week, you will see a photo of Lois. This year the proceeds of the Archbishop’s November Appeal will be directed to Indigenous ministry in the Northern Territory and Bathurst. (Readers who would like to contribute are directed to the website for the Anglican Board of Missions. http://www.abmission.org)

Gunbalanya is a four hour flight and a three hour drive away from Brisbane. There is little that we can do to respond directly to Hagar’s plea that we talk. However, we can support the work of Lois and others like her by giving generously to this Appeal. It is my hope that this year our donations to this appeal will outstrip all previous years and that we will take any opportunities that come our way to listen to our brothers and sisters in Christ whose lives are so vastly different from our own.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in All Saints, Indigenous Australians | Comments Off on Unsung heroes

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

Putting others first

October 20, 2012

Pentecost 21

Mark 10:32-45

Marian Free

 

In the name of God for whom the greatest is the one who serves. Amen.

I wonder what would be the result if I asked you to write down what you thought were the requirements for a good leader.  What would you value more highly – getting the job done or ensuring that everyone felt that they were making a contribution, forging ahead regardless or waiting for the slower ones to catch up, insisting that the task be done a particular way or seeking feedback from everyone else?

If you google “leadership” you will come up with at least three sites that claim to tell you the ten characteristics of a good leader and another that could come up with only seven. The site that caught my attention was strangely enough called Compare Business Products. Its definition of leadership was: “one’s ability to get others to willingly follow.” Vision was identified as a key characteristic of this style of leader: “A leader with vision has a clear, vivid picture of where to go, as well as a firm grasp on what success looks like and how to achieve it.” A good leader it says must also be able to communicate his or her vision and have the self discipline to work single-mindedly towards that vision and inspire others to do the same.

As well as vision, this article recommended that a leader have integrity, dedication, magnanimity, humility, openness. creativity, fairness, assertiveness and a sense of humour. An alternate site listed mission, vision, goal, competency, a strong team, communication skills, interpersonal skills, a “can do, get it done attitude”, inspiration and ambition as the qualities required by a superior leader.

Yet another felt that a good leader needed an exemplary character, enthusiasm, confidence, functioning in an orderly and purposeful manner, being able to tolerate ambiguity while remaining calm, an ability to think analytically, and a commitmentto excellence.

It is intriguing to note how different the lists are. I wonder to which, if any of these, Jesus would have given the stamp of approval.

In today’s gospel Jesus is making his way towards Jerusalem. His disciples are both amazed and afraid. It is in Jerusalem that Jesus is most likely to come into conflict with the religious leaders. It is in Jerusalem that his ideas will be most exposed to scrutiny and it is in Jerusalem where his popularity will be most threatening to the leaders of the church and to the might of Rome. No wonder the disciples are amazed. No wonder they are afraid. No wonder that they let Jesus go on ahead while they hang back! If he is in danger so are they.

Jesus’ leadership is one that includes his followers. He is not so focused on the future that he has forgotten those whom he leads. So he calls the twelve out of the crowd and explains what lies ahead for him. He tells them that he will be handed over to the chief priests and scribes who will condemn him to death and then to the Gentiles (the Romans) who will mock him, spit on him and kill him.

This is the third time that Jesus has told the disciples that he is going to die and for the third time the enormity of the revelation and the disciples’ complete failure to comprehend leads them to respond foolishly. This time it is James and John who respond foolishly. Despite Jesus’ previous teaching and despite the fact that more than once Jesus has used a child as an illustration of the ideal disciple, the two brothers ask to be elevated to positions of status or rank – not on earth – but in heaven! Did Jesus’ announcement make the brothers so anxious and so frightened that they wanted to assure their future –to be sure that following Jesus was going to be worth the risk? Or were they really seeking their own agrandisement at the expense of the other disciples?

Of course, we’ll never know what prompted their question. What we do know is that their request, not surprisingly, made the other disciples angry and led to Jesus to teach them about leadership. He points to the examples of leadership with which the disciples are familiar, in particular to the Romans who are ruling Palestine and whose rule is maintained by force. In the Empire power was in the hands of a few amongst whom there was fierce and sometimes violent competition for recognition and status.  Those who became rulers by wealth or by stealth ensured that they received due recognition for their status, and demanded subservience and submission from those whom they considered to be beneath them.

Jesus’ model of leadership is entirely different. In fact it is not leadership or authority that is to be prized among Jesus’ followers, but servanthood. The disciples are to stand out from the crowd, not by achieving notoriety or rank, but just the reverse. Instead of seeking recognition and status, the says, hey are to be as servants or slaves to others. This would have been an entirely novel idea in the first century, as it would be for many of our own generation. Just as it is difficult for us to get our head around the idea that the last will be first, so it a challenge to understand that in order to be the greatest in our community, we must be a slave to all.

Being a slave didn’t make it to any of our lists of the characteristics of a good leader though the first did include magnanimity and humility. The example Jesus set and the model Jesus asks us to adopt is that of putting others first – encouraging and building up those for whom we have responsibility – rather than demand that they follow our vision or do as we say. Leadership in the Jesus’ movement has nothing to do with self-agrandisement and everything to do with supporting, upholding and enhancing the lives of everyone else.  Honour is not something that can be bestowed or earned, but those who give of themselves for others, those who seek the well-being of others before their own are those who contrary to their own expectations, may discover themselves to be the greatest.

In the community formed by Jesus, there is no place for competition, no need to strive for elevation or promotion. Following in the footsteps of Jesus we relinquish all ambition and need for recognition and find our sense of purpose and meaning in putting others first.

Tags: ,
Posted in Mark's gospel | Comments Off on Putting others first

What do you need to give up?

October 13, 2012

Pentecost 20

Mark 10:17-31

Marian Free

 In the name of God who gives us all that we need. Amen.

Years ago I bought a book titled Poor in Spirit. It is filled with stories written by people living and working among the poor – both in the United States and in the Third World. The stories are varied – one tells how powerful it is to hear the mullah call the faithful to prayer before dawn and to greet and be greeted by everyone saying “God be with you.”  Another writes of the presence of God in the barrenness of the desert. Yet another tells of a baptism in the cow shed to demonstrate to others that one can be a Christian and not abandon one’s culture.

Today I’d like to share the story called “My Mother’s Blessing”. It tells the story of a young African who is brought up by his mother after the death of his Father. Mother and son become very close – she buys and sells fish and he prepares their dinner while he waits for her to come home at night. There are other children – daughters who have left home – but in this culture it is the son who is expected to care for the mother as she ages. It is difficult therefore for the son to confide to his mother that he has felt a call to become a member of a religious community and hard for his mother to accept his sense of vocation. She tries to dissuade him from this course of action but eventually resigns herself to the situation and does not mention it again.

The day comes for the son to leave home. His mother is old and frail; she knows that they may never see each other again. “Come,” she says, “Let us make our last offering to God.” She suggests that they say The Lord’s Prayer, the Apostle’s Creed and ten Hail Marys. Then, in a strong and confident voice she blesses her son: “All belongs to God and returns to God. Who am I to oppose your calling? Go! The greatest riches are not on earth. And thanks be to God for having chosen you.”[1]

Another title for the book could have been: “The greatest riches are not on earth.” A common theme of the stories is a deep trust in and a dependence on God that is not determined by the storyteller’s physical, material or emotional situation.

In today’s gospel we have three stories that are ostensibly about wealth – the rich man, the eye of the needle and the benefits that result from giving up everything to follow Jesus. It is easy to draw the conclusion from these that Jesus is demanding those who follow him to give up all their possessions and abandon everything to follow him. This section of the gospel can have a way of making us feel uncomfortable – none of us has taken the radical step of abandoning everything in order to be a disciple of Jesus.

I can’t speak for you, but I know that compared to those who live on one dollar a day I know that I am among the rich. Jesus’ encounter with the rich man leaves me wondering whether I too should sell all that I have and give it to the poor. The saying about the camel and the needle forces me to ask: how rich do I have to be to be unable to fit through the eye of a needle. Peter’s question brings me back to the rich man – how much does Jesus expect me to give up in order to be a disciple?

The gospels have a great deal to say about how we should use our resources. Jesus’ example and teaching urge us to care for the poor and the outcast. The beatitudes make it clear that the values of the Kingdom are not the values of the world: “blessed are the poor” we are told. There have been thousands if not thousands of thousands of Christians who have abandoned comfort and wealth to serve Jesus or to serve others. That said, it is important that we understand today’s gospel in its context. Is Jesus saying that the only way to follow him is to abandon everything?

I have found a small commentary by Paul Achtemeier[2] helpful. The wider context  of the gospel makes it clear that it is our attitude to our relative wealth, rather than wealth itself that is a problem.

Over the course of the last few weeks this has been a constant theme. We have been reminded not to compete but to be as a child, we have been exhorted not to hurt one of these little ones and told that unless we welcome the Kingdom as a child we will not enter it. Throughout this section of the gospel, Jesus has been trying to help his disciples to understand that the Kingdom is a gift, a gift to those who do not and cannot deserve it. Dependence on God and on God’s goodness is the primary criterion for entering the Kingdom of God.

It is within this context that we have to understand today’s gospel which, as I have said, consists of three distinct parts. First of all, the rich man comes to Jesus with a problem. He already keeps the commandments but he knows that something is missing – he knows that simply following the rules is not enough. Jesus’ response is radical and disturbing. He instructs the man to sell everything and to follow him. The man is a good person but he his wealth is more important to him than his relationship with God. He will have to give away his self-reliance if he is to achieve the relationship with God that he seeks. For the time being at least, this is more than the rich man is prepared to do.

Jesus’ conversation with the rich man does not establish a criterion for all people for all time – that would be to introduce a new rule, a goal to be reached. It would have the opposite effect and make us dependent on ourselves not God. Jesus’ conversation with the rich man establshes a general principle – nothing (wealth, achievement) should come between ourselves and God. Our confidence and hope should be in God alone.

Jesus continues this reflection – inheritance of the kingdom is not something that relies on any kind of achievement including wealth. Just as we cannot earn our way into heaven so we cannot buy our way into heaven. Inheritance of the kingdom, entry into eternal life is God’s gift to us and unless we can accept it as a gift, we like the rich man exclude ourselves from its benefits. The disciple’s question, “Then who can be saved?”, demonstrates just how difficult it is for human beings to give up their striving and rely on God. We find it so hard to accept that attaining the kingdom does not depend on our own efforts but on the free gift of God. Like the rich man we want to know what we can do, what rules we should obey in order to be saved. Like the disciples, we want to achieve it on our own merits, we like measurable goals, benchmarks that can be reached. Trusting in God’s love for us, does not provide enough certainty. We like to think that there is a certain standard against which we can measure ourselves. Giving up our need for certainty, trusting in God is both the hardest and easiest aspect of our faith.

Yet as Jesus goes on to say, if we can let go of our need for certainty and security the reward will be a hundred times more than anything we can imagine in this life or in the life to come.

What do you rely on more than God and how hard would it be to give it up?

[1] Lepetit, Charles. Poor in Spirit: Modern Parables of the Reign of God. Notre Dame, Indiana: Ave Maria Press, 1989, 61.

[2] Achtemeier, Paul. Invitation to Mark: A Commentary on the Gospel of Mark with Complete Text from the Jerusalem Bible. New York: Image Books, 1978.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Mark's gospel, Wealth | Comments Off on What do you need to give up?

Becoming as a child

October 6, 2012

Pentecost 19

Mark 10.13-16  St Francis’ Day

Marian Free

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

What is it about children? Mark has used a child as an illustration three times now. A child is used to confront the disciples’ ideas of grandeur. The disciples are urged not to do anything that would hurt the faith of “these little ones” and today’s gospel suggests that unless the disciples welcome the kingdom of God as a little child, they will not enter it. It seems that Jesus is using the example of a child to confront the arrogance of the disciples, to emphasise their responsibility towards the vulnerable and to teach them how to accept God’s gifts to them.

From a twentieth century standpoint the obvious conclusion from today’s gospel is that Jesus is encouraging us to re-capture the wide-eyed innocence of our childhoods, to be open to the mystery and wonder of the kingdom rather than approaching it with jaded and cautious minds. There may be some element of this in what Jesus is saying, but given the unwarranted self-assurance of the disciples, their competition with each other and their desire to exclude others from their number, it is more likely that Jesus is referring to the lack of social status and the dependence of children.

According to the rabbinic tradition children were a waste of time – like drinking too much wine or associating with the ignorant. One saying reads: “Morning sleep and midday wine and children’s talk and sitting in the meeting houses of the people of the land put a person out of the world (M Abot 3:11). Children were not only a waste of time, but they were owed nothing. A child had no claim on anyone and could have no expectation that they deserved anything from anyone – including their parents. If they were treated well it was due to the love and generosity of their parents, but no expectations or obligations were placed on parents.  Children were completely dependent on the adults in their lives and good treatment was a matter of luck rather than a right. As a consequence, anything good that a child experienced or was given was received as a gift which they had done nothing to warrant.

Even in today’s world in which children are generally valued and in which their rights are enshrined in law, a child is still dependent on the adults in their lives for the quality of their care, for affection, for food, clothing and shelter, for education and medical care. Most of us spend our lives trying to escape this sort of dependence on others and few would make dependence rather than independence a life’s goal.

Yet it is precisely this that Jesus is recommending to his self-absorbed disciples. He is reminding them that they should understand that entry into the kingdom is not a right or something that they should take for granted. Entry into the kingdom of God is not earned by proving that they are better than one another. It is not the role of the disciples of Jesus to determine who is in and who is out. Instead, they need to adopt the position of children to their parents and understand that they completely dependent on God’s love and mercy and that everything that they receive is a gift that is unrelated to anything that they do or do not do.

For many, including Jesus’ disciples, the gift of God’s undeserved grace is almost impossible to accept. It is easier to think that there must be some sort of entrance criteria for membership in the kingdom, that only those who behave in a certain way or achieve a certain standard can earn the right to enter into the Kingdom of God. It is difficult to accept that those who are least worthy, those who have no legal status or right are not only welcome in the kingdom, but show the rest of us how to graciously receive God’s free gift.

Such was the problem that faced Francis in the thirteenth century. Francis was born in Assisi in 1188, the eldest son of a wealthy textile merchant. He, like many wealthy young men of his day lived a dissolute sort of life spending his Father’s money on fine clothing and on carousing and drinking with his friends. In a time of inter-city wars and rivalry, Francis had dreams of grandeur of becoming a military hero – a knight who would win the heart of a fair lady.  An opportunity came for him to join the forces of Prince of Taranto and to fight for the Pope in the south of Italy. He told his brothers that he would return a knight. However, within a day he had returned home having heard a voice from God. Once home, having no clear sense of what God intended for him, he returned to his former lifestyle, though it held none of the attraction that it had had before.

Gradually, Francis changed his life. He became more and more concerned for the poor, more and more determined that he should share the poverty of Christ, and more and more determined to give up his extravagant lifestyle and embrace a life of prayer. At first Francis remained at home, living more simply and giving generously to those in need. He showed compassion to all and especially to those suffering from leprosy who were not only destitute, but who were also excluded from society because of their disease.  Eventually Francis gave up all his wealth, renounced his inheritance and adopted a simple life in the countryside around his hometown. He wore a robe in the shape of a cross and in warm weather and cold wore only sandals on his feet. Like a beggar he became completely dependent on the goodness of others. Like the disciples of Jesus he went from town to town proclaiming the gospel of Jesus.

In time he was joined by others, who like him had become aware of the hollowness of their lives.  Despite this Francis was haunted by a sense of his sinfulness. How could he possibly be worthy of the Kingdom? On one occasion when he was oppressed with grief and worry, he had a vision of Jesus weighed down by the cross struggling up the hill of Calvary and he remembered the words of the fourth Gospel: “Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.” He understood at once that it was not anything that he had done, but that it was what God had done that had secured his entry into the kingdom. At that point he knew that he didn’t have to compete with others, to achieve a certain standard or to be part of the in-group. He simply had to accept what God had done in Christ and to allow himself to be completely dependent on God’s mercy.

This simple, child-like trust in God determined the remainder of Francis’ life. He was able to let go of his need to be in control and to place his life in God’s hands. He finally understood his total dependence on God’s mercy, his need to receive the kingdom of God as a child.

In our individualistic, achievement driven world, the idea that child-like dependence is something to be valued is utterly incomprehensible. And yet, Jesus tells us that dependence is the very criterion that entrance into the Kingdom of God demands. God who owes us nothing has given us everything. The gift of the Kingdom is ours for the taking. All that we have to do is to swallow our pride, let go of our independence and gratefully reach out our hands to receive what is offered.

 

 

Tags: , ,
Posted in Mark's gospel | Comments Off on Becoming as a child

Cutting off our hands?

September 29, 2012

Pentecost 18

Mark 9:37-50

Marian Free

 In the name of God who urges us to be set free from those things which inflict hurt on others or which bind ourselves to this world. Amen.

If I were to watch the musical Godspel today, I’m sure that I would find it very dated. The great Jesus musicals – Jesus Christ Superstar and Godspel came out of the sixties and Godspel in particular captured the spirit of the age – flower power, peace and love. I first watched Godspel as a film and was especially moved by the way in which the relationships between Jesus and the disciples were played out. Because I had enjoyed it so much I leapt at the chance to take our children when the Arts Theatre produced Godspel. A group of families from our church booked tickets and off we went. All was well until the actors burst into a song about cutting off hands and feet and tearing out eyes. Not only was it incongruous to hear such gruesome things being sung in what was a light hearted sort if way, but I was conscious that collectively we, the parents, were exposing our children to something that really didn’t seem to fit with the gospel of God’s love that we were trying to share with them!

Fortunately, none of them seem to have been scarred by the experience, but it is a memory that has stayed with me and has served as a reminder that our scriptures are not always immediately transparent and open to understanding but can sometimes cause confusion or offense.

The reading from Mark’s gospel today contains at least one incident, a response to that incident and several sets of Jesus’ saying. Last week we saw that Jesus caught the disciples discussing who was the greatest. This week’s reading begins with a continuation of that theme. John informs Jesus that someone is casting out demons in Jesus’ name apparently expecting Jesus to be affronted. Given that the disciples have only recently failed to perform an exorcism, John’s comment reveals a certain smugness about being part of Jesus’ inner circle and a determination to protect the exclusiveness of that relationship.

John’s arrogance is quickly confronted by Jesus who makes the powerful and inclusive statement that: “anyone who is not against us is for us.” Discipleship is not exclusive or hierarchical but is available to anyone who chooses not to opt out. This inclusiveness is illustrated by the comment that anyone who gives a cup of water to the disciples because they are disciples will be rewarded. Being included does not require grand gestures or even heroic self-sacrifice. Even such an apparently small act of giving water demonstrates an allegiance toJesus which will not go unnoticed. So far so good, but suddenly we are confronted by a number of apparently unrelated sayings about millstones, self-mutilation, Gehenna and salt.

We make a mistake if we try to read such groupings as following what we consider to be a logical progression. The various gospel authors placed their material together in ways that made sense to their hearers. In this instance, certain sayings or events or simply catchwords, have led the author to think of others which seem to fit the context. For example, Jesus’ use of a child to confront the arrogance of the disciples follows naturally into another account of the disciples’ arrogance which in turn is illustrated by the damage that such arrogance could do to a child in faith “a little one”. In turn the illustration of the millstone – an extreme form of punishment in that time because the weight of the stone ensures that the guilty person drowns – leads into another set of sayings which are linked to the first by the word “σκανδαλιζω” – to scandalise or to cause to stumble. Not only are the disciples not to claim an exclusive relationship with Jesus, neither are they to do anything that would cause harm to the faith of someone else. In fact their own behaviour should be flawless. They should not behave in ways that would jeopardise their salvation. In fact, to be safe, to be certain of eternal life, they should remove off the offending body part.

It was these words that caused my distress during Godspel. However, I now know that Jesus doesn’t intend us to take these violent instructions literally. Here as elsewhere he uses hyperbole to get our attention and to make a point. Language that is particularly gruesome in the twentieth century would not have been so confronting to Jesus’ audience. They lived in harsher, more violent times. For Jesus to suggest that the community formed in his name should be legless and armless, or that they should all practice self-mutilation would have been understood as ludicrous.

The use of exaggeration by Jesus is not limited to this set of sayings. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus has said that anyone who calls their brother “a fool” is guilty of murder and that anyone who looks at a woman with lust in his heart is an adulterer. It is not that Jesus wants to have us drowning in a sea of guilt, feeling that we will never achieve the impossible standard that he sets or that we will never be worthy of the kingdom. He uses these dramatic statements to help us to recognize and to confront the sort of arrogance that allows us to believe that we are superior to any one else. The arresting sayings are to make us aware of our own short comings and to help us to see that our arrogance is generally ill-founded, to understand that most, if not all of us, have some sort of flaws and that, as a result none of us can lord it over others or congratulate ourselves on how good we are in comparison to them. By our very arrogance or simply through our complacency, Jesus suggests, our words or actions may bring the gospel into disrepute or cause others to misunderstand or to reject the gospel. We might just as we’ll drown ourselves.

While it is a relief to know that we can keep all our appendages, we are not, as a result, let off the hook. Jesus is indeed setting the bar high and encouraging us to rise to the challenge. Arrogance, lust, greed, self-centredness, jealousy, hatred and so on have no place in the life hereafter. That being the case, we would do well to rid ourselves of all such negative qualities now, because they will be of no use and will not be welcome in the Kingdom of God.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Mark's gospel | Comments Off on Cutting off our hands?

Jesus’ topsy turvy world

September 22, 2012

Pentecost 17

Mark 9:30-37

Marian Free

In the name of God who turns everything on its head and asks us to serve those who are least among us. Amen.

 

I didn’t watch much of the recent Olympics. However, what I did watch led me to conclude that there was a considerable difference between Australians competing in the Olympics and those competing in the Para-Olympics. Of course the competitors in both competitions shared the will to win, but it seemed to me that the former had a much greater investment in winning and the latter seemed to understand that simply by being at the Olympics, they were already winners.

I was particularly perturbed by the media coverage of the Olympics which implied that anything less than a Gold Medal was not good enough. There was little celebration of the silver and bronze winners and a focus on how much a competitor lost (in terms of endorsements) if they had not come in first. This was followed by a focus on the trainers and the training programme and how they had let the team down – particularly in the swimming.  It is true that Australia has done well in the pool in the past and we have come to expect a large medal tally. At the same time we are a relatively small country and it is perhaps irrational to assume that we will always dominate the rest of the world in any one sport.

The desire to compete and to win is perfectly natural, but the failure to accept loss on an individual, team or even national level takes away some of the pleasure that comes from participating. If the newspapers are to be believed, this attitude permeates all levels of competition. Parents watching children’s games have become so aggressive that their behaviour has to be controlled and some are taking extreme measures such as sending their children to psychologists to “cure” them of anxiety or any other characteristic which might limit their determination to win.

How different these attitudes are from that advocated in today’s gospel in which three distinct episodes are recorded to portray the expectations of leadership in the Jesus’ movement. The section begins with Jesus’ prediction of his handing over and death, it continues with the disciple’s discussion about who is the greatest and concludes with Jesus’ response. It seems highly likely that the author has deliberately placed these accounts together in order to make the point that the Christian ideal of leadership is the exact reverse of that of the world.

The disciple’s discussion as to who is the greatest throws into sharp relief their complete failure to understand what Jesus has just said. The leadership Jesus exercises will not lead to power and glory, but to disgrace and ignominy. As leader of this group of disciples, Jesus will provide an example of leadership that is completely contradictory to everything they know about leadership and authority. Jesus will not exert power over others, just the reverse, he will allow himself to be handed over and killed.

Jesus’ prediction of his death seems just too hard for the disciples to bear, or perhaps they simply cannot get their heads around something so radical and unexpected. Either way, they were so frightened and confused that they were afraid to ask him what he meant.  Their complete lack of understanding of what Jesus has said is demonstrated by the argument which follows. This lack of understanding is typical for Mark’s gospel. Jesus’ prediction of his death and resurrection is, on each occasion followed by an illustration of this disciple’s complete failure to understand. In an earlier chapter, Jesus’ announcement is followed by Peter’s insistence that he (Jesus) is wrong and after a third prediction of his death and resurrection, James and John, having learned nothing from today’s discussion, ask Jesus if they can sit at his right and left hand in heaven! The disciples are, apparently, completely nonplussed by a leader who expects to die rather than conquer and one who serves rather than demanding service.

Their misunderstanding is highlighted by their argument about greatness. For some reason Jesus is not with them for the discussion, but the way in which the narrative continues suggests that Jesus has some idea what is going on.

When Jesus and the disciples arrive at Capernaum they go into a house. Jesus asks what it was that they were discussing on the way. Their silence indicates some embarrassment.  Jesus has just told them that he is going to die at the hands of humans and their response was to argue about was which of them was more important than the others. Jesus calls the Twelve apart and tells them: Whoever wants to be first must be last of all and servant of all.”  This is completely contradictory to us. It was even more so in the first century when distinctions between social groupings were more clearly drawn. In world in which people are distinguished by rank or achievement, how can being last possibly be the standard against which one is measured? How can being a servant set one apart from the crowd? It jut doesn’t make sense – not in the first century culture and not in the culture in which we find ourselves.

Even more shocking and dramatic was Jesus’ illustration of this teaching. He took a child in his arms and claimed that whoever received a child received him, whoever serves a child serves him. The impact of this statement can only be understood when one remembers the first century attitude towards children that is reflected for example in Proverbs or in the Greco-Roman literature. In the first century, children and servants had no legal status. They were considered willful and undisciplined. They needed to be instructed and formed. Children were the property of their father no one would think of being their servant any more than we today would like to put ourselves in a position of being told what to do by those with so much less wisdom and experience than ourselves.

The disciples must have been shocked and affronted by what Jesus said.  Could Jesus really mean that they had to put themselves in the humiliating position of serving even children?

Of course, this is exactly what Jesus meant.  Jesus introduced a completely new way of being in community. The old ways of measuring status and achievement are completely overturned. Jesus is establishing a community which will operate by completely new standards and criteria. It will stand out from the world around it by the way in which members serve each other rather than lord it over each other.

This Is the standard to which we are called to aspire and by which we are to be distinguished from the world around us. Contrary to the standards of the world we are to be known by the way in which we put others (including the least deserving) before ourselves, our willingness to serve rather than to be served and our readiness to be last rather than first.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Mark's gospel | Comments Off on Jesus’ topsy turvy world

Taking up our cross

September 15, 2012

Pentecost 16

Proverbs 1.20-33, Ps 19, James 2.18-26,Mark 8.27-38

Marian Free

In the name of God who created us, and who despite our failures and our disloyalty, loved us enough to die for us. Amen.

Last weekend Michael and I attended the great debate that was a part of the Brisbane Writer’s Festival. We went in part because Germaine Greer was one of the speakers and in part because of the topic: “Reading the Bible is good for you.” Sadly it was a little disappointing. First of all, two of the speakers for the affirmative claimed that the Bible was “silly” and no one for the affirmative had a very strong argument for reading the Bible. Secondly, when it came to what was to be a free for all, there was such a degree of self-consciousness among the speakers that instead of an “no holds barred” argument, it simply fell flat.

That said, the third speaker for the negative, Ben Law a local writer and comedian, was witty and insightful. He began by saying that he quite liked the Bible, but that it was a document that could not be read without assistance because it was open to misinterpretation and to abuse. He supported the views of the other speakers for the negative, the first of whom pointed out that the way in which many Americans read their Bible has led to the most punitive of legal systems. The other had reminded us that well-meaning, but often misguided missionaries in this country and elsewhere have destroyed local language, culture and self-respect to impose a Western faith and lifestyle.

We all know that the Bible is filled with wisdom, love and compassion, but we cannot deny that it also contains accounts of God-sanctioned genocide, that its heroes are flawed and include in their number adulterers and murderers, that in the Psalms there are threats to bash babies heads against rocks and that its God constantly threatens wholesale destruction both of God’s people and of their enemies. Using the Bible as their defense Christians have embarked on the crusades, justified the enslaving of members of other races and have even engaged in battles against each other.

At the same time, the Bible has inspired believers to great acts of courage and self-sacrifice. Christians have for millennia cared for the poorest of the poor, fought to ensure the end of slavery, were among the first to respond to the AIDS crisis and have laid down their lives for others. The Bible inspired Bonheoffer to take on Adolf Hitler and Gandhi and Martin Luther King to struggle for justice for their people.

The Bible is a complex collection of writings. Today’s readings are an example of just how difficult and confusing it can be to read the Bible and how easily it can be misunderstood. Let me illustrate:

From the Book of Proverbs we read that God will laugh at our calamity and mock when panic strikes us. The letter to James tells us that the early church was already debating what should be believed with regard to faith and works. Not only that, there is in James a reference to Isaac’s offering of his son Jacob as if willingness to sacrifice a child was a laudable thing to do. Fortunately the Psalm has a much more positive message, but read in a particular way it could be seen to argue that those who keep the law will be rewarded.

Having listened to this morning’s readings what message are you going to take home? If you were asked this afternoon, what would you say about the Bible based on the passages from Proverbs or James? Would you be advising someone to read them without an interpretive aid?

Even today’s Gospel is not without some difficulties. Jesus says: “If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. For those who want to save their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake, and for the sake of the gospel, will save it.” Having announced his own impending death, Jesus urges his followers to understand that a life worth living is a life that is lived for God and for others rather than for oneself. He is trying to help them to understand that being outward looking rather than inward looking is not only a means to eternal life, but is also more rewarding in the present.

Jesus knew only too well that living for God is not necessarily safe or comfortable and that sometimes living for God and for others leads to being marginalised, excluded and even killed. However he encourages us to place our trust and our confidence in God because he knows that a life centred on God is infinitely richer than a life lived without God. That a life that is lived outwards has greater depth and provides more satisfaction than one that is wholly self-absorbed.

Sadly, in popular usage, this important aspect of Christian living has been tamed and domesticated. It has been transformed from something that is live giving, to something that is life denying, from a focus on God to a focus on oneself.  The phrase, “Taking up one’s cross” is used colloquially to imply that there is something praise-worthy in living stoically with pain, with difficult relationships or with disappointment. Used in this way, self- denial all too easily becomes self-absorption and dependence on God becomes dependence on oneself. Instead of taking up one’s cross of one’s own volition the cross becomes something that is imposed from outside, something to be endured, something to be borne. Used in this way, the cross is not the way to life but to a living death.

So, as the church recognised right up until the Reformation, reading the Bible is good for you, but only if it is read with understanding and care, keeping some basic precepts in mind.

When we read the Bible, we have to remember that even the Old Testament is God’s love letter to God’s people, that God, instead of wreaking destruction, constantly holds his hand, that God instead of condemning us for our betrayals, came to us, entered our world and died for us. We have to remember too that the Bible is not an instrument of power to be wielded over others to make them conform to our values and ideals nor is it to be used to enslave or subjugate others. When we read the Bible we have to remember that the Christ who died for us, demonstrated the love and compassion that lie at the heart of God.

Most importantly of all, when we read the Bible we have to read it through the lens of the cross, to remember, through the course of our lives, that it is in dying to ourselves and living to God that true wealth is to be found and that if we take up our cross we do so not to burden ourselves or to prove a point, but because we are confident that it leads to fullness of life both in the present and in the life to come.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Biblical interpretation, Dying to live, Mark's gospel | Comments Off on Taking up our cross

Changing the world

September 8, 2012

Pentecost 15

Mark 7:24-37

Marian Free

In the name of God whose shoulders are broad enough to bear our complaints and whose love is wide enough to respond. Amen.

I’m sure that most of you will have heard the extraordinary and moving story of the young Australian woman whose fiancé is living with locked-in syndrome as a result of a football injury. My google search failed to find the story, so I will call the couple Rachel and David. Rachel and David were preparing for their wedding when David knocked his head during a football match. When he woke from his coma, he was unable to do anything. Though fully aware of what was gong on around him, he could not move nor could he communicate. He was suffering from locked-in syndrome for which there is no known cure. For Rachel this situation was not good enough. She loved David and was determined that he should have the best life possible. In order to achieve this, Rachel moved into David’s parent’s home to be able to help care for him. Then, with David’s Father, she spent every spare minute researching a cure.

Hope came when, after extensive searching, they discovered that a doctor in South Africa had discovered that a particular sleeping tablet sometimes had the opposite effect that is, with particular patients it caused them to be more alert than usual. Rachel contacted the doctor to see if the same drug might assist David. After a number of discussions and a full consideration of the risks involved, she decided to give David a small dose of the medication. To their joy and amazement, the drug brought David out of his locked-in state! For an hour, he was able to communicate, to share how he had been feeling, his frustration and hopes. Sadly, at the time the programme was shown, the family had not been able to increase the times of alertness nor was there an clear understanding of how the drug worked. However, at lest for a short time each day, David is able to communicate and Rachel has her partner to talk to. No one knows what lies ahead for David but the determination of his fiancé has meant that his quality of life will be so much better than had she given up hope or given up on him.

People will go to amazing lengths for those whom they love. Magazines and newspapers are filled with inspiring stories of families and friends doing all that they can to ensure that the person whom they love has access to the best possible care even if that means taking them overseas. Others raise money to build care facilities that enable young people to receive care without going to an old people’ home. Many spend hours helping a family member or friend to recover from accident or stroke. Others establish funds or foundations to assist other people who are afflicted in the same way as their loved one and yet others challenge the laws to see justice truly done. We have all witnessed the way in which Daniel Morcombe’s parents responded to the disappearance of their son. They have spent years keeping their story in front of us in an attempt to make sure that their son was found. As well they have established programmes to educate children about “stranger danger.

The list of stories could go on and on and on. What is clear is that love doesn’t see the barriers that are put in the way, but pushes through sometimes with unexpected and astounding results. Very often the changes that result form such persistence help not only the family concerned but have much wider implications – changes to the legal system or to treatment regimes, funds for ongoing research all benefit the wider community.

Such is the case with the woman in today’s gospel. She is not even supposed to know that Jesus is in the area and, as a woman and a Gentile, probably shouldn’t even being trying to approach him. However, she is driven by desperation. Her daughter is unwell and like, most parents, she will do whatever it takes to save her. Even when Jesus refuses point-blank to help, the woman is undeterred. She breaks through Jesus’ argument to persuade him that even those outside the chosen people are able to access “the crumbs” that fall from the table. Jesus is unable to resist this logic and the woman’s daughter is healed. The long-term result of the woman’s persistence is that the community that formed in Jesus’ name was not restricted to those of Jewish birth, but was thrown open to people from all backgrounds and from every nation. Jesus’ mind was changed by the woman’s word (teaching) and history was changed as a result!

Too often we feel powerless to change our situation – either because of our physical abilities, societal restrictions, family background, income or other reason. Some of us assume that our situation in life is “the will of God” and submit, sometimes grudgingly, to the hand life has dealt us. The example of the Syrophoenician woman challenges these negative assumptions. While it is true that it is not always possible to bring about change – the cure for our disease might not be found in our life-time, it may take years and years for a refugee to find a country that will them – that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t try to bring about change or that we shouldn’t challenge society (or even God) about the way things are.

Often it is the most unlikely people who effect change – sometimes on a huge scale. The Syrophoenician woman was an outsider, with no position in society and almost certainly no income to boast of yet, according to this account she was able to change the mind of Jesus, and as a result, to change the course of history.

We may not be able to change the world, but it may be possible to change our small corner. Things don’t always work out the way we hope but whether they do or not, let it not be for the want of trying.

Tags:
Posted in Mark's gospel, Syrophoenician Woman | Comments Off on Changing the world

Giving our all

September 1, 2012

Mavis Parkinson

Pentecost 14, 2012

New Guinea Martyrs

Marian Free

 In the name of God in whose service we are asked to give our all. Amen.

 There were many speeches made during the second World War to inspire the troops, to give courage to those experiencing the bombing raids and so on. On the 31st of January 1942, Bishop Philip Strong made his regular radio broadcast to the missionaries in New Guinea.  It is  a war time speech worth repeating almost in full. He said:

“Now I would like a heart-to-heart talk with you. As far as I know, you are all at your posts and I am very glad and thankful about this. I have from the first felt that we must endeavour to carry on our work in all circumstances no matter what the cost may ultimately be to any of us individually. God expects this of us. The Church at home, which sent us out, will surely expect it of us. The Universal Church expects it. The tradition and history of missions requires it of us. Missionaries who have been faithful to the uttermost and are now at rest are surely expecting it of us. The people whom we serve expect it of us. We could never hold up our faces again, if, for our own safety, we all forsook Him and fled when the shadows of the Passion began to gather around Him in His Spiritual Body, the Church in Papua. Our life in the future would be burdened with shame and we could not come back here and face our people again; and we would be conscious always of rejected opportunities. The history of the Church tells us that missionaries do not think of themselves in the hour of danger and crisis, but of the Master who called them to give their all, and of the people they have been trusted to serve and love to the uttermost. His watchword is none the less true today, as it was when he gave it to the first disciples–“Whosoever will save his life will lose it, and whosoever will lose his life for My sake and the Gospel’s shall find it.

No one requires us to leave. No one has required us to leave. The reports some of you have heard of orders to this effect did not emanate from official or authoritative sources. But even if anyone had required us to leave, we should then have had to obey God rather then men.“

No, my bothers and sisters, fellow workers in Christ, whatever others my do, we cannot leave. We shall not leave. We shall stand by our trust. We shall stand by our vocation.

We do not know what it may mean to us. Many think us fools and mad. What does that matter? If we are fools, “we are fools for Christ’s sake”. I cannot foretell the future. I cannot guarantee that all will be well–that we shall all come through unscathed. One thing only I can guarantee is that if we do not forsake Christ here in Papua in His Body, the Church, He will not forsake us. He will uphold us; He will strengthen us and He will guide us and keep us though the days that lie ahead. If we all left, it would take years for the Church to recover from our betrayal of our trust. If we remain–and even if the worst came to the worst and we were all to perish in remaining–the Church would not perish, for there would have been no breach of trust in its walls, but its foundations and structure would have received added strength for the future building by our faithfulness unto death.”[1]

As a result of this message and as a consequence of the commitment and courage of the missionaries all but a few remained at their posts. During the course of the war that ensued twelve Anglicans, men and women, were executed as the Japanese advanced from the north eastern coast towards the Kokoda trail and Port Moresby. Of those twelve, two represented the Queensland Diocese – Mavis Parkinson (a young teacher from Ipswich) and Vivian Redlich (an English priest who had served as a Bush Brother before volunteering to serve in New Guinea).  Mavis is commemorated in our Te Deum window (as are two other New Guinea martyrs – May Hayman and The Rev’d John Barge). Seventy years ago, on September 1, 1942, Mavis and another woman May Hayman – a nurse – who had been captured by the Japanese, were taken by their captors to pre-dug graves where they were repeatedly bayoneted and then buried.

It is impossible to give you a full account, but I recommend that you read further (see below).

According to an unfinished letter from Mavis, the two women and a priest fled their mission station when they saw several Japanese boats off the coast. The crews began to shell the station and to disembark soldiers. When they realised that they were at risk, the three gathered a few belongings and some food and set off (as they had been instructed) to a neighbouring mission. They reached a  nearby village in safety but decided that they posed a risk to the locals. and so determined to move on.  In a letter home Mavis describes the events in detail. She tells how they left the path and struck off through the jungle in order to avoid the enemy. She relates the experience of sleeping rough with the cacophony of the jungle ringing in their ears and of struggling to find a way around a swamp before coming again to a recognizable path.

After a time, Mavis, May and the priest from the mission joined some Australian and Papuan servicemen who offered to escort them to Popondetta. However, before they reached safety,  their whereabouts was betrayed. The group were ambushed and separated. The women were captured, imprisoned and interrogated. When they refused to cooperate they were taken out and killed.

Saints and martyrs do not belong to a long forgotten age, but live and die for God even in our own time. In the twentieth century, there were more martyrs than in all the centuries before that. The lives and witness of such people challenge us to be true to our faith, strong in the face of difficulty and courageous in the presence of danger.  As today we remember the example of Mavis Parkinson, may we be challenged and encouraged to strengthen our own faith so that in the unlikely event that we will be called to stand firm, we will not be found wanting.

Further reading:

Faithful unto Death by E.C. Rowland (available in full on the web).

Vivian Redlich’s brother David has written an account of his life.

A google search will reveal other references/sermons.

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in King David, Martyrs, Saints | Comments Off on Giving our all

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »