Posts Tagged ‘self absorption’

Above and beyond

February 19, 2022

Epiphany 7 – 2022
Luke 6:27-38
Marian Free

In the name of God whose ways are not our ways. Amen.

An area of study for theological students is homiletics which, according to Wikipedia, is ‘the application of the general principles of rhetoric to the specific art of preaching’. Rhetoric is the art of persuasive speech that was developed long ago in Ancient Greece. There were schools that taught rhetoric and there are books and books by a variety of these ancient scholars who taught techniques like diatribe (an argument with an imaginary opponent), false conclusions, and the use of series ( 3, 5 and more ) and of rhetorical questions. Many of these tools are so ingrained in our language that we use them unwittingly and certainly many of our politicians and public speakers use them to persuade us to their way of thinking. Paul was a master of rhetoric and he used every technique available to decimate the arguments of his detractors and to convince the recipients of his letters that his understanding of the gospel was the only possible view.

Jesus on the other hand, was skilled at the rabbinic forms of argument as can be seen in his debates with the Jewish leaders.

But back to homiletics – the art of preaching. It will be clear to most congregations that not every preacher has studied (or mastered) the art of preaching – some of us speak too long or don’t have a consistent argument. Whether or not I am successful at the art is of course up for debate. Homiletics was not taught when I attended theological college but along the way I have learned that it is important to gain the audience’s attention (with a story or example) and to try to have just one take away message.

According to these basic principles, Jesus (or Luke as his recorder) has completely failed in what we have labelled as the ‘Sermon on the Plain’. As can be seen from today’s gospel, what biblical scholars have labeled as a ‘sermon’ is in fact a collection of loosely related sayings. Indeed they almost certainly began as a collection of Jesus’ sayings which were gathered together according to some theme or other known only to the original compiler. It is highly unlikely that Jesus, faced with a large and attentive crowd, felt that the best that he had to offer was a series of unconnected sayings . Even with the best memories in the world Jesus’ audience would have found it harder to remember a list of sayings than to have remembered stories or parables. I don’t imagine that after Jesus’ death his followers sat around and recited lists of sayings. More likely than not they would have remembered them one by one, possibly discussing what they meant before remembering something similar that Jesus said.

In whatever context Jesus delivered the sayings attributed to him, they were memorable. This I suggest is because they were and are so counter intuitive and counter cultural that they make an audience sit up straight and ask: “‘love your enemies.’ Did Jesus really say that?” “‘Give without expecting something in return.’ Who does that?” and “surely we can’t be compared with sinners – can we?”

The drive for self-preservation is at the core of every living being. In humankind it reveals itself in competitiveness – for land, for resources, for power – competitiveness that spills over into aggression when we feel that our access to land, resources or power is threatened. We see this in the build up of troops on the border between Russia and Ukraine, the take-over of Afghanistan by the Taliban, the violence against the Rohingya in Myanmar, the on-going conflicts in Ethiopia and Sudan and the far too many other struggles for ascendancy between nations and races all over the world. We have witnessed this need to look after number one most clearly during the pandemic. The emptying of supermarket shelves as people took more than they needed at the expense of those who did not have the resources – physical or financial – to obtain the bare minimum; the hoarding of vaccines by nations that could afford them, and the sometimes inhumane closing of borders to protect those within them.

How Jesus’ sayings must have rankled Jesus’ audience! There was nothing in Jewish teaching that encouraged love of enemies and as for being compared with sinners our gospel records make it quite clear that the ethic of the day was to separate oneself from sinners, tax collectors and prostitutes. How could Jesus possibly imply that they were equal – in loving, doing good and lending – with those who were so obviously outside the definition of ‘good’.

Jesus’ challenge in these sayings (which are loosely connected by the theme of love) is that we who believe should not be self-absorbed and self-satisfied, that we go over and above what is expected – in love, in generosity and is forgiveness, that we should confront (suppress even) our human nature and that we should behave in ways that reflect the presence of the divine in us – the divine that is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked. In other words we should not only love our neighbour, but also our enemy, that instead of taking advantage of others we should allow them to take advantage of us , that when asked to do help we go over and beyond and, that we give generously without expecting anything in return.

How slow, how resistant we, as Christians, have been to take these teachings to heart! How far short have we fallen from these ideals! How little are we distinguishable from the society around us!

It is only by taking Jesus’ words to heart and acting on them that our lives will become more and more like that of his and that we will stand out from the world in which we find ourselves and ultimately be among those who will lead the transformation of the world.

No room for neutrality

March 10, 2018

Lent 4 – 2018

John 3:14-21

Marian Free

In the name of God who so loved the world, that God sent his Son to save it. Amen.

Most of us would agree that it feels as though the world is teetering on the edge of disaster. We feel distressed by Trump’s apparently erratic behaviour, by Kim Jong On’s threats of nuclear war, by the intractable nature of the war in Syria, by the civil war and famine in south Sudan and Yemen, by the rise of the ultra-right in Europe and by the grab for power by dictators in more countries than one. We are rightly distressed by the plight of refugees, the increasing gap between the rich and poor and by corruption and the misuse of resources by those in power. We feel helpless in the face of terrorism and are frozen in indecision when we think about the damage that we are inflicting on the environment.

The world seems to be falling apart and we feel powerless to stop it.

That, at least is one way of seeing the world.

It is possible to see the situation quite differently. On Tuesday[1] Radio National’s Big Ideas presented a lecture by Gregg Easterbrook – writer for the Atlantic Monthly and the New York Times. Easterbrook pointed out that despite what appears to be evidence to the contrary, there are good reasons for optimism. Worldwide, malnutrition and extreme poverty are at historic lows, he says, and the risk of dying by war or violence is lower than at any point in human history. Everywhere in the world people are living longer and healthier. Contrary to what we see daily in our news, the frequency and intensity of war in the last 25 years is 5% of the rate wars of the previous century. According to the United Nations malnutrition is at its lowest point ever.

And those are just a few of the statistics that Easterbrook produced.

The world is an interesting and challenging place. On the one hand we as humans are capable of inflicting unimaginable suffering in places like Syria, and on the other hand we have not only reduced the threat of nuclear war, but in the last few decades the world as a whole has reduced its spending on all things military. On the one hand, we as humans are capable of the most appalling abuse of our fellow human beings when we traffic them into sexual or other forms of slavery and on the other hand, we are capable of acts of utter selflessness when we risk our lives to prevent the spread of deadly diseases or to bring relief to victims of wars and natural disasters.

The future of the world is both hopeless and hopeful, the nature of humanity is both heroic and despicable.

“God so loved the world, that he sent his only Son.” The world of the first century was no less violent, corrupt or inequitable than the world of the twenty-first century. Humanity was as cruel, as greedy and as violent then as it is now. Despite this, despite all the reasons for pessimism, God remained optimistic. God saw the potential in God’s creation and risked everything to save it.

That is not to say that God was or is naïve. The presence of Jesus in the world was not benign – anything but. Jesus was not and is not a comfortable Saviour. Jesus was (and is) confrontational and challenging. His very presence was divisive because it forced people to declare their hands. As the presence of God in the world, Jesus shone a light on injustice, oppression, greed, cruelty and exploitation. Jesus’ love and compassion exposed the baseness and insensitivity of those around him. His generosity and selflessness made people uncomfortable with their own greed and self-absorption. No one wants to feel that they are less than perfect. No one wants to have their flaws opened to the light of day, visible to the scrutiny of others. (They would rather remain in darkness.)

The person of Jesus revealed the true natures of those with whom he came into contact. People were either drawn to or repelled by him depending on their openness to change or their desire to maintain the status quo, their self-awareness or their smug self-satisfaction; their willingness to surrender control or their determination to hold on to their independence. Those who shared Jesus’ love of God and love of humanity found in him a source of hope and strength. Those who sought only their own advancement and gain, saw in Jesus a threat to their way of life. Those who desired to create a world of justice and peace found in Jesus a sense of purpose and direction. Those who were happy with the world as it was saw in Jesus only chaos and disorder.

“God so loved the world, that he sent his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life.” John 3:16 is not simply a comforting, comfortable verse that can be easily and blithely turned into some sort of simplistic Christian slogan. It challenges us to think about what it means to believe. The verses that follow tell us that unbelievers are those who do not want to have light shone on their selfishness, their meanness and their desire to dominate others. Unbelievers are those who are happy with the world the way that it is and do not want it to be saved.

Believing in Jesus means being committed ourselves to Jesus’ programme of loving the world. It means allowing both the good and the bad in us to be exposed to the light of God’s love and it means understanding that unless we allow ourselves to be changed we might be part of the problem rather than part of the solution.

God so loves the world that, through Jesus he enlists our help to save it. There is no room for neutrality – we are called to make a decision to come into the light or to remain forever in the darkness.

 

 

[1] March 6, 2018, Radio National, Big Ideas.