Posts Tagged ‘servanthood’

Wholly God’s

April 13, 2019

Palm Sunday – 2019
Philippians 2:5-11
Marian Free

In the name of God whose Son frees us from death and opens the way to eternal life. Amen.

You all know the story. God creates Adam. God puts Adam in a garden. God gives Adam everything in the garden – exceptthe fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The snake tells Adam that the reason that God doesn’t want him to eat the fruit is because he would become like God – implying at the same time that God has misled Adam. When Adam realises that he will not die but will become “wise” he decides that being like God is worth the risk of eating the forbidden fruit. He eats the fruit. God finds out (of course!). Adam and Eve are banished from the garden. Instead of a life of peace and ease they are both punished with lives of pain and toil. As it records in Genesis 3: ‘Then the Lord God said, ‘See, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever’. As a consequence of eating from the tree of knowledge, Adam was refused access to the tree of life and so all human beings who came after him became subject to mortality.

You will notice that I refer to Adam and not to Eve. This is because, as we can see from the letters of Paul, that at least in first century Judaism, Adam (not Eve) was given responsibility for the “fall”. Paul understood that it was through Adam that sin and death came into the world and that ever since all humanity have shared in Adam’s fate.

Paul’s letters reveal that he was convinced that the consequences of Adam’s action had been reversed in Jesus’ life. Jesus’ obedience contrasted starkly with Adam’s disobedience. Jesus’ refusal to claim equality with God completely reversed Adam’s desire to be like God. Death may have come to all through Adam. Life is made available to everyone through Jesus.

Paul explores this theme in a number of places. In 1 Corinthians 15 Paul claims: “For since death came through a human being, the resurrection of the dead has also come through a human being; for as all die in Adam, so all will be made alive in Christ. (1 Cor 15:21,22) Paul’s discussion in Romans 5 makes a similar point: “if, because of the one man’s trespass, death exercised dominion through that one, much more surely will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness exercise dominion in life through the one man, Jesus Christ” (5:17). In other words, Paul believes that Jesus has undone the damage caused by Adam’s disobedience. Adam created a breach between humanity and God that led to death. Jesus has repaired the damage done, brought us back into the ideal relationship with God and given us access to eternal life.

The hymn that formed our reading from Philippians today is based on that understanding. For those who know the story of Adam, it is quite clear that Jesus’ behaviour is the opposite to that of Adam. Both were created in the image of God but whereas Adam sought equality, Jesus did not. Adam rejected servanthood, but Jesus embraced the role that he saw to be his. Adam who desired to be like God was found in human likeness but Jesus “who was in the form of God did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited”. In his desire for self-aggrandisement Adam exalted himself. On the other hand Jesus, who was entitled to be arrogant, humbled himself. Adam was disobedient unto death. Jesus was obedient unto death. As a consequence of their actions, Adam was condemned by God and Jesus was exalted by God[1].

This hymn, which may in fact pre-date Paul, not only compares Adam with Jesus but also provides the model for Christian living. If Adam is the model of human existence before Jesus, Jesus is the model for Christian existence in the present. Jesus’ “obedience unto death” informs us that only if we empty ourselves of all desires and all ambitions can we be filled with God. Only if we are aware that we are not and never will be God, will we be willing and free to submit to God’s greater wisdom and direction. Only if we make ourselves completely God’s can God’s will be done in us.

Jesus’ life and death are an apparent contradiction. The one who is God behaves as the servant of God. The one who need never die, submits to death.

Those who follow Jesus must live out this contradiction. We must learn that, contrary to our natural inclination it is by not trying that we win the kingdom, it is by not striving that we attain life eternal. As soon as – like Adam – we think we can achieve goodness, holiness, wisdom or any other god-like characteristic by our own efforts, we demonstrate that we have placed our trust not in God, but in ourselves. When we acknowledge our limitations, we understand that a life directed by God is infinitely more satisfying than any life that is determined by our own choices and when we really believe that God knows us better than we know ourselves, we will have the confidence to trust God with life itself. It is not the things of this world that will meet our deepest needs, but only those of the kingdom of heaven.

Jesus (who was God) did not count equality with God as something to be exploited, we who are not God, should not place our trust in ourselves, but give our lives wholly to God who gives Godself wholly to us. Then, filled with the presence of God, we like Christ can be the God’s presence in the world.

[1]See further Malina and Pilch. On the letters of Paul. 307.

Tags:, , , , , , ,
Posted in Paul, Uncategorized | Comments Off on Wholly God’s

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

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