Sunday 8 March 2020 - Lent 2

Theme(s): gospel of grace / inclusiveness of the gospel / Jesus the Beloved Son / the cross of glory and shame / the glory of Christ / being born again / being born of water and the Spirit.

Sentence: Lord be gracious to us; we long for you. Be our strength every morning; our salvation in time of distress (Isaiah 33:2)

Collect:

Almighty God,
your Son Jesus Christ fasted forty days in the wilderness;
give us grace to direct our lives in obedience to your Spirit;
and as you know our weakness
so may we know your power to save;
through Jesus Christ our Redeemer. Amen.

Readings:

Genesis 12:1-4a
Psalm 121
Romans 4:1-5, 13-17
Matthew 17:1-9 [or John 3:1-17] This not being the year of Matthew, I include commentary on John 3:1-17]

Commentary:

Genesis 12:1-4a

Linked to the epistle reading, here we read of God's promise to Abraham. Without offering any justification such as Abraham being virtuous or virile or very worthy through some attribute such as intelligence, wealth or skill, that is, as a matter of gracious election, God promises to Abraham that he will become:

- a great nation

- a great name

- a blessing (so that God will bless those who bless Abraham, curse those who curse him, and so that through Abraham 'all the families of the earth shall be blessed' (3).)

Here lies the whole future of Israel (the great nation which will be famous for it bears witness to the Lord God as unique among all other claimants to divine status and which will influence the whole course of the world).

Later (e.g. in our epistle reading) those who love God and receive God's revelation will understand this promise to be fulfilled in Jesus Christ.

Psalm 121

This psalm is 'A Song of Ascents', a psalm recited by pilgrims to Jerusalem as they drew near to the Temple and this (according to the topography of Jerusalem) climbed up God's holy hill, Zion. Mention of plural 'hills' in verse 1 perhaps implies this psalm is to be recited some way off from Jerusalem when several hills/mountains can be seen by the pilgrim.

As the pilgrim lifts his eyes to the hills, from where does help come?

One answer in those days could have been 'from the gods believed to dwell on the shrines placed on each hill.' To any such thought the answer is a resounding 'No!' The pilgrim's help comes from 'the Lord, who made heaven and earth' - the God, that is, of all the world, not any local god with local concerns. Another answer, focusing on the Temple on Zion, perhaps out of sight at this point in the journey, is that help does not come from here or there or somewhere else but from one source and only one source, from the One who dwells in the Temple, the Lord who made heaven and earth.

This Lord needs no arousal (e.g. through shouted prayers or loud songs) because the Lord 'will neither slumber nor sleep' (4). In the heat of the day, climbing up towards Jerusalem, who keeps, protects and sustains the hot, sweaty and weary pilgrim? The Lord will do so (5-6).

The pilgrim is confident as he or she journeys towards the Temple in the holy city that nevertheless the Lord is at hand.

So too we might have a shared and similar faith in the Lord as our protector and keeper this Lent as we journey with Jesus towards Jerusalem.

Romans 4:1-5, 13-17

Last week we were in Romans 5 and this week we continue to read Romans ...backwards! However the connections between the two passages are clear: Paul is exploring and expounding the gospel of grace. The connection with our Lenten journey is also clear: as we walk with Jesus to the cross, we walk to the place where God in Christ acts generously that we might be freely forgiven and generously reconciled to God.

In these verses Paul is making a point within the many points of his great argument in this epistle that the gospel is a gospel in which the grace of Jesus Christ trumps the law of Moses, faith in response to that grace saves when obedience to the law does not. The point is captured in these words from v. 13,

'For the promise that he would inherit the world did not come to Abraham or his descendants through the law but through righteousness of faith.'

That is, in the context of arguments between Jews and Christians and between Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians about the significance of the law of Moses after the coming of Christ, Paul points out that the great promise of God to Israel made to their father Abraham was made to one who lived apart from the law but was counted righteous by God because of his faith.

Paul is saying that the gospel of grace has its roots in the story of Abraham. As a Jew and Jewish Christian he reaches into the story of Israel in order to assert the superiority of the gospel. His argument rests on going further back into that story than to Moses. He goes to the founding father of Israel himself, Abraham.

There is then a related point which is made and worth noting here. Through verses 16-17 Paul works in the theme of inclusion. If faith in God is more important than works of the law (1-5) then to whom does the promise of God to Abraham apply? Answer: the promise applies 'to all his descendants' but these are not confined to 'adherents of the law' (i.e. Jews) (16). No, the promise applies 'also to those who share the faith of Abraham' (16), that is, to all who believe in Jesus Christ, Jews and Gentiles, Israelites and Romans, Greeks and barbarians.

GOSPEL CHOICE ONE
Matthew 17:1-9 - The Transfiguration

The Transfiguration at first sight is an odd reading for the Season of Lent (why not in the Season of Epiphany?). Yet it is an event in the journey of Jesus to the cross.

(And, as an aside, if we read the alternative gospel, John 3:1-17, then we meet Jesus talking about his heavenly experiences (compare with the "transfiguring" of Jesus into a heavenly kind of figure) and connecting them to the cross).

In particular Jesus says to the disciples at the end of the Matthean passage,

"Tell no one about the vision until after the Son of Man has been raised from the dead." 

That is our clue (and cue) to think about how this reading sheds light on the cross and resurrection.

One insight is shared by N.T. (Tom) Wright in Matthew for Everyone (Part 2 Chapters 16-28), pp. 14-15: the transfiguration is the story of Jesus being glorified on a mountain, clothes shining white, between two great figures of Israel, Moses and Elijah and declared God's Son by God himself whereas the cross is the story of Jesus being shamed on a hill, stripped of his clothes, flanked between two bandits and declared God's Son by a Roman centurion.

Wright writes,

'The mountain-top explains the hill-top - and vice versa. Perhaps we only really understand either of them when we see it side by side with te other. Learn to see the glory in the cross; learn to see the cross in the glory; and you will have begun to bring together the laughter and the tears of the God who hides in the cloud, the God who is to be known in the strange person of Jesus himself' (p. 15).

Another insight flows from recognising the parallel between the divine affirmation in 17:5 and the divine affirmation at the baptism of Jesus, Matthew 3:17.

If the death and resurrection of a mortal man mean anything (noting that thousands were crucified by the Romans, and that resurrection from the dead was not unique to Jesus (compare the son of the widow of Nain and Lazarus)) then that is due to a specific, special person within the plan of God being killed and raised to new life.

At both baptism and transfiguration the special status of Jesus is disclosed and confirmed: Jesus is 'my Son, the Beloved' (5). Here in the transfiguration, alongside Moses and Elijah, representing the revelation of God in the law and the prophets respectively, Jesus is declared God's voice for Israel, 'Listen to him' (5) As Moses and Elijah were set apart by God for special purposes in God's plan for the world, so is Jesus. But only Jesus is 'my Son, the Beloved' so one who is greater than Moses or Elijah is present.

Later, down from the mountain, the disciples will enquire further. Their questions about Elijah (an enigmatic figure at that time as expectations ran that Elijah would return to rescue Israel from its imperial oppression) elicit from Jesus an interpretation of John the Baptist: he was Elijah returned. But Jesus goes on to point out that just as John suffered, so also he will suffer.

Thus, unlike Moses and Elijah whom God took to himself (the former at the point of death and the latter without death), Jesus will suffer before rising to God in the resurrection-and-ascension.

GOSPEL CHOICE TWO

This note added, Sunday 8 March 2020:
2020 special insight - I never knew this, but apparently for year A in the three year cycle, A, B, C, the readings for Lent 2, 3, 4, 5 are focused on individual encounters Jesus has (so this week Nicodemus, next week, the Samaritan woman at the well, the week after next week, the man born blind (which in John 9 is a significant encounter with Jesus), then in Lent 5 (Passion Sunday), Jesus and Lazarus. This comment, by Andy Burnham, offers an ancient explanation for these readings: "In Year A the readings shadow the teaching and enlightenment of those to be baptised or confirmed at the Easter Vigil. This set if readings is privileged in the sense that, in the Catholic Church at least, they may be used also in Years B and C"
In other words, as we journey as a congregation through these readings and these weeks building up towards Easter, we are taking an ancient journey that many catechumenates preparing for baptism at the East Vigil have taken through two millennia.


John 3:1-17 Nicodemus meets Jesus

Lots of Christians know John 3:16 by heart, "For God so loved the world that ..." but how many of us know the story within which this verse occurs? That story, featuring a Jewish leader named Nicodemus is intriguing in various ways.

First, Nicodemus is a Pharisee yet Pharisees in many gospel stories are opponents of Jesus. Nicodemus clearly sees something in Jesus which makes him both to personally visit Jesus in order to ask him questions. Noting that he visits "by night" (2), we might surmise that Nicodemus is taking a risk visiting Jesus in the face of antagonism against Jesus by Nicodemus' colleagues.

Secondly, Jesus "plays" with Nicodemus. When Nicodemus begins by flattering Jesus, "Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God" (2), Jesus responds by talking about a new birth (more of which below) and the impossibility of seeing God's kingdom without it (3). Nicodemus was not expecting that! When Jesus explains more about the new birth (verses 5-8), Nicodemus is reduced to expostulating, "How can these things be?" (9) So Jesus "plays" Nicodemus more: "You are a teacher of Israel and you don't know these things?" [10, CEB] That is not very fair (or "fair") of Jesus because if Nicodemus knew these things he wouldn't be bothering Jesus with his questions; and why should Nicodemus know these things when they were only now being revealed by Jesus?

Thirdly, Jesus' point here is not that Nicodemus is ignorant but that he needs to catch up with what God is doing through Jesus. The miraculous signs (2) which have drawn Nicodemus to speculate that Jesus comes from God are a taste of what God is really up to - lifting Jesus up on the cross, see verse 14-15 - and thus, once again, in John's Gospel, we, the readers, are drawn into facing the mystery of God's work in the One who is the Word made flesh (1:14).

What then is this talk about new birth all about? Let's note what Jesus (and also Nicodemus) says:
- "no one can see the kingdom of God without being born anothen" (3)
- [Nicodemus understands this as: "How can anyone be born after having grown old? Can one enter a second time into the mother's womb and be born?" (4)]
- "no one can enter the kingdom of God without being born of water and Spirit." (5)
- "What is born of the flesh is flesh, and what is born of the Spirit is spirit" (6)
- "Do not be astonished that I said to you, "You must be born anothen." The wind blows where it chooses, and hear the sound of it, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes.. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit." (8)

The Greek word transliterated here, anothen, has a double meaning and it could best to think of this word as being both things simultaneously rather than choosing one over another:
- anew or again
- from above
Hence the famous "You must be born again" but also, in some translations in the main body of the text rather than in the footnotes, "You must be born from above."

Either way, Jesus is talking about a new beginning (born again/anew) initiated by God (born from above) - a new spiritual birth, "born of the Spirit," into a new life.

Twice here, verses 3 and 5, Jesus talks about the kingdom of God - the new thing God is doing in the world, according to the Synoptic Gospels - and this new spiritual birth is critical and vital to being able "to see the kingdom of God" and to being able to "enter the kingdom of God."

But these are the last times in this gospel that the phrase "the kingdom of God" is used. From now on - see verse 15 - John's Jesus will speak about "eternal life" so, in a significant way, the birth anew or from above is, indeed, a birth into life - the eternal or never ending life of the one in whom God dwells, which will not be defeated by death.

But who can bring knowledge of this new birth and new life to earth? Only the one who has "descended from heaven, the Son of Man" (13). This secret of heaven, in other words, comes from heaven, via One - identified with the man Jesus of Nazareth - who has been dwelling in heaven. In speaking in this way, John's Jesus speaks with words familiar to Jews and Christians in the first century who both read the Book of Daniel and other related books known as "apocalyptic literature." We won't stop here to look further into this.

Finally, we get to verses 16 and 17 which make a lot of sense following on from verse 15 because the key, from the human perspective, about eternal life is that there is belief. Through believing in Jesus we may have eternal life (verses 15 and 16) and be "saved through him" (17).

From a catechumanel perspective, Nicodemus represents the enquirer who is fairly close in current belief and practice to Jesus, but not yet in the kingdom of God; perhaps even coming to Jesus from the shadows of current community and not in full openness. Jesus draws this enquirer to face squarely the need for new, spiritual birth into the kingdom of God which is eternal life.

Sunday 1 March 2020 - Lent 1

Theme(s): Facing temptation / Prayer and Fasting / Confronting sin through Christ / Study God's Word to resist the Devil

Sentence: Lord be gracious to us; we long for you. Be our strength every morning; our salvation in time of distress (Isaiah 33:2)

Collect:

Almighty God,
your Son Jesus Christ fasted forty days in the wilderness;
give us grace to direct our lives in obedience to your Spirit;
and as you know our weakness
so may we know your power to save;
through Jesus Christ our redeemer. Amen.

Readings:

Genesis 2:15-17; 3:1-7
Psalm 32
Romans 5:12-19
Matthew 4:1-11

Commentary:

Genesis 2:15-17; 3:1-7

Some controversy attends the story popularly known as 'the Fall' because, in an age of evolutionary understanding of the history of life, it appears incredible that Christians could subscribe to a view which seemingly requires us to believe that no death occurred in nature after Creation until the Fall.

Further, the way the story of the Fall is told, it can be read as a story which contributes to the subjection of women to men (cf. 1 Timothy 2:12-15). Neither space nor time permit an extensive reflection on such controversies here - probably sermons this Sunday do not permit that either, limited as most preachers are by time! So the following approach to this passage acknowledges such controversies while largely sidestepping them ...

In the big story of the world, told through Scripture in terms of the world's relationship to God the Creator, the story of the Fall marks and acknowledges a very simple fact about human life: we sin, we stuff up, we get things wrong, we fail, we let God, others and ourselves down. From sin flows pain and sorrow. Every day in the news media we are confronted with evidence of this simple fact. Likely everyday in our homes, workplaces and shopping malls we are confronted with evidence of this same fact. "You said you would ...". "I didn't realise when you said X that you actually wanted me to ..."

In Scripture this simple fact of life closes the door to the first part of the story of the world, the story of the Creator creating the world, and opens the door to the next part, the Creator becoming the Redeemer to redeem the world. In the latter story the Redeemer undoes the effects of the Fall (forgive sin, heal pain, turn sorrow into joy) and begins the restoration of the world to what God intended the created world to be, a place of perfect fellowship between God and humanity and between human people.

To retell this part of the story today, the first Sunday in Lent, is to acknowledge that we (once again) journey with Jesus to the cross which is the culminating action of God the Redeemer, and beyond the cross to the resurrection which is the inaugurating action of God the Healer of fallen Creation.

Psalm 32

If we take seriously the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross because of our wrong-doing, then we will take seriously our sinful, fallen nature - our part in, our responsibility for the state of the world.

When we acknowledge our sin we cannot be seriously concerned about that if we do nothing. To do something about our sin is to be penitent, active in repentance in which our lives turn from sin to holy living.

Psalm 32 is a penitential psalm which captures neatly the stress of continuing in unrepented sin while charting the happy state of those without imputed sin, who live lives attuned to God's ways.

Romans 5:12-19

One way to understand this passage is to understand it as Paul's account of what I have tried to express above in my comments about the Genesis reading for today: the big picture story of the world in relationship to God is Creation, Fall, Redemption.

In Paul's account he draws in the symmetry of the fall through 'one man' (12), specifically named as 'Adam' (14), and salvation through 'the one man, Jesus Christ' (15, 17). He also names two parts to the period in which 'death exercised dominion' following the fall (14), the period from Adam to Moses when there was sin without the law (13-14) and the period from Moses to Jesus Christ when sin continued, with the law (given by God to Israel via Moses) intended to constrain sin actually having 'the result that the trespass multiplied' (20).

(Note, as an aside, that Paul writing in 1 Timothy 2:12-15, mentioned above, can focus on the role Eve played in the dynamics between the snake, Adam and Eve, but here subsumes Adam and Eve as a couple into 'one man', presumably to make the symmetry re Jesus Christ: through one man came sin, through one man came salvation.)

In the battle between good and evil, between life and death, between sin and righteousness, Paul here states clearly, carefully (i.e. logically) and conclusively (i.e. no Christian need be in any doubt about the matter) that goodness, life and righteousness are the winners. Sin abounds, but grace abounds more (15, 20). Death exercised dominion but now righteousness and life (17) as well as grace exercise dominion (21).

All this comes about because 'at the right time Christ died for the ungodly' (6). So we journey through Lent with Jesus to the cross, not because we celebrate suffering and sacrifice for its own sake, but because through the cross comes life.

Matthew 4:1-11

Lent as a period of 40 days relates precisely to this period of testing in Jesus' own life (2). But that period itself is an analogy of Israel's 40 years in the wilderness as it journeyed towards the Promised Land. In both periods, 40 days / 40 years, there were tests and tribulations. Would Israel trust in God (for water, for food, for healing, for conquest of their Promised Land)? Will Jesus' trust in God?

In these verses in Matthew we learn of Jesus' own tests and tribulations. First, the general test of fasting and ending up in a famished state (2). Then, secondly, the particular tribulations at the hands of the tempter (who appears to intentionally test or tempt Jesus when he is weak rather than strong, verses 3-10).

Clearly Jesus is tempted on matters concerning his messiahship, here focused in Matthew's telling on the matter of his title and status as 'the Son of God' (3, 6). What better way to be acclaimed as Messiah than through a miracle concerning food or a dramatic rescue which fulfilled ancient prophecy (3-7). Jesus is resolute, so the tempter a.k.a the devil (5) or Satan (10) tries a third and final time to tempt Jesus to submit to his rather than to God's authority. In this third temptation Jesus is offered, literally, the world (8-11). Not just Israel would be his domain.

The fact that Jesus rebuts and rejects these temptations shows us that his messiahship will not be expressed in a worldly way (courting popularity, demonstrating powerfulness).

Apart from that lesson, what might Christian disciples learn from the example of their Teacher?

An important observation is that Jesus rejects the voice of the devil with the words of God: 'it is written' (4, 7, 10). Indeed one of the citations is a citation about the words of God, "One does not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God" (4).

The power to live a holy life draws on the power of God's written Word in Scripture. Knowledge of the truth counters the lies and deceptions of the devil. Obedience to God's laws gives life which obedience to the devil's lures would not. Jesus trusts God and trusts the promises of God made to him via the written Word of God.

If Lent is a period for fasting, it is also a period for study of God's Word.

Sunday 23 February 2020 - 7th Sunday in Ordinary Time

Theme(s): Love you neighbour / God builds the church / Working with God on the church / Love your enemies

Sentence: If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also (Matthew 5:39)

Collect:

Bountiful God,
you send the sun and rain to the righteous and unrighteous.
Let your grace fall upon your people,
enable us to love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us,
so that we may truly be your children.
We ask this through our Lord Jesus Christ,
in the unity of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
[slightly abbreviated from NZL 2017, p. 40]

Readings:

Leviticus 19:1-2, 9-18
Psalm 119:33-40
1 Corinthians 3:10-11, 16-23
Matthew 5:38-48

Commentary:

Leviticus 19:1-2, 9-18

What is the single decisive intersection between the Sermon on the Mount (see our Gospel reading) and the Law of Moses (a part of which is the Old Testament reading today)?

A good case can be made that both concern holy living - the way of living which sets the godly person apart from the ungodly person, or, we could also say, the distinctive way of life which marks a believer in the God of Israel who is the God of Jesus Christ from those who do not so believe.

Leviticus 19 begins with a clear call to holiness: 'You shall be holy, for I the LORD your God am holy' (2).

In what follows (including the omitted verses, 3-8), holy living is set out in detail.

It includes acts of mercy and kindness (9-10, 14), actions most if not all cultures value re truth, honesty, respect for possessions of others and fair dealings (11, 13, 15-16), a distinctive action - not swearing falsely by God's name (12), and love rather than hatred towards neighbours including not taking vengeance and bearing grudges (17-18).

The whole chapter covers even more ground in terms of human relationships, some of which makes perfectly good sense to this day (e.g. 31, 32), some of which we might want to debate (e.g. prohibition on tattoos, 28) and some of which might simply puzzle us (e.g. 27).

Sometimes the Law of Moses is derided as though it is out of date, out of touch primitive law-making for a people as far removed culturally from us as Mars is from Earth. But careful reading here impresses on us the Law's care and concern for holy living, for just, fair and honest dealings with people, for acts of kindness and mercy, and for love not hate towards others.

What is not to like?

Psalm 119:33-40

Look back to last week's post for comments on Psalm 119 in general as a psalm devoted to praising, receiving, and obeying the rules and commandments of God.

Here we might note the conviction of the psalmist that obedience to the Law of Moses is a means of life (35, 37, 40).

1 Corinthians 3:10-11, 16-23

Continuing from last week and the week before, Paul rounds off his argument (i.e. concern and anxiety for the well-being of the Corinthian church expressed through a persuasive argument) that the diverse work of Paul and Apollos is one work of God with a new image:
- last week, planting/watering/growing;
- this week, building.

Paul has laid a foundation and Apollos has built on that but it is one building, not two.

The imagery is both ambiguous and capable of extension. The ambiguity is that if the church is a building built by Paul and Apollos, it is also God's building, its true foundation being Jesus Christ (11) and its status is 'God's temple' (16-17). The extension is that if the foundation is Jesus Christ and if the work of apostles is that of builders constructing a new temple on that foundation (where "apostles" = church planters/builders, both ancient and modern, both the Twelve (+Paul) and the likes of Apollos and more recent days, say, Marsden, Ruatara, the Williams brothers and Bishop Selwyn), then one day there will be ... a building inspection!

'Now if anyone builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw - the work of each builder will become visible, for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each has done' (12-13).

As we each contribute to the building of God's church (which we do, by being members of the church, this is not just about 'ministers' or 'priests'), what are we building?

A sobering thought, especially when we read on through verses 14 and 15.

But Paul is not done here as he provokes the Corinthians about their poor showing re the state of their church. Moving the image of a building (in general) along, Paul questions the Corinthians (as a prosecutor in court might question a witness) about a very specific form of holy building:

'Do you not know that you are God's temple (in particular) and that (just as ancient Israel believed God dwelt in the Temple in Jerusalem) God's Spirit dwells in you?' (16)

Disunity and division has capacity to 'destroy God's temple' (17). Well, Corinthians, note that God is not a neutral bystander when his (or we might say, 'HIS') temple is being destroyed (17).

Paul then reprises his talk of wisdom and foolishness from chapters one and two (18-20). That is, Corinthians: get up to speed here. You can be wise (and understand the true, unitary character of the one church of God built on the single foundation of Jesus Christ) or foolish (bitterly pursuing rivalries and competitions to destruction).

In short, Paul cuts to the (concluding) chase, 'So let no one boast about human leaders'  (21).

Effectively, Paul says, you are very small-minded, you Corinthians. You need to open your eyes: you can have everything that God wants to give you and not settle for one thing (or one leader): 'all belong to you' (22).

Matthew 5:38-48

This passage is so well-known through the generations of its readers that phrases from it are embedded in the English language (e.g. 'turn the other cheek', 'going the second mile' and 'love your neighbour').

A detailed background in a full commentary will bring to life aspects of the passage (e.g. why Jesus referred to the right cheek, or who it was who might ask you to carry something for one mile).

Here, in a brief commentary, we simply highlight that these verses envision a kingdom of generosity. Less eye for eye and tooth for tooth, and instead more shaming your adversary by doing more for them than they require of you. Give freely, love inclusively. Pray for persecutors, love the unlovely.

In sum, be like God (48). (That takes us back, incidentally, to Leviticus 19:1-2 and its call to holiness because we are the people of a holy God.)

We could get to the last verse and despair: a counsel for perfection is just too hard, isn't it?

Yes, it is too hard if what Jesus was meant that the moment his sermon ended, he expected his hearers to be perfect. Yes, it is too hard if we are meant to be perfect in our own strength.

But, no, it is not too hard if we read more widely in Scripture and recognise the promise of the Holy Spirit, that God the Spirit will come to each of God's people and work in us to bring us to maturity in Christ.

And, no, it is not too hard if we recognise that the kingdom of God works on people being wholly committed to the gracious and loving way of God. It would not be the kingdom of God if it was worked on the basis of 'Try your best. If you love most people but nurse hatred and bitterness towards a few, that's fine. Give to the beggars who are not utterly repulsive. Only go the extra mile if it suits and you are not too tired.' Of course not!

That is, Jesus is not so much asking perfection of us, but asking us to commit to the perfect vision of the kingdom: the kingdom in which all are loved and in which grace touches everyone, including evildoers and enemies.

Note of explanation:
Matthew 5:43 gives an impression that Jesus is quoting an OT text which says Love your neighbour but hate your enemy. No such text exists. (E.g. check Leviticus 19:18). On the one hand Jesus doesn't say "It is written" but talks about what people have heard. On the other hand there are passages in the OT which speak of hating one's enemies (e.g. Psalm 139:21). And there is a contemporary text from the Qumran or Dead Sea Scrolls which explicitly teaches hatred of enemies (1 QS 1:4; 10-11; 9:21-26). Of course we also read in Luke's Gospel, in the section in which the Parable of the Good Samaritan occurs, 10:35-48, that Jesus and his hearers lived in a world where there were enemies and it was a jolting surprise on the hearers' part that Jesus should teach that a hated enemy was to be loved as a neighbour.

Sunday 16 February 2020 - 6th Sunday in Ordinary Time

Theme(s): Kingdom living / Church without party politics / Reckoning with God being in charge

Sentence: Happy are those whose way is blameless, who walk in the law of the Lord (Psalm 119:1)

Collect:

God of Israel old and new,
write in our hearts the lessons of your law;
prepare our minds to receive the gospel
made visible in your Son Jesus Christ. Amen.

Readings:

Deuteronomy 30:15-20
Psalm 119:1-8
1 Corinthians 3:1-9
Matthew 5:21-37

Commentary:

Deuteronomy 30:15-20

Do not read this passage if you think life consists of greys instead of black and white, or that God is kinda a real good dude who just wants to bless you whatever you choose to do. No!

'See, I have set before you today life and prosperity, death and adversity.' (15)

If we squirm at the thought of a binary (good/bad, life/death) approach to decision-making and its consequences, it may be worth considering what kind of a God would offer something different to what we read here. Would God be much of a god if the offer was, say, 'It would be neat if you chose to obey me, but it doesn't matter if you disobey me'?

Of course there is no need to be at all uncomfortable in the presence of the God who speaks to us through this passage. Its resounding plea is 'Choose life' (19).

Though today we might hear the voice of God speaking to us as individuals about the course and destination of our lives, this original plea was to Israel. What kind of people would she choose to be? God's people living in God's way and thus blessed by God in the land promised to them by God? Or a dying people (18) enjoying the shortest of stays in the land they entered with hearts turned away from God towards other gods (17)?

As a matter of fact, Israel's history was a mixed bag. There was obedience (and times of blessing, notably in the reigns of David and Solomon) and there was disobedience (and times of cursing, notably exile, from the perspective of which, Deuteronomy was written in the form we read it today). In other words, whatever our feelings in the 21st century about shades of grey versus black and white as we understand the times in which we live, ancient Israel, as its writings were compiled, edited and finalised into what we Christians read as the Old Testament, looked back on its history as a nation once blessed and now cursed. No greys!

Psalm 119:1-8

Famously nearly* every verse of this longest psalm refers to the Law (e.g. law, statute, precept, commandment, decree, word, ordinance, way). It celebrates the keeping of the 'law of the Lord' (1) and mixes up the promise of blessing for obedience (1-2) with prayer for steadfastness (5), reminder of God's will that his commandments be kept (4), and statement of intention to obey (7-8).

The connection with our gospel reading is clear: Jesus is outlining in Matthew 5:21-37 what he meant when he said that he had not come to abolish the law but to fulfil it (5:17-20). A Christian following Jesus' teaching on the law of God can enter fully into the spirit of Psalm 119, eager to be an obedient citizen of the kingdom of heaven.

*Can you find the exceptions? Reputedly there are two!

1 Corinthians 3:1-9

We continue through 1 Corinthians (with readings which are not intended to 'relate' to the gospel reading of the day).

Having eloquently spoken of the true spiritual wisdom found in (and only in) Christ (chapters 1 and 2), Paul is frank and robustly critical of his Corinthian audience.

He compares a potential 'spiritual' audience with the 'people of the flesh' to whom he writes (1, also 2,3).

On the one hand 'spiritual' is comparable to 'immature' or 'infantile' (so also comparison between feeding with 'with milk, not solid food' (2)).

On the other hand 'still of the flesh' is the state of 'jealousy and quarrelling' (3) specifically linked to a form of party allegiance: 'one says, "I belong to Paul," and another, "I belong to Apollos" (4).

This dissension in the Corinthian ranks has already been introduced as a topic for the letter (chapter 1). Now Paul addresses it further, in an argument which will continue through to the end of chapter 4.

We could puzzle endlessly about the nature of the party allegiances. Was it an allegiance to perceived difference in teaching content between Paul and Apollos (and Cephas, mentioned in 3:22)? Was each teacher being treated as a kind of principal of a particular school of Greek philosophy (or rabbinical leader of a Jewish school of interpretation)? Or was the allegiance more human than that, so that the allegiance was heartfelt affection towards the apostle who brought the party loyalist into faith through baptism?

However the allegiances came about, Paul is clear that a strong sense of 'belonging' is involved (4). So he takes up this sense of belonging in verses 5-9. What are Paul and Apollos? We could perhaps use the word 'just' here: just servants of the Lord; just servants of the Lord who happened to be in Corinth at a certain time so that Corinthians came to belief through one or other as the Lord 'assigned to each' (5). Just so, no more, no less.

Paul then makes a distinction between the work of each. He 'planted', Apollos 'watered' (6). Perhaps Paul preached first and Apollos second. Not for the last time in the history of evangelism, the later preacher (so to speak) reaped the harvest from the seed sown by the first. (Here in Aotearoa New Zealand we might look back over two hundred years to Marsden preaching with little fruit re conversions in 1814 (and successive preaching trips) and then forward to the 1830s when many Maori converted to the Christian faith). But. Where does the real credit for the success of the apostolic mission in Corinth (Aotearoa New Zealand) lie? With God: 'but God gave the growth' (6).

Thus, Paul says, neither he nor Apollos (by comparison) amount to 'anything' (7). What matters is 'God who gives the growth' (7). This is where the Corinthians' allegiance should be placed.

With this unifying factor in place in his argument Paul draws out the implications in verses 8 and 9. Paul and Apollos have had a 'common purpose' in their work. They are not their own men but 'God's servants, working together.' The Corinthians are not many parties of Christians but one entity: 'you are God's field, God's building.'

But we do not read this passage for a lesson in Corinthian church history. What is God the Holy Spirit saying to the church today through this passage?

Is the message here about growth into Christian maturity as a congregation? Whether riven with party conflicts or not, congregations can be torn in two or three by other divisions. (Is there a question for the global church about its (im)maturity as a church of many denominations?)

Is the message about how we see ourselves in ministry? It is natural to seek limelight, even in the church. Theoretically we deplore party allegiances, secretly (unconsciously) we might wish we had a following! Do we need to take a sober reckoning of our personal ministry role as simply that of a servant of the Lord: what counts is God's work in the church.

If God's work in the church is what counts, where do we see that work occurring? If the work of the servants of the Lord counts for little by comparison with the work of God, then that frees us from worrying that (say) we do not seem to have giants of the faith around us today as we had in former days. One kind of anxiety in the church concerns where the Pauls and Apolloses of the 21st century are to be found. But does that matter? What is God up to? Surely the power of God at work in the world is no less today than two thousand years ago!

Matthew 5:21-37

There is a lot of material here! Topically we have murder/hate (21-22); reconciliation (23-24, 25-26); adultery/lust (27-28, with added comment re parts of our bodies which cause us to sin, 29-30); divorce (31-32); oaths (36-37). There is a challenging and meaty sermon series laid out for us to follow. However that is not our task with this passage, which is to preach one sermon on these seventeen verses.

It could be that we take the opportunity to major on just one topic - that would be a reasonable way to respond to the passage. In which case we might want to delve into a commentary for consideration of important subtleties: e.g. what was in the background concerning life in Jesus' day which led to the way he teaches about oaths, reconciliation and divorce? How do we honour Jesus' words about remarriage in verse 32 with due seriousness, words which bluntly state that remarriage of a divorced woman creates a state of adultery?

To an extent (being frank), a sermon which sweeps across the whole passage offers the option of not addressing difficult issues such as those within verse 32. Yet such a sermon cannot avoid the fact that taken together, these verses confront just about every member of the congregation with some challenge or another. Who among us is reconciled to every person we have ever had a quarrel with? What person is free of lust? (Speaking as a man, in a world where many images of sexually exciting women are staples of advertising in print and video media, verse 28 challenges!) We live in an age in which many marriages end in divorce. In the language of yesteryear, a gentleman's word used to be his bond and business deals were struck on the shake of a hand, but now, it seems, nothing can happen without some voluminous contract being vetted by expensive lawyers.

We might also reckon with the fact that many readers/hearers of verses 29-30 are genuinely troubled by what these verses mean. Do they literally apply so the solution to lust is plucking one's eyes out and the end of thievery is bound to follow from losing one's hands? (To respond quickly on this matter: as is the case elsewhere in the gospels, Jesus is exaggerating to make a point. Self-mutilation is not required by Christians taking the Sermon seriously. But radical action may be the only solution to problems such as lust and theft. To cease lusting, I need to stop watching TV and trawling the internet. A shoplifter needs to stop going into shops. Etc.)

So, what then for the preacher? I suggest we have a nice long cup of coffee or tea or smoothie and think through what it would mean to be faithful to Jesus to preach on his Sermon.

Would it be faithful to preach on this passage as though we were the kind of rabbi Jesus seemed to despise, the kind who found ways around the laws of God rather than insisted on obedience to them?

(Conversely) would it be faithful to Jesus to preach on this passage in such a way that we were like another kind of despised rabbi, the kind who makes their hearers feel more weighed down and oppressed by the end of the sermon than they were at the beginning, suffocating under the weight of obligation to be perfect now in both outward action and inward attitude?

If the Sermon is a charter or manifesto for the kingdom of God, then it sets out a vision for how we will live in a renewed society of God's people. A restored humanity within this society lives in harmony with one another: neither murder nor hatred nor unreconciled relationships are compatible with this vision. Betrayal in marriage through adultery, imbalanced relationships between the sexes because lust fuels domination of one sex over the other is not compatible either. Drastic action may be required to match the deeds and attitudes of members of the kingdom with the vision of the kingdom. Truth telling is also vital to the kingdom, whether we think of faithfulness to marriage vows in particular, or commitment to any vow made simply. The opposite of thieving in the kingdom is more than the cessation of stealing, it is generosity and sharing of material goods.

Can we, in our sermons this week, capture the seriousness of what is at stake in this teaching of Jesus with the inspiration of what God desires of his kingdom people?

Sunday 9 February 2020 - 5th Sunday in Ordinary Time

Theme(s): Salt / Light / Righteousness according to Jesus / Wisdom / Discipleship / Christian character / Spiritual truth / True spirituality

Sentence: Shine forth from your throne upon the cherubim; restore us O God; show us the light of your face and we shall be saved. (Psalm 80:1,3)

Collect:

We praise you, God,
that the light of Christ shines in our darkness
and is never overcome;
show us the way we must go to eternal day;
through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Readings:

Isaiah 58:1-9a
Psalm 112:1-9
1 Corinthians 2:1-12
Matthew 5:13-20

Commentary:

Isaiah 58:1-9a

With an eye on the gospel reading (from the Sermon on the Mount) in which Jesus teaches what the real oil is on what God expects of God's people about the way they live, we read this stirring passage as a challenge in a similar vein: what does God really, really expect of us?

The prophet fastens on fasting as an issue. He paints a picture of his fellow Israelites fasting intently and faithfully and then complaining that God seemingly offers no accreditation (v.3). To them he says, as the voice of God speaks through him, your fasting is a sham. Verses 3-7 outline both the problem (fasting covers over unjust treatment of others) and the remedy (understand the true fast of God and do that instead of going without food).

Once the prophet launches into his memorable method of outlining what true fasting is, by asking an emotively powerful set of rhetorical questions, all Jewish and Christian ethics would never be the same again.

'Is not this the fast that I choose: to loose the bonds of injustice .. Is it not to share your bread with the hungry and bring the homeless poor into your house ...' (vss. 6-7)

Psalm 112:1-9

This psalm ties neatly into the Old Testament reading re just living (vss. 5-6, 9) and with the gospel, especially Jesus telling the disciples that they are the light of the world = 'They rise in the darkness as a light for the upright, they are gracious, merciful and righteous' (vs. 4).

Indeed one way to summarise the whole of the Sermon on the Mount could be to say that those disciples who live accordingly will be 'gracious, merciful and righteous.'

One feature of the life encouraged by the psalm is that the righteous live lives of 'happy stability' (see vss. 1, 6-8).

1 Corinthians 2:1-12

This is a very deep passage on which we could linger in theological reflection at many points. Its depth comes from Paul exploring the 'mystery of God' in the context of Corinth, a seaside city of many cultures with a church of several allegiances informed by two great philosophies of the day, Hellenism with its interest in 'wisdom' and Judaism with its interest in 'signs' (1:22).

Wisdom communicated itself in those days with 'lofty words' (2:1) and 'plausible words' (2:4), that is, in the rhetorical (persuasive) style of speech familiar to the Hellenistic world. On the one hand Paul seems to have been poor at such an approach (2:3-4). On the other hand, he is proud of this inability for what he has to say (the gospel of the crucified Christ) is not an argument to be presented persuasively ('so that your faith might rest not on human wisdom but on the power of God', v.5) but a 'demonstration of the Spirit and of power' (v.4).

Picking up the flow of Paul's themes developed in this and the previous chapter, he is saying that the pitiful weakness of a crucified man (and an obscure resident of Palestine on the edge of the empire at that) is 'foolish' for Greeks (1:23 etc) and a 'stumbling block' to Jews (1.23 etc) has no power in the usual way of persuasion to persuade hearers of the gospel that on the cross true wisdom lies and in the cross is the greatest sign of God at work in the world. No, the effectiveness of preaching the gospel lies with the Spirit's power to convict hearers that truth lies in the 'mystery of God' at work in Jesus Christ crucified rather than the opposite (e.g. if Jesus were a great philosopher in the mode of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle and a miracle worker in the style of Elijah and Elisha).

Understanding this, Paul goes on to say, Jesus Christ is the actual wisdom from God (1:30; 2:6-7).

What then follows in the passage, 2:9-12 (and 2:13-16) is an account of how God's truth is discovered: God reveals it (2:7, 10); the Spirit of God is the agent of revelation (2:10-13); the Spirit is able to reveal because only the Spirit of God 'comprehends what is truly God's' (2:11).

Note how the emphasis falls in this passage on truth being a gift from God, enabled by God and made available by God according to God's timing. On this matter Paul would have been in accord with his Jewish readers/hearers but out of sync with his Greek hearers/readers whose Hellenistic background assumed 'wisdom' was discoverable by insightful human intellectual exploration.

Much more could be said on this passage. One specific point of reflection would be to consider what this passage says to the church today about communicating the gospel. To offer one tiny illustration of where such reflection might go: is the church tempted to think that its problems with communication of the gospel are about getting the right advertising agency involved in marketing the gospel? If so, to what extent is an "advertising agency involved in marketing" a 21st century equivalent of 1st century Hellenistic philosophers plying their rhetorical (persuasive) trade?

Matthew 5:13-20

[NB A downside to following the lectionary is that we end up with an interrupted reading of the gospel. Two weeks ago we were setting off on Jesus' mission after his baptism (Matthew 4). But Matthew 5:1-12 is reserved for All Saints Day, 1 November 2020, so we now jump ahead to Matthew 5:13-20].

Now we diveed into the Sermon on the Mount without a Sunday to reflect on how the sermon begins, Matthew 5:1-12, and what that beginning says, especially what it says in terms of setting the tone for what follows (e.g. the theme of blessing, the unexpectedness of who is blessed and thus preparing us for the 'upside down' ethical world of the kingdom of God).

We also miss the setting in which Jesus draws his disciples aside yet we must compare this with what we learn at the end of the Sermon, that the crowds 'were astounded at his teaching' (7:28): thus is a tension created which the church has wrestled with ever since: is the high demands of the Sermon for all Christians or for a more select group (e.g. those called to monastic orders)].

Once again we are in biblical territory where many themes are densely packed into a few verses.

We could easily preach a whole sermon on being salt of the earth (v. 13) or light of the world (v.14-15) or the relationship between good works (v. 16) and faith.

Books get published on the meaning of 5:17-20 in respect of Jesus' understanding of the importance and continuing relevance of the Law of Moses for Christians living in the age of a new covenant with God.

Perhaps more so than other weeks, the few following remarks make no pretence to offer a route of avoidance of effort looking up a decent commentary or three!

What we might usefully consider as one reflection on this passage, 5:13-20, is to ask a question about what is at stake here.

Jesus has begun the task of bringing the kingdom of God into the world (or, if you prefer, bringing the world into the kingdom of God). He has preached the gospel of the kingdom and enacted kingdom business: that is, whether we think of the kingdom as the intimate (and immanent) reign of God over the affairs of the world, or as the restoration of creation, Jesus has announced that reign is at hand and has begun to restore creation through healings and deliverance (4:17-25).

Now in this wide-ranging sermon Jesus addresses the question of how those in the kingdom (disciples who have responded to Jesus' call to follow him) should live. Kingdom living, by implication from chapter 4, will be life lived which demonstrates the rule of God over disciples and which lives out the original vision of creation of humanity being in loving harmony with one another.

Even just a few living in this way will be like salt in food: its presence makes a difference to the food. A little light (even a few disciples living in the kingdom way) destroys a lot of darkness. Living saltily and lightfully will draw people to praise God.

We could pause right here in our sermon and ask of ourselves as well as of our hearers, Does anyone in our community/workplace/sports club know that we are Christians? What is different about our lives which demonstrates the rule of God over us and which offers a sign of creation being restored?

In similar vein we could tackle 5:17-20 (on which, we remember, books have been written).

If we go back to what the 'law or the prophets' (v. 17) were about, they were not about Israel living by a random set of strange rules, the stranger the better for demonstrating how faithful Israel was to a strange God. No! They were on about Israel living in a fallen world a community life in which people sought to live harmoniously with one another while honouring the rule of God over their lives, with the plus that some rules provided for ways of restoration (of people to God and to one another) when things went wrong). The prophets often made the point that one other thing could go wrong with trying to live in this way: the rules might be misunderstood so that the comparatively tiny ones (e.g. about the finer points of ceremony) could outweigh the actually important ones (like living justly and treating others mercifully).

With this in mind we could understand 5:17-20 in this way: Jesus is saying that the vision for life underlying the law and the prophets was his vision too. Accordingly he has not come to change anything about the law and the prophets as they relate to living under God's rule and to living in harmony with one another. We need to put those italicised words into the picture because clearly Jesus did change some rules (e.g. about clean/unclean foods).

What we then find Jesus doing in 5:21 and following verses is not to undo the law but to intensify it. Looking ahead to just one such treatment, re murder, 5:21-22, Jesus affirms that murder is wrong (it dishonours God who has made each of us equal in his sight; it (obviously) breaks harmony in society) and then goes beyond that. Hatred of another also dishonours God and disrupts social harmony.

Back to 5:13-20. Jesus can end this section by saying the disciples' righteousness must exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees (see also 'You must be perfect' at the end of chapter 6) because life in the kingdom is no less a vision for living under the rule of God and for living in harmony with one another than the vision that drives the scribes and the Pharisees to live as they do.

What is (and could or should be) interesting about the weeks ahead in Matthew's Gospel is asking the question, what difference does Jesus make to these two ways to live out the same vision?