![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif?v=92.1){kind=small}
Serena and I have just returned from a two week break in Northumberland. I came to see it as very much a "non retreat" retreat. "Non retreat" in that it wasn't intended to be a retreat and wasn't at a retreat centre. But, a retreat in the sense that it provided some very much needed R&R after a very difficult 12 months at our church, and an extremely busy couple of months at work. We were both running on empty, and the time away doing very little has helped to put us back on more of an even keel.
But that's not the aspect of Northumberland I wanted to post about. Northumberland is full of what G K Chesterton would have called the "Rolling English Road". This is the title of one of Chesterton's best-known and best-loved poems, which begins:
Before the Roman came to Rye or out to Severn strode,
The rolling English drunkard made the rolling English road.
A reeling road, a rolling road, that rambles round the shire...
It continues in similar vein. Chesterton's thought process is that the drunkard on his way home from the hostelry at dead of night does not necessarily take a direct route, but weaves about a bit, perhaps doubling back here or taking a detour there. And the English road which results is one of my favourite things: full of tight, twisty corners; following the contours of the landscape; taking in views of the surrounding countryside; crossing streams over little bridges; and great fun to drive in a nippy car like a Ford Focus! Despite their frequent twists and turns, rolling English roads do get you there in the end, and the journey is as enjoyable as the destination. Our ordinance survey maps for that part of the world are scribbled on to show the "good driving routes". Good meaning picturesque rather than direct or quick.
The A1 (and at times the A1(M)) formed the large part of our route home from Northumberland to London. This isn't a rolling English road any more. Thanks to bypasses, this road no longer passes through the centres of the towns along the route. Thanks to cuttings and embankments, the road now cuts through the landscape, rather than rolling with it. The result, of course, is that the journey is pretty quick, but the views of the countryside around are almost non-existent and the journey is just that: a purely functional journey from A to B.
So what? I like driving on little roads and not motorways (Although not the 350 miles from SE London to N'land)! Well, thinking about this got me thinking about the often-quoted saying of Jesus about the broad and narrow ways:
"Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the road is easy that leads to destruction, and there are many who take it. For the gate is narrow and the road is hard that leads to life, and there are few who find it." Matthew 7:13-14
This is often interpreted as meaning that it is very easy to disobey God and to sin, but very difficult to turn from sin and follow Christ. I wonder, though. Would the person who said "my yoke is easy, and my burthen light" really have meant that? I'm not too sure.
A lot of Christ's teachings spoke directly to the local people in words they would understand as a people suffering Roman occupation. Who built wide gateways and easy roads? The Romans... So, one possible interpretation of this passage I would draw out is that Christ is saying that the Roman's ways (of violent oppression in order to enforce the pax Romana) lead to destruction, whereas His ways (of peace leading to the pax Christi) lead to life.
I think there's also a lesson to be learnt in how we view our Christian discipleship and journey of faith. My own path of faith has been a lot like the rolling English road (at times staggering drunkenly) and not very much like the straight Roman road. It might be a little slower, but it rolls with the cultural landscape of the past and the scientific reason of the present, and does not ride roughshod through them.
There are those, though, who are happy to drive a straight Roman road through the path of reason and tradition (normally using the Bible as both weapon and justification), and to call that straight path "faith", or "the only way to God", or "the only escape from hell". Well, as far as I am concerned they are welcome to their wide gate and broad road! What might they miss cutting through the landscapes of the past, present and future? What enjoyment of the journey will they miss if the end goal is all that matters?
That Roman road's certainly not for me. So, based on my past experience, I shall keep on the windy, twisty, rolling English road that I have trod so far. As Chesterton puts it at the end of his poem:
"For there is good news yet to hear, and fine things to be seen,
Before we go to Paradise by way of Kensal Green."
But that's not the aspect of Northumberland I wanted to post about. Northumberland is full of what G K Chesterton would have called the "Rolling English Road". This is the title of one of Chesterton's best-known and best-loved poems, which begins:
Before the Roman came to Rye or out to Severn strode,
The rolling English drunkard made the rolling English road.
A reeling road, a rolling road, that rambles round the shire...
It continues in similar vein. Chesterton's thought process is that the drunkard on his way home from the hostelry at dead of night does not necessarily take a direct route, but weaves about a bit, perhaps doubling back here or taking a detour there. And the English road which results is one of my favourite things: full of tight, twisty corners; following the contours of the landscape; taking in views of the surrounding countryside; crossing streams over little bridges; and great fun to drive in a nippy car like a Ford Focus! Despite their frequent twists and turns, rolling English roads do get you there in the end, and the journey is as enjoyable as the destination. Our ordinance survey maps for that part of the world are scribbled on to show the "good driving routes". Good meaning picturesque rather than direct or quick.
The A1 (and at times the A1(M)) formed the large part of our route home from Northumberland to London. This isn't a rolling English road any more. Thanks to bypasses, this road no longer passes through the centres of the towns along the route. Thanks to cuttings and embankments, the road now cuts through the landscape, rather than rolling with it. The result, of course, is that the journey is pretty quick, but the views of the countryside around are almost non-existent and the journey is just that: a purely functional journey from A to B.
So what? I like driving on little roads and not motorways (Although not the 350 miles from SE London to N'land)! Well, thinking about this got me thinking about the often-quoted saying of Jesus about the broad and narrow ways:
"Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the road is easy that leads to destruction, and there are many who take it. For the gate is narrow and the road is hard that leads to life, and there are few who find it." Matthew 7:13-14
This is often interpreted as meaning that it is very easy to disobey God and to sin, but very difficult to turn from sin and follow Christ. I wonder, though. Would the person who said "my yoke is easy, and my burthen light" really have meant that? I'm not too sure.
A lot of Christ's teachings spoke directly to the local people in words they would understand as a people suffering Roman occupation. Who built wide gateways and easy roads? The Romans... So, one possible interpretation of this passage I would draw out is that Christ is saying that the Roman's ways (of violent oppression in order to enforce the pax Romana) lead to destruction, whereas His ways (of peace leading to the pax Christi) lead to life.
I think there's also a lesson to be learnt in how we view our Christian discipleship and journey of faith. My own path of faith has been a lot like the rolling English road (at times staggering drunkenly) and not very much like the straight Roman road. It might be a little slower, but it rolls with the cultural landscape of the past and the scientific reason of the present, and does not ride roughshod through them.
There are those, though, who are happy to drive a straight Roman road through the path of reason and tradition (normally using the Bible as both weapon and justification), and to call that straight path "faith", or "the only way to God", or "the only escape from hell". Well, as far as I am concerned they are welcome to their wide gate and broad road! What might they miss cutting through the landscapes of the past, present and future? What enjoyment of the journey will they miss if the end goal is all that matters?
That Roman road's certainly not for me. So, based on my past experience, I shall keep on the windy, twisty, rolling English road that I have trod so far. As Chesterton puts it at the end of his poem:
"For there is good news yet to hear, and fine things to be seen,
Before we go to Paradise by way of Kensal Green."
The whole (well, most) of London is in shock after another senseless evening and night of rioting on the streets: cars burnt out, shops smashed up and looted, buildings burnt to the ground. There seems to be no rhyme or reason to these senseless acts of violence - a political protest this ain't.
My initial reaction, like most others, was one of disgust - these "human" rioters are more animal than human; there is no similarity between them out there on the streets looting and middle class me sat in front of the TV (which was bought legitimately). I still think these mindless acts should be condemned...I still think the police should be supported throughout this, the rule of law upheld, and the looters/rioters bought to justice.
But, as a Christian how should I be feeling?
Aren't these rioters, as well as being rioters, also my brothers (and sisters)? Aren't they also created in the image of God, don't they also, somewhere, hold that spark of the Spirit within them, as I hope I do? Weren't we taught to love our neighbours as ourselves, and also to love our enemies? To bless those who harm us, to bless and not to curse? Whatever I might feel about certain people's behaviour, they are human every bit as much as I am, and not simply animals...
I've been reading Harry Williams' "The True Wilderness" which is a collection of his sermons from his time at Trinity College, Cambridge. It's a fantastic read, and portrays a version of Christianity and God which I definitely resonate with. Yesterday I was reading his sermon "Deeper compassion for humanity", and it is directly applicable to the current situation in London. Here's a bit of it where he ponders on an encounter with a kleptomaniac, but it might as well be with a rioter/looter/arsonist.
"Suppose for instance that we come across a kleptomaniac. We may be enlightened enough to realise that simply to condemn him as a criminal does no good to anybody. Instead we may think of him and behave towards him as somebody who has a disease called kleptomania, like a man who has the measles.
But this apparently enlightened, clinical approach is in fact an attempt to prevent ourselves from perceiving how much we have in common with him. For his stealing is an attempt to compensate himself for an intolerable sense of having no value, and this sense of having no value follows from his never having been properly loved. It is true of all of us that in this way or that way, to this degree or that degree, the love we needed to feel our own value has been withheld. And so the spectre of valuelessness haunts us all, waiting to spring. And quite a lot of the things I do are attempts to avert my gaze from this ghost who would take from me all reasons for living.
True, my own way of compensating myself for the threatening sense of valuelessness is not that of the kleptomaniac. I do not go around shop-lifting [also read rioting/looting/burning]. But I see to it nonetheless that I accumulate quite a lot of riches [to compensate]"
And he then goes on to list many of the things that we middle class, respectable citizens to heap up the riches of respectability and popularity. All perfectly acceptable in our modern, capitalist culture of course! However, the fact remains that we and the kleptomaniac/looter/rioter/arsonist have more in common than we think. We all feel valueless in some way and do something to compensate for it. It is only by recognising that we all suffer from the same wounds that we can find some common ground with the "other" and be able to communicate with them. We know we suffer from those same wounds because we've been there ourselves.
Williams says that instead of remarking "There, but for the grace of God, go I" when confronted with the other, it is much more honest to say "There, by the grace of God, I have been and I am". He concludes by saying that "[O]ur identification with the other person brings to our lives and to their's the power, the joy, the victory which is already ours and all mankind's in Christ Jesus Our Lord."
Difficult? Yes. Insulting to some? Probably. Incomprehensible to many? Almost certainly.
However, I think there is a genuine challenge here to all Christians (and in reality to all people) to respond with Love and not with hate; even in the face of such senseless violence. Can we do it?
My initial reaction, like most others, was one of disgust - these "human" rioters are more animal than human; there is no similarity between them out there on the streets looting and middle class me sat in front of the TV (which was bought legitimately). I still think these mindless acts should be condemned...I still think the police should be supported throughout this, the rule of law upheld, and the looters/rioters bought to justice.
But, as a Christian how should I be feeling?
Aren't these rioters, as well as being rioters, also my brothers (and sisters)? Aren't they also created in the image of God, don't they also, somewhere, hold that spark of the Spirit within them, as I hope I do? Weren't we taught to love our neighbours as ourselves, and also to love our enemies? To bless those who harm us, to bless and not to curse? Whatever I might feel about certain people's behaviour, they are human every bit as much as I am, and not simply animals...
I've been reading Harry Williams' "The True Wilderness" which is a collection of his sermons from his time at Trinity College, Cambridge. It's a fantastic read, and portrays a version of Christianity and God which I definitely resonate with. Yesterday I was reading his sermon "Deeper compassion for humanity", and it is directly applicable to the current situation in London. Here's a bit of it where he ponders on an encounter with a kleptomaniac, but it might as well be with a rioter/looter/arsonist.
"Suppose for instance that we come across a kleptomaniac. We may be enlightened enough to realise that simply to condemn him as a criminal does no good to anybody. Instead we may think of him and behave towards him as somebody who has a disease called kleptomania, like a man who has the measles.
But this apparently enlightened, clinical approach is in fact an attempt to prevent ourselves from perceiving how much we have in common with him. For his stealing is an attempt to compensate himself for an intolerable sense of having no value, and this sense of having no value follows from his never having been properly loved. It is true of all of us that in this way or that way, to this degree or that degree, the love we needed to feel our own value has been withheld. And so the spectre of valuelessness haunts us all, waiting to spring. And quite a lot of the things I do are attempts to avert my gaze from this ghost who would take from me all reasons for living.
True, my own way of compensating myself for the threatening sense of valuelessness is not that of the kleptomaniac. I do not go around shop-lifting [also read rioting/looting/burning]. But I see to it nonetheless that I accumulate quite a lot of riches [to compensate]"
And he then goes on to list many of the things that we middle class, respectable citizens to heap up the riches of respectability and popularity. All perfectly acceptable in our modern, capitalist culture of course! However, the fact remains that we and the kleptomaniac/looter/rioter/arsonist have more in common than we think. We all feel valueless in some way and do something to compensate for it. It is only by recognising that we all suffer from the same wounds that we can find some common ground with the "other" and be able to communicate with them. We know we suffer from those same wounds because we've been there ourselves.
Williams says that instead of remarking "There, but for the grace of God, go I" when confronted with the other, it is much more honest to say "There, by the grace of God, I have been and I am". He concludes by saying that "[O]ur identification with the other person brings to our lives and to their's the power, the joy, the victory which is already ours and all mankind's in Christ Jesus Our Lord."
Difficult? Yes. Insulting to some? Probably. Incomprehensible to many? Almost certainly.
However, I think there is a genuine challenge here to all Christians (and in reality to all people) to respond with Love and not with hate; even in the face of such senseless violence. Can we do it?
Alleluia, alleluia! Christ is risen!
He is risen indeed! Alleluia, alleluia!
On Easter Sunday my wife and I celebrated the resurrection of our LORD in Norwich Cathedral. The place was absolutely packed. I know we must never forget that it only takes two or three to be gathered together to worship in the presence of God, but it always feels special to be among a great number worshipping God in word, music and sacrament. It was truly inspiring and uplifting.
The Easter Sunday liturgy celebrates the resurrection of Jesus on the third day: a specific resurrection on a specific day, yet with eternal consequences. We also look forward to that great day when the dead shall all be raised to new life - the resurrection of the dead (of which Christ is the first fruits) - again, specific resurrection. However, there is another more general sense in which we can talk about resurrection. The Bishop of Norwich talked about this in his sermon on Sunday (but in case you think this is pure plagiarism let me assure you I was thinking of this area for this blog post anyway!).
This resurrection is the sort that is needed in our lives every single day. Some might call it "conversion", "transformation", "repentance", "letting God in", "committing to Christ", "being born again" or a whole host of other things, but the word resurrection will do nicely enough. What I mean by this is the act of letting go of old ways of being (dying, bearing your cross, being crucified in Christ), and allowing new growth to spring forth in its place (being born to new life, being resurrected, living in the risen Christ).
Unfortunately, the latter does not come without the former. One of my favourite hymns is "Take up thy Cross, the Saviour said", and the penultimate verse expresses this sentiment beautifully:
Take up thy cross and follow Christ,
Nor think til death to lay it down;
For only those who bear the cross
May hope to wear the glorious crown.
It is such an upside down way of thinking, but it is absolutely central to Jesus' teaching throughout his earthly ministry - dying so that we might live, losing our lives so that we could find true life, giving up all we have to find the Kingdom of God. The well-known metaphor Jesus uses in John's gospel is that of a grain of wheat, which if it does not fall to earth and "die" remains a single grain of wheat; but if it falls to earth and dies bears much fruit. This is the offer, and challenge, that Christ extends to all who would follow Him.
This sort of resurrection is urgently needed: in our own lives, and in the lives of our communities and churches. Many may feel that the seeds have been planted, they have fallen to the earth and been swallowed up, yet no green shoots have been seen. Others will feel that all they have seen is death: of projects, of plans, of friends, of friendships; and now they anxiously, urgently, and desperately await the resurrection. But where is it?
We may not know the time, we may not know the hour of its coming, but we do know that the tomb is open, Christ is not there, HE IS RISEN and that in the end Love wins (thank you Rob Bell!)! The desperately awaited Resurrection may look nothing like we expect it to, so if it is possible we must expect (and welcome) the unexpected, the unusual, the unorthodox. The risen Christ was not instantly recognisable to those who encountered Him. He bore the scars of His passion, but in His glory he was somehow changed, somehow unrecognisable. In the same way, resurrection in our own lives will surprise us - we will bear the scars of our own trials yet be somehow changed, somehow unrecognisable. CHRIST IS RISEN. ALLELUIA! ALLELUIA!
Now the green blade rises from the buried grain,
Wheat that in the dark earth many years has lain;
Love lives again, that with the dead has been:
Love is come again, like wheat that springs up green.
He is risen indeed! Alleluia, alleluia!
On Easter Sunday my wife and I celebrated the resurrection of our LORD in Norwich Cathedral. The place was absolutely packed. I know we must never forget that it only takes two or three to be gathered together to worship in the presence of God, but it always feels special to be among a great number worshipping God in word, music and sacrament. It was truly inspiring and uplifting.
The Easter Sunday liturgy celebrates the resurrection of Jesus on the third day: a specific resurrection on a specific day, yet with eternal consequences. We also look forward to that great day when the dead shall all be raised to new life - the resurrection of the dead (of which Christ is the first fruits) - again, specific resurrection. However, there is another more general sense in which we can talk about resurrection. The Bishop of Norwich talked about this in his sermon on Sunday (but in case you think this is pure plagiarism let me assure you I was thinking of this area for this blog post anyway!).
This resurrection is the sort that is needed in our lives every single day. Some might call it "conversion", "transformation", "repentance", "letting God in", "committing to Christ", "being born again" or a whole host of other things, but the word resurrection will do nicely enough. What I mean by this is the act of letting go of old ways of being (dying, bearing your cross, being crucified in Christ), and allowing new growth to spring forth in its place (being born to new life, being resurrected, living in the risen Christ).
Unfortunately, the latter does not come without the former. One of my favourite hymns is "Take up thy Cross, the Saviour said", and the penultimate verse expresses this sentiment beautifully:
Take up thy cross and follow Christ,
Nor think til death to lay it down;
For only those who bear the cross
May hope to wear the glorious crown.
It is such an upside down way of thinking, but it is absolutely central to Jesus' teaching throughout his earthly ministry - dying so that we might live, losing our lives so that we could find true life, giving up all we have to find the Kingdom of God. The well-known metaphor Jesus uses in John's gospel is that of a grain of wheat, which if it does not fall to earth and "die" remains a single grain of wheat; but if it falls to earth and dies bears much fruit. This is the offer, and challenge, that Christ extends to all who would follow Him.
This sort of resurrection is urgently needed: in our own lives, and in the lives of our communities and churches. Many may feel that the seeds have been planted, they have fallen to the earth and been swallowed up, yet no green shoots have been seen. Others will feel that all they have seen is death: of projects, of plans, of friends, of friendships; and now they anxiously, urgently, and desperately await the resurrection. But where is it?
We may not know the time, we may not know the hour of its coming, but we do know that the tomb is open, Christ is not there, HE IS RISEN and that in the end Love wins (thank you Rob Bell!)! The desperately awaited Resurrection may look nothing like we expect it to, so if it is possible we must expect (and welcome) the unexpected, the unusual, the unorthodox. The risen Christ was not instantly recognisable to those who encountered Him. He bore the scars of His passion, but in His glory he was somehow changed, somehow unrecognisable. In the same way, resurrection in our own lives will surprise us - we will bear the scars of our own trials yet be somehow changed, somehow unrecognisable. CHRIST IS RISEN. ALLELUIA! ALLELUIA!
Now the green blade rises from the buried grain,
Wheat that in the dark earth many years has lain;
Love lives again, that with the dead has been:
Love is come again, like wheat that springs up green.
What happened that first Good Friday? Well, the biblical account of the Passion is quite simple - Jesus was handed over to the Romans from the High Priests who then whipped up a crowd to call for his death. Pilate eventually gives in to the pressure and gives him over to be crucified until he is dead.
But what happened? Was sin forgiven? Was the sin of the world undone so that the world could be reconciled to God? Was some sort of price or debt paid? Was an ancient rite (passover or atonement) truly fulfilled?
I think before we can make any theological conclusions about Jesus' death we have to be quite straightforward about what happened that day - MURDER. Human beings took God's own Son, God Himself incarnate upon the earth and they killed Him in a most brutal fashion. God came amongst us, and we couldn't handle what He said and did, so we did what came most naturally to us - we did away with Him.
And what is Jesus' response to this? Well, we read (in other gospel accounts) that He forgave those who had tortured and killed Him. This wasn't forgiveness before He was killed, or after He was killed, but right in the middle of the long, slow death of crucifixion.
Even if we draw no more theological conclusions from the crucifixion, this is frankly STUNNING. God comes to dwell amongst us in human form, we abandon, deny, betray and reject him and we murder him on a cross. And He forgives us for doing it!
This is who God really is: the God who dies for us, indeed is killed by us, but Who forgives us even as we're doing it.
But what happened? Was sin forgiven? Was the sin of the world undone so that the world could be reconciled to God? Was some sort of price or debt paid? Was an ancient rite (passover or atonement) truly fulfilled?
I think before we can make any theological conclusions about Jesus' death we have to be quite straightforward about what happened that day - MURDER. Human beings took God's own Son, God Himself incarnate upon the earth and they killed Him in a most brutal fashion. God came amongst us, and we couldn't handle what He said and did, so we did what came most naturally to us - we did away with Him.
And what is Jesus' response to this? Well, we read (in other gospel accounts) that He forgave those who had tortured and killed Him. This wasn't forgiveness before He was killed, or after He was killed, but right in the middle of the long, slow death of crucifixion.
Even if we draw no more theological conclusions from the crucifixion, this is frankly STUNNING. God comes to dwell amongst us in human form, we abandon, deny, betray and reject him and we murder him on a cross. And He forgives us for doing it!
This is who God really is: the God who dies for us, indeed is killed by us, but Who forgives us even as we're doing it.
Shortish post today (and skipping out the rather important institution of the Lord's Supper, but I'll hope I'll be forgiven that! I'm also one post behind...)
Did Judas need to betray Jesus? We hear of the betrayal in Matthew 26: 47-56. As Jesus Himself said "Day after day I sat in the temple teaching, and you did not arrest me". The 'authorities' could have seized Jesus at any time, it didn't need to be in secret in the garden, and they probably didn't need someone to betray His location. Jesus is not in hiding, he is being quite open, and indeed by now His eyes are fixed firmly on the cross.
So was Judas's betrayal of Jesus necessary? Almost certainly not. So there must be some significance to the fact that Jesus was betrayed, and not just arrested. I guess for me the chief lesson of this part of the Passion story is that you can be very close to the Lord and still be very vulnerable to the influence of evil. Judas was both physically close to Jesus, and was one of the trusted twelve. The lesson for us now must be that even those "close to the Lord": ministers of religion, those committed to the faith, those dedicated to Christian service; all these are just as vulnerable to the influence of evil (Satan). And that can lead us to betray our Lord: if not necessarily in words then certainly in actions.
There seems to be some debate over whether Judas had any freedom in his actions - was this all part of God's plan, or did Judas choose to betray Christ, who would probably have been arrested anyway? Hmm, not sure, but generally I would plump for free will over any notion of rigid predestination. In fact there seems to be a huge amount of debate over the authenticity of Judas's part in the story at all - this story is missing from the "Q" source, believed to be an early document drawn on by the three synoptic Gospels. (All this debate about authenticity aside, this story of Scripture can still speak to us today)
A final point I would make is that Judas is not the only one of Jesus' disciples who betrays or abandons him, although he appears to be the only one who betrays him to his death. In the Garden of Gethsemane Peter, James and John fall asleep despite Jesus asking them to stay awake with him for just one hour. In this moment of His deepest desperation his friends nod off! Then, of course, Peter's denial of Jesus three times, even while Jesus is being interrogated by the High Priests. We should probably understand Peter "swearing an oath" as he denied Jesus for the third time as denying Jesus using 4 letter words. I think it is a great comfort to anyone involved in church leadership now to be reminded just how flawed and human Peter, the very first church leader, really was.
Jesus: betrayed, abandoned and denied by his friends and followers; in captivity, interrogated and probably tortured. This is all leading somewhere.
Did Judas need to betray Jesus? We hear of the betrayal in Matthew 26: 47-56. As Jesus Himself said "Day after day I sat in the temple teaching, and you did not arrest me". The 'authorities' could have seized Jesus at any time, it didn't need to be in secret in the garden, and they probably didn't need someone to betray His location. Jesus is not in hiding, he is being quite open, and indeed by now His eyes are fixed firmly on the cross.
So was Judas's betrayal of Jesus necessary? Almost certainly not. So there must be some significance to the fact that Jesus was betrayed, and not just arrested. I guess for me the chief lesson of this part of the Passion story is that you can be very close to the Lord and still be very vulnerable to the influence of evil. Judas was both physically close to Jesus, and was one of the trusted twelve. The lesson for us now must be that even those "close to the Lord": ministers of religion, those committed to the faith, those dedicated to Christian service; all these are just as vulnerable to the influence of evil (Satan). And that can lead us to betray our Lord: if not necessarily in words then certainly in actions.
There seems to be some debate over whether Judas had any freedom in his actions - was this all part of God's plan, or did Judas choose to betray Christ, who would probably have been arrested anyway? Hmm, not sure, but generally I would plump for free will over any notion of rigid predestination. In fact there seems to be a huge amount of debate over the authenticity of Judas's part in the story at all - this story is missing from the "Q" source, believed to be an early document drawn on by the three synoptic Gospels. (All this debate about authenticity aside, this story of Scripture can still speak to us today)
A final point I would make is that Judas is not the only one of Jesus' disciples who betrays or abandons him, although he appears to be the only one who betrays him to his death. In the Garden of Gethsemane Peter, James and John fall asleep despite Jesus asking them to stay awake with him for just one hour. In this moment of His deepest desperation his friends nod off! Then, of course, Peter's denial of Jesus three times, even while Jesus is being interrogated by the High Priests. We should probably understand Peter "swearing an oath" as he denied Jesus for the third time as denying Jesus using 4 letter words. I think it is a great comfort to anyone involved in church leadership now to be reminded just how flawed and human Peter, the very first church leader, really was.
Jesus: betrayed, abandoned and denied by his friends and followers; in captivity, interrogated and probably tortured. This is all leading somewhere.
It might seem like a strange thing to do to skip the best part of 5 chapters of teaching (Matthew 22 to 25), but this series of blog posts are really about the events of Holy Week. In any case, there is no necessity to believe that the block of teaching Matthew 22 to 25 actually took place between the entry into Jerusalem and the Anointing at Bethany. Why should there be?! (Of more interest is that Matthew organises Jesus' teachings into five main blocks. I hope I don't need to spell out too clearly why teaching organised into five blocks would have had particular significance to Matthew's 1st Century Jewish readers.)
So, on to the Anointing at Bethany (Matthew 26 6-13). In this story, Jesus' disciples chastise a woman who anoints Jesus' head with costly ointment or perfume, which could have been sold and the money used to care for the poor. In John's account of the same story the woman is identified as Lazarus's sister Mary (also of Mary and Martha fame).
You almost feel sorry for the disciples here as they did seem to have a good idea, didn't they? After all, they'd heard Jesus teaching the rich young ruler to give away all his possessions to the poor. Why shouldn't this woman be encouraged to do likewise to benefit the greater good?
Well, Jesus replies with that often-quoted line "For you always have the poor with you, but you will not always have me" This is certainly not an excuse, as some have considered it to be, to avoid caring for the world's poor. After all, if Jesus said the poor would always be with us why should we act to bring them out of their poverty? Whoops - kind of misses the point...
I think firstly Jesus is using this opportunity to remind his disciples that He will not be with them for much longer: they fail to grasp hold of this properly at almost every turn. So Jesus goes on to say that his body is now prepared for burial, i.e. wake up my disciples, I really am going to die! Had the woman grasped this, just as the disciples had failed to?
There are also the obvious allusions to Jesus' Messiahship in this act of anointing. Messiah literally means "anointed one". So this is yet another pointer to Jesus' true status and identity even in those last few days before his death. Perhaps we can even say that this anointing in the final few days points to the fact that it is in His death that Christ's true identity, purpose and Love for the world was most perfectly revealed. Anointing for death...anointing for Messianic kingship - the same thing here.
Finally, there is the act of giving by this woman. We are told in some of the other Gospel accounts that this perfume cost more than a year's wages for a labourer. That is a huge sum of money! Even for someone earning minimum wage in the UK, that would be many thousands of pounds! And of course most of this priceless perfume would simply have flowed from Jesus' head onto the dust of the floor. Wasted.
Wasted? Well, no. This was a gift of great value, given without care for the giver's own welfare - could this have bankrupted the woman or got her into serious trouble with her family? It was given with no expectation of reciprocation, given purely out of love. Of course this is the sort of giving that Jesus is going to commend, because it is exactly this sort of giving that He extends to us.
Giving of Himself at great price. Giving though it is totally undeserved. Giving with no expectation of reciprocation. Giving purely out of Love.
Not perfume, but Life itself.
So, on to the Anointing at Bethany (Matthew 26 6-13). In this story, Jesus' disciples chastise a woman who anoints Jesus' head with costly ointment or perfume, which could have been sold and the money used to care for the poor. In John's account of the same story the woman is identified as Lazarus's sister Mary (also of Mary and Martha fame).
You almost feel sorry for the disciples here as they did seem to have a good idea, didn't they? After all, they'd heard Jesus teaching the rich young ruler to give away all his possessions to the poor. Why shouldn't this woman be encouraged to do likewise to benefit the greater good?
Well, Jesus replies with that often-quoted line "For you always have the poor with you, but you will not always have me" This is certainly not an excuse, as some have considered it to be, to avoid caring for the world's poor. After all, if Jesus said the poor would always be with us why should we act to bring them out of their poverty? Whoops - kind of misses the point...
I think firstly Jesus is using this opportunity to remind his disciples that He will not be with them for much longer: they fail to grasp hold of this properly at almost every turn. So Jesus goes on to say that his body is now prepared for burial, i.e. wake up my disciples, I really am going to die! Had the woman grasped this, just as the disciples had failed to?
There are also the obvious allusions to Jesus' Messiahship in this act of anointing. Messiah literally means "anointed one". So this is yet another pointer to Jesus' true status and identity even in those last few days before his death. Perhaps we can even say that this anointing in the final few days points to the fact that it is in His death that Christ's true identity, purpose and Love for the world was most perfectly revealed. Anointing for death...anointing for Messianic kingship - the same thing here.
Finally, there is the act of giving by this woman. We are told in some of the other Gospel accounts that this perfume cost more than a year's wages for a labourer. That is a huge sum of money! Even for someone earning minimum wage in the UK, that would be many thousands of pounds! And of course most of this priceless perfume would simply have flowed from Jesus' head onto the dust of the floor. Wasted.
Wasted? Well, no. This was a gift of great value, given without care for the giver's own welfare - could this have bankrupted the woman or got her into serious trouble with her family? It was given with no expectation of reciprocation, given purely out of love. Of course this is the sort of giving that Jesus is going to commend, because it is exactly this sort of giving that He extends to us.
Giving of Himself at great price. Giving though it is totally undeserved. Giving with no expectation of reciprocation. Giving purely out of Love.
Not perfume, but Life itself.
This will be a short post today - 15 minutes until our screen curfew at 2200! (Periodically necessary to ensure we actually go to bed...)
Immediately after the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (the heart of Israel), Matthew's narrative takes us to the Temple (the heart of Jerusalem). The focus is coming, and things are hotting up.
The image is familiar: Jesus brandishing a handful of cords whipping the money-changers, traders, and those selling sacrificial animals out of the temple courts. Is this really the same Jesus as we know from the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5? The great tension - the Man of words vs. the Man of action. "Blessed are the peacemakers" vs. a physical show of revulsion at what the centre of Israel's worship has become. Of course, it is only Who Christ is that allows this tension to be realised without any tension (if that makes any sense)!
So why does Jesus do what he does? Yes, the temple had been polluted by a sense of commerce and profit - special temple money was needed to buy the animals which were necessary for the sacrifices which "put you right" with God. You can bet that every transaction took place with a tidy profit for the money changer / trader.
But I think this dramatic action is more than a protest against profit being made in a house of worship. Jesus disrupting the flow of sacrificial animals announces that the Temple's purpose is redundant - "I desire mercy, and not sacrifice" [ref?]. The sacrificial system starts to be shown up for what it actually is - ritualised murder - to that we shall certainly return. The Temple (in particular the Holy of Holies) is not the true dwelling place of the LORD on earth...
Begs the question, doesn't it, where is the dwelling place? how will this all end?
Immediately after the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (the heart of Israel), Matthew's narrative takes us to the Temple (the heart of Jerusalem). The focus is coming, and things are hotting up.
The image is familiar: Jesus brandishing a handful of cords whipping the money-changers, traders, and those selling sacrificial animals out of the temple courts. Is this really the same Jesus as we know from the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5? The great tension - the Man of words vs. the Man of action. "Blessed are the peacemakers" vs. a physical show of revulsion at what the centre of Israel's worship has become. Of course, it is only Who Christ is that allows this tension to be realised without any tension (if that makes any sense)!
So why does Jesus do what he does? Yes, the temple had been polluted by a sense of commerce and profit - special temple money was needed to buy the animals which were necessary for the sacrifices which "put you right" with God. You can bet that every transaction took place with a tidy profit for the money changer / trader.
But I think this dramatic action is more than a protest against profit being made in a house of worship. Jesus disrupting the flow of sacrificial animals announces that the Temple's purpose is redundant - "I desire mercy, and not sacrifice" [ref?]. The sacrificial system starts to be shown up for what it actually is - ritualised murder - to that we shall certainly return. The Temple (in particular the Holy of Holies) is not the true dwelling place of the LORD on earth...
Begs the question, doesn't it, where is the dwelling place? how will this all end?
I'm not a great blogger to be honest - extremely irregular! So I thought as a final piece of Lenten discipline I might try to blog each day through Holy Week. (I say "try" because we're away from Good Friday until after Easter Sunday, so there may be more than one day updated in one go...)
Anyway, it seems fitting to start with Palm Sunday, the traditional beginning of Holy Week when we remember Jesus entering Jerusalem on a donkey (or a colt, or both). The Gospel reading we had at church this morning was Matthew 21:1-11, what the NRSV terms "Jesus' triumphal entry into Jerusalem". There are so many things to talk about in this very well known story, but what I started thinking about this morning during the sermon was the role of the "very large crowd". (This was not the subject of the sermon: get me for my attentiveness!)
Verses 8 and 9 of this passage say that "A very large crowd spread their cloaks on the road, and others cut branches from the trees and spread them on the road. The crowds that went ahead of him and that followed were shouting, ‘Hosanna to the Son of David! Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord! Hosanna in the highest heaven!’"
Who was in this crowd? Where had they come from? Had they been following Jesus for some time, or were these brand new followers come Palm Sunday? We don't know any of this from the biblical record, so thinking about this is all a bit speculative. I think it is safe to say, though, that we do know how crowds/mobs behave nowadays, and crowds then and now are probably not so different.
So, how much did the very large crowd know about the One they were welcoming into Jerusalem. Did they really know who they were greeting, or were they just swept along? And does that even matter? If you're welcoming or serving the LORD, and don't know Who you're greeting, or in Whose Name you are serving, does that matter? "Classical" Christianity would say it probably does matter, but I'm not so sure.
The most intriguing question that struck me this morning was where were those very large crowds by the time Good Friday came? There's no indication that Christ in his last hours was surrounded by those same crowds trying to protect him from a terrible death, by force of arms if necessary - indeed I don't think the LORD I worship would have wanted that.
Then there was that other crowd, that other mob which called for Christ's death. Who were they? Were they so very different from the crowd who welcomed Jesus on Palm Sunday? Were any of the Palm Sunday crowd there in Jerusalem later on in the week, no longer crying "Hosanna" but "Crucify"? Again, we don't have any definite answers, but I'm tempted to say there probably were.
Why would I think that? Well, I think unfortunately because I could see exactly the same sort of thing happening if Christ came today - people are quick to follow a new thing (The New Thing in fact), but ultimately they're easily swayed by other voices - don't you think life would be easier if you didn't follow Him? isn't He a bit dangerous? if we follow Him, might we lose our freedom, our friends, our power, our privilege, our safe little position in society?
So, what would we say? Hosanna or Crucify? Or, being honest, both?
Anyway, it seems fitting to start with Palm Sunday, the traditional beginning of Holy Week when we remember Jesus entering Jerusalem on a donkey (or a colt, or both). The Gospel reading we had at church this morning was Matthew 21:1-11, what the NRSV terms "Jesus' triumphal entry into Jerusalem". There are so many things to talk about in this very well known story, but what I started thinking about this morning during the sermon was the role of the "very large crowd". (This was not the subject of the sermon: get me for my attentiveness!)
Verses 8 and 9 of this passage say that "A very large crowd spread their cloaks on the road, and others cut branches from the trees and spread them on the road. The crowds that went ahead of him and that followed were shouting, ‘Hosanna to the Son of David! Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord! Hosanna in the highest heaven!’"
Who was in this crowd? Where had they come from? Had they been following Jesus for some time, or were these brand new followers come Palm Sunday? We don't know any of this from the biblical record, so thinking about this is all a bit speculative. I think it is safe to say, though, that we do know how crowds/mobs behave nowadays, and crowds then and now are probably not so different.
So, how much did the very large crowd know about the One they were welcoming into Jerusalem. Did they really know who they were greeting, or were they just swept along? And does that even matter? If you're welcoming or serving the LORD, and don't know Who you're greeting, or in Whose Name you are serving, does that matter? "Classical" Christianity would say it probably does matter, but I'm not so sure.
The most intriguing question that struck me this morning was where were those very large crowds by the time Good Friday came? There's no indication that Christ in his last hours was surrounded by those same crowds trying to protect him from a terrible death, by force of arms if necessary - indeed I don't think the LORD I worship would have wanted that.
Then there was that other crowd, that other mob which called for Christ's death. Who were they? Were they so very different from the crowd who welcomed Jesus on Palm Sunday? Were any of the Palm Sunday crowd there in Jerusalem later on in the week, no longer crying "Hosanna" but "Crucify"? Again, we don't have any definite answers, but I'm tempted to say there probably were.
Why would I think that? Well, I think unfortunately because I could see exactly the same sort of thing happening if Christ came today - people are quick to follow a new thing (The New Thing in fact), but ultimately they're easily swayed by other voices - don't you think life would be easier if you didn't follow Him? isn't He a bit dangerous? if we follow Him, might we lose our freedom, our friends, our power, our privilege, our safe little position in society?
So, what would we say? Hosanna or Crucify? Or, being honest, both?
Things have been pretty insane for the last month or so. I don't really want to go into all the details, but it is church-based frustration, angst, disappointment...you get the picture. It's left me feeling very flat indeed, and whilst I'm normally an optimist everything has seemed pretty hopeless.
It was a bit of a surprise then when I found that in the midst of all this I found my mind a fertile place to come up with this prayer of confession (on the train home, no less!). It's not particularly original, and essentially consists of snippets from all over the place, but it came to my mind quite organically so I wrote it down.
A PRAYER OF CONFESSION
Almighty God, we confess to you our sins:
They are great and vaired.
For too long we have been part of the problem, and not part of the solution;
And for too long we have denied this.
We have said we have no sin; we have deceived ourselves;
And the truth is not in us.
LORD have mercy upon us
Christ have mercy upon us
LORD have mercy upon us
Turn us around from our sinful way of life,
Filling us with your Holy Spirit
So that looking to your Son Jesus Christ,
By whose cross and resurrection we are made free,
We may serve you from this day until everlasting.
In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.
Amen.
It was a bit of a surprise then when I found that in the midst of all this I found my mind a fertile place to come up with this prayer of confession (on the train home, no less!). It's not particularly original, and essentially consists of snippets from all over the place, but it came to my mind quite organically so I wrote it down.
A PRAYER OF CONFESSION
Almighty God, we confess to you our sins:
They are great and vaired.
For too long we have been part of the problem, and not part of the solution;
And for too long we have denied this.
We have said we have no sin; we have deceived ourselves;
And the truth is not in us.
LORD have mercy upon us
Christ have mercy upon us
LORD have mercy upon us
Turn us around from our sinful way of life,
Filling us with your Holy Spirit
So that looking to your Son Jesus Christ,
By whose cross and resurrection we are made free,
We may serve you from this day until everlasting.
In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.
Amen.
Here are the notes from the sermon I preached a couple of weeks ago. (My first attempt at not reading from a script, so you may not be able to get the whole gist of it...
Pride
1 Seven deadly sins
2 Pride
3 Childhood
• “Take pride in your appearance”. School: “take pride in your work”. Handwriting…
• Not the same as the sin of pride. Opposite of carelessness.
• Confusing as word can refer to a virtue or a vice.
• Actually originates from a Latin word meaning to be useful. We’re not concerned today with the virtuous meaning.
• Maybe also to recognise that when we were children we thought as children, but now it is time to lay aside our childish ways.
4 Pride manifests itself in many ways
• Pride in physical appearance. Classical view. Vanity. Vainglory. Not too concerned.
• Pride in possessions. Defining yourself by what you own. c/f Greed, so leave for another day. What does our Church have pride in? Buildings? Heard this morning about the level of poverty in the world. Only when we have nothing can we realise that God is everything.
• Pride in own abilities. More interesting. Western world is so well educated, so able to fend for itself that reliance on God is lost.
• Pride in own views and opinions. What I’m really thinking of as the sin of pride. Otherwise called Spiritual Pride.
o Pride that says “I know best, not my parents” “I know best, not my wife” “I know best, not my Minister” “I know best, not my God”
o We value our own opinions so highly, can never see others’ points of view.
o End up valuing our own position and view over God’s. Denominations fighting.
o STORY – Richard Rugg on gap year.
o This is the accusation we must make against the proud: “Just because you’re you, it doesn’t mean that you are right”
o This is the form of pride which means we never back down from our positions in arguments.
o Don’t want to lose face.
o [Dare I say that this is the form of pride which says “We have made a decision, and now we are going to make it right…”]
5 Pride extremely dangerous - 1
• Constant reverence of own opinions, beliefs and abilities naturally leads to SELF WORSHIP.
• Danger of this cannot be emphasized.
• This is idolatry! The most heinous sin for the Jewish people, and hence Jesus.
• The first two of the ten commandments from Exodus 20:
o “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery; you shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth generation of those who reject me, but showing steadfast love to the thousandth generation of those who love me and keep my commandments.”
• These idols include us!
• Danger for those in the church. STORY from Tony Campolo (p.79, 3rd para)
6 Pride extremely dangerous - 2
• Pride also extremely dangerous, as it leads to delusion. Delusion that we don’t sin and delusion that we don’t need to repent.
• STORY of Spurgeon.
• We are all slothful, lustful, quick to anger, envious, gluttonous and greedy, but unless we can recognize that we are also proud, we can never conquer those sins.
• Again, the danger cannot be emphasized.
• From John’s first letter:
o “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he who is faithful and just will forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.”
7 What to do?
• The way to conquer pride is humility.
• Recognize that the only thing that makes us wonderful is not how clever we are, how much money we earn, what sort of clothes we wear, but how much God loves us. Wonderful Richard Rohr quote “God loves us, not because we are good, but because he is good!”
• Nothing we can do to make God love us any more than he already does.
• Follow the example of Christ. Bible reading last week about Christ humbling himself as a slave and suffering death, even death on a cross.
• What about Jesus’ baptism? The one who doesn’t need to repent of any sins undergoes baptism. John objects. But Jesus, as our representative shows us what we need to do.
• Even if we THINK we don’t need to repent of our sins, we do, because the One who was without sin went ahead of us and showed us the way to go through the waters of Baptism.
Sanctification
• Luke talked last week about the process of sanctification, the process of allowing God’s Holiness to somehow rub off on us, infecting us with his Holiness.
• Orthodox church: threefold path of sanctification.
• First step is catharsis. A clearing away of things standing between us and God, so that we may grow in His light.
• What we might call repentance.
• Step even before this is overcoming our pride and recognizing we have a need for catharsis, a need for repentance.
• Are we prepared to be honest with ourselves?
Pride
1 Seven deadly sins
2 Pride
3 Childhood
• “Take pride in your appearance”. School: “take pride in your work”. Handwriting…
• Not the same as the sin of pride. Opposite of carelessness.
• Confusing as word can refer to a virtue or a vice.
• Actually originates from a Latin word meaning to be useful. We’re not concerned today with the virtuous meaning.
• Maybe also to recognise that when we were children we thought as children, but now it is time to lay aside our childish ways.
4 Pride manifests itself in many ways
• Pride in physical appearance. Classical view. Vanity. Vainglory. Not too concerned.
• Pride in possessions. Defining yourself by what you own. c/f Greed, so leave for another day. What does our Church have pride in? Buildings? Heard this morning about the level of poverty in the world. Only when we have nothing can we realise that God is everything.
• Pride in own abilities. More interesting. Western world is so well educated, so able to fend for itself that reliance on God is lost.
• Pride in own views and opinions. What I’m really thinking of as the sin of pride. Otherwise called Spiritual Pride.
o Pride that says “I know best, not my parents” “I know best, not my wife” “I know best, not my Minister” “I know best, not my God”
o We value our own opinions so highly, can never see others’ points of view.
o End up valuing our own position and view over God’s. Denominations fighting.
o STORY – Richard Rugg on gap year.
o This is the accusation we must make against the proud: “Just because you’re you, it doesn’t mean that you are right”
o This is the form of pride which means we never back down from our positions in arguments.
o Don’t want to lose face.
o [Dare I say that this is the form of pride which says “We have made a decision, and now we are going to make it right…”]
5 Pride extremely dangerous - 1
• Constant reverence of own opinions, beliefs and abilities naturally leads to SELF WORSHIP.
• Danger of this cannot be emphasized.
• This is idolatry! The most heinous sin for the Jewish people, and hence Jesus.
• The first two of the ten commandments from Exodus 20:
o “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery; you shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth generation of those who reject me, but showing steadfast love to the thousandth generation of those who love me and keep my commandments.”
• These idols include us!
• Danger for those in the church. STORY from Tony Campolo (p.79, 3rd para)
6 Pride extremely dangerous - 2
• Pride also extremely dangerous, as it leads to delusion. Delusion that we don’t sin and delusion that we don’t need to repent.
• STORY of Spurgeon.
• We are all slothful, lustful, quick to anger, envious, gluttonous and greedy, but unless we can recognize that we are also proud, we can never conquer those sins.
• Again, the danger cannot be emphasized.
• From John’s first letter:
o “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he who is faithful and just will forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.”
7 What to do?
• The way to conquer pride is humility.
• Recognize that the only thing that makes us wonderful is not how clever we are, how much money we earn, what sort of clothes we wear, but how much God loves us. Wonderful Richard Rohr quote “God loves us, not because we are good, but because he is good!”
• Nothing we can do to make God love us any more than he already does.
• Follow the example of Christ. Bible reading last week about Christ humbling himself as a slave and suffering death, even death on a cross.
• What about Jesus’ baptism? The one who doesn’t need to repent of any sins undergoes baptism. John objects. But Jesus, as our representative shows us what we need to do.
• Even if we THINK we don’t need to repent of our sins, we do, because the One who was without sin went ahead of us and showed us the way to go through the waters of Baptism.
Sanctification
• Luke talked last week about the process of sanctification, the process of allowing God’s Holiness to somehow rub off on us, infecting us with his Holiness.
• Orthodox church: threefold path of sanctification.
• First step is catharsis. A clearing away of things standing between us and God, so that we may grow in His light.
• What we might call repentance.
• Step even before this is overcoming our pride and recognizing we have a need for catharsis, a need for repentance.
• Are we prepared to be honest with ourselves?
