Sermon Notes Sunday 29th October
Desiree Snyman

One love, one heart
Let's get together and feel all right
Hear the children crying (One love)
Hear the children crying (One heart)
Sayin', "Give thanks and praise to the Lord and I will feel all right."
Sayin', "Let's get together and feel all right."
Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa … (Bob Marley and The Wailers) 

Copyright restrictions prevent us from publishing or playing in full Bob Marley’s anthem “One Love”. “One love, One heart” expresses the type of love that unites, includes, and transforms. To my way of thinking, the reggae beat to “One Love” needs to be heard as an ear worm as one considers the sacred text exhortation today “Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength and to love your neighbour as yourself. 

There is a deeper meaning behind the song than a simple call for unity. One Love addresses the repression and violence in the Jamaican 1976 elections and the unrest caused by the hostilities between the national and labour parties. Since then, the anthem “One Love” retains a message of hope and healing in the context of upheaval – a message as pertinent today as it was then.  Bob Marley’s inspiration is also the path into today’s ubiquitous message of Love God, neighbour, and self:

You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: you shall love your neighbour as yourself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. Matthew 22.37–40.

Before the two great commandments made it onto page 120 of A Prayer Book for Australia, before it was written in Mark 12:28-34, Matthew 22:34-40, and Luke 10:25-28, it was intoned from the Hebrew Scriptures.  

Deuteronomy 6.4-5 and Leviticus 19.18

Believe it or not, Jesus did not invent the Two Great Commandments, he adapted them from two books in the Pentateuch, the Torah.  Deuteronomy 6.4-5, the Shema, asserts:

4 Hear, O Israel: The Lord is our God, the Lord alone. 5 You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might. 6 Keep these words that I am commanding you today in your heart. 7 Recite them to your children and talk about them when you are at home and when you are away, when you lie down and when you rise. 8 Bind them as a sign on your hand, fix them as an emblem on your forehead, 9 and write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates.

Love your neighbour as yourself is from Leviticus 19.18:

18 You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against any of your people, but you shall love your neighbour as yourself: I am the Lord.

Jesus combines these two sacred texts, the Shema from Deuteronomy. and a liturgical text from Leviticus into one sentence. The first time the unity of love of God and love of neighbour is noted, is in Mark’s Gospel, written about 30 years after the teaching of Jesus.  

Mark 12:28-34,

28 One of the scribes came near and heard them disputing with one another, and seeing that he answered them well, he asked him, “Which commandment is the first of all?” 29 Jesus answered, “The first is, ‘Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one; 30 you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.’ 31 The second is this, ‘You shall love your neighbour as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.” 

When Mark writes his Gospel, the Shema from Deuteronomy is expanded: You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. Yes, Mark adds “mind” to how we love God. In Mark’s Gospel there is a friendly debate happening, it is a scribe who asks Jesus the question about which law is greatest, and the scribe is very pleased with Jesus’ answer.  

Matthew

In Matthew’s Gospel, the scribe disappears, and an argumentative lawyer asks Jesus for one great commandment, Jesus replies with two commandments: The second commandment is like the first “you shall love your neighbour as yourself”. Notice that the first part of the Shema disappears. Verse 40, “On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets” is significant. The emphasis of the Law is the love of God. The Law expects that we orientate our entire existence towards God at that God is at the centre of all we think and do. The message of the prophets on the other hand is about properly loving neighbour with justice and mercy. Jesus is an evolutionary prophet, seeing beyond either or thinking. For Jesus it is both, and. For Jesus it is not about love of God or love of neighbour, it is love of neighbour and love of God at the very same time, in the very same moment. This is how I interpret the Zen koan type question Jesus throws back at the argumentative lawyer:

Now while the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them this question: 42 “What do you think of the Messiah? Whose son is he?” They said to him, “The son of David.” 43 He said to them, “How is it then that David by the Spirit calls him Lord, saying, 44 ‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at my right hand, until I put your enemies under your feet”’? 45 If David thus calls him Lord, how can he be his son?” 46 No one was able to give him an answer, nor from that day did anyone dare to ask him any more questions.

For a dualistic thinker the world is divided into black and white, inside, and outside, neighbour and enemy, God and human. Jesus sees the oneness of all reality. When he asks how David can call his son Lord, the lawyers can’t answer the problem. We the reader know that Jesus is the son of David and the Messiah at the very same time. The non-duality hinted at in Matthew reaches full flourishing in Luke.  

Luke

Luke is written by a gentile for gentiles so the references to the Hebrew scriptures are lost completely. In Luke 10 it is not Jesus who gives the two great commandments but a lawyer who gives one sentence. A man approaches Jesus asking a deep existential question and like the good facilitator he is Jesus throws the question back, “what do the scriptures say?” The lawyer replies ““You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbour as yourself.” 

Notice how the distance between love of God and neighbour is decreased from being in two separate books in the Hebrew Torah until in Luke’s Gospel the two loves are distilled into a single sentence, rather than two teachings knitted together from two different books of the Bible. The unity of love of God and love of neighbour continues to develop in scripture. For example, in a letter from John: “Those who say, “I love God,” and hate their brothers or sisters, are liars; for those who do not love a brother or sister whom they have seen, cannot love God whom they have not seen” (1 John 4:20 NRSV) 

How we love something is how we love everything.

If we take these two commandments and think of them as two steps to a life worth living, we may have missed the point entirely. Some people describe a vertical relationship with God being honour for God and a horizontal relationship of love of neighbour. It’s a mistake because God has never been “up there”, there is and has never been any “vertical” relationship with God ever. At any rate, this has never made sense to me because if we are going to numerate the loves, I notice three, the love of God, the love of neighbour and the love of oneself. Furthermore, any spiritual practice devoted to loving God is more accurately a space to allow God to love us. For all who think the sacred is “up there”, the unity of love of God and love of neighbour redirects, the sacred is not up there but in the neighbour, in you. To come back to Bob Marley, there is only “One Love”. Life is all one love, one love, one love, one love. Love of God, neighbour and self, is deeper than love, it is about union, what Julian of Norwich calls oneing.  

Love means that we are in God

In every moment that we love God, we are loving our neighbour. The best way we can love God and the best way we can love our neighbour is to love ourselves. Lady Julian of Norwich uses the idea of “oneing” to describe divine union that love brings about. In chapter 53 of Revelations of Divine Love, she writes,

“This beloved soul was preciously knitted to God in its making, by a knot so subtle and so mighty that it is oned in God. In this oneing, it is made endlessly holy. Furthermore, God wants us to know that all the souls which will be saved in heaven without end are knit in this knot, and oned in this oneing, and made holy in this holiness.”

Love is more than an action or a feeling, it is a state of being. God or neighbour are not the objects of our love. In any moment of loving, you, God, and neighbour are one. If God makes God’s home in me, and God makes God’s home in you, then it is the God in me loving the God in you.

The place which Jesus takes in our soul he will nevermore vacate, for in us is his home of homes, and it is the greatest delight for him to dwell there. . . . And the soul who contemplates this is made like [the one] who is contemplated. 

(Julian of Norwich in “Showings”, Chapter 22 (Short text), trans. Edmund Colledge and James Walsh (Paulist Press: 1978), 164).

The point about love is oneing, in any moment of authentic love, we are oned with God, oned within ourselves and oned with creation. I would like to end with a quote from Rowan Williams:

The whole story of creation, incarnation, and our incorporation into the fellowship of Christ's body tells us that God desires us, as if we were God, as if we were that unconditional response to God's giving that God's self makes in the life of the Trinity. We are created so that we may be caught up in this, so that we may grow into the wholehearted love of God by learning that God loves us as God loves God.

(by Rowan Williams in an essay originally delivered as the 10th Michael Harding Memorial Address to the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement in 1989).

Sermon Notes Sunday 22nd October

Geoff Vidal

Matthew 22:15-33

I have found these last few weeks particularly distressing. Very hostile points of view have been blasted at us in media. People demand that we accept what they say without any discussion or search for understanding. There seems to be no attempt at seeking common ground or compromise. The VOICE referendum polarized opinions rather than drawing our nation into agreeing that there is a better way of working out how we do things. We have a horrible situation in the middle east with no obvious willingness to find ways to end conflict. Meanwhile the war in Ukraine forgotten and places of dreadful food shortages are ignored. That probably sounds a bit depressing, so let me tell you a Good News story. 

There was a time when US Presidents thought deeply about people who were even fighting and killing Americans; enemies were not to be annihilated but prayed for. Every year Roosevelt attended a special service at St. John’s church in Washington to commemorate his first inauguration. In 1944, as WWII was being fought, a junior Episcopalian Priest named Johnson was given the job of planning the service at St John’s. Rev Johnson decided to include a controversial prayer, one entitled “Prayer for Our Enemies.” The other clergy at St. John’s were critical of what Johnson planned to do. They told him “The White House would never authorize that prayer in wartime,” “It would be misunderstood throughout the country; the publicity would be terrible, since the Biblical instruction to pray for our enemies was scarcely understood, even by Christians in this country.”  

When Roosevelt read over the proposed service, however, he scribbled a note next to the prayer: “Very good – I like it.” Roosevelt recognized that humility, not hatred or anger, was the proper attitude for a nation whose men were under fire. So, gathering in the church at 10:30 on the morning of Saturday, March 4, 1944, the President of the United States, his Cabinet, and the senior officials of a nation that was fighting a major war bowed their heads as these words were prayed: 

Most loving Father,
who by thy Son Jesus Christ
hast taught us to love our enemies and to pray for them,
we beseech thee, give to those who are now our enemies the light of thy Holy Spirit.
Grant that they and we,
being enlightened in conscience and cleansed from every sin, may know and do thy will, and so be changed from foes to friends united in thy service;
through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. 

(From American Gospel: God, The Founding Fathers, and The Making of a Nation, Jon Meacham, Random House, Inc., 2006, p.167-8.) 

That was 1944. Now, opponents are demonized and we are being bombarded by statements seemingly not up for discussion or thinking through. A commentator recently described us as living in our own bubble of opinion. 

The last few weeks readings from Matthew have reported parables told by Jesus in the Temple in Jerusalem early in this incredible week of Jesus life between him riding the donkey into town and being crucified. (It’s now probably the Tuesday of Passion Week or Holy Week). And while people (even ourselves) might be saying “here we go, yet another parable we have to listen to”, Jesus began by asking “what do you think?” 

The Friday people hear me week after week beginning the service by saying “Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one; you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength” These words continue on from where we stopped in Matthew 22 this morning and describe Jesus’ answer to the next question he was asked; “which commandment is the greatest?”  

We are to love God with all our mind. We are to think! I appreciate the way the teaching of Desiree and Doug makes me think. I looked up some quotes on thinking. 

“It isn't what people think that is important, but the reason they think what they think.” EUGENE IONESCO 

“Where all think alike, no one thinks very much.” WALTER LIPPMAN 

“Men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin, more even than death”.  BERTRAND RUSSELL 

Well, what happened after Jesus asked the Chief Priests and elders in the Temple “what do you think?”? 

Matthew tells us that the Pharisees and the Herodians joined forces and went away plotting a strategy to trap Jesus. It is amazing that these two groups joined together. The Pharisees are nationalistic Jews and the Herodians are followers of Herod, a collaborator of the Romans and therefore a traitor to their people. These opposing groups have the common intent to trap Jesus and show that he was no better than any other Rabbi.

They begin by saying, “we know you tell the truth”. But they aren’t interested in the truth. They don’t want to know the truth. They want to trap Jesus by putting him in a situation where they expect that his response would either cause him to be alienated to a major part of the population by supporting the Roman occupiers or that he would lay himself open to a charge of treason. The word “trap” reveals the motive in this; this is not a dispassionate inquiry into what was the proper attitude to have to the Roman occupiers and their demand for taxes to be paid. These opponents of Jesus aren’t really interested in knowing the right attitude to Roman authority. They just want to put an end to the trouble Jesus is causing. 

So, they ask Jesus this question about taxes. Using a coin to make the point, Jesus answers their question by telling them “give to the emperor the things that are the emperors and to God the things that are God’s”. This statement is sometimes taken to be a teaching about two powers; political and religious. But, if we really think about it, we are being pointed in the direction of something much more profound. Jesus has opened up a debate about worship. Jesus has been asked to judge the comparative worth between two valuable things. 

A piece of metal is made valuable when the image of the Emperor (Caesar Tiberius or King Charles) is stamped on it. We are made valuable because we have the image of God stamped upon us; Genesis says all of us are made in the image of God. Lots of these gold coins with Caesar’s image stamped on them are still around. Coin collectors all around the world are excited that they own these coins almost 2000 years after they were first circulated. Caesar's image, his reputation, his golden impression has lasted 2000 years. Even in hundreds of years’ time, a person who owns one of the coins will be reminded of Caesar and the Roman Empire. His image has stuck; we still render unto it in one way or another. 

The image of God is not stamped on discs of silver or gold. God’s eternal image is stamped on humankind. And thousands of years after people first started knowing God, even after the last man and woman are dead and gone from this earth, the image of God will live on in us for all eternity. 

So, the real question is “what is the comparative worth between God and Caesar (or God and politics)?” Maybe that’s the reason we come to church. Maybe we are trying to discover the relative worth of conflicting values in our lives. 

The question they asked Jesus was about “paying taxes” to Caesar. Jesus’ answer speaks of “giving back” the coin to Caesar. There are two very different things here, paying and giving back. The original Greek verbs express this it clearly. 

Jesus’ answer is not really “give”, but “give back”, to God the things that are God’s. Just what we are to give back is not specified. But perhaps it’s helpful to remember that Jesus was talking to people who knew scripture well. The people knew the Psalm that said, “The earth is the Lords and all that is in it, the world and those who live in it” (Psalm 24:1). Whatever we have, including life itself, is on loan to us from God. So, we give back to God our lives by enjoying relationship with him; our “worship”. 

There’s not much time left now for us to start thinking deeply about the second part of today’s Gospel reading. And it would be a very long sermon if we started to look at how the Exodus reading about the conversation between God and Moses ties in with our Gospel. But there is a reason why Matthew tells us that Jesus was asked another malicious question, this time about resurrection. Pharisees believed there was a resurrection, but the Sadducees thought that there was nothing after death. Although this case brought up by the Sadducees could have happened, it’s most likely hypothetical, fabricated to confound the Pharisees and others who believed in resurrection. 

Jesus answers the question by saying “you are wrong …. Because you don’t know scriptures nor the power of God”. By God’s power, the resurrection will bring about a change in relationships and in some way, we will be “like the angels in heaven”. Jesus is really sticking it into the Sadducees here, because the Sadducees also denied the existence of angels. In the resurrection, relationships of family and marriage will be so much better than is possible on earth. Jesus then turns from God’s power in resurrection to the word of Scripture. Jesus reminds his listeners of the passage in Exodus where God tells Moses that he is the God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob: they are alive to God. 

God is God not of the dead, but of the living. Here and in heaven.

That’s why we give back to him our lives …. Our worship! 

Sermon Notes Sunday 15th October

Doug Bannerman

Pentecost 20 Matthew 22.1-14 

The majority should have had the grace to deliver for the minority.
But we failed the grace test. (Katherine Murphy) 

I am in profound disagreement with today’s gospel, and I disagree with the inclusion of this parable in what purports to be good news, a parable that exemplifies the Roman Empire in every way.  

Empire bespeaks a centralized social power structure of hierarchy, violence, slavery, poverty, injustice; absolute values imposed absolutely. It bespeaks a voiceless, oppressed, population which has been subjugated for so long, that it is, by and large, unconscious of its situation. Think TikTok, or any of the social platforms that promulgate misinformation.  

Three points.  

This gospel encourages us to regard all synagogues as places of hypocrisy and violence, Jewish leaders as hypocrites and murderers. (4.1-11; 12.34; 16.1-14; 19.3).  

This gospel predominantly focuses on men; and although Matthew does reject patriarchy (19.3-12; 23.8-12), his frequent use of the phrase ‘God the Father’ strongly suggests a divine patriarchy ruled by God.  

This gospel does explicitly resist and expose the violent oppression of the Empire (Chs 2; 14.1-12; 20.20-28; 22.15-22); however, the alternative to Rome’s Empire, God’s Empire, uses the identical term, Empire, together with the concept of supreme power.  

So, Matthew imitates precisely what he rejects. In its enforcement of God’s will to solicit compliance (do it or else), God’s empire resembles Rome’s use of power. And Matthew’s treatment of these issues of ethnicity, gender, and power, assumes the audience will go along with the story, accept its violence, hatred and oppression; and accept the value that opponents are simply impediments to be overcome by whatever means.  

Now, in theory, democracy is much the better way. So, citizens of democracy might consider opponents to be uninformed, mistaken, unwise, or naïve; overly cautious or needlessly impatient; or perhaps that they are animated by a different hierarchy of values, that yields a moral intensity distinct from, but nonetheless commensurate with, our own. But, in practice, there seems to be considerable reluctance in Australian society to consider what it might mean to proceed together meaningfully as partners in shared democratic projects.  

We value free speech; but what makes speech truly free is the possibility of disagreement without enmity. Yet again, in practice, opponents come to regard each other as bigoted, toxic, dangerous, malignant, wilfully ignorant, cynically self-interested, fundamentally dishonest, inferior – and hence incapable of good-faith disagreement.  

Consequently, opponents become symbols to be appropriated for the prosecution of our own politics. And what matters then, is not what our opponents actually say or do, but rather what we have decided they stand for.  

Democracy is not just a form of government. It is also the moral aspiration for a society of self-governing political equals. Citizens are called on to be active democratic participants, but they must also acknowledge one another's political equality. Democracy thus involves an ethic of civility among opposed citizens, in which it is OK to disagree about a choice of actions to take.  

Furthermore, as Robert Talisse wrote, ‘democracy is the proposition that a stable and decent society can be maintained in the absence of lords, masters, sovereigns, superiors, and kings. Democracy is the rejection of political hierarchy.  

This insight imagines society as a dynamic organism in which people are open to changing their preferences and interests in the light of their interactions with others. Not merely a process of assertion and grudging compromise, but one of being mutually influenced as equal participants in a common effort; thereby cultivating the moral dispositions of sympathy, generosity, forbearance and mutual trust, qualities on which true democratic life depend.  

In short, democracy lives by and through acknowledgements of the moral reality of other persons. No democratic society can long withstand the corrosive effect of widespread envy, disdain, disgust, resentment, grudgingness, spitefulness and contempt. 

The greatest danger to the stability of democratic life is not when disagreements become interminable, but when they become incommensurable, with no common standard of measurement – which is to say, when both parties get caught in a state of mutual incomprehension. Contempt thins out democracy until finally it reaches the point of dysfunction.  

Contemporary political contempt tends to arise before moral consensus is achieved and tries to set new norms through intimidation, so as to redefine society’s moral parameters by brute force. Moralism without any of the hard work of moral persuasion. As Scot Stephens and Waleed Ali have noted,

Over the last decade, we’ve watched this dynamic play itself out repeatedly within and between opposing sides around such matters as sexual harassment and abuse, racial injustice, police brutality, climate change, membership of the European Union, vaccine hesitancy, LGBTIQ discrimination, religious freedom, and abortion. On each count, worthy goals of mutual consideration and common pursuit have been either brought undone or had their broader appeal severely compromised by the “hashtag politics” of moral intransigence – think (#GetBrexitDone, #BlackLivesMatter, #DefundthePolice, #SilenceIsViolence, #StayWoke, #ThereIsNoPlanetB, #IGotVaccinated, #SaveRoe, et cetera).  

Declaration and posturing take the place of persuasion, claims of moral superiority undermine the hard work of gradual consensus-building, and the vigilante impulse for summary judgment rules out the possibility of complexity, ambiguity, degrees of complicity, or doubt.   

In the middle of last Thursday night, when silence reigned and phantasies danced in my half-awake mind, I wondered if this is what Jesus would preach in this day and age about the democratic experiment that is Australia?  

When Jesus announced the realm of God, he envisioned a society governed by love – more peaceful, more compassionate, more equitable, and more just. And I believe that planted deep in our hearts, this dream defines our mission as a Church community. We are called to transform the hearts, minds, and politics of our cities and towns, our states, our nations, and the entire global community.  

A final word from the field of ethics …  

It’s important to keep in mind that ethical, dilemmas do not necessarily have simple solutions that will satisfy everybody. Even reasonable people can disagree about what course of action to take in a given situation. That’s fine. The important bit is not really the answer you come to, but the reasons you give to support it. That’s what ethics is all about: finding good reasons to act the way we do.  

The path to grace.  

Doug Bannerman © 2023 

Resources:

Scott Stephens, Waleed Ali ‘Uncivil Wars: How Contempt Is Corroding Democracy’ (Quarterly Essay 87, 2022)
Robert Talisse Sustaining Democracy (Oxford University Press 2021)
https://ethics.org.au/how-ethical-dilemmas-strengthen-our-moral-muscle/

Sermon Notes Sunday 8th October

Geoff Vidal

Matthew 21:33-46

For me, and most people I know, the best drama and comedy happens when the writer of a book or the producer of a movie is able to capture images of people behaving as we know that people do. A child finding wonder in something simple. Teenagers doing something pretty crazy because they think that they know everything. Someone looking in a mirror checking out a spot on their face when they think no one is watching. Mr Bean in Church. 

This parable of Jesus, reported by Matthew is a wonderful story of people behaving as people do. We are at a point in our fairly rapid journey through the Good News according to Matthew, where parables are coming thick and fast.  It is the week before Jesus is crucified and only a few days ago he entered Jerusalem on a donkey and made a big scene in the temple tipping over tables and chasing out money changers. 

Matthew says that Jesus has the chief priests and elders of the people listening to him as he told these parables to help his followers live life in the Kingdom of God. He began this series of parables recorded in Matthew 21 by asking “what do you think?” Often people talk about Jesus being a very good teacher, and here he is like a conscientious teacher preparing students for the HSC. He is encouraging them to chew over what they know themselves; asking “what do you think?” so they use their brains fully. Earlier in his ministry, Jesus summarised the commandments by saying that we are to love God with all our mind as well as our heart and soul and strength. 

And, if we are open to using our minds and learning new things, this parable today does give us something to make us think and use our minds fully. This is a parable that raises some doubts and makes us question things and think through all the possibilities. That’s the purpose of it. Jesus is encouraging us to perhaps even talk about these things; to share our thoughts about his teaching. I am just too Anglican to stop now and open the floor for anyone to share their thoughts (but in some other denominations they do). 

This parable today deals with a vineyard which has not given any fruit.  “Listen” says Jesus. And there is plenty of scope for listening and thinking: putting old images together and coming up with new ones.  

Jesus is capturing the image of people behaving as we know people do. The people Jesus is speaking to already know a fair bit about vineyards and owners. His listeners would have a good image in their minds of the people in charge of this vineyard - the tenants. They could probably say, “yeah, my cousin Joe runs a farm out on the Jericho Road”.  Jesus’ listeners would have been able to picture what he is saying about these tenants reacting violently to the owner’s messengers sent to collect the fruit of their work. 

What are the fruits in question?  This is a key question for the meaning of the parable. Grapes are just a metaphor. An understanding of what the fruits might be comes from the writing of the prophet Isaiah. These people would know Isaiah well. Isaiah was a frequently used scripture. Luke wrote that Jesus read from the scroll of Isaiah in the synagogue and a complete copy of Isaiah was found in Dead Sea scrolls.  

So, from an early age, the people Jesus was talking with would have been well aware of this teaching in Isaiah that Israel is God’s vineyard. They knew this prophetic teaching of Isaiah that from what had been planted, (that is to say God’s planting of his nation, Israel), the Lord expected justice, but there was bloodshed. God expected righteousness but heard people crying out for better treatment. The establishment of justice and righteousness is one of God’s major instructions (not just in Isaiah, but throughout all scripture). 

There is even an old Arab proverb, “one hour of justice is worth a hundred of prayer”.    

In this vineyard, which the Lord planted and cared for, justice and righteousness should have grown. A life of justice and righteousness was a way of showing the relationship between God and his people. Living a life of justice and righteousness was the way to show a desire to keep the covenant promise between God and God’s people. The God of life and love wants justice to rule in the midst of God’s people and wants the rights of everyone, especially the poor and the powerless, to be respected. That’s what it means to pray “Your Kingdom come!” 

But the people have chosen to not really bother about justice and right living. This is what our parable today is all about! The tenants have not practiced justice and they have not established righteousness. Their normal behaviour is to have contempt for other people’s lives. They even show that contempt to those sent as messengers by the owner of the vineyard. But, even worse, they have committed murders. 

In the Bible, oppression of the poor is frequently presented as murder. The tenants are not only murderers because they kill the messengers, (or even the son), but because they exploit the poor and totally disregard their rights. They are murderers from the moment they fail to produce the fruits of justice which the Lord requires, and as a result the Kingdom of God will be given to someone else.   

This is a powerful illustration.  But it isn’t just a story or a history lesson. How often in our daily news do we hear about people pleading for their fundamental rights. The right to safety; to be able to live in Ukraine without missile attacks or to live in Syria or Sudan without fear. The right to be an educated woman in many countries where women are not allowed schooling. We hear of people pleading for the right to eat; to not need to line up for a UN food handout or fresh water from the single tap in the village. So many people cry out for the right not to be discriminated against. 

I think the Gospel story today is in some way describing the rejection of Jesus' preaching by the leaders of Israel. Those listening to Jesus would have been well aware from their knowledge of Isaiah and their Jewish tradition that they were the caretakers of the vineyard of the Lord. So, Jesus asks “now, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those tenants?” and they answer, “He will put those wretches to a miserable death and lease the vineyard to other tenants”. What Jesus has done here is to confront his opponents with judgement that has come from their own mouths. 

But it wasn’t just the opponents of Jesus in the temple who didn’t want to take on board what he was saying. Even Jesus’ closest followers didn’t want to hear Jesus’ prediction of his own arrest and death. 

Could it be that the parable is trying to get us to ask ourselves if there isn’t some kind of similarity between these tenants who don’t try to be righteous and the way we live our own lives? Maybe we should be asking ourselves, “what is our attitude to the things we know Jesus taught?” “What do we, as individuals, care about the establishment of justice and righteousness?” “What are our fruits?”  

A prominent American Methodist Bishop of the 1930s, G Bromley Oxnam, spoke of the need for justice in the USA. He wrote “The Christian demand for justice does not come from Karl Marx. It comes from Jesus Christ and the Hebrew prophets”. 

Further along, in another couple of chapters, the gospel of Matthew will tell us what Jesus said about separating the sheep from the goats. We are told that failing to feed the poor or to welcome strangers is the same as denying Christ himself (which means condemning the poor and the strangers and Christ to death). 

Being Christian is precisely the opposite; it is giving life! This is what the gospel requires and if we put it into practice, the God of peace will be with us (Philippians 4:4-9).

That’s the really good news. The God of peace keeps coming to us. We simply have to accept that Jesus is our Lord and trust him. As the old hymn says, “Trust and obey .... there is no other way to be happy”.

Sermon Notes 1st October 2023
Doug Bannerman

Exodus 17.1-7 Matthew 21.23-32

Warren Carter[1] reads Matthew’s Gospel as a work of resistance written mainly for a Jewish religious group who survived Rome’s defeat of Jerusalem in 70 CE … although we may note in passing that this gospel does indicate some openness to Gentiles (Matthew 2.1-12; 8.5-13; 15.21-28; 28.19-20).

Carter locates the gospel’s audience in Antioch, the capital of the Roman province of Syria. Consistent with Roman practice, the city was a key unit in maintaining control over a much larger area. Also typical of the empire’s practice, Rome cooperated with, and utilised, the local elite in exercising control. The Legate or Governor was responsible for the administration of Roman law, and appeal to him, at least in theory, meant access to legal process and rights; but as numerous ancient authors have stated, judges and verdicts could be bought.

The city’s social structure comprised a small elite (5%-10% of the population) who controlled city life to their advantage. The non-elite, who served the needs of the elite, included a spectrum of the very poor to somewhat wealthy. In this structure, the elite’s social dominance rested essentially on economic and political power, considerable wealth derived from the land at the expense of day labourers, and public repute.

Chapter 21 begins with, in Carter’s words, ‘Making an Ass out of Rome’ as Jesus enters Jerusalem on a donkey (Matthew 21.1-11). Then follows ructions in the Temple (Matthew 21.12-17) and the episode of the cursed and withered Fig Tree(Matthew 21.18-22); thence to our gospel reading for today – Jesus’ Authority and the Parable of the Two Sons.

Grand entrances in the Greco-Roman world expressed the imperial mind-set, a demand for public recognition of brute power gained by military or political means. Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem, the centre of power, is in contrast, a prophetic sign, a choreographed piece of street theatre. He adopts some of the trappings of Greco-Roman entrance processions and triumphs but reframes them in a very different context – an empire that seeks not to dominate, but to serve.

Similarly, the Fig Tree episode. A fig tree with fruit signified God’s blessing (Numbers 20.5; Deuteronomy 8.7-8; 1 Maccabees 14.12) a withered fig tree symbolized judgement (Isaiah 34.4; Jeremiah 8.13, 29.17; Hosea 2.12, 9.10, 16). The withered fig tree is an omen that represents the judgement Jesus has pronounced upon the Temple, upon the religious leaders, and on their Roman allies.

We already know that the chief priests and the scribes are allied against Jesus; but here, there is a different alliance. The elders are members of wealthy powerful lay families allied with the priestly elite and Pharisaic scribes in the Sanhedrin. This is the ruling body in Jerusalem, which has religious, economic and legal jurisdiction under Roman sanction. These dudes want to kill Jesus, by whatever means.

Now, the Temple is a place of worship, not teaching, which normally happens in the synagogue. Yet here is Jesus in the Temple, bold as brass, teaching. The religious elite interrupt, asking who gives him authority to do so. Their authority stems from their social status and power over others, and is based on birth (chief priests), training (scribes), wealth (elders), and political alliances.

And their question is a trap. If he claims his own authority, Jesus admits to having no institutional or cultural legitimacy, and appears to act against God’s purposes; if he claims God’s authority, he blasphemes (9.3) and violates the jurisdiction of the Sanhedrin.

Jesus, however, outwits them. The questioners become the questioned. Jesus says to them, ‘I will also ask you one question: if you tell me the answer, then I will also tell you by what authority I do these things. Did the baptism of John come from heaven, or was it of human origin?‘

This question about John’s baptism evokes John’s whole ministry and his challenge to the religious and political elite (Matthew 3.1-12; 14.1-12). From heaven, the abode of God (Matthew 5.34), denotes God-given authority; human origin means its absence. So, asking about John is astute. In Matthew, John and Jesus are closely linked (Matthew 3.1-12; 3.13-17).

Their answer ‘We do not know’, is not the fruit of genuine ignorance – it is avoidant – and by choosing a path of non-commitment, they unwittingly betray their real commitment. By refusing to say that John’s ministry comes from God; they reject the idea that John and Jesus have God given authority. Again, that refusal reveals their own lack of validation. Like the Pharisees and their tradition, they are not God’s planting (Matthew 15.1-9, 13-14), but are of human origin.

Jesus thus exposes and discredits the whole religious leadership, saying, ‘Neither will I tell you by what authority I am doing these things.’

He then introduces the parable of the Two Sons. The use of the word son invokes household relationships in which children honour their father by obeying him in all things. The first son declares that he will not obey, but in the passing of time, he changes his mind and does his father’s bidding. The second son declares that he will go to work, but in the passing of time, he changes his mind and does not go.

‘Which of the two did the will of his father?’ The religious leaders answer correctly. The first son does what his father wants; the second son does not. But the focus on father and the father’s will calls to mind God and God’s will (c.f. Exodus 20-23; Deuteronomy 5; Matthew 6.9-10; 7.21; 12.50) and, with that answer, they condemn themselves for not doing God’s will.

Not only have the elite rejected the justice and righteousness for which Jesus stands, but even when they have been offered time to change their mind, they do not – like the second son.

Now, all of this should not be generalized as condemnation of the various movements supposedly represented by members of the Sanhedrin. The Sanhedrin, elites of the prevailing religious culture, were a race apart. The main body of pharisees, scribes and priests devoted themselves faithfully to their craft, and as best they could, represented God’s will for justice, mercy and peace.

To conclude, we might ask ourselves if anything has changed? We also live in a world in which social and political power is exercised by wealthy, corrupt elites who do not have a clue about the lot of those who serve their purposes, who do not listen. And we are faced with the same conundrum faced by the early Christians – how do we effectively proclaim the values enunciated and lived out by Jesus?

The short answer to that is to enunciate and live out those values. Not so easy. But each individual effort to do so matters and is augmented when we do so from within the body of a like-minded community.

Doug Bannerman © 2023

[1] Warren Carter Matthew and the Margins: a Sociopolitical and Religious Reading (New Delhi: Rekha Printers 2007)

Sermon Notes 24th September 2023
Geoff Vidal

MATTHEW 20:1-16   “It wasn’t meant to be fair”

In Matthew, the emphasis is on the things that Jesus teaches about Christian life: the Kingdom of God. This Kingdom is different. There’s a different way of sorting out conflict and last week Desiree helped us understand what Matthew reported on generous forgiveness. Often, we are able to see how the Lectionary readings are linked to a particular message or theme. Today the Old Testament reading from Exodus clearly sets the scene for the Gospel story. Our life is a journey with God: The Israelites see that God is with them as they journey out of Egypt through the Sinai and the companions of Jesus are journeying with him to Jerusalem. And, on our life’s journey, God will provide us with what is needed. The Israelites wandering in the Sinai desert are provided with a sort of bread they call manna and birds. If you read on in Exodus, you hear how they eventually find that they can’t control what God provides. We are not able to store up what God provides and choose when we wish to use it.

We often hear that Jesus was a brilliant teacher who used the telling of parables to help people remember his message. But these parables are more than just good teaching; they are an invitation for us to see how God acts. In the parables we find some really significant information on what the Kingdom of God is like. The parables open up a world of possibility for us and they encourage us to respond by changing our way of doing things (repenting). Jesus teaches how to live the life of the Kingdom where the poor in spirit and the meek and the hungry are blessed. 

There are always new ways of looking at a parable even if we think we know it well. New things are always to be learned about life in the Kingdom of God. So, let’s go digging into the parable of today, being open to the possibility there might be something new to discover.  

Today’s parable unfolds in several scenes. It begins with the vineyard owner as he moves through a series of hiring of workers: early in the morning, and then at nine o'clock, noon, three o'clock, and finally at five o'clock. The next scene occurs when evening comes (about 6 o’clock) and the owner gives instructions for the way the workers are to be paid. The story then escalates with the way the wages are paid and it culminates in a confrontation between certain disgruntled laborers and the owner who has the final word. The passage ends with Jesus summarising "So the last will be first, and the first will be last".  

Because Jesus began the parable by saying “the Kingdom of Heaven is like a landowner”, we suspect initially that this is in some way a story about God. (Desiree has often pointed out that we need to be careful in our thinking about who is what in our Bible stories.) And, as we read this story today, we wonder what kind of God is lurking in these words of Jesus. The owner of the vineyard deals fairly with one group, paying them exactly what they bargained for after twelve hard, hot hours in the fields; but then he turns around and gives exactly the same pay to those who put in only one hour's effort in the cool of the evening.  

To our way of thinking, there is no justice if the letter of the law is followed with the way one group is paid and then there is startling generosity shown to other workers who began their day much later. We wouldn’t do that. Our kids and little grandkids have a better understanding of fairness than this vineyard owner. Kids are pretty quick in telling us “That’s not fair”.  There’s no doubt that, in a situation like this, the  ACTU and the Labor Council and all sorts of workers’ rights people would say, “You can’t do that, it’s not fair!” 

You don’t have to be a unionist to know that the people who worked longer should have been paid more.  That’s the way any fair-minded person would do it. But that isn’t the way the owner of the vineyard does things. When he is criticized, the landowner points out “You might not like it; you might think it’s not fair. But I can do it if I want to.” And he says “I did no wrong!” 

We have a problem in letting God do things God’s way. We expect that things will be done our way. So, God surprises us. The master of the vineyard hasn’t been unjust; he’s simply been extraordinarily generous to some of the workers. It’s God’s strange and unexpected generosity that causes us a problem. There’s a warning here that those who think that they know exactly how God must act are in for a big surprise. God’s plan is to bring delight and fulfillment to everyone. But it’s God’s plan, not ours! Remember the link to our Exodus reading; God certainly will provide everything that is needed (although not necessarily all that we want).

Everyone who toils in the Lord’s vineyard should be delighted that some receive exactly what is just. If some others who work in the vineyard have been blessed with God’s extravagant generosity, who are we to question why?  Isn’t God allowed to do what he likes with his love? And we are loved. In the story, the words spoken to the grumbling worker are “My friend, I am doing you no wrong ... are you envious because I am generous”. 

When we hear this story about the farmer who hires servants to work in his vineyard, most of us would probably think of ourselves as being like the servants who worked out in the vineyard all day. After all, here we are “in the vineyard” so to speak. We are people who have been here in church all our lives, or certainly most of our lives. To be told that somebody who shows up in the vineyard just one hour before the end is given the same as those who have laboured here all day, well, no wonder there was grumbling! 

And yet, if we were prepared to hear this parable from the standpoint of those workers who came late (the people who were passed over all day long and only got hired at the end of the day) and yet received the same wage as those of us who had been there the whole day, we would see it as a really good news story. And it is a good news story. The unemployed have now been employed.  Those who have recently decided to live their lives as followers of Jesus in this Kingdom of God that he says is near, can be encouraged to know that they don’t have to work themselves into a frazzle trying to catch up with people who have known Jesus all their lives. The bandit on the cross next to Jesus who probably had never seen the inside of a synagogue was promised “today you will be with me in Paradise”.  

There is a common theme running through these parables that Jesus shared, and it is grace. What God will do for us is not a matter of shrewd calculation on our part (how we manipulate God), but rather it is a matter of God’s extravagant graciousness. We somehow tend to think, “As far as God is concerned, if I do this, then I will get that.”  But what if our relationship with God is not a matter of what we do, or the way we understand it, but a matter of what God does and the way God understands it?  

Last week we heard how the disciple Peter came to Jesus wondering how often he should forgive someone who had wronged him. He asks, “seven times?”  That seems reasonable; perhaps even more than reasonable.

We know that it is hard enough to forgive someone one time, little own seven times. But Jesus told him that we are to forgive someone not seven times, but seventy times seven times. 

It seems that, built right into the heart of the gospel is a kind of generosity, of extravagance.  And, as Jesus said on one occasion, God makes his sun to shine on the good and the bad and his rain to fall on the just and the unjust. We are being given the message that God has created the world in such a way that there is room for God to be gracious. There is room for people who have nothing to be given everything. It is possible for those whose lives don’t add up to much of anything to have everything.  

God is willing to risk everything just for one who is lost. On the other hand, the wealthy, the trend setters, and the big wheels, are seen as nothing. A poor widow’s single copper coin is seen as being bigger than a huge cheque from someone with lots of money in the bank.  

Or as Paul said to one of the early churches, God has chosen to take the things that add up to nothing, and make them into something big. God takes those things with which the world is impressed and reduces them to nothing.  

Soon you are going to come forward to the Lord’s table. You will receive just one little bit of compressed bread, hardly enough to satisfy a big appetite.  And you will have just a thimbleful of wine, not enough to cure a big thirst. However, our hungers are so deep and our thirsts are so unquenchable. And yet as we accept the good news of Jesus Christ, just that sip, just that little bite of bread is enough to feed you forever, to strengthen and preserve your soul, not just through daily life, but into eternal life.

Sermon Notes Sunday 17th September

Desiree Snyman

Reflection on Matthew 18

Forgiveness

The movies The Railway Man and Philomena were both released in 2013. The Railway Man tells the tragic story of a traumatised war veteran whose mind is broken by the torture he suffered as a POW where he was forced to work on the Thai-Burma Railway north of the Malay Peninsula. Returning to the Far East decades later, The Railway Man meets with his tormentor. At first he attempts to torture his persecutor using the same methods that were used against him. His former persecutor accepts the reverse torture out of a sense of guilt. The Railway Man breaks down. In breaking down he breaks through his pain and miraculously forgives his torturer. Startlingly victim and abuser become firm friends and together become an emblem for peace.

The delightful Philomena is based on a true story. Philomena, whose child was taken from her by the Catholic Church makes brave attempts to track him down – later with the help of a journalist. Philomena discovers that her son was taken to America and when she travels there she finds out that not only has he died but that he had been looking for her and was buried in the grounds of the convent where he was born. The infuriating issue is that the nuns had refused to give either Philomena or her son information about each other.  At the climax of the film the journalist is filled with righteous rage and storms into the convent and challenges the nun about her lies and her deceit and the pain that she had unnecessarily caused. I identify with the journalist’s anger. Some anger, the burning white kind, can be a spiritual director, a gift of the Spirit, a bolt of power that energises you to challenge injustice. Like the journalist I was somewhat thwarted when Philomena looked down on the crippled nun, the one who had abused her and taken so much from her and said the words “I forgive you.” I felt my anger turning on Philomena – how dare she forgive so easily, so quickly! Philomena’s forgiveness is not piety, nor is it religious sentimentalism and it is not submissive obedience to some external moral law. Philomena’s forgiveness is a powerful moment of her agency, where she takes power back. She takes the initiative, she makes the decision about who she wants to be and how she wants to live her life – she will not be defined by her past, by the nun, by the journalist – she, Philomena, will decide how she will live her life. The moment is subversive and unexpected and strangely liberating.

Forgiveness?

At first glance the parable in Matthew 18 is about forgiveness. Matthew 6 encourages us to pray asking God to forgive our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us. Matthew 18 is a picture story about Matthew 6.12-14 illustrating the need to forgive others . Previously Jesus offered a simple three step checklist on forgiveness: – ask the sinner directly, take a few others with you, take the whole assembly with you. If there is no request for forgiveness treat him as “Gentile and tax collector,” in other words, treat him as a lost sheep (Matt. 18:15-20). Jesus is intentionally ironic in this teaching because the pharisees accused Jesus of befriending Gentiles and tax collectors (Matt. 9:11). In the parable of the lost sheep the shepherd must forgive the sheep to reconcile it back into the flock. Just as God forgives the lost sheep we must forgive others – without condition, without repentance, and without a promise of reform. As in the Parable of the Weeds, forgiveness, permission, and remission are the same word.

The parable ends with a stark warning on the unending torture that awaits those who are unable to allow the grace of forgiveness to flow through them. As Robert Capon writes: “In heaven there are only forgiven sinners. . . . In hell there are only forgiven sinners. . . . The sole difference, therefore, between hell and heaven is that in heaven the forgiveness is accepted and passed along while in hell it is rejected and blocked” (p220 in Kingdom, Grace, Judgment: Paradox, Outrage, and Vindication in the Parables of Jesus 2002).

We are aware that when we suffer because of another’s actions the act of forgiveness is excruciatingly hard, which is why when forgiveness flows through us it is pure grace, a miracle. The miraculous nature of forgiveness is on beautiful display in the true life dramas of Philomena and The Railway Man. We are also aware that not forgiving those who sin against us binds us to past hurts and becomes a double wound. Binding the sin to the sinner not only binds the sinner but binds us as well; and loosening or forgiving the sin of the sinner not only loosens the sinner but loosens us as well.

But

A teaching on forgiveness is a reasonable interpretation of this parable and one that I have been taught. While the teaching on forgiveness of sin is consistent in scholarship and commentary there is something in me, a soul voice, that doesn’t quite allow me to wholeheartedly swallow this conventional interpretation; here are some of my difficulties:

1.

I am anxious about the church as an institution speaking about forgiveness without referencing the power dynamics at play: those with power have the option to offer or withhold forgiveness and those without power can only beg to receive it. I agree with the concept of forgiveness, of course, however I have some hesitations when there is no depth analysis of trauma and its detrimental effects on the brain, the body, and the psyche.

2.

I feel anxiety because any current interpretations on forgiveness are in the context of institutional abuse. The Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse revealed how “forgiveness” was used by the church to pardon paedophile priests who were forgiven for their sin of child abuse only to be moved to a different school or parish to begin the sin again.

3.

I do not agree that the king represents God. Some logical elements simply don’t add up. While Peter and the church are asked to forgive 70 x 7 the king is unable to forgive his servant a second time. We are to forgive unconditionally but God forgives conditionally? Really? The king in this parable and other Matthean parables is a vindictive tyrant associated more with the death dealing oppressive reign of Rome that Jesus stood against. The king in this parable collects excessive tribute and inflicts vicious torture when his compassion runs out after only a few verses. If the tyrant king offers mercy at all it is purely self-serving and functions to reinforce oppression. The forgiveness of debt the high status slave receives serves to bind him to the king.

Concluding comments

I feel nervous around parables in the same way that I am nervous around trick questions. I’ve learnt the hard way that a simple allegorical view of parables will not be enough, and that the parable invites me to analyse systems of power, it invites me to think really hard about life. Parables are not stories or fables that convey a simple moral point. They are meant to provoke critical reflection, to pull the logs out of our own eyes. While sometimes based on real life events parables are not meant to be interpretated as literal.

Some of the background information to the parable is helpful. The first slave is more of a chief financial officer slave or minister of finance rather than a dish washing slave. The amount owed is billions and is likely to be a tribute or a tax that he is expected to extract from a subjugated people. This high status slave was part of the system that allowed few to have too much and too many to have too little. With this in mind the invitation to forgive 70X7 or 77 times depending on your translation takes on a different meaning. More than a symbol for “a lot,” 70x7 is a reference to jubilee politics and sabbath economics. Every seventh year was a year of rest where lands were to lie fallow (Leviticus 25). Every 7x7 year, every fiftieth year, all debts were cancelled, and lands returned to their original owners, and slaves were freed (Lev. 25:10). The intention is the same as the law of gleaning (Lev. 19:9-10), to ensure that everyone had access to the means of production, whether the family farm or simply the fruits of their own labour. In other words 7x70 evokes the cancellation of debt and the collapse of unjust systems.

The parable of the tyrant king is a depiction of the systems of power in first century Judea under harsh Roman rule and the multileveled tax systems creating poverty and hardship. The problems are structural sin. There are systemic issues. The system brutalises people into power and submission. Torture is required to maintain power over others. Even high status slaves are vulnerable.

One challenge that the parable offers me is this: do I maintain unjust structures especially those that are unmerciful to the environment and the vulnerable? Or can I take every opportunity to live out the sabbath economics and jubilee politics of Jesus? The slave had an opportunity to invest in a system of oppression or to offer grace, taking on the status of a child and giving up privilege. Can I take every opportunity to divest myself of privilege, to take on the status of a child, to forgive endlessly? Can I break with power over structures and take every opportunity to introduce grace as a counterforce into a brutal system of oppression? In small and big decisions, do I support an unjust structure for short term gain, or can I choose mercy which is counterculture and subversive? For example, is a simple “yes” to including a Voice to parliament an opportunity to introduce grace into a system of historical oppression?  If I can offer a small amount of mercy, that grace can serve as a crack in the structure, a mustard seed that grows into an invasive plant and takes over other cracks, and joins with other invasive plants, until the structure crumbles and only love and mercy are left.

Desiree Snyman

Sermon Notes 10th September 2023
Geoff Vidal

Matthew 18:10-20

Over in USA in the last few weeks, Carol and I noticed many homeless people: many with obvious psychiatric or drug issues. This was distressing and confronting. In the Gospel reading today, Jesus says look out for the little ones. This doesn’t necessarily mean infants. Jesus is referring to those who are considered by society to be of no great value: people like the ones we encountered in USA who are thought of as being just a total nuisance. How do you look out for these little ones?  Handing these people money isn’t always helpful. The assistance required is much more likely to become available to the desperately needy through our support of organisations such as Anglicare.

The need to care for each of the “little ones” is emphasised by the reminder in today’s gospel that it is God’s desire to search for and to recover the one lost sheep that has gone astray. When it is found there is great joy!!!

We have been given this challenge to show concern for the lost in our community.  When we are seen to have concern, we are like a magnet. We draw people in by the way we live and deal with each other. Outsiders are attracted to a community in which they can see a sharing of care and love. People stay away when they see there is a lack of love; where no one seems to care. People find it a turn off if they suspect disinterest and apathy and can see no obvious desire to resolve problems in a community.

The church should be a special place where God’s people live well together and set an example of how to resolve conflict. Doesn’t the world need that? What great timing it is that this teaching on what it means to be a loving and caring Church comes up on the day before the anniversary of Sept 11th (and at the time of G20 meeting where world leaders are struggling to find agreement on how to make life better for so many).

The best way to show care for the little ones is to be an obvious good example. This is seen in the work of the op shop and in the way we accept different people. If we live with each other and deal with each other well, we become a magnet to draw people in. That’s our mission; to be a community that outsiders can see is attractive.

For sure, it’s not easy to live this life of attractive unity and acceptance but, because it’s so important that we love each other, Jesus gives us this critical teaching on the way to sort out our conflicts.  And there will be conflicts! There will be difficulties, disagreements and upsets in our families and our church community that we are going to need to settle properly; in a way that attracts and doesn’t repel.   

There’s love and justice in the way Jesus says we are to deal with disagreements. Think of the disasters you have known of or heard of in the life of church congregations, maybe even this one, and ask yourself whether things would not have turned out quite differently (just so much for the better) if Jesus’ directions had been carefully followed. 

We aren’t asked to have a compassionate tolerance of everything and to let people get away with anything. We are to tell the truth even if that truth is a painful, tough truth. It’s not always a loving thing to say “Who am I to judge?” or “I’ll promise to stay out of your life if you stay out of mine. You can ruin your life but I won’t interfere”. That is not helpful.  A real friend is somebody who cares so much that they are prepared to say something like, “Now, that was not one of your better decisions, was it?” A true friend would say “What on earth were you thinking when you did that?”

The deepest love we can have for one another is a love which is prepared to get involved: which cares enough to confront, to challenge and, if need be, to oppose. Such love requires real courage because it is liable to be misunderstood and can easily lead to hostility and rejection. Even with the best of intentions, mistakes can be made and relationships can go wrong. We are called to recognize right and wrong in love. But serious love for our neighbour must be the motivation.  

When there is a breakdown in relationship, Jesus says the first step in attempting reconciliation is a private thing. We will make things worse if disagreements are brought up in public where self-defensiveness and self-righteousness could easily result and a person can be backed into a corner really quickly. 

Often an apology is asked for. I believe that saying “Sorry” isn’t necessarily the best way to apologize. There’s not necessarily any interaction required when someone says “I’m sorry”. Everyone has seen a huffy child stomp off saying “I’m sorry” when it is very obvious that they’re not. A much more loving and helpful way to resolve an issue is to ask “Will you forgive me?” This requires a response and can often result in reconciliation. 

Jesus is pointing out that, when there are differences between us, the responsibility for resolving them is ours; no one else’s! And the responsibility is mutual.  We both need to have the issue settled.

And if our best efforts don’t bring reconciliation, (if we can’t sort it out ourselves), we are not to let it rest. We are to bring in one or two witnesses who can moderate things and help us to get back on track and work things out. 

And then, if there’s still no resolution, Jesus says go to the “whole church” which for us doesn’t mean the whole congregation but simply “a bigger group”. There were no big Parishes and Hillsong churches back then. The purpose of bringing things to the bigger group is still to achieve reconciliation. 

But finally, if all the efforts of the church fail, the stubborn one is to be regarded as being outside the church. It’s not that this person is dismissed or finished with. But the matter has now run its human course (everything humanly possible has been done) and it’s now up to God. 

Jesus words seem harsh here, “let such a one be to you as a gentile or tax collector”, but remember Matthew's Gospel was written to encourage the sending out of the infant Church to the Gentiles to teach them. The church was very aware of the mission it had to “outsiders” such as Gentiles and tax collectors. This Gospel was written by an “outsider”, a tax collector named Matthew, whose selection by Jesus for him to be one of the disciples was a lesson in itself. 

The Christian who refuses the authority of the community is not just to be shunned. He or she is to be loved more than ever and is to be the subject of outreach and con­cern; imitating the way in which Jesus was so interested in searching out tax collectors that he was described as their friend. These Gentiles and tax collectors were the very ones that God searched for to bring into the Church. Yes, offenders are dealt with. But they are to be dealt with in love, and for the purposes of reconciliation.  

In all the gospels, this morning’s passage in Matthew 18 is one of the only two places where the word church is used. And as a Church, Jesus has given us the job of exercising authority for doing the work of God on this earth. We are called to bind and to loose. Our job is to bind the forces of evil which enslave people and to loosen the bonds of oppression which prevent people from living the fullness of life of God's kingdom. Whether that means opposing wrong actions of individuals or governments, clearly inappropriate values in our society or corrupt economic structures, the challenge of the gospel means that Christians need to love enough to speak uncomfortable truths in humility, but with courage. And when we do that, we can trust Christ’s promise to be there with us. 

In financial and management terms, we know that, to survive, the Church must be a well-run organization existing among all the rest of our society. But, if we are to be true to Jesus, his life and his teaching, then we must sometimes act in a way that other institutions regard as foolishness. Normal thinking is that you’d have to be crazy to search out and to care for those who refuse the authority of the institution; but that is the way of Jesus. Not very many people have turned away from the Church because they found it too forgiv­ing. But I’m sure that you know of someone who doesn’t come to Church anymore because they found it unforgiving and unloving. 

We will always need the presence of Jesus to give us the courage and power to live our lives in love and harmony the way Jesus teaches. That is why Jesus fin­ishes his instructions with a command to constant prayer. We should not expect that absolutely anything will be given to us if two of us agree and pray. The context of Jesus’ promise is living well together and winning back any lost member.  The ultimate promise is that when we gather together in Jesus name, God is there in the midst of us.

Sermon Notes 20th August 2023
Desiree Snyman

Find God in the faith of others: based on Matthew 15.21-28

She is not polite. Neither is she discreet. Stridently, loudly, she demands help for her daughter. She is desperate and no longer cares what people think or say about her, she just wants help. At first, he ignores her, hoping she’ll go away, but the self-conscious disciples urge him: "Send her away, for she keeps shouting after us." Shockingly, while few Jewish persons accept Jesus, the Canaanite woman of all people calls him “Son of David,” one of the titles for the Messiah. 

After ignoring her, Jesus tries explaining. His explanation goes right to the heart of his mission: "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." This doesn’t discourage the woman. She rushes forward and kneels at his feet. The word for ‘kneels’ is strong: it means to bow down and kiss someone’s feet, the hem of their garment, or the ground in front of them. She pleads, very simply, one last time, “Lord, help me!” Jesus is overcome and opens his heart to her: “Woman great is your faith! Let it be done for you as you wish”. When Jesus calls her “woman” he affirms her personhood. No longer is she “the Canaanite woman” or “little female dog” or “heathen” or “other”. She is mother, neighbour, daughter of God. Divisions are shattered. Wholeness, healing, and renewal pervades. No longer is her child identified with disease and demons; she is defined by God. The daughter is made whole, as is Jesus’ mission. Jesus is transformed through his encounter with the Canaanite woman; no longer does he only break bread with the lost tribes of Israel, but his manna is shared with all people.  

Religious strangers shaped the ministry of Jesus. The desperation of the Canaanite woman which Jesus had the audacity to call faith helped him expand his vision. After learning from the Canaanite woman Jesus embraces all people, not just the chosen ones. The Samaritan woman at the well deepens Jesus’ experience of gratitude. The Roman centurion taught Jesus a new way to approach faith, and his son was healed. Jesus found God in the faith of others.  

The magnificence of Jesus’ encounter with the Canaanite woman is appreciated when considering the context of the story. Previously, Jesus sent his disciples on mission with clear instructions that they were to go to the lost sheep of Israel only “Go nowhere among the Gentiles and enter no town of the Samaritans but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (Matthew 10: 5b-6). The problem is that the lost sheep of Israel simply don’t want their shepherd. The leaders of Israel reject Jesus (Matthew 12.14), even his own family rebuff him (Matthew 12.46). As if the week is not going badly enough, Jesus receives the message that his friend, mentor and cousin John the Baptist is martyred (Matthew 14.13). There is now no doubt left in Jesus mind that if he continues with his mission, he like John the Baptist will also lose his head. While the lost sheep of Israel reject Jesus’ message, thousands of others are attracted by his Good News. The feeding of the more than 5000 by the lake is a story of the success of faith, contrasted by the doubt of the disciples who have no trust that God is safe when a storm rocks their boat (Matthew 14.26).  

Preachers preach the sermons they most need to hear. In the past the story of the Canaanite woman inspired me to walk in solidarity alongside those who are HIV positive, orphans, those who are refugees and those who are the most marginalized in society. What this story teaches me now is how much I need strangers, how much I need to move out of my comfort zone, how much I need to find God in the faith of others. What the Biblical text does to me is that it holds up a mirror, it shows me how much I enjoy country club Christianity,” staying in my own comfortable comfort zone with those who think like me, talk like me, pray like me. Instead, the Gospel invitation is to move out of my comfort zone continually, to embrace diversity, to live out the phrase “your greatest difference from me is your greatest gift to me.”  

Moving out of my comfort zone, what might “outsiders” teach me about faith? How does God’s divinity shine though those who are “other” and what do “strange people” reveal to me about God? One of the Great Themes of Scripture is embracing the stranger, “outsiders” who have different relationships with the divine or different cultures, different experiences, or who are simply people who are refugees, asylum seekers, minorities, or those who identity as part of the LGBTQIA+ community. Jesus embraced strangers and he found faith in others. I am invited to do the same.  

Rabbi Jonathan Sacks says, “The supreme religious challenge is to see God’s image in one who is not in our image”. Barbara Brown Taylor says that if Sacks is correct “then the stranger – the one who does not look, think, or act like the rest of us – may offer us the best change at seeing past our own reflections in the mirror to the God we did not make up” (in Holy Envy p200).

Sermon Notes 13th August 2023
Geoff Vidal

Genesis 37:1-4, 12-28, Matthew 14:22-36 

The Friday congregation is a little more senior than we are on Sundays. The pews are harder on bottoms on Fridays so there is a shorter service of only the Gospel reading and two hymns. On a Sunday we often have the First Testament reading and there is a little more time for the sermon on Sundays. I try to work out what will be helpful to share in that time taking into consideration that there are differing expectations. Some people are wanting to learn new things and some people are hoping that they will have the things that they know confirmed. There’s no way we will all think the same things at the same time: we are all wonderfully different. But, thank goodness that we are not all clones of each other. 

Both the First Testament and the New Testament include the instruction that we are to love the Lord our God with all our heart and all our soul and all our mind and all our strength. Loving God by using all our mind is as important as loving God with all our heart and soul and strength. Some people find home groups (or life groups) help them to grow in their love of God. Books help growing minds; last week Desiree spoke of the helpful Julia Baird book “Phosphorescence”. At least one person who comes each Friday watches Christian TV early each morning. Another very popular connection with God is the TV program Songs of Praise (although watching Songs of Praise might be using more heart or soul than mind).

I am truly blessed in that I have an opportunity to meet with a few other men most Tuesday mornings and chew over a range of different theological and ethical ideas. We agree on lots of things but at times I am challenged by new ideas. I have to think differently and to consider why I think the way I think. 

Loving God with all your mind mostly comes down to trying to comprehend how we envisage God and what is our understanding of Jesus. 

So, perhaps we come here to church very sincerely looking for a clearer understanding of who Jesus really is. Or maybe you would like to have your thoughts of Jesus confirmed. Possibly we a seeking a better knowledge of God. You might have come to church today trying to figure out where God can be found. 

There is a funny story of a misbehaving boy being given a “talking to” by a priest. When asked the question “where is God?”, he became extremely distressed and ran home telling his mother “they have lost God down at the church and are blaming me for it!”

Well, just where is God? Maybe the Bible readings we have heard today can help: 

The reading from Genesis is more than just the story of Jacob’s older sons being so fed up by the way he favours and spoils their young brother, Joseph, that when they have a chance, they get rid of Joseph. They don’t kill Joseph as a few of them wanted to do, but they have him sold as a slave to be taken to Egypt.

There’s a reminder in this story of the power of evil in the world. Oppression isn’t a problem “out there” with slave traders and Pharaohs. Oppression happens very close to home when there is not peace between brothers or clans. 

This story of Joseph being taken to Egypt as a slave is the link between God’s promise to Joseph’s ancestor Abraham and God’s rescue of the Israelites from slavery in Egypt. God was present and involved in the lives of Abraham and Jacob and Joseph and in the life of Moses leading the Israelites out of Egypt. 

It’s distressing to hear survivors of the Holocaust (or relatives of victims) question the presence of God arguing that, if God did exist such horrors would not occur. I have read a book by Rabbi Kushner (a prominent Jewish theologian in New York) who tells his readers that it is much more helpful and appropriate to focus on the positive story of God in the Exodos of the slaves from Egypt than the evil actions of Nazi Germans.  

However, there are times when we wonder where God is. Why wasn’t God there to stop that disaster; that flood or fire or car crash or the abuse of that child or wife. Although we wonder where can we find God, the strange thing is, that, in fact, it is God who comes to find us.   

Our Gospel story from Matthew reminds us of how God (who we think we are looking for) can come to us unexpectedly. The story begins with Jesus, at the end of a busy day, sending his disciples away and going off alone to a secluded place to pray. Jesus often went away to pray when he had been busy. Each of the Gospels record that, when there was a lot going on, Jesus first priority was to get in touch with God in prayer. 

In this story today, we have a clear contrast between the situation of Jesus and that of his followers. When evening came Jesus was praying alone, but his disciples were in a boat, battered by the waves. They were a long way out from land, and they had the wind against them.  

Late in the night, Jesus comes to them out of the darkness, walking across the waters. Yet, despite their need for Jesus, the disciples are terrified at his presence. They yell out, “It is a ghost!”. Jesus reveals himself to them saying “It is I” and he encourages them by saying “Take heart; do not be afraid”. 

Now, Peter is prepared to take a risk if Jesus asks him to. Peter says, if it is Jesus, he will only have to tell him to come across the water to him, and he will do it. Initially, Peter places his trust in the Lord, but then he becomes really scared as he looks away from Jesus and becomes focussed on the storm going on around him. However, as Peter starts sinking, he calls on the help of the Lord, and Jesus holds him and keeps him safe. In Peter's situation of little faith and doubt, his Lord has stood by him.  

Jesus and Peter get into the boat, the wind drops, and the disciples are very aware that Jesus has rescued them one more time. They boldly proclaim: “'Truly, you are the Son of God.”  

It would be a pun, wouldn’t it, if I said, “Most Christians are in the same boat as the disciples and Peter.” But we are!  We are not always confident that Jesus is present with us. We often begin with the great courage which only faith can give us. However, this courage of faith seems to disappear when a storm blows up in our lives. We are not very confident when we are being knocked around by all the problems that trouble us in our lives.  

This Gospel story is a great reminder that God is present even when we don’t expect it and, ultimately, we are dependent upon the gracious help of our Lord. It is in knowing the presence of Jesus that we are able to get across whatever stormy patch we find ourselves in. Jesus is the one who is close to God, who gives us the example of looking to God for guidance and strength.  

However, even when we have our moments of believing that God is right there (thinking that God is present with us), our faith can be a bit shaky. Our faith can be very tentative if we have to jump out the boat into stormy water.  

The encouragement is for us to know that, when difficulties come our way, it is possible to find that God is truly there; it is possible to find assurance that God is present coming out of the darkness into our lives.  

Encouragingly, Peter's story, and the story of disciples who thought Jesus was only a ghost, reminds us that even people with only a little faith can still find that Jesus is not far away - just out at the edge of our vision we can find Jesus coming in towards us; Jesus wanting us to see him and draw him in to us. 

Yes, Jesus still comes, reaching out his hand and catching us, pulling us up out of the strife we are in, calming the things swirling around us, leading us into the safety and peace which only God can give. Blessing us with peace which is beyond our understanding.

Sermon Notes 6th August 2023
Desiree Snyman

Abba Lot went to Abba Joseph and said to him, “Abba, as far as I can I say my little office, I fast a little, I pray and meditate, I live in peace as far as I can, I purify my thoughts. What else can I do?” Then the old man stood up and stretched his hands towards heaven. His fingers became like ten lamps of fire, and he said to him, “If you will, you can become all flame.” 

The above tale of transfiguration from “The Sayings of the Desert Fathers” is about the total transformation that love brings about in a human person. As I have said before, spiritual evolution is less about saying prayers and more about becoming prayer. Spiritual maturity is less about doing and more about being. 

The Transfiguration celebrated on the 6th of August is the central feast day for Eastern Orthodox spirituality and epitomises the journey of what it means to be human. The transfiguration embodies the doctrine of Theosis, the journey of being made into God. Deification or apotheosis is the journey of being made into the Divine and it is a cooperation or a surrender to Great Creator Spirit. If theosis sounds a bit like blasphemy it may help to remember that the chief commanders in the fight for orthodoxy and the ones who actively fought heresy said that the point of life is the integration of our divine and human selves. Irenaeus said that the glory of God is the person fully alive, fully human, and fully divine. Athanasius said that God became what we are (human) so that we could become what God is (Divine). A common analogy to explain theosis is metal placed in fire. While remaining metal the metal placed in fire nevertheless obtains all the properties of fire namely heat and light. Another example is a drop of water in the ocean. While a drop of water is not capable of creating a tsunami, once immersed in the ocean, the droplet becomes one with the ocean. Similarly, our destiny as human beings is such utter immersion into the ocean of God’s love that we become partakers of the divine nature (II Peter 1:4). 

I agree with those who say that the Transfiguration was not so much about the transfiguration of Jesus but more about the transfiguration of the disciples. They had accessed deeper levels of their spirituality and were able to see Jesus, and themselves, from a different point of view. Jesus, like Abba Lot, had become all flame but the only reason the disciples could see it was because they themselves were all flame. 

Hold onto the idea that it is the disciples themselves that were transfigured. The inspiration for the text is of course Old Testament stories. Moses goes up a mountain and spends time alone with God face to face. Moses shone so brightly that a cloth was placed over his face because people could not look at him. Also remember the start of Moses’ spiritual evolution was his experience of the burning bush. The bush shimmered with light so bright it should have burnt to the ground. Moses experienced God, the “I am” or Yahweh through the transfiguration of nature.  

The idea of Jesus shining or Moses or the disciples or Abba Lot becoming all flame may seem too ethereal to be “real life.” The transfiguration is at best a cute metaphor or an inspiration for prayer. I too thought that the story of Abba Lot’s fingers becoming “ten lamps of fire” was magic realism; until I read Julia Baird’s book “Phosphorescence.” Julia writes that scientists have long been fascinated by the phosphorescence of creatures - fire fly plankton, glow worms, ghost mushrooms and more. Scientists now describe creatures that absorb light as having phosphorescence and those that produce their own light as having bioluminescence. A 2009 experiment explored whether we humans had bioluminescence. The researchers put five able bodied bare-chested Japanese men in darkened, sealed rooms for up to 20-minute intervals every three hours for three days. Extremely sensitive cameras found that the men glowed, especially around the face. While the intensity of light emitted by the body is one thousand times lower that the sensitivity of our eyes, the fact is, we humans glow. 

I realised that the transformation that love brings about, transfiguration, theosis or the story of Jesus or the disciples being transformed into light, is more real than I realised.  

All of you listening here today (or reading this text) already have this inner light, you already glow. You yourselves are the proof text that this transfiguration is a reality. It is precisely this inner light that has brought you to this moment carrying you through days of profoundest grief. It is precisely your bioluminescence nurtured by the love of God, nature, family, and friends, and sustained by your ability to pay attention and take notice that has carried you through wounds which are intolerable to bear. Anyone reading these words has danced in the refiner’s fire, the fire that does not consume. The presence of any doubt within you, the existence of any questions and the scars of any wounds you carry are portals to the light. As we allow our bioluminescence to shine let us receive a blessing from John O Donohue:  

You have travelled too fast over false ground.
now your soul has come to take you back.
Take refuge in your senses, open up.
to all the small miracles you rushed through.

Become inclined to watch the way of rai.
when it falls slow and free.
Imitate the habit of twilight,
taking time to open the well of colour
that fostered the brightness of day.

Draw alongside the silence of stone
until its calmness can claim you.
Be excessively gentle with yourself.

Excerpt from the blessing, 'For One Who is Exhausted,' from John's books: Benedictus (Europe) /

To Bless the Space Between Us (USA).

Sermon Notes 23rd July 2023
Desiree Snyman

I want to focus on the experience of anointing. Jacob’s experience with a dreaming-stone that he anoints is our entry point. The stone, likely a meteorite, is a fragment of the heavens that settles onto the land. This stone, born of the heavens and the earth, births a vision from the earth to the heavens. Jacob’s vision is of a ladder. Like a cosmic tree, it yields a flow of energy between this world and the heavenly spirit world. Jacob’s cosmic spirit dream of a ladder uniting earth to heaven with winged messengers (angels) flowing up and down is reminiscent of the ancient archetypal tree of life found across the ages in diverse cultures. The tree of life appears in Jewish mysticism (Kabbalah) as a diagram where each of the numbered branches represents the attributes of God. In Norse mythology an enormous ash tree connects the nine worlds, including the underworld, the earth, and the realm of the gods. The Assyrian tree of life represents a series of nodes and cross branches with winged genies on each line. A winged genie is a bearded man with an eagle head and angel wings. See how similar it is to Jacob’s ladder? In Christianity the tree of life is the cross. Saint Bonaventure taught that the healing fruit of the tree of life is Christ himself. In eastern Christianity the tree of life is the love of God. Saint Isaac the Syrian says that "Paradise is the love of God, in which the bliss of all the beatitudes is contained," and that "the tree of life is the love of God" (Homily 72). 

The I Am that will later speak to Moses through the burning bush speaks to Jacob through the meteorite-stone: Know that I am with you and will keep you wherever you go. Jacob is stunned. He calls the wilderness spot “The Gate of Heaven.” He sets up the baetyl or sacred stone as a pillar of witness. The pillar stone is a shrine at “Beth-El,” the “House of El.” El is a Canaanite Deity. Jacob anoints the iron-mineral petrified rock with christening oil. The rock pillar is now more than rock it is a “Living Being.”

The Urartian tree of life, Urartu Helmet fragment(Public Domain, Wiki Commons).

That Jacob sets up a “pillar” is surprising. Hebrew religion later forbade erecting pillars as they were associated too closely with Canaanite religion and were seen as a phallus symbolising union with the gods. See Exodus 23:24; Deuteronomy 7:5; Leviticus 26:1, Hosea 3:4 and Micah 5:13. 

Jacob offers a challenge: if this God that overshadows the mountains (El Shaddai) will give him bread and clothing on his journey he will embrace Elohim as his deity and that very stone as “El’s House” or Bethel. Jacob wants bread from stone and later Jesus in his own wilderness will be tempted to turn rocks into bread.  

The anointing of the pillar stone is the very first time in Biblical history that anointing occurs. A wild, unmanufactured, undomesticated rock petrified from stardust and earth, in the middle of the desert wilderness, is anointed, “in-christed,” re-created as a Christ, an anointed one. The rock is ritually re-created as “Christ”. The anointing of the rock is significant, it announces that this is the place where God is experienced, touched, tasted. The rock is like an anchor to the spiritual realm that is always around us. Where else does anoint occur in the scriptures?  

As we travel through the scriptures anointing is associated with priests and kings. A member of the Levite tribe, Aaron is anointed. The songbook, the psalms, sings about community saying “behold how good and how pleasant it is when God’s people dwell together in harmony. It is like the precious oil on the head, running down upon the beard, on the beard of Aaron, running down over the collar of his robes (Psalm 133). It is not only priests that are anointed but kings and queens too. A prophet Samuel anoints Saul as the first king of the Israelites. Anointing empowers people to perform a certain task and protects them in carrying out their work.  

In psalm 23 anointing is associated with healing. Sheep were driven to near madness with flies laying eggs in their eyes. The shepherd would anoint the sheep’s head with oil which would wash out the flies and prevent further infestation, providing healing and relief to the sheep. 

To summarise, anointing in the Hebrew Scriptures makes present three realities:

1.   when something or someone is anointed, they are re-created ritually as a Christ, an anointed one, a place where God is found.

2.   Anointing also empowers and protects people for a particular task, for example as a priest or a king.

3.   Anointing is also a sacrament sign of healing.  

In the New Testament it is Mary Magdalene who is most closely associated with anointing. Some authors suggest that Jesus learnt the practice of healing from Mary. The Feast Day for Mary Magdalene is 22 July. The “Bearer of the Anointing” Mary Magdalene is present at the critical moments in the Jesus story. In the same way that Jacob “in-christed” the rock so too does Mary Magdalene “in-Christ” Jesus. Christ means anointed one. Jesus has this name because of Mary. Mary anoints Jesus as the Christ. When Mary anoints Jesus, she reveals to us Jesus’ deep and true nature. Mary is the Beloved Disciple for two reasons. First, Mary understood the deep message of Jesus better than any of us, there is much we must learn from her. Second, she represents what it means to love with body, mind, soul, and spirit; she loved deeply and fully. 

Mary is referenced a few times in Scripture but comes to prominence as we enter Holy Week and especially in John from chapter 12. The scene in John’s Gospel is a sensory overload. Lazarus has been raised from the dead and is in the room, in a shaman-like state, neither fully present nor fully absent. He carries on him the stench of death. Into this odour of death Mary opens the perfume of Spikenard. She anoints Jesus’ feet with oil and her tears and massages them dry with her hair. It is a shocking image and one few of us are ready for. She has anointed him, made him Christ, priest, and king.

Spikenard is only mentioned in one other book of the Bible. It is featured in the Song of Songs, which is written in the form of love poetry, expressing God’s love for us. In the Song of Songs (1.12-14), the woman has anointed herself with spikenard as the king, the woman’s beloved, is reclining on his couch.

While the king was on his couch,
   my spikenard gave forth its fragrance.
My beloved is to me a bag of myrrh
   that lies between my breasts.
My beloved is to me a cluster of henna blossoms
   in the vineyards of En-gedi.

When we read this passage of the Gospels where Mary anoints Jesus, we can put ourselves in the place of Mary and ask ourselves if we love Jesus as much as she did. Mary offers a story and a wisdom that we need to live the Gospel. Mary teaches us to not only listen to the Gospel, to spread the Gospel but to be the Gospel. All the canonical Gospels call Mary the apostle to the apostles. In our liturgy and theology let us restore Mary’s voice and teachings to the story of the cross and Resurrection. Mary is there throughout the journey from the table to the cross from the cross to grave from the grave to the cave and from the cave to unitive consciousness. Let us also recapture the sacrament of anointing. Within the context of the resurrection, anointing becomes the ritual most closely associated with the passage from death of self to fullness of life, from egoic alienation to “union with God. As such, it conveys the very essence of Christianity’s transformative wisdom.

Sermon Notes 16th July 2023
Desiree Snyman

How do you do the right thing when you live in a society that is built on doing the wrong thing? How do you live with justice in an unjust environment? How do you live a lifestyle of kindness and gentleness when those around you thrive on indifference or worse exploiting others with cruelty for personal gain? How do you advocate for what is life giving in a death dealing situation?  

Schindler’s List is one example of how to do what is right in the midst of what is wrong. Based on the 1982 novel Schindler's Ark by Australian novelist Thomas Keneally, the movie directed by Steven Spielberg tells the true story of Oskar Schindler. Schindler was a German businessman who saved over a thousand Polish Jews from the Holocaust during World War II by employing them in his factory and protecting them from deportation and extermination in Jewish Concentration camps. In order to maintain his business and save as many lives as possible, Oskar Schindler was careful to maintain a close relationship with the SS Officer in his town, often bribing him to keep his Jewish workers safe. An industrialist, a member of the Nazi party, a flawed human being, Oskar tried to live with justice in a situation of immense injustice: “I was now resolved to do everything in my power to defeat the system” (jewishvirtuallibrary.org/oskar-schindler). Thomas Keneally said that: “He negotiated the salvation of his 1,300 Jews by operating right at the heart of the system using all the tools of the devil - bribery, black marketing and lies” (jewishvirtuallibrary.org/oskar-schindler). The point about Schindler’s List is the creativity and courage in saving lives in a Nazi Germany that mechanised the death of Jewish people. The example of Schindler’s List serves as a way to interpret the parable of the Sower.  

Jesus' listeners were aware that there was no escape from the foreign adversities that stood before them. They were faced with the challenge of adapting to a society tainted by oppressive Roman colonial forces. However, they were determined to discover and experience God's kingdom right in the midst of those difficult circumstances and this is the point of the parable: to experience God’s kingdom in the midst of unsolvable injustice and exploitation. 

The political, social, and economic realities behind the parable of the Sower describe the pain and oppression that the Jewish people lived under. Rome conquered Judea, Galilee, and other parts of Palestine in 63 BCE. The Romans imposed tribute upon the Judeans and Galileans. Herod the Great (37-4 BCE) and Herod Antipas (4 BCE-39 CE) were client kings of Rome who taxed the local peasant classes. The Galilean peasantry were thus burdened by four levels of taxation: the Roman tribute, Herod’s taxes, the tithes demanded by the priests and rent for leased land (see Hopkins 2002:204-208). 

What we find in the parable of the Sower is not a farming story, but a portrait of the brutal political, social, and economic situation in the time of Jesus. The elite believed that the harvest belonged to them in the form of tribute, taxes, tithes, and rent. The legacy of the Roman empire is civilisation in the form of plumbing, engineering, building, governance, law and above all roads. The Sower sows and some seed falls on the road, some is eaten by birds, some strangled by thorns. The seed falling on the road brings to mind the visceral image of the roman roads taking wealth out of the rural areas into the silos of the city. In the mind set of peasant audience the road siphons produce out of the regions into the city through taxes, tithes, and rent. The anguish of seeing your harvest taken away by the elite is heightened when the birds eat what is sown or the thorns strangle life out of your crop. This is precisely the emotional landscape of a 1st century Galilean peasant farmer, your livelihood eaten away or strangled to death by rent, taxes, and tithes.  

There is hope, one part of the harvest belongs to the farmer and when this harvest is shared the kingdom of God is manifest within the challenging realities of political, social, and economic oppression. Yes, large parts of the harvest do go to Rome, the Temple, the Jewish elite, and the landlords living in the cities. The edges of the fields were untaxed and left for gleaning. The harvest that is left untaxed can be shared to make the kingdom visible, by giving to everyone who begs from you (Mat. 5.42), doing to others as you would have them do unto you (Mat.7:12), lending and expecting nothing in return (Mat. 5.42). In other words when the leftover harvest is shared with others in need the kingdom of God has arrived. 

There are moments recorded in scripture that bring the parable of the Sower and the abundant harvest to life. The early church in Acts described how they "... had all things in common, and sold their possessions and goods, and distributed them among all, as anyone had need" (Acts 2:44-45). The feeding of the multitude when interpreted as a miracle of sharing is another example of an abundant crop being shared. 

The parables Jesus tells are not earthly stories with heavenly meanings but earthy stories with heavy meanings. Designed to unsettle the mind the parables are meant to shock our consciousness into the upside-down logic of Jesus’s Sabbath message as summarised in Luke 4: Good News to the poor, freedom to the captives, sight to the blind, Jubilee cancellation of debt, a circular economy of assets shared and liberty from slavery. The question Jesus and his audience had was how to live the kingdom of God and practice Jesus’ politics of the New Heaven and New Earth amidst the military oppression of Rome. 

How do we cope in an exploitive world? How do we exercise a choice to share, to care, to have compassion on the least, the lost and the last in a world that abuses the vulnerable as steps on a ladder to get ahead? In Nazi Germany Schindler found a way to save lives in a system designed to kill as many Jews as possible; he is a modern example of the parable of the Sower coming true. And what about us? Can we too envision and live out the vision of the kingdom of God? We are centuries and kilometres away from 1st century Galilee yet the brutality of exploitation by corporate, global capitalism is a subtler mirror of Roman colonialism. Explosive rent strangled the livelihood of Galilean peasants as much as it exhausts the people living in our suburbs. We are all compromised, the clothes we buy are made in sweat factories, the food we eat is harvested by people living in slavery conditions and the taxes we pay finance weapons of destruction. Do we give up because it is all too hard? Or can we be clever, creative, and courageous in manifesting the kingdom of God that is already present in the world by trusting in the lifestyle Jesus exemplified as the best, most prosperous, most joyful way to be human: The Good News to the poor, sight to the blind, freedom to captives, refugees and asylum seekers, the cancellation of debt, the circulation of assets.

Sermon Notes 9th July 2023
Desiree Snyman

Please may I borrow your imagination? Picture the most beautiful woman you have ever seen, no not with blonde hair and blue eyes, a woman with long, dark hair, olive skin and of middle eastern descent. She is tall, stunning, and magnetic with an inner luminescence that draws people to her presence (Wisdom 7.22). She is powerfully intelligent but also artistic and practical (Wisdom 7.22-24). For example, she has built her own home (Proverbs 9.1-6). The wooden beams holding up her roof were crafted by her (Proverbs 9.1). The stained-glass windows were designed and made by her. If you step out of the house, her garden flourishes with the best and most abundant crops (Wisdom 6.16). On a regular basis she opens up her home to the most vulnerable. She walks through the markets handing out party invitations calling people to feast at her home (Proverbs 1.20). She prepares a banquet for them with bread she has made herself and roast lamb from her small farm (Proverbs 9.1-6). People eat the best food at a table that she herself has made (Proverbs 9.2). After the meal she invites everyone to dance and even the most reluctant dancers with two left feet cannot help themselves and join in the ecstasy and joy of dancing the night away. She is warm and funny and sometimes plays tricks on people. She is also boldly outspoken; she points to the corruption of greedy businessmen and con artists exploiting the most vulnerable. Her home is a safe haven for those who need to recover from life’s worst stresses (Wisdom 4.11). She is a counsellor, a spiritual director, a community leader, a wealthy business leader, mentoring and advising politicians who serve the common good (Proverbs 8.14). Can you picture her? She has a name. In Hebrew she is Chokmah. In Greek her name is Sophia. In English we call her Lady Wisdom, or Wild Woman Wisdom. 

For the writers of our sacred texts, wisdom was such a powerful energy in the universe that one could almost speak about wisdom as if wisdom was a person. You can read about Wild Woman Wisdom in Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Ecclesiasticus better known as Sirach or the Wisdom of Jesus ben Sirach, Tobit, Judith, Song of Songs, the book of Job and the Wisdom of Solomon. 

So who is Sophia, or Wild Woman Wisdom? She is a master craftswoman and according to Job, “we have heard reports of her but “God alone has traced her path and found out where she lives.”  

In Wisdom 7.22 Woman Wisdom is a people loving, intelligent, holy, has unrestricted moving, free from anxiety. She collaborates with God and is responsible for creation: 

26 For she is a reflection of eternal light,
a spotless mirror of the working of God,
and an image of his goodness.
27 Although she is but one, she can do all things,
and while remaining in herself, she renews all things;
in every generation she passes into holy souls
and makes them friends of God, and prophets;
28 for God loves nothing so much as the person who lives with wisdom.
29 She is more beautiful than the sun,
and excels every constellation of the stars.
Compared with the light she is found to be superior,
30 for it is succeeded by the night,
but against wisdom evil does not prevail. 

Wild Woman Wisdom visits the markets and invites people to come and play, to tell jokes and to laugh at their mistakes. Proverbs 8.1 asks: “Does not wisdom call, and does not understanding raise her voice? On the heights, beside the way, at the crossroads she takes her stand.” 

Almost every feature of Matthew 11 can be traced back to the Jewish wisdom literature found in the Hebrew Scriptures and Deuterocanonical books. The development we see in Matthew is that Jesus is now characterised as Wisdom. Just as Wild Woman Wisdom received everything from God so Jesus receives everything from God. Just as Woman Wisdom gives understanding as a gift so too does Jesus reveal wisdom to those around him. Woman Wisdom is people loving (Wisd. 1.6) so too is Jesus. Just as Woman Wisdom calls people to play so too does Jesus. In the same way that Woman Wisdom condemns corruption, so too does Jesus in the ”Woe to you” statements. 

“Come to me and rest” is a beautiful invitation from Jesus. Matthew 11.28 is based on Ecclesiasticus, or Sirach 51.59, written by a scribe in about 125 BCE:

”Draw near to me, you who are uneducated, and lodge in the house of instruction. Why do you say you are lacking in these things, and why do you endure such great thirst? I opened my mouth and said, Acquire wisdom for yourselves without money. Put your neck under her yoke, and let your souls receive instruction; it is to be found close by. See with your own eyes that I have laboured but little and found for myself much serenity. Hear but a little of my instruction, and through me you will acquire silver and gold.” 

As Woman Wisdom’s prophet and messenger Jesus calls out to all who are tired and weary and promises them rest and restoration. Jesus condemns how scribes and pharisees use the law as a weapon to abuse people with burdens hard to bear. Instead of being a sacred and beautiful gift that sets people free to live a full and happy life, the rabbis had twisted the meaning of the law such that it was a heavy burden especially on those who were already weary. For example, there were more than 600 laws regarding what one could not do on a Sabbath. Jesus was not crucified by atheism and anarchy but by law and religion. 

While our postmodern Christianity does not have a heavy attention to the detail of the law, we are not that much better. The model of Christianity we have adopted suggests we have only done enough when we are running on empty. I grew up as a Methodist. John Wesley was the quintessential model of a good Christian. John Wesley was famous for instructing: “Spend and be spent in spreading the Good News. I took that to heart. Being spent is not much fun, nor do I really think it is Gods will that we should be burnt out.  

I agree with Barbara Brown Taylor who writes that some of us “have made an idol of exhaustion.” Somewhere along the way, “sold out for Jesus” had become “worn out for Jesus.” For example, the familiar prayer of St Ignatius of Loyola captures a tendency to overwork:

“Teach us, good Lord, to serve you as you deserve, to give and not to count the cost, to fight and not to heed the wounds, to toil and not to seek for rest, to labour and not to ask for any reward, save that of knowing that we do your will. Amen.”  

We in the church sometimes equate busyness with our worth; yet busyness is the single greatest obstacle to holiness. Some measure love of God with how many extracurricular activities are squashed in - small groups, ministry teams, mission trips, retreats, service projects, committees. I am deeply concerned at the ways in which church ministry tires people, leaving them running on empty. In contrast Matthew 11.28 invites us to count the cost, and to give up toil in favour of rest.  

Excessive busyness, even in the name of religion unfolds from a deep soul wound. Resting in Jesus provides a promised respite for the tiredness of our souls. A closing image may illustrate how. The movie “The Mission” describes how two Christian leaders respond differently to the threat of violence when a place of sanctuary for the Guarani tribe is attacked by Portuguese military, following the 1750 Treaty of Madrid. The start of the film depicts a group of missionary monks enduring an arduous hike through dense rain forest before scaling a high mountain to reach the mission station. Included in the group of missionary monks is an abbot father, the leader of the group, and a new convert Rodrigo Mendoza. The new convert is a former mercenary and slave trader who has been convicted of murder. As he endures what is really a tough hike through the South American wilderness of Argentina, he drags behind the symbols of his previous life wrapped in a bagged net. The heavy burden includes swords and armour. Some may identify with the symbol of Rodrigo dragging a heavy burden in that the expectations we place on ourselves wear us down. At some point a well-meaning monk tries to free the new convert from his burden but he merely reattaches himself to his burden and continues the long walk. 

When Rodrigo reaches the top of the mountain with his burden catching  on roots and tree branches and almost pulling him down, it is a local tribe member who cuts his burden loose. 

The weight falling away from a weeping Rodrigo is a very powerful moment in the film; it is this image that comes to mind when I read these powerful and memorable words from Matthew 28.11: “Come to me, all you who are weary and heavy laden. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in spirit, and you will find rest for your souls.” 

Sermon Notes 2nd July 2023
Desiree Snyman

Akedah, translated as “the binding of Isaac,” is the Hebrew word summarising Abraham’s near sacrifice of his son. If one hoped for Biblical family values, then Genesis 22.1-14 may not be the “go to” text. A shocking story of potential child sacrifice, one wonders why the earliest editors included the Akedah as part of the authorised sacred text. To state the obvious, we are shocked by God’s request that Abraham sacrifice his son and Abraham’s lack of argument. That Isaac is a treasured, much-loved, longed-for son is emphasised in the opening narrative: “And He said, “Take your son, your favoured one, Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the heights that I will point out to you.” Moriah was the location of Solomon’s temple and today is under Muslim control, it is the Dome of the rock.  

The only thing more disturbing that Akedah is the commentaries on the Akedah. Commentaries admit that God could never ask for child sacrifice and highlight the faith of Abraham who knew that the Lord would provide. If Abraham knew the Lord would provide why then go through the charade of binding Isaac and holding a dagger to him? Is that a normal expression of trust in God? Other commentaries comment on God testing the faith of Abraham. Let’s just make it a blanket rule that if you are in a relationship with anyone, (a partner, a spouse, a parent, an employer, a divine being) and they want to test your commitment to the relationship by asking you to sacrifice a child, leave. That is next level coercive control toxicity. 

In the episode following the Akedah Abraham goes down the mountain with his servants, Isaac’s name is absent: “Then Abraham returned to his servants, and they set off together for Beersheba. And Abraham stayed in Beersheba”. How does a father son relationship recover from a near sacrifice?  

Hineni

What I would like to focus on today is the word “Hineni”.  Hineni is Hebrew for “I am here, present, for you”. It’s the first word Abraham speaks in verse 1 and the last word he speaks in verse 11. Until he has to answer Isaac’s question, that lone word in Hebrew is the only thing Abraham says in this story. 

Hineni means more than “Here I am Lord.” Hineni implies being fully present, fully grounded. Hineni is a genuine openness, a commitment to the other and a self-emptying surrender. The three persons of the Trinity offer hineni to each other. The Creator is fully present to the Word who replies with Hineni, I am here, giving myself to you as you give yourself to me. 

Abraham uses the word Hineni three times in Genesis 22.1-19.

1.    Hineni is Abraham’s reply to God in Verse 11: “Sometime afterward, God put Abraham to the test. He said to him, “Abraham,” and he answered, “Hineni.” This the first time that Hineni is used, even though God has spoken to and called to Abraham many times up to this point.

2.    Hineni is also Abraham’s reply to Isaac in verse 6: “Abraham took the wood for the burnt offering and put it on his son Isaac. He himself took the firestone and the knife; and the two walked off together. (7) Then Isaac said to his father Abraham, “Father!” And he answered, “Hineni, my son.”’

3.   When a ram is caught in the thicket a messenger calls to Abraham and this is the third time hineni is used in verse 11: “Then an angel of the LORD called to him from heaven: “Abraham! Abraham!” And he answered, “Hineni.”’ 

Hineni is recognising the other. Hineni is being accessible to the other. Abraham is as open and receptive to God as he is to Isaac and the messenger.  

Hineni, Martin Buber and “I-Thou”

Martin Buber (1878-1965), a Jewish philosopher and Zionist Jew originally from Germany, made a remarkable contribution to the interpretation of the word "Hineni". Escaping from Nazi Berlin in 1938, he found sanctuary in Israel and began lecturing at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. One of the profound interpretations of Hineni can be credited to Martin Buber. Perhaps you have heard of Martin Buber’s classic “I-Thou”.

An over simplified explanation of the book is to consider the quality of our relationships with God, creation, ourselves, and others. One quality of our relationships is summarised as “I-It”. We treat others and even God as an object. “I-It” relationships are transactional, we are only interested in others to the extent that they can offer something to us.  

In contrast are “I-Thou” relationships. I-Thou relationships are a sacred encounter where we relate to others being to being. It is these “I-Thou” relationships that “hineni” defines. Buber's teachings regarding "hineni" highlight the profound impact of authentic interactions. By engaging in an "I-Thou" relationship, individuals can forge deep connections, discover profound meaning, and undergo mutual transformation. 

One metaphor that may help in understanding Buber’s interpretation of “hineni” is that of a snail. The outer shell of the snail represents the ways we protect ourselves from each other by putting on masks or playing power games. When the snail sticks its body out of the shell it is vulnerable. Similarly, “I-Thou” relationships imply vulnerability, being accessible to others, genuine, agenda free listening. This is precisely what is required of non-indigenous people always but especially during NAIDOC week. Aboriginal people are tired of “I-It” relationships. We non-indigenous people are invited to say “hineni” to Aboriginal people.  

Hineni and NAIDOC week

Sunday 2 July 2023 marks the beginning of NAIDIOC week, an opportunity to say “hineni,” to truly listen. The words of Glen Loughrey summarise what Aboriginal people are asking for in the Statement from the Heart.

·      We do not seek revenge; we seek to walk across the land together building a better future for this country.

·      We seek recognition in the 1901 Constitution, the birth certificate of this nation.

·      We seek a Voice on matters that impact our sovereign relationship with country and kin.

·      We seek a treaty over time identifying how we live together, sharing this space based upon being included in the Constitution.

·      We seek the opportunity to talk about the truth of what happened and what it feels like for both of us to live in this space called Australia.

·      We seek the opportunity to make the changes necessary to become a just and whole nation through Makarrata, the coming together after a dispute.

What would be the effects of non-indigenous Australians responding to Indigenous Australians with “hineni”? Glen says that: 

An opportunity has been offered to all non-Indigenous people to begin the process to right the wrongs by welcoming us into their world as equals, persons with a voice, able to contribute equally as co-sovereigns of this land. This invitation is not given to our own people. It is extended to you and if you accept, you will share the blessing of wholeness it leads us toward. We will no longer be persona nullius. We will be seen.

Sermon Notes 25th June 2023

Doug Bannerman

Genesis 21.8-21  

The story of Hagar is heart wrenching to say the least. Hagar is an Egyptian slave who has sought asylum in the land of Canaan. She is a refugee.  

Abram has also recently arrived in Canaan from Egypt, and his part in the story pivots on two women – Sarai, his wife, and Hagar her maid.[1] As the wife of a wealthy herdsman (Genesis 13.2), Sarai has privilege and power, although she does not escape the limitations of strong patriarchal social structures. She is, however, barren, a terrible affliction for the couple – to be without a family was to be without identity. So, Sarai tells Abram to secure a child through Hagar.  

Ironically, when Hagar finds that she has conceived, she has the insight that she is other than a tool; she is a real person, with identity. She has experienced a new reality that challenges the power structure. So, in the face of Sarai’s jealousy, Hagar takes command of her own life and runs away to the wilderness, a hospitable place symbolized by a spring on the way to Shur.[2]  

An angel of the Lord comes to her, declaring that if she returns to her mistress, her son, who is to be named Ishmael, will give rise to innumerable descendants (21.10 – 11). For the first time, a character addresses Hagar by name; and for the first time, Hagar speaks. ‘You are El-roi’ [the God of seeing] … ‘Have I really seen God and remained alive after seeing him?’ (21.13). A unique encounter in the OT – to see and be seen by the Divine.  

The encounter has the threefold character of Annunciation – that is to say the prediction of a male child, naming the child and foretelling his future life. As the first to receive an annunciation, Hagar, the Egyptian refugee, becomes the prototype of special mothers in Israel.  

The name Ishmael, however, has two meanings; comfort and suffering. The divine promise of Ishmael means a life at the boundary of consolation and desolation. Hagar returns.  

And Hagar Bore to Abram a son,
and Abram called the name of his son,
whom Hagar bore, Ishmael.

Now Abram was eighty-six years old
when Hagar bore Ishmael to Abram. (16.15-16)

We note, that the very first word of this part of the story was Sarai (16.1); but the last is Abram, an ending that continues to undermine Hagar. It may restore her name, but it silences her voice. It stresses not her motherhood but Abram’s fatherhood. The report that Abram named the son Ishmael obliterates the power that God gave to her. And Sarai receives no mention at all. Both Hagar and Sarai are sidelined.  

Following this, Sarai and Abram become Sarah and Abraham, symbolic of the promise of a new covenant, that Abraham will become the ‘ancestor of a multitude of nations. Hagar disappears but her story remains. Ishmael now becomes the object of divine rejection because Hagar, not Sarah, is his mother (17.15-21).  

We have arrived at today’s reading. Sarah, observing the healthy growing boy Ishmael at play with her son Isaac, is vexed. She does not want Ishmael to share Isaac’s inheritance; and so, she commands Abraham to cast out the foreign woman and child.  

Abraham is unhappy on several counts, both personal and legal;[3] but God reassures him; ‘Do not be distressed because of the boy and because of your slave woman …’ (21.12-13). God diminishes Hagar by calling her ‘this slave woman’, and further diminishes her when, in the wilderness, does not appear in person, but speaks remotely from heaven:  

What troubles you, Hagar? Do not be afraid; for God has heard the voice of the boy where he is. Come, lift up the boy and hold him fast with your hand, for I will make a great nation of him (21.17-18). 

Hagar cries out in distress, but God hears the voice of ‘the boy’. Hagar loses her God given identity as mother and as one whom God sees, to become once more ‘slave woman’ – an object, a refugee with no identity.  

Read in the light of contemporary issues and images, Hagar’s story depicts oppression in three familiar forms: nationality, class and gender. 

‘Hagar the Egyptian is a maid; Sarah the Hebrew is her mistress. Conflicts around these two women revolve around three males. At the centre is their common husband. To him belong Ishmael, child of Hagar, and Isaac, child of Sarah. Through their husband and his two sons ,these females have clashed. From the beginning, however, Hagar is powerless because God supports Sarah. Kept in her place, the slave woman is the innocent victim of use, abuse, and rejection.  

‘As a symbol of the oppressed, Hagar becomes many things to many people who find their stories in her: she is the faithful maid exploited, the black woman used by the male and abused by the female of the ruling class, the surrogate mother, the resident alien without legal recourse, the other woman, the runaway youth, the religious fleeing from affliction, the pregnant young woman alone, the expelled wife, the divorced mother with child, the … bag lady carrying bread and water, the homeless woman, the indigent relying on handouts from the power structures, the welfare mother, and the self-effacing female whose own identity shrinks in service to others.  

‘Hagar is a pivotal figure in biblical theology. She is the first person in scripture whom a divine messenger visits and the only person who dares to name the deity. Within the historical memories of Israel, she is the first woman to bear a child. This conception and birth make her an extraordinary figure in the story of faith: the first woman to hear an Annunciation, the only one to receive a divine promise of descendants, and the first to weep for her dying child …  

‘Beyond these … distinctions, Hagar foreshadows Israel’s pilgrimage of faith … As a maid in bondage, she flees from suffering. Yet she experiences exodus without liberation, revelation without salvation, wilderness without covenant, wanderings without land, promise without fulfilment, and unmerited exile without return. This Egyptian woman is stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted for the transgressions of Israel. She is the Suffering Servant of Isaiah, bruised for the iniquities of Sarah and Abraham; upon her is the chastisement that makes them whole.[4]  

‘Hagar is Israel, from exodus to exile, yet with differences. And these differences yield terror. All who are heirs of Sarah and Abraham, by flesh and by spirit, must answer for the terror in Hagar’s story. To neglect the theological challenge [that] she presents is to falsify faith.’[5] [6] 

Miraculously, Megan McKenna salvages some hope from the debris. McKenna used to work with a group of maids in a local motel, where they watched soapies and read scripture together during their breaks. They were absolutely delighted to hear the beginning of Hagar’s story. One woman, an illegal immigrant from El Salvador, said in her halting English: ‘Oh, now Sarai gets a tase of her own medicine. Now she knows what it is like to be a slave and be treated like dirt all the time. Serves her right. She doesn’t like it – well, we don’t either. We don’t live just to clean toilets, iron, and clean up after others and to be pushed around’. When they got to the bit when Hagar runs away, the women at the motel cheered Hagar on. But then, when Hagar is told to go back to her mistress, they ‘cried out loudly against this’[7]. But then one of them said, ’She has to. She has to think of her child not herself.’ There is a time to rebel, a time to run and a time to endure.  

Consolation and desolation.  

The magic of this little group is that, ‘what followed at the motel were their own stories – of being maids in the houses of the rich, getting pregnant by the husband … and being thrown out …’ Such is the lot of refugees around the world – and even worse for those who are unable to flee from their places of affliction because rich nations close their borders.  

As we come to the close of Refugee Week, may we consider our part in their stories of alienation and desperation.  

Amen. 

Doug Bannerman 2023

[1] Later God renames the couple Abraham and Sarah.

[2] Very different from Israel’s Exodus when ‘Moses led Israel onward from the Red Sea, and they went into the wilderness of Shur, they went three days into the wilderness and found no water’ (Exodus 15.22).

[3] Normally, if a slave-wife had borne children, she was not to be expelled or sold (so, Hammurabi’s laws, § 146), thus Abraham’s unwillingness to do so. See Kenneth A Kitchen The Bible in its World: The Bible and Archaeology Today (Exeter: The Paternoster Press, 1977 Pbk.) pp168

[4] cf Isaiah 53.5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

[5] Op cit Phyllis Trible Texts of Terror: Literary-Feminist Readings of Biblical Narratives (Philadelphia: Fortress Press 1984) p28

[6] Shocking as this tale may be, equally shocking is the manifest evidence that the narrators have deliberately attempted to make the male, Abraham, the dominant figure. For example, the narrators rob Hagar of her grief by changing the unambiguous feminine form of the verb forms to masculine constructions. Such alterations make the child lift up his voice and weep. But such masculine emotions cannot silence Hagar. A host of feminine verb forms throughout this section witness unmistakably to Hagar’s tears. See Phyllis Trible op cit.

[7] Megan McKenna Not Counting Women and Children: Neglected Stories from the Bible (New York: Orbis Books 1994) P177

Sermon Notes 18th June 2023
Desiree Snyman

A reflection on Matthew 9.35-10.10: noissim esreveR

One of God’s great apostles/disciples/saints is Teresa of Avila. One of the doctors of the church, Theresa has taught us much about our oneness with God. You may remember the story of when she was travelling by cart when one of the wheels was stuck and the cart tipped over spilling her into the mud. Covered in dirt, wet and cold Teresa complained to God “Why are you doing this to me?”. The Lord replied, “Teresa this is how I treat my friends.” Teresa answered, “Is it any wonder you have so few?” 

The Gospel reading today is clearly about us, the apostles/disciples/saints of God. Like Teresa and the first 12 apostles, we too are friends of God participating in God’s mission. Like Teresa and the early apostles we are sent by Jesus as Jesus to live out the transformation that love brings about. Much like Teresa, we know that being sent by Jesus as Jesus won’t win us any awards. The reward for participating in God’s mission is humiliation, as Jesus himself explains in Matthew 10.24: “A disciple is not above the teacher, nor a slave above the master; 25it is enough for the disciple to be like the teacher, and the slave like the master. If they have called the master of the house Beelzebul, how much more will they malign those of his household!” 

Jesus’ ministry of healing and preaching is a sign that God’s kingdom is now and in the world. The vision of the kingdom of God is a call for the personal and societal transformation that love achieves. God’s kingdom challenges Rome’s oppression with justice and Rome’s greed with freedom. In Matthew 9.35 “Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, and proclaiming the good news of the kingdom, and curing every disease and every sickness.” Jesus’ ministry of teaching and healing is established as a pattern that the apostles imitate.  

The ministry moves from the hands of Jesus into the hands of his 12 disciples.  As Jesus teaches, preaches, and heals, now the disciples are sent in twos to teach, preach, and heal: ”As you go, proclaim the good news, ‘The kingdom of heaven has come near.’ Cure the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons. You received without payment; give without payment”. 

Compassion

The pivot on which the ministry flows from Jesus through to the disciples is compassion (see Mat. 9.36). If the ministry of Jesus is one wheel and the ministry of the apostles is another wheel then the axle connecting the two wheels together is compassion: “When he saw the crowds, he had compassion for them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd” (Matthew 9.36). The Greek for compassion is σπλαγχνίζομαι (splagchnizomai). An onomatopoetical word, splagchnizomai imitates the sound of gut movement. Compassion is the gut-wrenching response to corruption and the pain it causes community. The phrase “sheep without a shepherd” is borrowed from Ezekiel 34.5 and is a criticism and indictment on the political leadership. Instead of caring for people, Israel’s leaders were feeding off people – they were cannibals. Compassion is not an intellectual exercise but a movement of the gut, the intestines twist and knot together in response to suffering. In other words, our response to suffering and injustice is not a mechanical action, but an outworking of bodily emotion, of gut felt care and empathy expressed in concrete engagement. Mission without love is like trying to drive a car with wheels but no axle. Without that intense compassion and love our work fails to be God’s mission.  

World Refugee Day 

World Refugee Day is June 20. As a church we honour refugees on the closest Sunday, today on June 18. Refugee week has 3 intentions:

1.    To honour those people who come to us as refugees, giving thanks for the skills, talents, and diversity they gift to us.  

2.    To lament the reason for forced displacement. 

3.  To encourage communities to receive people who are refugees with hospitality. 

Who or what are refugees? People who are forced to leave their homes because of violence or persecution are described as refugees. The term refugee is an international, legal term that designates a crime against people. Refugee is not an identity; it is not who people are. Refugee is something that happens to people.  Refugee is a status – not an identity. 

Australia is a signatory to the UN convention and its 1967 protocol. As Australians it is useful to remember that: 

·        ‘Article 14: Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries, asylum from persecution.‘ (1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights). 

·       While it is usually illegal to enter a country without a valid visa, it is not to be considered as illegal if it is for the purpose of seeking asylum (‘Article 31: The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on account of their illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of Article 1, enter or are present in their territory without authorization, provided they present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence). 

·       People seeking protection must not be prevented from entering a UN Convention signatory country. They must not be returned to a country where their life or freedom is threatened. (The 1951 Convention and its 1967 Protocol, UNHCR) 

·       92% of people arriving by boat since 2008 have been assessed to be genuine refugees, fleeing things like war, persecution, genocide, and torture. (Department of Immigration and Border Protection, Asylum Trends Australia, 2012-13 – Annual Publication, page 30) 

·       There’s no such thing as a queue. Anyone who wants to claim asylum must leave their home country first, so they flee to other countries. This is the standard way to seek asylum.  “The concept of an orderly queue does not accord with the reality of the asylum process.” (Asylum Seekers and Refugees.  What are the facts, Parliament of Australia website) 

·       Australia receives a fraction of the world’s asylum seekers each year. In 2013 alone, Sweden received 54,300 requests; France received 60,100; USA received 88,400; and Germany received 109,600 requests for asylum. In 2013, 24,300 people requested asylum in Australia. (www.unhcr.org)

(Source: https://br4r.org.au/facts-figures/). 

Refugees are apostles

I suggest there is a close link between being a disciple and being a refugee. Being a refugee and being a disciple has much in common.  

1.    The link between being a refugee and being a disciple is established in the early Christian movement. Following the resurrection of Jesus, the early disciples had to flee Jerusalem and seek asylum in other countries because people like Saul who became Paul were killing them.  

2.    Matthew 10 cements a close link between persecution that leads to people seeking refugee status and persecution as a disciple: “10.23When they persecute you in one town, flee to the next.”  

3.    Like refugees, disciples also “10.19Take no gold, or silver, or copper in your belts, 10no bag for your journey, or two tunics, or sandals, or a staff.”  

4.    Seeking asylum and being sent by Jesus as Jesus to proclaim the Good News are similar in that both seek hospitality in new areas: “ 10.11Whatever town or village you enter, find out who in it is worthy and stay there until you leave.” 

My suggestion is that we receive people who are refugees as apostles sent to us by God in Jesus to cure our ills, to raise to life the parts of us that are dead, to cast out our demons and to proclaim God’s faith to us. World Refugee Day is not about what we can do for refugees but what they can do for us. Refugee day is about noissim esreveR, reverse mission. We consider the ministry that refugees offer us as apostles, rather than what our mission to refugees might be.  

Just as Jesus sent the apostles to share God’s love with the world so too are we to see those who identify as refugees as sent to us by God to save us from our sins, the sins of indifference, consumerism, fear and a lack of compassion. Jesus sent apostles to “Cure the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers,* cast out demons.” May refugees be our apostles who cure our sickness, the sickness of having too much. May refugees be our apostles who raise the dead, the dead parts of our society who have forgotten compassion. May refugees be our apostles who cleanse our leprosy, the leprosy of fear of the other. May refugees be our apostles who cast out our demons, the demons of rampant capitalism. The question is this, if God’s sends us refugees (apostles), will we welcome them and allow their peace to bless our space? Or will they be rejected, forced to turn their backs on us, dusting their feet off as they leave? Sodom and Gomorrah were guilty of a lack of hospitality. Will we be hospitable to the apostles that are sent to us as refugees?  

12As you enter the house, greet it. 13If the house is worthy, let your peace come upon it; but if it is not worthy, let your peace return to you. 14If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake off the dust from your feet as you leave that house or town. 15Truly I tell you; it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgement than for that town (Matthew 10.12-14). 

Sermon Notes 11th June 2023

Geoff Vidal

The world has not yet recovered from all the things interrupted by COVID 19. Families are having their lives devastated by the many deaths from COVID which continue but are not regularly reporting in our media. Businesses succeed or fail depending on how well they deal with interruptions to the supply of material and disruptions to transport. A key element to success in any military operation is how well people of all ranks cope with interruptions. Generals in command must be able to deal with unexpected changes to the situation and, to be effective, soldiers and sailors need to show initiative and react quickly to any development in the battle. As a flying instructor I spent a lot of time training students to effectively deal with interruptions.

How do you handle the interruptions which invariably occur in everyday life? What do you do when you have just served a meal and there is an interruption? Some people let their answering machine take care of inconvenient phone calls (or wait to hear who is calling before picking up the phone).

Sadly, we don’t often have young children here with us at St Barts. When children are in church their parents are mostly anxious that the kids don’t make any noise which “interrupts” the service. And owners of mobile phones which ring during a service are embarrassed as they try to turn it off. I was very impressed by the gentle way Bishop Phillip dealt with a person who loudly interrupted an ordination service in our Cathedral.

The Genesis reading today, reminded us of the story of Abram (who later became Abraham). His life as a wealthy 75-year-old farmer was dramatically interrupted by God. We are told that the Lord said to him “go from your country and your kindred and your father’s house to the land that I will show you”. Abram went and this life-changing move was followed years later by another totally life-changing interruption to the lives of Abram and his wife Sari (now named Sarah). She became pregnant very late in life and their son Isaac was born.

I’m sure you are able to recall the stories of many other Biblical characters who found their routine, peaceful lives interrupted by God: Noah, Moses, Job, Jeremiah, Jonah, indeed all the prophets.

My thoughts on interrupted lives have been influenced by a lady named Peta Sherlock. She was one of the early women priests in the Anglican church here in Australia. Peta would probably prefer to be known as a scholar rather than a prophet.  Around 30 years ago, she would write each week some really helpful comments on the Gospel reading for the coming Sunday which were published in the Melbourne Diocese newspaper.

The 18th century Scottish poet Robert Burns wrote Auld Lang Syne and is regarded as Scotland’s national poet. Biographers have described Burns as a “wilful agnostic”. In Burns poems he made it clear that he doubted the existence of God and the existence of an afterlife. He often criticized the church. One of his statements was that "Churches are built to please the priest". In Dunedin, which is in a very Scottish part of NZ, they erected a large statue of him just outside the Cathedral with his back to the church. He is responsible for the well-known quote “The best laid plans of mice and men often go astray”.

I wonder if Robbie Burns was aware of this passage we heard today (chapter 9 of the Gospel according to Matthew). If he had read this part of the Bible and thought about it, he would have discovered that interruptions are a part of what Jesus brings to our lives.

It’s a good idea for us to make allowance for unforeseen interruptions. It’s very wise for us to be prepared for the interruptions that Jesus can bring to the things we have planned for our lives.

In this passage Jesus was the first one to interrupt. Jesus interrupted a man who was sitting down carrying on with his very lucrative job. Jesus saw the tax-collector Matthew working away at his job and said to him “follow me”. Out of the blue, this man was given a new opportunity. He was given a supporting role in ministry supporting someone he had never met before.

The miracle is that Matthew simply got up and followed this person who brought new life. As he began this new life, Matthew invited his new leader and the other disciples to come and have dinner with him and his old workmates. The Pharisees didn’t like that. They asked the disciples “why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?” It sounds more like an accusation than a question!

There’s a couple of things to note here. These Pharisees who prided themselves in their knowledge of scripture and their conformity to it openly acknowledge Jesus as a teacher. Jesus overhears them and, not very subtly (actually quite sarcastically), Jesus says to these teachers, “go and learn what this quote from the prophet Hosea means “(God says) I desire mercy, not sacrifice”.

The next thing we are told is that Jesus was interrupted at his dinner. There is an extraordinary request made for Jesus to go and heal a young girl who had died. A leader of the synagogue who had nothing else to lose thought that, if this Jesus could touch his daughter, she would live. So, he bursts into the dinner party and asks Jesus to come to lay his hand on the girl.

Then Jesus’ journey to this bereaved father’s house was interrupted by another lady in desperate need. She had been suffering for 12 years and she thought that, if she just touched Jesus’ cloak, she would be made well.  Jesus turns and sees her. He says to her, “Take heart; your faith has made you well”. We aren’t told whether this desperate woman has a big bucketful of faith or just faith the size of a mustard seed. However, she has faith and she is made well. This woman (whose name we don’t know) is able to return back into the society that had shunned her for years. Twelve years of living death is replaced by newness of life. 

Finally, at the synagogue leader’s house, when Jesus says to the crowd “Go away, the girl is not dead but sleeping” they laugh at him. But there’s yet another interruption.  The laughing crowd and the flute playing mourners are dramatically interrupted by life itself coming into their midst.

These events are all presented to those who read their Bible in a really matter-of-fact sort of way. Matthew tells this series of stories so simply and so quietly that we could easily miss the point.

Matthew got up without a word and followed. Jesus got up without a word and followed. He told the crowd making all the commotion to “Go away!”

New life comes immediately, silently, without commotion. The woman was healed by a touch. Jesus simply commended her for her faith. 

The girl was not dead, only sleeping, and once the musicians and the wailing crowd were dismissed, Jesus took her by the hand and she got up.

These proceedings are followed by a noisy telling of the story being spread throughout the district, but the events themselves were quiet.

There’s no doubt about it; no matter how well organised we are, interruptions will happen. Interruptions will spring up unexpectedly and demand our attention. Perhaps, when we are on our way to do something important, we will have something creep up on us and grab our coattails.

That’s the way of it! Our real ministry is mostly quiet! Because faith that simply gets up and follows the call is mostly quiet.

Even miraculous new life comes without fuss and commotion

Sermon Notes 4th June 2023
Geoff Vidal

We are in white today but next week the liturgical colour goes green. Green (which represents growing) is the colour for “ordinary time” or the Sundays after Epiphany and the Sundays after Pentecost. 

These green times are bracketed by special days. The Sundays after Epiphany are between our celebrations of the Baptism of the Lord and Transfiguration. The Sundays after Pentecost lie between Trinity Sunday and Christ the King. When this pattern for the Church’s Liturgical calendar was developed, the intention was for Trinity Sunday to represent a summing up of all the divine activity church people have celebrated since the beginning of Advent.  

The idea was that, in celebrating The Trinity, we would also be reminded of everything that God has done in creation. That is why we heard those first verses from Genesis today. They are a reminder of God’s ongoing work with everything created. As Jenny read the creation story to us, we were reminded that God says it is “good”; (we humans are “very good”). The fact that God created everything (including the stars billions of light years away), and God is pleased with it all, is the key point. It doesn’t really matter how it was created but it does matter why. We should spend time talking and thinking about the “why” of creation. 

So, today we are set the task of dealing with the Trinity. That’s a tough job! Our Christian God, The Holy Trinity, God as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, is a great mystery. Boldly, we humans try to describe this elusive mystery, which we recognize as God, in words. 

However, we have a bit of a spiritual problem when we let ourselves be trapped by trying to find words to describe the mystery of the Trinity. Rather than trying to describe the Trinity, perhaps we should just be open to the mystery itself.

And it is a mystery! How can there be three persons and one God? It’s not entirely satisfactory to talk of ice, water and steam being one substance. Or three leafed clovers. Something you might discuss with our musician, Ros Sharp, is that in music you have more than one thing happening at a time. It is important in music that each note be sounded clearly and distinctly, yet we enjoy hearing a mass of different notes all played at once. Multiple notes become a beautiful single harmonic sound in music. Harmony does not make a big deal of individual notes but rather rejoices in their interesting relationships, contrasts, and contributions to one another.  

Although we can’t adequately describe it, it is this Trinitarian nature of our God that really sets us apart from other religions. I am sure each one of us has had the experience of being in a conversation where the topic of religious differences has come up and someone has said “Well, the Christians and Muslims and Jews shouldn’t be squabbling. They all worship the same God, don’t they?” 

Can you imagine someone answering, “No! Christians do not believe in some solitary, generic, vague, easily managed, and inoffensive god, Christians believe that God is Trinity.”  Perhaps there is a really sincere intent to be inclusive and peaceable when someone says, “Christians and Muslims worship the same God,” or when some scholars speak of Jews, Muslims, and Christians as members of the “Abrahamic faiths,” (saying that changes Jews and Christians into less offensive “Judeo-Christians”). People might say these things because they have a genuine desire to bring unity and harmony. However, we can’t escape the reality that, like it or not, this challenging and mysterious Holy Trinity of the Christian Church makes us unlike any other religion. Because God the Holy Trinity is so different from every other idea of God, we try very hard to avoid talking about Trinity. We know that we will end up in strife if we have something to say. 

We just don’t have language, which is adequate enough to describe this Holy Trinity, let alone explain why we believe that is what God really is. Even carefully and sincerely (without being defensive or argumentative) trying to define the Trinity can be really unhelpful. One of the problems we have as humans is that our greatest gift, language, is also our greatest danger. We can destroy ourselves by our words. 

In our Gospel reading today, Matthew tells us about the final meeting of the disciples with the risen Lord Jesus. There is a lot of significance in the setting. The risen Jesus is back in Galilee; this remote and despised area where he began his teaching is where Jesus now concludes his teaching.  And Matthew says that it takes place on a mountain (that’s where Jesus is tempted by Satan - that’s where Jesus speaks his most famous sermon – Jesus goes off alone to pray on a mountain - the transfiguration of Jesus occurs on a high mountain). Now the ending comes on a mountain.  Also, there’s a reminder of Old Testament mountains that were places of divine work and revelation. So, Matthew’s mention of a mountain here creates a level of expectation.  

Matthew tells us that, here on the mountain, Jesus who had refused Satan’s offer of “all the kingdoms in the world”, now says “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.”  

Sometimes these last few verses of Matthew are used to “prove” the Holy Trinity because, in them, Jesus told his followers to baptize new disciples “in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit”. But this isn’t meant to be a lesson from Jesus on the Holy Trinity. When the risen Lord Jesus appears to his followers, we are told that “they worshipped him; but some doubted.” That’s me too! Most of us are a mixture of belief and doubt as individuals, as Anglicans, and also as a congregation. 

Again, I think there’s a language problem. Here, “doubt” does not mean disbelief or rejection. Doubt means hesitancy or uncertainty. Jesus risen presence did not instantly change people of little faith with a faltering understanding into spiritual giants. We hesitate to believe. But even though we are hesitant to believe and we feel a bit uncomfortable saying the Creed, there is a flame in our doubting that can be fanned into life. 

We should actually be encouraged because Jesus doesn’t rebuke the doubters! Jesus simply gives his final instructions. He says, “Go and make disciples of all nations”. That’s why we end our services with the instruction “Go …. to love and serve the Lord” Each week we are being reminded to “Go and make disciples”. The Roman Catholic expression “Mass” has its origin in the Latin word they heard at the end of the service meaning “Go now!”. All followers of Jesus are sent out into the community to love and serve and to be makers of disciples.

The word translated here in Matthew as “Go” is a continual verb in Greek grammar which more accurately means “Go always” or “keep on going”. So, this final chapter of Matthew’s Gospel hasn’t ended; it is still being written today in the mission and teaching of Jesus’ disciples. 

And the God who has given us this instruction (this mission) to make disciples is impossible to define. Even without difficulty of the Trinity, you can’t define God. You are not able to put God in your pocket. There is no “Connect with God” app available for our iPhones and iPads.  

For nearly 2000 years, countless millions of Christians have found life with God is an adventure, a journey, a leap into the unknown. How often have you come to church, fairly confident that you are on the right path in your Christian living, rather firm in your faith, only to be surprised by something you heard in the Bible reading?  How often have you been unsettled by what was said in a sermon? Have you been really challenged by the comments of some fellow Christian?  

Maybe that’s God working to stir up our brains. But, here’s another mystery; no matter how much we learn, there is still more to learn. This is not a drag: it’s actually exciting to discover something new. We are in deep strife if we ever think that we have no more to learn. We need to be open and willing to change our mind. 

Here are a couple of helpful quotes. There’s an English proverb which says, “Wise men change their minds, fools never.” Jonathan Swift (who wrote Gulliver’s travels and was an Anglican Priest; Dean of the Cathedral in Dublin) said “Never be ashamed to admit that you have been wrong, 'tis only saying that you are wiser today than you were yesterday.” There is always an opportunity and a need to be ready to change our minds. This means that people who have been churchgoers all their lives are no further advanced than the brand-new Christian getting involved with “Church” for the first time. 

Perhaps the point is not to try to understand the Trinitarian God, but to simply love God.  To be at peace in the knowledge that “Jesus loves me” To rejoice in the knowledge that God loves us so much he gave his Son so that we will not perish but may have Eternal Life.  

Matthew ends with Jesus saying “remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age.” What a wonderful promise! There are no conditions for us to meet. There is nothing we must believe. Whether we recognise it or not, Jesus Christ is always with us.

Sermon Notes 28th May 2023
Doug Bannerman

Chapters 7 & 8, the keystone of the Book of Signs in the Gospel of John, are dominated by a motif of strong conflict, and describe the manifestation and rejection of Jesus as Messiah.

They include most of Jesus’ responses to objections to messianic claims made for Him; and they are characterised by unusually sustained, sharp, controversial notes; all of which are wrapped in rapid exchanges, in which the narrator does not allow Jesus a speech of any length without interruption. There is a sense of urgency. The evangelist clearly aims to create a vivid and urgent impression of the persistent and murderous intentions of those opposed to Jesus and what He represented. [1]

There are repeated statements that Jesus’ life is in danger, with attempts to arrest him or lynch him on the spot.[2] Jesus avoids going to Judea because the Jews are looking for an opportunity to kill him. The people of Judea are afraid to even mention his name. When Jesus asks, ‘Why do you seek to kill me?’, the people of Jerusalem are surprised at the boldness of ‘one whom they seek to kill’. They try to arrest him ‘but no one laid hands on him’. So they send the police to arrest him, but that effort goes belly up. And, in the Temple, Jesus says bluntly to them, ‘you look for an opportunity to kill me.’ And they pick up stones to throw at him; but, Jesus hides himself and leaves the Temple.

The action is staged during the Feast of Tabernacles. Jesus has come up from Galilee for the festival, where the drama unfolds upon a double stage. In the foreground Jesus confronts the crowds attending the feast; in the background, the authorities deliberate and plot against Him. The narrative portrays a context of intense conflict, acute danger and hostility; and, today’s gospel reading is placed bang in the middle of it all.

One of the most distinctive ceremonies of the Feast of Tabernacles[3] was that of libations of water. On each of the seven days of the Feast, water was drawn from the Siloam reservoir, taken to the temple, and poured over the altar of burnt offering. One of the traditional readings for the festival is Zechariah 14, which describes the approaching day of the Lord. The symbolism of the water pouring over the altar summarises, as it were, several OT passages that speak of a river of living water which is to issue from the Temple mount, and become a source of life and healing far and wide.

It is the seventh and last day of the Feast of Tabernacles. Jesus enters the Temple with megaphone in hand, and cries out, ‘Let anyone who is thirsty come to me, let the one who believes in me drink.’

He could not have picked a more dangerous occasion upon which to make this declaration. John reports that some of the crowd think he is the Prophet; others think he is the Messiah; and the crowd are furious.

Now, the Fourth Gospel is the only NT document which uses the term ‘messiah’ (Greek μεσσίας), a Greek transliteration of the OT Hebrew word ‘Māšîaḥ’ [מָשִׁיחַ] or more probably the Aramaic Mšīḥāʾ [משיחא],[4] literally ‘anointed’ or ‘anointed one’. The OT usage of ‘messiah’ is usually of a consecrated person such as a king or priest, or a Messianic prince in apocalyptic literature.

In John, it occurs first in the prologue and is there translated by the familiar word Christos (Χριστός), which is used everywhere in the Gospel, except where the Samaritan woman is made to say, ‘ “I know that Messiah is coming” (who is called Christ).’ (John4.25) The combination of Messiah and Christ here, is undoubtedly derived from the Aramaic Mšīḥāʾ Yēšūʿ [יֵשׁוּע משִׁיחָא] again a transliteration which forms the familiar ‘Jesus Christ’.

That said, it is extremely difficult to find satisfactory evidence of the absolute use of the term Messiah [מָשִׁיחַ] in pre-Christian Judaism.[5]

Furthermore, the term, Messiah, does not become common in Rabbinic usage until after the destruction of the Temple in 70 CE.[6] ‘Messiah’ was not religious currency in the time of Jesus. The earliest traceable Rabbinic reference to the coming of the Messiah, per se, seems to be to Eliezer ben Jacob in 90 CE, the same period when John was writing the gospel.

It is clear, then, the Fourth Evangelist did not take the title Christ (Χριστός) simply from Christian tradition, but was familiar with its Aramaic original. So, John develops a doctrine of the person and work of Jesus with explicit reference to Jewish messianic belief, which we can summarise as: 1. The Messiah of the Jews is to be a descendant of David; 2. He is to appear no one knows whence; 3. He is to work signs and to reign as King; and 4. He is to abide forever.[7]

John does not affirm that Jesus is the Son of David; and if He is a king, His kingship is of an entirely different order; His origin is indeed mysterious, since He comes from another world; He does work signs, but in a more profound sense than the Jews imagine; and the death which appears to be the end of Him is in fact the climax and seal of His manifestation as the eternal Saviour of the world.

So, while formally, John claims for Jesus the Jewish title ‘Messias’ (Μεσσίας), in fact the Jewish concept of messiahship is ignored – and a doctrine of the Person of Christ is mainly worked out under other categories which are not those of Rabbinic Judaism.

However, in a visionary form, John submits the orthodox rabbinic doctrine that the ‘name of the Messiah’ was present with God before the creation of the world – that the Messiah’s coming was a part of the aboriginal design of God for the universe which God purposed to create.

During the first two centuries CE, Rabbinic thinking drifted slowly to associating water with the Spirit of God. The early 3rd century Jewish writer, Joshua ben Levi, like John, associated water with the gift of the Holy Spirit; which is a strong hint that this symbolism was already in view a hundred years earlier, when the John wrote, around 90 CE, that Jesus, ‘on the last, the great day’ of the Feast of Tabernacles cried out, ‘Let anyone who is thirsty come to me, and let the one who believes in me drink.’

An offering that the OT prophet Joel expressed with perfection.

And in that day the mountains will drip with sweet wine,
and the hills will flow with milk.

All the streams of Judah will run with water,
and a spring will flow from the house of the Lord

(Joel 3.18).

Doug Bannerman © 2023

[1] See C H Dodd The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel (London ,New York: Cambridge University Press 1953)pp 345,346

[2] See severally John 7.1; 7.13; 7.19-25; 7.30; 7.33-34; 8.40-47 

[3] Tabernacles, or Shavu`ot [שָׁבוּעוֹ], falls 50 days after Passover. Originally a harvest feast, Shavu`ot now commemorates the sealing of the Old Covenant, when the Lord revealed the Torah to Moses on Mount Sinai. The Christian Pentecost falls 50 days after Easter.

[4] Op cit C H Dodd p87

[5] Op cit C H Dodd p87

[6] See Israel Abrahams Studies in Pharisaism and the Gospels, and the composite Judaism and Christianity , especially in vol. II, The Contact of Pharisaism with other Cultures, ed. H. Loewe 1937

[7] Op cit C H Dodd p92