Fear and Hope

WESTMINSTER PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
December 24th 2006
Fourth Sunday in Advent
Rev. Mark R. Bradshaw-Miller
“Fear and Hope”
Micah 5:2-5a; Luke 1:39-55

About a week ago, I saw a television special about the birth of Jesus. Since I did not see the entire program I cannot make a sweeping judgment about it. However, the segment that I did watch was disappointing. I was disappointed because what I saw was basically just re-packaging of the same old arguments regarding the birth of Jesus. Different scholars, some less scholarly than others, presented their various arguments regarding the historicity of Jesus birth. The impression given was that the most important thing about the birth stories in the gospels is what can be proved as historical fact.
It is my belief that anyone who seeks to faithfully interpret the bible must look to the work of historians. After all, for too long many in the church have been left ignorant about the historical information regarding our faith. However, I do believe that too often we seem willing to believe that historians have the final word about the enduring legacy of the Gospels. As a result the most heated debates focus on whether Mary remained a virgin, or if all male children under two were actually killed by King Herod, or even if Caesar Augustus actually decreed a census. While those, and other issues, become litmus tests for orthodoxy they ultimately miss the larger truths surrounding the events of the nativity of Jesus.
In the beginning of the Gospel of Luke the words: “Do not be afraid,” are a recurring refrain. But if we focus solely on history we will miss this fact. Before learning that he will be the father of John the Baptist, Zachariah hears from the angel Gabriel: “Do not be afraid.” When Mary learns, from Gabriel, that she will be the mother of God, it is also with the words: “Do not be afraid.” And, when a group of shepherds are visited by the angel of the Lord to announce the good news of great joy, they too hear: “Do not be afraid.” While this serves to calm the nerves of the recipients of the news, it is also meant to say something about the ways of God.
When we come face to face with real power it is natural to react with awe and even fear. This human reaction has been used as a means of control by the powerful, throughout history. Fear is a powerful motivator and an excellent tool of manipulation. When people are fearful, they are more easily controlled. While this is no grand revelation, it bears repeating because the announcement, to Zechariah, Mary, and the Shepherds, could have been God’s opportunity to control and manipulate these people for holy purposes. Instead, these greetings become God’s resounding no to the ways of manipulation and control. In order to bring about the transformation of the world God chooses love. That is something for which we can rejoice.
One of the most powerful effects of Luke using the names of religious and political leaders is not to write history. Instead, it functions as a way of contrasting the ways of God with the ways of the powerbrokers of the world. God does not function or act in the same ways in which the powerful of this world. God enters the world in human form in a tiny corner of occupied Palestine at the edge of the Roman Empire. God uses the places and people who are powerless and does so under a cloud of shame and controversy. Since God does not function by accident, all of this gives us a glimpse of the ways in which God is at work in the world.
One of the best glimpses to the ways of God comes in the words from our scripture; what we often call the Magnificat. These words of poetry stand as a legacy to the faithfulness of Mary as the first disciple as well as a clear contrast to the ways of the world. These are words which simply could not, or would not, have been written by those who were at the center of the empire. This song of joy is a direct contrast to the ideology of Rome and of empire.
If there is one thing of which we can be sure, it is that the magnificat of the empire would be drastically different. The empire’s magnificat would be full of fear, threats, intimidation, and dripping with self importance. And, more than anything else, it would be a litany of the ways in which the little gods of our world operate. In fact, it might go something like this:
God has chosen me, because I am more important than all the poor ignorant slobs of this world. My legacy will last because of what I have done. I am special and particularly holy which is why God chose me in the first place. After all, that is they way he works. He makes sure that the proud are well rewarded. He supports the world leaders in their decisions and teaches the people their proper place. The hungry are left to fend for themselves because there is something inherently wrong with them anyway. But the rich, they will be rewarded with more tax loopholes as a sign of their special blessedness. This is the way God works so it is best to remain fearful because God has spoken.
The song of Mary is a testimony which says no to Magnificat of the empire. It is a testimony of hope in a world blanketed by fear and so often manipulated by the powerbrokers of this world.
The truth is that God could have very easily chosen to use fear to spread the message of salvation. With deeds of power, might, and manipulation God could have all but guaranteed obedience. However, we know, and give thanks, that this is not the way in which God works. Because of our susceptibility to the power of fear we must be reminded again and again of this message. As we stand prepared to welcome Jesus into the world this day, we are called to say no to the magnificat of empire and join the chorus of faith which sings:
My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior, for he has looked with favor on the lowliness of his servant. Surely, from now on all generations will call me blessed; for the Mighty One has done great things for me, and holy is his name. His mercy is for those who fear him from generation to generation. He has shown strength with his arm; he has scattered the proud in the thoughts of their hearts. He has brought down the powerful from their thrones, and lifted up the lowly; he has filled the hungry with good things, and sent the rich away empty. He has helped his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy, according to the promise he made to our ancestors, to Abraham and to his descendants forever.
Amen!

Injustice and Hope

WESTMINSTER PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
December 17th 2006
Third Sunday in Advent
Rev. Mark R. Bradshaw-Miller
“Injustice and Hope”
Zephaniah 3:14-20; Luke 3:7-18

I cannot think of a more unwelcome message in Advent than that of John the Baptist. “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?” I can’t see Hallmark adding that to the list of holiday greeting cards anytime soon. Yet, this is the message which we cannot avoid on this third Sunday in Advent. So what are we supposed to do with this message that seems so devoid of holiday cheer?
When faced with the5 message in this passage it is normal to have one of three reactions. One is to simply ignore it. Since we seek to take the bible seriously, that is not a faithful response. However, the other most common responses are fear and self-righteousness. The self-righteousness often comes from a belief that we are not like those “brood of vipers.” Instead, consciously or not, we identify with John the Baptist or the children of Abraham. Either way, we hear this message of repentance and call to change as being meant for everyone else but us.
However, if fear is more our reaction then it is probably for one of two reasons. One is because we know the sting of exclusion. We know what is it to carry the label of tax-collector, soldier, sinner, or any other label which carries means we are not welcome. The other reason for fear comes from the realization or revelation that our self-righteousness, born from the designation as children of Abraham, or children of the church, is not an exemption from the need for repentance and change. But whatever the reason for fear, each has heard John’s speech about the unquenchable fire and is left wondering: “What are we to do?” In other words; “We want to change be we do not know what to do, help us!”
John responds to this question, this plea for guidance, with very personal and concrete actions. However, this teaching turns out to be so socially subversive that Herod puts this troublemaker in jail in the verse immediately following our reading. This begs the question: ‘What is so dangerous about his teaching?’ The answer is really quite simple.
John answers the plea for guidance by saying: “Whoever has two coats must share with anyone who has none; and whoever has food must do likewise.” While this sounds like simple charity, it is so much more. It is a call to action for anyone who seeks to live faithfully in the midst of unjust society. If you have something and someone else does not; share! It sounds so simple but in fact is quite revolutionary in an age where excess is a virtue and not having enough is a social stigma.
John does not end his teaching with this but goes on to include the tax collectors and soldiers who have joined the ever-growing crowd. In this ancient society, they were not welcome in the community of faith. John challenges both groups to stop taking advantage of people, particularly poor people. To the tax collectors, John says stop participating in the cycle of taxation and corruption which rewards the rich and punishes the poor. And, to the soldiers – the enforcers of the empire – John tells them to stop threatening and stealing from the people, particularly the poor people.
The teachings of John have often been reduced to simply moral guidance to those who gathered to hear him. However, John is doing so much more. He has told them all to end their participation in the unofficial protocol of the empire. After all, the taking of extra taxes and the threats and intimidation were all unofficial ways of keeping the people fearful and obedient. However, when John invites these agents of the empire to act in human ways the effect will be more social justice and less fear for the people. But, if the masses, the crowds, no longer fear the soldiers and tax collectors the security of the empire will be threatened.
At its heart John’s message is a call to the enforcers of the empire to undermine the very system in which they work. It is not a call to revolution or a call to arms. Instead, it is an invitation to become human and to treat others in humane ways. These simple actions are ones which ultimately honor the image of God in each person. Whenever this happens, whenever the agents of empire act in humanizing ways, it will always be a threat to the ways of empire. This is why John is so dangerous.
When we encounter this scripture passage we are confronted with this question: “Where are we in this story?” It is not the sort of question which allows us to politely decline. If we seek to follow Jesus we are not given the option to avoid the question. So, where is our place in this story, collectively and individually? Do we stand, self-righteous, as children of the church, bearers of its traditions, who believe the message of repentance and change is meant for anyone but us? Or maybe we stand self-righteous alongside John the Baptist ready to cast the title of “brood of vipers” upon anyone with whom we disagree? If this is us, the message is clear: We must repent, change our thinking and join in the call to change our ways.
If however, we find ourselves akin to the tax collectors and soldiers of the empire familiar with the sting of exclusion, the message too is: Repent. Turn from the practices which dehumanize others and enrich us at the expense of others, particularly the poor. In fact, the message for all is repent. Repent from the practices of unrighteousness and of injustice. Turn toward the ways which give life and that honor the image of God in every person.
While the message of repentance is not often thought of as good news, it is good news. It is good news because it says to us, very clearly, that things do not have to remain the way they are. It is not part of God’s plan that anyone should suffer. It is in God’s plan that all will share what they have; food, clothing, access, welcome. It is not part of God’s plan that the ways of empire should prevail. It is God’s plan that all people have the resources, dignity, and respect so that image of God is honored in all people. It is this plan of God which allows us to have hope in a time of injustice. It is this plan of God which moves us to share this hope and act out of this hope in a world so hungry for this message. It is my prayer that we will move, and share, and act out this hope in our time, this time of need. Amen.

Captivity and Hope

WESTMINSTER PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
December 10th 2006
Second Sunday in Advent
Rev. Mark R. Bradshaw-Miller
“Captivity and Hope”
Malachi 3:1-4; Luke 3:1-6

The season of Advent is getting squeezed out. There is no doubt that one cause of this squeeze or loss of advent has to do with the retail holiday called ‘christmas.’ Now days, even before Halloween, the signs of ‘christmas’ begin to appear in all the stores. However, it would be unfair and dishonest to give all the credit to the creative and zealous retail establishments. I think the greater responsibility lies with those of us inside the communities of faith who are uncomfortable with the message of advent. As a result, we willingly jump right to Christmas. After all what sounds more festive? Joy to the world! Or “Repent, who can endure the day of God’s coming?!” Or, for that matter, what image will sell more cards: A jolly white guy in a red suit eating cookies and saying: ‘Ho, Ho, Ho.’ Or, An impassioned Middle Eastern man who wears camel hair, eats bugs, and says: Repent?
Whether it sells cards or not, the message of advent is not always so comforting. The message of John is one which calls us all to acknowledge and turn from the places in our lives where we are captive to the powers of this world. Given the option between these messages and the work of preparation, is it any wonder that we would rather skip the work of advent and get right to the celebration of Christmas?
The massage of advent becomes clear only when we unearth it from under the clutter of the “season.” The message is this: We live in an in-between time. This is the time between when God first entered into history in the person of Jesus and the time when all people will see the salvation of God. It is a message of waiting – active waiting – in the midst of a world that is drenched in chaos, war, suffering, and death. It is not an easy spiritual disciple but the good news is that we have a wealth of resources at our disposal. In order to wait, actively, we must reach back to the stories of our faith which are full of reminders that we do not wait in vain – that we are not alone – and that God is faithful and can be trusted.
The time in which the prophet Malachi spoke was at time of turmoil. Unlike other prophets, Malachi was part of the very establishment we was criticizing. Malachi was an insider when it came to the temple and he had a vested interest. He was trying to make change from the inside. That sort of work is fraught with dangers. The risks of burnout, or accommodation or even selling out, were quite high. But, this was the work to which God had called Malachi.
The message of Malachi “…prepare the way…” was one which would not have been foreign to the religious folk of Jerusalem. However, these religious words had lost their power. They no longer had the ability to inspire a community which had become overly comfortable with the life of faith. The worship practices had become a cover for injustice and the life of faith had become ritualistic and hollow.
It is why Malachi speaks these rather frightening words – in an attempt to get people’s attention – “Who can endure the day of God’s coming, who can stand when God appears?” This is a stark message for those overly comfortable in the life of faith. It is a message that God’s advent means nothing will ever be the same. It is a timely message for all of us who are at risk of becoming too comfortable with our religious traditions, because so much of what we take for granted is not intended to last. Everything we know and love – everything to which we cling so tightly is fleeting in the face of the call to “…prepare the way…”
Though Luke is writing to a broader audience than Malachi, he issues the same sort of challenge to the established order. Luke is the only gospel writer who tells the story of John the Baptist’s appearance in this way. However, the most illuminating part of this passage is the part which I often skip over. It is the portion which reads:
In the fifteenth year of the reign of Emperor Tiberius, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, and Herod was ruler of Galilee, and his brother Philip ruler of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias ruler of Abilene, during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the wilderness.
Luke includes references to these historical figures, the political and religious leaders, and contrasts it with the arrival of the word of God to John. It is a powerful statement of faith. It is making the claim that in the mist of the well defined political and religious order that God choose to speak and act and move outside of the established order – in the wilderness. It means that God is going to mess it all up and turn the world upside down. The salvation of God is not going to come through these well defined and well ordered political and religious traditions – no matter how invested we might be.
These political and religious leaders frame the life and ministry of Jesus in the gospel of Luke. At the end of the gospel, Jesus will be hauled in front of these very same leaders. They are the ones who will conspire to have Jesus executed for his message of repentance and salvation for all. So, the call to prepare the way is a choice laid before all who hear. Will we follow the ways of the political and religious leadership who ultimately crucify Jesus to protect their power and to ensure the status quo? Or, will we prepare ourselves to follow the way of John and of Jesus?
The answer to that question is found in the lifelong journey of turning from all the things, beliefs and practices which keep us captive to power and to status quo. This is at the heart of the season of advent. The hope in this season is the hope that we will acknowledge and be set free from the places of our captivity – in ourselves, this community and God’s world. While being prepared or preparing the way of the Lord may not be all that marketable, it is the hope of the world.
It is my prayer that God will continue to reveal the places of our captivity and set us free so that each one of us will become voices in the wilderness of our time proclaiming this good news message:
Every valley shall be filled, and every mountain and hill shall be made low, and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough ways made smooth; and all flesh shall see the salvation of God.
Amen.

Hunger and Hope

WESTMINSTER PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
December 3rd 2006

First Sunday in Advent / Communion Sunday
Rev. Mark R. Bradshaw-Miller
“Hunger and Hope”
Jeremiah 33:14-16; Luke 21:25-29

The scene presented by Jesus as the time of redemption does not fit with most images found on Christmas cards. How many of us are planning to send cards which have images of wars, chaos, turmoil, natural disasters, or hunger? Yet, this is precisely the image we are presented with as we begin advent. Jesus makes the claim, in Luke that the time of redemption will come, not beside still waters, but in the middle of chaotic times. Unfortunately, generations of Jesus’ followers have taken this passage and seen it as a roadmap for the end times. With ever eclipse, comet, hurricane or war brings the peddlers of doom with a new book, tape or video claiming they have the key to understanding the signs of the times.
While we know that those sorts of claims ignore Jesus teaching, and as such always unbiblical, there is something about these claims which can often grab our attention. After all, if we are remotely paying attention to the world around us the signs are there. War is our constant companion, wealth inequality is at levels not seen since the depression, and we can no longer ignore the real environmental crisis. If we wanted to make an ‘end time’ prediction, or sell some books, tapes, or videos, now would actually be a good time to do so.
However, faced with the signs of our times we are most often overwhelmed by it all. In fact, who would blame us if we simply buried our heads in the sand of willed? How can we not but fall victim to the hunger and hope that God will take us out of the world’s chaos? However, the hope that Jesus presents, the way of the disciple is not the one of retreat from the world or ignorance of the realities. Instead it is a call to stand up right in the middle of it all as witnesses to the hope we have in Jesus.
When faced with chaos, wars, and disasters; Jesus does not present a roadmap for the end times. He does not promise that his followers will not face struggles. Instead, Jesus tells makes it clear that being a disciples means being faithful and hopeful in the middle of it all. His words are quite simple: “Now when these things begin to take place, stand up and raise your heads…” There is no talk about retreating to sanctuaries safe from the world; instead there is a call to stand up tall and keep your head up despite the chaos all around. These are revolutionary hopeful words. It is a ridiculously hopeful symbolic action in the face of desperate circumstances.
The power of these words is often lost on people of privilege. After all, privileged people do not have to be reminded to stand tall and keep their head up. People of privilege are not taught to avert their eyes when speaking to people in power. People of privilege are not taught how to survive the recurring stops by the police because of the crime of driving while black. But for anyone who knows what its like to have to survive in a world not designed for them, these words are a witness to a powerful revolutionary hope. “Stand up and raise your heads…” in the face of it all!
This is not to say that these words offer nothing to people of privilege. After all, the despair of this world takes many forms. In fact, all people are in need of these words of hope. However, there is just less acknowledgement of that need the more comfortable, pampered or privilege we are. The hunger for the promise of God – for security, safety, and hope, know no bounds of race or class. The hunger just manifests itself in different ways.
The hunger for hope found in God exists in each one of us. As such, we must begin to name those hungers and acknowledge that ways in which we feed those hungers. There are many ways these hungers are fed: Maybe we do this by joining lockstep with the consumptive orgy of the retail Christmas holiday. Maybe it is through; food, drugs, sex, work, gossiping or complaining, seeking to control others, or always being right. The question facing each one of us is: “How do I feed my hunger?” If we answer this question by claiming we do not, then you are not being honest. The truth is that until we are aware of our hunger and the ways we seek to numb it that we can really join in the call for Christ to come again.
The revolutionary hopeful words from Jesus are also found in Jeremiah. When Jeremiah shares God’s vision it is during a time of great turmoil. “The days are surely coming … when I will fulfill the promise… (For) justice and righteousness in the land. In those days Judah will be saved and Jerusalem will live in safety.” They are words spoken with Jerusalem in under attack from Babylon. It is not a battle between two armies but is an attack on the city where there is no concern for body count or collateral damage. They are foolish words of hope in the midst of hopelessness. And yet, they are the sort of words which would have inspired those under attack to know that hope was not lost and that God had a plan. In fact, it may have just inspired them to “stand up and raise their heads…”
The words from Jesus and Jeremiah are a call to honesty and to hopeful action. They are a call for us to pull our heads out of the sand and confront the injustice and unrighteousness in ourselves, our church, our community and God’s world. It is a call to remember that our hope does not come from anything other than God. The words of the modern day prophets who claim to have the roadmap of the end times, or who promise security through better walls, deeper pockets, more distance from people unknown to us, or surrendered liberties simply do not have the last word.
“The days are surely coming…” and are here now! “There will be (and are everyday) signs in the sun, the moon, and the stars, and the earth distress among nations confused by the roaring of the sea and the waves. People will (and are) faint(ing) from fear and foreboding of what is coming upon (and is upon), for the powers of the heavens will be shaken.” So our call is quite simple: Stand up and raise your head, take a revolutionary hopeful posture in the world hungry for any signs of hope. May we be a witness to this hope which enables us to stand up and raise our heads for the living of these days. Amen.

Committed Like the Pig

WESTMINSTER PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
November 12th 2006
Stewardship Season
Rev. Mark R. Bradshaw-Miller
“Committed Like the Pig”
Mark 12:38-44

A couple of weeks ago, on the television show Grey’s Anatomy, I was reminded of an old adage about commitment. It goes something like this: “When it comes to a breakfast of ham and eggs, the chicken is involved but the pig is committed.” When it comes to the issue of stewardship, this old saying is quite relevant. Now, I am aware of the problems with this analogy. After all, neither animal has freely chosen to participate in the meal. However, putting that fact aside, I still believe that learning to be followers, disciples, of Jesus, is a process by which we learn to be committed like the pig.
The sort of commitment we are talking about is rather foreign in our culture. Often, we are told to beware of being too involved or attached to anything. After all, to be fully committed to something is just not healthy, or balanced. But, the truth is that faith in Jesus is a call to be more than just interested or involved. Jesus calls disciples to be fully committed in all areas of our lives, at home, church, school, and yes, even at work.
This mornings’ passage is once piece of the larger Jerusalem encounter. Since entering Jerusalem, Jesus has been struggling with the practices of the temple. In fact, our passage is actually the culmination of Jesus’ encounters in the temple. In this final scene we see Jesus unveil a system of exploitation which is supported by the religious leadership.
In this final scene, Jesus offers a complete condemnation of the scribal class. The scribes, in Jerusalem, were the well-to-do religious elite who had built a rather comfortable system through distortions of the law. In Israel, the Law of Moses was clear that widows were to be seen after so that they would not suffer. The scribes, in compliance with the Law, set up a system of trusteeship. When a woman became a widow a scribe would be assigned to oversee their estates since it was believed that women could not take care of such matters. The resulting system became known for its rampant abuses. This system created a world where widows were left in poverty while the religious elite lived rather comfortably.
It is this system and these leaders that Jesus says will receive the greatest condemnation. The scribes know the right religious rituals but seem little interested in the weightier matters of justice. The comfortable life of long robes and automatic respect and deference as well as the opportunity to solidify their power has led them to ignore the poor. The scribes had become accustomed to having others serve them, defer to them and even pander to them. These privileged people were, when it came to their faith, not fully committed. More likely, they were merely involved like the chicken at breakfast.
In spite of all appearances to the contrary, they were not people of deep faith. Their wisdom, work and adherence to the religious practices did not cover the fact that they were getting rich on the backs of the poor. Jesus indictment is clear: “They will receive the greater condemnation.” These are challenging words which hang in the air as this first scene comes to an end.
The second half of our reading begins with Jesus sitting down opposite the treasury. This action; Jesus sitting in this manner alludes to a model of prophetic judgment. In other words, he is not casually observing, he is sitting in judgment of the events taking place. Jesus watches this very public spectacle. Everyone would know what and by whom was given to the treasury. This practice also worked to reinforce the social stratification or divisions. The rich gave large sums and as they did, they would often be praised for their generosity. Almost as if people cheered as they brought their offering forward. Jesus, not only refuses to participate in that practice, but goes one step further. When one poor widow comes and places her offering of less than a penny, Jesus publicly cheers for her. He says that this poor widows’ contribution is greater than all the contributions of the rich who only gave from their abundance.
In essence, Jesus has stolen the thunder of all those sought recognition and given it to the least in society. However, he also reminds the disciples that the widow’s poverty is no accident. Jesus just finished teaching about the scribes who had gotten wealthy by devouring the houses of poor widows. And now, Jesus shames the practices of the whole system by giving recognition and acclaim to the least – the poorest – this widow. Placing these two scenes side-by-side it is undeniable that a comparison is intended. The first scene ends with a condemnation of the scribes who exploit poor widows under the guise of religion. And, the second scene ends with a commendation of the faith of a widow who is in poverty because of these ‘religious’ scribes.
While it is can be easy to miss in our reading, Jesus is angry. During his time in the temple he has seen and challenged the temple-state which has used religion to gain and uphold power. It used religion to keep the people complacent and poor while at the same time enriching religious leadership. This set up makes Jesus so angry that in the chapter immediately following this scene he calls for the destruction of the great symbol of this unjust system. He says: “Do you not see there great buildings? Not one stone will be left here upon another; all will be thrown down.”
If we only focus on the piety of the widow and her mite, we will miss all of this. Jesus does commend the widow and her faithfulness but it is only a part of what is happening in these two scenes. Jesus invites the disciples to recognize the larger systems at work in their lives. It is an invitation to call into question and judgment when any system or structure takes advantage of, intentionally or not, those most vulnerable in society. It is because of the focus on the big picture that I believe this passage works well to complete our intensive stewardship focus.
During a worship service I attended recently, a call for the offering was issued with the following words: “Now we are going to give God some of our earnings.” I was jarred by these words. While I do not know the intention of the speaker it came across something like; ‘we are going to give God a little of our leftovers.’ While I am sure that I am reading more into these simple words, it sounded eerily like the same commitment level of the chicken at breakfast. If we really believe; all we are and all we have is a gift from God, then we cannot be satisfied with “giving a little of our earnings to God.” Stewardship is not about casual commitment but a call to the radical reordering of our lives.
About four years ago I was at a conference on stewardship and fundraising. While there, I met a pastor who shared a story about one couple in her church. This couple asked to meet with the pastor about their stewardship commitment. In the meeting they shared with her how much they had been impacted by the call to be good stewards and more faithful in their discipleship. They had decided to make some drastic changes in their life as a result. He had decided to leave his high profile executive position and take a job which would allow him to spend more time with his family. The family had also decided to sell their large home far away from the church and buy one closer church because they wanted to be more involved in the life of the community which had meant so much to them. As their pastor concluded this story, another pastor cynically piped in: “I bet their financial pledge dropped off drastically.” She quickly responded: “Actually, their stewardship of time, talents and money has never been more faithful.”
I share this story, not because I believe we are all called to do exactly the same thing. I share it as an example of the all encompassing nature of stewardship. Each one of us is going to have to decide through prayer and reflection – how God is calling us to be good stewards. Being good stewards is so much more than simply giving money. It requires, daily, that each of us order our lives in ways that reflect our beliefs. Being good stewards about learning to be committed to our faith like the pig is committed to breakfast. Amen.

Sabbath, Creation, and Stewardship

WESTMINSTER PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
November 12th 2006

Stewardship Season
Rev. Mark R. Bradshaw-Miller
“Sabbath, Creation, and Stewardship”
Deuteronomy 15:1-11
This passage from Deuteronomy is outrageous. The idea of canceling debt every seven years would be disastrous for our economy. In fact, this passage sounds like it could have come from the likes of Karl Marx with all the talk of redistribution of wealth. Fortunately, it does not come from Marx, it comes from God.
Old Testament Professor Walter Brueggemann writes of this passage: “Such a provision is radical, for it shatters the conventional practices of loans, credits, interest, mortgages, and debt management by which any conventional market economy functions.” This leaves me wondering then; what are we, a people wholly attached to free market capitalism, to do with this word from God? After all, not even our fundamentalist brothers and sisters take this passage literally. Should we ignore it as a relic of history lacking any contemporary relevance? Well, before we get to the issue of relevance let us be careful not to miss out on the radical life-giving nature of this passage. Instead of seeking the contemporary “relevance,” let us just examine the text more closely.
At this point in Deuteronomy, the people of God can almost see the Promised Land on the horizon. God has liberated them from the slavery of the Egyptian empire, and is preparing them for a life of freedom. During the forty years in the wilderness God worked to overcome the habits learned and the imaginations stunted by life in the empire. One of the best interpretive lenses for this passage is as an alternative to the practices of empire. It is God’s intent that these former slaves would become living witnesses to their covenantal relationship with God.
Upon entering the land, each one of the families is to receive a parcel of land to call their own. It was a divine mandate for an ancient form of Forty Acers and a Mule. However, even before the land is acquired, God knows that the land will become concentrated into the hands of only a few people. Because God knows that over time some people will incur debt which will cause them to loose their land, a Sabbath Year practice is invoked. Every seven years all debts will be cancelled.
It is important to note that the debt being talked about in this passage is very specific. The debt being spoken about in this passage was the form of debt most often incurred by the poor. For example, it would have included farmers because of crop failure or the city dweller because of unemployment. However, relief from debt did not include such things as: unpaid wages or bills owed to shopkeepers for merchandise. The focus of the debt relief was about freeing up those things which were necessary for one to make a living in the ancient world.
Another important feature of this form of debt was the outcome of unpaid debt. When people came upon hard times and were unable to pay pack the loans they would become bond-servants or slaves until the debt was repaid. The institution of a Sabbath year ensured that the bond-servants or slaves would not become a permanent underclass. A Jewish commentary on this passage explained how this practice was vital to the community because: “Such a condition (the creation of a permanent underclass) would be unfair to human beings, fashioned in God’s image and dangerous to society as a breeding ground for lawlessness and irresponsibility.” As a result, in God’s country or covenant community, loans were investments in a descent, compassionate, and stable society. To maintain this covenant community it was necessary that every seven years, wealth was to be transferred from those who had amassed it to those who had none. In simple terms it is a biblical mandate for the redistribution of wealth and slave emancipation.
The requirement of this Sabbath Year even takes out an obvious loop-hole. For anyone who might decide not to loan money close to the Sabbath year the statue says:
Be careful that you do not entertain a mean thought, thinking, “The seventh year, the year of remission, is near,” and therefore view your needy neighbor with hostility and give nothing; your neighbor might cry to the Lord against you, and you would incur guilt (Deuteronomy 15:9).
From this verse it is clear that God does not seem to trust human beings when it comes to money and our needy neighbors. However, this admonition is thick with meaning. In the verses preceding this one, God warns not to become hard-hearted. And now, in this passage there is a command not to cause your neighbor cry out against you. This is no accident. Both passages are meant to send us back to the Exodus and the ways of Pharaoh. When asked to free the slaves, Pharaoh had a hard heart because the loss of the free labor would put a serious strain on the economy. As a result the slaves cry out for help. This deliberate connection to the past calls the people of God not to imitate the ways of the Empire, particularly when they come into positions of power.
The grounding for this Sabbath year, the forgiveness of debts, comes from the Sinai covenant or Ten Commandments. It begins when God tells Moses to ask Pharaoh to free the slaves so they may worship God. The journey to the Promised Land must begin with worship at the mountain of God. Worship, for the people of God, is about turning from the ways of Empire and reordering the community around life-giving practices. The community is continually called to remember how God has redeemed them and claimed them as a community which becomes the alternative to the Egyptian Empire.
For Christians, we become part of this long history through an often misused passage of scripture. It is in Matthew’s Gospel where Jesus has just been anointed by a woman with some very costly oil. The disciples want to chastise her because the oil could have been sold and the money used on the poor. Jesus stops them by saying: “Why do you trouble the woman? She has performed a good service for me. For you always have the poor with you, but you will not always have me (Matthew 26:10-11). Instead of seeing this passage as an excuse for poverty, we must see it as Jesus tying his followers to this great tradition of Deuteronomy which says: “Since there will never cease to be some need on the earth, I therefore command you, “Open your hand to the poor and needy neighbor in your land” (Deut. 15:11). The call to generosity is undeniably the fabric of our faith.
This powerfully challenging passage cannot be dismissed as a remnant of the past. It can no longer be ignored by the followers of Jesus – conservative or liberal, no matter how much we would like to try. It is a passage which carries a message that is the very fabric of our faith. Even Jesus alludes to its authority. So, if this is true, how are we, as Christians, to respond?
Theologian Robert Linthicum says the book of Deuteronomy has as its vision that worship of God will lead to a political system that establishes justice. Unfortunately, history shows how this has not worked out in practice. And, I am not hopeful that this will change anytime soon. Too often the worship of God has been used as a prop for the very practices used in the Egyptian Empire. However, I believe Robert Bellah points us in a more fruitful direction. Regarding the role and practice of faith communities:
To the extent, however, that real religious communities can retain or recover a sense of being in but not of this world, can live, at least to some extent, in patterns of voluntary simplicity and mutual concern, then they may act as genuine alternatives to the prevailing current… it is more than ever necessary that there be demonstration communities where elementary decencies can be maintained and handed down, humanizing a bad situation as long as it exists, and providing seedbeds for larger amelioration when that becomes possible.
While Robert Bellah’s call or challenge is not grounded in our passage, it does get at the heart of what we modern followers might take from our scripture this morning. Claiming this passage for our modern setting means instead of trying to “Christianize the social order” we are to become a living alternative to any and all practices which dehumanize or which are an insult to the image of God in each person. We may not be able to make major changes in the large systems. However, we can seek to be a living alternative and witness to the God who we know in Jesus Christ, who laid out a very clear plan for a just society.
The challenge before us is no small task. It will require that we, at least in this place, give up some tightly held beliefs. When we join our money together it will no longer be mine or yours or even ours. Instead, we believe and are to give witness, to our belief that it is God’s money, time and talent. Our work then becomes to figure out how to justly distribute it for God’s work in this place. Our challenge is to figure out how we are going to live into the alternative social vision of the God we know in Jesus Christ. So, on this and every day, let us pledge to one another and before God that we will seek to be a witness to the life-giving ways of God with money, time and abilities. Amen.

Reformed From What?

WESTMINSTER PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
April 30th 2006

Reformation Sunday / All Saints Day
Rev. Mark R. Bradshaw-Miller

“Reformed From What?”
Jeremiah 31:31-34; Romans 3:19-31


I can only remember once ever worshiping in a church which acknowledged Reformation Sunday. While this does say something about how closely I was paying attention, it also has much to do with a general ambivalence and ignorance about the Reformed tradition. I believe this is a great loss. So, as we celebrate our theological heritage, we will also look to see if this forgotten heritage has anything to offer for us today.
Reformation Day, which is actually Monday, is the day when we celebrate Martin Luther nailing his 95 thesis to the door of the Wittenberg cathedral. It is this event which is celebrated as the inauguration of the Reformation or break from the Catholic Church. Those of us who are Presbyterian are connected to this event through the parallel reformation going on in Geneva Switzerland under the leadership of Ulrich Zwingli. It is through the second generation reformer from Geneva, John Calvin, that John Knox carried the tradition to Scotland – the birthplace of Presbyterians.
The Reformation was fueled by anger over the rampant corruption of the religious leadership, the abuse of wealth and power in the institutional church and even the great ignorance and lax morality of local clergy. The theology developed by these early reformers continues to influence the church today. And while there is agreement about the essential beliefs of the reformation you would be hard pressed to find an exhaustive list. The fear of idolatry – the mark of good reformed theology – keeps us from creating such a list for fear the list could become inflexible or an object of devotion.
It was out of this concern that the reformers challenged the traditions and teachings of the church which contradicted the written word of God – the bible. It was the recognition of how we human beings often elevate our traditions above critical reflection. And, this critical reflection was always to be done through the lens of scripture. The life of faith was always to be judged through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ as shown in scripture. This concern led the reformers to translate the bible into the common language. In this way, all people would have access to the bible, not just church professionals.
Some of the other major themes of the reformation focused on the way of salvation. The belief is that salvation comes by the grace of God through faith alone. In other words, we cannot earn our salvation. The reformers also changed the number of sacraments from seven to only two: baptism and the Lord’s Supper. However, one of the great contributions was the belief in the priesthood of all believers. With this move, and the translation of the bible into common language, reformed Christianity emphasized the gift and responsibility which each person has for faithful living informed by thoughtful and responsible theology. Unfortunately, time only allows us to scratch the surface of our reformed theological heritage.
As we celebrate and even give thanks for our reformed heritage, it is imperative that we do so with humility and honesty. In other words, we must also take a few moments and look at the underside of the tradition which lays claim up us. The truth is that the history and development of reformed theology has led to some results which most of us would like to forget.
The reformation, while leaving a legacy for which we are thankful, has also given rise to fractionalization, and new forms of the very institutionalism we sought to reform. The reformation also has a bloody heritage. From the Thirty-Years war in Europe, to the English Civil War, the violence of Northern Ireland, to the destruction of the native peoples in the Americas under the cover of the City on a Hill theology and later manifest destiny, people of the reformed faith have played their part. The theological foundation for chattel slavery in this country came from our very own Presbyterian Church, and my own Alma matter Columbia Seminary. And, more recently, the rational for the South African Apartheid was developed by reformed theologians. With this sort of baggage, it has left some people to believe that the reformed tradition is best left for the dustbin of history, or at least asking: “How could this be?”
Part of the problem has been the misunderstanding and even outright abuse of the reformed doctrine that salvation comes through faith alone. This belief was reduced to the idea that as long as one’s intellectual beliefs were correct - or orthodox - you would be assured a place in heaven. In other words, as long as you thought the right things your actions were of little consequence. This narrowing of the tradition has led historian and Presbyterian pastor Ed Loring to call for an end of the reform tradition. It is a challenge to the church which says: if the good news we have offer in Jesus Christ allows people to continue the ways of injustice, oppression and abuse without calling for repentance, then we really have no news worth sharing. However, I, for one, do not believe, despite all the history, that our reformed heritage is worth casting off.
I give thanks for Allen Boesak, a Reformed Black South African theologian, who sees hope and a need for the reformed tradition. In an amazing and blunt essay called: “Black and Reformed – Contradiction or Challenge?” Boesak claims that the reformed tradition is life-giving despite its very close connection to the Apartheid regime. In his final analysis of the Reformed tradition for Black South Africans, he says: “It is my conviction that the Reformed tradition has a future in this country only if Black Reformed Christians are willing to take it up, make it truly their own, and let this tradition once again become what it once was: A champion of the cause of the poor and the oppressed, clinging to the confession of the lordship of Christ and the supremacy of the word of God.”
As we celebrate the reformed heritage, we too must be willing to truly make this heritage our own. Our celebration of the past must lead us to more faithful living and willingness to see where the Spirit is at work in new ways. Anything less would be unfaithful to the tradition and lead to traditionalism or worse, idolatry. While their may be a day when it is time to call for an end to the reformation it is not today. The same issues which gave rise to the reformation are still at work today. However, despite news to the contrary, our struggle is no longer with the Catholic Church. Our greatest struggle is with ourselves. Whenever we turn our backs on the word of God in favor of our little traditions, whenever we place national identity or market ideology before the lordship of Jesus Christ, or when we believe mental assent is the fullness of our faithfulness; it is we who are in need of reformation. So, let us embrace this day and this tradition and claim it as our own ever mindful that God is not finished with us yet. And may we trust that our church, the reformed church is indeed “always being reformed by the Spirit of God.” Amen.

The Trouble with Tithing...

WESTMINSTER PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
October 22nd 2006
Stewardship Season
“Give Thanks… Sing Praise… Declare God’s Steadfast Love!”
Rev. Mark R. Bradshaw-Miller
“The Trouble with Tithing”
Deuteronomy 14:22-29

Every year about this time, we throw around the word: Stewardship. One of the risks of doing this is that we might begin to believe that Stewardship only has to do with planning our budget for the coming year. This is unfortunate because stewardship is really so much more. In fact, stewardship is the belief that we have and all that we are is a gift from God, and that we are responsible for caring for and using these gifts in ways that give glory to God.
In other words, when we talk about stewardship we must include our entire lives. Now having said that, today we are going to focus on the spiritual practice of tithing.

I think it is safe to assume that when most people hear the word tithe they think of it as a religious word. However, that has not always been the case. For the community of Israel, the word tithe would have been understood as a tax. The tithe-tax was always the first ten percent of the entire yearly harvest which was paid to the ruling elite. So, originally, tithing had nothing to do with religious practice, it was simply a form of taxation.
When God commands the people to pay the yearly tithe-tax, they had yet to enter the Promised Land. At that point, they were still on the journey from the slavery of Egypt. Just as they are heading into the land, for a life free from the heavy hand of the Egyptian empire, God tells them they will face another tax. At first, this could not have seemed like good news. However, God takes this age old practice of taxation and radically redefines it.
Before they even enter the Promised Land, the community of believers is reminded that they did not earn this land. It was a gift from God. As such, they are not free to use this gift in any way they choose, it comes with specific responsibilities and expectations. Written into the fabric of the tithe-tax for God is the overt concern for the public management and equitable distribution of resources.
When God commands that a tithe be paid, it is not to be used to enrich the ruling elite. God commands that the tithe be paid so that there is enough for the most vulnerable in society. Notice that the first thing the community is to do with the tithe is to have a party! “Spend the money for whatever you wish--oxen, sheep, wine, strong drink, or whatever you desire. And you shall eat there in the presence of the LORD your God, you and your household rejoicing together.” God commands the people to celebrate the abundance in grand fashion.
Unlike other societies where the tithe-tax goes to support only those at the top God makes sure that all are included in the celebration. “As for the Levites resident in your towns, do not neglect them, because they have no allotment or inheritance with you.” So God expects that the tithe will still be gathered and that it will be celebrated and shared by everyone in the society. This really turns the tithe-tax on its head. The entire community will share in the abundance of the society including the resident aliens, (immigrants), widows and orphans.
But, beyond the annual celebration, God requires that every three years the tithe is to stay in the community.
Every third year you shall bring out the full tithe of your produce for that year, and store it within your towns; the Levites, because they have no allotment or inheritance with you, as well as the resident aliens, the orphans, and the widows in your towns, may come and eat their fill so that the LORD your God may bless you in all the work that you undertake.
So, the tithe is given back to the community so that those who are most vulnerable in society will be supported. God makes it abundantly clear that a society which withholds this support from the needy will not be blessed by God. It is this practice from which the Christian community looks to, or should, as a guide for its practice of tithing.
While we clearly do not live in the same sort of society as the original hearers of these commands, the practice of tithing still has its place. In our day there are both some very real positives and some very real problems with the practice of tithing. Tithing can be a very healthy spiritual practice which helps to center our life and ground our faith. When it becomes a regular practice it ceases to become something we do only when we feel like it. It is also positive because it done in proportion to the gifts we have received. Presbyterian Pastor Al Winn says that tithing confronts us with this important question: “What proportion can I return for God’s work in order to signify and symbolize and confess before everyone that all I am and all I have come from God?” Tithing can also be a positive practice because it allows us to set God’s work as the priority since it comes off the top instead of from whatever happens to be left over.
With that being said, there are also some problems with tithing which we must acknowledge. As with many practices, tithing can become legalistic and as a result it can be an impediment to spiritual growth. Another fact is that nowhere in the New Testament is the number ten or practice of tithing laid out as requirement. In fact, Jesus only talks about tithing twice and it is not very positive. In both instances, Jesus challenges the self-righteous who use the practice of tithing to lord it over others and who could, and should, give more than the tithe. Whenever Paul appeals to others to give he always makes sure to mention that we give out of freedom and joy, not from requirement. In the New Testament, ten percent giving is never a requirement.
Another problem with the tithe or ten percent as the hard and fast rule is that it is a flat tax. Flat taxes, while looking fair, actually place a higher obligation upon people on the lower end of the economic spectrum. (It is interesting to note however, that studies of giving show that: poor people give more of a percentage of their money than those who are wealthy.) The setting a uniform percentage also does not take into account the reality of things like; children in college, having to care for aging parents, medical expenses or other debts. For some people of faith, ten percent is simply not a reality. However, that being said, there are others who, because of ability and circumstances are able to give twenty or thirty percent. So, if there was a hard and fast rule for tithing it would have to be this: Give as God has gifted you to give whether it is one percent, five, ten, twenty, thirty, or more.
I want to end with a few more words from Al Winn, in a sermon he gave on tithing. In his conclusion he said: “I hope that we raise the budget next year, the General Assemblies budget, the Synods budget, the Presbyteries budget, and the local church budget from which all others come. But that is not a matter of eternal importance.” What is a matter of eternal importance, I believe, is that we, individually and collectively, embrace a posture towards life which says this: God is the source or our lives. All that we have and all that we are is a gift from God and we are thankful. I believe that as we embrace this simple truth, in all areas of our lives, we will be radically transformed. We will be transformed witnesses to God’s abundance, sustenance, and love for all people. We will be people who can truly: Give thanks, Sings praise, and Declare God’s Steadfast! Amen.

Does It Own Us?

WESTMINSTER PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
October 15th 2006
Stewardship Season
Rev. Mark R. Bradshaw-Miller
“Does IT Own Us?”
Mark 10: 17-31

Today begins our annual fall focus on stewardship. This year’s theme is: “Give Thanks… Sing Praise… Declare God’s Steadfast Love!” It is a reminder of a very simple truth. That simple truth is this: All that we have and all that we are is a gift from God. So this year, during our stewardship season, we are giving thanks for the way God continues to provide for our lives. Immediately following worship we have our family dinner and continue our stewardship theme all the way through November 12th. In simple terms, it means that we are going to have five weeks of sermons focusing on stewardship and money.
In the early stages of planning this season I was a little worried that five weeks might be a little much. However, these concerns quickly dissipated after I came across information from a workshop done by Reverend Bill Gillis dealing with money and the bible. Let me share a couple of the things I found. The first one said that the bible has about 500 verses on prayer and 500 on faith. It was followed by the question: “How many passages in the bible deal with money or possessions?” The answer turns out to be around 5,000. The second one was that if I was to preach as many sermons on money and stewardship as Jesus told parables about money and possessions it would work out to about twenty-two sermons each year. I share all of this to say that our focusing on only five weeks will really only scratch the surface of the biblical material regarding stewardship, money and possessions. Do not worry though, I do not intend to cover all 5,000 passages today. There is enough material in this gospel passage to keep us busy, at least for the next few minutes.
In this morning readings, we see Jesus on his way to Jerusalem. Along the journey a man approaches Jesus and asks: “Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” Jesus first rejects the claim of goodness and begins a dialogue which upsets everyone’s expectations. This man, the disciples, and all of us who read this story closely are left stunned by the implications.
Jesus encounter with this man ends with a rejection of the call to follow. But before Jesus responds to this man with challenging words that leave him shocked, Jesus looks at him in love. This is the only time Jesus is said to look at someone in love. It is a clear message that this passage can never be used to demonize those with wealth nor can it be used to further class warfare.
Even though Jesus loves this man, he does not water down the message. You still lack one thing; go, sell everything, give it to the poor and then you can come and follow me. This call to discipleship is the only time in the bible where Jesus extends the call to discipleship and it is met by rejection. It is a powerful witness to the power that wealth and possessions can have in a person’s life. It is a rather sad scene where this man is so bound by his own stuff that he turns away from the way of Jesus.
When Jesus turns to the disciples he makes it clear that this encounter was larger than just this one man. He says: “How hard it will be for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God… It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.” (By the way, the idea that the eye of a needle was a gate in Jerusalem where camels had a hard time entering but could with some work was merely a fantasy developed by the church of the middle ages.) So what began as a commentary on one rich man turns out to be a statement about wealth itself. It was a scandalous statement because the prevailing belief in the ancient world was that those with money had been specially blessed by God. And Jesus says that it is actually an impediment to discipleship.
Having said this, it is now important to clarify Jesus’ teaching about wealth. Jesus is not building a case for class warfare. We must remember that Jesus looks upon this man with love. It is also important to know that when Jesus deals with money and possessions he most often refers to it in a personified state. Money, for Jesus, is mammon which is actually a god. William Sloan Coffin does a good job of drawing our attention to this fact. He says: “Note that only money is put on par with God, not knowledge, not family nobility, not reputation, not talent: only money is elevated to divine status.” Jesus makes it clear, her and elsewhere, that the power of money can never be underestimated.
Conversely, Jesus’ ultimate concern is not money or the power of money –mammon. Jesus is most interested in the kingdom of God – or God’s alternative social reality. Anything which keeps people from its fulfillment is the stumbling block which must be removed. For the man in this gospel lesson, the greatest barrier to his faithfulness was his vast wealth.
The heart of this passage is these words: “Truly I tell you, (Jesus says) there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields, for my sake and for the sake of the good news, who will not receive a hundredfold now in this age--houses, brothers and sisters, mothers and children, and fields with persecutions--and in the age to come eternal life. But many who are first will be last, and the last will be first.” Unfortunately, this passage continues to be used to justify the modern day prosperity gospel heresy. While it is possible to create this fantasy from this passage, something more powerful is at work. In the early community this teaching represented the understanding that the community of Christians shared things in common. So, when you become part of the community of faith, you become rich in family – with all the followers of Jesus becoming your brothers and sisters. And, as the community pooled its resources all the members shared in the possessions. This is what Jesus meant when he talked about increasing property one hundred fold. Despite our attempts to make it say what we want, this teaching never intended to say that following Jesus would make us independently wealthy.
In this passage, Jesus calls this man to renounce the one remaining place in his life where he is bound. The man, in the gospel reading, simply could not renounce his vast possessions. For this man it was his possessions which stood in the way of his acceptance of Jesus invitation. Jesus’ ultimate concern is challenging anything which stands in the way of our faithful response to the invitation to be part of the new reality.
It is still true today that wealth-money-mammon is still a central issue for discipleship. The issue is not the possession of money but more importantly our relationship to it. It is my sincerest hope that we will take the challenge to evaluate the role that money plays in our life in light of Jesus call to discipleship. We will need to do this together. Money can no longer remain a private issue in a healthy community of faith. It is my sincerest hope and prayer that God will grant us the wisdom to see clearly the places of our bondage and the willingness to be set free of all that keeps us from embracing Jesus all encompassing call to discipleship. Amen.

Is this the Word of the Lord?

WESTMINSTER PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
October 8th 2006
Rev. Mark R. Bradshaw-Miller
“Is This the Word of the Lord?”
Mark 10: 1-16

Each week at the conclusion of the scripture passage, we end with the words: “This is the Word of the Lord.” Often times, we response with the words: “Thanks be to God.” It is our affirmation that the bible is the written word of God and we are thankful for what it says. However, on some days it may be more difficult than others to give thanks for what has just been read. It is even possible that one might even question if what is being read is actually a word from God. I must admit that when I saw this passage in the lectionary cycle for this week, I seriously considered skipping this passage. However, since I do believe the bible to be the written word of God, I knew I had to wrestle with this passage head on.
This passage from Mark requires that we dig deeply in order to avoid an overly simplistic reading. If we settle for a simplistic reading, we will end up turning it into a pharisaical law or discarding the passage because of its perceived teaching. Fortunately, these reactions to the passage miss what it really happening in this passage. In the end, I believe that we can say this passage is God’s word and even give thanks for what it says.
Chapter ten in Mark’s Gospel is a shift in Jesus ministry. As he crosses the Jordan into Judea the story moves ever closer to Jerusalem and Jesus death. Once Jesus crosses the Jordan, crowds gather around him. Anything which causes a stir with the people makes the religious leadership nervous. As a result, they go out to see if they can minimize the threat of this rabble rousing rabbi.
In order to test Jesus, the Pharisees seek to get his position on a ‘hot button’ issue of his day. In the ancient world, within the rabbinical circles, there was a heated debate regarding the issue of divorce. There were really two schools of thought and each was rather entrenched. At the heart of the ongoing debate was the issue of interpretation of scripture. While refusing to take sides, Jesus leaves his challengers, and the disciples, stunned.
Having been challenged by questions like this before, he knows how to proceed. Jesus does not answer the question but instead asks them what Moses commanded. They respond: “Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of dismissal and to divorce her.” It is important to notice that their response does not include a woman’s right to issue a certificate of dismissal or to divorce her husband. Jesus rebuttal addresses this issue.
“Because of your hardness of heart (Jesus says) Moses wrote this commandment for you. But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’ ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two, but one flesh.” In his response Jesus uses one part of scripture to argue against another. He places the creation narratives in conflict with the Sinai Covenant. This form of argument, using scripture against scripture, was unheard of in the rabbinical circles. Jesus uses this style of argument to do something which is nothing short of revolutionary.
Many interpreters have missed or simply decided to ignore this reality. However, Elizabeth Shussler Fiorenza helps illuminate why Jesus would have chosen the creation narrative. She says: “The Genesis passage is best translated as “The two persons – male and female – enter into a common life and social relationship because they are created as equals.” Jesus use of the creation story was a deliberate inclusion of women. The ancient interpretations of the Law of Moses saw women as property. As such, adultery was never an offence against a woman, only against another man. In other words, women did not count. That is why Jesus’ inclusion must attract our attention.
Throughout this passage Jesus reframes the conversation to include women and to point to a principle of equality within marriage. When Jesus speaks in private to the disciples he makes this abundantly clear when he says: “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.” Jesus shifts the discussion, so that women are no longer excluded and are given equal partner status in the marriage. In Jesus teaching, both partners in the marriage are given rights and as such, must also accept the responsibilities of the marriage.
While Jesus teaches a new reality for marriage, his teaching is not as simplistic as it might seem. It is also clear that divorce is seen as a profound spiritual and social tragedy. In other words, it is never easy. It is also clear that Jesus recognizes the social reality of divorce and as such shows that the fundamental issues of justice must never be ignored.
Even as we proclaim this powerful message, we must be careful not to see Jesus’ teaching as a new legalistic requirement regarding marriage. Jesus was not laying the foundation of a new law. Instead, he was challenging an unjust system which left women vulnerable. In simple terms, Jesus elevates the status of women in marriage. This is one of the reasons I am always shocked to hear there are still pastors who claim that the bible teaches there is no justification for divorce. There is not justifiable basis for that claim in this passage.
It is the shape of this encounter which is most telling. Jesus does not address this ‘hot-button’ issue until the Pharisees show up and try to test him on it. Instead of taking sides in the debate, Jesus reframes the issue with a demand for justice. Throughout his ministry, whenever Jesus breaks religious law, he always chooses the spirit over the letter of the law. So, any attempt to use this passage in legalistic ways is an abuse of scripture.
Instead, I think there is something more powerful and life-giving to be taken from this encounter. When Jesus was faced with a hot button issue of his day, he does not take sides in the partisan debate. Instead, he reframes the entire debate around the issue of justice. We live in an age of hot button and wedge issues. I wonder what it would look like if Christians refused to give their allegiance to this camp or that party but demanded justice for all. (Maybe this is a pipe dream) Nevertheless, we need to give up the practice of seeing this passage, and other like it, as a new law and instead follow Jesus’ lead by reframing the issues of our day through the biblical demand for justice. Following this path may just make it easier to see how this passage, too, is the word of God. Amen.

Is this the Word of the Lord?

WESTMINSTER PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
October 8th 2006
Rev. Mark R. Bradshaw-Miller
“Is This the Word of the Lord?”
Mark 10: 1-16

Each week at the conclusion of the scripture passage, we end with the words: “This is the Word of the Lord.” Often times, we response with the words: “Thanks be to God.” It is our affirmation that the bible is the written word of God and we are thankful for what it says. However, on some days it may be more difficult than others to give thanks for what has just been read. It is even possible that one might even question if what is being read is actually a word from God. I must admit that when I saw this passage in the lectionary cycle for this week, I seriously considered skipping this passage. However, since I do believe the bible to be the written word of God, I knew I had to wrestle with this passage head on.
This passage from Mark requires that we dig deeply in order to avoid an overly simplistic reading. If we settle for a simplistic reading, we will end up turning it into a pharisaical law or discarding the passage because of its perceived teaching. Fortunately, these reactions to the passage miss what it really happening in this passage. In the end, I believe that we can say this passage is God’s word and even give thanks for what it says.
Chapter ten in Mark’s Gospel is a shift in Jesus ministry. As he crosses the Jordan into Judea the story moves ever closer to Jerusalem and Jesus death. Once Jesus crosses the Jordan, crowds gather around him. Anything which causes a stir with the people makes the religious leadership nervous. As a result, they go out to see if they can minimize the threat of this rabble rousing rabbi.
In order to test Jesus, the Pharisees seek to get his position on a ‘hot button’ issue of his day. In the ancient world, within the rabbinical circles, there was a heated debate regarding the issue of divorce. There were really two schools of thought and each was rather entrenched. At the heart of the ongoing debate was the issue of interpretation of scripture. While refusing to take sides, Jesus leaves his challengers, and the disciples, stunned.
Having been challenged by questions like this before, he knows how to proceed. Jesus does not answer the question but instead asks them what Moses commanded. They respond: “Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of dismissal and to divorce her.” It is important to notice that their response does not include a woman’s right to issue a certificate of dismissal or to divorce her husband. Jesus rebuttal addresses this issue.
“Because of your hardness of heart (Jesus says) Moses wrote this commandment for you. But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’ ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two, but one flesh.” In his response Jesus uses one part of scripture to argue against another. He places the creation narratives in conflict with the Sinai Covenant. This form of argument, using scripture against scripture, was unheard of in the rabbinical circles. Jesus uses this style of argument to do something which is nothing short of revolutionary.
Many interpreters have missed or simply decided to ignore this reality. However, Elizabeth Shussler Fiorenza helps illuminate why Jesus would have chosen the creation narrative. She says: “The Genesis passage is best translated as “The two persons – male and female – enter into a common life and social relationship because they are created as equals.” Jesus use of the creation story was a deliberate inclusion of women. The ancient interpretations of the Law of Moses saw women as property. As such, adultery was never an offence against a woman, only against another man. In other words, women did not count. That is why Jesus’ inclusion must attract our attention.
Throughout this passage Jesus reframes the conversation to include women and to point to a principle of equality within marriage. When Jesus speaks in private to the disciples he makes this abundantly clear when he says: “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.” Jesus shifts the discussion, so that women are no longer excluded and are given equal partner status in the marriage. In Jesus teaching, both partners in the marriage are given rights and as such, must also accept the responsibilities of the marriage.
While Jesus teaches a new reality for marriage, his teaching is not as simplistic as it might seem. It is also clear that divorce is seen as a profound spiritual and social tragedy. In other words, it is never easy. It is also clear that Jesus recognizes the social reality of divorce and as such shows that the fundamental issues of justice must never be ignored.
Even as we proclaim this powerful message, we must be careful not to see Jesus’ teaching as a new legalistic requirement regarding marriage. Jesus was not laying the foundation of a new law. Instead, he was challenging an unjust system which left women vulnerable. In simple terms, Jesus elevates the status of women in marriage. This is one of the reasons I am always shocked to hear there are still pastors who claim that the bible teaches there is no justification for divorce. There is not justifiable basis for that claim in this passage.
It is the shape of this encounter which is most telling. Jesus does not address this ‘hot-button’ issue until the Pharisees show up and try to test him on it. Instead of taking sides in the debate, Jesus reframes the issue with a demand for justice. Throughout his ministry, whenever Jesus breaks religious law, he always chooses the spirit over the letter of the law. So, any attempt to use this passage in legalistic ways is an abuse of scripture.
Instead, I think there is something more powerful and life-giving to be taken from this encounter. When Jesus was faced with a hot button issue of his day, he does not take sides in the partisan debate. Instead, he reframes the entire debate around the issue of justice. We live in an age of hot button and wedge issues. I wonder what it would look like if Christians refused to give their allegiance to this camp or that party but demanded justice for all. (Maybe this is a pipe dream) Nevertheless, we need to give up the practice of seeing this passage, and other like it, as a new law and instead follow Jesus’ lead by reframing the issues of our day through the biblical demand for justice. Following this path may just make it easier to see how this passage, too, is the word of God. Amen.

If You're Not Against Us, You're With Us!

WESTMINSTER PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
October 1st 2006
World Communion and Peacemaking Sunday
Rev. Mark R. Bradshaw-Miller
“It You’re Not Against Us, You’re With Us”
Micah 4:1-4; Mark 9: 38-41

In recent history it has become somewhat controversial to talk about peace. Despite this, we are going to do it anyway. After all, like it or not, all who believe in Jesus Christ and seek to follow him are called to be peacemakers. Since we have much to talk about this morning we will not begin with a defense of this biblically based assertion. In other words, we are not going to revisit the specific locations. It is enough to say that if we interpret the bible through the life, death and resurrection of Jesus it is impossible to say that God is pro-war. Instead, this morning we are going to spend our energy focusing on the need for, and the practice of, peacemaking.
Peacemaking in its truest form is broader and more inclusive than international relationships. Peacemaking is something which is to be practiced in many forms. It can include relationships within families, faith communities, neighborhoods, nations, as well as inside each individual. Each one of these areas is interconnected and none is excluded from the call to be peacemakers.
Jesus encounter with John is all about the call for peacemaking. In this encounter we see how Jesus reveals a simple request for what it is; a destructive and divisive human tendency. The sin at work in this request is our human need to divide people up into opposing groups. It is something which begins in early childhood in an attempt to define the world in simplistic ways.
As a child I remember playing many games which seemed simple but which are opposed to the calling to be peacemakers. I want to use three examples of these games, I am sure you could add your own. The first and earliest division was Boys verses Girls. Later came Cowboys verses Indians, and finally the one played most often; smear the queer. As children we were not even aware of what we were doing, yet we learned the lessons well that: Men should dominate women, white, and light skinned people, should control the dark skinned people of the world, and that gay people could be used as societies punching bag. While many of our childhood simplicities are left behind, these are lessons that will take lifetimes to unlearn. In fact, instead of growing up and moving beyond the childish us verses them mentality many cling to these overly simplistic ways of seeing the world. Peacemaking means to, in the words of the apostle Paul, put away childish things.
The good news is that we are not the first people to face these issues of peacemaking. Every society in history has had their own way of deciding who will hold the reigns of power and who will be excluded. Even the earliest disciples of Jesus were not immune. John comes to Jesus and says: “Teacher, we saw someone casting out demons in your name, and we tried to stop him, because he was not following us.” In this request John, and the other disciples, have fallen prey to the childish us verses them mentality.
John’s concern is not that this other person does not follow Jesus. In fact, John is mad because this person is not “following us.” The disciples seem to believe that they have monopoly on God. If you want to get to God, they think, you have to go through them. So, instead of spreading the good news and welcoming all people to come and follow Jesus, the disciples expect that people will come and do things their way. Jesus says: “Do not stop him; for no one who does a deed of power in my name will be able soon afterward to speak evil of me. Whoever is not against us is for us.” Jesus is really speaking to the disciples in all ages.
Jesus encounter with John’s sounds much like a story of Moses and Joshua. In the book of Numbers chapter 11:27-29, Moses is faced with a similar problem. Joshua learns that there are two people in the camp who are prophesying for God but are not doing it in the way that Joshua and others believe is appropriate. Joshua then tells Moses to stop them. Moses replies: “Are you jealous for my sake? Would that all the Lord’s people were prophets…” Instead of expecting a monopoly on power and God’s favor, both Moses and Jesus point all believers to a new way of leadership and new way of community. This is peacemaking.
Last week I talked to a friend who pastors in another city about a recent struggle in that church. The church has grown and at first many longer term members expressed joy. However, as the new members began to take on leadership roles, things turned ugly. It turns out that the new members had a different way of doing things in the church and this was not well received. The tension and resentment, on all sides, grew so deep that many people left the congregation. As they have begun the process of healing they have found great wisdom and encouragement from the passages in Mark and Numbers. Peacemaking, for that community, meant internalizing the words from Jesus; “Do not stop him; for no one who does a deed of power in my name will be able soon afterward to speak evil of me. Whoever is not against us is for us.” And the words from Moses; “Would that all the Lord’s people were prophets…”
Peacemaking is not easy. Since we struggle with peace in our souls, our families, and our churches, it can leave us wondering if there any hope for our neighborhoods, country or the world? Because peacemaking is difficult on a small scale, the vision for international peace from the prophet Micah makes him seem like a dreamer. When Micah speaks of, “the days to come,” it sounds a lot like “Once upon a time.” Many interpreters of this vision have followed in that line of reasoning by claiming it is beyond our reality and beyond our capacity. While it is clear that this vision speaks beyond its current reality it does not remove responsibility from human beings.
In this vision the people and nations have two specific roles to play. The first action of the people is this: “Peoples shall stream to (The mountain of God), and many nations shall come and say: “Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; that he may teach us his ways and that we may walk in his paths.” God does not force them to come. The people and nations come to God on their own accord. Once the people of all nations learn the ways of God they: “beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.” This future vision is not about human passivity. It is a beautiful vision of peacemaking which comes as a result of obedience to God.
What makes this vision so amazing is that Micah knew the horrors of war first hand. The war faced by Micah was not half a world away. He was not insulated from the death and collateral damage. Yet, in the face of the reality of war, he knew that God had another plan, and was willing to share it. These words from the prophet stand as living testimony to hope and peacemaking.
Being peacemakers, in the tradition of Micah and as followers of the Prince of Peace, means that we are called to say; no, to violence “out there.” But it also means that we are called to say; no, to violence in this community of faith, in our families, and inside of ourselves. It means we must struggle against our human instinct and childish inclination to define who is “in” and who is “out.” It means we will have to give up the nonsense that “if you are not with us, you are against us,” and instead listen to Jesus who says: “Whoever is not against us is for us.” This may seem foolish in our world, but this is the way of the believer, it is the way of a peacemaker, it is the way of Jesus Christ. Amen.

The Children Keep Us Honest

WESTMINSTER PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
September 24th 2006
Rev. Mark R. Bradshaw-Miller
“The Children Keep Us Honest”
Mark 9:30-37

It is quite easy for us to stand back and criticize the disciples of Jesus. The writer of the Gospel of Mark makes that rather easy. Our passage this morning is a prime example. Despite Jesus repeated attempts to teach the disciples about the way of the cross and the life of a servant, they begin arguing about who the greatest is among them. It is clear that the disciples have, once again, missed the point.
I have always been curious about what measuring stick the disciples used to determine greatness. The passage gives no indication. Maybe they were arguing about who was the best healer, or who said the best prayers. Maybe it had something to do with who would take over when Jesus was gone. Whatever the disciples used as the gauge for greatness, Jesus was not pleased with their focus on self-interest and personal power.
Jesus does not respond with a reprimand or a long lecture. Instead, he teaches them about greatness when he says: “Whoever wants to be first must be last of all and servant of all.” Then, Jesus emphasizes this teaching by saying: “Whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me…” The idea of serving and welcoming children may seem rather sweet to us but in the ancient world it conveyed a different meaning. In order to understand this we need to look at the well defined social hierarchy of the ancient world.
When it came to the issue of who was served and who did the serving things were fairly simple. The main concern was how one welcomed and served the rich and powerful. It is not an oversimplification to say that those at the top of the social structure were served and welcomed while those at the bottom did the serving and did welcoming. Given this reality, it is understandable that the disciples might long to be on top. After all, most of them had come from the absolute bottom of the social order.
Jesus undermines this whole establishment through the inclusion of a child. Children, in this ancient social order, were not considered the model of innocence and purity. In fact, children were considered non-people. It went beyond the old adage that, children are to be seen and not heard. Until children reached early adulthood, they were not even considered part of the family. They were only slightly higher than dogs. So, when Jesus says: “Whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me…” he is turning the whole social order on its head. The last will be first and the first will be last. Those who are great are the servants of all.
Serving, welcoming and hospitality are all at the heart of this passage. Jesus makes sure that his followers understand that this is not something reserved for only those at the top of the social order. It is safe to say that followers of Jesus are judged based how they welcome children. So, we must ask ourselves: “How are we doing at welcoming children?” However, before I address that question I want to share two lessons that I have learned about hospitality.
The first lesson came from my parents. Whenever we would invite people into our home, it always meant change. We were required to clean up which meant; the house, inside and out, and ourselves. I remember how they would play music and even light the candles we were never allowed to touch. Every visitor meant a change in our routine. In order to extend hospitality we had to do things differently. And from my perspective, as a child, it was often in ways that I did not always like. But, in response to my complaints I was always reminded that this was how you welcome people. Whether we like it or not, welcoming others, even those we know and like, into our space, means things have to change.
The second lesson I want to share is from my experience at a Christian Camp. I had the opportunity to take a group of High School students to a Young Life camp in the San Juan Mountain range in southern Colorado. Though I will always remember the beauty of the mountains I was truly impressed with the camp staff. I watched as the staff went out of their way to make all visitors feel welcome. They engaged each visitor in such a way that let them know they mattered, were special, and loved, all in the name of Jesus.
The staff of that camp served people, in Jesus name, with a passion I have rarely seen since. In my conversations with the staff I learned two things which still amaze me. The first was that they worked extremely long hours for very little pay. The second and most amazing thing was that there was a two-year waiting list just to serve on the kitchen staff, which was the lowest paying job at the camp.
I believe that these two experiences illuminate vital lessons for our church as we seek to thrive in a world which has changed right before our eyes. In order for us to be a truly welcoming community, to truly welcome people into our house, we must be willing to adjust our institutional lives. Just like it was for the first disciples of Jesus, this will not always be easy or comfortable. This is a challenge not only faced by Westminster but by many communities of faith. It is a foundational shift where churches move from spending the majority of its energy on the maintenance of the status quo of the institution and instead commit its time, energy, talents, and money to the mission of Jesus Christ, no matter the risk.
The other lesson has to do with our calling and remembering the foundation of our faith. In order to do what we do, we must always remember the ‘why.’ That means we must know why; we come to worship, sing in the choir, usher, serve on session, a committee, a task force, or participate in Christian education or a work day or even why we give money and pray to support the work of the church. If we forget the ‘why’ of our calling, all of this can easily become drudgery. And frankly, no one wants to be around a group of people who are miserable. That two year waiting list to work in a kitchen was not because the work was fun. It had everything to do with the fact that they knew why they were doing what they were doing. They knew who it was they were serving.
So, if your service in the church becomes drudgery it is time to re-evaluate. First, it is time to remind yourself who calls you to your work. Then, take a close look at your God-given gifts and talents. If what you love doing and what you are good at have nothing to do with how you are at work in the service of God then it is time to do something different. Jesus Christ calls each one of us to be servants, using the gifts and talents we have for the sake of the gospel. Who knows, we may just end up with a two year waiting list for work in the kitchen!
Which brings me back to the original question: “How are we doing at welcoming children?” There are many ways to approach this question. However, the most fruitful way to wrestle with this question is let it become our driving motivation. From a practical standpoint, basic church growth models repeat one simple fact. Focus on the children and people will come. But, beyond that selfish motive, it also serves as a good indicator. After all, when we are not good at welcoming children it is a good indication that we are more interested in being served than on serving others. So, while the question begins with how welcome children it should lead us to extend hospitality to everyone who walks through our doors or anyone who encounter throughout our lives.
The ultimate question then, the one where we finally get honest with ourselves is this: Are we willing to extend this sort of hospitality? Are we willing serve all people in the name of Jesus despite the inevitable changes? This is what the gospel is all about. “…on the way they had argued with one another who was the greatest. Jesus sat down, called the twelve, and said to them, “Whoever wants to be first must be last of all and servant of all.” Then Jesus took a little child and put it among them; and taking it in his arms, he said to them, “Whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me, and whoever welcomes me welcomes not me but the one who sent me.” Amen.

It's Just Offensive

WESTMINSTER PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
September 17th 2006
Rev. Mark R. Bradshaw-Miller
“It’s Just Offensive”
Mark 8:27-38
In the Presbyterian Church, each person who is ordained as a minister of Word and Sacrament must submit a written statement of faith. I still remember the anxiety in preparing a written statement of my faith to present to the committee on ministry for my pre-examination. I remember that the committee took their work very seriously. I learned that a number of candidates were required to re-write their statements in order to pass. That is why I should have considered myself fortunate that they only asked me to make one change. However, I am still troubled by their request.
In my statement, when I wrote about the death of Jesus, I used the word execution instead of crucifixion. The committee said that I needed to use the word crucifixion because using the word execution might cause me trouble in my examination at the presbytery meeting. They suggested that I not do anything which might cause a stir so as not to get into any trouble. Even after making the point that crucifixion was in fact a public execution, I was finally told that it was too confrontational and would be offensive to some people.
I wish I could stand here and tell you I stood my ground. I wish I could tell you that I told the committee that the cross was offensive and as such refused to change my statement of faith. However, I decided to follow the path of least resistance and changed my faith statement so that no one would be offended. However, when I moved to Saint Louis, and was asked to submit my faith statement for this Presbytery, I added the word execution back into the document. This addition did not seem to offend anyone and I am still not sure what to make of that.
Our reading from Mark’s gospel begins with a very simple question. “Who do people say that I am?” Jesus seems interested in the word-on-the-street. However, he is after something else entirely and quickly turns the question to his followers. “Who do you say that I am?”
Peter is the only one to answer: “You are the Messiah.” Jesus responds by telling Peter, and everyone else, to be quiet. What happens next seems like an unrelated topic. Yet, this encounter has everything to do with Jesus’ teaching about the cross.
Peter mistakenly calls Jesus the Messiah. It becomes clear later that Peter believes the Messiah will be a mighty warrior. Peter was not alone in his belief that the Messiah was going to come and overthrow the Roman occupation and establish God’s kingdom on earth.
Nowhere in the Gospel of Mark does Jesus refer to himself as Messiah. It is almost as if he goes to great lengths to avoid confusion on this point. However, many followers of Jesus miss this point. So, when Jesus says: “that the Son of Man must undergo great suffering, and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests, and the scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again,” Peter’s protest makes more sense.
These claims had to seem like nonsense to Peter. It is out of his confusion and arrogance that Peter tells Jesus to be quiet. Come on Jesus, don’t you know that the Messiah is not weak. You are supposed to conquer and kill! Jesus must have just had a momentary lapse of memory. It is a good thing Peter was there to set him strait.
Jesus responds to Peter by calling him Satan. Then, he calls the other disciples and even the crowd so they will not miss this central teaching and make the same mistake that Peter has. Jesus says:
If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. For those who want to save their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake, and for the sake of the gospel, will save it. For what will it profit them to gain the whole world and forfeit their life? Indeed, what can they give in return for their life?
Peter, and others, assumed that Jesus would act like the rulers of this world. They expected a Messiah who would say things like: “Bring em on,” or “Go ahead make my day.” Instead, Jesus talked about being killed. He went even further by saying that if anyone wants to be a follower they must pick up a cross and follow him.
The cross, in ancient Rome, was used for public executions. This form of execution was never to be used on Roman citizens. It was a means of social control and domination. Ultimately, it was used to not only to kill, but to humiliate, and guarantee tranquility. Jesus’ use of the cross was so offensive because it was never intended to be a symbol of faith or hope or eternal life. It was a symbol of political repression, torture, and humiliation. Jesus call to pick up a cross is nothing short of offensive.
William Willimon, the former dean of the Duke University Chapel, says that Christians in North America have lost touch with the offensiveness of the cross. He has even suggested that churches replace the cross with an electric chair in order to reconnect with the offensive reality of the cross. However, I think it might be easier to come to grips with the offensive nature of the cross when we take time to look at what the images of torture inflicted by the United States in Abu Grahib in Iraq. If we want to connect with the offensiveness of the cross, one only has to look at those pictures. This is the reality to which Jesus was speaking and that is why it was so offensive.
Jesus encounter with Peter and the others points to a struggle that all disciples must face. Will we follow the way of Peter and try to fit Jesus into our agenda or will we follow Jesus on the way of the cross? Too often the followers of Jesus have tried to attach Jesus to our pet projects, our traditions, our prejudices, our political parties, and even our wars. But each time we do this, we stand, not with Jesus, but with Peter – the one Jesus called Satan. The simple reality is that disciples are called to follow.
Being told to pick up our cross and follow Jesus can sound like more things to add in our already busy lives. But being a disciple, picking up our cross and following Jesus, is not about adding one more thing to our busy calendars. Instead, it is an all encompassing call to follow where Jesus leads. In the business of our lives, and even the work of the church, it can be easy to loose track of this call. If you hear the call to pick up your cross and follow as just another item on the unfinished ‘to-do’ list, then it may be time to put some things down. This morning we are going to have the opportunity to do this, at least symbolically.
At the end of the sermon you are invited to take the blank piece of paper in your bulletin and write down those things which may be standing in the way of picking up your cross. What is it that God may be calling for you to put down or cease doing or ‘let-go’ of in order to pick up your cross and follow? Whatever it is, or they are, write it down on the paper. When you come forward, lay the paper on the floor in front of the communion table. Then, pick up one of the crosses on the table and return to your seat.
These crosses are yours to keep. They have come to us all the way from Liberia. The crosses were once the casings from bullets used during the many years of conflict in that country. Christians in Liberia have taken these shell casings and fashioned a small crosses. It is a powerful symbol of hope which does not allow for the scandal of the cross to be forgotten. What was once an instrument of death, a cross and a bullet, have become a symbol of hope.
When Jesus invites his followers to pick up their cross, he is inviting all of us to pick up the symbols of death and domination and turn them into symbols of hope. What the Roman Empire meant for humiliation, torture, and death, Jesus has turned it into a symbol of hope. May these small symbols of spent bullets be the tiny reminder that death does not have the last word and that we are called to proclaim this message to the death dealers of this world. Amen.