Today, July the twenty-first, is the eve of the feast of St Mary
Magdalene,
if you are the sort of church that celebrates that
sort of thing.
Methodists don’t tend to, of course, but
nevertheless I can't resist having a look at Mary Magdalene today,
because she is such an intriguing person.
We know very little
about her for definite:
Firstly, that Jesus cast out seven
demons from her, according to Luke chapter 8 verse 2, and Mark
chapter 16 verse 9.
From then on, she appears in the lists
of people who followed Jesus, and is one of the very few women
mentioned by name all the time.
She was at the Cross,
helping the Apostle John to support Jesus' mother Mary.
And,
of course, she was the first witness to the Resurrection, and
according to John's Gospel, she was actually the first person to see
and to speak to the Risen Lord.
And that is basically all
that we reliably know about her –
all that the Bible tells us,
at any rate.
But, of course, that's not the end of the
story.
Even the Bible isn't quite as clear as it might be,
and
some Christians believe that she is the woman described as a “sinner”
who disrupts the banquet given by Simon the Leper, or Simon the
Pharisee or whoever he was by emptying a vial of ointment over his
feet –
Jesus' feet, I mean, not Simon's –
and wiping it
away with her hair.
Simon, you may recall, was furious, and
Jesus said that the woman had done a lot more for him than he had
–
he hadn't offered him any water to wash his feet, or made
him feel at all welcome.
Anyway, that woman is often
identified with Mary Magdalene,
although some say it is Mary of
Bethany, sister to Martha and Lazarus.
Some even say they are
all three one and the same woman!
So if even the Bible
isn't clear whether there are one, two or three women involved, you
can imagine what the extra-Biblical traditions are like!
Nobody
seems to know where she was born, or when.
Arguably in Magdala,
but there seem to have been a couple of places called that in
Biblical times.
However, one of them, Magdala Nunayya, was on
the shores of Lake Galilee, so it might well have been there.
But
nobody knows for certain.
She wasn't called Mary, of
course;
that is an Anglicisation of her name.
The name was
Maryam or Miriam, which was very popular around then as it had royal
family connections,
rather like people in my generation calling
their daughters Anne,
or all the Dianas born in the 1980s or,
perhaps, today, the Catherines or Charlottes.
So she was
really Maryam, not Mary –
as, indeed, were all the biblical
Marys.
They don't know where she died, either.
One
rather splendid legend has her, and the other two women called Mary,
being shipwrecked in the Carmargue at the town now called
Saintes-Maries-de-la-mer, and she is thought to have died in that
area.
But then again, another legend has her accompanying Mary
the mother of Jesus and the disciple John to Ephesus and dying
there.
Nobody knows.
And there are so many other
legends and rumours and stories about her –
even one that she
was married to Jesus,
or that she was “the beloved disciple”,
and those parts of John's gospel where she and the beloved disciple
appear in the same scene were hastily edited later when it became
clear that a woman disciple being called “Beloved” Simply Would
Not Do.
But whoever she was, and whatever she did or did
not do,
whether she was a former prostitute or a perfectly
respectable woman who had become ill and Jesus had healed,
it
is clear that she did have some kind of special place in the group of
people surrounding Jesus.
And because she was the first witness
to the Resurrection, and went to tell the other disciples about it,
she has been called “The Apostle to the Apostles”.
So what
can we learn from her?
Well, the first thing we really
know about her is that Jesus had healed her.
She had allowed
Jesus to heal her.
Now, healing, of course, is as much about
forgiveness and making whole as it is about curing physical symptoms,
if not more so.
One may be healed without necessarily being
cured!
And Mary allowed Jesus to make her whole.
This
isn't something we find easy to do, is it?
We are often quite
comfortable in our discomfort, if that makes sense.
If we
allowed Jesus to heal us, to make us whole, whether in body, mind or
spirit, we might have to do something in return.
We might have
to give up our comfortable lifestyles and actually go and do
something!
What Mary did, of course, was to give up her
lifestyle,
whatever it might have been, and follow Jesus.
We
don't know whether she was a prostitute,
as many have thought
down the years,
or whether she was a respectable woman,
but
whichever she was, she gave it all up to follow Jesus.
She was
the leader of the group of women who went around with Jesus and the
disciples,
and who made sure that everybody had something to
eat,
and everybody had a blanket to sleep under,
or
shelter if it was a rough night, or whatever.
Mary gave
up everything to follow Jesus.
Again, we quail at the
thought of that, even though following Jesus may well mean staying
exactly where we are, with our present job and our family. Almost
definitely will, for the older ones among us!
But
Mary didn't quail.
She even accompanied Jesus to the foot of the
Cross,
and stood by him in his final hours.
And then,
early in the morning of the third day after he was killed,
she
goes to the tomb to finish off the embalming she hadn't been able to
do during the Sabbath Day.
And we know what happened –
how
she found the tomb empty, and raced back to tell Peter and John about
it, and how they came and looked and saw and realised something had
happened and dashed off, leaving her weeping in the garden –
and
then the beloved voice saying “Mary!” and with a cry of joy, she
flings herself into his arms.
We’re
not told how long they spent hugging, talking, explaining and weeping
in each other’s arms,
but eventually Jesus gently explains
that,
although he’s perfectly alive, and that this is a
really real body one can hug,
he won’t be around on earth
forever, but will ascend to the Father.
He can’t stop with
Mary for now,
but she should go back and tell the others all
about it.
And so, we are told, she does.
She tells the rest of the disciples how she has seen
Jesus.
She is the first witness to the Resurrection, although
you will note that St Paul leaves her out of his list of people who
saw the Risen Lord.
That was mostly because the word of a
woman,
in that day and age, was considered unreliable;
women
were not considered capable of rational judgement.
At least
Jesus was different!
So Mary allowed Jesus to heal her,
she gave up everything and followed him, she went with him even to
the foot of the Cross,
even when most of the male disciples,
except John, had run away,
and she bore witness to the risen
Christ.
The question is, of course, do we do any of these
things?
We don't find them comfortable things to do, do we?
It
was all very well for Mary, we say, she knew Jesus,
she knew
what he looked like, what he liked to eat, what
made him laugh, and so
on.
We don’t.
We
often find it very difficult to even envisage him as a human being,
someone just like us who we would probably have liked enormously had
we known him on earth, even if we had been a little scared of
him!
But we
don't have to do these things in our own strength.
The Jesus who
loved Mary Magdalene, in whatever way,
he will come to us and
fill us with His Holy Spirit and enable us, too,
to be healed,
to follow Him, even to the foot of the Cross,
and to bear
witness to His resurrection.
The question is, are we going to
let him?
Amen.
21 July 2024
Mary Magdalene
07 July 2024
Is God in this?
You
probably know the story of the time there was a big
flood,
and people had to climb up on to the roofs of their
houses to escape.
One guy thought this was a remarkable
opportunity to demonstrate, so he thought, God’s power,
so he
prayed “Dear Lord, please come and save me.”
Just
then, someone came past in a rowing-boat and said
“Climb in,
we’ll take you to safety!”
“Oh, no thank you,”
said our friend,
“I’ve prayed for God to save me, so I’ll
just wait for Him to do so.”
And he carried on praying,
“Dear Lord, please save me!”
Then along came the
police in a motor-launch, and called for him to jump in,
but he
sent them away, too,
and continued to pray “Dear Lord, please
save me!”
Finally, a Coastguard helicopter came and sent
down someone on a rope to him, but he still refused, claiming that he
was relying on God to save him.
And half an hour later, he
was swept away and drowned.
So, because he was a
Christian, as you can imagine, he ended up in Heaven,
and the
first thing he did when he got there was go to to the Throne of
Grace, and say to God,
“What do you mean by letting me down
like this?
I prayed and prayed for you to rescue me, and you
didn’t!”
“My dear child,” said God, “I sent you
two boats and a helicopter –
what more did you want?”
In
a way, that’s rather what happened to Jesus in our Gospel reading
this morning.
He has
gone home for the weekend.
Big mistake!
Because
on the Sabbath Day, he goes to the synagogue with his family,
and
because he’s home visiting for the weekend,
they ask him to
choose the reading from the Prophets.
Luke’s version of this
story tells us that he read from the prophet Isaiah,
the bit
where it says:
“The Spirit of the Sovereign LORD is on
me,
because the LORD has anointed me to preach good news to the
poor.
He has sent me to bind up the broken-hearted,
to
proclaim freedom for the captives
and release from darkness for
the prisoners,
to proclaim the year of the LORD's favour
and
the day of vengeance of our God,
to comfort all who
mourn.”
Mark doesn’t go into such detail,
but he
does tell us that Jesus’ friends and family were amazed.
“Where
did this man get these things?” they asked.
“What's this
wisdom that has been given him, that he even does miracles!”
And
we’re told they were rather offended.
“He’s only the
Carpenter’s son, Mary’s lad.
These are his brothers and
sisters.
He can’t be special.”
And they were offended,
so we are told.
Luke says they even picked up stones to throw at
him to make him go away.
But Mark says that he could do no
miracles there, just one or two healings.
And he was
amazed at their lack of faith.
After all, they thought,
what did he know?
He’s just a local lad, a builder.
Ought
to be home working with his brothers,
not gadding about the
country claiming to be a prophet.
They couldn’t hear God’s
voice speaking through him.
They didn’t expect to, and they
didn’t want to.
Like the man in my story, they had very
definite ideas about how God worked,
and working through a
local boy they’d known since childhood wasn’t one of them!
So
Jesus leaves them alone,
and goes off on a tour of the local
country, teaching and healing as he went.
And then he starts
to send out his disciples, two by two, giving them authority over
“impure spirits”.
They are sent out with literally only
their walking-staffs,
rather like modern-day trekking poles.
No
food, he tells them, no money, no bag –
you can wear sandals,
if you wish, but don’t take an extra shirt.
The disciples are
to rely on God’s provisions for them,
staying wherever they
are first welcomed –
and not moving next door if next door’s
cooking is better!
And if they are not welcomed, they are to
leave at once, without comment, but shaking the dust off their
feet.
And, we are told, that’s just what the disciples
did.
They drove out evil spirits, they anointed people with oil,
and healed people,
bringing the good news of God’s
Kingdom far and wide.
We aren’t told how long they were
on the road,
but I imagine not more than a couple of months.
We
are told that when they came back,
Jesus tried to take them to
a quiet place to debrief them,
but so many people were
following them all by this time that it became impossible,
so he went on teaching the crowds,
and eventually fed
them with the contents of a small boy’s lunchbox!
For
the disciples, this must have been an exciting interlude in their
lives.
But in the other gospels we are told that when they were
able to tell Jesus that even evil spirits responded to them,
Jesus
said that really, what mattered was that their names were written in
the Kingdom of Heaven.
A modern paraphrase puts it:
"All
the same, the great triumph is not in your authority over evil, but
in God's authority over you and presence with you.
Not what you
do for God but what God does for you –
that's the agenda for
rejoicing."
Do we have definite ideas about how God
works, I wonder?
Do we expect to see God working in the
ordinary, the every day?
Or do we expect him always to come down
with power and fire from Heaven?
Do we expect Him to speak to us
through other people,
perhaps even through me,
or do we
expect Him to illuminate a verse of the Bible specially,
or
write His message in fiery letters in the sky?
Because we
are human, we do sometimes
long and long to see God at work in
the spectacular,
the kind of thing that Jesus used to do when
he healed the sick
and even raised the dead.
“Oh, that
you would rend the heavens and come down!” as the prophet says.
And
very occasionally God is gracious enough to give us such signs.
But
mostly, these days, He heals through modern medicine,
guiding
scientists to develop medicines,
and vaccines,
and
surgical techniques that can do things our ancestors only dreamed
about.
And through complementary medical techniques
which
address the whole person, not just the illness.
And through love
and hugs and sympathy and support.
We do need to learn to
recognise God at work.
All too often, we walk blindly through
our week, not noticing God –
and yet God is there.
God is
there and going on micro-managing His creation,
no matter how
unaware of it we are.
And God is there to speak to us through
the words of a friend, or an acquaintance.
If we need rescuing,
God is a lot more likely to send a friend to do it than to come in
person!
Another story concerns two men who were talking in
their club.
“Haven’t seen you around lately,” said the
first man. “Have you been away?”
“Yes, I went on a trip
to North Africa. It was very hairy! I got lost in the desert – my
own silly fault, of course – and ended up calling on God to save
me!”
“Oh really. How did God do that? I mean, obviously
you were saved, as you’re here now.”
“Oh no, God didn’t
need to do anything, because just at that moment a caravan appeared
on the horizon, and they saw me and came to the rescue!”
We do
need to be open to how God is working!
And conversely, we
need to be open to God at work in us, so that we can be the friend
who does the speaking, or the rescuing.
Not that God can’t use
people who don’t know him –
of course He both can and does
–
but the more open we are to being His person,
the more
we allow Him to work in us,
to help us grow into the sort of
person He created us to be,
then the more He can use us, with
or without our knowledge, in His world.
Who knows, maybe the
supermarket cashier you smiled at yesterday really needed that smile
to affirm her faith in people, after a bad day.
Or the friend
you telephoned just to have a catch-up with was badly needing to chat
to someone –
not necessarily a serious conversation, just a
chat.
As a friend of my daughter’s who was going through a
tough time once said, “So nice to talk about general shit, not just
the shit shit!”
You will never know –
but God
knows.
We are, of course, never told “what would have
happened”,
but I wonder what would have happened if the people
of Nazareth had been open to Jesus.
He could have certainly
done more miracles there.
Maybe he wouldn’t have had to have
become an itinerant preacher, going round all the villages.
Maybe
he could have had a home.
I think God may well have used the
rejection to open up new areas of ministry for Jesus –
after
all, we do know that God works all things for good.
And,
finally, what happened to the people of Nazareth?
The answer
is, nothing.
Nothing happened.
God could do no work there
through Jesus.
Okay, a few sick people were healed, but that
was all.
The good news of the Kingdom of God was not
proclaimed.
Miracles didn’t happen.
Just. . .
nothing.
We do know, of course, that in the end his
family, at least, were able to get their heads round the idea of
their lad being The One.
His Mother was in the Upper Room on
the Day of Pentecost.
James, one of his brothers, was a leader
in the early church.
But were they the only ones?
Did
anybody else from Nazareth believe in Him,
or were they all
left, sadly, alone?
I think that’s an Awful Warning,
isn’t it?
If we decide we need to know best who God chooses to
speak through,
how God is to act,
then God can do
nothing.
And God will do nothing.
If he sends two boats and
a helicopter
and we reject them because we don’t see God’s
hand at work in them,
then we will be left to our own
devices.
As the people of Nazareth were.
“Not what
you do for God but what God does for you –
that's the agenda
for rejoicing.”
And if you don’t allow God to do anything
for you,
in whatever way,
what then?
23 June 2024
Goliath and the Storm
Completely forgot to record this, sorry!
Well, these are two very familiar stories that we have just heard read, aren't they?
David killing Goliath, and Jesus calming the
storm.
I'm sure I've known them since I was in Kindergarten,
and I expect you have, too.
Let's look at them more
closely,
and then see what, if anything, ties them together
and what, if anything, they have to say to us as God's people
gathered here this morning.
So then, firstly David and Goliath.
Just to remind you, in the part of the chapter that we didn't read, as it would have made the reading far too long,we learn that the Israelites under King Saul are at war with the Philistines,
and things aren't going well.
The Philistines' champion, Goliath, is challenging someone to single combat, which was a recognised way of finishing a war –
you often find this happening in novels,
especially if you read the sort of historical fantasy novels I do!
Anyway, Goliath was rather terrifying and none of the Israelites felt able to stand up to him.
Now three of Jesse's sons are fighting with the army,
and David, the youngest, is mostly responsible for looking after the sheep.
One day his father tells him to leave all that, and to take some food to his brothers and their commanding officer in the camp,
and to come back with news of what's going on
and whether his brothers are all right.
So David goes off.
And, of course, when he gets there, he hears all about Goliath's challenge, and the reward the king has put up for defeating him –
a big financial reward, plus his daughter's hand in marriage and tax relief for his family,
the usual sort of thing that heroes always are promised!
David keeps asking about this,
and his eldest brother tells him to shut up and go home:
“You've only come to watch the fighting.
Now go away and look after your sheep and stop being such a smartarse!”
But David, quite rightly, takes that as merely elder-brother-itis,
and goes on asking until he understands what is happening,
and what is at stake.
Then he has a bit of a think.
He can kill lions and bears and wolves when they threaten his flock,
he's been doing so for years.
How is Goliath going to be any different?
So he goes to the King and says he's up for it.
The king says “Don't talk nonsense, you're just a boy, how could you possibly fight a professional soldier?”
David explains about the wild animals and points out that if God has kept him safe from those, he'll surely keep him safe from Goliath.
The King is rather desperate by now, so he says, okay, have a go.
They load up David with armour until he can scarcely walk –
do you get the impression they are laughing at him?
But David, as we heard in our reading, said he couldn't manage with that.
And with a stone and his slingshot,
he hits Goliath square in the forehead, breaking his skull and killing him.
And, just to finish off the story, David grabs Goliath's sword and cuts his head off with it, and the Philistines all run away, so the Israelites are victorious.
There are some rather odd bits of this story, of course –
apparently, in the earliest versions nothing is said about David taking food to his brothers,
but he's just there with the army all along,
and they omit those verses where Saul appears not to know who David is, despite the fact that earlier in the book he has appointed him as shield-bearer and court musician.
And Goliath's height is rather more realistic –
instead of being over nine feet tall, he is described as over six feet tall,
which is still enormous by the standards of the day!
So some of the ambiguous bits are probably from a folk tradition of the story that got mixed in.
There are also questions as to whether that sort of armour was worn at that sort of date, and whether the tradition of challenging someone to single combat existed in that culture, and so on and so forth.
But I don't think they matter, because it doesn't make the story any less true, even if some of the factual details are arguable.
As they say, all the Bible is true, and some of it even happened!
So let's fast-forward nine hundred years or so and go a little further north along the Mediterranean until we reach Jesus and the disciples on the Sea of Galilee.
We don't know exactly where they were, it doesn't say.
What it does say is that Jesus has been teaching all day,
and vast crowds came to hear him,
so he stood in a boat so that everybody could see and, we hope, hear.
And at the end of the day, he suggests that they cross to the other side of the lake,
and he collapses, exhausted, on to a cushion in the stern and falls asleep while the disciples row across.
I don't know if you've ever been to Galilee?
I haven't, although my parents went with their church.
But some years ago now, one of the ministers in the then Brixton circuit went, and when he came back,
he told us that he had actually been on a boat on the lake when one of the sudden storms blew up,
and that it really had been quite scary.
And I’ve seen videos on YouTube, and it really does look scary.
I believe these easterly winds can blow up very suddenly, too,
and it might have been fine when they set out.
So there are the disciples,
many of them experienced fishermen who know about the sea of Galilee,
struggling to control the boat in the storm,
and there is Jesus, sound asleep.
So they wake him up and yell at him:
“All hands on deck, there!
Don't you go sleeping as if you don't care whether we drown or not!”
And Jesus, instead of helping to pull on the oars,
which is probably what they expected,
addresses the storm and it calms down as quickly as it came up.
And he asks why they were still so afraid?
Where, he wonders, was their faith.
And then, I expect, he helped them bail out the water that was swamping the boat.
But of course, this demonstration of his power over nature made them even more afraid than ever.
“Even the wind and the sea obey him!”
So, then, what is the link between these two stories, and what do they have to say to us today?
I suppose the obvious link is that, in each story,
people were out of their depth.
They couldn't control the situation.
The Israelites had no way of coping with the Philistine army,
and especially not with Goliath and his challenges.
The disciples couldn't cope with the storm.
They were out of their depths, and everybody was afraid.
David, when he went up against Goliath, or so we are told, said firmly that he was going in the Lord's strength, not in his own.
He refused to put his trust in bronze armour, but in the weapons he knew, backed up by the Lord's righteousness.
The disciples were unable to trust in their usual methods of getting home safely when the wind started to blow.
The oars simply would not co-operate, as the winds were too strong,
and those who didn't know how to row were wanted to bail,
but they couldn't keep up, either.
It wasn't until Jesus intervened that they were safe.
So it's a bit about trusting God when things go pear-shaped,
but, as we all know, that is easier said than done!
So maybe it's a bit about not panicking when things get out of control.
If we can't trust God –
and you know as well as I do that we can’t, not always –
if we can't trust God, then let's look round for someone who can.
In the Israelite's case, this was David.
He trusted God,
he didn't panic when he faced Goliath,
and he trusted that God would use his skills to defeat the enemy.
And that is exactly what happened.
The Israelites relied on David's faith, and God saved them.
And for the disciples, their faith was fast asleep in the back of the boat.
They, at that moment, couldn't trust God to save them,
but Jesus could, and did.
He didn't panic when he saw the boat was swamped,
he trusted that God would use his power to still the storm.
And that is exactly what happened.
The disciples relied on Jesus' faith, and God saved them.
Now, all too often, we are the ones who panic,
who can't cope,
when the situation has got out of our control.
I know I am.
But wouldn't it be lovely if we were the ones who people could rely on to have faith?
To not panic when we saw what the situation was,
to trust God to use our skills –
or to intervene directly in some way –
to save the situation.
Mind you, if we were like that –
and I'm sure some of us are, although not me –
then it is just as well we don't know it,
or we'd start to rely on our faith and not on God.
It's one of those paradoxes, like it always irritates me –
does it you? –
when people talk about the power of prayer, as it isn't the prayer, it is the God who answers prayer.
But I think we should all aspire to be that kind of person.
And you can't be one just by wishing.
It is really only by God's grace,
by God's power at work within us,
that we can become the people God created us to be,
people who don't panic when life gets out of control
but who trust God,
either directly or through the use of their skills,
to sort things out again.
There are times, of course, when all we can do is pray about a situation.
We can’t, after all, save migrants trying desperately to reach safety in small boats, for instance.
There are, however, small things that we can all do to help –
it does, of course, depend on the kind of person you are, but those of us who are registered to vote can,
should,
and dare I say must vote on 4 July.
I don’t presume to tell you how to vote, of course, that’s up to you.
Most of us can probably give a little to the local food banks,
even if it’s only a tin of cheap baked beans.
Many of us can be involved in Lambeth Citizens,
and some of us could even stand for the council.
But above all, sometimes we need to be the person who is trusting God when our friends or family can’t.
“I will hold the Christ-light for you in the night-time of your fear”, as the hymn says.
When we deploy the shield of faith, it’s not just for us, but for our friends and family, too.
We can grow into that kind of person by using the means of grace available to us –
prayer, fellowship, the Scriptures, Holy Communion.
But being aware, as Wesley was aware and reminds us in his sermon on the means of grace,
that they are only a means, not an end in themselves.
They need to be used to bring us closer to God,
so that God can, by the power of the Holy Spirit,
make us more the people we were created to be.
To become more like David, and less like Saul.
Amen.
09 June 2024
Be careful what you wish for
This photo has nothing to do with the sermon - I just like it!
Our Old Testament reading seems to me to be a prime example of the
Law of Unintended Consequences!
Or, indeed, the necessity to be
careful what you wish for!
Up until now, Israel has been a
theocracy;
in other words, it has been governed by God, as
ministered by the various judges and prophets, most recently
Samuel.
It hasn’t always gone well –
there have been
wars;
the Ark of the Covenant had been captured and taken away
by the Philistines, but then it was returned with all honour.
At
the time of which we speak, there was peace in the land –
for
one of the only times in history, it would seem.
But this
peace was precarious.
Samuel was getting old now, and his sons,
who were his obvious successors, weren’t doing a good job.
Unlike
their father, who was as upright as –
well, as an upright
thing,
they were susceptible to taking bribes, and justice was
not always served as it might have been.
Also, the people
of Israel had been looking round at how things were done in other
countries.
They didn’t have dreary prophets
interpreting God’s will at them all the time.
They
weren’t led into battle by priests guiding an ox-cart with the Ark
on it.
They had a King!
They were led into
battle by a King on a beautiful horse, wearing armour glittering in
the sun.
They didn’t have to spend hours in prayer
before they could get on with it…..
Anyway, everybody had
kings.
Why couldn’t they have a king?
So, as we
heard in our first reading, they went to Samuel and said, “look
here, you’re getting old, and your sons aren’t anything like you
–
we want a King, please, now.”
Samuel is very
hurt by this, and does what he always does when he has a problem –
he
goes and prays about it.
And God says to him, more or less,
“Well, now you know what I feel all the time, the way people reject
Me.
And really, it’s not you they are rejecting, it’s
Me.”
And, at God’s instruction, Samuel goes and asks the
people if they are sure they want a king.
Sure, there is the
grandeur and the pomp and circumstance –
but there is also the
tithes;
the conscription;
the droit de seigneur where the
king thinks he can, and will, have any pretty girl he chooses…..
there are a lot of bad things that might and will happen along
with the good.
But the people are convinced.
Prophets
and judges are old-fashioned;
they want a King.
Monarchy is
definitely the way to go.
And, as we know, they got
permission to have a King,
and Saul was appointed –
and
anointed –
King.
But as we know, he wasn’t altogether
satisfactory, and there was war again, and, eventually, David became
king,
and then his son Solomon,
but after that it all went
rather pear-shaped,
and the Kingdom was divided into two.
And
after a series of rather ineffectual, weak kings, the majority –
the
Ten Tribes –
were taken into captivity and absorbed;
the
two tribes of Judah were also captured,
but managed to retain a
distinct identity.
Mind you, we are not told what would have
happened had they remained a theocracy….
So what is this
all about, and what does it say to us today?
I’m certainly not
advocating a return to theocracy –
one only has to look at
so-called Islamic State or Boko Harum, or even what some American
Republicans would like, to see that it can and does stifle people’s
freedom of choice.
And monarchy itself is nearly obsolete.
Our
own King reigns, but he does not rule.
The King may well
have done all the dreadful things Samuel warned against:
“He
will make soldiers of your sons;
some of them will serve in his
war chariots, others in his cavalry, and others will run before his
chariots.
He will make some of them officers in charge of a
thousand men, and others in charge of fifty men.
Your sons will
have to plough his fields, harvest his crops, and make his weapons
and the equipment for his chariots.
Your daughters will have to
make perfumes for him and work as his cooks and his bakers.
He
will take your best fields, vineyards, and olive groves, and give
them to his officials.
He will take a tenth of your grain and of
your grapes for his court officers and other officials.”
But
a good King –
and there have been many throughout history –
a
good King protects his people, as well as exploits them.
And a
good King leads by example.
C S Lewis, in his novel “The Horse
and his Boy”, expressed it thus:
“For this is what it means
to be a king:
to be first in every desperate attack and last in
every desperate retreat, and when there's hunger in the land (as must
be now and then in bad years)
to wear finer clothes and laugh
louder over a scantier meal than any man in your land.”
Being
a King is not just about privilege and luxury –
but for a bad
King –
and probably for every good King there has been a bad
one –
for a bad King, it is all about privilege and
luxury.
The people needed to be careful what they wished
for.
But one of the main problems of a Kingdom, mostly,
is that it is up against others.
Kings have to fight
because other people want their Kingdoms.
Sometimes these are
kings from other sovereign states, and other times they are internal
contenders for the throne;
people who think that the king really
isn’t doing as good a job as he might and they would do a better
one.
Civil War.
Satan’s Kingdom divided against itself
–
as Jesus points out in our Gospel reading –
is always
going to fail and spiral down into chaos and darkness.
So
let’s contrast this with God’s kingdom, that Jesus tells us so
much about.
He told us lots of stories to illustrate what
the kingdom was going to be like, how it starts off very small, like
a mustard seed, but grows to be a huge tree.
How it is worth
giving up everything for.
How “the blind receive their sight,
the lame walk,
the lepers are cleansed,
the deaf
hear,
the dead are raised,
and the poor have good news
brought to them.”
And some of the stories were very
unsettling to his hearers.
The mustard seed that Jesus
spoke of –
well, mustard was a terrific weed, back in the day
–
grows like the clappers, and still does –
and nobody
in their right mind would have planted it.
Besides which, it
would have attracted birds,
which would then have eaten the
other the crops.
And the yeast that leavens the whole of
the dough?
Well, for Jews, what was really holy and proper to
eat was unleavened bread, which you had at Passover.
You threw
out all your old leaven –
we’d call it a sourdough starter,
today, which is basically what it is –
and started again.
I
remember being told in primary school that this was a Good Idea
because you need fresh starter occasionally.
But the thing is,
leavened bread was considered slightly inferior –
and the
leaven itself, the starter –
yuck!
It isn’t even the
bread that is likened to God’s country, it is the leaven
itself!
And did you notice –
it was a woman who took that
leaven.
A woman!
That won’t do at all!
Again, for
male Jews, women were slightly improper –
and who knew that
she wouldn’t be on her period and therefore unclean?
And she
hid the starter in enough flour to make bread for 100 people!
She
hid it.
It was concealed, hidden.
Not what people
would expect from the Kingdom of God, is it?
Be careful
what you wish for!
You wanted a King, instead of God;
a
King who would introduce conscription, would confiscate your bit of
land and give it to one of his favourites.
A King whose country
would be manifestly unfair and unequal.
But that was what you
thought you wanted.
And then you got God’s Kingdom.
A
place that was totally not what you expected.
A place of justice
and mercy and love and forgiveness;
but also a place where your
most entrenched ideas are turned upside-down;
where what you
thought you knew about God turned out to be all wrong…. And yet, a
place so worthwhile, so wonderful, that you would sell all your
possessions to get there.
Perhaps, just perhaps, it was
worth wishing for a King so that we could know Christ as King of the
Kingdom of Heaven.
Amen.
26 May 2024
Trinity Sunday 2024
Today is Trinity Sunday, the day
on which we celebrate all the different aspects of God.
It’s
actually a very difficult day to preach on, since it’s very easy to
get bogged down in the sort of theology which none of us understands, and which we can very easily get
wrong.
The trouble is, of course, that the concept of the
Trinity is trying to explain something that simply won’t go into
words.
We are accustomed to thinking of God as Father, Son and
Holy Spirit, and most of the time we don’t really stop and think
about it.
Trinity Sunday is the day we are expected to stop and
think!
The thing is, the first half of the Christian year,
which begins way back before Christmas, is the time when we think
about Jesus.
We prepare for the coming of the King, in Advent,
and then we remember his birth,
his being shown to the
Gentiles,
his presentation in the Temple as a baby
and,
some years, the time when he was a teenager and stayed behind in the
Temple rather than going home with his family.
Then we skip a
few years and remember his ministry,
his arrest, death and
resurrection,
and his ascension into heaven.
Then, as last
week, we remember the coming of the promised Holy Spirit,
and
today we celebrate God in all his Godness, as someone once put
it.
The second half of the year, all those Sundays after
Trinity,
tend to focus on different aspects of our Christian
life,
and how what we think we believe informs, or should
inform, the way we live.
And today is the fulcrum, the
changeover day;
the one day in the year when we are expected to
stop and think about God as Three and God as One.
And it
is difficult.
It’s a concept that doesn’t really go into
words, and so whatever we say about it is going to be in some way
flawed.
It took the early Church a good 400 years to work out
what it wanted to say about it, and even that is very obscure:
“That
we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity;
Neither
confounding the persons nor dividing the substance.
For there is
one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy
Spirit.
But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the
Holy Spirit is all one, the glory equal, the majesty coeternal.
Such
as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Spirit.
The
Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Spirit
uncreated.
The Father incomprehensible, the Son
incomprehensible, and the Holy Spirit incomprehensible.”
The
whole thing incomprehensible, if you ask me!
One picture I
rather like is of H2O –
dihydrogen monoxide.
Which,
as you probably realise, can be a solid – ice,
a liquid –
water,
or a gas – steam.
All of which look and behave
totally differently,
and are used for totally different things,
but they are all H2O –
and life as we know it would
be impossible without it!
There are many other pictures,
of course.
I have heard people talk of an apple –
skin,
flesh and core.
Or an egg –
shell, white and yolk.
Or
perhaps three tins of soup –
lentil, tomato and mulligatawny
–
all different, but all soup.
But none of these images,
helpful as they might be,
is more than just the tiniest corner
of a picture of what the Trinity is like.
Nobody really
understands it.
And, of course, that is as it should be.
If
we could understand it, if we knew all the ins and outs and
ramifications of it, then we would be equal to God.
And it’s
very good for us to know that there are things about God we don’t
really understand!
It’s called, in the jargon, a
“mystery”.
That means something that we are never going to
understand, even after a lifetime of study.
Lots of things to do
with God are mysteries, in that sense.
Holy Communion, for one
–
we know what we mean when we take Communion,
but we
also know that it may very well mean something quite different,
but
equally valid, to the person standing next to us.
Or even the
Atonement –
none of us really understands exactly what
happened when Jesus died on the Cross, only that some sort of change
took place in the moral nature of the Universe.
Nevertheless,
for all practical purposes, we live very happily with not
understanding.
We synthesise some form of understanding that
suits us,
and, provided we know it is not the whole story,
that’s fine.
And the same applies to the Trinity.
It
doesn’t matter if we don’t really understand how God can be Three
and One at the same time;
what matters is that we love and
trust him, whatever!
Of course, the terms “Father, Son
and Holy Spirit” aren’t the only ones people use to refer to the
Trinity.
I’ve heard people say “Creator, Redeemer,
Sanctifier”, or “God the Unknown, God the Known, God the Worker
of Miracles”.
And there are plenty of other names for God used
in the Bible:
the Good Shepherd,
the Rock,
Strength
and Refuge,
Provider,
Emmanuel, which means “God with
us”,
even Wisdom, a female personification.
And, of
course, all those names do show us aspects, glimpses of Who God is
–
we can never grasp all of God, and it wouldn’t be right to
try.
Even Moses, you remember, was only allowed to see the
merest glimpse of the shadow of God’s back,
and that was
nearly too much for him.
But finding a name, an aspect of God,
that you need right now,
can help enormously in one’s prayers,
I find.
And that changes as we grow and change, and as our
perception of God grows and changes, and as life happens.
This
week, we might find it helpful to pray to the Good Shepherd;
perhaps
yesterday we needed to pray to Lady Wisdom, or Lady Love;
maybe
tomorrow we will need to meditate on the Rock, or the Shadow of a
great Rock in a weary land.
The Bible never actually uses the
word “Trinity” –
it’s a term that came later when they
tried to put it into words.
Strikes me, it’s one of the things
that we human beings like to do,
to try to put things into words
that won’t actually go!
Understandable, really, but it doesn’t
always help.
But the Bible does have the concept of the Trinity
–
it speaks of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit,
all
as God, yet makes it very clear that God is One!
That lovely
reading from Isaiah, that was our first reading this morning, about
our Creator:
“Have
you not known?
Have you not heard?
The LORD is the
everlasting God,
the Creator of the ends of the earth.
He
does not faint or grow weary;
his understanding is unsearchable.
He gives power to the faint,
and strengthens the
powerless.
Even youths will faint and be weary, and the young
will fall exhausted;
but those who wait for the LORD shall
renew their strength,
they shall mount up with wings like
eagles,
they shall run and not be weary,
they shall walk
and not faint.”
Says it all, doesn’t it!
And
today is not really a day for deep theological reflection, nor a day
for self-examination to see where our lives don’t measure up to
God’s standards.
It’s a day for enjoying God and praising
him!
“Have you not known?
Have you not heard?
The
LORD is the everlasting God,
the Creator of the ends of the
earth.
Amen!”
28 April 2024
The Treasurer
“Here is some water.
What is to keep me from being
baptised?”
This is an odd little story, the one we heard
from Acts, isn't it?
I wonder who these people were,
what
they were doing,
and, above all, why it matters to us this
morning.
Well, finding out who these people are is
probably the least difficult part of it.
The man was, we are
told, a eunuch who held a high post in the government of the Queen of
Ethiopia.
Now, we do know a little about her
her official
title was Candace, or Kandake, or even Kentake
nobody is really
sure,
but if you know somebody called Candace,
that's
where the name comes from.
Anyway, this one was called
Amanitore, apparently,
and her royal palace of Jebel Barkal in
the Sudan
is a UNESCO World Heritage Site.
Her tomb is
also in the Sudan, in a place called Meroë.
Confusingly, the
area that our Bibles call “Ethiopia” or “Kush” is actually in
what is now Sudan,
and present-day Ethiopia was then the
Kingdom of the Axumites!
Anyway, the Queen isn't important,
except that you should understand that she was a ruler in her own
right, not just a regent
Amanitore, for instance, was co-ruler
with Natakamani,
who may have been her husband, but was more
probably her son.
The Candaces were very powerful, and could
order their sons to end their rule by committing suicide if
necessary.
So a senior treasury official in her government would
be a pretty high mucky-muck back then.
We know rather more
about his employer, though, than we do about the treasury official
himself.
He might not even have been a Kushite, which is the
more proper term for Ethiopians back then –
the word “Ethiop”
in Greek basically just means someone from sub-Saharan Africa.
He
probably was a eunuch, though;
many people in positions of
authority were, in those days, rather like in the Middle Ages in this
country they were usually in holy orders of some kind.
Basically
they were people who were celibate, for whatever reason, so as not to
have divided loyalties between their job and their families –
with
all the stuff one hears about work-life balance,
and the sort
of hours people who work for American companies are expected to put
in, maybe they had a point!
Although, of course, the people in
the Middle Ages were voluntarily celibate, which our friend could not
have been.
He was probably a slave, or at least born into
slavery,
and brought up to eventually get this high and
trustworthy position.
There is, of course, plenty of form for
this –
look at Joseph, who was sold into slavery in Egypt but
ended up as a hugely influential administrator in Pharoah's
court.
And the same was true for this man.
We don't
know his name, which is unfortunate as I don't like to keep referring
to him as “The Eunuch” as though it were the most important thing
about him, so let's call him “The Treasurer”.
He was
probably born into slavery, maybe into a family who belonged to the
Ethiopian court, and raised from an early age to serve the Royal
Family.
I have no idea what sort of education he would have had,
but he obviously was an educated man;
he could read, which
was not very usual in that day and age,
and what is more, he
could read Greek or Hebrew, I am not sure which,
but neither
could have been his first language.
And when we meet him,
he has just been to Jerusalem to worship God.
Again, I have no
idea how he became what's called a God-fearer, a non-Jew who worships
God without converting to Judaism,
but he could not have been a
convert, or proselyte as they were known, because he was a eunuch,
and the Old Testament forbids anybody mutilated in that way to
enter the Temple.
And now he is on his way home –
he
must have been a pretty high-up official to have been allowed to go
on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, don't you think?
I wonder
whether he bought his copy of the Book of Isaiah during his visit?
I
don't know whether it was in the Greek translation known as the
Septuagint, or whether he had been able to read Hebrew and buy one of
the Hebrew versions.
Jewish men could all read, because they
were expected to read the Scriptures in their services,
but
elsewhere the skill was not that common long before printing was even
thought of,
when all manuscripts had to be copied by hand.
So
a copy of the book of Isaiah would have been very valuable.
And
he had one, and was reading it during his journey, but not really
understanding what he read, and doubtless wishing for someone to come
and explain it to him.
That someone turned out to be
Philip the Evangelist.
Now, this isn't the Apostle Philip, the
one who tends to be partnered with Bartholomew in the lists of
apostles;
he's a different Philip.
We first meet this one
early in the Book of Acts,
when the gathering of believers is
getting a bit large, and the Jewish and Greek believers are
squabbling over the distribution of food.
Philip and seven other
people were appointed deacons to sort it out for them.
Philip
would have been Greek –
it's a Greek name –
but he
might also have been Jewish,
since he was fairly obviously
resident in Jerusalem around then.
He, incidentally, is
the chap who ends up with four daughters who prophesy who entertains
St Paul on his way back to Jerusalem later on in Acts.
But
for now, he is wanted on the old road between Jerusalem and Gaza and,
prompted by the Holy Spirit, he goes there and walks alongside the
Treasurer in his carriage –
I expect the horse was only going
at walking pace.
Back then, the concept of reading to yourself
was, I believe, unknown, and everybody always read aloud, even if
only under their breath,
so he would soon have known what the
Treasurer was reading, and was intrigued:
“Do you
understand what you're reading?”
This man, an obvious
foreigner, someone who obviously wasn't Jewish, probably didn't know
the traditions at all
what on earth was he finding in the
book?
And the Treasurer admits that yes, actually, he is a
bit lost.... and Philip explains it all, and explains about how the
prophet was referring to Jesus, which of course meant explaining all
about Jesus.
And so the Ethiopian challenges him:
“Okay,
there's some water.
Any reason I shouldn't be baptised?”
He
couldn't be accepted in the Temple as a Jew –
would these
followers of the Way –
they were barely called “Christians”
yet –
would they accept the likes of him, or was this going
to be another disappointment?
I can hear a challenge in his
voice, can't you?
The Authorised version, which some of you may
still like to read, claims he made a profession of faith,
but
apparently that's not in the earliest manuscripts available and has
been left out of more recent translations.
“Why can't I
be baptised?”
Well, there was no good reason.
Jesus loved
him and died for him, and Philip knew that, so he baptised him.
And
then left the new young Christian to cope as best he could, while the
Holy Spirit took Philip off to the next thing.
It is a
strange story, and I know I've spent rather a long time on it, but it
intrigues me.
You can't help comparing it with the story of
Cornelius,
a couple of chapters later.
Cornelius, too, is
an outsider, a member of the Army of Occupation, a Gentile
but
he, too, loves God and wants to know more.
And Peter is sent to
help him, although Jewish Peter needed a lot more persuading than
Greek Philip to go and help.
And again, it is clear that God
approves, and Cornelius and his household are baptised.
The
thing is, this was an age when the Church was gaining new converts
every day –
three thousand in one day, we're told, after
Pentecost.
How come these two are picked out as special?
I
think it's because they are special.
These are the outsiders,
the misfits.
They aren't your average Jewish person in the Holy
Land of those days.
Cornelius is a member of the hated Roman
army;
but at least he lives in Caesarea and might have been
expected to pick up one or two ideas about local culture and so
on.
But the Treasurer?
He is not only a Gentile, but of a
completely different race, and a different sexuality.
A total
and utter outsider, in fact.
But he is accepted!
That's
the whole point, isn't it?
There was nothing to stop him being
baptised.
The Holy Spirit made it quite clear to Philip that
this man was loved, accepted and forgiven and could be baptised with
the contents of his water-flask!
How difficult we make it,
sometimes.
We agonise over who is a Christian and who isn't.
We
wonder what behaviour might put people right away from God.
And
sometimes we cut ourselves off from God by persisting in behaviour,
or patterns of thought, that we know God doesn't like, and we aren't
comfortable in God's company.
And yet God makes it so
simple:
“Here is some water.
What is to keep me from
being baptised?”
And the answer, so far as God is concerned,
is “Nothing”.
Anybody, anybody at all, who stretches out a
tentative hand, even a tentative finger, to God is gathered up and
welcomed into his Kingdom.
I don't know what happens when it's
people like Professor Alice Roberts or David Attenborough who really
don't want God to exist –
I suppose that when people say “No,
thank you!” to God,
God respects their wishes, even if that
means He is deprived of their company, which He so wanted and longed
for.
The Treasurer, the Ethiopian Eunuch, was the most
complete outsider, from the point of view of the first Christians,
that it was possible to imagine.
And yet God accepted him and
welcomed him, and he went on his way rejoicing.
We aren't told
what happened to him.
Was he able to meet up with other
Christians?
Was he able to keep in touch with the early
Christian communities and learn more about early Christian
thinking?
We don't know.
We aren't told anything more about
him –
but then, I don't suppose Philip ever heard any
more.
Our Gospel reading minded us that unless you abide in
Jesus you wither away
or perhaps more properly that your faith
does –
and perhaps that happened to him.
We will never
know.
But perhaps he did abide in Jesus.
Perhaps, even
without fellowship and teaching and the Sacrament and the other Means
of Grace we find so important,
perhaps he still went on
following Jesus as best he knew how.
I hope he did.
Maybe
his relationship with God would have been purer and stronger than
ours is, because there wouldn't have been anybody to tell him that he
was doing it all wrong.
“Here is some water.
What
is to keep me from being baptised?”
We have, I think, all
been baptised;
possibly as babies or perhaps when we were older
–
but what keeps us from entering into the full relationship
with God that this implies?
My friends, if there is something
between you and God, put it down now,
come back to God and rest
and rejoice in Him.
There are no outsiders in God's kingdom –
everybody is welcome, and that includes you, and that includes
me!
Amen.
And as soon as we started the next hymn I realised what I should have said, so said it before the notices - because God loves and accepts absolutely anybody, we need to love and accept them, too. I didn't have time to unpack this, but if I preach this sermon again, I'll be sure to work it in!
14 April 2024
Mr Moneybags and the Big Issue Seller
Once
upon a time, there was a really big city gent, known as Mr
Moneybags.
You might have seen him, dressed in an Armani suit,
with a Philippe Patek watch on his wrist,
being driven
through Brixton in a really smart car to his offices in the City, or
perhaps in Canary Wharf.
Mr Moneybags did a great deal for
charity;
he always gave a handsome cheque to Children in Need
and Comic Relief, and quite often got himself on the telly giving the
cheque to the prettiest presenter.
But in private he
thought that the people who needed help from organisations like Comic
Relief were losers.
Actually, anybody who earned less than a
six-figure salary was a loser, he thought.
He despised his five
brothers,
three ex-wives,
ten children,
twenty-five
grandchildren
and the hordes of
mistresses,
secretaries,
assistants
gofers
and
general flunkies
who surrounded him –
and they knew it,
too.
Especially, though, he despised homeless people and
beggars,
who he thought really only needed to pull themselves
together,
to snap out of it,
to get a life.
Particularly,
he despised the Big Issue seller
who he used
occasionally to come across in the car-park.
He would usually
buy a copy, because, after all, one has to do one’s bit, but once
in the car would ring Security and get the chap removed.
Laz,
they called him, this particular Big Issue seller.
Not
that Mr Moneybags knew or cared what he was called.
I’m not
quite sure how Laz had ended up on the streets,
selling the Big
Issue
or even outright begging.
It might have been
drugs, or drink,
or perhaps he was just one of those unfortunate
people who simply can’t cope with jobs and mortgages and
families
and the other details of everyday life that most of us
manage to take in our stride.
But there you are, whatever the
reason,
Laz was one of those people.
He was rather a nice
person, when you got to know him;
always had a friendly word for
everybody,
could make you laugh when you were down,
knew
the way to places someone might want to go, that sort of thing.
But
what he wasn’t good at was looking after himself,
keeping
hospital appointments,
taking medication,
that sort of
thing.
And so, one morning, he just didn’t wake up,
and
his body was found huddled in his bed at the hostel.
They
couldn’t find any relations to take charge of it,
so he was
buried at the council’s expense, very quietly, with only the hostel
warden there.
But the warden always said, then and ever
afterwards,
that he had seen angels come to take Laz to
heaven.
At about the same time, Mr Moneybags became
ill.
Cancer, they said.
Smoking, they muttered.
Drinking
too much….
Rich food….
So sorry, there was very little
they could do.
Now, of course, Mr Moneybags wasn’t about to
accept this,
and saw specialist after specialist,
and, as
he became iller and more desperate, quack after quack.
He tried
special diets,
herbal remedies;
he tried coffee
enemas,
injections of monkey glands,
you name it, he tried
it.
But nothing worked and, as happens to all of us in the end,
he died.
His funeral wasn’t very well-attended,
either.
Funny, that –
you’d have thought that more of
his
five brothers,
three ex-wives,
ten
children,
twenty-five grandchildren
and the hordes of
mistresses,
secretaries,
assistants
gofers
and
general flunkies
might have wanted to be there.
But no.
In
the end, only the ones to whom he had left most of his money were
there,
and a slew of reporters,
hoping to hear that the
company was in trouble.
Which, incidentally, it wasn’t
–
whatever else Mr Moneybags may have been,
he was a
superb businessman, and the company he founded continues to grow and
flourish to this very day.
Anyway, there they were,
Mr
Moneybags and Laz the Big Issue seller, both dead.
But,
as is the way of things,
it was only their bodies which had
died.
Mr Moneybags found himself unceremoniously told to sit on
a hot bench in the sun, and wait there.
And he waited, and
waited, and waited, and waited,
getting hotter and
hotter,
thirstier and thirstier.
And he could see the Big
Issue seller, whom he recognised,
being welcomed and fed and
made comfortable by someone who could only be Abraham, the
Patriarch.
After a bit, he’d had enough.
“Abraham,”
he called out, “Couldn’t you send that Big Issue seller to
bring me a glass of water, I’m horrendously thirsty?”
And
you know the rest of the story.
Abraham said, not ungently,
‘‘Remember, my son, that in your
lifetime you were given all the good things, while Lazarus got all
the bad things.
But now he is enjoying himself here, while you
are in pain.
Besides all that, there is a deep pit lying between
us,
so that those who want to cross over from here to you cannot
do so,
nor can anyone cross over to us from where you are.’’
And
he pointed out that Mr Moneybags’ five brothers,
three
ex-wives,
ten children,
twenty-five grandchildren
and
the hordes of mistresses,
secretaries,
assistants
gofers
and
general flunkies
wouldn’t listen to Laz
if he were to go back and tell them –
they really knew it
already, thanks to Moses and the Prophets.
You note,
incidentally, that Mr Moneybags didn’t ask if he could go
back!
Jesus had a lot to say about money, and our relationship with it
didn’t he?
And about our relationship with other people, too, for that matter.
Do you remember the story he told about the sheep and the goats?
This was when he reckoned that at the Last Judgement it would be those who had cared for Jesus in the persons of the sick, the prisoners, the hungry and, yes, the Big Issue sellers who would be welcomed into heaven, and those who had ignored him, in those guises, would not.
“For whoever does it unto the least of one of these, does it unto Me”, he said.
It must have come as a shock to Jesus’ hearers.
They had been taught that if you were rich and successful, it meant that God favoured you, and if not, not.
I am always rather amused when I read Matthew’s version of the Beatitudes and compare them with Luke’s –
Luke says, frankly, “Blessed are you when you are hungry, or thirsty, or poor”, but then, he was a Gentile and didn’t have the background that Matthew, a Jew, had.
Matthew can only bring himself to write “Blessed are you when you are poor in spirit, or when you hunger and thirst after righteousness.”
For him, still, poverty is not a sign of God’s favour, but rather the reverse.
Even today, you know, there are those who preach prosperity, they preach that if you are God’s person you will be rich and healthy.
But that isn’t necessarily the case.
Jesus never said that!
Okay, so he healed the sick, but he had a great deal to say about the right attitude to possessions and to other people.
It’s in this sort of area, isn’t it, where what we say we believe comes up smack bang against what we really believe.
We discover, as we study what Jesus really had to say, that being His person isn’t just a matter of believing certain things, it’s about being in a relationship with Him, and about letting him transform us into being a certain kind of person.
It’s no good believing, says St James, if that faith doesn’t transmute itself into actions.
And this seems to be what Jesus says, too.
It’s no good saying you believe in Jesus, and ignoring the very people Jesus wants you to look after –
the dispossessed, the refugees, the downtrodden, the marginalized, the exploited.
It’s not easy, I know.
We do hesitate to give money because of the very real possibility it might be spent on drugs or drink.
The other day I bought a sandwich for the beggar sitting outside Lidl on Acre Lane, and when I came out with it, she had gone!
But there are other ways of giving.
There are various charities we can give to,
or even lend a helping had at.
Brixton Hill’s foodbank on Wednesdays always needs donations, and volunteers, too, for that matter – contact Rev Kristen or my Robert to find out more.
Of course, one can even buy the Big Issue!
Seriously, though, we need to take this sort of thing seriously.
Quite apart from anything else, our very salvation may depend on it.
We say that salvation is by faith, and so it is –
but what is faith if it doesn’t actually cost us anything?
What is faith if it is mere lip-service?
And anyway, what sort of picture are we giving to the world if we just talk the talk, and don’t walk the walk?
Do you remember Eliza Doolittle, in My Fair Lady, exclaiming “Don’t talk of love, show me!”
I reckon the world is saying that to the Church right now.
Don’t let’s just talk about Jesus, let’s show people that he is risen and alive and dwelling within us by the power of his Holy Spirit.
The best way to cultivate a right attitude to money, people and spiritual things is to see the “beggar outside our gate” –
quite literally the Big Issue seller, if you like, but basically anybody who is not like ourselves.
Although, mind you, the other day I bought a sandwich for the beggar sitting outside Lidl and when I cam out she’d gone, so I was left with a sandwich I didn’t want!
You can’t win, sometimes.
But mostly they are thankful for the odd sandwich or pasty or similar.
And we must remember that it could have been us….
The miracle is that the more loosely we hold our possessions, the more we enjoy them,
the more we serve the needs of others, the more we value them, and the more we listen to God’s words, the more we value ourselves.
And, of course, the more we are able to show people Who Jesus Is, and that he is alive today.
Amen.