NOTES FOR REFLECTION

November 13                         NOTES FOR REFLECTION             Remembrance Sunday

Texts: Micah 4:1-5; Romans 8:31-39; John 15:12-17

Theme:  A number of possibilities this week.  For those with a love of irony, what about The Church Militant (if not Triumphant)?  Or if ambiguity is more our thing, we might be tempted to go for The Cost of Obedience.  [Think Conscientious Objectors here.]  On balance, my pick would be, The Church in Conflict.

Introduction.  We have only to glance at the suggested Sentence of Scripture for today to see that my comments on the theme above are hinting at.  The Church does not know where to take its stand on issues like this.  The 'prescribed' sentence for today is John 15:9: 'As the father has loved me, so I have loved you.  Now remain in my love.'  What has that to do with Remembrance Sunday?  Why not a verse from the Beatitudes: "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God?"  Or "Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you?"

Equally we might query the choice of readings.  While the wonderful vision of Micah is appropriate, the choice of the other lesson, and of the gospel passage, is less obvious.  If we should have something from Romans, why not 12:17-21?  As for a gospel passage, what about Luke 6:27-36?

Yet there is enough in these readings to ponder if we will but scratch the surface.  First Micah gives us a vision of universal peace almost in spite of himself, as the verses seem to alternate between universalism and narrow nationalism.  St Paul writes in the plural "us" and "us all".  But who does he have in mind?  Only the believing community, or all humanity?  For whom did Jesus give his life – only those who believe in him, or all humanity?  And our gospel passage also takes this bob-each-way approach.  The time-honoured 'Anzac Day' verse about laying down our lives for our friends is nicely balanced by Jesus' advice that to remain his friends we must obey his commands, which include, of course, the commandment to love our enemies, turn the other cheek, etc.

Background.  It is undeniable that the Early Church was pacifist in its teaching and practice, even during periods of horrendous persecution.  Men and women of faith accepted martyrdom, rather than resort to violence in self-defence; and there are documents from the very early days of Christianity making it clear that Christians could not be soldiers, and vice versa.  While it is unlikely this 'purist stance' remained unsullied right through the first three centuries, the adoption of Christianity as the official faith of the Roman Empire in the fourth century brought a complete change of attitude into the Church.  Suddenly the Church found itself in a favoured position, protected, and given great privileges, by the Imperial Authorities, which could only be due to the grace of God.  From there it was a small step to recognising the Empire as the Kingdom of God on Earth, surrounded by the forces of darkness outside the borders of the Empire.  Therefore, it was now God's work to serve in the Imperial Army to defend the empire against its pagan enemies.  From forbidding its members to take up arms, the Church began its centuries-long role as the State's chief recruiting agency whenever the nation declared it was at war.  In 1940 a Methodist Minister, the Reverend Ormond Burton, was arrested at the Basin Reserve in Wellington, for standing on a wooden box and saying, "Our Lord Jesus Christ said, 'Love your enemies'.  On a charge carrying a maximum sentence of 3 months' imprisonment (disturbing the peace!), he was sentenced to nine months and refused a right of appeal.  Far from defending its minister, the Church threw him out, and he wasn't allowed back in until the 1950's.

Are there signs of hope today?  For me, there is one great sign coming out of Europe.  Less than 100 years after the start of the First World War the countries of Europe are once again in economic turmoil.  Yet not one of them has suggested that the only way to defend its national interest is to resort to war.  War on a massive scale has become literally unthinkable in Europe.  In its absence, despite all the nationalistic instincts in each country, there is a general acceptance that co-operation is the only hope of coming out of this situation in reasonable shape.  Britain, Germany, and France are leading the charge to protect their own interests by promoting the interests of the others.  There's a very long way to go, but we can take heart:  Europe has moved a big step forward towards realising Micah's vision in the last 100 years.

Micah.  The tension that in some ways is at the heart of our humanity runs through this short passage.  It seems to be innate in our human nature to think in terms of "us and them", "friends and enemies".  We might (somewhat reluctantly) accept in our heads that there is only one human race, one human family, that we are all children of the one God; yet that is denied by just about every belief system we hold, including our religious, political and economic ones.  In the same way, while Micah's vision is universal in scope, it is still clouded by narrow, nationalistic spectacles.  Verse 1 lays claim on God's behalf to universal sovereignty; but in verse 2, Jewish hubris takes over.  The Lord becomes "the God of Jacob"; the law emanates from Zion, the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.  In verse 3 the wonderful vision of universal peace and the cessation of warfare is spelt out in glorious detail.  In verse 4, the vision includes peace within the nation, as each citizen is assured of the means of economic security.  But in verse 5 the idea of one world under the sovereignty of the one and only God, gives way to a sickeningly modern liberal outburst of politically correct religious pluralism.  What evidence is there that peace will ever come about in that way?

Taking It Personally.

·        What is your most fundamental identity?  Are you a human being, who happens to be a particular gender, born in a particular country, speaking a particular language?

·        Is your first loyalty to "your country" or to the world? 

·        Do you agree that Europe is showing some signs of moving beyond war as a means of resolving disputes?  Does that argue in favour of globalisation or against it?

·        Is patriotism a virtue or a vice?

·        Are such institutions as the U.N. and the International Courts of Justice in accordance with Micah's vision or not?

·        Is Micah's vision an Old Testament version of the Kingdom of God, which we pray for every time we pray the Lord's Prayer?

·        Would you like to end today's session by praying, 'Our Father in heaven...Micah's vision come to be, on earth as in heaven...?

 

Romans.  We must remember that this is an extract from a letter written by St Paul to his fellow Christians – that is, it is intended for in-house dissemination only.  Any lapse from the purity of universalism may be attributed to this.  St Paul says that God is "for us".  We are used to the Christmas proclamation that God is with us – Emmanuel – but what does it mean to claim that God is for us?  If we understand it to mean that God is for all humanity – that God loves all humanity and seeks what is best for us all, then we can say a grateful Amen to St Paul's teaching.  But the danger of this phrase becomes all too apparent in times of war.  A God who is for us becomes a God who is on our side and against our enemies.  Verse 32 should act as a counter-balance.  Christ died for the sins of the whole world, and not just for the sins of those who believe in him: 1 John 2:2.  Yet St Paul in the very next verse talks of "those whom God has chosen", implying that some are "in" and others are "out".   We can forgive him this lapse in the light of the magnificent verses 37-39!

 

Taking It Personally.

·        Do you believe that God is for you?  What experience can you recall on which to base this belief?

·        Has someone brought an accusation against you – a word of criticism of some sort?  How did you react?  How do you feel now as you recall the occasion?  Does this passage help you to deal with that episode?

·        Remind yourself that right now Christ is interceding for you with the Father?  What would you like him to ask for on your behalf?  Offer a prayer of thanksgiving for Christ's prayers for you.

·        Ponder verses 37-39 over and over again.  Come back to them many times during the week – perhaps even memorise them.  Repeat them to yourself whenever you need some "divine therapy".

 

John.  Presumably this passage has been chosen for verse 13: Greater love has no one than this, to lay down one's life for one's friends.  This and the even stronger passage in John 10:17-18 are often dragged out for "war service" despite the fact that they were never intended to be used for such a purpose.  While there have been individual cases of extreme heroism involving the sacrifice of one's own life to save the lives of others, the vast majority of deaths in wartime are "accidental" – a case of sheer bad luck.  Far from wishing to lay down their lives for their friends, real servicemen (and women) have the usual desire to live and to get home in one piece as soon as possible.  Moreover, the stumbling-block for those who wish to misuse this passage in this way remains huge.  Jesus says that the way to remain friends with him is to obey his commands.  These commands, of course, have a very "pacifist" tone: they include loving our enemies and praying for those who persecute us.  And we have the example of his own behaviour when the armed Temple guards came to arrest him.  He refused to put up any resistance, and ordered Peter to put away his sword.  Everything he taught and did can be summed up in that one command with which this passage ends: Love each other.  War is the ultimate negation of love.

 

Taking It Personally.

 

·        How do you feel about the pacifist tone of these notes?  Does it annoy you?  Do you agree or disagree that Jesus was a pacifist?

·        Do you consider yourself a peacemaker?  In times of personal conflict are you the first to seek a peaceful resolution?

·        If Jesus means that we should lay down our lives in service to others, how do you measure up?

·        Would you describe yourself as a friend of Jesus?  Would you describe Jesus as a friend of yours?  Reflect on verse 15.  How do you feel about your "change in status".  Use this verse as the basis of your prayer today as you talk with Jesus as one friend to another.

 

 

NOTES FOR REFLECTION

November 6                           NOTES FOR REFLECTION                         Pentecost 21

Texts: Amos 5:18-24; 1 Thessalonians 4:9-18; Matthew 25:13

Theme:  Not easy to put into words today.  Perhaps "For Your Urgent Attention", except that it sounds like the heading to a scam email!  What we are dealing with is "the end of the age" in one form or another.  Perhaps "The Last of Many Comings" might suggest the approach I'm intending to take.  Rather than preparing for the "Final Examination" (actually, given the time of the year, that wouldn't be a bad choice of theme!), I want to stress that God in Christ is continually coming to us, if only we are prepared and ready to encounter him.

Introduction.  In Old Testament times there had developed an idea of a time of final accountability to God, usually described by the phrase "The Day of the Lord".  It took various forms; sometimes it seems that Israel as the chosen people of God would escape judgment, and the foreign nations would cop the lot.  At other times it seems that Israel was to be especially judged because, being the people of God, she was accountable to God in a unique way.  With the coming of the Christian era, the "Day of the Lord metamorphosed" into Christ's return (popularly but incorrectly called "the Second Coming").  With that change we move from judgment to salvation.

Background.  Metropolitan Anthony, one of my favourite spiritual writers, favours the word "encounter" to describe those tantalisingly brief moments when we sense the presence of God or Christ with us; and he says that every such encounter carries with it an element of judgment.  The classic text that perfectly illustrates the point is Luke 5:8, where Peter suddenly realises who Jesus is and falls at his feet saying, "Go away from me, Lord, I am a sinful man."  Metropolitan Anthony believes that God will not reveal himself to us until we are ready to receive that revelation: "it is an act of his infinite mercy to me not to be present to me while I am yet not capable of sustaining his coming".  Meditation on a Theme, p.38.

In the following passage (ibid, p.47), Metropolitan Anthony extends this concept of encounter to the meeting of others:

An encounter is rarely experienced, if you give it its full meaning.  People's paths cross, they come up against each other – how many pass us by in the course of a single day without seeing us?  And how many are those at whom we look with unseeing eyes, to whom we address neither a look, nor word, nor smile?  And yet, everyone of those people was a Presence, an image of the living God, whom God may have sent to us with a message or to receive a message from God through us, a word, a gesture, a look of acknowledgment, of compassion, of understanding.  To be carried past one another in the street or in life, by the crowd or by chance, is not yet an encounter.  We must learn to look and see – to look attentively, thoughtfully, taking in the features of a face, its expression, the message of a countenance and of the eyes.  We must learn, each of us...to see one another in depth, looking patiently, as long as necessary, in order to see who it is who stands before us.

Amos.  In one of the most scathing attacks in the prophetic books Amos excoriates the complacency of the self-righteous.  They are looking forward to the Day of the Lord (the Day of Judgment) because they are sure that their religious practices will have won enough Brownie points with God to ensure a favourable outcome.  But God abhors all their empty religious ceremonies and rituals because they are not offered from the heart.  What God wants of his people is true righteousness, manifested as justice.

Taking It Personally.

·        Do you look forward to the Day of the Lord with excitement, hope, fear, curiosity,

disbelief, or none of the above?

·        How might God view the worship we offer in our churches?  Do you enter into it wholeheartedly, or somewhat mechanically?

·        What do you understand by God's call for "justice"?  Do you consider yourself a just person?

·        How do you feel about the "Occupy Wall Street" movement?  Does the term "Equity for Humanity" sound like something God might be calling for in this passage?

·        What can you offer back to God in response to this challenging passage?

Thessalonians.  Here is another take on this whole issue.  It is very clear from the Scriptures that the infant Church expected Christ's return at any moment.  As months and then years passed with no such return questions started to arise, along with a great concern about those who die before Christ comes back.  Will they miss out on the salvation Christ will bring with him?  St Paul assures them that this will not be so.  Indeed, "the dead in Christ will rise first".  [v. 16]  I don't think we are expected to pay too much attention to the precise imagery Paul uses here.  [This is, perhaps, the very first letter he wrote, and there is a certain primitiveness about his style and theology.  Contrast this with his more mature thought in 1 Corinthians 15.]

Taking It Personally.

·        Is this aspect of our Christian faith of burning interest to you, or do you give it little or any thought?

·        How would you answer the question put to St Paul if a child asked you "what has happened to Granny?"

·        Do you find this passage encouraging?  Who might you encourage with these words?  [v.18]

Matthew.  Matthew starts this new section of his gospel with a thematic statement at 24:36:  No one knows about that day or hour [of Jesus' return], not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.  Then he records a group of 5 related parables, all dealing in different ways with the sudden return of someone and the need to be alert and ready for this unexpected return.  Today's parable is one of that group.  By today's wedding practices, the story strikes us as odd in detail.  And many of us get upset about the unwillingness of the wise ones to share their oil with their less prudent counterparts.  But, of course, this parable is not about the need to be generous givers to those in need; it is about the requirement to be alert and ready to meet Christ whenever he is ready to come to us.  It is a warning against spiritual procrastination – the idea that we will give some thought to spiritual well-being later – when we've got more time, when we're less busy with more important matters, etc.

The reference to the oil may be related to the (rather surprising need) for wedding garments in the Parable of the Wedding Banquet (Matthew 22:12).  We have to be ready, prepared, and not just in the right place at the right time.  Some commentators suggest that the supply of oil represents our accumulation of good works, but that can't be right.  That would be a gospel of good works.  It's more likely to refer to our preparation by prayer and practice, making us able to see God when he comes to us.  That cannot be acquired from others: spiritual practice is something we have to do for ourselves.

Taking It Personally.

·        Read the passage from Metropolitan Anthony above.  Do you really encounter those you meet – or are you more like ships passing in the night?

·        Imagine you are sitting in a waiting room outside a closed door marked "God".  How long are you willing to sit and wait?

·        What are your feelings as you wait?

·        When the door opens how do you feel?

·        Do you feel sorry for the "foolish" ones?  If not, what do you feel towards them?

·        Are you ever guilty of spiritual procrastination?  Next time you catch yourself at it, take a moment to construct "an apology for absence" and present it in prayer to God.

 

 

NOTES FOR REFLECTION

October 30                             NOTES FOR REFLECTION                         All Saints' Sunday

Texts:  Revelation 7:9-17; 1 John 3:1-3; Matthew 5:1-12

Theme:  Imitating, Not Idolising.  We honour our saints as examples to be followed, not idols to be placed on pedestals and worshipped.

Introduction.  The first thing to notice about today's readings is the absence of a lesson from the Old Testament.  If we think of saints as great heroes of the faith, we would find this omission surprising.  There are, of course, a large number of great heroes of our faith history in the Old Testament.  But look up a Concordance and you will find a clue:  the one I use has only 1 reference to "saint" in the whole Old Testament.  It is very much a New Testament term.  But the same book also reminds me that it is a post-resurrection New Testament term.  It gives only 1 instance of its use in the gospels.   And there's one more thing to note about its usage in the New Testament: it is almost always used in the plural – "saints" rather than "a saint".  So what does the term mean?  "Saints" are those people who, through faith in Jesus Christ, have been sanctified by the gift of the Holy Spirit.  In other words, "saints" is a synonym for "Christians".  Today, we celebrate ourselves and all our fellow Christians!

We begin with a glimpse of the eternal destiny of saints, courtesy of the great seer St John the Divine.  The saints are there in the presence of God, wearing their white (baptismal) robes.  They are already multitudinous, but there's always room for more.  Our second lesson acts as a bridge between now and then, here and there, earth and heaven.  We are already children of God, but the best is yet to come.  St John does not know the details: all he can say for certain is that we will see God face to face.  In the meantime, our calling is to purify ourselves, by living the life outlined in the Beatitudes given by Jesus and recorded in today's gospel passage.

Background.  Most of us can remember a time in our youth when we had a hero or heroine: a sports star, perhaps, or a film star, or someone in a book, or even someone in our family.  My first hero was a man called Albert Hooper, and I first came upon him when I was five.  My mother had noticed that I was keen on kicking a ball around, so she started taking me to watch the local football team in our home town of Newquay in Cornwall.  Albert Hooper was the goalkeeper, and from the very first time I saw him I knew that that was what I wanted to be – a goalkeeper like Albert Hooper.  No doubt my Mother expected the phase to pass, but when it didn't she knitted me a little yellow goalkeeper's jersey just like the one Albert wore; and every Saturday when the team was playing at home I would wear my little yellow jersey and I would stand behind my hero's goal, even changing ends at half-time.  After a while Albert noticed me and from then on he always greeted me nicely, as if we were great mates.  And about 13 years later, at the tender age of 18, I ran onto that same field and took my place as the goalkeeper for the Newquay team.

The point of that story is this.  My little 5-year-old self was a lot wiser than my present-day self.  He knew that heroes are for imitating, not idolising.  Think about that word "idolising" for a moment.  If we make idols out of our heroes, we are not merely guilty of idolatry: we are rendering them safe.  We place them out of our reach.  We tell ourselves that they are exceptional and we could never be like them, so they present no challenge to us.  I could have done that with Albert Hooper when I was 5.  To me he was the best goalkeeper in the whole wide world!  Yet that inspired me to do everything I could to become like him.  It took me 12-13 years, but I made it!

How do we treat our saints?  Alas, we idolise them, don't we?  First of all, we treasure miraculous stories about them, making them larger than life, and far beyond our ability to imitate them.  So we are excused from even trying.  Yet the Scriptures tell us two things of relevance here: we must not commit idolatry and we must become imitators.  Go back to the Concordance and you will find a number of entries for "imitate" and its correlates.  St Paul does not hesitate to exhort the Corinthians and the Philippians to imitate him: 1 Corinthians 4:16; 11:1; Philippians 3:17.  He also said quite a bit to the Thessalonians about imitating himself, the Lord, and the churches of God in Jesus Christ : 1 Thessalonians 1:6-7; 2:14; 2 Thessalonians 3:7, 9.  The author of the Letter to the Hebrews urged the faithful to imitate the faith of their leaders (Hebrews 13:7); and St John urged his followers to imitate what is good: 3 John 11.  And then there's Ephesians 5:1: "Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children, and live in love."  IMITATE GOD!

The old practice of naming a child after a saint, or giving a child a saint's name on baptism, carried with it the hope that the child would grow up to be like that saint.  We might also think about our practice of dedicating our individual churches to particular saints.  St Barnabas, the encourager of others; St John the apostle of love; St Mary the model of faithful obedience; and St Stephen, the joyful martyr.  Perhaps each congregation could ponder how well we imitate our patron saint, or do we simply idolise them and render them innocuous?  

Revelation.  This passage is part of the astonishing vision of life beyond the curtain of time.  It follows the famous reference to 144, 000 servants of God who were about to be sealed on their foreheads.  We are very clearly told that these are representatives from the 12 tribes of Israel; not the elect few who are the only ones to receive salvation, as one or two sects have argued down the ages.  Now comes "a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language".  The language is surely intended to suggest to us the fulfilment of the Abrahamic covenant.  They are waving palm branches, perhaps to suggest Christ's entry into Jerusalem.  Most importantly, they are all wearing white robes – surely intended to refer to the white robes given to people following their baptism.  In baptism we enter into the death of Christ – hence the robes have been made white "in the blood of the Lamb".  And they are beyond all pain and suffering.

 

Taking It Personally.

·        Do you have a mental vision of heaven?  How does it compare with the one we are given here?

·        Note that the promise of God is always "I will be with you" (or perhaps "you will be with me"), whether it's with Moses in Egypt or the martyred saints in heaven.  Is that enough for you?  What more do you want?

·        Note how the great multitude seems to be united in one voice and in service to God.  All ethnic, national, and other divisions have been overcome.  How do you feel about that?

John.  Today's passage from John's First letter is surely one of the most wonderful in all Scripture!  It is a progress report on the transformation of the saints from our natural selves into something far more glorious.  And the process is already underway.  Note the tense in the first verse: it is not a promise for the future: we are already "children of God".  We are already two natures in one person, human by natural descent and divine by the grace of God.  And, as the commercials love to say, that's not all!  Something even more glorious is still in store for us, although we do not yet know what it is.  Just as children often grow to be more like their parents with the passing years, it seem that something similar happens to us, the children of God.  We become more and more like God (in whose image and likeness, of course, we are created).  Notice, in passing, the link between verse 3, and verse 8 of today's gospel passage: to see God we must become pure in heart.

Taking It Personally.

·        This is a perfect passage for slow, meditative reading.  Let each word, each phrase, sink in to your consciousness.  Come back to it many times over the coming week.  Ask God to give you the grace to believe it.

·        When you are next before a mirror remind yourself that you are looking at a child of God.  How do you feel about that?

·        Note the opening thought in this passage: God has "lavished" love on you.  If you have any particular hurt from your past that is troubling you,bring it into the presence of this great love and ask for healing.

Matthew.  The implication is that Jesus withdrew from the crowds, and addressed this famous teaching to his disciples.  Certainly it makes no sense to those who do not believe in God.  Notice that there seems to be a mix of "being" and "doing" here, but the emphasis is on the former.  It is about being moulded into the person God created us to be.  It is about being imitators of Christ, or having the same mind as Christ.  It is about the way saints are to grow into the glory of God.  Notice that in verses 3 and 10 the present tense is used, while in the other verses the "reward" follows the event.  Above all, notice how this "charter" turns on its head the values of our country at this time.

Taking It Personally.

·        Use this passage as a personal checklist.  How are you doing?

·        Which of these beatitudes do you find the most challenging?  Why?  What can you do about it?  Is there someone you could talk to about it?

·        To what extent (if any) are you going to use this list as a checklist for assessing policies and programmes put forward in the coming General Election?

·        We have already noted the connection between 1 John 3:3 and verse 8 of this passage.  Now reflect on the connection between verse 1 of that passage and verse 9 of this passage.  As a child of God how might you carry out the ministry of peacemaker in your present circumstances?

 

NOTES FOR REFLECTION

October 16                             NOTES FOR REFLECTION                         Pentecost 18

Texts:  Isaiah 45:1-7; 1 Thessalonians 1:1-10; Matthew 22:15-22

Theme: Two Sides of the Same Coin?  Coins can be used to express diametric opposites: "on the other side of the coin..." and equivalence: "two sides of the same coin".

Introduction.  In the Western World we tend to favour dual thinking, the either/or approach.  We think in terms of right or wrong, black or white, good or bad, winners or losers, strong or weak.  We naturally assume that today's gospel passage is about the political world or the spiritual realm; but is it?  And what are we to make of this passage from Isaiah?  Could God really be using a foreign king to further his divine purposes?  Is God really the creator of darkness as well as light; and does God really send disaster as well as prosperity?  And where does the epistle fit into all this with the people of Thessalonica becoming renowned for their conversion from one mindset (polytheism, Greek secularism, etc) to a very different one (faith in Christ).  There is something in all this about paradox and mystery – which is to say, there is something in all this about God.

Background.  There is no doubt that Cyrus was a real historical figure.  He rose to power in Persia around 550 B.C., and proved himself a brilliant leader and military strategist.  He began expanding his power beyond his national boundaries in 547, and within 2 years he had taken over most of the peninsula of Asia Minor.  In 539 he captured Babylon, before that the great power in the region.  Among his first acts was to grant freedom to many captive people held in Babylon.  He decreed that any Jewish captive who wished to do so could return home to Jerusalem; and he even returned the sacred vessels that had been looted by the Babylonians when they conquered Jerusalem.  In fact, he showed the same generous attitude to people of other nationalities and faiths, but that is not mentioned in the Bible: these are, after all, the Hebrew Scriptures telling Israel's story.

Glance back to the end of chapter 44 and you will find these words: "who says of Cyrus 'he is my shepherd and will accomplish all that I please'; he will say of Jerusalem, 'Let it be rebuilt', and of the temple, 'Let its foundations be laid'.  This has given rise to much debate over the timing of this prophecy in relation to the actual event.  There are 3 possibilities:

·        It was written before the event as inspired prophecy:

·        It was written before the event by a politically shrewd observer who could read the 'signs of the time':

·        It was written after the event, with the benefit of hindsight.

The issue of tax raised in the gospel passage was a very important one.  Jerusalem was often under foreign domination and required to pay tribute money to the overlords of the day.  But in 6 A.D. the Roman occupiers had imposed a temple tax; effectively a cut of all money given as offering to the Temple had to be given to the Roman authorities.  This had so enraged some Jews that there had been a violent uprising: to take money from the Temple was to rob God.  The Zealots in Jesus' time still held to this line so it was a very important issue, a political 'hot potato'.

It might be useful to think of our own way of dividing issues up into separate compartments.  Is the oil-spill off Tauranga a transport issue for Stephen Joyce to handle, or an environmental issue for Nick Smith?  Is the sole aim of Fonterra to maximise returns to farmers, or, bearing in mind the importance of milk in a healthy diet for growing children, should Fonterra have a responsibility to keep down the local price of milk?  Is it either/or or both/and that should guide our thinking?

Isaiah.  The first shock is that Cyrus, a foreigner, Gentile, leader of a pagan nation, is referred to as God's "Anointed", meaning "Messiah" or "Christ"!  On the other side of the coin (so to speak!), Cyrus' great military successes are ascribed to God (vv.2-4).  God has summoned (called) Cyrus by name (as we have been called), and has even bestowed on him a title of great honour.  And all this even though, we are assured twice, Cyrus has never acknowledge God.  Even all-conquering foreign kings are under the governance of God for there is none like him in the whole world.  In God there is no duality: God is both/and, not either/or.  He creates both light and darkness, prosperity and disaster.

Taking It Personally.

·        Looking back over your life, can you see God's involvement in it even when you were quite unaware that God was at work in and with you?  Was there a time when you did not "acknowledge" God?

·        Many have claimed that the dramatic fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of Communism was God's doing, working through people like Mikail Gorbachev.  In the light of this passage what do you think of claims such as these?

·        How do you feel about the statement by Isaiah that God is responsible for darkness and light, disaster and prosperity?  (If you are tempted to assume that 'good' people get the prosperity and 'bad' people get the disaster, remind yourself of Job!)

·        Where was God in the Pike River Mine disaster, the Christchurch earthquakes, or the Tauranga oil-spill?

Thessalonians.  This may well be the earliest letter we have from St Paul.  He visited Thessalonica (modern-day Salonika) on his second missionary journey.  The city was large and important, with a busy sea-port and all the dubious behaviour that went with that.  It was also on an important trade route, the Via Egnatia, and had a large Jewish community with a synagogue.  When many people started to be converted to the new faith it aroused deep hostility in the Jewish community, and Paul was driven out of the city by them.  Widespread persecution of the new converts followed; yet many remained firm in their faith and this became widely known in the area.  Hence Paul writes to them warmly, commending them for their faith, and lauding them as great examples to other struggling faith communities.

Taking It Personally.

·        In your prayers do you regularly give thanks for particular people or groups, family friends, workmates, your local church community, your neighbourhood, etc?

·        Is there someone you seek to imitate as a person of faith?  Who have been or are examples of faithful people for you?  Have you given thanks to God for them?

·        Have you in turn become a model of faith for others to imitate?  Has the gospel rang out from you; is your faith well-known to people who know you well?

 

Matthew.  Recall again that this is in Holy Week, after the cleansing of the Temple, when Jesus has upset the money traders and others making money from the pilgrims in the Temple.  Notice, too, that this is the first of three issues raised with Jesus, before he raises one of his own.  Thus, he is asked about paying taxes, the resurrection life in relation to divorcees, and the greatest of all the commandments.  He raises the issue of the Davidic descent of the Messiah.  It's all rather tedious stuff, as the religious hierarchy and an assortment of powerful allies make one last attempt to trap him into self-incrimination.

 

Today the Pharisees and the Herodians team up.  Not natural allies, as the latter support the puppet-king, Herod, and favour collaboration with the Roman overlords, and the Pharisees do not.  [Which means, of course, that the Herodians would favour paying taxes to Caesar, and the Pharisees would not.]  After an opening flourish of nauseating flattery they put their question in classic binary mode: is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, yes or no?  Jesus begins his response by making it clear he knows exactly what they're up to, and then finesses them by asking for a coin used in the payment of taxes.  The implication is that Jesus and his disciples do not have such a coin and therefore cannot pay the tax, whereas his questioners do have one and could pay the tax.

 

The coin bears an image of Tiberius Caesar [emperor from 14-37A.D.], and the inscription read: "Tiberius, son of the divine Augustus."  Such a claim to divinity (or descent from divinity) was blasphemous to the Jews.  Jesus' response uses the word "render" (not merely "give").  It is a technical word meaning to pay a debt owed to the payee.  Thus Jesus is saying, if you owe something to Caesar pay him what you owe; likewise, whatever you owe to God repay that debt.

 

The subtlety of all this is two-fold.  First, none of us can ever repay the enormous debt we owe to God.  Secondly, the coin belongs to Tiberius because it bears his image.  But we bear God's image, so we belong to God.  God's claim over us is total; Caesar's claim, if any, is a few coins.

 

 

 

Taking It Personally.

·        To what extent do you separate your religious beliefs from your business decisions?  Do you live in two separate realms, the secular and the spiritual, or is there only one? 

·        Are you an either/or person or a both/and person generally?

·        Take out a coin and look at it.  Look at the Queen's head on it.  Remind yourself it bears her image.  Now remind yourself whose image you bear.  Stay with that thought for some time.  How do you feel about it?

·        How do you feel about paying taxes?  Are you glad of the opportunity to share in providing health care and education to others, or do you begrudge it and seek ways to minimise your tax liability?

·        Do you agree or disagree that these are valid questions of faith?

NOTES FOR REFLECTION

October 9                               NOTES FOR REFLECTION                         Pentecost 16

Texts: Isaiah 25:1-9; Philippians 4:1-9; Matthew 22:1-12

Theme: R.S.V.P.  In other words, it's all about our response to the King's invitation – better known as God's grace.

Introduction.  In the broader picture the gospel narrative today is, and in recent weeks has been, about authority and our willingness or otherwise to accept it.  Related to that is the ongoing question of identity.  The teachers of the law and the elders questioned Jesus' authority: now we have invited guests throwing their invitations back in a denial of the King's authority over them.  Who is this king that expects them to drop everything and attend his son's wedding feast?  The passage from Isaiah is set in the context of rebellious enemy states having been brought into submission, and now being open to God's gracious invitation to become one with his people.  All nations are under God's authority.  In the epistle, St Paul writes as one having authority to a local church in which personal agendas are damaging the community's witness.  Their response will depend, in part, on who they think he is: an Apostle or an interfering busybody?  Does he have the authority to tell them what to do?

Background.  We might think about our own Royal Wedding, which all seems so long ago now, but, in fact, it was at the end of April.  The invitations to that event were greatly sought after, we were assured!  It is unlikely that any fortunate recipient made light of it; even less likely that anyone declined it on the ground of having better things to do with his/her time!

We might also see some connections between a more recent event, one much closer to home.  The kingdom of heaven, we might say, is like "Party Central" or "God's Fanzone", open to everybody who wants to turn up: however, patrons who are inappropriately dressed (not wearing official sponsor's products) will be ejected.

There's also the lovely (but rather provocative) story about the Vicar who started missing the odd Sunday morning service.  When Vestry finally challenged him about this he produced a series of explanations: he missed one Sunday because a friend he hadn't seen in years turned up unexpectedly on his doorstep so he stayed home to spend time with him; another, because it started to rain rather heavily and the church always felt so cold in bad weather; a third because it was such a lovely day he took the opportunity to play a round of golf; and the fourth, because his wife was away visiting her sister, so he needed to look after the children.  After hearing all this and deliberating for some time, Vestry resolved to warn him that if he continued to behave like the parishioners they would have no alternative but to ask the Bishop to dismiss him.

Isaiah.  One of the key ideas running through the whole Book of Isaiah is the universal reach of God's salvation.  Until his time, the prevailing view was that different nations had different gods: Yahweh was the God of Israel but had no "jurisdiction" outside her borders.  Then sometime around the 8^th to 7^th centuries B.C. a change of thinking developed.  As the idea of monotheism took hold, it became clear that Yahweh could not be limited by national boundaries.  He was still the God of Israel, irrevocably bound to Israel by the Abrahamic Covenant, etc, but through Israel he would bring salvation to all nations.  In this passage we see evidence of this shift.  Isaiah begins in the first person singular: "you are my God; I will exalt you".  Then he speaks of God overcoming "foreigners", "strong peoples", and "ruthless nations", representative of the traditional view that everyone else was Israel's enemy and therefore an enemy of Yahweh.  But then (v.6) comes a wonderful invitation addressed to "all peoples", "all nations", and "all faces".  By verse 8, God's people are "from all the earth".

Taking It Personally.

·       Do you prefer small gatherings of people you know or large crowds of all sorts?  When you receive an invitation to a social function how concerned are you about who else may have been invited?

·       On Christmas Day, would you prefer to have dinner at home with family and friends, or join in a community "open-to-all" type celebration?

·       Do you agree with Isaiah that God has done "marvellous things"?  Such as what?

·       Having pondered those marvellous things, spend some time in prayer extolling him and praising his name.

Philippians.  St Paul is clearly writing to a real congregation of real people!  Even among those who ministered alongside Paul a personal dispute has arisen.  Paul does not ignore it or try to make light of it: he acknowledges it and names the participants.  Nor does he take sides.  Instead, he urges them to settle their differences, and the rest of the congregation to help them reconcile.  They should all focus their attention, their energies and their hearts on God, in worship and prayer, and fill their minds with all that is good and positive.  That is the way to establish and experience the perfect peace of God.

Taking It Personally.

·        Are you at ease and at peace with each of the other members of your local church, or are there "issues" needing to be addressed?

·        How might other members of the congregation help in promoting any necessary reconciliation?

·        Is your gentleness evident to all?

·        Are you anxious or worried about anything?

·        Are you presently experiencing the peace of God that passes all understanding?

·        Do you sometimes catch yourself thinking negatively?

·        Review the last week.  To what extent have you succeeded in putting into practice the things that you have learned from St Paul's writings?

Matthew.  We continue Jesus' teaching in Holy Week, only days (and perhaps only hours) from his capture and crucifixion.  Although introduced as a "kingdom parable" this one is very much a "judgment parable".  There is an uncompromising division between those who receive salvation (or, more accurately, those who accept it) and those who do not.  Some of the language is harsh, even brutal.  And the plot verges on melodrama in places: burning a whole city does seem something of an over-reaction to what was, at worst, a social snub.  But the central message is clear: God's invitation is open to all, but each must actually accept it.  A reply is required.

The image of the wedding feast is common, reaching its climax in the wedding feast of the Lamb.  We're in eschatological territory here.  As in the Parable of the Vineyard, the treatment meted out to the King's servants equates to the treatment of Israel's prophets over the centuries.  Those who received their invitations did not just politely decline them; they made light of them, preferred to pursue their own agendas.  This was a terrible insult to the dignity and authority of the King.

The new batch of "guests" was a very mixed bag.  It included "the good and the bad", dealing a grievous blow to all those who believe that entry into heaven depends on the quality of our behaviour.  Two difficulties with this story have baffled commentators for years.  The first concerns the "man there who was not wearing wedding clothes".  As he had been rounded up off the street it's hard to see how he (or any of the others) could be.  Among many possible explanations perhaps the strongest two are these:

·        The literal approach.  It has been suggested that the custom for such weddings was for the host (the King) to provide wedding garments for the guests as they arrived.  Perhaps this guy had refused to "dress up like a penguin" -  that is, his attitude was hostile.

·        The metaphorical approach.  To enter into God's presence we must "put on Christ".  This guy tried to enter as himself rather than "in Christ".

Taking It Personally.

·        Recall the last time you received a social invitation.  Did you accept it gladly, accept it reluctantly out of social convention, decline it on 'diplomatic' grounds, or simply decline it?  How did you feel about the invitation and your response to it?

·        Recall the royal wedding in April (William and Catherine), and the speculation beforehand about who was on the guest list.  How would you feel if a recipient of such an invitation had made light of it, perhaps by trying to sell it on TradeMe, or joking about it on YouTube?

·        Ponder the tough language in verses 7 and 13 – remember this is Jesus speaking).  How do you feel about it?

·        Can you recall a social occasion at which you felt inappropriately dressed?  How did you feel about it?

·        Does it matter what you wear to church?  Is it a sign of respect to God, or are you more concerned about what others may think of you?