February 12 NOTES FOR REFLECTION

February 12                            NOTES FOR REFLECTION

Texts: 2 Kings 5:1-14; 1 Corinthians 9:24-27; Mark 1:40-45

Theme:  There are some fairly obvious ones today; but I'm going with "Obstacles to Grace", looking at some of the things that might hinder our relationship with God, or prevent God's grace flowing into us.

Introduction.  There is much that is strange about the healing of Naaman, including the fact that it remained very much a sore appoint right up to Jesus' time: see Luke 4:27-30.  The strangest thing about it is its inclusion in the Hebrew Scriptures at all!  What were the Jewish faithful to learn from this story?  That their God cared as much for Syrians as for Jews?  That Elisha humiliated the second most powerful person in Syria and lived to tell the tale?  Or that, only when we get rid of our national and ethnic illusions of superiority, and our false preconceptions of what God should and shouldn't do, are we open to receive God's grace?  So there are things we must get rid of for our relationship with God to grow.  There are also things we must do: just as athletes train to achieve physical fitness, so we must strive to achieve spiritual fitness.  When we are ready to acknowledge our need and call out to God unconditionally, to open ourselves to God's healing grace, God is willing to meet our needs.

Background.   Writers such as Richard Rohr, Thomas Keating, Jim Marion, and Ken Wilber have been pouring out books in recent years on the subject of spiritual evolution and development, both in relation to our species and to the individual human being.  It is generally accepted that the new-born infant has no sense of self: very young infants will watch their own foot waving about with the same attention he or she gives to a rattle or a toy dangling above the cot.  The infant does not distinguish between self and object.  The ability to do this develops gradually over the next 2 years or so, so that by that age the child has some degree of self-awareness, but this is still fuzzy around the edges.  The close bonding with the infant's parents means that the distinction between self and parent is not nearly as clear as that between self and stranger.  As the years go by there is a gradual move to identify with a larger group of people, other family members, play-mates, and others who are seen often.  Somewhere in the teens a period of re-alignment of loyalties takes place, with a growing sense of self and autonomy, and then more equal relationships may be entered into. 

Meanwhile we start o indentify with "clans" or "tribes" of our own choosing, be they sports teams, hometowns, or our country.  Healthy religious faith seeks to lead us on further, to transcend such us-them divisions altogether and recognise the oneness of humanity, and even of all creation.  But most of us struggle with this to some degree.  When push comes to shove – and especially when peace gives way to war – all pretence to belong to the one human race is liable to be replaced by a growing conviction that our side is right and the other side is wrong; that God is on our side and the other side is demonic.  Listen to debates on the Treaty – or on our three-tikanga constitution – or on globalisation –and you will not hear many voices raised in support of the proposition that we are all one in God!  Come to that, go to a meeting on the future of the Parish of East Otago and suggest that it doesn't matter where we worship – or which churches we use and which ones we close - and see how many people agree with you!  Despite the universalism that has been an essential part of our faith since the time Of Isaiah – reaffirmed by Jesus in his ministry and spelt out in black and white by St Paul at least three times – we still do not really believe that in Christ there is no such thing as male and female, Jew or Greek, free or slave: that in Christ all such differences are transcended.  When they are not they become obstacles to grace.

Kings.  What a wonderfully told story this is!  Right from the start we are alerted to the fact that it operates on the two levels we have become used to in recent weeks, the material (worldly) realm, and the spiritual one.  Naaman is the Commander of the Syrian army.  We are told that he is a great man in the eyes of his master (the King of Syria) and highly regarded because the King and the people believe that Naaman has won a great victory on the battlefield.  However, the author makes it clear to us that his victory was given to him by the Lord, although he sees no need to explain to us why the Lord God of Israel should give victory to a pagan army often at odds with Israel.

The picture of the great man is completed by an assurance that he is a valiant soldier, then immediately dashed to pieces with a medical diagnosis: he has leprosy.  His life will never be the same again.  Help comes in a most extraordinary way.  In his own household, serving his own wife, is a young girl captured from Israel, nameless and quite probably abused.  Yet she has compassion for his plight.  She plucks up courage to raise the subject with her mistress: "if only", she says, indicating the strength of her concern for the master's health.  The wife passes her message on, and his desperation is such that he decides to give it a go.  He seeks leave from the King, and again we see the worldly point of view: the King gives him a letter of authority addressed to the King of Israel (not, to the prophet of whom the servant girl spoke).  To men of such rank the assumption is that you deal with the man at the top and he will order the prophet to carry out the work.  Similarly it is assumed that the prophet (or perhaps the King) will expect a pretty handsome koha for his troubles.  The King of Israel adopts a similarly worldly view of all this, fearing a diplomatic set-up as a pre-cursor to more aggression.

The Rabbis taught in Jesus' time that to heal leprosy is as difficult as raising the dead: the King's response in verse 7 ("Can I kill and bring back to life?") suggests that this view has ancient roots.  Elisha hears what's going on and tells the King to refer the unfortunate Naaman onto him.  Now watch and admire the storytelling genius of this author: every little detail helps to heighten the drama.  "So Naaman went with his horses and chariots" (verse 9): we might say, with his entourage, all very impressive and reeking of power.  Elisha doesn't even stir himself to greet his "distinguished" patient: he sends out a messenger with a ridiculous "green prescription".  Naaman is incensed.  He has a very clear idea of how a healer should act: wonderful comedic touch!  Naaman has to accept that he is no longer the powerful one; he has to learn to control his anger; he has to lose his ethnic/national superiority; and he has to submit to the advice of his staff.  All those things are acting as obstacles to God's healing grace; and only when he jettisons his pride and arrogance and submits to the Lord's authority exercised through Elisha, his servant, and Naaman's own men, is he healed.

Taking It Personally.

·        Recall a time when you were ill.  Which part of Naaman's story do you most identify with?  The shock of the diagnosis?  The willingness to try the unorthodox?  The sense of anger at the way a health professional treated you as a person?  The indignity of the hospital gown?  What did you learn about yourself from that whole experience?

·        Think about your ethnic or national identity for a moment.  Are you proud of it?  Why?  Do you consider yourself patriotic?  Is your Christian identity more or less important to you than your national or ethnic identity?

·        Are you open to receiving advice from those of "inferior rank" (children, junior colleagues, recent immigrants, etc)?

·        Is this story about baptism, being born again, healed, cleansed, converted?  Read verse 15: does that alter your view?

·        Read Luke  4:27-29.  Why do you think this story is so controversial?  Can you identify with those who find such a story offensive?  [Think about our propensity to re-write history, to cover over the black spots in our national history.]

Corinthians.  It is not obvious to me why this short reading has been chosen today.  I want to see it as a warning against spiritual passivity, or quietism.  Yes, God, takes the initiative, but that does not mean that we just sit back and let it all happen.  We need to be spiritually fit: we need to work at it, in prayer, in worship, in Bible study and reflection, and in other forms of spiritual exercise.  Perhaps verse 24 is not St Paul at his best, with the implication that we compete with one another for the crown of salvation and there can only be one winner!  But he recovers in verse 25, so we can overlook that brief lapse.

Taking It Personally.

·       Are you careful to ensure that you get regular physical exercise?  Do you try to eat healthily and get a reasonable amount of sleep?  Why?

·       Do you give the same amount of attention to your spiritual wellbeing as to your physical wellbeing?  Why not?

·       What form of spiritual exercise might you trial during the coming week?

Mark.  And here's another beautifully told story.  Notice that it is not set anywhere in particular: it is a representative case.  The leper comes to Jesus in breach of the Law and custom: he should have kept well away from other people.  He kneels before Jesus and begs him.  This is the essence of prayer.  He comes, he submits, he acknowledges his need, and he asks for help.    Jesus responds immediately by touching him – also a clear breach of the Law and custom.  Jesus thereby renders himself unclean, and identifies fully with the leper.  But then he tells the leper to go to the temple and do all that the law requires for him to be re-admitted to the worshipping community.  All he asks for himself is that the man will keep what has happened quiet.  Fat chance!  He tells his story to anyone who will listen [think Facebook, twitter, etc;] and the story goes feral: it ends with Jesus excluded and confined to "lonely places".  He and the leper have swapped social positions.

Taking It Personally.

·   Reflect on this story as a model for petitionary prayer.  What is your most pressing need at this time?  Bring it to Jesus; kneel before him; cry out to him for help.  Hear Jesus assure you: "I am willing.  Be healed."

·   Notice how Jesus is "filled with compassion".  Compassion means to "suffer with".  Jesus feels the man's pain and it becomes his own.  There is nothing "professional" or emotionally distant about Jesus' response to this man.  Reflect on your own intercessory prayer for others.  Is it rooted in compassion for those others?

·   Some translations say Jesus was angry, either because the leper seemed in doubt as to whether or not Jesus would treat him, or because he was angry at the effect leprosy was having on this poor man.  Do you feel this sort of anger when you confront illness?

·   The language is pretty strong in verse 43: it is the same phrase used in exorcisms!  Does this change your image of Jesus in this story?

·   Can you recall feeling socially excluded at any time?  Who might feel such exclusion in our country, or in our church, today?  How do you feel about that?  Angry?  Compassionate?  Pray about it.

 

February 5 NOTES FOR REFLECTION

February 5                              NOTES FOR REFLECTION

Texts:  Isaiah 40:21-31; 1 Corinthians 9:16-23; Mark 1:29-39

Theme:  There is an unusual degree of agreement among commentators that Mark is describing a typical day in Jesus' ministry as witnessed by the disciples as they began their training: so perhaps the theme could be "A Typical Day", or, a little more dramatic, "The Action Begins".  But notice the sub-text in Isaiah and in Mark is still the critical question of identity.  Who is God/Christ?  Which means, who do we say he is?

Introduction.  It is a constant human failing to scale God down to size.  We reduce him to "buddy" status, perhaps, or as a personal insurer/ medical practitioner/bodyguard/P.A./ Personal Trainer/Life Coach; or just and Agony Aunt/Bartender to whom we can pour out our troubles.  Whenever we are tempted down this track we should hasten to re-read today's passage from Isaiah.  Do you not know?  Have you not heard?  God is the Creator of all things; and you think he's out of his depth in dealing with your problems?  But the opposite error is just as tempting: why should God worry about little old me when he is creating and sustaining the whole universe?  So the gospel passage sees Jesus dealing with both individuals and crowds.  St Paul reminds us about the difference between a calling and a career choice.  With the former there is no choice, no terms and conditions, no agreed salary or recompense.  The gospel is the only thing that matters to him, and he will do anything to get a hearing (although that doesn't stop him complaining bitterly!).

Background.  I want to start with Corinthians today because it is so strikingly modern and applicable to our own situation.  Paul is white-hot with anger.  [Go back to the start of this chapter 9 and read up to today's passage.]  Clearly, he has his critics in Corinth.  Some have dismissed him as an outsider and a bludger.  He's been accused, it seems, of living off his hosts and contributing nothing.  That has really pushed his buttons! Paul insists that he was entitled to their hospitality, but also that he chose not to accept it.  He earned his own living while he was with them.  Verse 5 is particularly intriguing, as it implies that St Paul was married and his wife accompanied him on this travels to Corinth – although the comments may apply only to Barnabas.

The same tone of exasperation and anger permeates today's reading from Isaiah.  The people are grumbling that God seems to overlook them in their daily struggles, because they are so obsessed with those struggles that they are wallowing in self-pity.  The remedy is simple: look up!  Look at the stars in the night-sky [remembering just how spectacular they would be in those days with a complete absence of artificial light].  Be reminded of the greatness and glory of God; compared to him we are all – the great and the famous included – like mere grasshoppers.  Yet he cares for us.  When we turn to him, cease our attempts to solve our own problems in our own way, and place our hope in him, he will reinvigorate us and we will soar high as if on eagle wings.

Mark is often thought of as a mere journalist, a reporter of events, and well aware of the shortness of the average reader's or listener's attention span.  It's true that he doesn't rank as a theologian, and of all the gospel writers he seems the least interested in the content of Jesus' teaching.  Perhaps he is best understood as the author of a training manual for those entering discipleship.  The careful structure of his gospel would point in that sort of direction.  He begins by making clear who Jesus is and the nature of his relationship with God.  Then he records the calling of the first disciples; and now he has begun to show what a life of discipleship looks like from the inside.  And we still haven't reached the end of chapter 1!

Start reading at verse 21 and we get an even clearer picture of what Mark is up to.  He, too, is dealing with our inability to grasp the real truth about Jesus.  The evil spirit recognises him immediately (verse24), but the crowds do not.  They see him as a great teacher and miracle worker, but nothing more.  Although "the whole town" comes to him, and he heals many and casts out demons, and so on, there is no suggestion that these wonderful deeds led to any conversions.  At the end of the day (to coin a phrase) Jesus had the same number of disciples as he began the day with – precisely 4.  News about him spread quickly over the whole region of Galilee, but it was not news of the arrival of the Messiah.  So far people were not sufficiently developed spiritually to recognise that truth: hence Jesus tried to keep secret his messianic identity until they were ready to hear and understand.

Isaiah.  This passage comes at the end of the chapter that begins with those wonderful words, "Comfort, comfort, my people, says your God."  The people are disconsolate.  They have suffered national loss, disgrace and exile.  They are downcast, convinced that God has given up on them, or, worse still, powerless to come to their aid.  Now Isaiah proclaims that those terrible times are over; God is coming to his people with justice and salvation.  But is it all wishful thinking?  How can the people now believe such promises?  By lifting their eyes above the common grind and seeing the majesty of God reflected in his creation.  They will not be given a detailed strategic plan: their hope is not in a manifesto or a series of plans to be set before them.  Their hope is in the nature and character of God.  Hope in God because of who God is.  When we do that we get a new sense of perspective, a new sense of what might be possible, a sense of excitement and a desire to be a part of it.

Taking It Personally.

·        What are you most worried about at this time?  On a scale of 1 to 10, how big is this issue?  Do you feel that "my cause is disregarded by my God"?

·        Ponder verse 21.  Let the sting of irony sink into you.  Respond to those questions.  Yes you have heard; but have you understood so deeply and fully that you can say, "I know"?

·        Find a small insect or something similar.  Stand up and look down on this creature.  See how small it is.  Now read verse 22.

·        Find a picture in a newspaper or magazine of some important people.  Have the picture in front of you as you re-read verse 23.

·        Think of the devastation caused by floods, or the Christchurch earthquakes, or tornadoes and hurricanes.  Now ponder verse 24.

·        Finish with a few minutes of meditation on verse 26.  Might you have been guilty of trying to scale God down to size?

Corinthians.  Paul's less pleasant side of his character is on show throughout this passage.  Whatever we may be told about suffering in silence, turning the other cheek, forgiving our enemies, and all that stuff, Paul is not always very good in practising what he preaches (or, at least, what Jesus preaches!)  A constant source of irritation for him seems to be the refusal by many Christians to accept him as an apostle, equal in rank to Peter, Andrew and the rest of the original dream-team.  Notice his special pleading on this point in verses 6 and 7.  But, as mentioned above, he is particularly incensed at the suggestion that he was imposing himself on them and expected to be fed and watered without cost.  He argues his right to such rewards with great vigour in verse 7 to 12; but no sooner has he established (to his own satisfaction) his right to payment in cash or kind, than he switches tack and insists that he has never exercised that right.  Even then, he can't leave the bone alone: he returns to the fight in verses 13 and 14, and then insists again that he has not exercised his right.

To our modern eyes verses 19-23 paint an unpleasant picture.  It looks too much like a politician trying to re-invent himself for each different audience.  But Paul is concerned only with the gospel: that he will never change.  How it is presented will be different for each group, and on such less important matters he will adapt and compromise and do whatever it takes to get the gospel preached and heard.  Preaching the gospel brings its own reward (after all!)

Taking It Personally.

·        Accepting that Paul has been unjustly treated, how do you feel about the tone of his response?  Can you recall an occasion on which you were falsely accused of something, or your motives were seriously and unfairly questioned?  How did you react?

·        Is there a lesson for the Church here in dealing with conflict?  Is it better to "have it all out there" or accept the slings and arrows of outrageous critics and say nothing to keep the peace?

·        Notice how Paul argues that he is compelled to preach the gospel.  To get a grasp on this read Jeremiah 20:7-10.

·        Read verses 20 to 23 again.  How do you feel about Paul's tactics here?  Is it about sensitivity to the needs and feelings of others, or is it political trickery?

·        Overall, how does this chapter 9 affect your attitude to Paul?  Does it make him seem more human?  Is he being too emotional for your taste?  Is he driven on by concern for the Corinthians or is his own pride at stake?  Now stop judging Paul and ask God to show you what your attitude to Paul says about your own character.

Mark.  There are three little episodes joined together here.  Verses 29-31 feature the healing of Peter's mother-in-law.  The story infuriates some feminist theologians who are angered that the poor woman is raised from her sick bed so she can wait on the men!  Methinks they protest too much.  Usually, when a fever leaves a patient she is too weak to do much for a while.  But healing from Jesus is the whole deal.  He hasn't just taken her fever away – he has restored her to full health and vitality.  And the proper response is one of service to him.  Then, after sunset (to avoid any breach of Sabbath law) Jesus heals the crowds who come to him.  He is there for individuals, and for multitudes.  Thirdly, we see Jesus get up very early in the morning while it was still dark (the phrase will return in Mark's account of Easter morning: 16:2), and prays. We are not told what about, or whether this was his usual spiritual practice.  What we are told is that the disciples and everyone else were looking for him.  We miss the import of this because of that translation.  In the Greek the meaning is more like "hassling" him.  Today we might even say they were stalking him.  The sense is that they were after him for what they could get from him, to receive healing, not to give him all praise and thanksgiving.

Taking It Personally.

·        Which of these three episodes most appeals to you?  Why?

·        Put yourself into the second story.  Notice the crowds queuing hour after hour.  How do you feel about them?  Compassionate?  Tired?  Resentful?  Would you rather Jesus paid you more attention instead of them?

·        Notice how Jesus wants to move on, rather than stay with the admiring crowds.  What lesson is there for the church in that?

·        Focus on verse 39.  Notice the balance between preaching in their holy places and practical ministry – (driving out demons).  What lesson is there for the church in that?

·        Ponder the apparent fact that of all the crowds to whom Jesus ministered that day, none became his disciples.  What do you make of that? 

January 29 NOTES FOR REFLECTION Candlemas

January 29                  NOTES FOR REFLECTION                         Candlemas

Texts: Malachi 3:1-5; Hebrews 2:14-18; Luke 22-40

Theme:  The proper name of today's celebration is The Presentation of Jesus in the Temple, which is informative if not very catchy.  A more eccentric choice might be Spaghetti Junction, on the ground that so many different ways are coming together here that it's difficult to see a clear path ahead.  Perhaps "A Meeting of Opposites" might do, or, for those of a more classical bent, "Nunc Dimittis", if only to annoy the spell-check on my laptop.

Introduction.  Today's celebration completes this Christmas-Epiphany period of "revelation".  Again, we are informed in The Lectionary that "This is a principal feast and should not be displaced by any other celebration"; although we are then reminded that the actual date of the feast is 2 February, so we can leave it until then if we like!  But why is it so important as to rank with such feasts as The Baptism of the Lord, for example?  Perhaps because it has an air of "completing" the birth of Jesus:  born on Christmas Day, and circumcised and named on the 8^th day, the final step is the "purification" of his mother on the 40^th day.  [In that sense, this feast is more about Mary than it is about Jesus; and for that reason it is known in the Orthodox tradition as The Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

Our first lesson sets the tone in two ways.  First it speaks of the Lord coming to the temple; and secondly it emphasises that his coming has an unavoidable element of judgment about it.  The second lesson emphasises again that what we have been reflecting on over the last month or so is the birth of a human being: it is very important to the author of this Letter to the Hebrews to stress the humanity of Jesus.  Only if he were fully human (as well as fully divine) could he become our Great High Priest.  Only St Luke includes this episode in his gospel: the Christ Child has been acknowledged by the angels, the shepherds (the outcasts of society), and the Gentiles (represented by the Magi); and now he is acclaimed by representatives of the Jewish people in the form of Simeon and Anna.

Background.  As hinted in the first paragraph of the introduction above, the title of this feast is something of a misnomer, because there are in fact two ceremonial rites taking place here.  On the fortieth day after the birth of any child, male or female, firstborn or not, the mother would need to be ritually purified before she could rejoin the worshipping community.  We might want to pause there and think for a moment about what that says of the prevailing religious attitude towards childbirth: it was something 'unclean' requiring the exclusion of the woman from the community of faith until she had been rendered 'clean' again.  But it was also fortuitously in the interests of the new infant: we have a rather modern view of what the temple would have been like, anti-sceptic, quiet and peaceful like our modern-day holy places.  In fact, the temple was, in part, a slaughter-house, with all the noise, smells and pest problems associated with that – not at all a healthy place to which to bring a new-born baby.  Perhaps for that reason, if this were the only rite required (purification of the mother) it was not usual to bring the infant.

However, the law also required the firstborn male child to be formally consecrated or dedicated to the Lord, which, of course, required the presence of the child.  Hence Mary and Joseph bring the infant Jesus today.

It may be worthwhile to reflect today on what this whole ceremony tells us about our practice of baptising infants, in view of the fact that infant baptism is opposed by some parts of the Church (such as the Baptists).  We have (mercifully!) moved away from the idea that the mother needed "purifying" after childbirth [the Book of Common Prayer prescribed a service for this purpose called "The Churching of Women"]: the closest we come to that may be a lovely little rite called Thanksgiving for the Gift of a Child", which is found on page 754 of the Prayer Book.  A prayer of thanksgiving for the preservation of the mother's life and health through pregnancy and labour is included in that service: see page 758 and the mother's own prayer on page 757.  But there is something of the idea of dedicating the child to God in our baptismal ceremony, and is some ways to mark the child with the sign of the cross can be seen as the Christian equivalent of circumcision.  We shouldn't push this argument too far, but on a day when we are noting the careful way in which the Holy Family is following the dictates of law and tradition it is helpful, perhaps, to see our own practises as rooted in that same tradition, albeit reinterpreted in the light of Christ.

The central idea for me in all this is precisely that: here we see the balance between the traditions of the past and openness to the news ways of God.  Once again I find myself coming back to that extraordinary verse in Isaiah: "Forget the former things; do not dwell on the past.  See, I am doing a new thing.  Now it springs up.  Do you not perceive it?"  Hold this in your mind as we once again gather with our Bishop to try to discern the way ahead for our parish and our congregations: more of the same, or a new thing?  And the truly wonderful thing in today's gospel passage on this point is that the two with the most investment in the past and the status quo are the two who immediately discern the new thing that God is doing in their presence.  Any other observer would have seen yet another couple of parents bringing yet another wee baby into the temple – ho, hum – ya-ya-ya!  But these two old folk (strictly, we are not told how old Simeon is, but he sounds ready to go!) see no less than the Lord's salvation, the hope of Israel, the promises of God fulfilled, etc.

But not in any "ah, isn't he a bonny wee chap" sentimental sort of way.  They foresee the pain that lies ahead for Mary, and the divisive effect this child is destined to have when he grows to manhood and begins to carry out his mission.

Malachi.  It seems that people have been noting that evil people were getting away with their crimes scot-free, and asking "where is the God of justice?"  [See 2:17]  This passage is God's response.  He promises a messenger to prepare the way for him, and then he himself will come to the temple.  But before they get too excited at that prospect, they should know that his coming will bring a time of judgment.  The faithful will undergo a period of refining (purifying), and the unrighteous will be rejected.    Included in that latter class are those who take advantage of widows, orphans, workers, and aliens; as well as sorcerers, adulterers and perjurers.  (Despite the impression sometimes given by Christian preachers, not all sin is sexual in nature!)

Taking It Personally.

·        How important to your faith is the Old Testament?  Do you find tradition interesting and helpful, or is it something you are inclined to get rid of?  Do you welcome change?

·        Is it helpful in your understanding of Christ to see him is the light of Old Testament prophecy, or do you see this as a case of re-writing history ex post facto?

·        What do you make of the list of people who will face judgment in verse 5?  Do you agree that the Church is more inclined to condemn sexual sin and rather too wary of condemning social and economic sins of the kind mentioned here?

·        Are you naturally sympathetic to the workers' point of view in industrial disputes, or do your instincts tend to lie with the employers?  Are you sympathetic to refugees, boat-people and immigrants, or do you favour tighter border control.  Are these the sorts of issues the Church should be involved in or not?

Hebrews.  Scholars still debate the authorship of this Letter; but whoever wrote it, the issue of Jesus' true humanity was obviously a burning issue.  The author takes every opportunity to stress that Jesus was fully human in every way except that he did not sin.  In today's passage he stresses that Jesus was like us with flesh and blood (he had a real body, not just an appearance of one as some early heretics maintained), and he suffered temptation just as we do.  All this was necessary to enable Jesus to overcome the power of death, to atone for our sin, and to become "a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God".

Taking It Personally.

·        Spend some time imagining Jesus as a child?  How realistic is your image of Jesus in his childhood years?  Is he a typical boy, always on the go, getting up to mischief, getting his clothes dirty and turning up late for meals?  Or is he perfect in every way?

·        Read Hebrews 5:1-10.  Does that help to fill out your image of Jesus?  Notice the reference in verse 8 to Jesus learning obedience through suffering.  What do you make of that? 

·        The author also stresses that Jesus is "for us" (as well as one of us).  He came not to help angels but "the descendants of Abraham".  Can you recall a recent instance when you felt Jesus helped you?  Did you give thanks?

·        What help would you like from Jesus at this time?  Now ask him.

Luke.   Once again we have an example of how meticulous St Luke can be in dealing with details.  He alone of the gospel writers records that Jesus was named and circumcised on the eighth day; and now he alone records the arrival of the Holy Family at the Temple on the fortieth day after the birth.  Mary has observed the prescribed period of purification – a  woman was 'unclean' for 40 days after giving birth – and must now be ritualistically made clean so that she can once again re-join the worshipping community.  But as Jesus is Mary's firstborn male child he must also be brought to the temple to be consecrated to the Lord.  Luke even records the sacrifice to be offered by Mary and Joseph, which scholars delight in pointing out that it was at the rate prescribed for poor parents, "a pair of doves or two young pigeons".  Onto the stage comes Simeon, a resident of Jerusalem, who we are told was "righteous and devout" and had been "waiting for the consolation of Israel".  We always assume that he was an old man, although the Scriptures do not say so.  He represents wisdom and prophecy – an elder upon whom the Holy Spirit rested.  He has been promised that he will not die until he has seen the Lord's Christ.  He has come to the temple at the prompting of the Holy Spirit and recognises in the infant Jesus the fulfilment of that promise.    He sees in Jesus the divine agent of judgment, and cautions Mary of painful times ahead for her.  His words are seconded by Anna, a devout widow of prayer, whose age is given (she's 84).  Luke stresses again the Holy Family's compliance with the Law (verse 39); and then notes that a period of growth follows for Jesus in all aspects of his humanity, physical, mental, spiritual and social.

Taking It Personally.

·     Notice the stress Luke places on compliance with the Law, and following proper procedure.  Even the Holy family is not immune from it.  How do you feel about that?  What analogy might we draw with Church practice and procedure today?

·     Reflect on the openness of Simeon and Anna.  Simeon can depart in peace now that Christ has come.  How might this passage guide us as we reflect on future directions in our lives and in our Church?

·     This passage is a good one for praying with the imagination.  Place yourself in the temple as an observer.  Can you see the baby?  How does Mary look?  Is Joseph taking a keen interest?  What reaction do they have when Simeon takes the baby into his arms?  What do you make of Simeon and Anna?  Are you inclined to dismiss them as two old fuddy-duddies?  Does the baby make any noise or do anything? 

·     Ponder verse 40 for some time.  What does it tell you about Jesus the human being?  What does it tell you about growing up in Christ?

 

Parish Meeting, St John's, 31 January at 7pm.

For the   Parish  Meeting: to which All parishioners are invited with Bishop Kelvin at St. John's Waikouaiti on Tuesday 31^st January at 7pm. Copies of a 'Discussion Paper' compiled by Roger, available this Sunday.

Roger's Reflections, Sunday 22 January

January 22                              NOTES FOR REFLECTION            

Texts:  Jonah 3:1-5, 10; 1 Corinthians 7:29-32; Mark 1:14-20

Theme:  "The Call of God (Part II)", perhaps?  Or "The Direct Experience – Repeat Broadcast".  (This is the season for endless repeats on T.V., so why not in the Church?)  To avoid being that silly I'm going with "Now is the Time".  An alternative might be "All Change", where "all" means everyone and everything, such is the true meaning of repentance.

Introduction.  Much like last week, we have the old and the new way through which God speaks to the people.  Jonah is a prophet, albeit in this case a reluctant or even rebellious one.  He is given by God a very clear message for the Ninevites, calling upon them to repent.  They are, of course, Gentiles, so I guess we are to understand this passage in the context of  the revelation to the Gentiles.  At the second time of asking, Jonah delivers the message and it bears fruit: the people of Nineveh repent.  But again, we are left to wonder what, if anything, happened next: did they grow in their new-found faith, or return to their old ways?  St Paul, in three short verses, tells us what should happen next.  There should be a complete re-prioritising of everything, particularly of our values.  Nothing is now more important than our faith.  The gospel passage shows this extraordinary change in the specific examples of the fishermen.  They abandon the means of their livelihood and their families to "follow him", wherever and whatever for, they know not.  Not a bad description of the meaning of faith, really.

Background.  Once again we have readings that speak to us of a new stage of spiritual development.  We might easily overlook that simple, apparently inconsequential remark that Jesus makes at the start of this passage: "The time has come."  So important is this expression to Mark that he makes them the first words Jesus utters in his gospel.  The expression surely implies that there has been a preceding period of waiting, that something important is now happening, and that the timing of the new happening is not accidental.  After everything else that has happened in the past, including the stuttering false starts surrounding the birth and early years of Jesus' life, this is the real deal!

Jonah forms an interesting background to this story: we recall that when Jesus was asked for a sign in one of his many disputes he referred them to the "sign of Jonah" (Matthew 16:1-5), usually taken to mean that, just as Jonah was three days in the belly of the great fish before being coughed up to a new life, so Jesus would be entombed for three days before being raised to new life.  Here, the link is the message of repentance: just as God sent Jonah to call the people of Nineveh to turn from their sinful ways, so now Jesus proclaims the same message to the Jews and to the whole world.  It is important to read the little Book of Jonah non-historically: although it is traditionally treated as a prophetic book, it really belongs with the wisdom literature.  It is a short, and brilliantly written parable, showing human nature in all our cussedness, and lack of empathy for those we consider our enemies.  We are reminded, perhaps, of James and John who offered to Jesus to call down fire from heaven on a Samaritan village that did not welcome them: Luke 9:51-56.  (Or John Cleese as a wonderfully demented nun slapping a recalcitrant schoolgirl across the face while yelling "God is love, you dolt!  What is he?  God is love!")  Compare Jonah with the Good Samaritan: he wouldn't have walked by on the other side – he would have run!

So the time has come, but for what?  And Jesus' cryptic answer is that the kingdom has drawn near.  Over the centuries many different understandings have been put forward as to what this expression means.  Is it to suggest (as many of his time assume) that Jesus was to throw out the Roman overlords and establish in Israel a theocracy with him as ruler?  Or is the kingdom of the heavenly realms only, to be entered on death?  The 'answer' as always is far more complex than either of those options would suggest.  In keeping with the general approach I have been putting forward in these notes for two or three months now, I find a helpful way of trying to grasp what this is about is to interpret the term "kingdom of God" (or "Kingdom of Heaven") as this new stage of spiritual development that is now to be made possible through Jesus Christ, the essence of which is direct communication with God through Christ.

So here is our gospel reading we no longer hear a prophet speaking about God: instead, we have God, incarnate in Jesus of Nazareth, speaking directly to those he encounters.  We are told here of four who immediately responded positively, with such dramatic effect; but, of course, the gospels are full of people whose reactions were the complete opposite.  That remains true to this day.     

Jonah.  This little book is a wonderful study of human nature!  First, we must recognise that Jonah is spiritually open to God.  There is no suggestion that Jonah did not hear God, or did not understand what God was calling him to do.  He understood only too clearly.  God was calling him to go to Nineveh "and preach against it, because its wickedness has come up before me".  Jonah was not the first prophet to receive a calling he didn't want.  Even the great Moses tried to persuade God to send Aaron instead of him to Egypt.  Nor was Jonah's unwillingness based on fear for his own safety, or of a lack of ability to fulfil the task.  He was afraid that Nineveh would heed the message and repent; and if it did, Jonah was even more afraid that God would prove to be something of a wishy-washy liberal instead of a paid-up member of the Sensible Sentencing Trust, and forgive the whole city.  However, a near-death experience and a miraculous rescue can have an effect on even the most recalcitrant mind; and so, when the word of the Lord came to Jonah a second time, he obeyed.  Notice (and enjoy!) the subtle little detail in verses 3 and 4:  Nineveh is a great city, requiring 3 days to traverse.  So Jonah has not reached the city centre when he delivers his message.  He is obeying, but to the least possible degree that he thinks he can get away with!  But, alas!  It is enough to fulfil God's purposes!

 

 

Taking It Personally.

• Read the whole book – it's very short.  Reflect on Jonah's character.  When is he most like you, and when is he least like you?
• Have you had an experience when your life was seriously in danger?  Did that change your outlook, and has that change been permanent?
• Have you ever felt God prompting you to do something you didn't want to do?  Did you take evasive action, comply grudgingly, or comply wholeheartedly?
• Do you want wrongdoers to suffer for their wrongs, or are you more likely to pray for their forgiveness?
• Notice how honest Jonah is with God – especially in chapter 4.  Can you be as honest and direct in your prayers?

Corinthians.  This extraordinary little passage calls into question our basic attitudes, assumptions and values.  All are turned on their heads by 'the Christ event'.  Spiritual writers (and many psychologists) talk of a false self and a true Self.  The false self is the one we naturally develop to help us navigate through the ordinary circumstances of what we take to be our separate, individual lives.  It is only when we become aware that there is more to us than that – that we can transcend that little self and become tuned into the Self that we call God – that everything changes for us.  We discover that everything has only a relative value, surpassed by the Ultimate Value of the One True Divine Reality (a.k.a. God).  It seems to me that this is what St Pal is trying to help us grasp in these few verses.  To move from one stage of spiritual development to the next means that "this world in its present form is passing away".  Remember that he is writing post-Pentecost: the Holy Spirit is now available to all, not just to the specially chosen anointed few.  That's the game-changer, as we sometimes say today.

Taking It Personally.

• To what extent does your Christian faith shape your attitudes, assumptions and values?
• Does your faith give you a different perspective – are you more "philosophical" about things that go wrong?  Do you consciously call upon your faith to help you keep a sense of proportion?
• Are you engrossed in "the things of the world" or do you "hang loose" to them?  Is there anything you would not give up for your faith?

Mark.  As I noted last week, there are differences between the various gospel accounts of the calling of the first disciples.  So this is Mark's version.  It starts at the Sea of Galilee, such a central feature in his narrative.  It is unclear whether Jesus had already met these men, or if they knew him by reputation only.  Most of the comments made on last week's gospel apply again here.  In particular, note the unconditional and unquestioning response.  No questions, no ifs and buts, just immediate obedience, despite the enormous cost.  They are walking away from their families and their means of earning a living.  And for what?  To follow Jesus of Nazareth who promises to make them "fishers of men and women", whatever that is supposed to mean.  Notice the sense of urgency, emphasised in this passage: "the time has come" (v.15); "at once" (v.18); and "without delay" (v.20).

Taking It Personally.

·         Suppose you read a contemporary account of this story in the paper?  Would your suspicions be roused?  Would your cynicism?  What would you make of four fishermen simply dropping everything and clearing off?   Shades of Scientology, brain-washing, de-programming etc. Here?

·         Put yourself in Zebedee's shoes.  How would you feel if your two sons simply walked out on you (and the family business) in front of the hired men who may well have been enjoying seeing Zebedee's rather public humiliation.

·         Looking back, have there been any radical breaks in your life, where you have suddenly changed course?

January 15 NOTES FOR REFLECTION

January 15                              NOTES FOR REFLECTION                               

Texts:  1 Samuel 3:1-10; 1 Corinthians 6:12-20; John 1:43-51

Theme:  A number of possibilities this week: the more obvious ones would be "Discipleship" or "The Call of God".  I'm going with "The Direct Experience": with this reading we have finished (for now) with intermediaries, prophets, wise men, etc.  Now people directly encounter God in Jesus Christ and their whole world changes for ever.

Introduction.  Our first reading is a bridge from the former stage of spiritual development to the new one.  Young Samuel (probably about 12 years old now as he is referred to as a boy instead of a child) represents the spiritually open but undeveloped stage: he hears God calling him but does not recognise God's voice.  He still needs someone to "translate" his experience for him.  In our gospel reading St John is taking us to the next stage.  He has just written of the intermediary stage (John the Baptist directed two of his disciples to Jesus), and now he has two more people directly encountering Jesus and becoming disciples through a personal call on their lives.  St Paul's contribution is to spell out the consequences of accepting that call.  It is a call to freedom "from" AND a freedom "for".  The Corinthians have grasped the first point, but not the second.

Background.  Through Advent, Christmas, and the Epiphany we have been talking about the way in which most of us come into a faith through the ministry of others.  Few, if any, have a direct experience of God before they have some understanding of who God might be.  I have suggested that we understand this in terms of some sort of spiritual evolutionary process, for humanity in general and for individual human beings.  We need to develop our spiritual faculties in the same way that we develop our physical and mental ones.  This sort of understanding, I think, helps to explain why many people (including members of our own families and circle of friends) just "don't get it".  Like young Samuel they do not yet know the Lord and so are quite unaware of his presence with them.

In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son...  The opening words of the Letter to the Hebrews puts this perfectly.  This is the stage we are at in our gospel reading this morning.  John the Baptist is the last of the great prophets through whom God has spoken to his people.  Now God is speaking directly to by his Son.  What difference does that make?

In recent weeks I have commented on the (somewhat surprising) fact that all the drama around the conception and birth of Jesus does not seem to have had any lasting impact.  Once the initial excitement was over, the shepherds and the magi disappeared back into obscurity: even Mary and Elizabeth become invisible for 30 years at least.  John, the child who leapt in his mother's womb at the sound of Mary's voice, now tells us that he would not have known who Jesus was had the angel not told him to watch for the one on whom the Holy Spirit descends in the form of a dove.  And until that happens – until Jesus is baptised – nothing very much happens.  With that event the new spiritual stage is launched – the kingdom of God, as small as a mustard seed, is sown on the earth and begins to grow.

And those who see and hear and experience are changed for ever.  This time "it takes".  This is manifested in two ways.  First, in the responses of those who are called to follow Jesus:  even more than Mary, their response is one of unquestioning willingness.  They do not ask where they are going if they follow him, or what it will involve, or how long they will be away.  They accept the call immediately.

And they do something else.  They find someone else and bring that person to Jesus.  Thus. Andrew brings Peter, and Philip finds Nathaniel.  The good news spreads by being passed on within family and other social relationships.  And let's be clear: they bring the people to Jesus.  This is not a regression to the former "intermediary" stage.  Andrew does not teach Peter about Jesus, he brings him to Jesus for Peter to have his own experience of Christ – to see for himself and make up his own mind.  The same is true of Philip bringing Nathaniel.

Passages like this obviously provide the foundation for our "doctrine of call".  Again, the author of the Letter to the Hebrews has some useful things to say to us about this whole idea.  Speaking of the office of high priest, he says, "No one takes this honour upon himself: he must be called by God..."  See Hebrews 5:1-6.  (According to him, even Jesus was "called" by God to be his Son.)  We need to think seriously about the implications of this.  In our desperate desire to be inclusive (and to fill gaps on rosters!) we tend to call for volunteers.  Jesus does not.  There were hundreds, and probably thousands, of men involved in the fishing industry around Lake Galilee at that time.  Jesus chose 4 of them. 

And we have only to think of the immediate practical consequences of accepting that call to see that it could not work on any other basis.  These fishermen abandoned their means of livelihood and walked out on their families.  That was their calling.  In every age some are still called to such a life.  But the vast majority of Christians are called to live out their lives of faith in their ordinary business, family and social circumstances.  Either we need to widen the term "discipleship" to include such lives of faith, or we need to find a different term for what is a very different calling.

Samuel.  Samuel has been brought up in the temple.  He has witnessed the work of the priests and the worship of the people every day of his life.  Yet this whole experience has not yet led to spiritual growth.  In verse 1 we learn that this is not a spiritually enlightened time generally: In those days the word of the Lord was rare; there were not many visions.  Perhaps verses 2 and 3 also are to be understood in this spiritual sense:  the old priest's eyes were becoming so weak he could barely see.  But there is still hope: the lamp of God had not yet gone out.

Be all that as it may, one thing is clear: Now Samuel did not yet know the Lord.  The word of the Lord had not yet been revealed to him.  Thus, when God called out to Samuel, Samuel heard the voice, but assumed it must be Eli calling him: a good example of the logical brain blocking a spiritual experience.  Eli becomes the mirror image: old and near blind though he may be, his brain has been tuned over the years to recognise spiritual realities.  Knowing that he did not call Eli he realised it must be God calling the boy.

Taking It Personally.

·        Have you ever heard God calling you or speaking to you?  How would you describe the experience?

·        If not, would you like to?  Why?

·        Looking back, were you more open or less open to spiritual experiences in your childhood than you are now?

·        Is there anybody who has been "an Eli" for you – someone who could help you to see or understand something that might otherwise have passed you by?

Corinthians.  What a wonderful bunch these early Corinthian Christians must have been!  Scholars generally assume that the phrases in quotation marks are taken by Paul out of a letter written to him, and to which he is replying.  They have assumed that if God loves them unconditionally and forgives them all their sins, it doesn't matter what they do in their ordinary lives.  Corinth was famous for its immoral lifestyle, and it seems that many of these early converts had not abandoned that lifestyle.  Hence "everything is permissible for me" is their motto.  Notice the wonderfully wise tack Paul takes in response.  Today, all too many Christians believe in a "holy legalism" – preferably backed by Parliamentary laws.  "Thou shall not do this that or the other thing.  Paul does not go down this track.  He doesn't deny that all things are permissible, but points out that some things are actually harmful.  They have consequences.  We hear much today of "victimless crimes": but, says St Paul, to indulge in such activities is to victimise ourselves.  We are not souls who happen to inhabit physical bodies for a while.  We are embodied persons in whom the Holy Spirit of God resides.  Therefore honour God with your bodies.  [There is an echo of this in our marriage liturgy where, on the exchange of rings, one party says to the other "with my body I honour you".  See, for example, page 784 of the Prayer Book.]

Taking It Personally.

·     Reflect on your body, and how you treat it.  Are you kind to it, giving it only the right type and amount of food, enough exercise but not too much, and attending promptly to any medical needs it may have?

·     In your care of your body are you motivated by simple commonsense, or do you see it as part of your spiritual practice?  What does it mean to you that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit?

·     When was the last time you gave thanks to God for your body, for its wonderful abilities, and its amazing complexity?  Why not do that right now?

John.  There are certain marked differences in the way in which each of the gospel writers record the calling of the first few disciples, but also much common ground.  The clearest feature is the unconditional nature of the call and of the response.  John chooses to emphasise the way in which the good news spreads: in a sense, Jesus (in this account) did not call Peter: he called Andrew who then went off and brought Peter to see for himself.  Similarly, Jesus called Philip who then found Nathaniel.  Notice how in each case some knowledge of the faith history (the Old Testament Scriptures) is assumed.  Andrew tells Peter "we have found the Messiah", but does not have to explain to Peter what he means by that.  Peter knows they are expecting the Messiah to come sometime.    Similarly, Philip talks about "the one Moses wrote about in the Law, and about whom the Prophets also wrote".  Presumably, Nathaniel understands what he is talking about, even though he is temporarily blinded by his prejudice against Nazareth (think Auckland here!).  Nathaniel has been sitting under a fig tree – a favoured spot for prayer and Scriptural study because of the shade it gave from the heat of the sun.  Nathaniel acclaims Jesus as Son of God and King of Israel, two terms that reappear in the Passion story – both as praise and in mockery.  Notice, too, the repeat of this theme of heaven being open; and this reference to Jacob's ladder.  Recall the punch-line to that story: "Surely the Lord is in this place and I was not aware of it."

Taking It Personally.

·     Our place of origin seems important in this story.  Where are you from?  How has that influenced the course of your life?  Has it been an advantage or a drawback?  Have you ever experienced prejudice against people from your hometown?  Do you hold any animosity towards any other "hometown" in the way that Nathaniel did?

·     On meeting Christ yourself, did you feel an urge to find someone you knew and bring them to Jesus?  Do you have such an urge now?

·     This is a good story for praying with your imagination.  Place yourself near Philip.  Listen as Jesus calls Philip to follow him.  How do you feel?  Excited?  Fearful?  Do you hope that he will now turn to you and call you, too?  Are you trying to attract his attention or make yourself invisible?  Why?

·     Spend some time in prayer pondering the call of Christ in your life and your response to that call, past, present, and future.