Sunday, May 15, 2011

DAY BY DAY

May 15, 2011
Easter 4
Psalm 23
Acts 2:42-47

(prayer)

I want to start by calming some fears you may have after seeing the title of today’s message: no, I am not planning on singing songs from Godspell. Besides, as far as early 70s hippy-culture-religious-musical-movies go, I’m much more familiar with the soundtrack from Jesus Christ Superstar.

//

“Day by day, they ...

• Spent time together in the temple;

• Broke bread at home and ate their food with glad and generous hearts;

• Praised God;

• Had the goodwill of all the people.

Day by day, the Lord ...

• Added to their number those who were being saved."

This section from the book of Acts is an early account of what it meant to be The Church of the Risen Christ. I guess I am wondering how well it might translate to today.

//

The 21st century in North America is NOT the 1st century in the Middle East. I think it is fair to say that we live in a very complex time. Our world is bigger. Now, I know that (physically) the earth is basically the same size as it was for Peter and the other members of the early church (although they had no idea of the physical shape and scope of the world) – but unlike them, we live in a time when we are aware of so much more that goes on outside of where we live. We have much greater access to travel to see people and places for ourselves: not everyone has the means to do this, but certainly more than in Peter’s day. And we access to information about what is going on in the lives of others around the globe (sometime as things are happening).

The disciples lived in a simpler time, by comparison. By in large, they ate foods that were produced locally, rather than shop the vast array of imports we come to expect every time we walk into a store. Often times they lived day to day, where we might only have to live paycheque to paycheque (although many in our culture today have savings that would have been the envy of the ruling class of the first century).

At the time of Peter, the followers of Jesus participated in the religious practices and structure of the national Hebrew spirituality. Although by the time the book of Acts was written, this was no longer the case; the movement had spread out into others communities within the Roman Empire. It is unclear how long the group in Jerusalem was able to maintain its cohesiveness - certainly they were around 20 years after Peter, as some of the letters of the Apostle Paul contain fundraising requests for the “saints in Jerusalem”, but were they still active another 20 years down the road when Acts was written, I can’t say.

//

So, how relevant can the way of being church in the 1st century be to us in the 21st century?

//

Relevant or not, I think that the communal simplicity of the early church way of being is something attractive for people who seek Spirit in our day and age.

I feel quite confident in saying that most spirit-seeking-people of today appreciate a true sense of community – a ‘belonging’ that invites us to enjoy the benefits of shared joy and generosity.

I believe that this is attractive because in so many ways true community is hard. Modern people are busy: they work as much as they can; most retired people I know are even busier; and so much of young people’s lives are scheduled and structured. We live in a culture that has to schedule a time to be spontaneous. Our technological advances have made it easier to star at a screen (TV or computer or smartphone) rather than sit across a table from an actual person. I have 236 facebook friends, most of whom I never have an in depth face to face conversation with and a few of which I have never actually met outside of the Internet.

Now, there is a real upside to this cyber-community; I have been able to connect with others who share common interests to me from all over the world (music, theology, politics, sports...). That’s pretty cool. But ... there is still a longing for something more direct.

Within the wider United Church, I am active in both of the governing committees of Yellowhead Presbytery (the Presbytery Council and the Operations Team). This past Friday, I had a meeting with the Presbytery Council; this one was a conference phone call. It was to be a short meeting, so bringing people into the capital region from Edson and Grande Cache made little sense. But the sense of community is not the same connecting to people by phone as it would be face to face. It’s funny, the conversations can be the same, the business can be the same, but the community is different. When the Presbytery Ops Team meets this coming Thursday, we will all travel to Spruce Grove to share a common space. Even the person who thought they’d have to join us by phone, now says she’ll be there in person. Something about that feels ‘good’ and ‘right’ (for a church and maybe for more than the church).

In our lifetimes, we have noticed that the world is changing. Included in that evolution is the reality is that the Church is changing as well. In fairness, in some ways “the-way-church-is-done” has been slow (even reluctant) to change. {insert church lightbulb jokes}

Something I have noticed in my ten and a half years as your minister here is that St. David’s is not a congregation that insists on hanging on to traditional practices for tradition’s sake. For the most part, my observation is that (in this church), we move on or hang on with a purpose. There’s almost always ‘method behind our madness’. My overall impression (from what I have experienced here) is that this church accepts that we must be a people of faith today, not simply bearers of a wonderful ancient testimony.

//

To Peter and the others, the sense of shared spirit drew them together. I believe that many people in this church and community see value in such a union as well.

So, the answer I suggest to my own rhetorical question is “Yes” - there is much we can gleam from the example of the church described in Acts 2 to help us be a relevant community of faith in our place and time as well.

//

So, let’s look at those Acts 2 church characteristics. What does the text say they did?

Verse 42 of chapter 2 says “They devoted themselves to the apostle’s teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers.” That verse starts this week’s reading from Acts 2 and it was the final verse of last week’s reading. A week ago, we heard Simon Peter inviting people to turn to God anew and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. So compelling were Peter’s words that the text tells us that some three thousand people joined the followers of The Way. And that these people ... devoted themselves to the apostle’s teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers.

The aspects of ‘church’ that are described here (in reverse order) are:

1) Involvement in ‘the prayers’: this is most likely a reference to the daily prayer rituals of the Hebrew traditions. At this point, the early Christian movement remained fully enmeshed within the Hebrew tradition. The entire body of the church in these early days were Jewish. The closest they came to starting a new religion is that they were becoming a distinct popular sect within Judaism. In the passage today, it implies that this was not something that created conflict - at least not initially: “[they had] the goodwill of all the people” (v47).

2) Another aspect of this early church was they engaged in ‘the breaking of bread’: Keeping in mind that the book of Acts was written by the same person who wrote the gospel of Luke, modern theologian and biblical scholar, William Willimon, has said that “Each dinner-time episode in Luke is a time of fellowship, revelation and controversy. Jesus was criticized for the company he kept at table. ... He failed to make proper distinction between persons at his table. We know, from contemporary experience [Willimon continues], that social boundaries between persons are most often rigidly enforced at the table. Eating together is a mark of unity, solidarity, and deep friendship, a visable sign that social barriers, which once plagued these people, have broken down.” (Interpretation Commentary Series: Acts, p41). I doubt that in this very early time of the Christian movement that the sharing of bread had been simplified and ritualized as a communion or eucharist yet, but I suspect that for many of that group, this act of sharing a meal meshed nicely with Jesus’ last supper desire that they “take and eat, and do this in remembrance of me”.

3) Thirdly, the church is in ‘fellowship’ There is a community bond here. It came out of the Pentecost experience of having people from all over the known-world share in a unique outpouring of the Spirit, resulting in a unified body of believers. So united (as it says a verse later in Acts) that they pooled their resources to ensure that each person had what was needed. This was not simply a community of those who could afford the luxury of coming together – it was a community that mutually supported itself to ensure its wide inclusivity.

4) Finally, the first description of this church in Acts 2:42 - there is a desire to learn: “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching”. The push that brought people into this group may have been the dramatic events of Pentecost, but that kind of charismatic experience is only momentary. That kind of frenzy and emotional is hard to sustain. Ironically, if it was an ‘every-time’ experience, the impact would diminish over time. And often the frenzy and emotion doesn’t allow for much depth. The response of the crowd was not to expect more drama and high level excitement, but to realize that learning and reflection often requires a calmer setting and mood. They were hungry to hear from Peter and the others, those who had been with Jesus in his life time, those who proclaimed his resurrection. William Willimon has a good phrase about this as well: “The church is not to drift from one momentary emotional outburst to the next ... rather the church moves immediately to the task of teaching, keeping itself straight about what it is and what it is to be about”. (ibid. p40)

//

All of these aspects of the ancient church, sound relevant to our time and place to me. And we practice much of this as part of our regular life together as St. David’s United Church.

Now, we haven’t chosen to create a compound or commune or kibbutz where we all literally live and work together 24-7. But we do hold each other in other ways. When we share of ourselves within this church (sometimes financially as offerings, and practically, helping with various church programs and projects), we are engaging in the same spirit as that post-pentecost church. During our Sunday services, when we take the opportunity to greet each other in the Peace of Christ, we are proclaiming a unity and connection that makes us more than a bunch of individuals who happened to wander into the same room at the same time. When we join our voices and minds in song, we are literally finding the harmony that is possible between us.

There is a sense that not one of us is able to (or expected to) go it alone. As our United Church creed proclaims: We are not alone! Thanks be to God.

We do pray together; we do create opportunities for fellowship. And in the long standing traditions of The Church, we sure do plan times when we can eat full meals together (and we do intentionally engage in the ritual monthly commemorating of Jesus’ last supper as part of our church worship services).

//

I do think that this model of church modelled for us in Acts, chapter 2, can be relevant for us today. I certainly believe that (generally) people long for this type of true and welcoming community.

//

And I know that it is hard to do this really well all of the time. Not all of us are able to be part of this community in all of these four basic areas:

 The worship life;

 The learning life;

 The sharing life; and

 The social (fellowship) life.

We do have all of these aspects, but how many of us are to be fully engaged?

Fortunately, one of gradual changes we have seen in this church over the years is the intermixing of these different church lives – Sunday worship can also be a time of learning, sharing and fellowship.

Virtually all the various ways people serve the church (committees/groups) include as part of their activities time for devotion, prayer and shared support. I’m not sure how many of you know that at each Church Council meeting over the past number of years, we include in the agenda of the meeting time for prayers of support: before we pray we share what is on people’s hearts, who is on their hearts – and then we pray, not as an add on to the business of the meeting, but as part of it. As well, it is hard to leave a Church Council meeting in a bad mood, because we usually end meetings by sharing news about what things people are happy for or celebrating in their lives: again not as an add on to the business, but as part of it. At the Council, this was an intentional evolution from what I would call a business-efficiency model to a mission-opportunity model. Both can work, but the later seems to be a better fit for ‘church’ governance.

I sit in on a lot of committee and group meetings around this church and I see this desire and practice of fellowship all over the place.

I know that the people who were able to devote themselves to the Strengthening the Branches course that our recent student minister was able to lead as a means to do some of her own learning while here, found that a really valuable experience. The scuttle-butt that reaches my ears is ... more, more.

That’s good.

I have enough humility to know that this has virtually nothing to do with me, or any minister or other staff this church could have. This church is going to be what “WE” make it.

“Seek justice, love kindness, walk humbly with your God”: this is what the prophet says is required of us. In and through all of the aspects of church I have been talking about today, I believe should (implicitly and explicitly) be founded in our common story of God’s compassion and fairness: a story that includes the impact of Jesus’ life, death and resurrection. As “church” we are to be interesting in figuring out what it means that God’s welcome is wide, with God there is comfort – and that this as true now as it has always been.

In all of this we are to honour that God is our companion on this journey – the wise and caring shepherd and guide, the overly generous banquet host, who invites us into an eternity-long relationship based on compassion and peace.

If we don’t give ourselves the fullest opportunity to experience what we can offer to each other, we will find ourselves lacking. I’m quite certain of that!



And so, today, from this passage from Acts 2, I hope we can see that church is not supposed to be one-dimensional, we are to know fully what it means to be engaged in:

• shared, spirit-felt worship,

• real fellowship,

• meaningful sharing and

• a devout prayer and reflective life.

We are hungering for these things, aren’t we? Well, we know what to do then...day by day!

Let us pray

(ad lib)



#657VU “He Leadeth Me”

Sunday, May 8, 2011

JOY CAN RISE

May 8, 2011
Easter 3
Acts 2:14a;36-42
Luke 24:13-35

(prayer)

So, Simon Peter said, “Save yourselves from this corrupt generation”. I wonder how much has changed. Dictionary.com defines the noun corruption as “dishonest or fraudulent conduct by those in power”. The adjective corrupt can describe the actions of those misusing their power but it can also describe the wider impact of those actions. Sometimes corruption’s effects extend beyond those most directly involved.

As many of you know, I am a news junkie. When I watch TV, it is most likely to be on a news channel (or Star Trek or Survivor or Man v Food or a football game). I enjoy the ins and outs of politics and governance. Like many others (I am sure) I enjoyed watching Donald Trump make a fool of himself grabbing headlines by clasping on to the lunatic fringe of the so-called "American birther movement". All of his investigations and predictions turned out to be nothing but hot air. He was a fair target at the comedic national correspondents’ dinner last weekend.

All of that seemed extra trivial when we saw what happened on Sunday night. When the United States' military found and killed Osama bin Laden, I was watching and waiting for The Donald to attach himself to (what is now tongue and cheeky being called) the Deather movement: those who doubt that bin Laden has expired and insist on seeing some proof (photos, video, etc.). Now this movement is smaller than it may appear given the amount of press the issue is getting – most of the people calling for pictures are not really doubters but are simply morbidly curious.

I suspect that we all can think of examples that show, to some people, past experiences of political secrecy and corruption have resulted in an inability to see everything relating to government as corrupt.

//

The context of the reading from Acts this morning is the story of the Pentecost festival that immediately followed Jesus’ resurrection. We will celebrate the full events of that day in five more Sundays at the conclusion of the Easter season. According to the Book of Acts, Peter tried to explain what had been happening to the crowd. As we will hear in a few weeks, Peter spoke about an outpouring of God’s spirit. Then as we heard today, he told the crowd about his experience with Jesus and his belief that Jesus is (in fact) the Messiah of God.

Last week here at St. David’s we heard the story of the disciples getting to see the risen Jesus on easter-eve and again one week later. Part of Jesus message for them was that they were to continue to preach (in his name and example) about the forgiveness and reconciliation God offers. This was the same message John the Baptist was sharing before Jesus even began his ministry. It appears as we read Acts that this is also what Peter is telling the Pentecost crowd: be reconciled to God and know the gift of God’s spiritual presence in your life!

Before Jesus, there was John the Baptist. Luke chapter three recounts it this way: 3[John] went into all the region around the Jordan, proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.

After Jesus, there was Peter the Baptist, whom the same author (Luke and Acts were written by the same person) recounts Peter saying: 38... ‘Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins may be forgiven.

These are the bookends of Jesus’ ministry: calls to Baptisms of repentance and forgiveness. So it makes sense that this was the general focus of Jesus as well. The oldest gospel, Mark, describes the start of Jesus’ ministry this way: 1:14...Jesus came to Galilee, proclaiming the good news of God, 15and saying, ‘The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God has come near; repent, and believe in the good news.’

//

Sin is a topic that (especially in more mainline, progressively-minded churches) we often avoid. Perhaps that is because for some rather zealous and boisterous preachers it has been the only topic that the subject of sin is hard to broach without all that TV evangelistic baggage.

I’ll try anyway.

For me, sin is best thought of as that which clouds our ability to know and appreciate the presence of God in our midst. As such, it is fair to say that sin is that which separates us from God – even as God is not separate from us.

I think “sin” can be thought of in two ways. We could say there is a narrow definition and a broad definition. Narrowly, sin is a thing, a specific action, or even thought. Sin is something a person does – it is individual and personal. That is the favourite focus of the fire and brimstone preachers.

Broadly, sin is situational, contextual, attitudinal. Sin, in this way, is corporate and may be easy for an individual to say, well that’s not me, it’s not my fault - I can’t change that.

The prophet Micah summarized the faithful life with three phrases: to seek justice, to love kindness, to walk humbly with our God. I find it helpful to see these (along with Jesus’ instruction to Love God with our whole being and to love our neighbour as ourselves) as the benchmarks of faith-filled living. To do otherwise, I suppose, could be called “sin”

Individually, we can each work on setting up our life to appreciate God in our midst (humility), we can approach others with love and compassion and kindness and fairness. That might be fine for dealing with narrow sinfulness. But I believe that broad sin is the bigger problem in our world.

We tacitly accept systems of society and relationship and economics and governance that are not rooted in fairness and justice, that are devoid of compassion (kindness is irrelevant) and that see greed and selfishness as signs of strength and achievement; humility on the other hand is seen as weak, even silly in this dog-eat-dog world and something to be shamed.

This tacit acceptance could be called “sin” as well – community/societal sin. This kind of sin, which is enlivened by fear and greed can make spirit hard to grasp. It’s as if the whole environment has been corrupted.

“Save yourself from this corrupt generation!”

The root meaning of repentance is to change direction. Broad repentance is a desire to buck the trends of this life that encourage and reward: injustice, hardness of hearts, selfishness.

I believe that (as the first chapter of Genesis says) that we are created in goodness and that our basic nature is to be loving and fair and humble. We are drawn to that original goal – we want that kind of life and world to live in. Maybe that is why in the few days that followed Peter’s Pentecost speech that some three thousand people welcomed his message, we baptised and became the first of a new generation of followers of Jesus’ way.

//

I wonder if what we need is the courage to see what is possible. Is there enough openness amongst all of the cynicism that is all around us to see the hope and promise that is truly in our midst.

//

It was the late afternoon of the first Easter. That morning, the women had found the empty tomb and brought back a story about seeing angels that spoke of resurrection. Cleopas and his partner were from Emmaus, a village a few kilometres from Jerusalem. They counted themselves among those that were with Jesus in Jerusalem. We don’t know anything else about them – how long they had been part of the group, how much time they had spent with Jesus, did they travel with him, or did they simply catch the wave of excitement after the Palm Sunday parade? However it had been for them, they were devastated by his execution. They had hoped Jesus would be ‘The One’ who would redeem Israel. But now there was no reason to stay with the disciples – they were going home! It was over.

//

It was over but it wasn’t forgotten. So, when the fellow traveller on the road showed the slightest interest in their lives, they opened right up and told him the whole story. It is a common aspect of resurrection stories across the gospel accounts – often the risen Jesus is not recognized at first: Mary thought he was a gardener until she heard her name spoken; the fishing disciples just saw him as a nosey person on the beach shouting out advice, until that advice yielded a miraculous catch. And here, these two Emmaus disciples were talking about Jesus with Jesus and couldn’t see that it was Jesus. But something about this person was is intriguing that they were hesitant to part company, even when they arrived at their destination. They discouraged the traveller from continuing on: “stay with us”. I know that night was approaching and it would be un-wise for travellers to stay on the road in the dark. That would be a good enough reason to be welcoming to a traveller. But I like to imagine that there was a less tangible reason that these two disciples didn’t want this person to leave them, just yet. Perhaps, they had a sixth sense that they could be irrevocably changed by sticking with this guy. “Stay with us!”

I think that it is fair to assume that these two disciples were with Jesus three evenings earlier sharing supper with him on the night when he arrested: the night that the New Testament quotes Jesus as saying: “take and eat, this is my body broken for you; do this in remembrance of me!” It had to be a moment that was etched in the minds of all who were present – it was the last time they enjoyed Jesus’ company; just a couple of hours later he was in custody. As the story was re-told over the years, the followers of Jesus’ Way would look back on that meal and call it The Last Supper.

Clearly, for Cleopas and the other Emmaus disciple, the events of the Last Supper touched them at a sub-conscious level because when their guest blessed and broke the bread for the evening meal on that Sunday night, the memories came flooding back. This was Jesus, risen and among them. It had been Jesus who walked and talked with them on the road, for some reason they weren’t able to notice. As soon as their eyes were opened to the truth of who they were with, Jesus was gone. But in that momentary recognition they were changed. They immediately grabbed on to the memory of the events they had just experienced. They recalled the scriptural conversation they had along the road – they began to see Jesus as strongly rooted in their tradition and quite possibly The One sent by God to redeem the people.

Any concerns over travelling the roads at night were ignored and they ran back to the city they had escaped that afternoon. They found the others and proclaimed (as the women had done a few hours earlier): Jesus is Risen.

//

Out of despair, joy had risen.

//

For the Emmaus disciples, the grief and tragedy (they had been part of) had corrupted their ability to hope in what was possible.

Another way to use the word corruption is to speak about something that has been messed up in some way – none of us wants a computer that has a corrupted hard drive. When things are corrupted they are not going to be able to do what they are designed to do.

//

I believe strongly in the notion of a ‘good’ creation. I know that this world is good, because of the natural balance I see in the earth at its best. I see the natural goodness with humanity all the time – not as an act of gaining favour or exploiting charitable acts, but as natural goodness shining through. I also see the imbalance. I get worried when people become reigned to that imbalance, even to the point of giving up on the possibility of good.

As we begin to accept that goodness cannot dominate our lives, it can be said that we have been corrupted. I would go further to use the language of sin, when speaking of giving up on the possibility of good.

//

I think what has turned so many people off of ‘church’ is that perception that the focus is on sin and guilt: the focus is on the worst of who we are: using a fear of the impact of that way of living as a motivation to repent. “You’d better repent, or else ...!”

And repentance does imply a turning away from ‘sin’ (however we define it). But it can also be a turning toward a well-focused life – where we love God and all that God has made (including ourselves and our neighbours). If all we ever focus on is what we are leaving behind, we are not giving repentance its full due.

I cannot conceive that thousands of people would come to Peter for baptism out of fear – they had to be focused on the good life that was possible in the wake of Jesus’ resurrection.

//

We, too, I believe are called ‘to’ something, not ‘away’ from something. There are possibilities for good work and ministry together for us here at St. David’s as part of the wider Body of Christ.

If we are not - in the present - looking forward, then we might very well have some corruption issues to deal with.

Last week, I encouraged myself and you-all to be open to what is out there as possible for us. Today, I hope we can be enlivened by those moments of clarity and encouragement that remind us of the best of our potential. Next week, we will continue to read of the example of the early church and how they developed ways of relating that defined their sense of community and what it means to be a movement becoming a church.

May we know that God walks with us on this journey. Let us pray:

Stay with us God, even when we don’t notice you – especially when we don’t notice you. Be patient and persistent in your love for us until we see our potential to live as Jesus did. Amen.



#182 VU “Stay With Us”

Sunday, May 1, 2011

OPPORTUNITIES

May 1, 2011
Easter 2
Psalm 16
John 20:19-31

(prayer)

Happy Easter!

No, I didn’t look incorrectly at the Calendar. And no, it is not Orthodox Easter on the Julian calendar (2011 was one of those rare years when both the eastern and western church shared the same day for Easter Sunday).

I say Happy Easter because Easter is more than one day in the church – it is a whole season – a seven week season in fact. If you have one of those Canadian Church Calendars that our women’s group sells in December, you will see that every date in May is coloured white – in fact it is white from April 24th all the way to June 11th. Easter is a 49 day season that runs from Easter Sunday to the day before Pentecost.

//

Over these next few weeks, I hope that our times together in worship can build on the big theme of Easter: that is...

• With God all things are possible.

• Trouble and difficulty do not have to be the final word.

• Out of despair, joy can rise.

• Jesus can still be known and experienced – resurrection gives us that opportunity.

All of these things are not statements of unequivocal fact for us (none of us was there at the empty tomb or in the upper room; none of us broke bread with Jesus in Emmaus or ate breakfast fish with him by the shores of Galilee) – these Easter themes are not statements of unequivocal facts, but are declarations of faith. And yet, they may not be based on blind faith – for us, there may just be a logic behind what we have come to believe. [more on that later]

//

Our reading from the gospel of John begins on Easter Sunday evening. If you were at the 8am service last week, you would have heard the first 18 verses of John, chapter 20.

As we heard this morning, the context of verse 19 is that Sunday evening has come; the followers of Jesus are huddled behind locked doors in their rented room. They were afraid that the temple guards that had come and arrested Jesus 3 days earlier would be coming for them as well.

[ASIDE: Sadly, the gospel of John has been used by Christians for centuries to justify anti-Semitism. This is because of the authors labelling of the opponents of Jesus in Jerusalem simply as “The Jews”. An uninformed reading of these texts (like John 20:19) might assume that all Jews were to be feared by the followers of Jesus. That is of course absurd because the followers of Jesus were, themselves, Jews. Jesus was a Jew. Clearly the reference in John 20:19 is to be understood to mean that the disciples were behind locked doors for fear of the Jewish authorities: the members of the Temple hierarchy that saw Jesus as having committed blasphemy: the ones who took Jesus to the roman governor, Pilate, who then sentenced Jesus to death for treason against the empire (claims to kingship). Now, John’s gospel is generally agreed to be the last of the Biblical gospels to be written – perhaps as late as the 90s of the first century – that’s sixty some years after the events they describe. John’s text is not simply an historical record – it is a theological record. It not only includes accounts about some of the things that Jesus said and did, but (also) those stories are interwoven with 60 years of theological and Christological development: what was believed about God and Jesus. For example, in John 8:12 when Jesus is quoted as saying “I Am the light of the world” or in 6:35 when he says “I Am the bread of life” or in 14:6 where we read “I Am the way, the truth and the life”, these are more than historical quotes, they are statements of faith from the late first century Christian movement: John’s church was proclaiming that (for them) Jesus is (like) Light [guide, warmth, comfort], Bread [nourishment], Jesus is the Way, Truth and Life [a sure connection to God].” These sayings had become true for the church of the 90s. Back on topic about anti-Semitism, another truth for the Christian church of the 90s, is that they were no longer a strictly Hebrew movement – over the decades they had evolved to recognise that the love of God, in Christ Jesus their lord, was not restricted to one group or another – Christianity may have begun as new kind of Hebrew sect, but as it grew, it no longer fit neatly within traditional Judaism: in the language of the Apostle Paul “in Christ there was no longer Jew or Greek, slave or free, male or female” – all of these types of people still co-existed in the church, it’s just that divisive labels didn’t matter. However, within just one generation or so after the first Easter, even the groups of largely Jewish Christians in Judah and Galilee, found that they no longer had a place in the synagogues. And so we can understand how, to a Christian of the late first century, ‘The Jews’ were seen as separate from ‘The Christians’. Some of them in the 1st century may have even been comfortable extrapolating the historic opposition to Jesus from the temple elite to the entire Jewish nation (we saw the Nazis of the early 20th century make the same extrapolation) – but that is not something that is historically accurate, and it is certainly not helpful for us in a diversely spiritual world of the 21st century: where we have seen far too many examples of how fundamentalist religious zeal feeds on the hate that brews within holy divisions. And so, back to the text, a fair and right interpretation of references to “The Jews” in the gospel of John is to see them as limited to “the Jerusalem Temple Authorities”: not every Jewish person of Jesus’ day and NO Jewish person in our day!]

Now where was I?

Yes, in the locked room on the first Easter eve. The tomb was discovered empty in the morning by Mary Magdalene – that fact was confirmed by Peter and another disciple who went and inspected the site themselves (the testimony of two reliable male witnesses would even stand up in a first century court). An empty tomb was not a sign of resurrection; it was a sign of vandalism – Mary and her male companions all assumed that someone had taken the body away: not that Jesus was risen.

When Mary later came running back saying that she had seen and talked with a risen Jesus, this news caused more confusion that it did celebration. It was just Mary; this time there were no other witnesses. This insignificant testimony by a woman experiencing deep grief was not enough to overcome the fear they felt.

You-all heard what happened next. Somehow Jesus slipped past the locked door and was seen and heard by the group of followers in the room: his message “Peace be with you. You are enlivened by the Holy Spirit and sent out by God to share the good news of God’s forgiveness.”

The disciple known as The Twin was not there when Jesus’ came. Even though there were lots of witness this time, Thomas was as sceptical about the words “We have seen the lord” as he was when Mary spoke them a few hours earlier. “Unless I see and touch for myself, I will not believe.”

On the first week anniversary of the resurrection, the disciples (including Thomas this time) are together again – still behind locked doors / still afraid? – Jesus comes again, especially for Thomas – “Peace be with you. Touch and see.”

As with all of the gospel of John, these words are not merely an attempt at passing on historical quotations – they are theological statements for the church of the late first century.

We might be right to assume that there was virtually no one alive in John’s church that ever meet Jesus in the flesh (during his lifetime or a resurrection appearance) – John 20:29 is not really words for Thomas but for the church (the church of the late 1st century right up to our day):

“Blessed are those who have not seen

and yet have come to believe.”



These are not words that speak of so-called blind faith (see, I said, I’d come back to this). It does not say ‘blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe’; it says, ‘blessed are those who have not seen and yet HAVE COME TO believe’.

Faith is not a destination that we instantly transport to (we can’t ask Scotty to just beam us there); faith grows and develops along the way. I would even go so far to say ... that faith is dependent on the opportunities and experiences that come our way. A message from our gospel today is that just because one of those opportunities does not include viewing crucifixion wounds up close, doesn’t mean that faith is impossible. There are still paths that can get us there. We can still ‘come to believe’.

//

So, for us now – May Day 2011 – what opportunities and experiences might be in front of us that can strengthen our connection to the mystery and holiness we hope is all around us?

What opportunities and experiences might be in front of us that can strengthen our connection to the mystery and holiness we hope is all around us?

//

//

I feel a bit lonely up here this morning. I feel blessed to have been able to walk with Alex as she was here from September to April as a student minister.

I know that this internship experience was only 8 months long. That’s only 6% of my time as minister at St. David’s (127 months since Oct 2000) and 3% of the time I have been an ordained UC minister (251 months since June 1990) and less than one half of a percent in lifespan of this congregation’s history (since 1989).

I know that this experience was only eight months long and that the absolute primary focus of that time had to be on Alex’s learning, but I have found myself this week reflecting on how that time was an opportunity for me to learn and grow in faith. And, oddly enough, I am not lamenting what is no longer here because the internship is concluded, but I am grateful for what I have gained: I have been thinking about how that has been true for me personally and how I imagine it to be true for our church as a whole.

I wonder where we go from here.

//

“I wonder where we go from here”: it’s a great question. And it’s a hard question. I know that if we gathered a half dozen people together from this room right now, we would likely have a variety of ideas of what might be desired – I doubt we would have an instant consensus of what might be necessary and possible. “I wonder where we go from here” is the start of a deep conversation.

I know I have mentioned this before, but I’m going to again: when my wife Patti and I brought our first son home from the hospital and put his delicate, sleepy body in his crib for the first time, we looked at each other and both wondered: “so, now what?”

I imagine that Mary and Peter and Thomas may have looked at each other after Jesus left that locked room and wondered the same thing: so, now what?

Jesus had said, “As the Father has sent me, so I send you.” Did the disciples stare into each other’s eyes and say, “I wonder where we go from here.”

Well, we know what their first step had to be. If they were truly to take the notion of ‘being sent’ seriously, they would have to leave the security of the locked room – they would have to set aside the paralysing fear and venture out in hope and faith, trusting (as Jesus said) they had the Holy Spirit as a companion.

In spite of what we might assume about today’s story concerning Thomas, throughout the gospels and other parts of the Bible, the biggest obstacle to faith is not doubt, but fear.

“You of little faith, why are you afraid?” Jesus once told them in the boat during a storm (Mt 8:26).

The path of faith begins by moving away from fear! That message comes out clearly in the last half of John, chapter 20.

Jesus gave his disciples an indwelling of the Holy Spirit to be their companion along the way. This was not necessarily new: ancient Psalmists (like the author of Psalm 16, which was read this morning) fervently believed that God was “spiritual companion”: In you, I take refuge ... you show me the path of life. In your presence there is fullness of joy. (Ps 16:1,11). On that night in the locked room, Jesus reminded his followers that they have what their tradition has always believed –



They enjoyed an indwelling of God’s Holy Spirit. And so, maybe they didn’t need to always be afraid. They didn’t need to take refuge in a locked room ... God is their refuge.

//

Of course, fear pops up here and there along the way – often for good reason – because fear is tied to uncertainty, and there is a lot of uncertainty in life and in the world in which we live. We worry about the impact of choices we make – we wonder about what joy/calamity an uncertain future might bring.

[Uncertain future ... now, I’m not really speaking about the election tomorrow, but since I brought it up – I do encourage those of you citizens 18 and older to be sure to take your whole self into the voting booth: mind, body and spirit. In faith, believe that you have received the Holy Spirit and that this blessing influences how you look at the world. So citizen, be guided by your morals, your sense of justice and a desire (as Paul wrote in a letter to the Corinthians) for the ‘common good’ for yourself and your fellow Canadians. That’s all I’ll say about that for fear of breaching the non-partisan expectations of religious charitable organizations.]

But I digress... where was I?

Oh, yes, ‘moving beyond fear’.

For faith to be grown – to be able to ‘come to believe’, we need to journey into the opportunities and experiences where we might discover the Holy.

That practically demands that we wonder where we should be going from here.

//

Be thinking about that,

meditate on that,

pray about that,

be open to acting on what you discover.

To do anything else is akin to hiding a stagnant faith behind a locked door.

“Blessed are those who come to believe.”

Thanks be to God. [END]

//

Let us pray:

Holy Spirit,

may we embody your grace and carry that good news to a waiting world.

AMEN.





Page 806VU “O God, Our Help In Ages Past”