SOMETHING TO TALK ABOUT

September 23, 2012

Pentecost 17

James 3:^13-18

Mark 9:^30-37

(prayer)

The Revised Common Lectionary cycle of readings has been walking us through the letter of James and the gospel of Mark, in recent weeks.  [I like the discipline of following the lectionary, in planning church services - it all starts with the Word, not necessarily whatever might be on my mind at the time - although it is amazing how often those two processes intersect.]  Last week, in church, we read the story about Jesus asking his disciples how they would describe him.  There were two questions: 

-Who do people say that I am? and

-Who do you say that I am?

//

I am the kind of a person who has his ears pretty close to the ground.  It is an occupational necessity for a pastor.  Not every situation where I can be helpful to people as they move through the ups and downs of life and spirit, is always explicitly expressed.

Nothing breaks my heart more in this ‘business’ than to hear that someone was in need of a pastoral presence while they were in the hospital or going through a tough time and I only find out about it well after the fact when, someone says to me “how come no one went and visited Mr Jones or Mrs Smith.”

On the other hand, it is amazing how much private details people seem willing to share with me, simply because I am a minister.

//

I think that I enjoy gossip as much as the next person, but I always try to be extremely mindful of the destructive potential of gossip.  This summer’s General Council reminded the whole church of the real evils of ‘nattering behind the scenes’. When it comes to news that should be relatively confidential, I can be a vault.  People can be assured that the loonie stops here.  Okay, my wife is my supportive sounding board on most things, but that is the normal limit.

//

So Jesus asked them:  what are the rumours; what are people saying in the streets and in the whispers; who do people say that I am?

As I noted last week, when Jesus asked his second question: who do YOU say that I am?, his reaction to Peter’s messiah-based answer was to give them more to talk about.  Jesus’ focus was not of the victorious king who wields power and might, but of the suffering servant.

//

Today, we heard Jesus reiterating the message of the suffering servant and then he preached that servanthood would be the hallmark of discipleship not who saw themselves as the greatest.

As we move through the book of Mark, there are two significant stories that happen between last week’s “who do you say that I am” reading and today’s “the first must be last” lesson.

Firstly, Peter, James and John were on a mountain top with Jesus and experienced a vivid common vision of Jesus being seen as shining with all the glory of God, keeping company with the key figures of the history of the law and the prophets: Moses and Elijah.  This experience confused and absolutely frightened these disciples: at one point, they hit the ground and hid their eyes until it was over.  And to make things very hard, Jesus told them they were NOT to talk about it.  

You know, sometimes you just need something to talk about.

Secondly, As Jesus, Peter, James and John meet up with the other disciples after coming down from the mountain, there was quite the commotion – apparently there was a young boy who suffered from horrific convulsions.  In the culture of the day, the people interpreted this as the boy being possessed by an unclean spirit.  Now, although earlier in the gospel (in Mark chapter six): ⁷[Jesus had] called the twelve and began to send them out two by two, and gave them authority over the unclean spirits, the disciples were apparently unable to help this young boy.  Jesus did, and so the disciples had something new to talk about:

²⁸ …‘Why could we not cast out [the unclean spirit]?’

//

Fear and failure can encourage people to try and find some certainty in life – to shore up what they can.

It is in this context fear and failure that Jesus speaks to the disciples in today’s passage: ³³ …‘What were you arguing about on the way?: ³⁴[who is the greatest? Really?] ³⁵ …‘Whoever wants to be first must be last of all and servant of all.’

//

Whoever wants to be first, must be last.

//

For all but one year of the many years that I worked at summer camp in my youth and young adult years, the meals were always served ‘family style’, each table got food on trays and in bowls for that table.  In the exception year, we had a head cook, who thought it was too much work to portion out the food like that so he insisted that everyone parade by the kitchen through-window and be served ‘cafeteria style’.  It was mayhem, with all of the tables competing about who would get to eat the food while it was hot.  We used to play those big room, wedding, church supper games to determine which table went first.  Sometimes, we tried to see who could be the quietest.  Yeah, that will work with a camp full of happy kids. [The idea might have worked better had the camp kitchen been equipped with heat lamps.]

I and a few other staff members had argued for a return to ‘family style’ but we were overruled by the camp board of the day, who didn’t want to upset this cook for fear that he’d quit mid-summer.

I don’t know why we feel prone to give into the fears that we’ll upset someone when we are trying to do something we know that is right.

So myself and others, no matter where we were sitting, always waited until after everyone else had gone through the line.  We often preached our unofficial motto when it came to camp activities – ‘it’s for the kids’.  That summer, we ate what was left of the cold food, as we lived out that motto.

The next summer, the board instituted a ‘family style’ only dining room policy before any cooks were hired.

//

//

When Jesus wanted his audiences to really ‘get’ his point when he had something really important to say, he was known to use meaningful metaphoric words (parables) and occasionally to point to something tangible in their midst:

The kingdom of God is like a mustard seed (the people could picture that in their heads).  It starts small and becomes more than expected.

Hey, look at that bird over there (and they would turn their heads and look), do you think it worries about planting crops or making clothes?  If God cares for a bird, why can’t you believe that God cares for you?

When Jesus uses parables and points to things people can easily imagine and understand – he wants them to remember the message behind what he’s saying.

Now, some of Jesus’ metaphors may not be fully part of the modern experience, but they were never intended to be; they were for an early first century audience.

But, we can see through time and ‘get’ the message too, even if we have never grown a mustard plant or spent a night on a hill with a flock of sheep.

//

And then again, some of Jesus’ parables and life lessons can be universally understood in anytime.  Such is the case with today’s reading.

//

Jesus invites a little child into this circle of adult learners (that’s all the word ‘disciple’ means: learner) and proclaims… ³⁷‘Whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me, and whoever welcomes me welcomes not me but the one who sent me.’

What Jesus did there was radical and shocking – he was breaking what were seen as long-standing societal expectations and norms.  A child would not be welcomed into an adult learning circle, especially the sacred male circle of rabbi and disciples.

I can’t tell from the text whether Jesus went and got the child and brought him amongst the men, or if she simply un-wittingly crashed their party.  If Jesus got the child, perhaps the reaction was a bit subdued, a bit ‘wait and see what Jesus is up to’; but certainly, if the child just appeared on his own, I imagine that someone took almost immediate action to remove the child from where she didn’t belong.  It’s not that children were to be seen and not heard – they weren’t even supposed to be seen!

³⁷‘Whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me, and whoever welcomes me welcomes not me but the one who sent me.’

That required a shocking, radical shift in thinking.

//

I know that in my dozen years as the minister with this church that there have been many dynamic changes in how we worship and learn together. 

We have used a number of different Sunday School programs over the years, including last fall investing in a Godly Play program and permanently set up children’s sanctuary down in room three. 

We expanded our repertoire of hymns and worship songs, with the addition of the More Voices Hymn book (that was published in 2007).  Just a few months ago, our Christian Development committee took the initiative to include a variety of rhythm instruments for anyone to use, as an expression of active worship.

Our building has transformed over this time too.  In my first year, the sanctuary was gutted and re-done to allow room for the choirs and more seating at the back.  We have added better sound and (just last fall) video screens to enhance our worship experiences.  And this summer, as the United Churches in Leduc and Beaumont amalgamated and brought their furniture and energy together, St. David’s was able to create more flexible seating at the front and a place for young children to play and worship within the circle of this congregation.

//

I know (and I appreciate) that change is always tied to loss.  What is moved away from often still has value and meaning to some.  Change can be hard.  If I had a nickel for every time I have heard someone say, “it never used to be like that…”, I would be able to be a very generous person.  When people say, it never used to be like that, sometimes that is a joyous reflection, but (often) it is a lament.

I wonder (when Jesus welcomed that child among his disciples) if any of the on-lookers said, “Well, it never used to be that way…”

//

Change is loss. 

Change is always loss.

And yet change is part of life. 

Moreover, change sometimes is demanded because of what we hold as valuable and as we seek to hold true to what we have come to believe.

//

Case in point: the place of children in church, since that is the direct context of our gospel reading today.  At one time, there was an axiom in church and wider in society that children should be seen and not heard.  Sunday school ran completely concurrently to sanctuary worship.  There was no children’s story in church.  Seldom were children even in the main worship service.  And if they were, they were to adhere to adult behaviours of still quiet … and non-distracting reverence.

But, our growing sense of the value of children as children has allowed many people to begin to appreciate the gifts that a child’s experience of God and worship can be to themselves and the adults around them.

As a minister friend of mine wrote on my facebook page recently, “children should be SEEN and HEARD in church.”

//

I have watched all of my four children find their place in Sunday church as they have aged and grown. 

Being a PK (a preacher’s kid) has its pitfalls.  You get watched and scrutinized pretty closely sometimes.  My oldest was an active toddler in church.

One of the aspects of me that the congregation I served at the time appreciated about me when I was called there was that I had a young family.  They saw that as a positive in a minister.  Probably a totally inappropriate factor as far as hiring practices go, but I did get the sense that they imagined that my children, along with the slightly older children of one of the other ministers on staff, would be a visible parable for the congregation showing the variety and valuable diversity and wonder within the family of God.

But I am not stupid.

I know that there is still the occasional person who pines for the way it used to be: when children were barely seen and defiantly not heard.

When my oldest (at three), at the start of the service, before the children went to their Sunday School classes, used to stand beside me as I played guitar and hold a long candle snuffer and pretend it was a guitar.  It was a proud moment for me as a dad, but most importantly, he was a person being moved by the spirit in a way that made sense for him at his age.  It was rhythmic, it was artistic and it was cute.  And it, as far as I was concerned, belonged in church.

One Sunday, after church, when I was greeting people and shaking hands, I was told by a long-time congregational member that my boy’s behaviour was “distracting, disrespectful and disgusting” - exact words from thirteen years ago.

It was the most disheartening moment in my life as a father and as a minister.  But, it was just one person – surely it didn’t represent a wider approach to church?

Then I met the ‘fear of upsetting’ concept head on.  I shared how much this one comment hurt me both parentally and theologically with a few trusted people in the leadership of the congregation.

Their response:  “We think it would be best if he just sat quietly with his mom, from now on.”  That really brought me down.  I know the comments didn’t represent everyone in that church.  I know that the people I talked to were trying to ‘keep the peace’.  But, sometimes you never get a second chance to make a first impression.

Less than a year later, I was in Leduc. The rest (as they say) is the history of the last decade, plus two.

And that history includes my children playing guitar and drums, lighting candles, pushing buttons for the slide show, and assisting their dad during baptisms and communion from time to time.  [every Sunday is take your son or daughter  to work day for a minister.]

You might even remember a little girl spinning circles at breakneck speeds during the hymns just in front of the pulpit.  [Annie still spins at home while listening to her iPod.]

And it is not just the PKs.  I have witnessed this congregation being ever more open to the involvement of children as children in this church, on Sundays and at mid week events – I have witnessed a wonderful decade-plus of children (mine and others) being accepted as valid people of God in their own right.

//

What would Jesus do about the place of children in church?

//

I am so proud of the leaders and people of this congregation who refuse to go back to the ‘seen and not heard’ era.  So, my Matthew will likely continue hang out with his dad when that is what the spirit calls for (okay not until at least mid-October because all of the rest of his regular season football games begin at 10am on Sunday mornings).

And Sam Ritter, you keep drumming that drum – feel free to interrupt our social circles with the Spirit of God flowing through you.

//

All of us (of every age and ability, of every intellect and experience, of every ... ‘whatever’) are valid people of God, who deserve to be moved by the spirit and must be welcomed, if we hope to know what it is to welcome Jesus and the ‘one who sent him’.

//  //  //

I’ll leave it there.  I hope I’ve given you something to talk about.

Let us pray...

God hold us close when we are unsure of the way before us.  help us hold on to what we value and believe.  Amen.

#560VU 

“O Master, Let me Walk With Thee

WHO IS JESUS?

September 16, 2012

Pentecost 16

Proverbs 1:20-33

Mark 8:27-38

(prayer)

I mentioned it a bit last week, but the geography within the gospel of Mark has a great deal to do with the focus on Jesus’ ministry.  The early chapters of the gospel had Jesus sticking close to home: in the villages and country-side near Nazareth (his home town), particularly in the region of Lake Capernaum (Sea of Galilee).  Naturally, those interested in Jesus all came from his own culture and religion.  Then last week in chapter seven, we heard about Jesus’ travels along the Lebanon coast and in the province of Syria.  There Jesus crossed the literal and figurative boarders between people: Jesus saw the gentiles (non-Jews) as just as valid recipients of the grace and love and power of God (which flowed through him) as the Galileans.  If you look at the story, Jesus took a little convincing but he eventually agreed that people had value in God’s eyes.

Today, our passage serves (as one resource I read this week called it) as the ‘hinge point in Mark’s gospel’ (Seasons of the Spirit).  The focus from this point on (geographically and theologically) is on Jerusalem; on the path towards Jesus’ passion, his suffering, death (and eventually resurrection).

Now, while, the people of Galilee and Judea (where Jerusalem was) were all people of Israel, the practice of faith between the northern, rural population was markedly different from the southern, urban people.

In the gospels, Jesus is often challenged by various religious leaders.  Three of the most common ‘opponents’ of Jesus are:

1.    Pharisees;

2.    Sadducees; and

3.    Scribes.

Even though, it seems that the text seems to speak all of these in the same breath and can become lumped together in our minds, they do have very different ways of approaching life and faith.

First of all, the last group: the scribes.  These were experts in the law.  They were responsible for the copying and maintaining of the writings of scripture (our Old Testament was the Hebrew Bible of Jesus’ day).  They were very closely aligned with the temple leadership in Jerusalem and tended to interpret the scripture in very fundamentalist and literal ways.

The Pharisees and the Sadducees both had their origins in the second century before Jesus. (BC [before Christ] or BCE [before the common era]).  The Sadducees could be described as more conservative than the Pharisees.  While the Pharisees saw the whole of scripture as authoritative (the five books of the Torah and the work of the prophets and the other writings, and even the oral traditions that followed these words over the centuries), the Sadducees only accepted the Torah, the (so called) books of Moses as canonical scripture.  Only Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy were authoritative and binding.  And the Sadducees interpreted these books much more literally than the Pharisees.  Because of the focus on the Torah and its strict instructions for worship in the Tabernacle of Moses’ time, the Sadducees were very ‘temple focused’ – the temple had been built as a permanent, stone tabernacle in the time of King Solomon ~900 years before Jesus.  As a result, most Sadducees probably resided close to Jerusalem.  Pharisees were less tied to the Temple and so they could be found in many outlying areas, including up in Galilee – they taught and worshiped in local synagogues.  One could say that they were more ethical in their teaching, while the Sadducees could be described as more theological.

The theology of the levitical purity laws were central to Sadducee life: a person’s free will either had them follow the Torah or not.  It was very easy for Sadducees to judge if people were choosing to be faithful or not.

Pharisees held a middle ground position on free will – they would say that it is impossible for free will or the sovereignty of God to cancel out each other.  This viewpoint allowed Pharisees to be champions of human equality.  God’s overarching loved almost demanded that the vulnerable were cared for.

Pharisees believed in the immortality of the soul, in a life after death and a future for the dead.  They believed in a complex hierarchy of angels and demons.  The Sadducees rejected these ideas.

//

Clearly, from all we can read about Jesus in the New Testament, he was basically a Pharisaic Jew.  Certainly, he had way more in common with the Pharisees than he did the Sadducees.

I like to think of Jesus’ run-ins with his opponents this way:

When debating scribes, it is always about an interpretation of scripture: probably a ‘literal’ interpretation on behalf of the scribe and a ‘more than literal’ opinion of Jesus.

When Jesus ran afoul of Sadducees, it was often around Jesus’ use of traditions not directly tied to the Torah or what they saw as improper behaviour according to the law.  To them Jesus was often a rebel from the rural north in need of their wisdom from the capital region.  When Jesus debated with Sadducees is was like comparing apples and oranges.  We would not expect them to see things the same way very often.

When Jesus had differences with the Pharisees, it was more like comparing apples to apples.  Jesus was having disagreements within his own ‘denomination’, so to speak.

//

//

In whatever way we look at it, Jesus had a habit of upsetting the officialdom of religion – even those with whom he had a lot in common.

And they had lots of names for Jesus: rebel, blasphemer, naive, just the son of a carpenter, false rabbi.

//

In today’s reading, Jesus and his disciples are at Caesarea Philippi.  It is near one of the sources of the Jordan River.  As it does in 2012, in Jesus’ day, the Jordan ran south from the Sea of Galilee (aka Lake Capernaum) to the Dead Sea (aka the Salt Sea, for obvious reasons).  Symbolically, we can envision Jesus at this point in the narrative being at the start of his journey toward Jerusalem: the journey that lead to his suffering and death.

At this time of new beginning, Jesus asks the disciples to think about what has happened so far.

“Who do people say that I am?”

The answers the disciples gave to that questions (John the Baptist [who had been beheaded by King Herod by this time], the ancient prophet Elijah, another prophet) are the same quoted in Mark chapter 6, verse 14-16.  Even King Herod, having heard about what Jesus and his disciples were doing even compared Jesus to John the Baptist.  Herod must have sighed in disappointment – he thought his troubles with want-to-be prophets were over.  Not so.  This Jesus was as if John was still alive.  (sigh...)

//

Jesus’ first question was simply an attempt to hear the rumours that people were spreading.  The next question was to hear the disciples opinions:  “But, who do you say that I am?”

Some of them had been with Jesus for almost three years.  They had seen him perform miraculous healings; they were witnesses to his wise teaching and his compassionate example.  What did all of those experiences teach them about who Jesus was?

//

It is Simon Peter who proclaims that Jesus is ‘The Messiah’: the anointed one of God.  Messiah is a royal image.  The coronation ceremony of the  ancient kings of Israel was an anointed with oil.  We are also familiar with the greek translation of messiah : CristoV – Christ!

By the time of Jesus, within parts of Judaism, there was a broad stream of belief that God would send a new king to redeem and save the people: a new king – in the manner of King David of old.  Jesus disciples adhered to these beliefs. 

So, when Peter blurts out that Jesus is this new king, anointed by God, it is a statement of deep confidence that Jesus’ authority was unstoppable.  Jesus would lead the people as a king: the new David.

//

Curiously, Jesus tells his followers that he doesn’t want them engaging in this ‘messiah’ talk.

[Some biblical scholars refer to this curious attitude as the Messianic Secret (a theory first proposed by William Wrede in 1901) – it is a characteristic found several times in the gospel of Mark.  Last week after Jesus healed a deaf man, ^* he ordered them to tell no one.]

//

Recap:

We know a bit about what some the different opponents of Jesus said about him.

We know about the rumours that others were spreading about him.  The ones that Jesus’ disciples and even King Herod had heard.

We even know what at least one of Jesus’ closest disciples said about him.

But who does Jesus say he is?

//

The descriptive title that Jesus chooses for himself is “ben ’adam” – the son of man.  It is a word used in several places of the Hebrew Bible (aka Old Testament).  It literally means ‘son of adam’, or even more basic, ‘son of dirt/earth’. 

Originally, it seems to have been an alternative description to the ‘sons of God/heaven’, referring to heavenly servants of God (~angels); the ‘sons of men’ were the sons of the earth, the earthly creatures of God. The sons of God were immortal; the sons of earth, mortal.

The prophet Ezekiel is referred to as a son of man.  In that case it means human.  The New Revised Standard Version chose to translate ben adam as “Mortal”.

Most of the times we see son of man (ben adam) in the OT it means a mortal human.

But in the book of Daniel, it has a different connotation that gives rise to the New Testament use of the phrase.  Daniel is a text about the saving and redemptive power of God in the face of the people being oppressed by an outside leader. The story is set in the time of the Judean exile in Babylon (7^th century before Jesus) – it promises that God will triumph over king Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon.

However, because it seems that the book of Daniel did not become part of the common canon of the Hebrew Bible until about 150 years or so before Jesus, it was likely understood to be a metaphor to represent what was the current domination of Judea and Galilee by the Caesar and the Roman Empire.  We can think of this as a means of getting a subversive anti-government document past the censors: ‘no, this isn’t about Caesar, it’s just an old story about Babylon’.

//

In Daniel, there is a vision that ‘one like the son of man’ coming down from the clouds who would establish an everlasting kingdom.

//

In this respect, the phrase son of man has a lot in common with the word messiah.

So when Jesus followed up Peter’s confession (that proclaimed Jesus as the messiah), by speaking about the Son of Man (à la Daniel), Peter thought they were on the same page.  But...

Jesus description of what was to happen to the Son of Man shocked the disciple called the Rock:  the Son of Man must undergo great suffering [even to death].

Jesus started preaching this openly, so Peter pulled Jesus aside to point out the inconsistency in his message:  the son of man doesn’t suffer, Peter must have argued, the son of man ushers in an everlasting kingdom.

Jesus refuses to have this conversation in private, he lets all the disciples in on Peter’s concerns and starts to rebuke Peter for his rebuking of Jesus: he calls Peter, a satan (an accuser) and tells him that he is focusing on human things, not divine things.

To call Peter ‘Satan’ is to say that he is in opposition to God and God’s plan.  It is a harsh insult.

//

In the end, Jesus is still pointing to an everlasting kingdom, but it is not one exactly comparable to the kingdoms of earth – as Jesus would say later during his trial interviews before governor Pilate, ‘my kingdom is not from this world’ (John 18:³⁶).

//

//

The centre of all of the biblical gospels is Jesus’ final week – his passion – his betrayal, his arrest, his trial and execution: and then his resurrection.

The disciples (especially Peter) cannot imagine that future.  They saw the path to the everlasting kingdom as a smooth peaceful transition ushered in by the prince of peace.

//

But ‘Who Jesus Is’ is threatening to the established powers of the world – political and religious.

Jesus preached an inclusion that radically upset the necessary societal divisions that kept the powerful in power.

‘Who Jesus Is’ is an afflicter of the comfortable as much as he is a comforter to the afflicted.

//

The gospel of Mark uses this conversation between Jesus and Peter as an opportunity to foreshadow the ending of the story (none of the gospel writers are very waiting until the end to tell the end of the story to their readers), so the author inserts, post-easter language her that his post-easter, late first century audience would understand:

·         Jesus death would not be the end – he would be raised after three days; and

·         the call to follow the hard path of faith, for the followers of Jesus to be willing to risk themselves for the furtherance of the gospel – to figuratively take up the crosses (the challenges, the sufferings) that seek to stop their proclamations of Jesus as the sovereign of an everlasting kingdom.

//

//

//

So, how can our modern 21^st century ears hear what the gospel is saying?

//

I guess we can ask, what are the obstacles that stand in our way of proclaiming a hope for Jesus’ peaceable kingdom?

//

We don’t face the sword or gun much in our part of the world.  We live in an area with relative tolerance for divergent religious and sociological views: especially for the traditionally dominant Christian believers of North America.

However, we must not ignore that this is not the case in some parts of our globe.  There is still religious persecution, against Christians and others: often brutal and violent.

//

We must oppose the division of people for whatever reason, if we believe that our God is a God of welcome and that Jesus sat in an open circle where divisions were set aside.

//

I believe that for North American Christians, the modern crosses to bear are ambivalence and distraction.  We live in a world that doesn’t really care about what we believe, so we can’t expect the systems to support it or make it easy.

For example, as many of you know, I coach my son Matthew’s atom football team.  Yesterday was our second regular season game and it was the last one I will be able to be on the bench.  All of his remaining games start at 10 o’clock on Sunday mornings, when I am otherwise disposed.

Society doesn’t owe me my Lord’s Day.  The Capital District Minor Football Association, in particular, doesn’t owe me my Lord’s Day.  The rest of life will carry on with Sunday to Saturday, 7 days a week, 365 days a year (okay, society still breaks for the Christian Christmas, but that’s the last bastion of the old Christo-dominant society).

We live in a society much more like that of the first Christians, where the official way of being was not necessarily their way.

The cross I bear is to be able to suffer through the distractions and ambivalence that others might feel about my spiritual beliefs and for me to take time to be holy.

//

//

What is your cross?

//

How can you deal with its weight and still find a meaningful spiritual connection to the God of hope and love?

God bless us all on this journey.

Let us pray;

God, give us grace to accept with serenity

the things that cannot be changed,

Courage to change the things

which should be changed,

and the Wisdom to distinguish

the one from the other.

#331VU 

“The Church’s One Foundation”

OPENING UP

September 9, 2012

Pentecost 15

James 2:^1-17

Mark 7:^24-27

[David Wilcox - Beyond Belief  YouTube]

I have been a fan of David Wilcox for more than a decade.  Patti and I have travelled to Calgary, Kelowna, Los Angeles, New York and even Hendersonville, NC to see him perform and in the case of North Carolina to hang out with him in a retreat setting.

What draws me to his music (besides his wicked skills with the six-string-ax) is his ‘poetry’:  he knows how to phrase music and words in such a way that reaches deep within me and pulls out thoughts and challenges that speak to how I can be as a person.

“BE the mercy!”  Be the mercy.

//

‘Welcoming In and Reaching Out.’

We say it.  It is our congregational motto.  A lot of churches say something like that.  They are good words; they are nice words; they are noble words.  They look great in a church bulletin and newsletter: the framed version of St. David’s motto and mission statement (in the south entrance hall) looks impressive on the wall.  ‘Welcoming In and Reaching Out’ makes a good first impression on our website and letterhead.

‘Welcoming In and Reaching Out’, as amazingly profound as these words of faith are, they are just words.  They mean nothing in reality, unless they are experienced.

We don’t strive to have Jesus call us hypocrites, by making welcoming in and reaching out an empty promise.  We don’t want to be another version of the example the Letter of James cites in today’s first reading, where we pick and choose our welcome based on the needs of those who are already here.

We strive to let the words of faith (Welcoming In and Reaching Out) live!

//

Faith, without works, is dead.

//

In the second chapter of the book of Acts, one can read an account of how the earliest post-Easter Christian community tried to live out its faith.  It goes like this starting at verse forty-four:

⁴⁴All who believed were together and had all things in common; ⁴⁵they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds^* to all, as any had need. ⁴⁶Day by day, as they spent much time together in the temple, they broke bread at home^* and ate their food with glad and generous^* hearts, ⁴⁷praising God and having the goodwill of all the people. And day by day the Lord added to their number those who were being saved.

//

Now this still is focused pretty internally - as the video said earlier, within the gated community.  But it did not take long for the early church to wrestle with (and move beyond) issues of inclusiveness.

Faith without works is dead.

The early church knew this!

The early church knew this because they learned from Jesus’ example and they had prophetic voices like that of the authors of the book of Acts and the Letter of James to inspire faith into action.

//

The first six and a half chapters of the gospel of Mark are set in the region of Galilee.  Jesus stays pretty close to home - sticking to the towns and countrysides around Lake Capernaum (aka the Sea of Galilee).

But starting with today’s gospel reading from Mark 7, verse 24, Jesus moves beyond what is familiar, beyond people like him, beyond those who share his faith and culture. 

At first, he seems to try to avoid this kind of contact, by staying with people he knows, perhaps a traveller from Tyre who had met Jesus in Galilee.  The opening verse of our passage for today says quite clearly that Jesus ‘did not want anyone to know he was there.’

In my experience, ‘avoidance’ only works for so long.  Issues of welcome and inclusion were bound to come up on this road trip for Jesus.

They did.

//

A reputation based on Jesus’ skills as a healer had travelled with him to the Lebanon coast.  A gentile (non-jewish) woman from the southeastern region of the roman province of Syria, near Phoenicia, comes to Jesus to beg him to help her daughter, who suffered from some mental illness ailment (in the language of the day: an unclean spirit or a demon).

Jesus’ response is shocking when we hear it in the context of all that we have come to know about Jesus.  He treats the woman like an unwanted dog, who is threatening to take away a family’s food.  Jesus tried to make the case that this was an issue of fairness.  A street dog does not deserve what belongs to a child.  When the gospel of Matthew (which was written after Mark) relays this story, it says that Jesus completely ignored the woman until his disciples got annoyed at her incessant shouting. Matthew clarifies what Mark likely meant about Jesus belief that the ‘children must be fed first’:  ‘I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.’  It is the children of Israel who are Jesus' focus.

The woman’s response is the same in both gospel versions: 

‘Sir, even the dogs under the table eat the children’s crumbs (Mark) that fall from their masters’ table (Matthew).’

Jesus thought that he could ignore this foreign woman’s needs because she was not like him - because she was outside the walls of the limits of his faith.  She was to him like an annoying animal compared a beloved child.

But this un-named woman does what may be unprecedented in all of scripture … she gets Jesus to change his mind.  It takes a big man to admit when he is wrong, and Jesus is a big man in this story.

She doesn’t shoot for full equality at the beginning – all struggles for equality seem to be forced to go through stages of ever increasing levels of inclusion.

But she invites Jesus to make a slight adjustment in his metaphor.  Instead of viewing her as an annoying wild street dog, can he see her as a family pet?

As a pet owner myself, I know that the reality often is that our pets are ‘like’ children in our families. 

If this woman Jesus couldn’t get Jesus to see her in the full status as a child [of God], maybe he could think of her as someone who is ‘like a member of the family”.

Jesus reverses his previous position:  “go, your daughter is well”.  In Matthew’s gospel, the woman is praised for her faith.

//

That is the last time in the gospel narrative that we hear of Jesus limiting his work and ministry to, solely, people who fully shared his religion and culture.  The very next story in Mark’s gospel that we also read today is Jesus healing a man whose deafness had left him with a speech impediment.  This time there was no nationality or faith test from Jesus – he just responded to the need.  Jesus simply said, ‘be opened’ into the man’s ears (probably had to whisper it directly into his deaf ears) and it was suddenly as if he had been able to hear all along.  Even the speech impediment was gone.  Miracles abound.

//

Faith in action!

//

I know that Jesus words, Be Open, are literal in this story.  The man's ears were to be opened up so he could hear.  But, I see a broader (more than literal) message in Jesus' words to this man from region of the Ten Cities (Decapolis) – how open are we to receiving the grace of God?  Do we hear those words of Jesus (Be Open) as a challenge for how to live?  I mean, look at the man's response - he was told to not make a 'big deal' about it, but he couldn't keep silent.  Are we open to going beyond ourselves as a result of the grace and love of God?

//

God’s open and unfailing love to those in need is a consistent theme in the texts of scripture we have before us today.

Faith has to be lived authentically and with integrity for it to have any real meaning.  Our faith must be as obvious to the eyes of the world as it can be to its ears.

//

As some of you may know, I am a bit of a news and politics junkie.  I watched on TV and online and in news clips most of both the US republican and democratic conventions.  Even though I am Canadian, I still try to view things I see and hear within the contexts of my values and worldviews.

As I reflected on the challenges of our scripture passages today with-respect-to openness and inclusivity, I could not miss the irony that the party whose platform was overtly religious in its tone seemed to be less consistent with the messages in James and Mark than the party who struggled to maintain its one and only direct reference to God in its platform.  Either way, political parties can say all they want – they can write all of the policies and plans they desire – but it will be the actions that dictate what is really important.  Churches, in this respect, are no different.

//

So, St. David’s, it is not enough to just proclaim the desire to welcome in and reach out.

//

As your minister for the last decade, I do think that we try very hard and have done well in many ways to live out these words.

Over the past year, we (in Leduc and Beaumont) spoke to each other about cooperation within the United Church.  In the end, we took conscious actions to allow two congregations to become one.

We have melded our resources, some of which are physical that you can see, even in this sanctuary.  Worship chairs that once provided comfort and function for Beaumont United Church, now allow for flexible seating at the front and back of this sanctuary.  Even something as simple as making the second row from the front one chair shorter, means that there is room for people in wheelchairs to sit within the congregation and not on its edge.  And, one of the first impressions of this sanctuary is a now circle of play and worship for young children and their parents as part of the gathered community in worship, not in the hallways.

This past week, at both the Beaumont and Leduc registration and information days, we had a display that invited people to ask, “Is there more?” and proclaimed that we are an ‘open-minded church for the 21^st century’:  words that challenge us to live them out.

I believe that our broadly inclusive wedding policy that does not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation is a active sign of this, as well.

//

These examples are all active signs of Welcoming In at work.

//

Reaching Out, on the other hand, continues to be our growing edge and greatest potential.

Yes, we do work in this area: good and faithful work.  When I arrived in Leduc, this church already encouraged regular donations to the food bank at least one Sunday a month.  As you can see, we gather a significant enough amount of donations that the foodbank has left us a fairly large bin.  As we fill it, we are doing the active work of Reaching Out.

When the We-Can Food Co-op needed new organizers and a new host, people from St. David’s stepped up.

And for the last several years, our Inreach-Outreach Committee has organized and hosted a free Thanksgiving Day dinner.  This morning, they met again and committed to this project again for October 8^th, 2012.  Sign-up lists are at the back for people to take an active part in making this plan a reality.

In early December for the past several years, people in this church are given information on issues of human rights and have the opportunity to participate in Amnesty International’s Write4Rights letter-writing campaign.

//

Aside: I notice that much of our local outreach is food based.  I guess, we really listened when Jesus told Simon Peter that a response to a love for Christ was to feed his sheep.

//

We also have participated in the outreach work of the United Church of Canada (in Canada and around the world) through regular and special donations to our denomination’s Mission and Service Fund.

//

Let me pose the question on our information display, “Is there more?”  How else can Reaching Out be an active ministry of this church and not just great words on paper?

A lot of churches (St. David’s included) do a pretty decent job of looking after their active church-folk, internally. That is a primary focus of most churches.  And that is good.

And there are a good number of churches (again, I would include St. David’s here as well) do a decent job of welcoming people to come into the life of the church.

But many churches (too some degree St. David’s as well) can be disproportionally inward-focused.  
I would like to challenge this congregation, through its people and committees and Church Council to find one new means of selfless outreach (non-food related) to add to our ministry sometime before next summer.  We can’t be everything to everyone, but reaching out is a corporate growing edge for us and I encourage you all to be thinking about a new way of reaching out, either locally, regionally or globally.  Submit your ideas to the Inreach-Outreach committee, via the church office.

Worship and work must be one!

Faith is shown in our works!

//

//

For the most part, this morning, I have been applying the lessons in James and Mark to the church at the congregational level.  Before we go, I also want to remind us all that these are personal challenges as well.  In fact, I believe that it is the small acts of faithful work that really make a difference in this world.

In each of our lives, we encounter situations where our welcome and outreach can be tested; we face opportunities to see if the rubber is going to hit the road.  Jesus met this challenge and had his eyes opened by someone that his prejudices had already written off.

One of us can come up against a new wall of exclusion in this walk of life when we can proclaim in our words (but more so, in our actions) that the grace and love of God will not be contained.
The grace and the love of God will not be contained - not if we have anything to do about it.

//
Each of us has heard the invitation of Jesus in Mark chapter seven:  be opened.

May the world see that this is an authentic truth about us as followers of Jesus.

//

I want to end this message the same way I began it, with those inspiring words from David Wilcox. [replay video]

#137MV 

“Welcome Jesus, You are Welcome”