Category: Minister

https://youtu.be/dDLFvbI3SjE

Hespeler, May 14, 2023 © Scott McAndless – Christian Family Sunday, Sixth Sunday of Easter
Acts 17:22-31, Psalm 66:8-20, 1 Peter 3:13-22, John 14:15-21

It has become common these days to blame religion for so much of the evil we find in this world. This is not without some good reason. If you want to create a list of all of the ways in which religion, all religion including Christianity, is evil, it is not really very hard. Just think of all of the Jihads, Crusades and genocides that have been carried out in the name of faith. Consider the atrocities committed because of religious differences – in Northern Ireland, Afghanistan, Israel and the Palestinian Territories just to name a few.

Evils in the Name of Faith

Remember, in our own country, the story of the Christian Doctrine of Discovery, endorsed by all major Christian faiths, that justified stripping all lands from the indigenous people because they were “savages.” Think of the residential school system that was a matter of national government policy, but that various Christian churches bought into wholeheartedly because they saw it as a chance to build up their own institutions.

Yes, religion is not the only cause of such devastation. We could also say many of the same things about nationalism, tribalism and racism, for example. But still, no one should underestimate all of the evil that has been carried out in this world in the name of faith.

But more than that, many people’s individual lives have been devastated by their encounters with religion. Abused people have often seen their abusers empowered and protected by religious institutions.

On this Christian Family Sunday, we need to admit that sometimes religion has had a devastating effect on families. Parents have been persuaded by religious teachers that, if their children don’t fit in with certain expectations, that they should reject them, maybe even turn them out. Such teachings have led to horrible outcomes like suicide and addiction.

Why Remain?

Many people today struggle with the long-terms effects of the trauma they experienced because of a strict religious upbringing. This is a pain that they carry with them every day and that most cannot overcome without extended therapy. Religion of all sorts has negatively affected people’s lives.

The downside of religion seems undeniable in many ways these days. And so, you might well ask me why I stay committed to the kind of work I do. Why not just give up on religion altogether? I’ll tell you why. It is because of the altar to the unknown god.

Paul in Athens

When the Apostle Paul went to Athens, he discovered a city that was full of religion and of gods. There were found some of the most famous and celebrated temples and altars in the whole world – the incredible Parthenon, the celebrated temple of Olympian Zeus, the massive Temple of Hephaestus, to name only a few. These temples represented some of the most powerful religious institutions that had ever existed.

In the names of these gods and others like them, the Roman legions had marched and conquered the world. In their names much evil was done, and perhaps some good. But, whether for good or ill, people believed in these gods and their stories because that was what they had always been taught. And so, Paul looked at all of these altars and concluded that the Athenians were indeed very religious people.

And maybe he wondered, given all of the violence that had been committed in the name of those well-established gods, whether it might not have been better if such religions had never existed. As a member of a religious minority who had suffered at the hands of the worshipers of these gods, you could hardly blame him for thinking such things.

Before the Areopagus

So why, then, when he spoke before the Areopagus, an assembly of leading Athenian citizens who were judging him, did he speak positively of the spiritual and religious lives of the Athenians. “Athenians,” he said, “I see how extremely spiritual you are in every way.” Why didn’t he simply reject their spiritual impulses as dangerous and deadly? I believe it was because of the altar to the unknown god.

As he wandered around the city, he had seen an altar dedicated to an unnamed god. Now, no one has ever found the actual altar to the unknown god among the many archeological digs in the city of Athens, but there is no reason to doubt that there was at least one there. They were not uncommon at all in the ancient Mediterranean world. There has been one found in excellent condition in the city of Rome.

Why were there such Altars?

But I’ve got to wonder why such things existed in a place like Athens. They had plenty of gods, after all – twelve major deities and tons of minor gods and demi-gods. You would think that they had all of the bases covered. And yet these strange altars kept being built, no doubt at great cost and personal sacrifice. Why?

The answer is simple. These altars were erected because, from time to time, people had experiences of the divine that they could not fit within the boundaries of all the huge varieties of religions that they saw around them.

Perhaps they were just going along with their everyday lives and they suddenly found themselves experiencing a transcendence that they could not explain. It might have been a moment of pure joy, or perhaps of terror. Maybe they felt as if they had been helped in some way that they couldn’t explain. Maybe they couldn’t quite put their finger on it, but they just knew that they were in the presence of the divine.

But clearly, what they had experienced did not fit with anything that they had been taught about the traditional gods all their lives. And so, they had to create some way to acknowledge what they had experienced that was outside of the religion of their society. That has to have been what happened.

What Comes First?

But do you realize what that means? We often work under the assumption that spiritual experiences are created by religious practice and belief. We assume that if you pray in certain ways or go through certain rituals, that you will experience God. We think that if you learn all the proper doctrines about God according to a religion, that you will come to know God. But the very existence of the altar to the unknown god proves that is not true.

Pretty clearly, if you had just taken away all of the altars to all the Olympian gods in Athens and all of Greece, if you would take it away all of the priests and the philosophers who taught their religious and spiritual ideas, this would not have eradicated the belief in the divine. People still would have been experiencing such things and, in response, feeling compelled to set up altars to the unknown that they had experienced.

Our Disposition to Spiritual Experience

The truth of the matter is that there is something in humanity itself, something that is built into the very structure of our minds, that disposes us to have spiritual experiences. I don’t know why that is. My suspicion is that it is something that God has built into us, but I obviously cannot prove that. But wherever it comes from, it is an undeniable part of who we are.

That doesn’t mean that everyone will have spiritual experiences – at least not to the same degree. But they will always remain an important part of human life and experience.

So, even if religion itself is flawed – even if it has often led to evil in this world, we cannot respond to that by giving up on religion entirely. If all of the principled and thoughtful and moral people just gave up on religion, would it just cease to exist? No, it would not.

You could tear down all of the churches, the temples, and mosques. You could destroy all of the institutions that support them. What would that mean? Would it bring the end of religion and the evil it might do? No. People would continue to experience the divine and they would continue to build their altars to an unknown god.

If we Abandon Religion

But that is not the only result. I can almost guarantee you that things would be quickly turn so much worse. If all of the principled and ethical believers abandoned religion, what would that leave? That would just leave all of the unscrupulous ones. And do not think for a moment that they wouldn’t be only too happy to co-opt all of the good intentions of those builders of altars to an unknown god and direct them towards new campaigns of terror, hatred and intolerance.

So, if you were to ask me to defend my choice to continue to participate in the Christian religion despite knowing the damage it has done and that it is capable of, that is what my answer would be. I stick around not because I have deluded myself into thinking that there is never anything wrong with religion. I stick around because I am not going to abandon this tradition to those who would use it in such ways.

I’m going to stick around so that I may do my best to promote a Christian faith that is open, tolerant and welcoming. I want to demonstrate to the world that it is possible to be a Christian and not be hateful. I am very sorry that I seem to be living in a time when so many have found it easy to conclude otherwise. But I will do my part to counter that narrative.

What Paul was Thinking

And so, while I obviously have no way of knowing all that was happening within the mind of the Apostle Paul at that meeting of the Areopagus, I’d like to think that he was thinking something along those lines and that is why he chose not to condemn the Athenians for the errors that he saw in their religious practice. He had respect for the divine experiences that they had had and how they had found ways to honour them.

And yes, Paul did not hesitate to proclaim his own understanding of the best way to approach the divine, especially because of what he had learned through his own experience of the risen Jesus Christ who revealed God in extraordinary ways. There is nothing wrong with doing that.

Paul’s Respect for them

But it is amazing to see how Paul speaks of these things while maintaining enormous respect for the spiritual experiences of the Athenians. He quotes their own poets and philosophers to them. He recognizes that their impulses towards the divine and even their desire to set up modes of worship are legitimate. That kind of respect for people who believe differently can take us a long way. It is an attitude that I would like to bring to every aspect of my religious life.

But more than that, even as he doesn’t refrain from sharing his own understanding and faith, he is definitely interested in finding the points of contact with others rather than the points of difference. He focusses, for example, on the common kinship of all humanity: “From one ancestor he made all peoples to inhabit the whole earth.”

And he also doesn’t insist that God’s concern is limited only to his own people. The God he worships acknowledges all nations: “And he allotted the times of their existence and the boundaries of the places where they would live.”

Most of all, he humbly acknowledges that all our knowledge of God is, at best, little more that us fumbling about and perhaps finding him. Such humility will always serve us well in all our dealings with those who believe differently.

Religion

Religion is not the greatest evil on the face of the earth. Neither is it the salvation of humanity. It really is a whole lot of us fumbling about and trying to do our best to honour what we have experienced of God. It is just a response and an imperfect response at best. But it is not going to go away if we give up on it. It will likely only become more problematic.

The hope, above all, is not found in religion. It is found in the God for whom we fumble about. The grace and hope is found in the fact that that God “is not far from each one of us. For ‘In him we live and move and have our being.’”

https://youtu.be/LgJFEq5ygBY

Hespeler, May 7, 2023 © Scott McAndless – Fifth Sunday of Easter
Acts 7:55-60, Psalm 31:1-5, 15-16, 1 Peter 2:2-10, John 14:1-14

In 1946, a brand-new translation of the New Testament was published. It was called the Revised Standard Version. And this was a very significant event in the history of the English Bible because, the previously unrevised Authorized Version had been around for a long time – I mean a very long time. That Bible, better known as the King James Version, was first published in 1611.

So, for 335 years, people had only heard one translation of the Bible. It was quite a shock for some people to hear familiar verses translated in new ways. And one particular verse was especially shocking. We read it this morning and in the Revised Standard Version it was translated like this: “In my Father’s house are many rooms; if it were not so, would I have told you that I go to prepare a place for you?”

“I want my mansion!”

In this passage, Jesus is speaking to his disciples just before his death. He is apparently describing to them what it is that will await them after they die. So, the promise seems to be that, in heaven, they will get to have rooms in God’s house. That sounds nice enough. Why would anyone have any trouble with that translation? Well, the problem was that they were used to a somewhat different translation in the King James Version. In the King James version, Jesus says, “In my Father’s house are many mansions.”

And now you see why people got upset. It seemed as if this new translation of the Bible was ripping them off. The King James Version promised them a mansion and now this newfangled Bible was downgrading them to a mere room? I don’t think so. And so, one of the big complaints against the new translation was, “I want my mansion!”

A Word with Changed Meaning

It was all a misunderstanding. What the original Greek text of the Gospel of John says is basically what it says in the Revised Standard Version: In my Father’s house are many rooms or dwelling places.

But actually, the old King James Version hadn’t been wrong, at least not when it was first published over 400 years ago. Over 400 years ago, the English word mansion didn’t mean the same thing that it means today. Back then, when somebody said that they lived in a mansion, people didn’t imagine the homes of rich people like, in the year when the Revised Standard Version was published, Henry Ford or Andrew Carnegie. They didn’t imagine The Beverly Hillbillies.

Back when the KJV was published, a mansion just meant a place where you stayed. It often referred to a room in an inn or a place where you were staying in somebody else’s house. 400 years ago, that was an excellent translation of the original Greek phrase. It wasn’t the Bible that had changed. It wasn’t the promises of Jesus that had somehow been reduced, it was just that the English language had changed.

It’s about what you get

So, that is one misunderstanding that people have had of this verse. But there is another, deeper, misunderstanding that is also there that I think we need to address. Whether they’re thinking of a room or a mansion, there is a bigger fundamental assumption that people bring to this passage. They assume that is all about what they get in heaven. It is taken as a description of the accommodations, even of the possessions that they will have in the afterlife. And I just want to underline that that is absolutely not what is being described for us in this passage.

I do not believe that Jesus or anyone else in the New Testament for that matter, ever gave us a description or list of what we would get in heaven. I don’t think they ever described it at all. And they didn’t for one fundamental reason: whatever is waiting for us from the other side of death, absolutely defies all human description. We’ve never been there, and we don’t have the language to describe it.

The best we can do is offer a few metaphors. The best we can do is tell a story about what it is like. And that is exactly what Jesus is doing in this story. He’s not telling you what you get. He’s telling you a story.

A Familiar Story to them

And the story that he is telling would have been familiar to everyone who was listening to him or reading this gospel in the first century, because it was based on something that was essential to their culture. Their imaginations would have filled in the details of the story with no trouble.

But we are not a part of that culture, so it is harder for us to fill in those details and understand the richness of the story he is telling. So, for us to appreciate what is really going on, we have to add those details. So allow me to assist you.

A Young Man Makes his Way

The young man had come to the city to find himself. His father was a wealthy man who owned a fine farm in the countryside. The young man knew that it would all be his one day and he would look forward to doing his best to take care of it. But in the meantime, he wanted to experience the world outside of the farm and discover himself apart from his family.

And so, he did not flaunt any of his wealth. He went and found what work he could to sustain himself. And he just lived in the city and experienced its people.

Miriam

And it while he was there that he met and became rather enchanted with a young woman named Miriam. She was a simple girl, hard working and kind. She kept a booth in the city marketplace for her father.

Over several weeks he had interactions with her as he bartered for some fruit. He found himself spending more and more time hanging around her booth. He was smitten. She was smart, clever and had a killer sense of humour.

He just had to find out more about this enchanting woman. And so, he started to ask around. He found out that she came from a poor family, but one that was highly respected and honoured. He decided to approach her parents. Respecting all of the customs and expectations of the society, he wanted to ask them if he could have their permission to speak to their daughter.

Meeting the Family

To them he revealed his family and the resources that he could claim, but he asked them not to say anything of that to her. He had this odd idea that she should be free to choose for herself whether or not she wanted to spend time with him. He didn’t want her to be influenced by his name or wealth.

The parents thought his ideas to be odd, to say that least, but they told him that he had their permission. So, he spoke of his love to her and, to his own wonder and amazement, he discovered that she felt much the same. They entered into a period of time together of heady love. They continually found ways to talk together and spend time. Always he was careful not to act in any way that might put her virtue or modesty in question, but it became plain to all that theirs was a relationship that was not to be denied.

Love matches were not common in those days. The normal practice was for marriage to be something worked out between families with the actual couple’s feelings on the matter being seen as a question of little importance. Love marriages could sometimes be frowned upon just because they were unique, but it was not as if it wasn’t something that could happen. As he came to the next step, therefore, the young man was very nervous about how he would speak to her.

A Misunderstood Proposal

They met in the public square. They gazed lovingly at one another for a while before he finally found the courage to speak of his plans. “My love,” he said abruptly, “I am leaving. I have to go out of the city.”

In his nervousness and fear, he did not pause to think about how she might respond to such words. He did not realize how it might have sounded to her. Immediately her eyes filled with tears. He saw such dismay upon her face. She was clearly thinking that he had chosen to abandon her.

“No, that’s not it at all,” he cried out. “Please don’t misunderstand what I’m saying.” But then he felt lost because he could not imagine how he could put into words what it was he was intending to say.

And so he paused for a moment, took a deep breath, and decided that it would be best to explain to her, step by step, what it was that he was planning to do. “In my father’s house there are many rooms. I know I haven’t told this to you before. I haven’t said it. But, yes, I do come from an honoured family and a prosperous house.”

“That’s what I mean when I tell you that I have to go now. I am going there, to my father’s house. And if I go there, it is only so that I can prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself, so that where I am, there you may be also.”

And when she heard that, she finally understood. And she sent him off with all of her love.

Back Home

And so, the young man went off to his father’s house. After a few days’ journey, he arrived and greeted his parents joyfully. He went in and over a welcoming meal he told them everything about the incredible woman that he had met in the city. So lovingly and joyfully did he describe her that his parents simply could not wait to meet this extraordinary woman.

But first, the man had some work to do. His father’s house was built around a central courtyard. On one side was the main entrance and the room where his father carried out his business. On another, there were kitchens. Over here was a place for welcoming guests with lavish couches for reclining while dining. But there were also a number of private chambers.

It was a large and extended family who lived here, not just his parents and siblings. There were his grandmother, his uncles and aunts and cousins as well. And they all had their own spaces for sleeping and other private matters. His task was to prepare a place among those chambers for himself and his bride so that they could join his father’s household.

Preparing a Place

He worked at it hard for many days, expanding the space, making it warm and welcoming. He filled it with mementos that reminded him, and he hoped would remind her, of the many discussions they had had together in the marketplace. He put in windows to fill the room with light and cabinets in which she would store her happiest memories. Finally, it was all ready. And so he went and said to his father, “Now I will go to find my bride and I will bring her here and she will make her home in the heart of our family.”

A few days later, the father looked out of his front door and was pleased to see his son coming down the walk. He was accompanied by his best friends who had come to wish him well and at his side was a beautiful young woman with whom he would share a wonderful life.

Beyond Death

I happen to believe that there is something that awaits us on the other side of death. I don’t tend to imagine it in terms of people sitting around on clouds or playing harps. Nor do I think that we’re all going to join in some never-ending chorus singing the praises of God. I don’t think that the streets will be paved with gold. I mean, who would want to drive on a street paved with gold? And, no, I don’t think that we get a mansion or even a room. At the same time, I do not think of an afterlife in terms of some people burning in eternal conscious torment.

These are all words or images that you can find in the Bible, except for that one about clouds and harps, that just comes from a Philadelphia Cream Cheese commercial, I think. But I do not believe that any of those images are meant to demonstrate to us what that existence is. They are meant to give us some vague sense of what that existence is like.

Telling us a Story

When Jesus told his disciples of the rooms in his father’s house, he wasn’t giving blueprints of heaven. He wasn’t telling you what you’d get. He was telling them a love story using elements that were essential features of a marriage in that world at that time.

For them, marriages did not include things like giving rings or ceremonies before ministers or justices of the peace. The essential ritual of a marriage involved taking your wife to live in a room in your father’s house that you had prepared to share with her. Jesus wasn’t saying what the afterlife was, he was telling a story.

Love Remains

Like I say, I believe in an afterlife, but I believe that it’s going to take place in a plane of existence far beyond our understanding. I suspect it probably has more to do with participating in a great collective consciousness than it has to do with any rooms or streets or clouds. But whatever it is, we simply don’t have the language to express it.

And so, we’re left with stories and images and metaphors. But, man, they are some pretty amazing stories. And with this particular story about the rooms in his father’s house, what I suspect that Jesus was saying more than anything else was that the fundamental nature of this existence that we can scarcely imagine is love – pure, unconditional and unfailing love. I believe that he was saying that, when everything else has been destroyed, love remains, and love is enough.

https://youtu.be/BC8ljlvF0AQ

Hespeler, April 30, 2023 © Scott McAndless – Fourth Sunday of Easter
Acts 2:42-47, Psalm 23, 1 Peter 2:19-25, John 10:1-10

We seem to live in an age when anytime anyone wants to take a measure that will address some of the social and economic inequalities in our world, they will face a torrent of criticism and abuse. Any program that seeks to address the systemic issues in society that tend to keep racial minorities from advancing socially or economically will be attacked as being too woke – as if being awake and aware of systemic problems were a bad thing.

Any measures that seek to create a safe space for young people to discover their own identity is routinely labelled as grooming these days, often by people who have no understanding of how ironic they are being. Any tax or economic measure that, in any way, seeks to lessen the gap between the extremely wealthy and the abjectly poor is attacked as socialism.

This is just the world we find ourselves in these days. And what it often means is that we are now living in times when we cannot even discuss such measures rationally. It all just descends, almost immediately, to name-calling that has no real substance behind it. In various places, this has also led to the banning of books that raise such issues or even just make people think about them.

Radical Community

And so, can you imagine what might happen today in certain jurisdictions if somebody published a book that described a community where nobody had private property. Instead, everybody in this community sold everything they had and used the proceeds to support the people of the community according to only one criterion. People would not receive based on their status or their wealth, but only based on their need.

Can you imagine the outcry? Can you imagine the parents complaining about how they don’t want their children being exposed to a book that is based on such a radical woke ideology? Can you hear the people complaining about elites who want to impose on us their socialistic and perhaps even communist point of view? I don’t need to imagine it. I hear it all the time these days, don’t you? Of course, once you explain to those people that the book they are complaining about is the Bible, you might get a somewhat different reaction.

Political Hot Potato

The passage we read this morning from the Book of Acts is one of those political, economic and theological hot potatoes of the Bible. Down through the years there have been many socialists, Communists and anti-capitalists who have pointed to this passage and said, “Look, here is the proof that our approach is divinely ordained.” Meanwhile, I’ve certainly heard conservatives of various kinds dismiss what is described in this passage as little more than a failed experiment that only demonstrates that their approach is the only one that can possibly work in the real world.

So, I do think it is time for us to really dig into this passage and understand what is actually going on in it. The passage describes a community that actually existed – quite possibly for a long period of time – in the city of Jerusalem. This was genuinely one way in which the early church did seek to live out what they had learned from Jesus.

A Response to Jesus’ Teaching

And it does make a lot of sense, doesn’t it? I mean, how else do you set up your community after listening for so long to a man who said, “Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God”? (Luke 6:20) How else do you respond to the teacher who told the rich man, “There is still one thing lacking. Sell all that you own and distribute the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me.” (Luke 18:22)

So, it shouldn’t surprise anybody that the early church did this. And the evidence for it is more than just what is found here in the Book of Acts. In Paul’s letters, he writes often about a collection that he was making among the churches that he had founded. This collection was explicitly for the poor (see Galatians 2:10), but it is also clear that this money was not for the poor people in the communities where these churches were located, although, of course, there must have been many poor people there. No, Paul insisted that all of the money needed to be taken to Jerusalem. (see 1 Corinthians 16:3) It is not hard to figure out that what this money was needed for was to support this ongoing community in Jerusalem and to provide for the people in it according to their need.

A Long-Lived Community

But the community lasted even longer than the time of Paul. Various leaders of the church right up until the fifth century made references to a group of people called the Ebionites. These were Christians who followed a very strict Jewish interpretation of the faith. They started out in and around Jerusalem, though with various wars and the destruction of Jerusalem, they eventually moved onto other places. The most important defining feature of this group, however, was their poverty. They owned nothing. That is what the name Ebionite means, the poor ones. So, it does seem very likely that this community that is described in the Book of Acts continued to exist on pretty much those same terms for something close to five hundred years.

So I would say that those who look at this passage and see in it a mandate to set up society on very different grounds from what we have in our modern capitalistic societies do have a point. This was not merely some experiment that was doomed to failure. There were Christians who lived out this economic vision of the faith and did so for a very long time.

And Yet Rarely Copied

And yet, at the same time, there doesn’t seem to be any evidence that, as Christianity spread to other places, and particularly as it spread in Gentile territories, other churches sought to live in the same way. At least, certainly not to the same extreme as it did in Jerusalem. So, while it seems very clear that the way the church lived in Jerusalem was important, it really didn’t seem as if there were any expectations that all Christians everywhere were meant to live in the same way. So, I am not sure that we could use this to say that this is the only and divinely inspired way to run an economy. I would caution socialists or Communists against making that argument.

An Alternate Vision

So, we are still left with the difficult question of how we are supposed to understand the significance of this description of the Church community in Jerusalem. I have come to see it like this. There is no question that Jesus presented a very different way of organizing society. This alternate vision was something that he called the kingdom of God. And the kingdom of God definitely had economic dimensions to it. It was a kingdom where the first would be last and the last first. (Matthew 20:16) It was a kingdom where, to borrow from the Song of Mary, God had “filled the hungry with good things and sent the rich away empty.” (Luke 1:53)

But, even if the church had this alternate vision for ordering society, it certainly had no ability to make it happen. The Roman Empire had all the power and had absolutely no interest in setting up a system where the resources of the Empire went to people according to their need. So, if a society organized according to the principles of the kingdom of God were to be established, the church would have to wait for God to do it. And the church absolutely expected that God would do that, though when exactly that would happen continued to be a problematic question. But they would never stop trusting that God would do it.

While They Waited

But in this, as in all things, the early church was never content with simply waiting for God to bring about the kingdom. They believed that they needed to start living in the reality of that kingdom in anticipation of what God was about to do. And I believe that that is what the establishment of this special economy in the Jerusalem Church is all about. They knew that they would have to wait in order to see it all come to pass, but they were determined that at least some would live in its reality right now.

That is why this community was established and that’s why it endured for so long. It is also why the Apostle Paul and all the churches that he established thought it to be a joy and privilege to give from out of their limited resources to support the poor in Jerusalem. Just knowing that there were some Christians out there who were living according to the economy of the kingdom of God was something that made the kingdom of God more real and closer to them. They believed that it was important that they be part of it in this way.

A Witness

They also believed that the very existence of such a community that was founded on a different economy stood as a witness to and as a condemnation of the system that flourished all around them. It was a way of declaring to the world that there was an alternative to a system that was entirely geared towards the prosperity and power of those who were already powerful and prosperous. They knew, because of the powerful earthly forces arrayed against them, that they could not set up such a witness in every church and every place, but they understood that, if they pooled their resources and gave generously, they could make that community exist somewhere and that it would stand as a rebuke to the ways in which their world was ordered.

So, that is how I have come to understand the existence of this extraordinary community of believers in Jerusalem. It seems to me that they believed that this was how society ought to be ordered and that it was how society ultimately would be ordered. All that stood in the way were the powers that were presently dominating in the world. It was not a matter of practicality that all Christians didn’t live this way; it was a matter of principality.

How we Respond Today

But, of course, all of that still leaves us to struggle with a question of how any of this applies to the challenges of living as the church in the modern world. In many ways, I’m not sure that the situation has changed all that much. It seems to me that many of the same powers are still at work in this world, the powers that seem to conspire so effectively to make sure that the great majority of the wealth of this earth remains in the hands of the relative few.

I am not blind, of course, to the many blessings that have been brought to us by our capitalistic system. I enjoy them daily. But I’m also aware that it is a system that has its flaws. For me, however, the problem is not the system itself. The problem is the powers in this world that conspire to use the system to their own end and thus also conspire to shut many out of its blessings.

But wherever the problem may lie, the reality is that we, in the church today, have no more power to change how things work than did that small group of Christians in Jerusalem at the very beginning. But just because we can’t overhaul the system, doesn’t mean that we should just throw up our hands and say that there’s nothing we can do.

Showing the World Things Can be Different

Wouldn’t it be something if we were able to set up communities, even small examples, that could demonstrate to the whole world how things could be different? That would be interesting. That would be a witness. And I know that various churches have attempted things like that at various times. I think it can be a powerful way to challenge the system of our world.

But just like it was not possible for all Christian communities in the first century to live that way, I do recognize that that is not going to be an option for the vast majority of Christians living in the world today. Most of us – myself included – really do not have the ability to just opt out of living according to the rules of the capitalistic world. There is nothing wrong with that.

Bearing Witness

But just because we have to live in it, doesn’t mean that we don’t see the flaws that are within the system. Just because we have to live within it and sometimes even see the benefits of it, doesn’t mean that we can’t be critical. We are people who are called to live according to the vision of the kingdom of God, which is a kingdom where the blessings that are given are shared according to need.

And anytime we can make that happen, that is a witness. I often see it happening, for example, when we host the food bank or when we are open for Hope Clothing here at St Andrews. I see it when we offer people food to eat, not because they’ve earned it but simply because they could use it.

We need to recognize this for what it is. If it is only charity, if it is only being kind, that is wonderful, but it is not enough. We should recognize this as a subversion of the system under which we live and, as much as possible, it should be something that we do in the full hope and expectation of the kingdom that God will establish. It is not enough to simply wait for God to do it. We must find creative ways, even if it’s for only moments at a time, to live within the reality of God’s kingdom.

https://youtu.be/G4iVwAAVBVg

Hespeler, April 23, 2023 © Scott McAndless
Acts 2:14a, 36-41, Psalm 116:1-4, 12-19, 1 Peter 1:17-23, Luke 24:13-35

Look. Do you see them there? Two people traveling down the well-worn road that leads from Jerusalem to Emmaus. I think you should meet them. One of them is a man. He is named Cleopas. The other one is left unnamed which may be an indication, according to the customs of that society, that she is a woman and possibly Cleopas’ wife.

Or maybe there’s another reason for why she or he is left unnamed. There is something about having an unnamed and undescribed character in a story that you tell. It invites your reader to describe that character with their own imagination. Which usually means, of course, that you create the character in your own image.

It is an invitation to your readers to put something of themselves into the story. In other words, maybe the gospel writer is inviting you to see yourself as that other disciple walking to Emmaus. And so, let me ask the question. What are you doing on this day walking from Jerusalem to Emmaus?

What Day is it?

The day itself is obviously significant. The story begins by noting that this is taking place on the same day. What day is that? Well, it is Sunday. But not just any Sunday. It is still Easter Sunday. I know that is two weeks ago for us, but you need to imagine yourself on Easter day. Why, on this day of all days, are you walking to Emmaus?

And let’s make it plain. What are you doing walking away from the church? Because the church, such as it is, such as it exists at this point in time, is in Jerusalem. And there, in itself, is a question that is worth dwelling on for a moment because it is a timely question. We live in a time when many seem to be walking away from the church. Why?

Preaching to those Not Here

I realize that there is some problem with me raising that question in this particular context. This is a problematic thing that preachers do all of the time. You see, we preachers have a certain tendency to preach to the people who aren’t here. We see all of the people who, for whatever reason, seem to be wandering away from the church and that is understandably distressing. But of course, it is just plain wrong to take any frustration that we feel about that out on the people who actually show up at church.

I’m sure you all understand how unfair that is. So, I want to be very clear that I’m hardly speaking to you personally when I raise these issues, but I do not think that we can afford to just ignore a strong tendency in our society. Many are wandering away from the church, and, without being accusatory, it is important for us to try and understand why.

Why are you Walking Away?

So put yourself on that road to Emmaus. Ask yourself why, on this day of all days, you find yourself walking away from the church? Let’s admit that the church really hasn’t performed very well up until this point in the story. You just have to look at the top part of this chapter in the Gospel of Luke to see that.

This day started with a great triumph. Jesus was raised from the dead, shattering the power of sin and decay. But in terms of the church’s response to this triumph, things have not been so victorious.

The Church Reacts Poorly

The women went to the tomb, seeking to prepare the body for burial. But then the body was missing, and two men told them that Jesus was not there because he was risen. The women then returned to the male disciples to tell them about what they had seen. It was at this point that things kind of went off the rails. The gospel tells us that, “these words seemed to them an idle tale, and they did not believe them.” And then Peter ran out to examine the tomb, finding nothing but folded linens.

So, what we see is that God has done something amazing in and for the church, but the church is struggling to absorb and understand what has happened. In their confusion, they even seem to be turning against one another. At least some of them, the men, do not trust what they are hearing from others, the women.

And so, this seems to be one of the reasons why these two disciples are walking away from the church. They don’t like that sense of confusion and people turning against one another. And, honestly, if that’s what you’ve been experiencing, why would we blame you if you started to walk away?

Attitude Towards the Women

At one point, when the two disciples are discussing unknowingly with the risen Jesus, they do seem to tip their hand to something else that has upset them. “Moreover, some women of our group astounded us,” they say. “They were at the tomb early this morning, and when they did not find his body there they came back and told us that they had indeed seen a vision of angels who said that he was alive.”

Did you notice the subtle shift there from what is said at the beginning of the chapter? When the women were at the tomb early in the morning, there was no talk of visions. They saw and spoke to two men, who I think we can presume were angels. But now, when other people talk about it, it has become a vision.

This seems to be an intentional denigration of the experience of the women at the tomb. At the very least, they seem to be questioning the genuineness of the experiences of these women.

But they have experienced at least something of the power of the resurrection. At this point in the story, they are the only ones who have done so. It doesn’t seem to be a very helpful indication that their experience has been minimized.

Respecting One Another

And here then is something else that seems to be leading people to walk away from the church. If we cannot give respect to what other people experience of God, we are going to keep running into trouble. We need to be listening to each other. We need to be willing to be open to what other people have experienced of God. That doesn’t mean that everybody else is always right about what they say about their experience. We are all capable of making mistakes. But we need to be willing to respect one another’s spiritual journeys.

Expectations about Jesus

But there is something else that these two travelers note that seems to have led to them to be walking away. When they are asked how about why it is that they are looking so dejected, they tell the apparent stranger walking with them about everything that has happened to Jesus over the last few days. Then they let it slip what it is, exactly, that distresses them about what has happened. “But we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel,” they say.

So, they are aware of what Jesus has done. They are perhaps even aware that things could not have happened any differently, and that what did happen was God’s will. But they stumble over something. Things just didn’t turn out as they expected.

Our Reaction when Expectations aren’t Met

And there is the rub, isn’t it? We all carry expectations into the life of the church. Sometimes those expectations are good things, sometimes they are impossible things, and sometimes they are just expectations that don’t quite fit into what God’s plan is. But whatever expectations we bring into the life of the church, we will be disappointed in some way at some point. And when that happens, the impulse is often to just walk away.

I understand the response, though I know it is not always what we should be doing. Sometimes it means that we will miss out on the very best plans that God has for us. But if in some way, you find yourself walking away from the church in these difficult times, it is probably true that unfulfilled expectations have something to do with it.

So let’s put ourselves on that road to Emmaus for a few moments. Can we at least try to understand why some may feel as if they are walking or drifting away? It is a helpful exercise.

Persuading them to Turn Around

But the best part about this story is that it doesn’t just end up with these two disciples wandering right away. At the end of the story, they turn around and they go back. They have gathered together with the church seemingly before the end of the same day. The church is reunited and has found strength that it never knew that it had. And we need to ask what it is that leads to such a happy ending, because it might be something that we are in need of today.

So, what do the two walking disciples experience that leads them to turn around. They experience the risen Jesus. That is the most important point. But it is how they have that experience that we need to focus on this morning.

Experiencing Jesus through the Scriptures

The experience of the presence of the risen Jesus happens for them in two ways as they travel down the road. First, they experience Jesus through the scriptures. The stranger explains to them, using the Bible, important truths about Jesus. “Then beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them the things about himself in all the scriptures.”

Now, this explanation of scripture does not exactly make them totally encounter the presence of Jesus, but it certainly brings them much closer. As they remark to each other later, “Were not our hearts burning within us while he was talking to us on the road, while he was opening the scriptures to us?” 

And Through the Sacraments

Then, of course, the presence of Jesus is made absolutely unmistakable when Jesus breaks the bread. And I think it should be clear what that represents. It is a reference to the early church’s practice of communion.

So, on one level, the message of the story is obvious. These travellers encounter and are convinced of the reality of the risen Jesus by their participation in two key practices of the church – the preaching of the scriptures and the practices of sacraments like communion. The promise of the story to the church is that, as we continue in these practices, we will experience the risen Jesus too.

Experiencing this Outside the Church

And that is true, but I have to note that, for these two disciples who are walking away from the church, they obviously don’t hear the scriptures preached or receive the sacraments in the church. They somehow experience them outside of the church and it is that experience that prompts their return to the church. And here, I think, is the true challenge that is facing the church today.

There was perhaps a time when you could expect that people would wander away from the church for a while, but they would just eventually find their way back. They would come in and experience the scriptures being preached, the sacraments rightly celebrated, and the community and they would just find their place again.

There was a time, for example, when people just sort of seemed to expect that young folk, once they came to a certain age or perhaps went off to university or to start a career, that they would just leave the church. But that was okay, we were assured, because it would all work out and they would all come back again at some point, probably when they had children. And I’m sure that there was a time when it did work like that. It doesn’t work like that anymore. It hasn’t for some time.

How Can we Do What Jesus did for these Disciples?

So, I suspect that we are in an age when we need to be thinking in terms of what Jesus does for these two disciples who are wandering away from the church. We, like he does, need to find ways to join people on their journeys where they are, even if they are walking away. We need to take the time and make the effort to understand where they are.

And, most of all, we need to find ways to allow the nature of the church at it’s very best to come to them where they are. I do not think that that necessarily means that we need to go out and interpret the scriptures directly to people or take them the sacraments. I think those things are symbolic of taking the whole of what the church is to people where they are.

Wherever people are, it has to be our task to carry the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ out to them. We need to be as Christ to them. We cannot guarantee that, when we do that, they will all turn around and start walking back to the church, but some will. And whether any do or not, spreading that grace and that love in practical ways will absolutely mean that the message of hope that we have heard in Jesus Christ is spreading in the world. And we will be fulfilling what Jesus is calling us to be.

https://youtu.be/YKVS2LTmgWA

Hespeler, April 9, 2023 © Scott McAndless – Easter
Jeremiah 31:1-6, Psalm 118:1-2, 14-24, Colossians 3:1-4, John 20:1-18

Ladies and gentlemen, it is a beautiful, crisp and clear Sunday morning. The sun is just a little up over the horizon on this early spring day. The birds are singing. A gentle breeze is blowing. And a lively crowd of hundreds has turned out for the final leg of this first ever Sunday after the Passover footrace.

And, yes, it seems as if the patience of all of these spectators has finally paid off as I think… yes, I can see the two lead runners coming around the bend. My friends, this is so exciting, they seem to be running neck and neck. On the inside track is a figure that I know will be familiar to many running fans. He is big, he is brash, he is built as solid as a rock. With broad shoulders and the calloused hands of a man who has spent many years hauling in fishing nets on the Sea of Galilee, that can only be Simon who is known to his friends and fans alike as The Rock.

But alongside him, matching him pace for pace is… that other guy. You know, he is that disciple that Jesus was really very fond of, but I never seem to remember his name. The commentator in my ear is telling me that his name is John, but I am not sure whether or not that is right.

The Final Leg

Anyways, this race just got pretty exciting as it looks as if the other guy, you know the one who isn’t The Rock, just took the lead on the straightaway. Yes, as we come into the final stretch, he is a good length ahead of his nearest competitor. I can see the sweat on The Rock’s brow from here as he struggles to catch up, but he just doesn’t seem to have it left in him to make up that gap.

And now, as we come up to the finish line it is the other guy and The Rock – the other guy and the Rock. It looks like it’s going to be a photo finish, a photo finish. But now… what is happening? It seems as if the other guy is stopping short. He’s pulling up just before the finish line. I repeat, the other guy is not entering into the tomb. He’s pulling up and just looking in and, yes, Simon the Rock is rushing straight past him and going into the tomb! Ladies and gentlemen, this is so exciting! It appears that we have a winner!

The Rock has entered the tomb and he is examining the linen cloths lying there. And now the other guy has entered as well. He appears to have come in second in this race, but it looks like, yes, it appears that he believes! Of course, it’s not entirely clear at the moment what it is that he believes because neither of them seem to have understood the purpose behind what has happened here today because they do not understand that Jesus had to rise from the dead.

A Strange Intrusion

I’m sure that I am not the only one who is a little bit puzzled by this strange intrusion into the story of Easter morning in the Gospel of John. I certainly understand why the story of Mary Magdalene discovering the empty tomb, her conversation with two angels inside and then ultimately her meeting with the risen Jesus outside the tomb is really important.

But I cannot help but wonder why, in the midst of all of that, we have to take a break to hear the story of a footrace between Simon Peter and this other disciple. Why does that matter? It’s not as if they really discover anything of much importance. They simply confirm what Mary has already reported, that the tomb is empty.

They examine what evidence there is inside, but it certainly doesn’t amount to more than a few folded grave clothes. Sure, that might be interesting to a crime scene investigator, but it’s hardly conclusive proof of anything. So why is this reported? Why does it even matter?

Ignoring Women’s Discoveries

It does sort of feel like an example of the kind of thing that often happens when women make discoveries of significance or importance.

When Elizabeth Magie, a creative genius, invented a game that powerfully illustrated some of the excesses of capitalism and monopolistic practices, she called it The Landlord’s Game. But you’ve probably never heard of that game, have you, even though it became one of the most popular board games of all times? That is because two men, George and Charles, better known as The Parker Brothers, took her idea and renamed it Monopoly.

Or think about the scientists who have taught us about the nature of the universe. Everybody knows who it was that discovered gravity because his name was Sir Isaac Newton. Everyone knows who discovered the special theory of relativity. His name was Albert Einstein. So how is it that nobody seems to know who it was who discovered what stars are made of – that they are mostly made of hydrogen? That was a phenomenally important discovery and yet no one seems to know that scientist’s name. It might have something to do with the fact that her name was Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin.

Women have often discovered extraordinary things and made enormous accomplishments and yet, when it comes to writing down the stories of these discoveries, how often do we tend to focus only on the things that men did?

A Bit of Male Chauvinism

And so, yes, in the midst of the Gospel of John’s resurrection story, which should be focused only on Mary Magdalene making the most important discovery of all time, it is somehow not very surprising that we are forced to pause and listen to a story about a couple of men who apparently got into a competition to see who could run to the tomb first. It seems like a bit of a moment when the men of the world are saying, hey, I know these women did amazing things on Easter Sunday but, look at us over here! We found this folded cloth! Hurray for us!

So yes, it seems to me that there is a bit of male chauvinism going on in this account. But I do not think that this is just about a couple of men trying to steal the limelight. This little footrace is actually all about a rather dangerous trend that has been part of Christianity right from the very beginning.

The Power of an Event

The Christian faith sprang into existence as a result of the extraordinary event that we celebrate here today. The resurrection of Jesus is an event of such power that it calls into question every other principality and power in this world. It destroys the power of sin and guilt which keeps so many enslaved by the power of shame and condemnation. It destroys the power of death and the fear of death that looms over everything that we do in this world. Above all, it offers to people freedom – freedom from guilt, from fear and from death.

But whenever you are dealing with something as powerful as that, we human beings have an immediate reaction. We want to control it. We want to make sure that this thing that could disrupt absolutely everything doesn’t do that. We immediately want to make sure that somebody is in charge. It is ironic of course, it is really an attempt to rob the resurrection of its true transformative power, but it is what we do.

A Power Struggle

And so, in the aftermath of their experience of the resurrection, the church was immediately plunged into a power struggle. There were people and factions who wanted to become the controllers and the conduits of this incredible power.

And that is also what this footrace between Simon Peter and the other disciple represents. Because clearly, these two figures represent two factions of the church that were in contention with each other. We know, of course, that Simon Peter was an acknowledged leader for many in the early Christian Church. The other disciple in this race, whose identity is very carefully kept obscured, clearly represents the leadership of the church for which this gospel was written.

Surely this is reflective of real-life conflict between those Christians who followed the leadership of Peter and those who saw themselves as part of the Church of the Beloved Disciple.

Mary Magdalene’s Leadership

In addition, we know that Mary Magdalene was acknowledged, at least by some Christians, as an important leader and as one who could speak for the risen Jesus. In many ways this race is all about the early attempts of various men to replace her in her role as a leader because some could not tolerate the very idea female leadership.

So I suspect that the author of this Gospel, by inserting this strange story of two men racing to the tomb to look at some folded linen, might have been trying to say something about the absurdity of what we have sometimes tried to do with the incredible good news of the resurrection of Jesus. We have tried to get it under human control. It just seems safer if we don’t let it shake things up too much.

“Do Not Touch Me”

There is an episode towards the end of this story that illustrates just how dangerous this impulse is. When Mary Magdalene is finally confronted with the risen Jesus, when she finally manages to recognize him through all of her tears, her first reaction is completely understandable. She reaches out to take hold of him. And let’s recognize this gesture for what it is. She wants to hold onto the power of the resurrection for her church. She wants to be the conduit through which others can experience this incredible power.

But what does Jesus say to her? “Do not touch me, because I have not yet ascended to the Father. But go to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’”  The power that raised Jesus from the dead is the power of God. It will never fall under the control of Mary nor of the disciples nor of any church. If ever we try and restrict it and tell God whom God may raise and when and how and why, we will show ourselves to be fools. It is the power of God. We cannot hold on to it.

Transforming Power

So Mary cannot hold onto Jesus. What we need to do is allow the power of Jesus and of his resurrection to take hold of us. To transform us both as individuals and as a church. That is when we will experience the true power that raised Jesus from the dead.

You cannot control it. You have to let it control you. And that can be frightening because it destroys the power in this world that keeps people in line, that makes people feel guilty or shameful for who they are and who God made them to be. The power of the resurrection is meant to set us free from all such domination so that we may set others free – so that we may proclaim to all that they are loved and accepted just as they are because that is what the power of God does.

My friends, let us not get into footraces with people who perhaps approach faith and belief a little bit differently from us because we have to be right and so therefore they have to be wrong. That is a waste of our energy. Let us allow the power of Jesus’ resurrection to overtake us and set us free to love, to serve and to release the people of this earth from the domination that is preventing them from being who they truly are in the eyes of God. I believe that that is the power that Mary Magdalene learned by the end of that day. Some two millennia later, isn’t it about time that we learned it too?

https://youtu.be/mOcHWce06LY

Hespeler, April 2, 2023 © Scott McAndless – Palm Sunday
Isaiah 50:4-9a, Psalm 118:1-2, 19-29, Philippians 2:5-11, Matthew 21:1-11

I have a question that is a kind a test about whether or not you were listening to our gospel reading this morning. We read the story of the triumphal entry of Jesus into Jerusalem from the Good News Translation of the Gospel of Matthew.

Jesus sends his disciples to get some transportation to carry him in his triumphal procession into the city. They bring him what he asks for he sits on what they bring and the parade begins, right? I’m sure you all followed that just fine as we read it. My question is this: what did Jesus get on?

Got on What?

Here is the verse I am curious about. Verse seven reads like this: “They (the disciples) brought the donkey and the colt, threw their cloaks over them, and Jesus got on.” (GNT) So it clearly says that the disciples brought back two animals – a mother donkey and her colt. It says that they then threw their cloaks over both of them. And then it says that Jesus got on. Got on what? On the mother? On the colt? On both animals? No, that can’t be right, can it? I mean, can you imagine somebody riding two donkeys at once? That would be ridiculous!

Ah well, I guess we just don’t know. In fact, the translators of this passage have led us to think that they don’t know either. Presumably the original Greek text of this Gospel did not make it clear which animal Jesus rode. I mean why else would they render it into English using such an imprecise phrase as “Jesus got on.”

What it Actually Says

But wait a minute, we don’t need to speculate. We can just find out for ourselves. I can show you what is actually written in the Greek. Do you want to know what the original text says that Jesus got on? Was it the mother? Was it the colt? Because, I mean, it can’t possibly be both, am I right? Ha, ha, ha, oh.

Well, just in case some of you are a little bit rusty on your Koine Greek, it does say very clearly which animal Jesus got on. It says he got on them – on both animals. The translators clearly understood that very well, they just decided to translate it as something that was unclear because, well, it just seems a bit silly that it would say that. But it does.

Who Wrote the Gospel?

The Gospel of Matthew, according to tradition, was written by none other than Matthew, the disciple of Jesus. And if that is true, then surely the author of this passage would have been there that day, would have been reporting on that triumphal entrance as a first-hand witness.

But wait a second. That can’t be, can it? Because if the person who wrote this passage was present and reporting as an eyewitness, how could he not describe how it was that Jesus managed to ride both of these beasts into the city?

Did he ride with one foot on the back of each donkey like a water-skier? Did he sit on the bigger one and put his feet on the smaller one? Did he put the colt on the back of its mother and then ride on top? If you had seen any of those feats, how could you possibly resist describing what it looked like? Come on, Matthew, you have got to let us know!

The Writer Wasn’t There

But we have no such description, which is probably an indication that the writer was not there that day. In fact, the Gospel itself never claims to have been written by Matthew, never claims to have been written by anyone, in fact. There was no name on the original document.

And most scholars today would argue that there are other reasons for thinking this gospel writer was not an eyewitness. For one thing, we know that he used at least one other Gospel as a source. He copied whole passages out of the Gospel of Mark into his Gospel. Generally, you would not expect a firsthand witness to be copying descriptions of things from another book!

The Changes Matthew Makes

He does often copy things from Mark word-for-word. But sometimes he also makes some changes. For example, in Mark’s story of the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the story is told in almost the exact same words, but there is a significant difference. Mark says that Jesus only rode into town on one donkey. Jesus sends the disciples to get one animal, a colt, they bring back one animal, they throw their cloaks on it and Jesus sits on it. Yes, the story does seem a bit more sensible in Mark’s Gospel.

But that immediately makes you ask a question, doesn’t it? Why would the writer of Matthew (let’s just call him Matthew, whoever he was, because that’ll make it easier) make such a change? He seems to have done it intentionally, even though it doesn’t make much practical sense. People have wondered about that question for centuries now. It’s one of those hot topics in New Testament scholarship.

The Usual Explanation

And many scholars will try to explain the reason why Matthew made that change. He actually tips us off in the passage itself. He adds something to the account from the Gospel of Mark by saying, “This took place to fulfill what had been spoken through the prophet:’Tell the daughter of Zion, Look, your king is coming to you, humble and mounted on a donkey, and on a colt, the foal of a donkey.’”

So, you can see what Matthew is doing here. He knows that what happened when Jesus entered into Jerusalem was the fulfillment of this prophecy from the book of Zechariah. Of course, the other gospel writers knew this as well, as did most early Christians. But Matthew is the only one who says that explicitly in his Gospel, even taking the trouble to quote the passage.

Matthew Notices Something

But, when he quotes the passage, he notices something that maybe Mark didn’t pay much attention to. He notices that the passage in Zechariah speaks of the Messiah arriving on two animals – “mounted on a donkey, and on a colt, the foal of a donkey.”

And so, having gone to the trouble of quoting it, Matthew says to himself, “Oh look, it says in the Bible that the Messiah has to enter on two animals. So, I guess that’s what must have happened, and Mark just forgot to mention it.” So, when Matthew comes to tell the story, he tells it that way. That is pretty obviously what has happened.

Hebrew Poetry

But there is one thing that is a bit funny about that. The two animals are not really there in the Old Testament passage. The prophecies of Zechariah were written in poetry. And ancient Hebrew poetry had a unique form.

Ancient Hebrew poems didn’t rhyme or use particular metres like English poems often do. Rather than repeating sounds, they repeated meanings. In a typical Hebrew poem, and there are lots of them in the Bible, the poet generally says something in one way in one line and then, in the next line, says the same thing  just using different words.

Take, for example, the closing lines of the twenty-third psalm: “Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days  of my life, / and I shall dwell in the house of the Lord my whole life long.” Those two phrases are essentially saying the same thing, just using different words. And that kind of pattern is all over ancient Hebrew poetry. So actually, when the prophet Zechariah says, “mounted on a donkey, and on a colt, the foal of a donkey,” that is just two ways of referring to the same donkey. The prophet never thought that the Messiah would arrive riding on two beasts.

Is Something Else Going on?

So the whole question then becomes, did Matthew simply not understand how ancient Hebrew poetry worked? Is his whole insistence that there had to be two animals for Jesus to ride based on a simple misunderstanding? There are a number of scholars who seem to think so. And maybe they are right. But I cannot help but wonder whether there might just be something else going on here.

What if Matthew actually did understand how Hebrew poetry worked? And what if he was hoping that his readers would just pay attention to what he did here? Doesn’t every writer hope that? Maybe he expected us to read this passage and say, hey, wait a minute, wouldn’t it have looked kind of silly for Jesus to ride in on two animals? He wanted to make us stop and think for a moment.

And maybe the two donkeys are not about what actually happened that day; maybe they are not based on a misunderstanding of ancient poetry. No, I think it might have been Matthew’s symbolic way of saying something important to us readers.

Of course, if that is the case, then it is really a shame that the translators of the Good New Bible have obscured what Matthew actually wrote. I’m not sure that the Gospel writer would be happy with what they did here.

A Theme in this Gospel

There is a theme that runs through the Gospel of Matthew. Several times in the course of this gospel, Matthew makes a point of talking about what happens when you mix the old with the new. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus quotes from the old law of Moses and then goes on to give new interpretations of how it should be applied. This pattern is followed several times.

And then there is a parable of Jesus that is found only in this gospel. Jesus says to his disciples, “Therefore every scribe who has become a disciple in the kingdom of heaven is like the master of a household who brings out of his treasure what is new and what is old.” (Matthew 13:52)

A Message in This

So this idea of carefully putting the old and the new together in some creative way runs throughout this whole gospel. In fact, a number of people have suggested that Matthew sees himself as the scribe in that parable that only he repeats. This is how he saw his job as gospel writer, to carefully put together the old and the new and, in so doing, to create a completely different understanding.

So I somehow do not think that it is an accident or a mistake that Matthew is the only gospel writer to tell us that Jesus rode into Jerusalem on the backs of two donkeys. Because, of course, these were not two ordinary donkeys. It was a donkey and a colt – a mother and her child. It was an old donkey and a new one. I think that Matthew was saying something very important to the church – something much more important than would have been accomplished with a simple literal description of what happened when Jesus rode into Jerusalem.

Expectations

It seems clear that when Jesus arrived in Jerusalem, he was met with very high expectations. Many of those expectations were likely based on old ideas – the restoration of the old kingdom of David, the restoration of old traditions and ways of doing things. They may not have used the exact words, but I am sure that many of the people who cheered Jesus on that day were shouting out their own version of, “Make Judea Great Again.”

But Matthew was not content with telling a story of Jesus coming into Jerusalem on an older donkey, on old ideas, traditions and an idealized past. He managed to slip in there that there was a new donkey coming into town as well. If Jesus was going to be Messiah, his messiahship was not going to be only based on old ideas or restorations of old kingdoms. Jesus was coming in the name of the God who was about to do something new.

Old and New Together

And that makes me wonder where we are on this Palm Sunday. This is a Sunday that is full of old traditions. People have been waving palms and marching down aisles for a long time in this and in many other churches. I think it’s a day that brings a lot of nostalgia for an idealized past. And I love that nostalgia. I also feel it. But I’m also very thankful for Matthew who reminds us that Jesus also rode in on a colt, the foal of a donkey.

So, I think Matthew would challenge us to think about the young colt today. He also carried Jesus into town. What are some of the new ways in which Jesus is presenting himself to the world today?

You know, for centuries, the church developed ways of presenting the message of Jesus to the world. One of the ways they did it was by building beautiful buildings like this one. They would build beautiful buildings, ring beautiful bells, and people would just come in. I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but that strategy doesn’t quite work as well as it once did.

The New Colts

So, what are the new colts? Does the church today need a social media strategy? I would absolutely say that it does. Do we need to find ways to bust out and learn how to be the church outside the building? No question. We are live streaming. We are engaging people right around the world with some of the media that we create. Yes, Jesus is riding a new Colt into town. But will we welcome these innovations with a waving of our palms today? Or will we just say, that sounds ridiculous? I suspect that Matthew wanted to challenge us with those kinds of thoughts in our reading this morning.

https://youtu.be/rmGkPkiYyBU

Hespeler, March 26, 2023 © Scott McAndless – Fifth Sunday in Lent, Baptism
Hebrews 11:1-3, 8-12, 23, Ezekiel 37:1-14, Psalm 130, Romans 8:6-11, John 11:1-45

This sermon was preached on the occasion of the baptism of Rosalynn, daughter of Ian and Brittany.

I was reading recently in the Letter to the Hebrews in the eleventh chapter, the famous chapter on the nature of faith. “Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for,” it begins, “the conviction of things not seen.” And it goes on from there to lay out many examples from biblical history of people who displayed extraordinary faith in God under trying circumstances.

But I was particularly struck by what it says when it comes to the parents of Moses. Now, Moses’ parents, as you may recall, had their child under some pretty extreme circumstances. Their people, the Hebrews, were enslaved in the land of Egypt. And the pharaoh, the ruler of Egypt, had apparently decided that they were just too many of these Hebrews. He wanted to reduce the population by decreeing that all male Hebrew babies were to be thrown into the Nile River at birth.

Moses’ Parents

So, this is what the writer to the Hebrews says about Moses’ parents: “By faith Moses was hidden by his parents for three months after his birth, because they saw that the child was beautiful, and they were not afraid of the king’s edict.” And right off the bat, obviously, good for them for disobeying what was clearly a horribly unjust law. But what strikes me in that is what the letter writer tells us about their reason why.

They did it, he says, because they saw that the child was beautiful. Think about that for a moment. There are a few things that that statement makes me wonder. And, since we have a couple of experts here today on the subject of infant beauty, maybe they could help us to answer my questions.

It Requires Faith?

Brittany and Ian, now I know that it is manifestly obvious to everyone who is present here today that your baby, Rosalynn, is objectively the most beautiful baby ever born. I mean, look at her! So, I am wondering, why on earth would anyone think that it would take extraordinary faith for parents like you to see that she was beautiful?

I mean, it is an odd thing to say, isn’t it? How many parents have you heard of who don’t think that their baby is beautiful? And, in the context of that story in the book of Exodus, you’ve got to ask about all of those other Hebrew parents who didn’t have the courage to hide their baby from the king’s edict. Is he implying that they didn’t think their babies were beautiful? Or is it saying that Moses was the only beautiful Hebrew baby born that year? Somehow, that doesn’t make much sense to me.

I did go back and check, by the way, in the Book of Exodus. And it turns out that the letter to the Hebrews is quite right. The only reason why Exodus says that Moses’ mother hid her boy was because “she saw that he was a fine baby.” Apparently, it was just because he was beautiful.

Parents Loving Children

So, I wonder why the Letter to the Hebrews chooses to underline this as an extraordinary example of faith. Nothing could be more ordinary than a mother thinking her child beautiful! But at the same time, I think it is right. Being a parent and loving your child (which obviously means more than just thinking that they are beautiful, but that is part) – loving your child is an act of extraordinary faith.

You know that, Brittany and Ian. I have no doubt that when Rosalynn was born, you felt an immediate bond with her and saw the beauty that was in her.

But that love was also immediately put to the test as, for about the first week of her life, she struggled. You feared for her. You were no doubt tempted at times to despair for her. But your love for her never failed even in the darkest moments. More than that, your loved prevailed. I know that the doctors and the nurses did so much for her. But I have absolutely no doubt that your steadfast love for her was ultimately what pulled her through.

And the author of the letter is absolutely correct about that one thing at least, that kind of love is indeed a supreme demonstration of faith. It is about believing in someone even when they would seem to have nothing to offer. It is about seeing the value and strength in them even when they are at their weakest. That is what you chose to do for Rosalynn.

A Testimony of Faith

So I want to thank you, Brittany and Ian, for sharing your testimony of faith with us today. By sharing with us your story of a love that took you through a time of trials and that has now led to this child thriving, you are teaching us about the kind of faith we need at a very important time in the life of this congregation.

But this is not just about the amazing story of Rosalynn up until this point in her young life. This is also about why we are here on this day in particular. I know that it’s not just by chance that you have come to us today, on this fifth Sunday of Lent. I have no doubt whatsoever that God has chosen to send you to us on this day because God is saying something really important to us through you.

Our Journey

We are on a journey here at St. Andrews Hespeler. We started the year by taking a good look at where we are as a congregation and what the challenges are as we prepare for a future that we know will be filled with change and many challenges.

During this season of Lent we have been doing our very best to open our hearts and listen to what God is saying to us about the questions that have come out of that process. And, as you see on the very walls of this sanctuary, one exercise that we’ve been doing has included celebrating the long history of this congregation.

A Timeline

You will see on the walls many pictures and mementos of the past life of this church. But do not make the mistake of thinking that this is just a highlight reel – an exercise in celebrating a glorious past. No, what we’ve been celebrating is all of the ways in which this congregation has played a key role in so many people’s lives.

People have been formed here, they have grown and developed their passions and interests. People have celebrated some of the most important milestones of their lives including baptism, marriage, the death of a loved one and many other significant changes in this place and with this community.

Rosalynn’s Place in it

And I find it very meaningful that you, Rosalynn, should join us on this day at the climax of our celebration of that significant history. Because you are a part of that history. I know that there are many who share your family name who have shared in this history. Not only that, don’t think that I didn’t notice that you also bear the name of a Shirley who has been much loved and respected by the people of this congregation.

Your father and many other children from your family were also baptised and grew up with this church as an important part of their life. In fact, I understand that, over an entire century, babies from your family were baptised here wearing the very same dress that you are wearing today. You are an important link to our past today.

But you are also more than that. You are a symbol of the future. You are just beginning your journey with the church today. And, as is true anytime we look into the future, we do not know what your faith journey will look like.

Your parents have promised to teach you about Jesus and what Jesus has done for you. We as a congregation have promised to support them in that task.

Following Through on these Promises

Those are not necessarily easy promises to make. Both this congregation and your parents will face some challenges in terms of knowing how to follow through on those promises in the changing world where we find ourselves today.

But that is okay. For these are promises made in faith. Your parents had faith in you during those early days, perhaps even in those moments when it was hard to believe, and they bring that same kind of faith to the promises that they made here today. So do we as a congregation.

It is true that we don’t necessarily know how we can best support your family as they raise you and set you on a good course in life. Things are changing so fast these days that, not only do the approaches that worked so well in the past not seem to work the same way anymore, but we can’t even be sure that the approaches that work today will still be working the same way tomorrow.

But that should not frighten us in the church. We are called to be people who are like Moses’ parents, who love so much and so unconditionally that they never give up even when things look impossible.

The People of Abraham

We are the people of Abraham. I love the way that the letter to the Hebrews describes the faith of Abraham who, at God's call and invitation, set out to go to an entirely new country that he had never seen, giving up everything that was familiar. “By faith Abraham… set out, not knowing where he was going,” it says, “For he looked forward to the city that has foundations, whose architect and builder is God.”

That is how it works. We have taken Rosalynn into the life of the church even though we do not know all that she will do and be. She will grow up to have her own thoughts and ideas and she may very well come to see Jesus and the church differently from how some of us see those things right now. She will also have to decide for herself at some point whether she wants to be a full member of a church.

But all of that is okay. None of it has prevented us from baptizing her today because we don’t have to control the grace that it given to her in her baptism today. Not even her parents will ultimately control that, though they will help to shape it.

We do this not because we know what will come of it but because we can be confident that God will take everything that she is and everything that she will be and shape her into the person that God wants to unleash on the world for its good.

Looking Forward

We do it, in other words, because we look “forward to the city that has foundations, whose architect and builder is God.” And isn’t that so much more fun than just knowing exactly how it is going to all work out?

And if that is true for Rosalynn, how much more is it true for us as the church. Oh, I know that all of us have certain ideas of what this church is supposed to be. Most of those ideas are, of course, based on what we have experienced of the church in the past.

But the church that we are committed to, the one that we love and to whom we have pledged faithfulness in this journey, is not the church of the past. The church that we are committed to is “the city that has foundations, whose architect and builder is God.”

Love, Faith and Commitment

Someday in the future, it is practically inevitable, Rosalynn will make some choice or direct her life in some way that her parents do not anticipate and maybe never imagined that she would do. It happens to every child in some way at some point, so of course it will happen to her.

But, having seen Ian and Brittany’s love for her and what it has brought her through so far, can you imagine that they would reject her or stop loving her because of such a thing? Of course not! They have faith in her like Moses’ parents had faith and it will keep them through difficult and changing times.

Our love for and commitment to the church works in the same way. We can’t afford to just love the church that has been. Our commitment to the church is a commitment to a “city that has foundations, whose architect and builder is God.” And the architect and builder is not done with building this church yet. We are in for the journey together. And we will act in faith as God leads us to that future.

https://youtu.be/Qw2vydJ6RDc

Hespeler, March 19, 2023 © Scott McAndless – Fourth Sunday in Lent
1 Samuel 16:1-13, Psalm 23, Ephesians 5:8-14, John 9:1-41

The question that is asked at the beginning of our reading this morning from the Gospel of John is, in many ways, the oldest and most fundamental question of humankind.

Jesus and his disciples are walking along one day when the disciples notice a man by the side of the road. He is begging because he is blind and has been from birth. And so the disciples ask what, to them, seems to be a natural question: “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?”

Full of Assumptions

And that is a question that is simply overflowing with unspoken assumptions. And these are not just assumptions about the man himself or about his family. These are assumptions about the moral and ethical nature of the universe itself.

The question just takes it for granted that, if anyone is faced with adversity, whether it be a disability or an illness or some other misfortune, that it must be somebody’s fault. Somebody has to be to blame, probably the person themselves or someone close to them.

They are Oblivious

But the really amazing thing is that the disciples seem to be totally oblivious to the fact that they are making an assumption. They are unaware. You might even say that they are blind to their assumption. They simply ask Jesus a question assuming that he’s going to give one of two answers – either the man himself or his parents.

It never even seems to occur to them for a moment that there could possibly be an answer outside of those two possibilities. That is how deeply ingrained the assumption is; they don’t even know that they’re making it.

But I honestly don’t think that we should be too hard on the disciples for making this assumption. They are not the only ones. Later on in the story, the Pharisees, who are perhaps the most important religious leaders in the local community, make it pretty clear that they are also labouring under the same unconscious assumption. When they are trying to argue with the now former blind man and he actually demonstrates that he is not ignorant and can hold his own in the argument, he makes them look bad. They finally end up shouting in frustration, “You were born entirely in sins, and are you trying to teach us?”

When these Assumptions Come out

It is at those very moments when we are really frustrated at our own unexamined shortcomings, that our deepest underlying beliefs and assumptions come out. So it is made clear that the Pharisees have been assuming all along, just like the disciples were, that this guy (or at least his parents) must have done something to make him deserve it.

So, the disciples make the unconscious assumption, the religious leaders make the unconscious assumption, but these are not the only ones. For this is an assumption that runs right through society until this very day. Oh, we often don’t say it. In fact, it has become rather rude to say it out loud, but that doesn’t seem to stop us from making the assumption all the time. If someone has suffered some tragedy or misfortune, we all pretty much assume the same thing. It must be their own fault.

All the Time

It happens all the time to victims of various crimes. You hear a story of someone who has been raped, for example, what are the questions that automatically come to mind? What were they doing there at that place at that time? If she was a woman, what was she wearing? What had she been drinking? What kind of lifestyle had she been living previously? These are all questions that come to mind automatically.

They are also the kind of questions that will be asked of that woman if charges are laid, and she is forced to testify in court. It is almost never said in so many words, but the underlying assumption behind all of those questions is that she must have done something to deserve this terrible thing that happened to her.

The Assumption Behind our Prejudice

It is also the fundamental assumption that lies behind so much racism and other forms of prejudice. When you see some racial group within society that seems to suffer from various problems whether it be endemic poverty, addiction or violence, the default assumption that we tend to fall back on is not that this has been caused by some sort of structural imbalance in society or past history of oppression that is affecting present generations.

No, it is always easier to fall into the assumption that there must be some sort of ethical failure within the community itself – that they don’t want to work hard or that they don’t have good families or whatever it might be. There must be some reason why and it must be their own fault. That is the assumption of the racist and I suspect it is an assumption that every one of us, no matter what our racial background might be, can fall into far too easily.

And, yes, even when we are dealing with people who are suffering from illness or disability, we may make this assumption without even being aware of it. I mean, of course we don’t want to think that it’s somebody’s own fault if they are sick or if they lost their sight or anything like that, but if we can find some sort of cause behind the problem that can somehow be traced back to something that they did, it’s like we relax. It’s like the world suddenly makes sense again.

Why we do it

And I think I know why we do this. We do this because the world is a very scary place. It is a place where bad things often happen for no particular reason – at least not for any reason that we can understand. And when the world doesn’t make sense, which it often doesn’t, we will grasp for any reason that we can find in order to force it to make sense.

And often the easiest reason that we can find is to blame the victims themselves for what it is that they are suffering from. They must have sinned in some way. It must be their own fault. It’s a terrible thought; of course it is. It’s just that at least it seems better than the alternative which is to give in and admit that we live in a universe where something really bad could happen to me or to somebody that I love for no reason at all.

And if I can just take it for granted that that man was born blind because somebody sinned, I can feel safe because I don’t think I have sinned in anyway that might make me deserving of such a fate.

Jesus Doesn’t Share it

So, the blind assumption is very common. But what is particularly notable in this story is that Jesus doesn’t share that assumption. In fact, he takes the assumption and rejects the entire premise behind it. “Neither this man nor his parents sinned,” Jesus replies. He forces his disciples to consider that there might just be something going on in this situation outside of their easy and comfortable assumptions. And with just those few words, Jesus tears apart most of our assumptions about the moral universe.

What if everything that is bad that happens doesn’t have to be somebody’s fault. What if it is actually not at all helpful to waste our energy finding someone to blame or to shame for everything that has gone wrong. In fact, what if our whole approach of finding a reason for why a bad thing happened is completely wrongheaded?

A New Way of Thinking about it

That is exactly where Jesus redirects the disciples’ thoughts. Jesus says, “He was born blind so that God’s works might be revealed in him.” And I want to be clear on what Jesus is saying here. He is not proposing an alternate reason for why the bad thing has happened to this man.

I know it’s sometimes taken that way, but Jesus is not saying that it was God’s will that this man be born blind so that Jesus might do an amazing thing by healing him. He is not talking about cause and effect; he is talking about effect and opportunity.

God does not will for anybody to have horrible things happen to them. I believe that such things sadden the heart of God even more than they sadden our hearts.

Where we Need to Spend our Energy

No, instead Jesus is challenging them and all of us to look at such tragedies from a different point of view. As much as we would like to, we may never know why some things happen – not in this life anyways. And that is why we cannot consume ourselves in searching for scapegoats and people to blame.

But, Jesus is saying, in every problem, every tragedy, there is an opportunity for action. There is a possibility of revealing God’s works in this world for good. He is asking us to focus on that possibility instead of focussing on the question of who we can blame.

The Result: Enlightenment

And, of course, the whole remainder of this story is all about what happens when we make that shift. The result is, quite literally, enlightenment. The result is not only that the blind man is made able to see, but also that he is given great insight into who Jesus is – insight that far exceeds the wisdom of the Pharisees who think they are experts about such things.

So, you might say that, with his response to the disciples, Jesus is enlightening all of us about the true moral nature of the universe.

A Message for our Time

There is much in this story that speaks to us where we are in our lives at this time. We seem to be living in a moment, after all, where life is hard. People are struggling, I know that they are. They are having a hard time paying the bills. People are really struggling with difficult emotions and mental health challenges. Others are struggling to find better health.

We are seeing these things in our own lives or in the lives of the people that we love, and we often don’t know how to respond. The easiest response is usually the most ancient one. The easiest response it to ask, “Who sinned that such a thing should happen?” We look for someone to blame.

Blaming the Victims

And it often easiest to blame the victims themselves. If you are the one struggling, how easy it is to blame yourself. “I am too weak.” “I am too lazy.” “I made the wrong choices,” you repeat the litany to yourself. It is also stunningly easy to blame the people you love when they have their own troubles.

I’m not saying that there never are reasons for why people struggle and I’m not saying that they never have anything to do with it themselves. But I would say that those reasons are usually far more complex than our blame and shame reflexes would imply. Even more important, becoming fixated on those reasons, unless you are addressing them in a constructive way, will rarely get you out of the situation.

No, adopt the approach that Jesus takes. Focus instead on where, in this situation, there might be an opportunity for God’s works to be revealed. If you do, you may be amazed at the wonderful new thing that God brings about. Enlightenment in some form will follow!

Our Journey Together

This doesn’t just apply to our personal struggles, but also to where we are in our journey together as a congregation. We are in a moment in the story of this church when we are struggling with how our ways of being church just don’t seem to work like they used to. And we feel as if we are flying blind and don’t quite know what to do to meet our future.

And what is the temptation when we are living through such difficult times? The temptation is to look around to find someone to blame. “Who sinned,” we want to know, “that the church should be brought to such a state.” And we can usually find someone to blame and, oh, it feels so satisfying when we do.

But it doesn’t actually solve anything. The causes are always much more complicated than the simplistic blame we choose to lay. And the cycles of criticism that ensue are rarely, if ever, constructive. I wonder what Jesus would say when we asked who to blame, this person or that person for the struggles we are dealing with in the church?

“Neither,” he would say “but this present challenge has emerged so that God’s works might be revealed in us.” How might such a radical rethinking of the issues transform how we see the challenges before us today?

https://youtu.be/W6NhZvmia6M

Hespeler, March 5, 2023 © Scott McAndless – Lent 2, Communion
Genesis 12:1-4a, Psalm 121, Romans 4:1-5, 13-17, John 3:1-17

In our reading this morning from the Book of Genesis, we are told that the Lord comes to Abram out of the blue with an incredible promise. “I will make of you a great nation,” God says, “and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing.”

And let us just stop and savour that promise for a moment. These are, perhaps, some of the most important words in the Bible, for they are the promise upon which so many other promises are founded.

A Chosen People

This is the moment when the people of Israel become God’s “Chosen People.” And they become that despite the fact that none of them have even been born yet.

But at the same time, this passage doesn’t say that this special status is conferred as a privilege. It is not favouritism on God’s part. There is a very important purpose behind it all – it is “so that you will be a blessing.” Thus, the nation of Israel is called to exist as God’s people in order to be a blessing to all of the people of the earth.

A Blessing for us

But we don’t believe that this promise is only given for the people of Israel. It is also the promise that lies behind the foundation of the church. There is a real sense in which God has said to us, “I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing.” And we ought to claim that as God’s promise to us. God wants us to be a great nation and that we have a great name – that people might know us throughout this town and beyond as people who are significant and meaningful. If this is God’s promise given to Abram, it is given to us as well.

And yet, just like in the case of Abram, we must recognize that this blessing is not given merely for our own sake. If we, as a church, have any blessing, any particular status in the eyes of God, it is only so that we might bring blessing to the other people of the world. When we hoard God’s blessing to ourselves, we rob it of its true power. It is only when we take whatever we receive from God and use it to energize our ministry of reaching out and caring, love and compassion, that we will know the depths of those blessings.

But there is also something else that we must learn from Abram about activating such a blessing in our church. We must ask how Abram obtained such a blessing for himself.

How did Abram Earn this?

And it is very important to note that, up until this point in the Book of Genesis when God comes and offers this blessing to Abram, the patriarch has done nothing at all.

At this point in the story, he has simply been introduced as the son of Terah and as the husband of Sarai. That is all we’re told of him. He has lived with his father as his father has moved around. He hasn’t said anything. He has also professed no particular faith in the God who will become so important in his story. Abram is just a guy. He is a guy who is not really any different from any other guy.

This makes one thing perfectly clear. That God’s blessings are not given as something that we earn. There is not a single thing that we could do that would make God more inclined to love us and bless us. All of God’s blessings come to us as a result of God’s grace, the lovingkindness that God chooses to lavish upon us.

Abram’s Response

Yet there is one thing that truly does set Abram apart in this story and that is his response. When God says to Abram, “Go from your country and your kindred and your father’s house to the land that I will show you,” we are told only one thing about Abram’s response. We are told that “Abram went.”

Did you noticed what is missing there? Where is the part where Abram hears that call and raises his objections? “Excuse me, Lord, but do you really expect me to walk away from everything that I am familiar with, everything that makes me comfortable?

I have my traditions and the ways I have always done things. And I have all kinds of wonderful memories of the things that have happened in this place. Why should I leave all of that behind for the sake of some big promise that you’re going to show me a new land that I know nothing about? How do I know that that’s a good trade? How do I know that such a costly journey will be worthwhile?

How We React to New Things

That is exactly how I would respond to such a command, wouldn’t you? I mean look, for example, at how we react in the life of the church whenever we consider doing something new or different. What are the reactions that you hear? “Oh, we’ve never done it that way before,” one will say. Or, “we tried that once and it didn’t work,” another will say, likely referencing something that is hardly the same thing.

And heaven help you if you try some new thing and it, in any way, seems to impinge on some program or activity that the church has been doing for thirty years and actually doesn’t really work today like it did thirty years ago because it’s no longer relevant to people. Such things, apparently, must be maintained at any cost, even if you must sacrifice the exciting new future that God is calling you to.

I speak in general here, of course, I’ve had enough experience with enough churches to know that this is the kind of thing that we do all the time. We value holding onto what is familiar and comfortable much more than we do embracing whatever new thing God might be calling us to do. It is just human nature.

He Just Went

But that is, of course, what makes Abram so extraordinary in this story. When he receives the call from God to leave everything that is comfortable and familiar and move into an unknown territory to receive an ill-defined blessing, he likely felt the same kinds of hesitations and doubts that you and I would. But he clearly did not let any of that get in the way of him making one singular response: Abram went.

And in those two words, the whole key to Abram is found: Abram went. The Apostle Paul praises Abraham in his letters (calling him by the new name that will be given to him later) as an extraordinary example of faith. But, when Paul says that, he is not thinking about faith in the same way that we usually talk about faith in the church today.

When we talk about faith, it usually means something like that we accept certain concepts and ideas and doctrines about Jesus or God or the world. But Abram’s faith did not consist in him believing or holding any particular beliefs. In fact, there are no indications that Abram believed anything in particular, at least, not anything different from anyone else around him.

The Meaning of Faith

When we talk about faith, we often mean that somebody simply accepts certain teachings without raising any questions or struggling with any doubts. When we talk about it, we often frame faith as the opposite of reason and suggest that if anyone has any doubts or critical thoughts, they cannot have faith. But there is nothing of that in this response of Abram. We are given absolutely no insights into what is going on inside Abram’s mind because, ultimately, that is not what matters to God. What matters to God is that Abram went.

Abram’s true expression of faith is simply acting on what God has promised him and doing that despite knowing that it will lead to a loss of what is comfortable and familiar and easy. Abram went.

A Listening Process

All of this is extremely important for us to understand because of where we are as a congregation in this moment in time. During this season of Lent, we are engaging in a listening process. We have raised some very important questions about where we are in the church right now and where we are going. And we are listening for God to speak on these questions. And I am going to tell you two things that I am certain of in this listening process.

I am certain that God will speak. And I am certain that God’s message will, in some way, be a promise that is for our blessing and for the blessing of the world through us. I know that because I know the God that we meet in the Bible does speak, does care and does offer us this blessing.

Will We Listen?

But there are two things that are uncertain in this process. One is whether or not we will listen, and the other is whether or not we will actually act on what we hear.

Listening is not automatic because it’s not easy for us to listen to God. It is not easy because we fill our minds and our hearts and our lives with so much noise that we don’t offer the opportunity for God’s voice to get through.

Psalm 46 encourages worshipers to “be still and know that I am God.” (v.10) When the prophet Elijah is given the opportunity to meet with God, the God that he meets is not found in the wind, the earthquake or the fire. God’s voice is only heard in “a sound of sheer silence.” (1 Kings 19:11-13) And so the reality is that unless we can teach ourselves to be in silence, we will generally miss the voice of God.

Learning to Listen

And so it is no accident that we have introduced into this season of listening various practices of prayer whose primary purpose is to teach us to find the silence. In Lectio Divina, you teach yourself to stop listening to everything else but what God might be saying to you in a certain passage of scripture. A meditative prayer takes a similar approach to focusing your mind only on what you hear the scriptures saying to you.

Through these and other practices that we are teaching you, you will learn to quiet your mind and to put aside the concerns of life to focus on the presence of God in a particular moment. This does not come easy. It is something you have to work at and practice, but I promise you that this is something worth learning because God does speak, and you really don’t want to miss the message when God does.

The Bigger Challenge

So, the listening is a challenge, but it is something we will work at. The bigger challenge is actually acting on what we hear. And that is a challenge because of all of the things I’ve been talking about.

It is a challenge because we have all kinds of reasons not to do what God is telling us to do in the life of the church. We’ve never done it like that before. We tried it once and it didn’t work. It will take away from the familiar old practices that we are used to and comfortable with and that we want to hold on to even though they actually don’t seem to work anymore. These are among our many excuses for not doing what God is telling us to do.

Abram’s Example

And that is why I am so thankful for the example of Abram today. When he heard the voice of God, he had every reason not to do what God told him to do. He could have complained and offered all kinds of excuses. But Abram went. Abram went and it changed the future and brought blessings to the whole world as a result. So, if we hear the voice of God, what will we do? That is the biggest question facing the church both here locally and globally today.

Abram went; what will you do?

There is no text version of this sermon. You can only access the video below.

https://youtu.be/QeNh6svzT80

If the above embedded video does not play, click on this link to go directly to YouTube: https://youtu.be/QeNh6svzT80