Sunday, December 30, 2012

Grown-up Christians?




Sermon preached on December 30, 21012 (1st Sunday after Christmas) at the Church of the Ascension, Munich

Isaiah 61:10-62:3; Galatians 3:23-25; 4:4-7; John 1:1-18

Now I’m always a little bit suspicious when the readings assigned for the day have gaps in them. Perhaps you noticed too that today’s reading from Paul’s Letter to the Galatians leaves out seven verses. So why; what was the motivation of the people who put the lectionary together? Were they trying to hide something difficult or uncomfortable? Perhaps a contradiction or a passage that seems to condone violence or might be considered discriminatory?  Well no, in this case I don’t think the motive is quite so dubious, I suspect they probably just wanted to put the spotlight on the “Incarnational” message, appropriate to this season, that “God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, in order to redeem those who were under the law.” 



However, the result of this editing is that the first half of one argument is combined with the second half of another similar, but not identical argument. The trouble is that Paul is difficult enough to understand even without conflating and compounding him. So please indulge me while we have a look at what Paul actually wrote:
First argument, part one (as we heard):
3: 23 Now before faith came, we were imprisoned and guarded under the law until faith would be revealed. 24Therefore the law was our disciplinarian until Christ came, so that we might be justified by faith. 25But now that faith has come, we are no longer subject to a disciplinarian,
Part two: 26for in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith. 27As many of you as were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus. 29And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to the promise.

The Letter to the Galatians is written to churches Paul had founded in what is now part of Anatolia in Turkey. However since his visits there other ‘apostles’ had called in and had tried to convince the Galatians that to become followers of Christ they needed to become Jews first. Paul’s purpose in writing this letter is to change their minds back again, and he does not mince words in doing so. After all, this chapter begins with the words “You foolish Galatians!” 

Anyway his first argument here is that the Law, in particular the ritual law covering worship, festivals, circumcision, did once serve a purpose, it was our “disciplinarian.” That’s how our Bible version translates paidagogos, a servant or slave who was charged with looking after children between ages of 6 and 16, a task that included taking them to school, making sure they did their homework, and generally keeping them out of mischief. So it was a protective role that is something between a nanny, governess, or babysitter!

But now, Paul says, if you have faith in Christ you are also trustworthy and reliable, which are just different ways of translating the same word, pistos. And as you are faithful, trustworthy, and reliable, you are also mature enough not to need a babysitter anymore. So you don’t need to become a Jew, because for believers that is not a relevant category anymore. Anyone can become a Christian: Jew or Greek, slave or free, man or woman. All of you, regardless of your background, are inheritors of God’s promise and are children of God. Just believe and be baptized as a sign of that belief and as a symbol of your belonging to Christ.
Second Argument, part one (which we didn’t hear) 4:1 My point is this: heirs, as long as they are minors, are no better than slaves, though they are the owners of all the property; 2but they remain under guardians and trustees until the date set by the father. 3So with us; while we were minors, we were enslaved to the elemental spirits of the world.
Part two: 4But when the fullness of time had come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, 5in order to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as children. 6And because you are children, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, ‘Abba! Father!’ 7So you are no longer a slave but a child, and if a child then also an heir, through God.

Paul’s second argument is similar to the first; he did like to use repetition to get his point across, especially with those he considered ‘foolish!’ But here he is coming from a legal angle and tailoring his argument to his audience, the Roman citizens of the colonies in Galatia. In Roman society, as a minor, you did not have many legal rights. Your father decided when you were considered to be of age, there was no fixed birthday like 18 or 21. When you came of age there was a big party, you got a special toga to wear and your father adopted you formally, thereby making you the legal heir.

This is what Paul was alluding to. Before Christ came, says Paul, we were minors and others looked after our affairs. God, our Father, chose a particularly impressive way and very personal to help us come of age. God’s son, made human, came personally to set us free, to give us the status of adopted children, and to make us heirs of God’s promise.

So according to Paul, God considers us capable of being faithful without a complex set of rules telling us just what to do in any given situation, without detailed membership requirements, and without people set over us to tell us what to do. What we need is faith in God through Christ. Through the Incarnation God sent God’s Son to bring us into a direct and personal relationship with a God we can call “Abba,” a familiar and intimate term like mummy or daddy. God sent God’s son to teach us to be in close relationship with one another, a relationship marked by the universal equality that in Christ Jesus categories like Jew or Greek, slave or free, and male and female do not play a role, a relationship in which the promise of Genesis 1:27, that God created all of humankind, both male and female, in his selfsame image, has been restored. We are now mature enough to hear, understand, accept, and live by this message!

But are we? Are we truly mature, faithful, and trustworthy? Are we truly grown-up in this sense? We’ve come a long way over the last two thousand years, but I’m not convinced that we already exhibit all the signs of maturity Paul listed. We often miss having a ‘babysitter’ and look for detailed rules for life from our church, or from Holy Scripture, or from our pastors. We put a huge distance between ourselves and God, and we are still a long way from the equality and acceptance of all that is supposed to follow from our baptism. So was Paul overly optimistic, are we perhaps not really ready for the freedom maturity brings? 

Yes and no! As a parent I know that maturity is not a single moment, it is not something that just happens on some arbitrary date whether that be age 16, 18 or 21. It is a process that starts long before legal adulthood and doesn’t stop after that date, in fact it never stops. I certainly hope that I have not yet reached full maturity, my family will probably confirm that this hope is realistic, because I still want to grow and develop. Everything we do and learn changes us. As that famous Anglican theologian John Wesley wrote in a sermon entitled Christian Perfection: “How much soever any person has attained, or in how high a degree whatsoever they are perfect, they still need to grow in grace and daily to advance in the knowledge and love of God the Savior.”

It’s just like the kingdom of heaven: neither something completely in the future, nor something already realized, it has started but still awaits completion. When all humankind exhibits all the signs of maturity that Paul lists, when we are truly open to God and one another, when we are truly inclusive, really one, and fully united, then not only will we be fully mature Christians, but that will also be the moment when the kingdom will have finally come. Paul’s examples tell us that we will not achieve this simply by obeying a set of rules and rituals, but by a transformation that started for humanity with Christ’s Incarnation and starts for each of us with Baptism. This transformation is not an intellectual process: true faith is faith of the heart, or quoting John Wesley again:  “True religion is having a heart right toward God and man.”

As the Gospel passage told us, “to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God.” The source of this power, the power to become the children we are meant to be, the power that can transform us, are the knowledge of God through Christ, the Spirit God has sent into all our hearts, and God’s grace mediated through Christ.  
God did not send God’s Son to make us mature. God sent God’s Son to invite us to begin a process of transformation with God’s help. Let us accept that open invitation, especially in this season when we remember and celebrate Christ’s first coming over two thousand years ago.

Sunday, November 25, 2012

Yes to the King



Notes for a sermon preached (without notes) on November 25, 2012  at the Family Service of St. David’s Episcopal Church, Washington, DC
Proper 29: Daniel 7:9-10; 13-14, Revelation 1:4-8, and John 18:33-37

What type of stories begins with the words “Once upon a time?”  [Fairy Tales]
And who are some of the main types of characters in fairy tales? [witches, dragons, princesses ....]
I was thinking of princes, princesses, kings and queens! So are they all just fairy tale figures?[no]
Well no, kings and queens, at least not for me. After all I come from a country called the United Kingdom, and I am a proud “subject” of her majesty Queen Elizabeth II.
And it seems that a king is not just fairy tale figures for the church either, as today we celebrate the feast of Christ the King.

Now some people have a problem with this particular festival and in some church calendars it gets renamed – for example as the “Reign of Christ” - to avoid the use of the word King. There those who find the metaphor of Christ the King inappropriate for churches in the United States of America as the USA is a republic with an elected head of state and was founded in a rebellion against a king. Others have a general problem with what they feel ‘king’ stands for. Historically kings could be tyrants and oppressive; they lived in huge palaces while many of their people lived in poverty, and they used force to defend and expand their kingdoms.

But while there are good reasons to have a problem with the words and the concept of Lord and King, I think one reason for the problem is a misunderstanding of what the terms Lord, King, and Kingdom meant for Christ and mean for us as Christians. I also think it’s partially based on an unwillingness to accept any really absolute authority over us, anything that might impact our individual rights and freedoms.

So how should we understand the idea of Christ the King? In most gospels that word king does not occur until it is used by Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor, when he questions Jesus after his arrest. Pilate’s questions show that even in Jesus’ day, the nature of his kingship was misunderstood.  Are you the King of the Jews, Pilate asks? At that time there was no such king; Rome had not allowed King Herod’s successors to bear that title. So what Pilate really wants to know is whether Jesus is claiming this political title in opposition to Rome, as a national liberator, and would be worldly ruler.

When Jesus replies we learn that it his kingdom is “not from this world.” Nor will it any way be initiated or defended by force: “If my kingdom were from this world, my followers would be fighting to keep me from being handed over.” In Greek the “followers” are actually quite literally ‘armed attendants’ – it’s the same word used for the temple police: The ones who had just arrested Jesus the night before. So Jesus is not only making clear that his kingdom is different, his followers are too. He neither wants, nor needs an army. Then finally when Pilate again asks him directly: ‘So you are a king?’ We learn one more important aspect about Jesus’ kingship: ‘You say that I am a king. For this I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to my voice.’ Jesus came not to rule, but to witness to the truth of God’s love. Those who accept this truth are obedient to Jesus Christ as a king, a king of truth.  

I really want to emphasize that we have a choice: we choose whether we want to belong to the truth. We choose to believe and in doing so we choose to accept an absolute higher authority, one we “swear allegiance” to at Baptism, when we become citizens of the kingdom, and every Sunday in the Creed when we reaffirm this choice. The image of a King, albeit one without the usual trappings, is still a good one because Christ is not like a President we elect and potentially change every four years, the choice we make is for life and beyond. The image of King is therefore a reminder that we have accepted a higher authority and that we have agreed to put our King’s values, the truth Christ came into the world to testify to, over those of this world, even over our country, our party, and our individual goals. That’s not easy as all of us, myself included, are much more used to the reverse order, to one in which we put ourselves first. 

So let us say yes to Christ the King, to a King who, while not a fairy tale figure, is not of this world, who is not a tyrant, and whose kingdom does not rely on force. Christ as King stands for the truths of love, justice, mutual service, and forgiveness. And our King, Christ, invites us, to become citizens of his kingdom, and to witness to and live out these same truths.
Amen

Christ our only King



Sermon preached on November 25, 2012 (@ 8.00 and 11.15 am) at St. David’s Episcopal Church, Washington, DC
Proper 29: Daniel 7:9-10; 13-14, Revelation 1:4-8, and John 18:33-37

Both my children tell me that I would have made a good history teacher, I haven’t worked out yet whether that is meant as a compliment. Now is an opportunity to try out this role, at least for some of the sermon. Today we celebrate the feast of Christ the King, or as it is sometimes also called, the Reign of Christ and I want to tell you some of its history. This is not an ancient feast. It was originally instituted by Pope Pius XI in 1925 in response to the growing nationalism and secularism of his day – Fascism and Communism were the two big trends of the 1920s. Pope Pius wanted to remind Christians that their primary allegiance was to their spiritual ruler in heaven, and not to some pretty ugly earthly rulers like Mussolini. In 1969 another Pope, Paul VI, moved it to its current date: The last Sunday in the liturgical year, before our new year begins with the First Sunday in Advent. You won’t find this feast in our 1979 BCP but over the last 20 years most Anglican churches have adopted it as a major feast and in the Church of England’s latest prayer book, Common Worship, it is one of the “red letter days.”

I get the feeling however, that a lot of Episcopalians have come to regret the decision to adopt this festival. As I said earlier some calendars rename it – for example as the reign of Christ - to avoid the use of the word King. There are some very good reasons for this.  Some find the metaphor of Christ the King inappropriate for churches in the United States of America. This country is a republic, you elect your head of state and don’t have a hereditary monarch, your national identity is even bound up in the fact that you rebelled against a king. As a UK national and proud “subject” of her majesty Queen Elizabeth II I don’t have a problem with a monarchy, but I can understand the problems some Americans might have. Though just as an aside – elected leaders can be oppressive too!

Others go beyond just this particular Holy Day and are generally reluctant to use "lord" and "king" for Christ or to talk of “God’s kingdom.” Lord and king not only stand for something oppressive, they are also exclusively male. So in the newer prayer books of other denominations and in our alternative liturgies we find “God be with you”  instead of “the Lord be with you,”  the “word of the Lord” after the lessons and the gospel announcement “The Holy Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ” are replaced by “Hear what the Spirit is saying” and “The Holy Gospel of our Savior” and instead of the “peace of the Lord” it is the “peace of Christ” that we exchange with one another. None of these other terms are theologically or scripturally incorrect. I agree fully with the need to watch our use of language and make sure that it is inclusive. God is not male.

But are these the only reasons why so many people have a problem with the words and the concept of Lord and King? I don’t think so. I think there are two other more problematic ones.


  1. There is a misunderstanding of what these terms meant for Christ and mean for us as Christians and 
  2.  There is a reluctance to accept the higher authority words like ‘king’ and ‘lord’ stand for.   

So how should we understand the idea of Christ the King? Although Jesus frequently used the word kingdom – kingdom of God and kingdom of heaven – for the new state of life he came to institute, he never applied the word king to himself. In most gospels that word does not occur until it is used by Pilate when he questions Jesus after his arrest. Only in John’s Gospel is the word used a little earlier in the story of the feeding of 5000. Right after that episode we read that “when Jesus realized that they were about to come and take him by force to make him king, he withdrew again to the mountain by himself.” (John 6:15) Clearly Jesus did not want to be a king on their terms, nor have anything to do with a reign instituted by force. Even then the nature of his kingship was misunderstood. The crowd wanted a national liberator, a political and earthly king. And Pontius Pilate has the same wrong idea. Are you the King of the Jews, he asks? At that time there was no such king; Rome had not allowed King Herod’s successors to bear that title. So what Pilate wants to know is whether Jesus is claiming this political title in opposition to Rome and as a national liberator.

Jesus doesn’t reply and by asking Pilate a question instead, he demonstrates that he does not accept the authority of this earthly ruler! And when Jesus gets round to defining and describing his kingdom we learn that it is “not from this world.” Nor will it any way be initiated or defended by force: “If my kingdom were from this world, my followers would be fighting to keep me from being handed over.” The followers are actually quite literally ‘armed attendants’ – it’s the same word used for the temple police: The ones who had just arrested Jesus the night before. So Jesus is not only making clear that his kingdom is different, his followers are too. He neither wants, nor needs an army. Then finally when Pilate again asks him directly: ‘So you are a king?’ We learn one more important aspect about Jesus’ kingship: ‘You say that I am a king. For this I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to my voice.’ Jesus came to witness to the truth of God’s love. Those who accept this truth are obedient to Jesus Christ as a king, a king of truth.  To sum up the message in this passage: Jesus’ kingship does not conform to worldly standards; it is a kingdom of peace and of truth: a very countercultural kingdom. Jesus says something similar in Mark’s Gospel (10:42-45) in a passage we heard just a month ago:
“You know that among the Gentiles those whom they recognized as their rulers lord it over them, and their great ones are tyrants over them. But it is not so among you; but whoever wishes to be great among you must be your servant; whoever wishes to be first among you must be slave of all. For the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many.” This king or ruler is a very strange one indeed. His rule is defined by humility and service, and instead of using violence to obtain or maintain power, this king, our king, is willing to sacrifice himself for his subjects. Pope Pius made a similar point when he instituted this celebration: "'Christ,' he says, 'has dominion over all creatures, a dominion not seized by violence nor usurped, but his by essence and by nature.'"

That brings me to my second point. The passage from Daniel tells us, at least in the translation I prefer, that the Ancient of Days gave one like the Son of Man “dominion and glory and kingship, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that shall not pass away, and his kingship is one that shall never be destroyed.”
But many people, including many churchgoers, would rather not accept the absolute authority that goes with the word kingship. If we agree with the ideas, then sure, we’ll follow them, but only then. They are options, something to be considered. Neither God, nor Christ, is their ruler. We find this attitude all over the political and social spectrum. Many only accept the authority of the individual self, others might put their country, or their party first. It is far too easy and too common to substitute other allegiances or the pursuit of individual goals for the values Christ holds up for us, for the truth he came into the world to testify to. But as Christians we believe that Daniel’s vision has been realized in Jesus Christ, and that he is the one we are called to serve as king by choice. We choose to belong to the truth, we choose to believe and in doing so we choose to accept an absolute higher authority, one we “swear allegiance” to at Baptism, when we become citizens of his kingdom, and every Sunday in the Creed when we reaffirm this choice. That’s why the image of a King, albeit one without the usual trappings, is still a good one because Christ is not like a President we elect and can change every four years, the choice we make is for life and beyond.

So I really want to commend today’s Feast of Christ the King to you. I think Pope Pius’ intention to remind Christians that their primary allegiance was to their spiritual ruler in heaven is just as important now as in 1925. I want to appeal to you all to accept Christ as your King, a king who stands for the truths of love, justice, mutual service, and forgiveness and who invites us, to become citizens of his kingdom, and to witness to and live out these same truths.
Amen