A Sermon preached on Sunday, December 22 (The
Fourth Sunday of Advent) at Church of the Ascension, Munich
Psalm 80:1-7; 17-19, Isaiah 7:10-16,
Romans 1:1-7, Matthew 1:18-25
You might have noticed a change of
focus with today’s readings. The previous three Advent Sundays we were mostly looking
into the future. The Epistles helped us reflect on how we should prepare ourselves
for Christ’s Second Coming and Isaiah’s wonderful visions gave us a hint of
what God’s Kingdom will be like. But this week, just three days before we
commemorate the event, all three readings focus on the Incarnation, on the
birth of a child to be called Emmanuel, born of a young woman or of a virgin,
descended from the royal House of David.
The reading from Matthew’s Gospel is
actually quite a dangerous passage. When I was at university in Leeds, a long
time ago, one of the professors of theology was a David Jenkins. I was not
studying theology in those days, that strange idea came much later, but I knew
him as he worshipped at the Anglican chaplaincy as I did. Just two years after
I graduated he was chosen to be Bishop of Durham and then became both famous and
infamous very quickly. First by publicly asserting that, among other things, the
Virgin birth need be taken too literally. Then, just three days after his consecration
as Bishop of Durham in York Minster, that ancient cathedral was hit by lightning,
supposedly a bolt of lightning that came out of a completely clear and cloudless sky, and the wooden
roof of the Minster's 13th century south transept was destroyed by fire. For
many people this was a sign from on high: God was not pleased with this cleric!
So out of respect for our hosts here at Emmaus church I suppose I had better be
careful about what I now say about the Virgin birth as described in today’s
Gospel and announced in Isaiah? Actually, if God was to burn down every church
in which a preacher told people that some aspect of the Biblical narrative,
whether the Virgin birth, or miracles like walking on water or the feeding of
the 5000, was not to be taken literally, then I fear we would not have many
Anglican churches left….
So let’s take a risk, keeping the
fire extinguishers handy, and talk about the Virgin birth.
Is it necessary for
Christianity? Would our faith fall apart if Mary had not just been with child
from the Holy Spirit, but if her husband Joseph had also been involved? The
short answer is, NO it wouldn’t. St. Paul managed to write a lot of very
foundational letters, established many churches, and converted many people
without once mentioning the Virgin birth. In fact, just like the authors of the
Gospels according to Mark and John, he doesn’t describe the birth of Jesus at
all. Jesus was, as we heard in today’s Epistle, descended from David according
to the flesh. But even more important for Paul was that Jesus “was declared to
be Son of God with power according to the spirit of holiness by resurrection
from the dead.” (Romans 1:3-4) For Paul the resurrection was a more important
sign of God’s power and intervention than the circumstances of Jesus’ birth.
Is the Virgin birth possible?
One claim made is that of course in those days, 2000 years ago, people were
ignorant and gullible about such things and therefore found it easy to believe in
virgin births. Well no, as C. S. Lewis once pointed out, “the reason Joseph was
worried about Mary’s pregnancy was not because he didn’t know where babies came
from but because he did.”[1] It
took an angel to convince him that this baby was from the Holy Spirit! I can understand why atheists, like my
favorite Richard Dawkins, think a Virgin birth is impossible (though modern
genetic science is coming close). But Christians? We believe in a God who is the
creator of everything, who is timeless and beyond time, yet this omnipotent,
omniscient, and omnipresent Being is not capable of arranging for a Virgin
birth? Really? Let me quote the Qur’an on this topic. From Surah 19, verses
20-21: “(Mary) said: ‘Shall I have a boy, when no man has touched me and I have
not been an unchaste woman?’ (The Angel) said: ‘This it will be, your Lord has
said: ‘This is an easy matter for Me, that We may make (the boy) a sign
unto mankind and a Mercy from us.’”[2]
Is the Virgin birth important?
Well, Matthew must have had a good reason for even mentioning it. He’s taking a
risk with this account of a birth without male human intervention; he's opening
it up to sneers and innuendo. So perhaps there really was something strange or
unique around Jesus’ birth that needed explaining, as both Luke and Matthew do
in their different accounts either from Mary’s or as we heard today from
Joseph’s perspective.
But even more important is the message
or meaning of the Virgin birth for our faith. For one thing, it addresses the
question of Jesus’ legitimacy and authority. Where did his power to teach, to
heal and to save come from? Although, as I said, Paul does not mention the virgin
birth, these are still important issues for him too. So he begins his letter
to the Christians in Rome with the statement that he serves “the gospel
concerning (God’s) Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh
and was declared to be Son of God with power according to the spirit
of holiness by resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord.” (Romans
1:3-4) In Paul’s day son of god was not an exclusive title, for example Caesar was
also referred to as a son of god. But Paul is telling his readers, in Rome, the
capital of the Empire, that only Jesus is the real Son of the real
God. Firstly because he is descended, as a human, from a royal house much older
than Rome, the House of David, instituted by God and is heir to the promises
God made to that House. Secondly because his Resurrection is sign of a power
above anything in the world: God’s power. So Jesus is the world’s true Lord.
Matthew has a similar interest and
approach. Just before today’s passage, in verse 1-17 of chapter 1, he provides
a long account of the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah, the son of David, the son
of Abraham. “Abraham was the father of Isaac, and Isaac the father of Jacob,
and Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers, and Judah the father of Perez
and Zerah by Tamar, and Perez the father of Hezron, ……” and so on over another
fourteen verses. How strange that we don’t read this passage often in church….!
Its purpose is to link Jesus not just to the royal house of David, as we saw in
Paul’s letter, but even further, right back to the patriarchs. This is one
source of Jesus’ authority: he will fulfill the promises God made to Israel and
throughout Israel’s history.
In Matthew, the Holy Spirit is
active not just in the resurrection but already at Jesus’ birth. It is an expression
of God’s direct and personal involvement in this event and in all our lives. According
to Scripture, God had intervened in other unexpected births. Isaac’s, Samuel’s,
and John the Baptist’s were only possible because God had intervened, but they
still had both human fathers and mothers. The miraculous circumstances of
Jesus’ birth are a sign that this is different, even more special, or unique. God
has not just sent another prophet. Instead, as the name Immanuel tells us, God
is with us, God is present and active in the world, and not just intervening
from a distance. The name Joseph gives
the boy, Jesus or Joshua, meaning ‘God saves’ or simply ‘God. Help!’ tells us
that the purpose of God’s direct intervention in the person of the Son, Jesus
Christ, is to save us - mostly from ourselves.
To do this, to fulfill the promises
of these names, Jesus cannot just be a good human. The Virgin birth stands for
the essential truth that God took the initiative and did inconceivable or
supposedly impossible things. Like becoming human, living a fully human life, suffering
and dying and conquering death for us all.
One more thought. “Mary … was found
to be with child from the Holy Spirit.” This is the same Spirit of God that
moved over the waters, forming order out of chaos, in the creation story in
Genesis. This tells us that the Incarnation, through God’s Spirit, is the
inception of a new creation. Jesus’ birth stands for a fresh start for the
world and for each and every one of us who is willing to live as a citizen of
God’s Kingdom.
If we take Scripture seriously, which
I think is far more important than taking it literally, then this passage from
Matthew really is dangerous. It tells us that God is passionately interested in
our lives and willing to intervene, to be involved, and to change our lives, if
we allow God to do so. If we let Jesus in, he will do new things within our
hearts and lives – which is awesome both in the colloquial sense, fantastic or
great, and in the original sense, frightening or terrifying.
Nelson Mandela, whose body was laid
to rest at the beginning of the week, after ten days of commemoration and
celebration, believed in a God who is with us, in a God who is present and
active in the world. Mandela was willing to let Jesus in to do new things
within his heart and life. Sentenced to life imprisonment by the Apartheid
regime, he came out of prison not bitter and looking for revenge, but as Archbishop
Tutu said: "Like a most precious diamond honed deep beneath the surface of
the earth, the Madiba who emerged from prison was virtually flawless. Instead of
calling for his pound of flesh, he proclaimed the message of forgiveness and
reconciliation.”[3]
And one tribute I read by a former prison chaplain[4]
described how during a Communion service in prison Nelson Mandela went over to
the young, white, Boer warder on watch and asked him: "Brand, are you a
Christian?" "Yes," the warder responded. "Well then, you
must take off your cap, and join us round this table. You cannot sit apart.
This is Holy Communion, and we must share and receive it together." Which
the warden did! Nelson Mandela let Jesus renew and change him, and then through
him others were transformed. [In a
moment, as our tribute to Mandela, we will sing the hymn God bless Africa written
by Trevor Huddleston, an anti-apartheid activist and Anglican
bishop.]
But I started this sermon with one
Bishop of Durham, so let me finish with another, later Bishop of Durham:
Tom Wright. “We have been made new with a life which death cannot touch, a life
which will lighten our path through whatever darkness lies ahead, a life which
doesn’t spring from mere human possibilities.”[5] I
think that this offer of new life for us all is the most important meaning of
this special birth we will soon celebrate. The birth of the Son of God, named ‘God
with us’ and ‘Savior.’
Amen
[1] Quoted in
http://ntwrightpage.com/sermons/Christmas07.htm
[2] Majid Fakhry, An Interpretation of the Qur’an (New
York: New York University Press, 2004), 303
[3]
http://www.churchtimes.co.uk/articles/2013/13-december/news/world/week-of-international-tributes-to-nelson-mandela
[4] Harry Wiggett quoted in Church
Times 13.12.2013
[5] http://ntwrightpage.com/sermons/Christmas07.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment