A third way, an alternative kingdom

Here's the sermon that I shared at St Nicholas Rawreth and All Saints Rettendon this morning: 

Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna, was martyred by Roman authorities around AD 156, aged 86. When Polycarp was brought into the stadium at Smyrna to meet his fate the Roman proconsul tried to persuade him to deny Christ, saying, "Swear by the fortune of Caesar; repent, and say, Away with the Atheists." Instead, Polycarp declared, "Eighty and six years have I served Him, and He never did me any injury: how then can I blaspheme my King and my Saviour?"

Polycarp was martyred because he refused to deny Christ and swear by the fortune of Caesar. The two went together because the claim of the Caesar’s from the time of Jesus through to the time of Polycarp was a claim to divinity. In the Roman Empire, at that time, “Caesar was the king, the saviour, and demanded an oath by his ‘genius’.” “Polycarp declared that to call Caesar these things would be to commit blasphemy against [Christ], the true, divine king and saviour.” The message of Christianity, in its early phase, was in conflict with the political forces of its day because Christ’s divinity and rule was seen as central by the Church, not Caesar’s.

We see the same kind of conflict occurring in today's Gospel reading about Jesus and the payment of taxes (Matthew 22.15-22). Jesus is asked whether it is against the Law of Moses to pay taxes to the Romans. Before he answers, he asks his questioners to bring him one of the coins used to pay the tax. This coin would have had on it an image of the Emperor Tiberius and a superscription which would have said that Tiberius was the son of the divine Augustus. As all images were prohibited by the Law of Moses and as the superscription proclaimed Tiberius to be a son of a god, these coins were hot property as far as the Jews were concerned. From a strict Jewish perspective, the coins themselves were blasphemous and to have one was compromising.

The trap that had been set for Jesus was a neat one. If he takes the orthodox Jewish position he can be denounced to the Roman authorities as a revolutionary encouraging the Jews not to pay the tax. But if he says that the Jews should pay the tax, then the religious leaders can denounce him as someone who encourages blasphemy.

So how does he respond? Cleverly is the answer. And more cleverly than we have tended to realise in interpreting this story within the Church.

Firstly, he asks for the coin used to pay the tax. This means that those questioning him have to produce the coin. In other words, they have to reveal that they have with them, handle and use these blasphemous coins. By this simple action Jesus makes it much harder for them to then denounce him if he should recommend paying the tax.

Then he says, “pay back to the Emperor what belongs to the Emperor, and pay God what belongs to God.” Now, this is an amazing statement because it is one statement that can be understood in two different ways.

The Church has traditionally understood Jesus to be talking about a difference between loyalty to a state and to God. In other words, that the state can make legitimate demands on its citizens like the payment of taxes and that it is right for Christians to meet those obligations. Always recognising, of course, that we have a greater and wider commitment to God that encompasses the whole of our lives and not just those parts to which a state can make a claim. That is one way of understanding what Jesus said and, on that basis, his hearers could have understood him to be that the tax should be paid.

But, with their knowledge of recent Jewish history, Jesus’ hearers would also have realised that his words could be understood in another much more revolutionary sense. “Pay back to the Emperor what belongs to the Emperor” could also mean pay the Romans back for all that they have done in oppressing our people. While the second half, “pay God what belongs to God”, could be understood as meaning give to God alone the divine honour that has been blasphemously claimed by Caesar. So, Jesus’ words could be heard as a revolutionary call to arms.

But is that what they were? Well, his hearers couldn’t tell because the phrase he chose to use could be understood in either way. They were amazed, the story tells us, and well they might be because they couldn’t be sure which way his words were to be taken and, therefore, he had eluded their trap. Jesus told his followers to be wise as serpents and innocent as doves and he certainly modelled that approach here.

What can we learn from this? One thing we can see is that Jesus wasn’t trapped in the two camps of revolution or compromise that characterised the politics of his day. He was able to articulate a third way, an alternative kingdom, that countered oppression and that called for justice but which worked for these things through peaceful means. He calls us to do the same. To be people who challenge the oppressions and injustices of our day but with the tools of peace and not the weapons of war.

As a result of his approach, Jesus was a threat to all around him - to the Jewish zealots advocating violent uprising he was a threat because he called for peace; to the religious leaders working with the Roman oppressors, he was a threat because he challenged the hypocrisy of their position; and to the Roman authorities enforcing allegiance to Caesar, he was a threat because he called the Jewish people back to what should have been their sole allegiance, to God.

Because it is in the final part of Jesus’ phrase that we find the most radical of statements whichever way we interpret what he said. We are to pay God what belongs to God and, if God is the creator of all that we have including our lives themselves, then he is calling us to give everything to God. If God is God, then that means not just individual giving but corporate giving too, because everything that the state has has also been given to it by God. There is nothing that cannot be given back to God because everything that exists is ultimately a gift to us from God.

Everything that we have is a gift from God to be given back to him by being used, not for ourselves, but for others. What we have - our money, our time, our talents, our community, our environment - is entrusted to us by God to use wisely in countering injustice and caring for others and for our world. This principle applies to every aspect of stewardship - our time, our talents, our community involvement and our care of the environment. When we do so, like Jesus, we are wanting to see God honoured in thankful recognition of all that he has done in creating life and in countering injustice.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rev Simpkins - Sing Your Life.

The only hope for humanity

Here's the reflection I shared during today's lunchtime Eucharist for St Martin-in-the-Fields:

Desmond Tutu is someone whose life has been shaped by Jesus’ teaching to love your enemies as yourself. For Tutu, Christianity is the religion of the downtrodden and dispossessed in which everyone is equal in the eyes of God and those who follow Jesus are exhorted to love our enemies. He has said that, “It wasn’t easy to love your enemy when they were throwing us in prison or murdering us.” It is the most difficult of all doctrines, he says, but it offers the only hope for humanity.

I mention this because our Gospel reading (Matthew 10.34-11.1) seems to show a very different side to Jesus than that highlighted by Desmond Tutu. Here Jesus doesn’t appear to be saying, “love your enemies,” instead he says that he has not come to bring peace but a sword and that he came to make enemies of the members of families. What is going on here? Are we talking about the same person? Is there a contradiction in what Jesus was teaching? Do we have to make some kind of choice between the two? It all seems very confusing.

The important thing to be aware of in understanding these words of Jesus is that he was talking to his disciples about a mission that was specifically to the people of Israel. Jesus began his instructions to his disciples, as recorded in Matthew 10, by saying: “Do not go to any Gentile territory or any Samaritan towns. Instead, you are to go to the lost sheep of the people of Israel.” Everything that Jesus says in this chapter is in the context of that mission and when we understand that it makes a big difference to the way we understand what Jesus was saying here.

Jesus thought of his own people, the Jews, as being lost. They had moved away from God’s plans and purposes because they had not been bringing the light of God to the Gentiles. Instead, they had turned in on themselves and acted as though God was just a national God for themselves. What Jesus was about to do through his death and resurrection would blow that kind of thinking out of the water. As he said to the disciples in verse 18, they would, in future, be telling the Good News to both Jews and Gentiles. But, for now, before his death and resurrection Jesus sent his disciples only to their own people with the message that the kingdom of God – the day when Jews and Gentiles would come together to worship the one true God – was coming near. Jesus’ mission and ministry in Israel before his death was an opportunity for the people of Israel to come on board and be part of the new thing that God was doing in the world. But Jesus was realistic about the way many would react to this opportunity.

He knew that some would respond positively and embrace his message but that others would be violently opposed. His message would, therefore, bring division among the people of Israel. Some would accept and follow and others would be violently opposed. This is what he meant when he spoke about not bringing peace and the members of the family being divided. He was speaking specifically about the effect that his message, life, death and resurrection would have on the people of Israel.

We know from subsequent events that Jesus was right in his assessment of the situation. Jesus himself was violently opposed and killed by those who did not accept his message despite large numbers of Jews hearing and following him. The early Church was persecuted at the same time that it grew rapidly in numbers with both Jews and Gentiles becoming followers of Christ. Finally, Jerusalem itself was overrun by the Romans and the Temple, the focus of the Jewish faith at that time, was destroyed. That act meant that there could no longer be a solely national focus to the Jewish faith and the early Christians spread out from Israel even more widely as a result.

So Jesus, here, is speaking specifically about what would happen within the people of Israel as a result of his message and mission but he was not talking about the content of that message and mission. His message and mission was to bring the light and forgiveness of God to the whole world, both Jews and Gentiles; a message and mission of peace and reconciliation, not of violence and division. The Gentiles were viewed, at that time, as enemies of God’s people but Jesus was saying that God’s people should love their enemies and that God would bring all peoples into his kingdom. 

The good news of Jesus is peace, reconciliation and love for enemies, just as Desmond Tutu claimed and has practised. It is the reverse of violence and division but its effect in the Judaism of Jesus’ time and immediately after was division. Just as Jesus, the early Church and those like Desmond Tutu gave themselves wholeheartedly and peaceably to this mission despite the opposition and violence that they have encountered, so we must do the same as followers of Christ. That is what it means to take up our cross and follow in Jesus’ footsteps by living all out for the peaceful reconciliation of all peoples. As Desmond Tutu has said, to do so offers the only hope for humanity.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

James Whitbourne - A Prayer Of Desmond Tutu.

Tombs of the Kings

"The 'Tombs of the Kings' is the impressive necropolis that is located just outside the walls, to the north and east of Pafos town. It was built during the Hellenistic period (3rd century B.C.) to satisfy the needs of the newly founded Nea Paphos. Its name is not connected with the burial of kings, as the royal institution was abolished in 312 B.C., but rather with the impressive character of its burial monuments. The 'Tombs of the Kings' was the place where the higher administrative officers and distinguished Ptolemaic personalities as well as the members of their families were buried. The necropolis was continuously used as a burial area during the Hellenistic and Roman periods (3rd century B.C. - beginning of 4th century A.D.). There is sufficient evidence to support the fact that the first Christians also used the site for their burials, while at the same time the site constituted an endless quarry. Squatters established themselves in some of the tombs during the Medieval period and made alterations to the original architecture."

Photographing the site provided great scope for contrasts of light and shade, contrasting shapes (semi-circles and rectangles, in particular) and for seeing through a variety of openings, which made many of these images 'Windows on the world' photographs.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eurythmics - When Tomorrow Comes.

Why are we waiting?

Have you ever observed people waiting at a bus stop? Some people are entirely focused on the experience of waiting, constantly checking their watch to see how much time has gone by and how late the bus in question is in arriving. Others take the opportunity to look around them to observe other people and the area in which they are waiting, perhaps to notice things that they would not otherwise see. Which, I wonder, are you most like?

Many things in our world have become instant. Today we can connect to people, information and misinformation with a few mouse clicks in a way that was simply not possible a few years ago. But we shouldn’t assume that such changes make us any wiser or that the benefits we can gain by waiting have been eradicated by the speed with which our society moves.  

Hebrews 11. 1 - 2 tells us that:

“To have faith is to be sure of the things we hope for, to be certain of the things we cannot see. It was by their faith that people of ancient times won God's approval.”

In other words, faith is about waiting, and Abraham, who we heard about in our Old Testament reading (Genesis 17. 1 – 7, 15, 16) is held up in Hebrews 11 as a hero of faith precisely because he was someone who waited:

“It was faith that made Abraham obey when God called him to go out to a country which God had promised to give him. He left his own country without knowing where he was going. By faith he lived as a foreigner in the country that God had promised him. He lived in tents, as did Isaac and Jacob, who received the same promise from God. For Abraham was waiting for the city which God has designed and built, the city with permanent foundations.

It was faith that made Abraham able to become a father, even though he was too old and Sarah herself could not have children. He trusted God to keep his promise. Though Abraham was practically dead, from this one man came as many descendants as there are stars in the sky, as many as the numberless grains of sand on the seashore.” (Hebrews 11. 8 – 13 GNB)

“Each one of these people of faith died not yet having in hand what was promised, but still believing. How did they do it? They saw it way off in the distance, waved their greeting, and accepted the fact that they were transients in this world. People who live this way make it plain that they are looking for their true home. If they were homesick for the old country, they could have gone back any time they wanted. But they were after a far better country than that — heaven country. You can see why God is so proud of them, and has a City waiting for them.” (Hebrews 11. 13 – 16 The Message)

Abraham waited and was commended for his faith being held up as an example for all of us who come after him. Why? We can ask the question in the song traditionally sung by those waiting in queues - why are we waiting?

W.H. Vanstone is a theologian who has written particularly profoundly about the experience and he gives at least two answers.

Firstly, he wrote, in The Stature of Waiting, that as we wait “the world discloses its power of meaning – discloses itself in its heights and its depths, as wonder and terror, as blessing and threat.” We become, so to speak, “the sharer with God of a secret – the secret of the world’s power of meaning.”

When we experience moments of seeing the world as “a wonderful terror or a terrifying wonder,” we become “a point at which something in the world is not only registered but understood, experienced, recognized.” Because we are in the world seeing it as it really is, the world no longer “merely exists” but is “understood, appreciated, welcomed, feared, felt”; “the world is received not as it is received by a camera or a tape-recorder but rather with the power of meaning with which it is received by God.”

Our role within creation is to articulate and name the meaning of the world which God has created. As James Thwaites has suggested the creation is crying out (Romans 8: 19 - 22):

“for its goodness to be fully realised and fully released. The creation cannot be good apart from the sons and daughters because we alone were given the right to name it; we are the image bearers who were made to speak moral value and divine intent into it. We were created to draw forth the attributes, nature and power of God in all things.”

The world and its meaning cannot be understood and appreciated quickly or lightly - it takes time and experience, observation and reflection – and so we wait. We wait like those people at the bus stop who take the opportunity to look around them to observe other people and the area in which they are waiting to notice things that they would not otherwise see.    

Vanstone also wrote in Love's Endeavour, Love's Expense: “So it is with the love of God. For the completion of its work, and therefore its own triumph, it must wait upon the understanding of those who receive it. The love of God must wait for the recognition of those who have power to recognise … Recognition of the love of God involves, as it were, the forging of an offering: the offering is the coming-to-be of understanding: only where this understanding has come to be has love conveyed its richest blessing and completed its work in triumph.”

God waits for us; waits for our recognition, understanding and response to his love. His love is written in to his creation and his purposes are being worked out through history. Paul writes in Romans 1. 19 & 20 that:

“the basic reality of God is plain enough. Open your eyes and there it is! By taking a long and thoughtful look at what God has created, people have always been able to see what their eyes as such can't see: eternal power, for instance, and the mystery of his divine being.”  

We need to come to a point where we see this for ourselves. Instead, as Paul writes in that passage from Romans, we have often trivialized ourselves into silliness and confusion so that there is neither sense nor direction left in our lives. We pretend to know it all, but are actually illiterate regarding the real meaning of life and the love of God within human history.

Recognition of the love of God involves, as Vanstone states, “the forging of an offering.” That is what Abraham did, he offered himself by obeying when God called him to go out to the country which God had promised to give him. He offered himself to God by leaving his own country without knowing where he was going and by living as a foreigner in the country that God had promised him. The offering which we make to God reveals the extent to which we have recognised and responded to his love. It is “only where this understanding has come to be” that love has “conveyed its richest blessing and completed its work in triumph.”

We are changed by this recognition and this response. For Abraham, this change was acknowledged by a change of name for him and Sarah and by the act of circumcision – outward signs of an inward grace. For us, as Christians, the outward sign of the inward grace is the act of baptism; the public declaration of faith in the forgiveness held out by Jesus and the enacting of that cleansing by dying to our old way of life as the water goes over us and rising to a new way of life as we emerge from under the water.

Why are we waiting? Like Abraham, we wait to see the meaning of world – its terror and wonder – and within this to see the love of God for us embedded in the beauty and fear of existence and threaded through human history. Why are we waiting? Both God and the creation are waiting for our full response to this love in creation; for us to fully offer ourselves to God, as Abraham did and as the greatest commandment (Matthew 22. 35 - 37) encourages us to do, with all our heart, with all our soul, and with all our mind.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Staple Singers - I'll Take You There.