July 12 NOTES FOR REFLECTION
Texts: Amos 7:7-15; Ephesians 1:3-14; Mark 6:14-29
Theme: Something here about "Speaking the Truth to the Powerful" comes to mind when reading the first lesson and the gospel. (A slightly more provocative choice might be "Having the Guts to Get On the Right Side".) But our second lesson raises a far more fundamental issue: who is the truly powerful – Jeroboam (or his toady, Amaziah), Herod, or God? You might consider "The Power Above All Powers" if you want to emphasise this wonderful passage from Ephesians. The image of the beheading of John might be one that offers an obvious point of contact with current affairs, but would require a certain delicacy. Perhaps "Who Remembers the Executioners?" might suffice.
Introduction. Amos gives us an obvious connection from last week to this. Just as Ezekiel was called to speak the truth to the Exiles even though none of them were likely tol listen to him, so now Amos has been commissioned to tell the people of the north that they are about to be captured and taken off into captivity, a message they certainly do not wish to hear. He is advised to "go back where you come from", a phrase still in use this week across the Tasman, although in slightly different circumstances. The second lesson is one of those glorious texts that contain the elixir of eternal life, a cure-all for all sicknesses real and imaginary. How little everything else seems when read alongside a passage such as this! And how vile the execution of John the Baptist strikes us by way of contrast, as we plunge from the heavenly realms back into the depths of our human nature. This week's readings together offer a real spiritual challenge: according to how we respond, we can either emerge strengthened in faith and hope in Christ, or become captive in a very dark place of despair and hopelessness.
Background. I'm pretty sure I invented a new word this week. I was brooding over the ongoing drama in Greece, and reading all sorts of well-informed people telling the Greeks they had to face facts and live in the real world. Most of those experts do not themselves live in the real world, at least not in the same real world that vast numbers of Greeks now live in. The Greeks, the experts seem to agree, are a nation of spendthrifts: through the good years they spent too much, borrowed too much, and earned too little. Now it's payback time – for the Greeks, that is. Spendthrifts need to learn the harsh lesson of financial prudence.
But if they borrowed too much to pay for their "lavish" lifestyle, does it not follow that someone somewhere lent them too much? If the borrowers are to be criticised for their profligate spending, should we not also criticise the lenders for their profligate lending? Hence the need for my new word: on the moral high ground there is no room for spendthrifts or lendthrifts. But, of course, no one is allowed to say anything to those profligate lendthrifts because they are the rich and powerful: the Greeks are the impecunious beggars at Dives' gate and should behave accordingly. While Yanis Varoufakis, the ex-Minister of Finance in the Greek Government, went too far, no doubt, in calling those he was negotiating with "terrorists", there can be little doubt that the financial bosses of Europe attempted to frighten the democracy out of the Greek people. All credit to them (pun intended) for standing firm. And there was a biblical note to all this: explaining the sudden resignation of Mr Varoufakis, the BBC correspondent in Athens said it was no surprise – the other countries had "demanded his head on a plate"!
Of far more depth and interest to me than the musings and mutterings of all these well-fed and well-paid experts was an article in the online edition of The Tablet (U.K.) of 7 July. It seems to be the text of a talk given on BBC Radio 4 by the Reverend Dr Giles Fraser, the Parish Priest of St Mary's, Newington in South London. He saw at the heart of the stand-off between Germany and Greece the very different view of salvation in the Western and Eastern Churches. Angela Merkel is the daughter of a Lutheran Minister. That church embodies the Western view that Christ's death on the Cross was the penalty to be paid for the sins of humanity. That the offence of sin against God had incurred a debt that had to be repaid to God before good relations could be re-established. The debt was so enormous that humanity could not pay it, so God sacrificed his own Son to pay the debt on our behalf. In broad terms, that understanding of salvation through Christ's death on the cross is at the heart of Western theology, and certainly has many adherents in the Anglican tradition.
But the Eastern Church, including, of course, the Greek Orthodox Church, has never accepted that atonement model of salvation. In the Eastern Church the emphasis is on Easter Day, not Good Friday. The Resurrection is the supreme demonstration of God's grace, freely given, without being "earned" by Jesus' self-sacrifice, or in any other way. It is all about God's extravagant love and forgiveness. (The Parable of the Unmerciful Servant makes exactly this point, of course.)
Dr Fraser's case is simply this. Angela Merkel represents all those who, informed by their Western Christian understanding, believe that debts are discharged by payment, not forgiveness. The Greeks, informed by their Eastern Christian understanding, believe that debts can be discharged by forgiveness. He doesn't argue that one view is right and the other wrong; he simply suggests that there may be a fundamental theological issue feeding into what most people assume to be an economic and political stoush. In other words he challenges us to stand firm and refuse to allow "religion" to be pushed out of the Public Square. Pope Francis is perhaps the most important role model for us to follow here; but it's encouraging to find that even a parish priest in an individual church somewhere in South London is doing his bit, too.
It's fashionable these days to play down the importance of belief in the Church. "Dogma" and "doctrine" are rude words to be avoided on pain of ridicule. Dr Fraser's article has shown us that what we believe about the economy of salvation may have a profound effect on how we treat those whom we believe to be in our debt. We owe him much.
Amos 7:7-15. The wonder is that Amos was offered "voluntary self-deportation" instead of something more like the fate suffered by John the Baptist. The kindly organisers of the Lectionary have protected us from verse 17, which is the heart of the message Amos had brought to the powerful elite in Israel (the Northern Kingdom, as it was then). It's not the sort of forecast anyone wants to hear. (We can imagine Stephen Joyce tut-tutting and warning against self-fulfilling prophesies, or Tim Groser assuring us that there is still plenty of time to turn things round.) Amaziah seems particularly concerned that Amos has focused his campaign around the religious heart of the Northern Kingdom, Bethel "for it is the king's sanctuary, and it is a temple of the kingdom". Is this an early hint of the "keep politics out of religion" movement? (The Occupy Movement – remember them? - can camp at Parliament but not at St Paul's.) Although Amaziah informs the King what Amos is up to, it seems that Amaziah continues to handle the matter himself. Perhaps he recognises that Amos may indeed be "under God's protection" and tries to send him away for his own good. But notice the implication that Amos may be being paid for his troubles: he tells him to go back to Judah and "earn your bread there". Amos' response is a simple one. None of this is my idea. I am not a prophet by choice or descent. I much prefer running a few sheep and looking after my sycamore trees (or "dressing" them as the NRSV has it.) But God has sent me here, and neither you nor I have any choice in the matter.
Taking It Personally.
- A week to reflect again on how much you allow your faith to influence your own "political" or "economic" beliefs. Take an issue such as "Global Warming": is that primarily a spiritual (religious) issue for you, or is it more of a political or economic one?
- You may have seen a documentary this week on bullying in the workplace. One of the issues was about standing up to the person in authority and challenging what you believe to be an abuse of power. Have you found yourself in that situation at any time?
- Who (if anyone) do you recognise as a prophet in this country?
- As you read a newspaper or watch the TV News each day this week, look for parallels between the news items and stories or teaching in the Scriptures. Use these parallels to shape your prayer about these topics.
Ephesians 1:3-14. The whole of chapter 1 is worth pondering over and over again. Marvel at the depth and breadth of the vision as well as the language used to describe it. Notice how it takes us beyond the limitations of time. Looking back, God has chosen us from "before the foundation of the world": looking forward, God has a plan which will come to fruition in the fullness (completion, end) of time. In the meantime we have already been blessed with "every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places". We have been "marked with the seal of the Holy Spirit". In the words of the old song, who could ask for anything more?
Taking It Personally.
- Imagine this whole passage like a warm deep bath of water, and immerse yourself in it. Soak in it. Enjoy the feel of it. Be cleansed by it. Relax, and let go of every tension in your mind and body. And be thankful!
- Select 7particular phrases or verses from this passage, one for each day of the week. Each day pray with your selected piece, pondering it, repeating it, mediating on it and praying with it. And be thankful!
- At the end of the week give yourself a double treat. Have another bath in the passage as a whole. Then read slowly and prayerfully through the rest of chapter 1. And be thankful!
Mark 6:14-29. A few weeks ago we reflected on the image of a house divided against itself. Here we see a terrible example of this. After the death of Herod the Great, who had been the puppet king of the whole of Palestine on behalf of the Romans, the territory had been carved up between four of his sons, including Herod Antipas (the villain in this story) and Herod Philip. Herodias was a granddaughter of Herod the Great and had married Herod Philip. However, Herod Antipas, while a guest in Herod Philip's home, had persuaded Herodias to leave her husband for Herod Antipas, whom she then married contrary to law. John the Baptist loudly objected, and paid the ultimate price for speaking the truth to those in power. Notice how this passage starts as an afterword, a sort of "Gross Designs Revisited" script. Here the emphasis is on the subsequent parlous mental state of Herod Antipas who is ravaged by guilt. In Jesus he sees John the Baptist revisiting him: we might say in his paranoia Herod is haunted by the memory of what he had done to John. At his birthday celebration he had been entranced by the erotic dancing of a young girl: the NRSV names her as his daughter Herodias, which seems a little confusing. More likely, she was the daughter of Herodias, said by Jewish historian, Josephus, to be called Salome. Whoever she was, the awful result shows human nature at its most base. Herod's lust came full circle, and John became collateral damage. The contrast between the Kingdom of God and human kingdoms could hardly be more stark.
Taking It Personally.
· A challenging passage for praying with the imagination. Put yourself in the role of a servant attending at the birthday bash. When you realise what is going to happen, what do you do? Do you speak up or acquiesce?
· What do you make of verse 29? What does it remind you of?
· Would you be prepared to give evidence at the inquest?
No comments:
Post a Comment