Open Space At The Well

John 4:5-42

 

Today we have another long Gospel reading. And it is a reading chock full of theological, Christological and Trinitarian themes. It also tackles many of the social ills of both Jesus and modern-times – gender politics, relationships, racism, nationalism – these are just some of the ideas tossed around in this encounter at the well.

 

It is also integral to John’s project of connecting Jesus directly to God and to the key historical and theological themes of Jewish history and religion. Jesus is the living water intricately inter-related with God and the entire revelation of this historical drama – past, present and future are all to be found in him. Like God, Jesus is the centre point of the story, its beginning and end, and John goes to great lengths to get this mystical truth across.

 

What I would like to concentrate on is the space in which this story unfolds – at a well in the middle of the village where the woman is an outcast because she has a history of living with men and not being married to them. She is not a prostitute but a woman captured by the religious laws of the time and as a result living in a perceived sinful relationship. It is no surprise that John portrays her as feisty and astute, to be compelled to live such a lifestyle requires or ensures one develops a level of survival skills most ordinary people never do.  She has had to argue for her life on more than one occasion and she will again. No man dominates her. She is in charge of her life and will make the decisions and the arguments to ensure she continues to not only survive but thrive.

 

Jesus meets her in an open space. This is not a meeting that takes place behind closed doors or in a place that would give power to one or the other. It is not in her house or in a synagogue. It is in the square in the middle of the village near a well. It is a non-threatening environment one level in which both can speak freely. Perhaps its like a coffee shop or the old front bar in a pub. In both places people share far more openly than they do in the office, in the home of a stranger or on a bus. These are the open spaces where all feel safe to talk, discuss and occasionally argue.

 

The choice of space is important for us. How do we create a safe open space where we and others can communicate at the level of honesty and acceptance these two did? This is an important question if the church, you and I, are going to engage with those who are outside our building this morning. What could that open space look like – a garden, a café, a choir practice, a concert ? What does it require of us to engage in such an open space way? Are we sufficiently comfortable with ourselves and our understanding of ourselves that we can talk, be challenged and change our ideas just as Jesus and the woman did? Are we prepared to go into the centre of our village and have conversations like this one? And how do we do it with intention and not by accident? Jesus places himself in this space intentionally, he was loitering with intent, and when the opportunity for a full and frank discussion cam about he took it. Are we ready to do the same and go into the world with the intent to do so?

 

Jesus meets her out in the open. Jesus didn’t invite her to a special place to have this discussion, it happened when they both needed refreshments, he because  he was travelling, she because this was the safest time of the day for her to get water. They met at a spot where all could see what was going on and both risked the gossip and scuttlebutt of those who peered out from behind half closed doors, discretely pulled back curtains and those who accidentally had to go outside to get a better look. This was a controversial meeting between two controversial people in full view of the local media and, was no doubt, on the social media network almost instantly. But they had nothing to hide and were comfortable with the fact that their meeting would have an impact on others.

 

This sense of out in the open challenges us in the church who always want people to come inside – our building, our choice of space, our particular world view or theological position and away from the prying eyes and ears of others. Are we confident enough to have these controversial conversations in full view of others? To be able to sit down in places that are not our own and work through the possibilities of faith with others? Or do we always want to do it  in our safe space, on our terms, surrounding by people who believe as we do? It is a challenge the church has only intermittently taken up but must begin to consider if we are to remain as the living water in this world.

 

Recently I was asked to write a response to a prominent Australian’s viewpoint on indigenous recognition and treaty. When the draft was finished it was sent off to an aboriginal QC in Sydney for comment. He was blunt. We do not have to engage with people such as this was the answer. But I suspect we do for the sake of the cause and for the sake of the other person. And we need to do it out in the open, not in selected forums and meetings where the primary audience is people like ourselves. Jesus sets the example.

 

The chosen space is a prominent, critical community landmark – the well. Everybody has to go to the well at some time everyday. Water is the most important element after oxygen in our lives. You can last up to 3 weeks without food but only 3 days without water. Water is essential to our very existence. They meet at the well because the need for water does not discriminate –village elders and the outcast and marginalised and rabbis and the incarnate Son of God all have the same need and use the same well to fulfil that need.

 

Jesus is not subtle when he says whomever drinks from here will get thirsty again and again and again. You will never be satisfied. The inference is that no matter what your past is or what you need is it cannot be satisfied by material necessities, no mater how important they are. Jesus is pointing to a deeper need which can only be satisfied by a mystical and graced gift coming from the heart of God.

 

The well speaks of depth, of going deep within to discover the truth about self and about the mystery we call God. The well speaks of the never-failing supply of life lived openly around the mystical source of life. The well reminds us that we all have the possibility of engaging at this depth if we are but ready to let our bucket down and engage honestly, openly and critically with God and ourselves.

 Finally this story is not about the past, hers or the dispute between the chosen people of God and those excluded; it is not even a story about the present, hers or the history they were living; it is a story about the future, the unfinished possibilities for creation; for Jesus, the unnamed woman and all the creatures yet to be. This is a story of expanding space, the surge for more that drives the Jewish, Christian and creations story. It is about the mystical future place in which is hidden the kingdom of God we can not imagine. The Jesus story leads us into the unknown, a future of fulfilment and wonder we can not imagine but only grasp a glimpse of in the chaos around us. 

Yes this is an ordinary story about relationships, space and human need but one  full of deep truth, power and mystery, just as is the stories of each of our lives and of how we  live them in the centre of our village. It is time for the church and for those of use who find our vitality within the church to step out into the open, create the space for others to be safe and to begin the conversations that will fill us and them with the water of life in a future kingdom we only hear rumours about now. Amen

An Open Table - All Are welcome

Luke 15:1-32

 

Driving through south-western Victoria recently, I became aware, in a way I had not been before, of Australia as a fenced country. Ownership of the land is defined and marked out by fences, fences of all types, stone and rock, wood and wire, roads and rivers. It occurred to me that fences speak about where we place people in the geography of our country, the value we place upon them in our economy and the lingering presence of past definitions and practices.

 

Our gospel reading opens a window into the slurs and asides spat at Jesus by his detractors and opponents. ‘“This fellow welcomes sinners and eats with them.” In shame based societies proper conduct in public, keeping appropriate company and not keeping inappropriate company was all about keeping up appearances. You kept company with those of a similar status as yourself or made the effort to engage with those above or beyond your class. You did not keep company with those deemed to be below you – not consorting with the servants, slaves, prostitutes or drunks.

 

Table fellowship, whom you ate with, was the place this was most obviously evident. When people challenged Jesus about who he was with, it wasn’t a comment about his open and generous nature or his willingness to include everyone, it was about how radically he disregarded the sacred nature of table fellowship. Jenks suggests “the slander is more a marker of social conflict between Jesus and his opponents rather than an index of his personal values and conduct.’

John Dominic Crossan writes:

“In the first as in the twentieth century, a person might create a feast for society's outcasts. The could easily be understood even or especially in the honor and shame ideology of Mediterranean society as a benefaction and one of extremely high visibility. No doubt if one did it persistently and exclusively there might be some very negative social repercussions. But, in itself, to invite the outcasts for a special meal is a less socially radical act than to invite everyone found on the streets. It is that "anyone" that negates the very social function of table, namely, to establish a social ranking by what one eats, how one eats, and with whom one eats. It is the random and open commensality of the parable's meal that is its most startling element. One could, in such a situation, have classes, sexes, ranks and grades all mixed up together. The social challenge of such egalitarian commensality is the radical threat of the parable's vision. It is only a story, of course, but it is one that focuses its egalitarian challenge on society's mesocosmic mirror, the table as the place where bodies meet to eat. And the almost predictable counteraccusation to such open commensality is immediate: Jesus is a glutton, a drunkard, and a friend of tax collectors and sinners. He makes, in other words, no appropriate distinctions and discriminations. He has no honor. He has no shame.”

 

Jesus was pulling down fences and breaking the sacred nature of table and the rules set up to protect it. Jesus simply doesn’t recognise those rules and lives with little regard for social ranking in terms of who one eats with. One may in fact include many people from many different social rankings thus causing confusion about what is and is not acceptable.

 

Here is a principle worth considering  by the world and by the church.

 

Australia, we are told is a classless society, one in which everybody has equal opportunity to be well fed, well educated and to be happy. There are no privileged classes and there are no underprivileged classes in the telling of this story. Yet we know that this is not true. A recent article suggested that good looking students get better grades than not so good-looking children and we suspect this also applies to university entrance and job success. We know that if you go to a private school you will have better resources, better social networks and that more opportunities may indeed come you way. We know that certain suburbs and types of people are to be avoided if you wish to live amongst your own social class. Aspirational people seek to live closer to schools with a good academic record to give their children the best chance, value education and tutoring and avoid their children mixing with the wrong peers.

 

Social ranking matters. Symbols of social ranking matters, Houses in the right suburbs, children in the right schools, overseas holidays, right labels on clothes and the right badge on the care all matter, otherwise why would people incur great debt to achieve them

 

Once we have arrived at such social acceptance we avoid those we have left behind. We move on and begin to look for the next plateau in the social ranking game.

 

Jesus sets the challenge in this story. His behaviour is radical and anti aspirational. He spends time with those he likes, those he befriends, those who enable him to be the fully engaged human being he was. He is not stifled by societies expectations but takes social, intellectual and spiritual stimulation from the most interesting and alive people he knows, those without expectations and fences, those outside expectations and fences. He challenges us to let go of our dependence upon our class aspirations and become classless and at home with whoever we wish to share table with.

 

For the church this is another great taboo, who shares table with us? Is this life-giving table available to all or only to those who are like us, come from our class and share our world view? Over the recent years the church has had to, and continues to be challenged to redefine who is welcome, including slaves, non-whites, women gays, trans-genders, believers from other denominations and people of other faiths. What was once only a denominational practice, open only to those who believe like us, is now challenged by the diversity of our understanding of who are recognised as persons (slaves, indigenous,LGBTI people and women and children). Our Archbishop, in a press release Friday reminds us all to be open to the possibilities with in the upcoming plebiscite on marriage equality and that we, as reflective people, are to exercise our consciences on this matter.  Our church, the Anglican Church has had to face this because of its historical attachment to the establishment and has come rather late to practice a welcoming hospitality to all, at least to some degree.

Who is welcome at this table – there is no limitations based on class, gender or race; there is no fence built to keep people away. All are welcome. This is the church and the society Jesus speaks up for and challenges the table based social ranking of his time. This the church and society we are to speak up for and challenge the fences built to keep people in or out of our own safe places. Amen. 

The Good Samaritan in 2016

My mother-in-law would tell the story of being lost with a group of people in Adelaide. They had no idea where they were or how to get to the venue they were heading for. While they were standing on the side of the road in their Ascot finery a group of Harley Davidson riding bikies in full club colours rode by. Imagine their surprise when one broke ranks, turned around and roared to a stop in front of them. He said they looked lost, could he help? They said where they wanted to go and he gave them the directions. This story was told (often) to remind us not to judge the book by the cover. Help comes in many shapes and sizes. Knowing my mother-in-law, this was indeed a moving moment because one she would not normally have associated with, under any circumstances, helped her.

In the light of the outcome of our recent general election, it is more than appropriate todays gospel is the story of the Good Samaritan, an oxymoron for the audience in Luke’s story, nothing good comes out of Samaria!  Here was a despised person taking the central role in an object lesson on who is my neighbour and how to be neighbourly.

Those who were the obvious doers of good crossed to the other side, for no other reason than for the fear that what had happened to that unfortunate traveller may indeed happen to them, and no amount of doing good was worth putting self at risk. They were good, were deemed good and were responsible for doing good in their lives in other ways, in the temple, in their religion and in their practice. Somebody else would deal with this situation. It wasn’t their responsibility.

It is the question sitting at the back of our heads, or at least mine, how would I react in a similar situation? It is fine to do good when there is no risk, when the one we are doing good for is like us, shares our values and our lifestyle, but what about when it is a possible life threatening situation or the one needing our help is unlike us or is our enemy? Would I act as the Good Samaritan does? Would I do the right thing then?  I can never be sure of the answer.

As a country the recent election answers this. How do we respond? Not very well. We are more concerned with the protection of our lifestyle and safety. We have ignored those who are our neighbours and have prevented others from caring for them as well.

Our neighbours? Those without a country, those who seek to find a better place in this world, those who are homeless and unemployed, those who have their land and country taken away from them. These are our neighbours and we have supported policies and ideals which isolate, marginalise and persecute them through the continuing support of hard-line policies ranging from the One Nation rhetoric through to the mainstream parties strong borders and close the gap policies and more.

Luke’s Jesus says enough is enough. Our neighbour is our responsibility. Our neighbour relies on our neighbourliness for hope, life and a future. We cannot avoid this responsibility by pointing to all the good we do elsewhere if we cross to the other side and leave people stranded, victims of injustice and violence, to be violated again and again by our limited goodness.

Luke’s Jesus expands the Deuteronomy 6 definition of neighbour beyond the borders of a state (Jews and aliens living in the community) and spreads it out to include all, even the dreaded Samaritans. Neighbourliness is the hospitality we owe to all even at the risk of our own wellbeing.

It is also important to note the Samaritan was the first responder who placed himself at risk. After helping the traveller he took him to an inn and delegated e task of neighbourliness to the inn keeper. We do not have to stay involved for ever. This is a task to be shared.

Luke’s Jesus equates neighbour with the one who should act and the one who needs our action. Here is the discarding of duality – the doer and the one for whom it is done are the same one. This is not charity. Charity is the embedding of power and the embedding of hopelessness. The one being done for is seen as a lesser being because they need someone to help them.

For Luke’s Jesus, we are one with, same as, united with the one we assist. We are aware we may in fact require them to be neighbourly to us at some time. We are vulnerable, frail, ordinary human beings whose life circumstances may very well mean we are laying by the road side waiting for a neighbour to wander by.

Thomas Merton writes:  “A life is either all spiritual or not spiritual at all. No man can serve two masters. Your life is shaped by the end you live for. You are made in the image of what you desire.”

How do we answer Merton? What is the end we live for? How is our lives shaped by that end? Are we indeed shaped by a spirituality grounded in neighbourliness or are we living simply for the immediate, the safety of the moment, out of fear of the other? Merton is direct, as is Jesus: “You are made in the image you desire”. Luke’s Jesus responds with, “Which of these three, do you think, was a neighbour to the man who fell into the hands of the robbers?” He said, “The one who showed him mercy.” Jesus said to him, “Go and do likewise.”

Merton and Jesus reminds us, just as the duality of helper and the one needing helps is false thinking, so is the duality of spiritual and secular. You either act out of your spiritual experience or you don’t, you either remain faithful to the faith you attest to here at the Eucharistic table or you seek only your own wellbeing.

It is at the Eucharistic table we celebrate, not only the breaking open of the the life of Christ, but the breaking open of our own lives to the other, to the neighbour and it requires us to be neighbourly at all times, especially with those so unlike us we must exhibit the obedience that took Jesus to the cross.

In our church, in our country we are called to be inclusive, welcoming, empowering, giving, at the risk of losing all we hold dear. The growing world wide epidemic of isolationism by states is an epidemic contrary to the growing out into the world of the neighbourliness essential to the Christian faith and contrary to the example of Jesus.

How do take on the role of neighbour? By becoming, as we concluded last week, open-hearted, open-minded and open handed. Critically so. By this I mean we must critically reflect on our practice, how we engage with, talk about and listen to those who need our neighbourliness. We must challenge our conventional thought, leave behind our intellectually lazy acceptance of seemingly acceptable thoughts and behaviours and begin to wrestle with the reality in which we live.

Jesus engages the lawyer in this deep reflection. We do not know what conclusions the lawyer came to but we know he was challenge to move beyond what was the normal wisdom. It is time for such deep reflection by all of us, individually, as a church and as a nation if we are going to discover the Good Samaritan within.