Confronting Violence

Matthew 13:24-43

All gardeners know weeds grow no matter how diligent you are. If you are a gardener like me, the weeds always seem to grow better than the plants I planted! A gardener’s main task it seems is to keep the garden clean of weeds.

In todays reading from Matthew we have a landowner who seems to have more than the normal outbreak of weeds amongst his wheat. And the weeds he is dealing with look like the real deal. Called darnel it is a wild wheat like weed that replicates the real wheat. Weeding it out as it grows is a risky task. What is and what isn’t the real wheat? We won’t know until we go to harvest and then we wil sort it out.

Really? Isn’t it too late then? Does this sound like a Jesus who understood rural life or is it a parable from a later edition with a different purpose?

The Jesus Seminar scholars suggest the following: “The parable reflects the concern of a young Christian community attempting to define itself over against an evil world, a concern not characteristic of Jesus. Letting the wheat and weeds grow up together suggests the final judgment rather than agricultural practice.” [Five Gospels, 194]

And the parable itself seems to point in that direction:

40Just as the weeds are collected and burned up with fire, so will it be at the end of the age.41The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will collect out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, 42and they will throw them into the furnace of fire, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 43Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Let anyone with ears listen!

What we have here is another of a number of difficult passages pointing towards a violent end for those who are not of the true faith, the church. It is not our responsibility to judge others; God will do that and will condemn them to a furnace of fire. But don’t worry; we who are righteous will shine like the sun and escape the punishment of those who sit amongst us in this and other communities.

Are we comfortable with this image and language? How does this sit with us in a world where our understanding of people’s behaviour has been influenced by science, psychology and personal experience? Are we able to accept an image of another burning in a fiery furnace and not be challenged by the image of the God it portrays?

Perhaps we are today more comfortable with this concept of punishment than ever before. We live in a surveillance society where one of the fastest growing industries is the prison system; a society in which prison and detainment camps are accepted as part of our response to the plight of others (refugees etc) and where we are quick to condemn others by means of media and hearsay. Perhaps today we are more comfortable with the idea of a last judgement that will separate the wheat from the weeds as long as we are included in the wheat, than ever before.

There is also the fact that we may have become desensitised to the violence in our faith and our liturgy, a violence which reflected a different world view and a different cosmology. On the ABCs the Drum the archbishop addressed the issue of domestic violence and a research paper which stated that Christians from certain styles of Churches are more likely to commit violence on their partners. It was primarily a discussion on the doctrine of headship - males as heads of the household and women as being obedient to that headship. His response is that there will be an apology on this at General Synod if it passes a vote.

At the same time It is important we address the violence in our liturgy and the language of sacrifice and redemption we repeat each time we gather for worship. We need to ask how have we embedded and normalised violence as a symbol of Gods' (understood as male) action in the world and find ways to address this. Domestic and other types of violence are expressions of our acceptance of violence as a way of being in the world and, for the church, violence as an accepted part of Gods action in the world.

It is much bigger than headship.

Are we comfortable with images of eating the body and blood of Jesus, of God sending his son to die on the cross to make us better, of Jesus as the sacrificial lamb of God to be sacrificed because of our failure in order to bring about redemption and peace?

In discussion with many older people I hear things like; “Well, I cringe at some of the things I hear in church”, “I can’t believe any more in some of the stuff we say in our liturgy”, “I have moved on in how I understand what happens but I still like the form of our service” and more.

Or are we disturbed by such language because it does not depict the God of our experience or the one discovered by rational and critical reflection? Are we ready to explore new ways of taking the ideas expressed in the scriptures and our liturgy and begin to craft a new way of doing church that is relevant to a modern worldview?

Matthew was writing for a community in the midst of a battle to control the synagogue, a battle between traditional religion and the embryonic group who followed Jesus. Matthew was employing language which basically said, let us not try and identify who is a true follower of Jesus, let’s leave that up to God. In doing so he employed an image understand by those reading his words.

We are living in a very different time and with a very different understanding of how the world, and God, works.  Is the language of such as the Agnus Dei (which you may have noticed is not part of the 10am service book) relevant or does it take us back to an understanding of human sacrifice Abraham left behind when he decided to sacrifice the sheep instead of Isaac? Are these words and the story they tell the story of God that is your story?

Jesus, Lamb of God, have mercy on us.

Jesus, bearer of our sins, have mercy on us.

Jesus, redeemer of the world, grant us peace.

I spend much time with people who are wracked with guilt and shame, much if it seemingly imputed by words they have listened to over and over again in their church liturgy. Is it not time for a careful look at what we say simply because it is our tradition to say these words? Is it time to consider new images and options in order that what we know in our head is no longer in conflict with what we are asked to believe?

Now I know that this may be difficult for some, but the word acts and what we say influences how we see and accept what is happening in the world. Is our acceptance of the violence we see around us influenced by our acceptance of the apparent violence in our faith we attest to each week?

Perhaps it is time for us to begin the discussion on just what we need to be saying and how that reflects our informed understanding of God, faith and scripture. This is a subject our worship committee, like the wider Anglican Church here and overseas, is thinking about and we would be happy to hear your ideas and suggestions in writing.

Matthew’s Jesus poses us a modern challenge, to bring the message of the kingdom of God into sync with the time in which we live, just as he attempted to do to those he was representing at the beginning of the church. Amen.

Not Me!

Luke 19:1-10

Why do we like Zaccheaus but never want to identify ourselves with him and his ilk?

 

As kids growing up on a farm post WWII we loved to play war games. Near our house was a hillock full of granite boulders and broken craggy trees providing an ideal spot to build forts from which to recreate great imaginative battles. The problem was no-one wanted to be the baddy. Everyone wanted to be the goody. So we often ended up defended ourselves from imaginary enemies who threatened the safety of the world!

 

Nobody wanted to be or identified as the baddies then, and no one wants to do so when they grow up. We can easily recognise the failure and faults of others and easily draw a line between ourselves and “them”, because we always find a way to be seen to be a goody. We exaggerate our perception of ourselves as being good people and are often blind to our baser nature and our real selves. Rarely do we see the sin of others in our own actions, thoughts and words. We are always in the right.

 

When we read the gospel stories, such as Luke’s story about Zaccheaus, we are appalled at the elitist position of the Pharisees and take a stand next Zaccheaus, defending him from the nasty Pharisees. Yet Zacchaeus was a thief, a robber, a person who did indeed spend much of his time taking money from the poor to feed the rich – that is himself. He was no angel. He was indeed a villain.

 

I would suggest he would be someone we would rather not be seen with, let alone share a meal with. If he moved in next door we wouldn’t invite him over for a welcome drink. Zaccheaus was no good. Yet we defend him and not the Pharisees. We fail to see ourselves in the Pharisees or in the bad guy.

 

Jesus not just says hello but goes home with Zaccheaus. Zaccaheus makes a big statement about returning what he had taken, rather grandiosely, and Jesus pronounces salvation has been witnessed. Those standing by condemn both of them. They stand with neither Jesus nor the chief tax collector.

 

And this is too easily the default position we can take for ourselves, the place of immunity, untouched by faults exhibited by others unable to place ourselves among them. In an individualistic worldview, the fault always occur elsewhere. It is not I but you who does these things I abhor.

 

Along with this goes the act of accepting inappropriate behaviour from those who are apart of our inner circle or those we spend time with. We are blind to the fact that some around me, if not me, are behaving badly. We make excuses, allow things to go on unchecked and refuse to call out bad behaviour because they are ‘nice people’, ‘well intentioned’, ‘mean no harm’.

 

The church has found itself caught in this trap. Abuse of all kinds have been tolerated, ignored, excused with statements like these. We have found it difficult to recognise sin in ourselves and in others because we want to see all those around us as good people. Therefore we tolerate behaviour that would elsewhere be called out and dealt with as inappropriate.

 

Much of such behaviour is entrenched and requires deep and honest self reflection by individuals and by communities to change. It is painful, costly and lengthy. The tax collector makes a start in the euphoria of the moment but will have to actually put his words into costly and embarrassing action. He will have to admit to the extent of his inappropriate behaviour. There are no shortcuts.  He will have to confront people who are understandably angry, upset and very unforgiving yet that what it means to be saved in an ongoing manner. Salvation is a process and he will find the process difficult.

 

The church and us here at St Oswald’s are on a similar path. Due to the types of behaviours which have been allowed to occur in the past and continue to day, not just child abuse but the more subtle, and sometimes not so subtle manipulation of others to get our way, we are faced with making changes which protect and support all.

 

The Diocese has developed a comprehensive process for dealing with such issues and we will explore this more fully in January with a seminar on such. Until that time there will be several changes occurring around the parish to ensure the safety of all. For example, the parish centre will become the hub of parish life. All staff will work out of the parish centre to ensure people are supported. All appointments to discuss any issue with staff (vicar, secretary, organist or choir director) will be scheduled and held within the parish centre when the centre is open and staffed. A new approach to governance is being adapted for the parish to ensure we comply with best practice and the changes to the new Diocesan governance act.

 

These may seem cumbersome but are necessary because, whether we like it or not, not everyone we encounter is perfect, like we are. Like Jesus we recognise that the tax collector has to start somewhere on his process of redemption. Simply by recognising the tasks he needs to carry out he has taken the first steps towards salvation. Those around Jesus and the Zachheaus are yet to do so. They are still transferring their failures onto the baddy and holding fast to their righteousness.

 

The world outside the church is looking at us for the signs of accountability and repentance and until we are honest with ourselves and face up to our sins they will remain critical and sceptical of us.

 

So where do we start? Well, we could begin by:

 

• Being aware of why we do and say things to others;
• Being mindful of the impact our words and actions may have on others;
• Being mindful of personal space and boundaries;
• Thinking before we speak and ensuring what we say is appropriate for the person, time and place;
• Being prepared to honestly reflect on our motivations  - what is behind what we want to do?;
• Being mindful of the big picture and not just what we want to achieve?
• Being aware that we are to be concerned with our behaviour and not pointing the finger at another, the sin here of the bystanders.

 

Zaccheaus encounters Jesus and begins the long road back to redemption in his society. Whether he ever made that journey, we will never know. But Jesus endorsed his commitment to do so and his willingness to begin the process of deep personal assessment necessary. In AA, an important part of the process to sobriety is to write an inventory of all whom you have hurt and then to look at how you can set things right. It takes honesty, humility and great courage to do so. Zaccheaus had that ahead of him.

  

As we the church begins to put right what we have made wrong, as we as individuals in the church reflect on the role we have played and may continue to play in continuing inappropriate behaviours, we too have a long road ahead of us. Like Zaccheaus we can commit ourselves today to the necessary self awareness to make that possible. 

 

 

 

 

 

  

In Your Ears

Luke 4:11ff

We live in a world of words. Words come at us from every quarter, the radio, tv, conversations, advertising hoardings and more. We constantly have to make choices about what words we listen to, what words we respond and how to decide which words are worth our effort and which are not.

Human beings are wordy people. We write books, songs, poetry and propaganda. We believe intrinsically in the power of words. We use words to say I love you, I hate you , I don’t believe you and what’s for dinner; often without taking a breath. We pay millions of dollars each year to copy writers, advertising gurus and spin doctors to find the right words to entice, cajole and bully others into doing, buying or following what ever is the most expedient for us.

We use words to labels others, to excuse behaviours to convince others of the rightness of policies, programs and lies. We use words to designate who is in and who is out, who is acceptable and who is not and who are the reason for the situation we find ourselves in.

We understand that words do more than simply communicate an idea, that words are in fact the most powerful tool we have at our disposal. Martin Luther King, John F Kennedy, Winston Churchill, Gough Whitlam and Paul Keating were great orators who knew the power of the word to make a case for an idea, an idea that generated response and action. Powerful men, powerful words.

We may have once said ‘sticks and stones may break my bones, but names (words) will never hurt me’ but we now know this for the lie it was. Words hurt and words inflict, encourage, and incite harm beyond imagination.

Governor Lachlan Macquarie wrote in his Orders to Soldiers in 1816, ‘All Aborigines from Sydney onwards are to be mace prisoners of war and if they resist they are to be shot and their bodies hung from trees in the most conspicuous places near where they fall, so as to strike terror into the hearts of surviving natives.’ The consequences of that statement were felt across the colony up to the late 1800s.

Today we have refugees who arrive by boat labelled as illegal and placed in offshore detention (prison) camps for a decade, and in some cases more without recourse to the legal system, work or appropriate living conditions.

Words are not neutral and call from us the best and the worst, dependent upon who is using them, how they are used and what they are used for. Spend a week watching the commercial tv news and scan the transcript of the words used to introduce and describe each news story. You will be surprised at what you hear.

In today’s Gospel, those gathered in the synagogue, the house of meeting, were surprised by the words they heard, spoken by the living word of God – Jesus. Jesus was the word God spoke into the world to act out of the mystery of the Godhead. The idea of Jesus as the word is made clear to us by John in the prologue to his Gospel – “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ² He was in the beginning with God. ³ All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being.” Jesus was the creative word spoken at the beginning of all creation and as spoken word, was a verb, the word that brings action, doing, into life.

For those who read the Jewish scriptures there was no separation between the word and action. One was the result of the other. One called the other into being. Without a word, a saying, a name, nothing existed or would exist. There is no tree or variety of tree until we give it a name. There is no individual person until we have a name to call him or her. There is no emotion until we have a created a name for it.

Luke has Jesus introduce God’s mission plan, naming it very clearly and laying it baldly before his audience. The idea of God’s preference for the poor is based heavily on tis text. Yet it is not simply a statement of what has long been known by his listeners, the text he uses was one used by Isaiah many centuries before and would have been know by those listening. They would have nodded agreement and muttered their approval of the text of the day. They had heard it before as the readings from the Jewish scriptures were akin to our lectionary, following seasons and festivals with readings appropriate for each.

What surprised the listeners were the words he used just before he sat down. “Today this scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.” Or more literally ‘in your ears” and therefore in your knowing and acting.

It has been suggested that the text, written in the past tense, refers to something that has being and is to continue to have being. In other words, this has happened, it is not wishful thinking it is real, then, now and eternally. And you, having heard this are obligated to ensure it occurs. You have heard the word, you are give life to it, bring it into being, making real the words you have heard.

You and I are obligated to make real now what has already happened in the eternal scheme of things. What is real in the spiritual is to be real in the material.

No wonder they asked who he was and imply, how dare he impose such obligations on us? They began to look for reasons to sidestep their responsibilities, something Jesus returns to often in his dialogue with the religious leaders.

We live in a world where, according to recent Oxfam report, 61 people have between wealth equal to that of 50% of the world’s population or 3.7billion people. In 2013 there were 10.2 million people in prison with almost half in USA, Russia and China. In the last major study on homeless there were 100 million people homeless worldwide. Another study suggests that 35% of women worldwide suffer some form of domestic violence. Some 168 million children are caught up in child labour, over half of them in hazardous work.

It appears we are slow to put the word into action. Yet we are not exempt from the obligation to do so. As a result of hearing the will of God for the world it is up to us to make it real, as a nation, a church and individually.

How do we do this?

• ·      By being conscious of how we use words and labels to describe others, are we adding to the violence by the way we speak?
• ·      By critiquing the words we hear used in the media, by politicians and those who wish to control our actions and rejecting any language designed to coerce, manipulate or appeal to our baser emotions.
• ·    By being aware of words that appear rational and reasonable which are used to incarcerate, marginalise and enslave others such as progress, development, economies of scale and more.
• ·      By supporting words that are life giving and empowering such as rights, opportunities and respect for the dignity and life of each of God’s created words (creation) in the world.

These are broad suggestions. The task we share with Jesus is to discern the practical ways in which we can make them real. Jesus did it through obedience, dialogue, respect and experience.

“Today this scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.” Go and make it real. Amen.