The thing I'm noticing as I read these last few chapters of Matthew is a feeling, and it's a little claustrophobic, a little intrusive. At the beginning of Matthew, the story starts at a point (Nazareth) and expands across the whole region, following Jesus and the disciples as they travel. Now it's starting to zoom back in, the scope of the story is getting smaller. In chapter 26 especially things get intense and start to happen quickly; I feel like a lens has zoomed in on Jesus and I'm noticing lots of small details.
Another thing I sense about these chapters is a call to loyalty: are you in or are you out? It's time to make up your mind. Are you ready to go, with plenty of oil (25:1-13)? Do you know what to do (25:14-30)? Have you learned what I've been teaching you, and have you been practicing it (25:31-46)? Saying you believe is not enough; Jesus has come to make the world new, to transform God's people and the very way we live together--does it appear that you are being transformed?
Chapter 26 continues episodes of dis/loyalty: The Roman establishment (chief priests, elders, high priest--although they are Jewish religious officials, they are also pawns of Rome) is not loyal; a nameless woman who anoints Jesus is; Judas is not; Peter swears he will be; Jesus himself is not sure about the whole thing.
Q: Is there a difference between loyalty and faithfulness when it comes to our relationship with God? If so, what's the difference? Is one more important than the other?
Notice the sequence of events in this chapter, and the sense that we are "zooming in" on the climax of the story. In one chapter, the plot to arrest Jesus gets formed (v. 4), a woman anoints him in an acceptance of his death (6-13), Judas agrees to betray (14), they celebrate Passover and the shift to communion is commanded (26-29), the disciples declare their loyalty, they go to Gethsemane, take a nap while Jesus prays, Judas kisses him, he's arrested, he heals an ear, the disciples flee, Jesus is interviewed by Caiaphas and the elders and convicted, and Peter denies him. Wow. There is no time for reflecting on events; only for reporting them.
The church year sets a rhythm for us to feel the story in this way. At this time, from Pentecost to Advent, we are in "ordinary time". We hear stories of what Jesus was doing in his "ordinary time". They are slower, stretching out over these lazy months, allowing us to keep pace with him. But in Lent, and particularly Holy Week and the "triduum" (three days, Maundy Thursday, Good Friday, Holy Saturday) there's this intense focus on just a few hours of Jesus' life, and death. We zoom in on this story, the way the story zooms in for us. We have been taught to focus on "Jesus died for our sins", but there's so much more to the story. What about the disciples and their loyalty, or lack thereof? What about the Romans, and the deals made between the government and the religious establishment? And most importantly, what about the rest of the story? For me, the important piece is not why Jesus died (for my sins, or because of the Romans); but that God did not let that death be the end of Jesus' influence, reign, and presence in creation. But, this isn't supposed to be a sermon, and we haven't got to that part yet... so tune in again next week.
Thursday, August 25, 2011
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Bible Study: Matthew 23-24
As you continue your reading in Matthew, are you getting a sense of Jesus demonstrating and contrasting what IS faithful and what is not? Jesus redefines, in some ways, what it means to be faithful or obedient, what it means to keep the law.
In ch. 23, for example, Jesus rages against the “scribes and Pharisees”, who probably cannot be faulted in their observance of the law, in a technical sense. Jesus knows that the law is given to provide a framework within which God’s justice is practiced in God’s creation for God’s people. The piety of the scribes and Pharisees (some, not all, of them) has been reduced down to a mere following of the letter of the law, without meaning. The law has become an end in itself for them, not a means to the greater goal of justice. And so Jesus chastises them with this list of seven “Woe!”s , and almost makes fun of their religious accessories (phylacteries and fringes)—which he may himself wear.
Q: can you think of an example of “official religion” or the institution following a practice or declaring a decree that makes it less credible, and consequently, makes God less credible? How do we know where the line is between “variety of religious expression” and unfaithfulness that may discredit religion/God? Whose responsibility is it to monitor that line or to call those who cross it to account?
Vs. 37-39 Jesus’ lament to the city, “Jersualem, Jerusalem!”, conjures in me Jonah’s question when he is sent to Ninevah: “why would you want me to go there? They won’t listen.” And here we see a feminine image of God: the mother hen who gathers the chicks safely under her wing. Yet Jerusalem has been the stray, chirping around unprotected, thinking itself invincible.
As we near the end of this gospel, we enter into what I think of as “the last chance”—there’s more for Jesus to teach and more for them to learn, and he’s trying to cram it all in. His speeches get longer and he moves around less. He uses many metaphors to talk about the change to come, and refers to Hebrew stories and scripture.
It is interesting to remember that the gospel of Matthew was probably written down between 50-60 c.e., and the temple was destroyed in 70 c.e. As Roman oppression increased to the point of revolt, the people increased their hope that Messiah would come and deliver them. They probably “saw”or witnessed many who seemed trustworthy but turned out to be false. They felt the pain of those birth pangs, of hoping with all their being for deliverance from their situation, for a new day that God would usher in. The language here is very strong and very full; these are real images and some of these things are happening right around them.
Q: these are some of the more frightening images of how the kingdom of God breaks in. Do you find them compelling? Helpful? Do they make you want to “straighten up your act” or give up? In what tone do you hear Jesus saying them: warning, frightened, matter-of-fact? Do you find yourself “making the cut” but worrying about others who might not? Will the coming of the Son of Man be a good thing, or maybe not?
Keep in mind the larger context of the gospel of Matthew: he is demonstrating to a Jewish audience that Jesus is Jewish enough to qualify as the Messiah. In a time of rebuilding the community--literally, after the revolt--he is advocating that the Way of Jesus is the best way to be religious. Remember when we read just a paragraph at a time, it's easy to misunderstand or misinterpret the point of the whole story.
Friday, July 22, 2011
Who We Are
Well, I missed an opportunity today.
Someone asked, "What kind of church is this?"
It's a fair question, sure enough. But I immediately went into defining over and against, who we are not, describing why and how we're not like some other Christian groups.
And I'm just tired of it--the "negative" or defensive approach to defining who we are. I just finished reading a book* about this "heaven and hell" theology that has defined American Christianity for centuries, how it's just part of the fabric of society and has crept into teaching and preaching when we don't really mean it (some DO really mean it, but some of us don't believe it).
I really, really like having so many denominations. Sure, it can be tricky to navigate around so many ideas and hopes and dreams and interpretations, with proper respect, language, and finesse. But I am glad there are so many ways to get to God, because I think more people can get to God. But I, for one, haven't done a great job of highlighting the way I prefer. Traditional, progressive, mainline Protestantism doesn't get much attention, yet here we are with something very positive and life-giving to offer.
So, the result of this missed opportunity today is my elevator speech. I've been thinking about it for years, literally years--what's my brief answer to the question, what would I tell someone about why this is important, in the time it takes to ride up an elevator?
We are a progressive community that focuses on God's love for all people and how we partner to do God's work in God's world.
That's it, for now. Not defensive, not full of theological jargon, not an attempt at full conversion--just a simple, positive statement that hopefully will provoke further conversation.
What's yours?
*the book is A Christianity Worth Believing by Doug Pagitt. Pretty good read.
Someone asked, "What kind of church is this?"
It's a fair question, sure enough. But I immediately went into defining over and against, who we are not, describing why and how we're not like some other Christian groups.
And I'm just tired of it--the "negative" or defensive approach to defining who we are. I just finished reading a book* about this "heaven and hell" theology that has defined American Christianity for centuries, how it's just part of the fabric of society and has crept into teaching and preaching when we don't really mean it (some DO really mean it, but some of us don't believe it).
I really, really like having so many denominations. Sure, it can be tricky to navigate around so many ideas and hopes and dreams and interpretations, with proper respect, language, and finesse. But I am glad there are so many ways to get to God, because I think more people can get to God. But I, for one, haven't done a great job of highlighting the way I prefer. Traditional, progressive, mainline Protestantism doesn't get much attention, yet here we are with something very positive and life-giving to offer.
So, the result of this missed opportunity today is my elevator speech. I've been thinking about it for years, literally years--what's my brief answer to the question, what would I tell someone about why this is important, in the time it takes to ride up an elevator?
We are a progressive community that focuses on God's love for all people and how we partner to do God's work in God's world.
That's it, for now. Not defensive, not full of theological jargon, not an attempt at full conversion--just a simple, positive statement that hopefully will provoke further conversation.
What's yours?
*the book is A Christianity Worth Believing by Doug Pagitt. Pretty good read.
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Bible Study: Matthew 15 & 16
As we read through the gospel of Matthew this summer, I am noticing the movement of Jesus and the disciples: they are in the country, in the city, on the road, in the synagogue, outside, inside, at the sea, on the sea. Jesus is covering a lot of territory and crossing a lot of borders, in terms of geography, theology, tradition, and ethnicity.
Here in chapter 15 Jesus' ministry and purpose are expanding. In his conversation with the Pharisees and scribes (15:1-20)he expands the purpose of an old tradition and the understanding of a commandment. In the confrontation with the Canaanite woman (15:21-28) his own purpose is expanded, as she challenges him to include Gentiles in the vision of the kingdom of God. His healing ministry expands through a new crowd of people, and seven loaves of bread expand to feed more than four thousand people.
Q: how have you seen God expanding, at work in the world? Why is it hard to see, why do we miss it so often, when we believe it is true?
In chapter 16 the flow seems to reverse, as Jesus begins to focus his teaching, at least to his disciples, on finer points. "Who do people say that the Son of Man is?" he asks in verse 13. The disciples have watched all this healing and feeding and arguing about the law, all things that define Jesus; so what does it mean, he wants to know. How are they processing this ministry in which they are taking part? "Who do YOU say that I am?" This is the "elevator speech"--how do we talk about our faith as a response to a question? How will the disciples respond when they are asked, or attacked, about following Jesus? The rest of the chapter becomes a warning about difficulties ahead, including Jesus' own arrest and death. It's time to have an answer ready.
Focusing on a detail at the expense of the expansive story of God's love can be very dangerous, and has been used for destruction, war, and abuse. Yet Jesus asks a basic question, that needs a basic answer, and the answer will likely be different for each person. A faithful answer, I believe, is based on an understanding of and love of the larger story. Our "elevator speech" is not a simplistic reduction of what God is up to, but rather a starting point for a larger conversation.
Q: Who do YOU, reader, say that Jesus is? Why do you say that? DO you say that (have you told anybody)?
Q: What does Jesus mean by taking up a cross to follow him (16:24)? How have you done this in your life? Was it worth it?
Reading through Matthew is starting to feel a bit like following Billy, from The Family Circus cartoon, to the mailbox. But we've learned a lot along the way, both what to do and what not to do. Jesus, the way, is showing us the way.
Here in chapter 15 Jesus' ministry and purpose are expanding. In his conversation with the Pharisees and scribes (15:1-20)he expands the purpose of an old tradition and the understanding of a commandment. In the confrontation with the Canaanite woman (15:21-28) his own purpose is expanded, as she challenges him to include Gentiles in the vision of the kingdom of God. His healing ministry expands through a new crowd of people, and seven loaves of bread expand to feed more than four thousand people.
Q: how have you seen God expanding, at work in the world? Why is it hard to see, why do we miss it so often, when we believe it is true?
In chapter 16 the flow seems to reverse, as Jesus begins to focus his teaching, at least to his disciples, on finer points. "Who do people say that the Son of Man is?" he asks in verse 13. The disciples have watched all this healing and feeding and arguing about the law, all things that define Jesus; so what does it mean, he wants to know. How are they processing this ministry in which they are taking part? "Who do YOU say that I am?" This is the "elevator speech"--how do we talk about our faith as a response to a question? How will the disciples respond when they are asked, or attacked, about following Jesus? The rest of the chapter becomes a warning about difficulties ahead, including Jesus' own arrest and death. It's time to have an answer ready.
Focusing on a detail at the expense of the expansive story of God's love can be very dangerous, and has been used for destruction, war, and abuse. Yet Jesus asks a basic question, that needs a basic answer, and the answer will likely be different for each person. A faithful answer, I believe, is based on an understanding of and love of the larger story. Our "elevator speech" is not a simplistic reduction of what God is up to, but rather a starting point for a larger conversation.
Q: Who do YOU, reader, say that Jesus is? Why do you say that? DO you say that (have you told anybody)?
Q: What does Jesus mean by taking up a cross to follow him (16:24)? How have you done this in your life? Was it worth it?
Reading through Matthew is starting to feel a bit like following Billy, from The Family Circus cartoon, to the mailbox. But we've learned a lot along the way, both what to do and what not to do. Jesus, the way, is showing us the way.
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Bible Study: Matthew 9 & 10
In the Sermon on the Mount, chapters 5-7, Jesus teaches—a lot of information. In chapter 8, he is on the move, and here in chapters 9-10 he continues moving about the countryside, covering a lot of territory (by walking, remember!) and doing a wide variety of things.
The main things that are happening in these chapters are healing and calling of the disciples. In both of these things, there is a distinction, a setting apart: the kinds of things Jesus does in his ministry are different from what religious leaders have traditionally done, different from what the scribes and Pharisees do.
1. Jesus is a healer, and a very comprehensive one. Jesus heals leprosy, fever, paralysis, demon possession, hemorrhage, blindness, muteness, those near death, and “every disease and every sickness”. Without medical training or equipment, Jesus can make people whole with just a word and a touch.
Q: Do you think this catalog of Jesus’ healing feats is meant to convince us that God can cure the same things among us? Or does it show us the breadth of God’s care, how deep and broad is the arena in which God does wonders?
Many of these stories include an aspect of spiritual or communal healing that we may miss, in addition to the physical healing. Skin conditions and ailments involving blood were violations of purity laws in Jewish culture, which resulted in the ostracizing of those who suffered them. By restoring the skin or healing the wound or condition, Jesus also repaired the social and legal gap, enabling the person to return to community, including living among family, working in their trade, and participating in worship.
Q: How has Jesus healed you, physically, spiritually, or emotionally?
2. Jesus gathers people to work with him, and seems to be fairly lax in his standards. He does not invite the scribes and Pharisees--religious leaders—to do religious work with him. He invites ordinary people to be holy together, to be God’s presence in the world however they can do that. The fishermen bring what they know (those nets and boats get used a lot!), the tax collector brings what he knows, they learn together and do more things. But they aren’t just squeezing this work in on the side—Jesus sets them apart for a specific purpose, to follow him, not only where he goes but HOW he lives, works, moves, interacts in the world.
Q: What would Jesus ask you to “bring along” for ministry?
The “setting apart” is quickly noticed: the disciples and Jesus are criticized for doing things their own way. They don’t wash right, they don’t eat with the right people, they don’t follow the rules; they’re not very popular but they are very noticeable. In chapter 10, Jesus begins to warn them that the going will get rough, but it’s time to get going, nonetheless.
Q: What things do you do because of your faith that are not popular or are misunderstood by others?
Q: What “rules” does our church/tradition have that are more a hindrance than a help for God’s mission?
The main things that are happening in these chapters are healing and calling of the disciples. In both of these things, there is a distinction, a setting apart: the kinds of things Jesus does in his ministry are different from what religious leaders have traditionally done, different from what the scribes and Pharisees do.
1. Jesus is a healer, and a very comprehensive one. Jesus heals leprosy, fever, paralysis, demon possession, hemorrhage, blindness, muteness, those near death, and “every disease and every sickness”. Without medical training or equipment, Jesus can make people whole with just a word and a touch.
Q: Do you think this catalog of Jesus’ healing feats is meant to convince us that God can cure the same things among us? Or does it show us the breadth of God’s care, how deep and broad is the arena in which God does wonders?
Many of these stories include an aspect of spiritual or communal healing that we may miss, in addition to the physical healing. Skin conditions and ailments involving blood were violations of purity laws in Jewish culture, which resulted in the ostracizing of those who suffered them. By restoring the skin or healing the wound or condition, Jesus also repaired the social and legal gap, enabling the person to return to community, including living among family, working in their trade, and participating in worship.
Q: How has Jesus healed you, physically, spiritually, or emotionally?
2. Jesus gathers people to work with him, and seems to be fairly lax in his standards. He does not invite the scribes and Pharisees--religious leaders—to do religious work with him. He invites ordinary people to be holy together, to be God’s presence in the world however they can do that. The fishermen bring what they know (those nets and boats get used a lot!), the tax collector brings what he knows, they learn together and do more things. But they aren’t just squeezing this work in on the side—Jesus sets them apart for a specific purpose, to follow him, not only where he goes but HOW he lives, works, moves, interacts in the world.
Q: What would Jesus ask you to “bring along” for ministry?
The “setting apart” is quickly noticed: the disciples and Jesus are criticized for doing things their own way. They don’t wash right, they don’t eat with the right people, they don’t follow the rules; they’re not very popular but they are very noticeable. In chapter 10, Jesus begins to warn them that the going will get rough, but it’s time to get going, nonetheless.
Q: What things do you do because of your faith that are not popular or are misunderstood by others?
Q: What “rules” does our church/tradition have that are more a hindrance than a help for God’s mission?
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
Bible Study: Matthew 5 & 6, part 3
This section continues a pattern from 5:17-38 where Jesus radicalizes the law. Yet this section also represents a shift as Jesus turns from the internal relationships of the alternative community toward how the community will relate to others, especially hostile others. Jesus turns the community toward the abusive others and suggests strategies that will break the cycles of violence perpetuated by their enemies while asserting the community’s own dignity as children of God.
The title of this section is Holy Resisting, not Spineless Acquiescing! Walter Wink has done some fine work on the meaning of these instructions.# Jesus assumes in this section that his audience consists of those being harmed whether by being struck, sued, or forced by someone else. How might they respond to the violence being perpetrated against them?
The first issue involves being struck. The law had allowed “an eye for an eye”. This allowance did not originally serve as a rallying cry for vengeance as it does today. This law placed limits on retribution. An eye for an eye meant one could not, for example, take another’s life for striking out their eye. Punishment could be commensurate with the offense and no more. But Jesus radicalizes this command as he has with the others. Jesus suggests responses to Roman violence. Acts of violence carry symbolic value that sometimes surpasses the physical pain involved. Slapping someone less powerful with the back of the hand would not hurt physically as much as a fist to the cheek would, but it carried a psychological element that put “lesser” people in their place. Jesus describes someone who is backslapped since they are struck on the right cheek in a culture that only used the right hand in public interaction [since the left had unclean functions.] When Jesus says, “Turn the other cheek”, he calls for a situation where one stands up to one’s enemy and requires him to stop the violence or to at least strike one as “an equal” [right hand fist or slap to the left cheek.].
We too assign different meaning to different acts of violence. We respond differently to a parent who spanks her five year old than we would to one who punches her. When I ask a male student if he would rather receive a knock out punch at a campus party or have an enemy take him over the knee and spank him in front of everyone, his answer is clear. Though the physical pain is less, the shame carried in the spanking makes the punch preferable. Likewise in Jesus’ day violent acts could carry shame. In one legal code that Wink describes, an unprovoked punch by one of equal status is subject to a fine of four days worth of wages; but a slap levies a fine that costs 200 days’ wages and a backslap even twice that amount! Jesus says that in an undesirable situation where someone, probably a soldier, tries to put people in their place, they should stand up and reassert their dignity without themselves resorting to violence.
Jesus raises a similar strategy in two other cases. If someone rich enough to loan money takes them to court demanding their last resort collateral [their coat] then they should let that person know how destitute he leaves them by handing over every stitch of clothing that they have on! He must see how he robs them of everything. If a soldier conscripts them to carries his pack to the Roman limit of one mile, then keep carrying it a second mile so that the soldier must beg for it back or suffer the wrath of his superiors who know that the populace can only be abused so far before they begin to rebel. [Soldiers who forced peasants beyond the official limits might suffer loss of pay, food, or rank. Most often they would be publicly whipped.]
In each of these examples Jesus describes ways to challenge the way things run by refusing to accept that which seeks to humiliate! The alternative community refuses to accept their dishonoring by the powerful, knowing that God has declared them blessed! But they also do not take up weapons of retaliation. They offer holy resistance rather than violent resistance.
The remainder of this section speaks of the need to love enemies. The faithful resisters will respect the humanity of their abusers and not stoop to their level. Jesus demands that their love move beyond the community in solidarity. They must have respectful regard of all people without discrimination since God is perfectly consistent in caring for all people. The justice that they hungered and thirsted for is this greater justice for all people. In their quest to care they must be perfectly consistent, like God, in caring for all!
The title of this section is Holy Resisting, not Spineless Acquiescing! Walter Wink has done some fine work on the meaning of these instructions.# Jesus assumes in this section that his audience consists of those being harmed whether by being struck, sued, or forced by someone else. How might they respond to the violence being perpetrated against them?
The first issue involves being struck. The law had allowed “an eye for an eye”. This allowance did not originally serve as a rallying cry for vengeance as it does today. This law placed limits on retribution. An eye for an eye meant one could not, for example, take another’s life for striking out their eye. Punishment could be commensurate with the offense and no more. But Jesus radicalizes this command as he has with the others. Jesus suggests responses to Roman violence. Acts of violence carry symbolic value that sometimes surpasses the physical pain involved. Slapping someone less powerful with the back of the hand would not hurt physically as much as a fist to the cheek would, but it carried a psychological element that put “lesser” people in their place. Jesus describes someone who is backslapped since they are struck on the right cheek in a culture that only used the right hand in public interaction [since the left had unclean functions.] When Jesus says, “Turn the other cheek”, he calls for a situation where one stands up to one’s enemy and requires him to stop the violence or to at least strike one as “an equal” [right hand fist or slap to the left cheek.].
We too assign different meaning to different acts of violence. We respond differently to a parent who spanks her five year old than we would to one who punches her. When I ask a male student if he would rather receive a knock out punch at a campus party or have an enemy take him over the knee and spank him in front of everyone, his answer is clear. Though the physical pain is less, the shame carried in the spanking makes the punch preferable. Likewise in Jesus’ day violent acts could carry shame. In one legal code that Wink describes, an unprovoked punch by one of equal status is subject to a fine of four days worth of wages; but a slap levies a fine that costs 200 days’ wages and a backslap even twice that amount! Jesus says that in an undesirable situation where someone, probably a soldier, tries to put people in their place, they should stand up and reassert their dignity without themselves resorting to violence.
Jesus raises a similar strategy in two other cases. If someone rich enough to loan money takes them to court demanding their last resort collateral [their coat] then they should let that person know how destitute he leaves them by handing over every stitch of clothing that they have on! He must see how he robs them of everything. If a soldier conscripts them to carries his pack to the Roman limit of one mile, then keep carrying it a second mile so that the soldier must beg for it back or suffer the wrath of his superiors who know that the populace can only be abused so far before they begin to rebel. [Soldiers who forced peasants beyond the official limits might suffer loss of pay, food, or rank. Most often they would be publicly whipped.]
In each of these examples Jesus describes ways to challenge the way things run by refusing to accept that which seeks to humiliate! The alternative community refuses to accept their dishonoring by the powerful, knowing that God has declared them blessed! But they also do not take up weapons of retaliation. They offer holy resistance rather than violent resistance.
The remainder of this section speaks of the need to love enemies. The faithful resisters will respect the humanity of their abusers and not stoop to their level. Jesus demands that their love move beyond the community in solidarity. They must have respectful regard of all people without discrimination since God is perfectly consistent in caring for all people. The justice that they hungered and thirsted for is this greater justice for all people. In their quest to care they must be perfectly consistent, like God, in caring for all!
Bible Study: Matthew 5 & 6, part 2
Holy Reconciling: Matthew 5:17-37
Having offered his followers an identity very different than the one offered by the Roman appraisal of them, Jesus turns to the practices that he expects for the community gathered around this alternative vision. Jesus reaches into the law and the prophets to find the model for godly living. He has not come to set aside even a stroke of the law but has come to fulfill it (Mt 5:18). Yet this does not mean that things will continue as they have been operating. Jesus becomes the authoritative interpreter who will teach them righteousness or justice that surpasses the practices of the religious establishment (Mt 5:20).
Jesus is aware that those who have lived their lives under violent powers will be tempted to use the same violence toward others. Having been threatened, they may turn to people in their own community with threats; having been insulted by the powerful, they may use their power to degrade others. Jesus interprets the law radically identifying God’s intent: they are not to will harm for anyone in their community. At this point, the concern focuses on internal relationships, that is, how members of the community will treat their “brother or sister” (Mt 5:22). Murder is not only carried out by the sword. Abusive anger and scathing insults directed against other members of the community violate God’s command for life.
Worship also is to take place within the context of whole relationships. If a member has offended another, he must go and seek reconciliation with her before offering gifts to God. Right relationship with God should be sought within the context of right relationships with others in the community of faith. Gifts are offered to God only after one has pursued reconciliation with the parties that one has harmed. Thus worship and our offerings to God cannot be used to justify unjust and broken relationships. Followers of this new way must seek out reconciliation with those whom they have harmed before they find themselves morally bankrupt in the presence of a judge. To nurture old animosities rather than to seek healing with another again locks up people in prisons of their own making.
Jesus continues his mapping of communal relationships and his reinterpreting and radicalizing of the law. In each case he interprets prohibitions in light of their disintegrating effects on communal life. Adultery is not only about sleeping with those who are not one’s marriage partners; it is about making others into objects of one’s own fantasies. The use of others to satisfy one’s own base needs makes them into objects rather than people to relate to as fellow children of God. Such attitudes lead to hell and havoc for the community. Jesus calls for people to remove from themselves all that violates their integrity. He desires whole people holistically seeking the Empire of God. Hungering lustfully over others takes away from the hunger and thirst for justice on their behalf. Similarly, the practice of dismissing or divorcing the person whom one has pledged to care for leads to a break down of community. People are not objects to be disposed of based on personal whims.
Finally, Jesus challenges the interpretation of the law that suggests that one must speak truth when an oath is taken; but, that, therefore one may lie at other times. Integrity–that is the whole, single-minded focus–requires that one’s word be consistently dependable. When one utters “yes” then the meaning is always “yes”; when one declares “no” the meaning will always be a clear “no”.
In this section Jesus has offered his radical interpretation of the law that provides the grounds for healthy community living. Within the community of faith people are not to replicate the control and violence that they suffer in the broader world. They are to use words to build each other up rather than to tear each other down. They are to own up to the harm they have caused others and seek reconciliation with them. They are to treat each other with respect and not make objects of others. They are to care for each other for the long haul and not dispose of each other when conflicts arise. They are to live with integrity, totally dedicated to following their hunger for justice so that unrighteousness does not derail this utterly essential quest for wellbeing for all.
Having offered his followers an identity very different than the one offered by the Roman appraisal of them, Jesus turns to the practices that he expects for the community gathered around this alternative vision. Jesus reaches into the law and the prophets to find the model for godly living. He has not come to set aside even a stroke of the law but has come to fulfill it (Mt 5:18). Yet this does not mean that things will continue as they have been operating. Jesus becomes the authoritative interpreter who will teach them righteousness or justice that surpasses the practices of the religious establishment (Mt 5:20).
Jesus is aware that those who have lived their lives under violent powers will be tempted to use the same violence toward others. Having been threatened, they may turn to people in their own community with threats; having been insulted by the powerful, they may use their power to degrade others. Jesus interprets the law radically identifying God’s intent: they are not to will harm for anyone in their community. At this point, the concern focuses on internal relationships, that is, how members of the community will treat their “brother or sister” (Mt 5:22). Murder is not only carried out by the sword. Abusive anger and scathing insults directed against other members of the community violate God’s command for life.
Worship also is to take place within the context of whole relationships. If a member has offended another, he must go and seek reconciliation with her before offering gifts to God. Right relationship with God should be sought within the context of right relationships with others in the community of faith. Gifts are offered to God only after one has pursued reconciliation with the parties that one has harmed. Thus worship and our offerings to God cannot be used to justify unjust and broken relationships. Followers of this new way must seek out reconciliation with those whom they have harmed before they find themselves morally bankrupt in the presence of a judge. To nurture old animosities rather than to seek healing with another again locks up people in prisons of their own making.
Jesus continues his mapping of communal relationships and his reinterpreting and radicalizing of the law. In each case he interprets prohibitions in light of their disintegrating effects on communal life. Adultery is not only about sleeping with those who are not one’s marriage partners; it is about making others into objects of one’s own fantasies. The use of others to satisfy one’s own base needs makes them into objects rather than people to relate to as fellow children of God. Such attitudes lead to hell and havoc for the community. Jesus calls for people to remove from themselves all that violates their integrity. He desires whole people holistically seeking the Empire of God. Hungering lustfully over others takes away from the hunger and thirst for justice on their behalf. Similarly, the practice of dismissing or divorcing the person whom one has pledged to care for leads to a break down of community. People are not objects to be disposed of based on personal whims.
Finally, Jesus challenges the interpretation of the law that suggests that one must speak truth when an oath is taken; but, that, therefore one may lie at other times. Integrity–that is the whole, single-minded focus–requires that one’s word be consistently dependable. When one utters “yes” then the meaning is always “yes”; when one declares “no” the meaning will always be a clear “no”.
In this section Jesus has offered his radical interpretation of the law that provides the grounds for healthy community living. Within the community of faith people are not to replicate the control and violence that they suffer in the broader world. They are to use words to build each other up rather than to tear each other down. They are to own up to the harm they have caused others and seek reconciliation with them. They are to treat each other with respect and not make objects of others. They are to care for each other for the long haul and not dispose of each other when conflicts arise. They are to live with integrity, totally dedicated to following their hunger for justice so that unrighteousness does not derail this utterly essential quest for wellbeing for all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)