The Church is a funny place … you can divide a congregation by mentioning some aspect of human sexuality … issues of the role of gays and lesbians in the life and ministry of the Church, same sex marriage, even the attitudes towards sex, marriage and reproduction have been hot button issues between the pew and the pulpit. I remember as a theology student hearing one of our profs comment that if you want to have a long and successful career in the Church, stay away from issues of sexuality …
Yet, when we really get down to it – the Bible has only a small handful of verses that make any mention of sex and issues sexual – and almost all of those passages are ambiguitous in their meaning, and even more obscure in their intent. I remember hearing a lecture by a Catholic Theologian who would eventually be excommunicated by Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict, who said that failing to place the few passages that speak of sex in their proper context opens our interpretation up to wild and wonderful stances, that are not what the author intended.
This theologian went on to wonder why it is that we spend inordinate amounts of time and energy fighting over a small handful or passages that are unclear in their intent, while we completely and utterly ignore the many passages throughout both the Old and New Testament that speak of poverty and justice issues, and that are any thing BUT obscure and unclear.
It is a question that has risen to the fore once again in our modern world. Why do we have such a total and almost complete reluctance to raise much less even address issues of poverty when there are over 2000 seperate references to poverty and the response of God's people throughout the Bible … 2000 references and it is a at best a marginalized conversation in the Church today … versus a couple of dozen (AT MOST) references to sex and it is one of he most divisive and explosive hot button topics the Church has …
Why the dichotomy?
Perhaps it lies in the interpretative stance we take when we approach passages like today's reading from the Gospel. In the midst of Mary's act of extravagence towards Jesus we have the comment by Judas saying - “that oinment should be sold and the money given to the poor ...”
A noble idea, but the author of the Gospel steps in to besmirch Judas by saying - “yeah, but he wasn't interested in the poor – he wanted access to the money himself because he was the one controling the purse for the disciples as they travelled ...”
Judas is regarded as a villan in the Gospels and in the Church traditions that followed … afterall, what kind of man could stand before Jesus and then turn him over to the authorities and to death … this take on Judas has dominated and coloured everything we've believed about this mysterious figure since the earliest days of the Church. Modern theologians have begun to seriously wrestle with Judas and our attitudes about him … they ask the thorny questions like – 'are his actions really any worse then that of Peter who ACTIVELY denied knowing Jesus repeatedly?” - or “was Judas any worse then the other disciples who split and ran when the authorities came for Jesus?”
They say history is written by the victors – and in the case of Judas, he was pretty much done before the story was put to parchment … the remaining disciples would have contempt for Judas and his actions, and would make sure that any of those who followed in their newly forming Church would understand that Judas was evil, and his actions contemptous at best. So any reference to Judas would be spun to reflect the badness of the man and his action … So his reference to the poor became an opportunity to make an editorial comment to ensure the reader and listener understood that Judas was a bad bad man …
Yet, if we step back – Judas' comment is consistent with Jesus' ministry and the 2000 plus references throughout the Scriptures that make reference to the poor … Modern scholarship is wrestling to reclaim Judas by asking the simple question - “is Judas perhaps the most faithful of the disciples?”
Taking the lead from the question raised by Kazantzakis in his book The Last Temptation of Christ, they are exploring what it means to the life, death and resurrection of Jesus to have one of his trusted companions take the active step of ensuring Jesus' death … we can't have the resurrection without the death … could it be that Judas was part of God's intention and plan, and that as such is more of a saint then a sinner?
It's a tough issue … it's an uncomfortable issue … it demands of us the willingness and the ability to step beyond our strongly held beliefs and understandings and be open to new ideas and interpretations … it requires keeping an open mind and being able to wrestle with the issue and see things from a new perspective.
Whether it is sex and sexuality in our faith, the role and place of Judas in the Bible, or our responses to poverty … there is a lot of work to be done … but too often we entrench our positions, we strengthen our resolve and we become – whether we're even aware of it or not – like a small child plugging our ears, closing our eyes and chanting “la la la la la la – I'm not listening ...” when we encounter new ideas such as caring for the poor …
And, this is NOT a new phenomena … it has been going on for centuries … the opposition that lead to Jesus' death was just such resistance to new ideas and visions … the condemnation people like Galileo, Luther, and even John Calvin experienced is such resistances … and it continues today … names like Martin Luther King, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Desmond Tutu and countless others who from a faith stance actively opposed the status quo and the way things ARE, to envision and proclaim the way things will be are examples of the active resistance put forth in faith …
Yet, if we step back and look at the incredible vista of Church history and heritage we are left realizing that change is not only inevitable it is unstoppable.
I remember listening enraptured by a presentation made several years ago by Anglican writer and theologian Herbert O'Driscoll who told the tale of Church history beginning with the first stirrings of the house churches seeded by the early disciples and apostles. Then he travelled through the Byzantine Church, the Medieval Church, the Rennaissence and Reform Church all the way through to the modern era … he spoke of the changes in architecture, the changes in language and liturgy, and the changes that were part of the ever evolving church … then he said - “try to take someone and move them 50 years forwards or backwards in the church and see what happens.”
They would be like a fish out of water, he noted dryly. They would find themselves in a place that is unrecognizable … everything – the music, the prayers, the liturgy, the language, the dress, even the architecture would be different … there would be some elements that are similar, and there would be vestiges that are maintained and the same – but the changes would be dramatic … he then went on to describe the changes he had experienced within his own life time …
“Look back on your experience as a person,” he urged his listeners – “and think about the church of your childhood and whether you would still be comfortable with it today …” He then went on to challenge us to reflect on the changes we've witnessed in our life times, and how profound those changes are in a few short decades … then he asked – why do we resist change?
It is inevitable, and it is happens … it is the will of the spirit.
We will always have to poor among us is not then, a call to complacency, but rather it is a reminder that in those moments when we find ourselves comfortable and content, when we are enjoying the good things of life, we must continue to be mindful of the poor and their needs. We are not to ignore them, but to remember them even as we pour out the extravagent oil …
The prophetic all is not about the pageantry and the sacred atmosphere of our worship that is rich in tradition and oppulence – but the prophetic call is about acting on our faith.
Today south of the Border a commentator on fox network is getting inordinate amounts of press coverage for his condemnation of Jim Wallis and Wallis' call to the Church to embrace and embody Social Justice and Economic reform … the commentator has identified the words – Social justice and economic reform as euphemisms of communism and nazism, and has openly said repeatedly that any pulpit that cites these words are pulpits that should be avoided … “if your minister, priest or rabbi uses those words, leave immediately,” he said, “because they are not faithful, and are nothing more than communists and nazis ...” AND, he has focused his mis-informed wrath on Wallis and all that Wallis and the Sojourners' community represents.
The topper for me was the contention by this commentator that social justice and preferential concern for the poor is NOT BIBLICAL.
When I read that, my response was – HUH? … 2000 plus references to poverty and the poor and it is NOT Biblical … now, that's a theological reading that simply defies all logic …
Unfortunately, such a reading and interpretation arises when we stand in that room with Jesus and the others and we take Jesus' own words as a call to complacency … “the poor will always be among us, don't worry about them … God'll look after them ...”
Maybe God will look after them – through us … maybe God wants us not to worry about the poor, but rather by re-orienting our view of the world and faith live the principles of love, justice and righteousness in the way the prophets like Isaiah envisioned.
The prophets were not proclaiming a message that allows us to sit content and inactive … instead they were proclaiming a message that demands an active response …
Remember your past – says Isaiah – recall ALL the things God has done for you and – to use a modern notion – PAY IT FORWARD … if someone pours out expensive oil for you – you are obligated to pour out expensive oil for another … Such a notion is the very heart of Biblical Blessings … I receive this gift, and I will return it, and you will receive it and return it, and in the process the Blessing strengthens and spreads and soon the transformative power of our faith being lived out, shared and acted upon touches dozens and hundreds and even thousands of lives …
Isaiah, Jesus, and Paul are not calling us to a complacent faith that lets us sit at home and do nothing – they are calling us to an active living faith that takes us into the world to embrace and embody the change and evolution that is part of our faith journey … a living and active faith reminds us daily that the poor are among us, and that we must never forget that …
Our faith is about sharing the Good News …
May it be so – thanks be to God … let us pray …
No comments:
Post a Comment