St Barnabas Church, Warrington

January 29 NOTES FOR REFLECTION Candlemas

2012-01-27T17:25:00.001+13:00

January 29 NOTES FOR REFLECTION Candlemas

Texts: Malachi 3:1-5; Hebrews 2:14-18; Luke 22-40

Theme: The proper name of today's celebration is The Presentation of Jesus in the Temple, which is informative if not very catchy. A more eccentric choice might be Spaghetti Junction, on the ground that so many different ways are coming together here that it's difficult to see a clear path ahead. Perhaps "A Meeting of Opposites" might do, or, for those of a more classical bent, "Nunc Dimittis", if only to annoy the spell-check on my laptop.

Introduction. Today's celebration completes this Christmas-Epiphany period of "revelation". Again, we are informed in The Lectionary that "This is a principal feast and should not be displaced by any other celebration"; although we are then reminded that the actual date of the feast is 2 February, so we can leave it until then if we like! But why is it so important as to rank with such feasts as The Baptism of the Lord, for example? Perhaps because it has an air of "completing" the birth of Jesus: born on Christmas Day, and circumcised and named on the 8^th day, the final step is the "purification" of his mother on the 40^th day. [In that sense, this feast is more about Mary than it is about Jesus; and for that reason it is known in the Orthodox tradition as The Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

Our first lesson sets the tone in two ways. First it speaks of the Lord coming to the temple; and secondly it emphasises that his coming has an unavoidable element of judgment about it. The second lesson emphasises again that what we have been reflecting on over the last month or so is the birth of a human being: it is very important to the author of this Letter to the Hebrews to stress the humanity of Jesus. Only if he were fully human (as well as fully divine) could he become our Great High Priest. Only St Luke includes this episode in his gospel: the Christ Child has been acknowledged by the angels, the shepherds (the outcasts of society), and the Gentiles (represented by the Magi); and now he is acclaimed by representatives of the Jewish people in the form of Simeon and Anna.

Background. As hinted in the first paragraph of the introduction above, the title of this feast is something of a misnomer, because there are in fact two ceremonial rites taking place here. On the fortieth day after the birth of any child, male or female, firstborn or not, the mother would need to be ritually purified before she could rejoin the worshipping community. We might want to pause there and think for a moment about what that says of the prevailing religious attitude towards childbirth: it was something 'unclean' requiring the exclusion of the woman from the community of faith until she had been rendered 'clean' again. But it was also fortuitously in the interests of the new infant: we have a rather modern view of what the temple would have been like, anti-sceptic, quiet and peaceful like our modern-day holy places. In fact, the temple was, in part, a slaughter-house, with all the noise, smells and pest problems associated with that – not at all a healthy place to which to bring a new-born baby. Perhaps for that reason, if this were the only rite required (purification of the mother) it was not usual to bring the infant.

However, the law also required the firstborn male child to be formally consecrated or dedicated to the Lord, which, of course, required the presence of the child. Hence Mary and Joseph bring the infant Jesus today.

It may be worthwhile to reflect today on what this whole ceremony tells us about our practice of baptising infants, in view of the fact that infant baptism is opposed by some parts of the Church (such as the Baptists). We have (mercifully!) moved away from the idea that the mother needed "purifying" after childbirth [the Book of Common Prayer prescribed a service for this purpose called "The Churching of Women"]: the closest we come to that may be a lovely little rite called Thanksgiving for the Gift of a Child", which is found on page 754 of the Prayer Book. A prayer of thanksgiving for the preservation of the mother's life and health through pregnancy and labour is included in that service: see page 758 and the mother's own prayer on page 757. But there is something of the idea of dedicating the child to God in our baptismal ceremony, and is some ways to mark the child with the sign of the cross can be seen as the Christian equivalent of circumcision. We shouldn't push this argument too far, but on a day when we are noting the careful way in which the Holy Family is following the dictates of law and tradition it is helpful, perhaps, to see our own practises as rooted in that same tradition, albeit reinterpreted in the light of Christ.

The central idea for me in all this is precisely that: here we see the balance between the traditions of the past and openness to the news ways of God. Once again I find myself coming back to that extraordinary verse in Isaiah: "Forget the former things; do not dwell on the past. See, I am doing a new thing. Now it springs up. Do you not perceive it?" Hold this in your mind as we once again gather with our Bishop to try to discern the way ahead for our parish and our congregations: more of the same, or a new thing? And the truly wonderful thing in today's gospel passage on this point is that the two with the most investment in the past and the status quo are the two who immediately discern the new thing that God is doing in their presence. Any other observer would have seen yet another couple of parents bringing yet another wee baby into the temple – ho, hum – ya-ya-ya! But these two old folk (strictly, we are not told how old Simeon is, but he sounds ready to go!) see no less than the Lord's salvation, the hope of Israel, the promises of God fulfilled, etc.

But not in any "ah, isn't he a bonny wee chap" sentimental sort of way. They foresee the pain that lies ahead for Mary, and the divisive effect this child is destined to have when he grows to manhood and begins to carry out his mission.

Malachi. It seems that people have been noting that evil people were getting away with their crimes scot-free, and asking "where is the God of justice?" [See 2:17] This passage is God's response. He promises a messenger to prepare the way for him, and then he himself will come to the temple. But before they get too excited at that prospect, they should know that his coming will bring a time of judgment. The faithful will undergo a period of refining (purifying), and the unrighteous will be rejected. Included in that latter class are those who take advantage of widows, orphans, workers, and aliens; as well as sorcerers, adulterers and perjurers. (Despite the impression sometimes given by Christian preachers, not all sin is sexual in nature!)

Taking It Personally.

· How important to your faith is the Old Testament? Do you find tradition interesting and helpful, or is it something you are inclined to get rid of? Do you welcome change?

· Is it helpful in your understanding of Christ to see him is the light of Old Testament prophecy, or do you see this as a case of re-writing history ex post facto?

· What do you make of the list of people who will face judgment in verse 5? Do you agree that the Church is more inclined to condemn sexual sin and rather too wary of condemning social and economic sins of the kind mentioned here?

· Are you naturally sympathetic to the workers' point of view in industrial disputes, or do your instincts tend to lie with the employers? Are you sympathetic to refugees, boat-people and immigrants, or do you favour tighter border control. Are these the sorts of issues the Church should be involved in or not?

Hebrews. Scholars still debate the authorship of this Letter; but whoever wrote it, the issue of Jesus' true humanity was obviously a burning issue. The author takes every opportunity to stress that Jesus was fully human in every way except that he did not sin. In today's passage he stresses that Jesus was like us with flesh and blood (he had a real body, not just an appearance of one as some early heretics maintained), and he suffered temptation just as we do. All this was necessary to enable Jesus to overcome the power of death, to atone for our sin, and to become "a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God".

Taking It Personally.

· Spend some time imagining Jesus as a child? How realistic is your image of Jesus in his childhood years? Is he a typical boy, always on the go, getting up to mischief, getting his clothes dirty and turning up late for meals? Or is he perfect in every way?

· Read Hebrews 5:1-10. Does that help to fill out your image of Jesus? Notice the reference in verse 8 to Jesus learning obedience through suffering. What do you make of that?

· The author also stresses that Jesus is "for us" (as well as one of us). He came not to help angels but "the descendants of Abraham". Can you recall a recent instance when you felt Jesus helped you? Did you give thanks?

· What help would you like from Jesus at this time? Now ask him.

Luke. Once again we have an example of how meticulous St Luke can be in dealing with details. He alone of the gospel writers records that Jesus was named and circumcised on the eighth day; and now he alone records the arrival of the Holy Family at the Temple on the fortieth day after the birth. Mary has observed the prescribed period of purification – a woman was 'unclean' for 40 days after giving birth – and must now be ritualistically made clean so that she can once again re-join the worshipping community. But as Jesus is Mary's firstborn male child he must also be brought to the temple to be consecrated to the Lord. Luke even records the sacrifice to be offered by Mary and Joseph, which scholars delight in pointing out that it was at the rate prescribed for poor parents, "a pair of doves or two young pigeons". Onto the stage comes Simeon, a resident of Jerusalem, who we are told was "righteous and devout" and had been "waiting for the consolation of Israel". We always assume that he was an old man, although the Scriptures do not say so. He represents wisdom and prophecy – an elder upon whom the Holy Spirit rested. He has been promised that he will not die until he has seen the Lord's Christ. He has come to the temple at the prompting of the Holy Spirit and recognises in the infant Jesus the fulfilment of that promise. He sees in Jesus the divine agent of judgment, and cautions Mary of painful times ahead for her. His words are seconded by Anna, a devout widow of prayer, whose age is given (she's 84). Luke stresses again the Holy Family's compliance with the Law (verse 39); and then notes that a period of growth follows for Jesus in all aspects of his humanity, physical, mental, spiritual and social.

Taking It Personally.

· Notice the stress Luke places on compliance with the Law, and following proper procedure. Even the Holy family is not immune from it. How do you feel about that? What analogy might we draw with Church practice and procedure today?

· Reflect on the openness of Simeon and Anna. Simeon can depart in peace now that Christ has come. How might this passage guide us as we reflect on future directions in our lives and in our Church?

· This passage is a good one for praying with the imagination. Place yourself in the temple as an observer. Can you see the baby? How does Mary look? Is Joseph taking a keen interest? What reaction do they have when Simeon takes the baby into his arms? What do you make of Simeon and Anna? Are you inclined to dismiss them as two old fuddy-duddies? Does the baby make any noise or do anything?

· Ponder verse 40 for some time. What does it tell you about Jesus the human being? What does it tell you about growing up in Christ?

Parish Meeting, St John's, 31 January at 7pm.

2012-01-27T15:50:00.001+13:00

For the Parish Meeting: to which All parishioners are invited with Bishop Kelvin at St. John's Waikouaiti on Tuesday 31^st January at 7pm. Copies of a 'Discussion Paper' compiled by Roger, available this Sunday.

Roger's Reflections, Sunday 22 January

2012-01-22T12:13:00.001+13:00

January 22 NOTES FOR REFLECTION

Texts: Jonah 3:1-5, 10; 1 Corinthians 7:29-32; Mark 1:14-20

Theme: "The Call of God (Part II)", perhaps? Or "The Direct Experience – Repeat Broadcast". (This is the season for endless repeats on T.V., so why not in the Church?) To avoid being that silly I'm going with "Now is the Time". An alternative might be "All Change", where "all" means everyone and everything, such is the true meaning of repentance.

Introduction. Much like last week, we have the old and the new way through which God speaks to the people. Jonah is a prophet, albeit in this case a reluctant or even rebellious one. He is given by God a very clear message for the Ninevites, calling upon them to repent. They are, of course, Gentiles, so I guess we are to understand this passage in the context of the revelation to the Gentiles. At the second time of asking, Jonah delivers the message and it bears fruit: the people of Nineveh repent. But again, we are left to wonder what, if anything, happened next: did they grow in their new-found faith, or return to their old ways? St Paul, in three short verses, tells us what should happen next. There should be a complete re-prioritising of everything, particularly of our values. Nothing is now more important than our faith. The gospel passage shows this extraordinary change in the specific examples of the fishermen. They abandon the means of their livelihood and their families to "follow him", wherever and whatever for, they know not. Not a bad description of the meaning of faith, really.

Background. Once again we have readings that speak to us of a new stage of spiritual development. We might easily overlook that simple, apparently inconsequential remark that Jesus makes at the start of this passage: "The time has come." So important is this expression to Mark that he makes them the first words Jesus utters in his gospel. The expression surely implies that there has been a preceding period of waiting, that something important is now happening, and that the timing of the new happening is not accidental. After everything else that has happened in the past, including the stuttering false starts surrounding the birth and early years of Jesus' life, this is the real deal!

Jonah forms an interesting background to this story: we recall that when Jesus was asked for a sign in one of his many disputes he referred them to the "sign of Jonah" (Matthew 16:1-5), usually taken to mean that, just as Jonah was three days in the belly of the great fish before being coughed up to a new life, so Jesus would be entombed for three days before being raised to new life. Here, the link is the message of repentance: just as God sent Jonah to call the people of Nineveh to turn from their sinful ways, so now Jesus proclaims the same message to the Jews and to the whole world. It is important to read the little Book of Jonah non-historically: although it is traditionally treated as a prophetic book, it really belongs with the wisdom literature. It is a short, and brilliantly written parable, showing human nature in all our cussedness, and lack of empathy for those we consider our enemies. We are reminded, perhaps, of James and John who offered to Jesus to call down fire from heaven on a Samaritan village that did not welcome them: Luke 9:51-56. (Or John Cleese as a wonderfully demented nun slapping a recalcitrant schoolgirl across the face while yelling "God is love, you dolt! What is he? God is love!") Compare Jonah with the Good Samaritan: he wouldn't have walked by on the other side – he would have run!

So the time has come, but for what? And Jesus' cryptic answer is that the kingdom has drawn near. Over the centuries many different understandings have been put forward as to what this expression means. Is it to suggest (as many of his time assume) that Jesus was to throw out the Roman overlords and establish in Israel a theocracy with him as ruler? Or is the kingdom of the heavenly realms only, to be entered on death? The 'answer' as always is far more complex than either of those options would suggest. In keeping with the general approach I have been putting forward in these notes for two or three months now, I find a helpful way of trying to grasp what this is about is to interpret the term "kingdom of God" (or "Kingdom of Heaven") as this new stage of spiritual development that is now to be made possible through Jesus Christ, the essence of which is direct communication with God through Christ.

So here is our gospel reading we no longer hear a prophet speaking about God: instead, we have God, incarnate in Jesus of Nazareth, speaking directly to those he encounters. We are told here of four who immediately responded positively, with such dramatic effect; but, of course, the gospels are full of people whose reactions were the complete opposite. That remains true to this day.

Jonah. This little book is a wonderful study of human nature! First, we must recognise that Jonah is spiritually open to God. There is no suggestion that Jonah did not hear God, or did not understand what God was calling him to do. He understood only too clearly. God was calling him to go to Nineveh "and preach against it, because its wickedness has come up before me". Jonah was not the first prophet to receive a calling he didn't want. Even the great Moses tried to persuade God to send Aaron instead of him to Egypt. Nor was Jonah's unwillingness based on fear for his own safety, or of a lack of ability to fulfil the task. He was afraid that Nineveh would heed the message and repent; and if it did, Jonah was even more afraid that God would prove to be something of a wishy-washy liberal instead of a paid-up member of the Sensible Sentencing Trust, and forgive the whole city. However, a near-death experience and a miraculous rescue can have an effect on even the most recalcitrant mind; and so, when the word of the Lord came to Jonah a second time, he obeyed. Notice (and enjoy!) the subtle little detail in verses 3 and 4: Nineveh is a great city, requiring 3 days to traverse. So Jonah has not reached the city centre when he delivers his message. He is obeying, but to the least possible degree that he thinks he can get away with! But, alas! It is enough to fulfil God's purposes!

Taking It Personally.

Read the whole book – it's very short. Reflect on Jonah's character. When is he most like you, and when is he least like you?
Have you had an experience when your life was seriously in danger? Did that change your outlook, and has that change been permanent?
Have you ever felt God prompting you to do something you didn't want to do? Did you take evasive action, comply grudgingly, or comply wholeheartedly?
Do you want wrongdoers to suffer for their wrongs, or are you more likely to pray for their forgiveness?
Notice how honest Jonah is with God – especially in chapter 4. Can you be as honest and direct in your prayers?

Corinthians. This extraordinary little passage calls into question our basic attitudes, assumptions and values. All are turned on their heads by 'the Christ event'. Spiritual writers (and many psychologists) talk of a false self and a true Self. The false self is the one we naturally develop to help us navigate through the ordinary circumstances of what we take to be our separate, individual lives. It is only when we become aware that there is more to us than that – that we can transcend that little self and become tuned into the Self that we call God – that everything changes for us. We discover that everything has only a relative value, surpassed by the Ultimate Value of the One True Divine Reality (a.k.a. God). It seems to me that this is what St Pal is trying to help us grasp in these few verses. To move from one stage of spiritual development to the next means that "this world in its present form is passing away". Remember that he is writing post-Pentecost: the Holy Spirit is now available to all, not just to the specially chosen anointed few. That's the game-changer, as we sometimes say today.

Taking It Personally.

To what extent does your Christian faith shape your attitudes, assumptions and values?
Does your faith give you a different perspective – are you more "philosophical" about things that go wrong? Do you consciously call upon your faith to help you keep a sense of proportion?
Are you engrossed in "the things of the world" or do you "hang loose" to them? Is there anything you would not give up for your faith?

Mark. As I noted last week, there are differences between the various gospel accounts of the calling of the first disciples. So this is Mark's version. It starts at the Sea of Galilee, such a central feature in his narrative. It is unclear whether Jesus had already met these men, or if they knew him by reputation only. Most of the comments made on last week's gospel apply again here. In particular, note the unconditional and unquestioning response. No questions, no ifs and buts, just immediate obedience, despite the enormous cost. They are walking away from their families and their means of earning a living. And for what? To follow Jesus of Nazareth who promises to make them "fishers of men and women", whatever that is supposed to mean. Notice the sense of urgency, emphasised in this passage: "the time has come" (v.15); "at once" (v.18); and "without delay" (v.20).

Taking It Personally.

· Suppose you read a contemporary account of this story in the paper? Would your suspicions be roused? Would your cynicism? What would you make of four fishermen simply dropping everything and clearing off? Shades of Scientology, brain-washing, de-programming etc. Here?

· Put yourself in Zebedee's shoes. How would you feel if your two sons simply walked out on you (and the family business) in front of the hired men who may well have been enjoying seeing Zebedee's rather public humiliation.

· Looking back, have there been any radical breaks in your life, where you have suddenly changed course?

January 15 NOTES FOR REFLECTION

2012-01-14T12:37:00.001+13:00

January 15 NOTES FOR REFLECTION

Texts: 1 Samuel 3:1-10; 1 Corinthians 6:12-20; John 1:43-51

Theme: A number of possibilities this week: the more obvious ones would be "Discipleship" or "The Call of God". I'm going with "The Direct Experience": with this reading we have finished (for now) with intermediaries, prophets, wise men, etc. Now people directly encounter God in Jesus Christ and their whole world changes for ever.

Introduction. Our first reading is a bridge from the former stage of spiritual development to the new one. Young Samuel (probably about 12 years old now as he is referred to as a boy instead of a child) represents the spiritually open but undeveloped stage: he hears God calling him but does not recognise God's voice. He still needs someone to "translate" his experience for him. In our gospel reading St John is taking us to the next stage. He has just written of the intermediary stage (John the Baptist directed two of his disciples to Jesus), and now he has two more people directly encountering Jesus and becoming disciples through a personal call on their lives. St Paul's contribution is to spell out the consequences of accepting that call. It is a call to freedom "from" AND a freedom "for". The Corinthians have grasped the first point, but not the second.

Background. Through Advent, Christmas, and the Epiphany we have been talking about the way in which most of us come into a faith through the ministry of others. Few, if any, have a direct experience of God before they have some understanding of who God might be. I have suggested that we understand this in terms of some sort of spiritual evolutionary process, for humanity in general and for individual human beings. We need to develop our spiritual faculties in the same way that we develop our physical and mental ones. This sort of understanding, I think, helps to explain why many people (including members of our own families and circle of friends) just "don't get it". Like young Samuel they do not yet know the Lord and so are quite unaware of his presence with them.

In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son... The opening words of the Letter to the Hebrews puts this perfectly. This is the stage we are at in our gospel reading this morning. John the Baptist is the last of the great prophets through whom God has spoken to his people. Now God is speaking directly to by his Son. What difference does that make?

In recent weeks I have commented on the (somewhat surprising) fact that all the drama around the conception and birth of Jesus does not seem to have had any lasting impact. Once the initial excitement was over, the shepherds and the magi disappeared back into obscurity: even Mary and Elizabeth become invisible for 30 years at least. John, the child who leapt in his mother's womb at the sound of Mary's voice, now tells us that he would not have known who Jesus was had the angel not told him to watch for the one on whom the Holy Spirit descends in the form of a dove. And until that happens – until Jesus is baptised – nothing very much happens. With that event the new spiritual stage is launched – the kingdom of God, as small as a mustard seed, is sown on the earth and begins to grow.

And those who see and hear and experience are changed for ever. This time "it takes". This is manifested in two ways. First, in the responses of those who are called to follow Jesus: even more than Mary, their response is one of unquestioning willingness. They do not ask where they are going if they follow him, or what it will involve, or how long they will be away. They accept the call immediately.

And they do something else. They find someone else and bring that person to Jesus. Thus. Andrew brings Peter, and Philip finds Nathaniel. The good news spreads by being passed on within family and other social relationships. And let's be clear: they bring the people to Jesus. This is not a regression to the former "intermediary" stage. Andrew does not teach Peter about Jesus, he brings him to Jesus for Peter to have his own experience of Christ – to see for himself and make up his own mind. The same is true of Philip bringing Nathaniel.

Passages like this obviously provide the foundation for our "doctrine of call". Again, the author of the Letter to the Hebrews has some useful things to say to us about this whole idea. Speaking of the office of high priest, he says, "No one takes this honour upon himself: he must be called by God..." See Hebrews 5:1-6. (According to him, even Jesus was "called" by God to be his Son.) We need to think seriously about the implications of this. In our desperate desire to be inclusive (and to fill gaps on rosters!) we tend to call for volunteers. Jesus does not. There were hundreds, and probably thousands, of men involved in the fishing industry around Lake Galilee at that time. Jesus chose 4 of them.

And we have only to think of the immediate practical consequences of accepting that call to see that it could not work on any other basis. These fishermen abandoned their means of livelihood and walked out on their families. That was their calling. In every age some are still called to such a life. But the vast majority of Christians are called to live out their lives of faith in their ordinary business, family and social circumstances. Either we need to widen the term "discipleship" to include such lives of faith, or we need to find a different term for what is a very different calling.

Samuel. Samuel has been brought up in the temple. He has witnessed the work of the priests and the worship of the people every day of his life. Yet this whole experience has not yet led to spiritual growth. In verse 1 we learn that this is not a spiritually enlightened time generally: In those days the word of the Lord was rare; there were not many visions. Perhaps verses 2 and 3 also are to be understood in this spiritual sense: the old priest's eyes were becoming so weak he could barely see. But there is still hope: the lamp of God had not yet gone out.

Be all that as it may, one thing is clear: Now Samuel did not yet know the Lord. The word of the Lord had not yet been revealed to him. Thus, when God called out to Samuel, Samuel heard the voice, but assumed it must be Eli calling him: a good example of the logical brain blocking a spiritual experience. Eli becomes the mirror image: old and near blind though he may be, his brain has been tuned over the years to recognise spiritual realities. Knowing that he did not call Eli he realised it must be God calling the boy.

Taking It Personally.

· Have you ever heard God calling you or speaking to you? How would you describe the experience?

· If not, would you like to? Why?

· Looking back, were you more open or less open to spiritual experiences in your childhood than you are now?

· Is there anybody who has been "an Eli" for you – someone who could help you to see or understand something that might otherwise have passed you by?

Corinthians. What a wonderful bunch these early Corinthian Christians must have been! Scholars generally assume that the phrases in quotation marks are taken by Paul out of a letter written to him, and to which he is replying. They have assumed that if God loves them unconditionally and forgives them all their sins, it doesn't matter what they do in their ordinary lives. Corinth was famous for its immoral lifestyle, and it seems that many of these early converts had not abandoned that lifestyle. Hence "everything is permissible for me" is their motto. Notice the wonderfully wise tack Paul takes in response. Today, all too many Christians believe in a "holy legalism" – preferably backed by Parliamentary laws. "Thou shall not do this that or the other thing. Paul does not go down this track. He doesn't deny that all things are permissible, but points out that some things are actually harmful. They have consequences. We hear much today of "victimless crimes": but, says St Paul, to indulge in such activities is to victimise ourselves. We are not souls who happen to inhabit physical bodies for a while. We are embodied persons in whom the Holy Spirit of God resides. Therefore honour God with your bodies. [There is an echo of this in our marriage liturgy where, on the exchange of rings, one party says to the other "with my body I honour you". See, for example, page 784 of the Prayer Book.]

Taking It Personally.

· Reflect on your body, and how you treat it. Are you kind to it, giving it only the right type and amount of food, enough exercise but not too much, and attending promptly to any medical needs it may have?

· In your care of your body are you motivated by simple commonsense, or do you see it as part of your spiritual practice? What does it mean to you that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit?

· When was the last time you gave thanks to God for your body, for its wonderful abilities, and its amazing complexity? Why not do that right now?

John. There are certain marked differences in the way in which each of the gospel writers record the calling of the first few disciples, but also much common ground. The clearest feature is the unconditional nature of the call and of the response. John chooses to emphasise the way in which the good news spreads: in a sense, Jesus (in this account) did not call Peter: he called Andrew who then went off and brought Peter to see for himself. Similarly, Jesus called Philip who then found Nathaniel. Notice how in each case some knowledge of the faith history (the Old Testament Scriptures) is assumed. Andrew tells Peter "we have found the Messiah", but does not have to explain to Peter what he means by that. Peter knows they are expecting the Messiah to come sometime. Similarly, Philip talks about "the one Moses wrote about in the Law, and about whom the Prophets also wrote". Presumably, Nathaniel understands what he is talking about, even though he is temporarily blinded by his prejudice against Nazareth (think Auckland here!). Nathaniel has been sitting under a fig tree – a favoured spot for prayer and Scriptural study because of the shade it gave from the heat of the sun. Nathaniel acclaims Jesus as Son of God and King of Israel, two terms that reappear in the Passion story – both as praise and in mockery. Notice, too, the repeat of this theme of heaven being open; and this reference to Jacob's ladder. Recall the punch-line to that story: "Surely the Lord is in this place and I was not aware of it."

Taking It Personally.

· Our place of origin seems important in this story. Where are you from? How has that influenced the course of your life? Has it been an advantage or a drawback? Have you ever experienced prejudice against people from your hometown? Do you hold any animosity towards any other "hometown" in the way that Nathaniel did?

· On meeting Christ yourself, did you feel an urge to find someone you knew and bring them to Jesus? Do you have such an urge now?

· This is a good story for praying with your imagination. Place yourself near Philip. Listen as Jesus calls Philip to follow him. How do you feel? Excited? Fearful? Do you hope that he will now turn to you and call you, too? Are you trying to attract his attention or make yourself invisible? Why?

· Spend some time in prayer pondering the call of Christ in your life and your response to that call, past, present, and future.

January 8 NOTES FOR REFLECTION The Baptism of the Lord

2012-01-08T11:15:00.001+13:00

January 8 NOTES FOR REFLECTION The Baptism of the Lord

Texts: Genesis 1:1-5; Acts 19:1-7; Mark 1:4-11

Theme: I'm tempted to suggest "How Time Flies!", as two weeks after celebrating Christ's birth, we meet him as a thirty-year-old. However, I suggest we stick with "Revelation in Baptism", to stress that our readings between Christmas and Candlemas are primarily about the revelation of Christ.

Introduction. For Mark, Jesus' story begins with his baptism. He has no birth narrative, and nothing like the wonder of John's Prologue revealing the eternal existence of Christ. For this reason, perhaps, our first lesson comprises the opening few verses of Genesis. The beginning of the old creation forms the background to the beginning of the new. The common element is the creative power of the Holy Spirit, brooding over the primal waters and bringing order out of chaos; and descending like a dove on to Jesus as he emerges from the new waters of baptism. Our second lesson, from the Book of Acts puts even greater emphasis on the creative work of the Holy Spirit, bringing the gift of speaking in new languages, and separating it from the immersion in water that is the symbolic act of baptism.

Background. Advent-Candlemas can be a confusing period for those of us who are used to stories with a strict chronology. Advent begins with a focus on the return of Christ at the end of the age. Then we "walk backwards to Christmas", in the words of the famous song. We focus on John the Baptist, and then on the Annunciation. The prophet of Isaiah is the other great character of Advent, some 700 years before the time of Mary, John and Jesus.

Now we celebrate the Epiphany on 6 January when the magi bring their strange prophetic gifts to the infant child; and two days later we witness Jesus' baptism at the age of 30. Which reminds me: our Lectionary is very clear about the equal importance of both these events. In each case we are told: "This is a principal feast and should not be displaced by any other celebration." Quite how we are to do due honour to two major feats two days apart is not explained (yes, I know we could have weekday services, but let's be practical here!) The task is, perhaps, to find a way of celebrating both feasts together. Part of my solution at St John's, Waikouaiti this year is to choose all the hymns with an Epiphany flavour, while sticking to the Baptism for the readings and preaching.

Back to the issue of chronological time. One thought is that the creators of our church year are deliberately disregarding the principles of chronology to stress that, when the eternal decides to invade the temporal, chronology flies out the window. More theologically, for the eternal God there is only the eternal NOW. (All things 'happen' for God simultaneously.) No, this doesn't make immediate sense to us because we are inescapably children of the time-space continuum. The challenge is to accept that God is free of all that – that is what we mean when we say God is e-ternal (outside of time.)

So back to the idea of "revelation" as the central theme of this period of our church year. That motif, of course, begins with the birth announcement by the angel (and backing singers) to the shepherds. What, exactly, is revealed to them? In the end, I suspect, very little. When they hurry off to Bethlehem to see for themselves, they find Mary, Joseph, and the baby lying in a manger. According to the angel, the sign to them was to be precisely that: they would find a baby (wrapped in cloths) and lying in a manger. As we read St Luke's account of all this, it's hard to avoid the suspicion that what really amazed the shepherds is that they found things exactly as the angel had foreseen. It is the marvel of a man who has just seen a magician perform the very trick he said he would do. But beyond that, is there any real evidence that the shepherds comprehended the enormity of this birth? Had they any real grasp of who this child really is?

Something similar may be going on with the strange story we know as the Epiphany. The psalmist talks of the heavens proclaiming the glory of God; and St Paul makes much (in the early stages of his Letter to the Romans) about creation revealing God's existence to those who had not yet heard the message of salvation. So part of this story may be drawing on that idea, that the heavens (through this one itinerant star) are proclaiming the glory of Christ. A further idea is that it may have been aimed at those who believed in what we today know as astrology: that whatever power and authority heavenly bodies may be thought to have, they are mere pointers to the one who is higher than them all.

Coming to the baptism, a good question to ask is not so much, what was revealed, but to whom? This is one of those rare cases where it really is helpful to compare the different versions in the 4 gospels, and to note the subtle and not so subtle differences. In particular, who (besides Jesus, of course, saw or heard anything out of the ordinary? Was it an objective event, which could have been witnessed by anyone who happened to be there at the time; or was it a purely subjective experience for Jesus alone? St Matthew splits his vote two to one. "At that moment heaven was opened" (objective); "he saw the Spirit of God descending" (subjective); and "a voice from heaven said, 'this is my Son" (objective).

Mark is almost wholly in the subjective camp. "...he saw heaven being torn open" (subjective) "and the Spirit descending on him" (subjective); "and a voice came from heaven" (objective); "You are my Son" (subjective"). St Luke leans the other way. "...heaven was opened" (objective); "the Holy Spirit descended on him" (objective); "a voice came from heaven" (objective); "you are my Son" (subjective).

Then there is St John. He does not directly report Jesus' baptism. Instead, he has John the Baptist say of Jesus: "I saw the Holy Spirit come down from heaven as a dove and remain on him. I would not have known him, except that the one who sent me to baptise with water told me, 'The man on whom you see the Spirit come down and remain is the one who will baptise with the Holy Spirit." So John the Baptist saw what was happening, but whether or not he heard the voice from heaven, we do not know.

Where does all this get us? For my money the revelation through baptism was primarily for Jesus: a precious confirmation that he is whom he had come to believe himself to be, the Messiah, the beloved Son of God.

Genesis. The opening chapter of Genesis is in the form of a hymn of praise. It has a wonderful depth and richness to it that can only be cheapened by silly arguments about creation and evolution. The truth with which we are concerned here is not the "what" but the "by whom" question. And, perhaps, also the "why" question. Later theologians insisted that God created all things "ex nihilo". This indicates that the second verse must succeed the first in time, not expand it. First, God created the heavens and the earth. When first created the earth was formless and empty. When first created the earth had areas of water (or, perhaps, the whole earth was covered with water); there was only darkness (no light); and the Spirit of God was hovering (or brooding) over the waters. The image suggests a hen incubating her eggs – the symbol of the beginning of life. The next thing that God did was to create light. Without light there could be no life. (Recall how St John explores this idea in the Prologue to his gospel.) God saw that the light was good, and he separated it from darkness. [Light is good, darkness is not.] Notice that for the Hebrews the day started with evening: darkness is overcome by the dawn. We tend to think in the reverse: we start with dawn, and the light gives way to darkness.

Taking It Personally.

Can you recall a time of emptiness, chaos and darkness in your life? Can you now imagine the Spirit of God hovering over that situation, seeking to bring light and life into it?
Can you draw on this idea next time you find yourself in troubling circumstances? Try a simple prayer of invocation such as, "Spirit of God, hover over this situation now and bring light and life into it, I pray."
Sit in a dark room for a little while. Then turn on a light. Appreciate the difference between the light and darkness. Give thanks to God for light, and for the gift of sight.

Acts. This is an intriguing little story that may have all sorts of political sub-plots. We know from the gospels that the relationship between Jesus' disciples and those of John the Baptist was sometimes tense. This episode may be designed by the early church to make it clear that John's ministry in itself was not sufficient: his baptism was likewise only half what was required. It needed to be completed by Jesus' ministry. Or it may have something to do with the argument that "real" Christians spoke in tongues or uttered words of prophesy – an argument that was sometimes heard during the heyday of the Charismatic Renewal in the seventies and eighties. Two points here. First, in separating the water baptism from the laying on of hands and the anointing with the Spirit, the way was cleared (no doubt, inadvertently) for the development of the idea of Confirmation. Secondly, the suggestion that they were then baptised into the name of the Lord Jesus would seem to be at odds with the very clear instruction in St Matthew's gospel to baptise in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Taking It Personally.

Never let a chance go by to reflect on your own baptism. Read the liturgy in the prayer book. Notice the invocation of the Holy Spirit over the waters of the font. Notice, too, St Peter's promise that all who are baptised will receive the Holy Spirit. That includes you!
In what way would your life have been different if you had not been baptised?

Mark. A couple of Old Testament echoes strike me here. First, the idea of heaven being torn open seems to hark back to the plaintive cry of Isaiah (64:1). Secondly, the dove brings to mind the one released by Noah from the ark, which returned with an olive leaf in its mouth. The baptism of the earth for the removal of sin was over: a symbol of peace symbolised a new start. See also 1 Peter 3:18-22.

Taking It Personally.

Imagine that this is your baptism. The Holy Spirit descends on you and remains. And you hear words spoken to you from heaven: "You are my son/daughter, whom I love; with you I am well pleased." Repeat those words to yourself over and over again until you begin to believe them. Then rejoice and give thanks.

Notes for Reflection Christmas

2011-12-24T21:15:00.001+13:00

December 24/25 NOTES FOR REFLECTION Christmas Eve/Day

Texts: Isaiah 9:2-7; Titus 2:11-14; Luke 2:1-14

Theme: Pretty obvious, really, however we choose to express it. I'm going with "The Gift of a Child." It may be worth pausing at that point and pondering that simple phrase. Of course, in this context it refers to the infant Christ; but it also applies to all new-born infants. And who is the gift from in those cases?

Introduction. The pattern we have become used to through the Season of Advent continues here. An amazing and mystifying prophecy from centuries ago is fulfilled in an equally amazing and mystifying way. Somewhere around 700 years before that first Christmas, Isaiah proclaims a message of hope to the people devastated by defeat, capture and exile. A child is to be born! And centuries later that child is born in Bethlehem, exactly as Isaiah had foretold. And that has made all the difference, as St Paul writes in his letter to Titus.

Background. During the Advent Season I have been trying to flesh out the idea of the progressive stages of the spiritual development of humanity, at least that part of humanity that has been influenced by the Judaeo-Christian tradition. Taking a cue from the author of the Letter to the Hebrews, I have suggested that, for a long period of time, humanity in general did not have the spiritual "equipment" to encounter God directly. Just as we have evolved physically and mentally over millennia, so we have needed to evolve spiritually. As always, evolutionary progress does not happen in all creatures of a particular species at once. One or two "get there" first. So it was that God first revealed himself to exceptional individuals – particularly gifted or "anointed" to receive from God and share with everyone else.

While such an evolutionary process is gradual, there comes an occasional leap forward. Some years ago a popular book advanced the theory of the "Hundredth Monkey". This idea came from observing a troupe of monkeys in a fairly limited environment – I think they were confined on a particular island. One monkey discovered a new technique for doing something – sifting grain from earth by dropping it in the water; the grain floated and could be scooped off. Another monkey saw this and copied it. Then another, and so on. So far, so understandable. But the observers discovered that when the number of monkeys in this confined habitat that knew this trick reached a certain number (think, tipping point or critical mass), other monkeys of the same species in entirely separate environments suddenly "acquired" this same technique! How to explain that? Jung might say it points to the collective unconscious. Whatever the explanation, it suggests that at a certain point the whole species is somehow gifted with a new ability.

It's something like this I have in mind as I try to understand something of the mystery of the incarnation – and later, the coming of the Spirit at Pentecost. In some way we cannot explain rationally, this new life that is born is Bethlehem has entered, not just Mary, but all humanity: our human nature has been forever changed by the birth of this child that Isaiah talked about all those centuries before the event. That's why both Isaiah and the angel that frightened the wits out of the shepherds broadcast a rather strange birth notice. Not to Mary (and Joseph) a boy... But UNTO US. There in those little explosive words is the great miracle and the great mystery of Christmas. Even FOR US might have sounded right; but unto us?

Perhaps one way into this is to think about the way in which a baby can be said to be born unto (or at least into) a whole family. The child belongs to the parents as child, to the grandparents as grandchild, to the parents' other children as sibling, and to the parents' siblings as nephew/niece. (And so on through cousins, etc.) So a child can be said to be born unto his/her family; and if we accept that all humanity is one family (God is the Father of us all) then here is part of the mystery we are grappling with.

But only a part. As St John grasped perhaps more than any other biblical writer, this particular birth is about the incarnation of the Divine in the flesh of all humanity. From then on we could no longer insist that we are "only human". We are (at least potentially) both human and divine, and that potentiality is realised in general at Pentecost and in the particular case through baptism.

We make a great mistake if we allow ourselves to be drawn into debate about the details of immaculate conception or virgin birth. The joy of Christmas is part of the joy of the whole Christ-event, which is the process by which we become children of God through the Spirit as well as children of our parents through the flesh. More about that next year.

Isaiah. This is one of those passages that makes marvellous sense to us, but must have made absolutely no sense to the people of Isaiah's time, and probably to Isaiah himself. The people have been decimated by the Assyrians; their land has been pillaged, their leaders killed or taken hostage, their men slaughtered, and their women and children enslaved. It doesn't get much worse than that. And what is God's solution to all that? Another great military leader, an alliance with a stronger nation, or at least some sort of credible rescue plan? No, God's answer is embodied in a baby! Think about that for a minute – actually several minutes! Take any more manageable calamity you can think of – the earthquakes in Christchurch, for example. Imagine Gerry Brownlee standing up in the middle of the devastated CBD and announcing that he brings good news for them. The Government is to be placed on the shoulders of a new-born baby! And yet at a literal level that's basically the message from Isaiah.

We need to dig down to a lower level. The child is surely about starting all over again. About new life in the midst of death. About God once again doing an entirely new thing – when the time is right – when enough people are ready.

Finally, as we ponder this whole idea of the birth being "unto us", have a look at the beautiful little liturgy called "Thanksgiving for the Gift of a Child", which begins on page 754 of the Prayer Book. Read through it slowly and prayerfully. Thinking of the baby Jesus, pray the prayers in that service, and be thankful.

Taking It Personally.

· Focus on verse 2(a). Can you recall a time when you suddenly had a bright light shone at you in the midst of darkness (perhaps the headlight of an approaching car while driving at night)? Remember how your eyes take a moment or two to react, during which you cannot see properly. (Think Paul on the road to Damascus, temporarily blinded by a bright light.) Perhaps our spiritual blindness results from the Divine light being too strong for us?

· Now verse 2(b). Birth in a world where death is part of our reality. The wording reminds us of psalm 23. Read that psalm through. How does it relate to Christmas? (A clue, Emmanuel – God with us!)

· Read verse 3-5, and think of the destruction of war: Hiroshima, Afghanistan, Iraq – pick any of them. Focus on the sheer bloody horror of it all. Then read verses 6 and 7.

· Finish with a period of quiet meditation on Isaiah 55:8.

Titus. A little Christmas stocking filler! Christ is the embodiment of the grace of God. Because of the appearance of that grace among us all thing have been changed, including our human nature so that we can now lead godly lives. Time itself has changed; we are now in an age that will end with the return of Christ.

Taking It Personally.

· We feel different at Christmas, don't we? Do you? Do you feel more tolerant, more kindly disposed towards others, even ""difficult" others? How do you explain that?

· We anticipate Christmas, look forward to it, and become more hopeful. What are you most hoping for at this time? What are you most looking forward to? How do your hopes relate to your faith?

Luke. The birth takes place in a real, historical world, as Luke is at pains to record. Quite possibly he is guided in part by his great love of irony here. Caesar wants to puff himself up by recording how many subjects he has. But for Luke only one new-born baby really counts. Notice that there is no reference to an innkeeper in this story, despite countless nativity plays involving such a character (often with comic-tragic results!). Come to that, Luke does not specifically mention a stable (or an accompanying cast of animals): all that comes from his reference to a manger.

Above all for Luke this birth is a reunion of heaven and earth. Heaven takes the initiative. The angel (messenger) appears, accompanied by a blinding light (the glory of God). As usual, the humans involved are terrified, and so the angel has to begin where they all do: "do not be afraid". Then comes the birth announcement, and that same little phrase: the baby has been born "to (or unto) you", followed by the full angelic choir. And all this for a bunch of shepherds, universally looked down on at the time as the lowest of the low. When they had recovered their wits, they set off for Bethlehem to see for themselves. What they found was a man, a woman and a baby – nothing out of the ordinary. But they told people about the angel's message and we are assured that all who heard their testimony were amazed. Mary, however, stored these things up in her heart and pondered them, while the shepherds went on their way praising God.

And then...not much happened for 30 years! Things were still not quite ready.

Taking It Personally.

· Read the passage slowly, noticing the details that are there and those that aren't. Place yourself in the encounter between the shepherd and the angel. How do you feel? What can you see? Can you look or is the light too bright? What are the sheep doing? Have they seen what's going on or are they just continuing to chew or sleep?

· Go with the shepherds to Bethlehem. What do you see when you get there? How do you feel? Contrast the vision with the pictures of the Nativity Scene you may have seen over the years. Does Mary look like a woman who has just been through the trauma of labour and childbirth, or is she all serene and beautiful? What's Joseph doing?

· Look at the infant. Does he look as though he has just been born? What can you smell? Are there animals around, or evidence that they have been around? What are the shepherds doing? Do Mary and Joseph seem welcoming or do you feel intrusive? Are you in a hurry to leave, or would you like to stay? Do you say anything to Mary or Joseph? Do they speak to you?

· What are your thoughts as you leave? What does that birth mean to you? Do you feel in any way that this baby has been born to you?

December 18 NOTES FOR REFLECTION Advent 4

2011-12-17T11:41:00.001+13:00

December 18 NOTES FOR REFLECTION Advent 4

Texts: 2 Samuel 7:1-11, 16; Romans 16:25-27; Luke 1:26-38

Theme: Do not be Afraid. [This is the almost invariable opening line when an angel visits a human being.] As we continue to explore the idea of developing our spiritual faculties, perhaps we need to hear those words addressed to us: do not be afraid.

Introduction. During this Season of Advent I have been trying to explore the theme of the spiritual journey, corporate and individual, as being a process of stages by which we learn to hear God directly, rather than through a mediator. Thus, we can say with the author of the Letter to the Hebrews, that in olden times God spoke to us through specially anointed individuals, such as the patriarchs, Moses, Samuel, the Judges and Kings, and, of course, the prophets. Then came the incarnation when God in Christ came among us in Jesus Christ and spoke directly, but usually without being understood. Finally, at Pentecost God made his Holy Spirit available to all. We are now equipped to "receive" God directly: what we need to do is to learn how to tune in. This pattern of growth is well illustrated by today's readings.

King David is glowing with success. He is in a wonderful palace, his enemies have been defeated and all is well with his world. His thoughts turn to God. Is it right that he should have a splendid palace while God (represented by the Ark of the Covenant) is in a tent somewhere? He tells his friend, the prophet Nathan, of his concern, and Nathan tells him to do whatever he has in mind. It quickly turns out that God has something very different in his mind. Both David and Nathan were operating in the worldly mode. Nathan should have known better: as a prophet he should have listened to God, not to the king and not to his own sense of what is right. St Paul ends his magnificent Letter to the Romans with a final outburst of praise, emphasising the importance of divine revelation through the "prophetic writings". And Mary has an extraordinary encounter with an angel and moves from bewilderment to acceptance as she opens herself to the will of God.

Samuel. It's hard not to feel some sympathy for King David. Successful men don't always give credit for their success to God, or even give God a first (let alone a second) thought. The author, of course, is clear that the happy circumstances in which David finds himself are a gift from God. Where it seems David goes wrong is in the apparent belief that one good turn deserves another; God having been good to him, he will now return the favour. In other words, he is, perhaps unconsciously, claiming equality with God. He is overlooking the fact that God sets the agenda – God always takes the initiative – and so his own proposal to build a fine temple is presumptuous, to say the least.

Nathan the prophet forgets his prophetic role. He responds to David as a man – he operates in the worldly mode. He is so sure that God is with David that he assumes that whatever David had in mind will be just fine with God. He does not deem it necessary to check with God first before encouraging David in his plans. So God speaks firmly to Nathan. Notice that God does not speak directly to David. The message is for David but God gives it to Nathan to pass on. Nathan has switched into the spiritual mode: he can now hear what God is saying: David still needs an intermediary. Notice that the promise of an eternal kingdom in verse 16 is the one that the Archangel Gabriel gives to Mary in this morning's gospel passage.

Taking It Personally.

· Are you more likely to "remember" God in your times of difficulty or in your joyous times? When you feel thankful about something do you usually take time to express your thanks in prayer?

· What do you think of David's attitude? How would you characterise it? Have you ever felt that you were doing a good turn for God?

· Do you sympathise with Nathan? Are you inclined to encourage people to "go for it" without taking time to ponder whether the "it" they are going for is the right thing to do?

· Given the subsequent history of the kingdom of Israel, what do you make of the promise in verse 16? Should modern Israel determine its policies in accordance with such promises?

Romans. One of St Paul's favourite themes is the revelation of "the mystery hidden for long ages past, but now revealed and made known". This adds weight to the idea that God's self-revelation has been gradual – stage by stage – as humanity's spiritual evolution has progressed. Only when there were sufficient spiritually open people did God reveal "the secret", of salvation for all through Jesus Christ. The reference to the "prophetic writings" is a little obscure, as it seems to suggest writings contemporary with St Paul. But perhaps it means that with the coming of the Spirit at Pentecost we are now able to understand the prophetic writings of old in a new way. [See Luke 24:45] The universal quality of salvation is emphasised in verse26 – a fitting climax to this full statement of Paul's theology.

Taking It Personally.

· Notice how Paul's thinking and theology lead him into praise and worship. Make praise for the wonder of God's self-revelation the centre of your prayer this week in the lead-up to Christmas.

· Reflect on how your own understanding of God's purpose has grown over the years. Do you sometimes find that things you didn't understand once suddenly become clearer to you?

Luke. Today's passage is about what we now call the Annunciation. Notice first that it is unique to Luke's gospel. [Matthew's account is far more terse, and is focused on Joseph rather than Mary; and Mark and John omit it altogether.] The Church tends to emphasise only one half of the extraordinary promises the angel makes to Mary, perhaps because she seems not to notice the other half. We can understand her reaction to the news that she, still a virgin, is to give birth. But the angel also tells her that the son to be born to her will ascend David's throne and will reign for ever. What on earth could that mean in the worldly sense? Mary's immediate response shows her operating in the worldly mode. Of course it makes no sense in that mode to say that she will be pregnant even though she is a virgin. "How can that be?" she asks. But she is talking to an angel! Angels do not operate in the worldly mode. His answer makes no sense in that mode: it can only be understood in the spiritual mode. Mary now moves from one mode to the other by faith. One thing she does know is that she is a servant of the Lord God. That is enough for her to leave things in God's hands – including her own life.

Taking It Personally.

· Read through this passage slowly, several times. Try to enter into the story as an interested observer. What are your feelings?

· Does the idea of the "virgin birth" bother or embarrass you? Is that a part of the Creed you feel uneasy about? Think about the "mode" in which you are operating: could that be the problem?

· Notice how Mary starts off being logical, even though she is talking to an angel! Do you find your logical mind gets in the way of your faith sometimes?

· Angels invariably tell their human audiences not to be afraid; but there is something scary about opening ourselves to the spiritual reality. Do you recall an occasion when you felt nervous or plain scared in this way?

· Pray this simple (but frightening!) prayer each day this week: "Lord God, send your Holy Spirit upon me, overshadow me with your procreative power, that Christ may be born anew in me. Amen."

Parish of East Otago Christmas Services

2011-12-15T08:34:00.001+13:00

St Barnabas, Coast Road, Warrington.

Christmas Eve: 9.00pm Carols; 9.45pm Eucharist Service

Christmas Day: 9.30am Eucharist Service.

St John's, Beach Street, Waikouaiti.

December 23: 7.00pm Carol Service

Christmas Day: 9.30am Eucharist Service.

Hui te Rangiora, Puketeraki, Coast Road, Karitane

Christmas Day: 11.00am Eucharist Service

St Mary's, Stourness Street, Palmerston.

Christmas Day: 10.00am Eucharist Service.

Kotahitanga, Haven Street, Moeraki

Christmas Eve: 4.00pm Eucharist Service.

Boxing Day: 9.00am 175th Anniversary Community Service.

There are no Christmas services at St Stephen's.

__________

Send

December 11 NOTES FOR REFLECTION Advent 3

2011-12-09T14:58:00.001+13:00

December 11 NOTES FOR REFLECTION Advent 3

Texts: Isaiah 61:1-4, 8-11; 1 Thessalonians 5:12-24; John 1:6-8, 19-28

Theme: As usual there are a number of possibilities. I rather like "John on John", as the author of the Gospel reflects on the role or ministry of John the Baptist. That offers an opportunity to look at the question I raised last week, "Why do we need John the Baptist?" And just as that question led into a quick overview of St Mark's gospel, so this same question invites a similar overview of St John's gospel this week.

Introduction. The link between our first lesson and our gospel passage is a little more obscure than usual, but it is there in the person of John the Baptist. We recall again that when John was held in captivity and doubt set in, he sent emissaries to check with Jesus, in effect, that Jesus really was the Messiah as John had originally thought. By way of response Jesus pointed to what was going on all around him – the blind were given back their sight, the deaf could hear again, the lame could walk, and the dead were being raised. In other words, the very things that Isaiah had predicted would happen on when the Anointed One came in passages such as today's first lesson were coming to pass. There is, of course, a great irony here. John has identified himself by quoting from Isaiah, yet he has apparently failed to recognise the Messianic signs that are accompanying Jesus' ministry, as predicted by that very same prophet. That could well have been the point of Jesus' answering John's question in the way that he did. Meanwhile, St Paul's First Letter to the Thessalonians is again used to remind us that, for us, the focus has shifted from Jesus' first coming to his return at the end of the age.

Background. All the gospels at least hint at some ongoing difficulty within the early Church over the exact relationship between John the Baptist and Jesus – or, more accurately, between their respective followers. St John is perhaps the most explicit on this matter: see 3:25-26. He is also very clear about John's mission. In today's extracts from the wonderful prologue to his gospel, St John spells out his understanding. John the Baptist is NOT the Light (the Christ), but a witness to the light. And as soon as he has finished the prologue he begins the main body of the gospel by bringing John onto centre stage to make the same point even more emphatically. Moreover, in the prologue he explains why a witness was necessary: He (Christ) was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognise him. There is the point I made last week. For whatever reason people were incapable of recognising Christ: they needed to have him pointed out to them.

So the first thing we could say in an overview of St John's gospel is that the act of witnessing is crucial to the development of the Christian faith. It is John who points two of his own disciples towards Jesus: 1:35-37. One of those is Andrew who goes and finds Peter: 1:40-42. Later the Samaritan woman will return to her village and testify to Jesus with such good effect that many of the villagers come out to meet Jesus and are themselves convinced: 4:39-42.

Even more explicit in this gospel is the other main theme I raised last week. The reason why John was necessary was that most people lacked the spiritual faculties necessary to discern Jesus' true identity. At that time the people still needed a prophet (one who is spiritually advanced) to lead them into spiritual truths. Take a quick run through this gospel and we will find episode after episode of almost comic misunderstanding between those who are operating in the worldly mode and Jesus trying to speak spiritual truths to them. Here are just a few examples:

· 2:19-22, where Jesus is talking about his body (death and resurrection), whereas his protagonists think he is talking about the temple.

· 3:1-21, the dialogue between Jesus and Nicodemus, where Jesus tells the old man he must be born again – born from above – born of water and the Spirit.

· 4:7-26, where Jesus meets the Samaritan woman at the well and they talk past each other about "water".

· 4:27-34, where the disciples urge Jesus to eat something, only to be told he has food they know nothing about.

· 6:25-65, where just about everybody is baffled by Jesus' identifying himself as the bread of heaven.

· 8:23, where Jesus tells his critics, "You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world." And 8:47 is in similar vein: "Whoever belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God."

That this idea of worldly/spiritual divide is at the heart of St John's presentation is spelled out most clearly in 7:39, where he interrupts his own narrative to explain what Jesus means by "living water": By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive. Up to that time the Spirit had not been given, since Jesus had not yet been glorified.

To recap and summarise: in the past God had spoken to his people through the prophets. With the coming of Jesus God spoke directly through his Son, but most of the people lacked the spiritual capacity to see, hear and understand. So they needed people like John the Baptist to spell it out for them. Then at Pentecost the Spirit came to lead the people into all truth: 16:13. Next time you hear the reader say, "Hear what the Spirit is saying to the Church", understand that it is something different from, and deeper than, "hear what Mary has just read out in the church".

Isaiah. This is the great messianic prophecy that Jesus took as his kaupapa when he began his teaching in his hometown synagogue: Luke 4:18-19. The Anointed One (the One on whom the Spirit of the Sovereign Lord has come) inaugurates a time of renewal and transformation for the people, and of restoration and re-building for their towns and cities. In short, the coming of the Anointed One (the Christ) makes a difference! As mentioned above, these are the signs to which Jesus drew John's attention: hence the gospel writers' emphasis on the healing work that Jesus carried out during his earthly ministry. Notice that this passage in Isaiah is in the first person. Isaiah the prophet usually acts as a mouthpiece for God, or for himself. Here he is the mouthpiece for the Christ who is to come. Also noteworthy is the priority given to preaching good news to the poor. It comes before the various acts of mercy mentioned in the passage. But it's not all good news: in this passage the coming of the Anointed One also includes judgment: the year of the Lord's favour is intertwined with the day of vengeance of our Lord. [When Jesus reads from the scroll in the synagogue he breaks off before this day is mentioned; perhaps to make the point that his first coming is about the offer of salvation – judgment is delayed until his return.]

Taking It Personally.

· Read the passage slowly and prayerfully several times. Which phrase strikes you in particular? As we approach the end of this year and the beginning of the next, how does this prophecy of better things to come make you feel?

· In what way is this good news for the poor?

· Are you aware of someone who is broken-hearted at this time? How might you bind up that person's wounds?

· Who among those known to you might be held captive – to addiction, for example, or by an unhealthy relationship? Is there some way in which you might be able to help set that person free?

· Spend some time in intercessory prayer, drawing on this passage.

Thessalonians. It is thought that this Letter was written as early as 50-51 A.D. The belief in Christ's imminent return was still very strong and had led to a somewhat laid-back attitude. What's the point in working hard if everything is about to end? So St Paul urges discipline, both in the practical everyday sense and in the spiritual sense. Above all he urges them to keep a Christian attitude, one of joy and thanksgiving whatever their personal circumstances. Verses 19-23 are of particular importance. They are to be open to the Spirit, listening to the word of God, and bringing commonsense to bear. Not everybody who claims to be speaking for God really is! Paul's final remarks are both words of instruction and of prayer for them

Taking It Personally.

· Examine your attitude in the light of this passage. Are you generally a thankful and joyous person, or is your mood dictated by your particular circumstances?

· What about your attitude towards other people? Ponder verse 14. Which of those things do you find most difficult to do? Why? As you reflect on this verse do particular people come into your mind? Do you need to change your attitude to them?

· And then there's verse 15! Clearly St Paul has in mind a community of faith prepared to take responsibility for one another as well as for their own attitude and behaviour. Is that how things are in your local church?

· Are you open to the leading of the Spirit? Make that a focus of your prayer, drawing on verse 23.

John. The first point St John makes about John the Baptist is that he is a man: not an angel, nor some divine spirit, or a voice, but a man. Secondly, he was "sent by God". He was a man on a divine mission. His mission was to be the witness to Christ; and notice the importance attached to him by St John. It is "through him all might believe". John the Baptist is the primal witness to Christ, the pattern for all other witnesses to come. Clearly, he caused a great stir, so much so that the Temple equivalent of ERO was sent to audit his teaching, since he did not have the appropriate credentials of a rabbi. His interview is recorded by St John in fairly neutral terms: it seems his interrogators wanted to hear his explanation of what he was up to. In answer he identifies himself as the one calling in the wilderness. He is then asked to explain why he baptises people, and it's in answering this question that he gives us a further clue about the need for his ministry: "among you stands one you do not know" (v.26). Then in the next verse comes his famous remark about untying the sandals. This was one thing that no disciple could be obliged to do for his master: such work was reserved for slaves. It is, of course, a preview of Jesus' actions in washing his disciples' feet at the Last Supper. It is also an amazing illustration of John's humility: he considered himself unworthy even to be Christ's slave!

Taking It Personally.

· There's no avoiding this question! How do you witness to Jesus?

· If you were asked who you are, how would you answer? With just your name, or with some reference to your family of origin or your place of birth? Or would you describe yourself in terms of your faith – "I am a disciple of the Lord Jesus Christ", or even "I am a unique manifestation of the creative love of God"?

· At Christmas we will sing of Emmanuel, God with us (or God among us). How aware are you of God's presence with you? Take some time in silent prayer today: be conscious of spending the time in God's presence. This week pause frequently and say to yourself "I am in God's presence". At the end of the week reflect on this practice: has it made any difference to you or for you?

Advent 2

2011-12-04T10:56:00.001+13:00

December 4 NOTES FOR REFLECTION Advent 2

Texts: Isaiah 40:1-11; 2 Peter 3:8-15a; Mark 1:1-8

Theme: Again, a rich field of contenders; but I'm going for "Same Voice, New Creation". Today we are starting on Mark's gospel, the gospel for Year B of our three-year cycle. Mark (like John) clearly has in mind the opening verses of Genesis. The old and the new creations are "spoken" into existence.

Introduction. Today is a good day to take an overview of the gospel, and to emphasise its role as a map of the journey of faith. That journey has three major stages for most of us. First, we hear about God: because of our undeveloped spiritual faculties we cannot see or hear God directly, so we need intermediaries (prophets, teachers, etc) to tell us about the reality of God. Then we become interested in, and begin to develop a relationship with, Jesus Christ, primarily as a teacher and exemplar; and our spiritual faculties begin to develop. The third stage is one of opening ourselves to the interior witness of the Holy Spirit, when our spiritual faculties continue to develop to the point where we can encounter God directly.

These stages overlap. In fact, each successive stage does not replace the earlier ones, but is a further development of them. Hence the gospel story begins with the prophet, John, who points us to Jesus, who teaches us about the coming of the Spirit. Against that background we can see each of the four gospels progressing in a similar way. Mark ends (in his original version) with an open tomb and the only witnesses too terrified to speak. Matthew introduces the resurrected Christ and takes the story almost to the Ascension; but the Spirit has not yet come. Luke's gospel then goes a step further with the Ascension, but does not include the coming of the Spirit. John then includes Jesus' teaching about the coming of the Spirit and the breathing of the Spirit by Jesus onto the disciples. [Even then, we need to turn to the Book of Acts for a full account of the coming of the Spirit.]

So Mark's gospel begins with John the Baptist, a prophet calling our attention to the one who is to come. He does so by recalling the earlier prophecies – a prophecy of the coming of a prophet to prepare the way of the Lord. Only then does Jesus enter upon the stage. Our first lesson contains the major part of the prophecy quoted by Mark. Then our second lesson reminds us, as it were, that we are not focused on Jesus' first coming: we are awaiting his return.

Background. To track this journey of faith through the Scriptures a key term is prophecy. This should be understood, not so much as a prediction of some future event, but as hearing the word of God directly. It is God's desire that we all become capable of that, but to do so we need to develop our spiritual faculties: Jesus frequently referred to "those who have ears to hear" or "eyes to see". Here are a few key passages to help get some idea of all this:

· Numbers 11:24-30 – the anointing of the elders of Israel. Notice especially verse 29(b), where Moses says, "I wish that all the Lord's people were prophets and that the Lord would put his Spirit on them!"

· Jeremiah 31:31-34 – a new covenant. Verse 34 says, "No longer will a man teach his neighbour, or a man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest," says the Lord.

· Joel 2:28 – "I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your old men will dream dreams, your young men will see visions."

· John – many passages from the Farewell discourses (chapters 13-17), such as 16:12-15; and see also 7:39.

· 1 Corinthians 14:1-5, especially verse 1 where St Paul writes, "Follow the way of love and eagerly desire the spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy." See also verses 22 and 29-33.

· Hebrews 1:1-4: "in the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son...".

And here is a useful passage from Thomas Keating in his book, Manifesting God:

"How are we to reach what Paul calls 'the deep knowledge of God' (Colossians 1:9, 2:3, 3:4-11), by which he means the experiential knowledge of God, or what the Christian tradition calls 'contemplation? It is the latter that makes us sensitive to the divine mysteries. Though we cannot explain them with our conceptual apparatus, they are just as real as anything that we can see, feel, think or imagine." [His answer to his own question is prayer.]

Isaiah. Last week's lesson started with the agonising cry from the prophet in prayer," Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!" This week he is back to his role as God's prophet, and the tone is completely different. "Comfort, comfort my people". The hard times are over: the people have done their time and are due to be released. They are no longer to be frightened of their enemies: even the mighty invaders (in this case, the Assyrians) are mere mortals: they will wither and die just like the grass. But the God of Israel will never die. So it is time to go up on the highest mountain and proclaim the good news "here is your God'. But first must come one calling in the desert – a herald to proclaim that the Lord is coming and so his way must be prepared for him. Why is all this good news? Because God has a shepherd's heart: he will tend and care for his flock.

Taking It Personally.

Can you recall a time when you experienced God's comfort? Are you in need of that comfort now?
How might you prepare the way for the Lord to come afresh into your heart and soul and life at this time? What rough places, mountains or other obstacles might you need to deal with first?
To whom have you brought the good tidings of Advent?
With what confidence could you point to your local church and say, 'Here is your God?'
To what or whom are you most looking forward to this Advent Season?

Peter. It is thought that this letter was written in the second century A.D., perhaps around the year 120. Clearly, people are beginning to question the reality of the promised return of Jesus as the years go by without any sign of him. The author responds to these concerns with two arguments. First, God's notion of time is quite different from ours: indeed, being eternal (outside of time) it might be more accurate to say that God has no idea of time. Secondly, the author says that the delay in Christ's return can be put down to God's forbearance and patience: God wishes everyone to come to repentance before the end comes. In the meantime, Christ's followers are called to live lives of faithful discipleship.

Taking It Personally.

Another "holiness code" checklist. How have you measured up this last week?
Reflect on the phrase "and speed its coming" in verse 12. Do you want to "speed" the coming of the end of the world? Honestly? Why might you be reluctant? Why might you feel guilty about being reluctant?
Turn to verse 13 and ponder the petition in the Lord's Prayer: "your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as in heaven". When you pray that, are you not "speeding" the coming of the "new heaven and a new earth, the home of righteousness?" Why would you be reluctant to do that?

Mark. The first thing to notice about this gospel is what is missing: there is no birth narrative and no genealogy. For Mark Jesus' human origins are of no concern. His opening line is almost a complete summary of the story he is about to tell. Notice the word "beginning". He doesn't mean the beginning of his story, the text: he means he is writing about the beginning of the good news of Jesus. The "gospel" is not the book he is writing, but the message that Jesus has brought to us – the good news of salvation. To be correct, "Jesus Christ" should read "Jesus the Christ". Mark is very clear: Jesus IS the Christ and the Son of God.

He is also very clear that in Jesus God has initiated a new creation. The first creation came about by God calling in the void: the second creation begins with a voice calling in the wilderness. The living dead, people dead in their sins, respond in huge numbers, and accept baptism from John. Baptism was usually reserved for non-Jewish converts; but now the Jewish people are accepting the need for a washing away of sin and a new beginning. That is the way in which they are preparing the way of the Lord: by rejecting all that is in them that obstructs the flow of God's grace, and opening themselves up so that God may truly be incarnated in them. Advent is the time of preparation for Christmas: repentance is a time of preparation for the birth of Christ in our hearts.

Taking It Personally

Flick to the original end of St Mark's gospel (16:8). Does this help you to grasp what Mark means by the "beginning" of the gospel? It has started but it hasn't finished yet. That means that you are part of the ongoing gospel. How do you feel about that?
What do you need to do to prepare for a fresh birth of Jesus in your heart and life? Are there any obstacles in your life that may block the flow of God's grace into you and through you?
To whom have you acted as John the Baptist calling his or her attention to Jesus?
Try to visualize the scene at the River Jordan as crowds come to John for baptism. Place yourself in that crowd – or are you more comfortable on the edge? Do you want what they want? Do you experience a deep spiritual hunger for more, or are you merely an interested bystander?

November 27 NOTES FOR REFLECTION Advent Sunday

2011-11-27T09:22:00.001+13:00

November 27 NOTES FOR REFLECTION Advent Sunday

Texts: Isaiah 64:1-9; 1 Corinthians 1:3-9; Mark 13:24-37

Theme: We're spoilt for choice on this wonderful Sunday. "Here we go Again!" "Starting Over"? But I'm going with "Yes, John, He is the One who is to Come". [Answering the question from John the Baptist in Matthew 11:2.]

Introduction. Advent Sunday is one of the great Sundays of the year, and it's important to make the most of it. We start with that blood-curdling cry from Isaiah to a silent and apparently absent God: "Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down"! It has the same heartfelt anguish that we hear in Christ's awful cry from the Cross: "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" Both capture perfectly the sense of divine absence or indifference when we are stuck, when prayer doesn't come at all or remains unanswered. Our next reading, of course, knows that Isaiah's prayer has been spectacularly answered (if a tad delayed!) in the Advent of Jesus. The mood is now completely different; it is one of joyful expectation. But even while Jesus was on earth it was not always obvious, even to spiritual giants like John the Baptist, that God really had come amongst us. Hence John's question from the dungeons of Herod's palace. And now in Mark's gospel the question turns to Christ's return. When will it be? What will it be like? What signs should we look out for to warn us that he's on his way? How should we live our lives in the meantime?

Background. I'm writing these notes the day before our General Election, so I am having to rely on the Opinion Polls to tell me what is likely to happen tomorrow. If they're right, about half of our people are satisfied enough with the present state of our country to re-elect our present Government, and the other half are not so sure. Who's right and who's wrong? Are these dark times and getting darker, or are we indeed on the pathway to a brighter future?

How do we read the signs of our times? How much attention should we give to financial indices and how much to social ones? Are the latest GDP figures a better guide to the state of our nation than those relating to hospital admissions of children? Is the promised payout to farmers by Fonterra more important or less important than the average price of milk in our supermarkets? Is it more important to increase the production and export of our large coal deposits or protect the atmosphere from further harm caused by the burning of fossil fuels? What are we to make of the increasing numbers of people on anti-depressants? Do we have a sense of God here with us, or are we with Isaiah desperately calling for divine intervention? And we can take that question at various levels, from our nation down to our families and even our own lives.

Isaiah. It is difficult to remain dry-eyed when you really hear the pathos in this cry, which is, of course, a prayer. As suggested above, the opening verse is the cry of a man who feels that God is, at the very least, far away, concealed in the heavenly realms, and refusing to "come down" to earth. He recalls occasions in the past when God did deign to come down: the imagery in verse 3 suggests Mount Sinai. In better times God had shown himself uniquely among the gods as one who cares enough to help those who wait for him. Notice how Isaiah does not accuse God of acting unjustly or capriciously: he acknowledges the fault is all on the peoples' side. They have turned away from God; indeed, they have given up on God (verse 7). It all sounds pretty desperate. Yet the fact that he is crying out to God shows that he has not given up hope; and that hope is ultimately based on their relationship with God. He is their Father (verse 8), and they are his people (verse 9).

Taking It Personally.

· Reflect on this passage as a format of prayer. Notice the key characteristics. Authenticity, for one: this is real stuff! How does your own prayer life match up to this?

· Have you had times when you felt that God was just not interested in you, not listening to you, or even absent from you? Did you call out all the more (Bartimaeus comes to mind), or did you give up on prayer? What got you started again?

· Ponder the phrase "those who wait for him [God]". Do you wait for God, or are you more inclined to expect instant answers?

· Do you call on his name and strive to lay hold of him (verse 7)? Ponder this verse and reflect on your own prayer in the light of it.

· This week address your prayer to "Father" [or better still, "Abba"] and add, "I come to you as one of your own children". Then pray within that relationship.

Corinthians. A classic prayer of thanksgiving from St Paul. As you read it, remind yourself that this is addressed to one of the most dysfunctional churches in Paul's collection! [Look what he says next in verses 10-17.] Yet, despite all their only-too-human failings, Paul is able to assure them that, through God's grace in Jesus Christ, they "have been enriched in every way", and that they "do not lack any spiritual gift". They are still awaiting Christ's imminent return; but God has already called them into fellowship with his Son Jesus Christ.

Taking It Personally.

· This is one of those wonderful passages that need to be taken twice a day for at least a week – sentence by sentence. Read it out loud, addressed to yourself. Start with verse 3. It is all too familiar as a quick phrase in our liturgy. Now take it in slowly: God and Christ are sending YOU grace and peace. How wonderful is that!

· Now take in verse 5. You "have been enriched in every way", even though you may not know it, so that you do not lack for spiritual gifts. Ask God to lead you into the truth of that – to show you the gifts he has already given you.

· How important is Christ's return to you? Are you eagerly awaiting it, dreading it, or not really interested or convinced that it will never happen

· What does it mean to you to be called by God "into fellowship with his Son Jesus Christ"?

· Finish with prayers of thanksgiving.

Mark. The first point to note is the change in time-span as we compare this passage with our second lesson. The Corinthians were still [c.48-50 A.D.] eagerly awaiting Christ's imminent return: by the time Mark's gospel is being written [c.65-70 A.D.] the focus is on the Son of Man coming in glory at the end of the age. There is considerable support among scholars for the idea that what Mark has in mind is the destruction of Jerusalem, including the Temple, which took place in 70 A.D. If the gospel was written shortly before that, then the author has read the signs of the times and seen the inevitability of a rebellion resulting in a Roman onslaught. If it was written after the event (as some scholars believe), then the author was writing with the benefit of hindsight. There are two key points for us to note. First, verse 32 should be memorise and recalled every time some self-styled prophet tells us that he (and come to think of it, it always is a man!) has cracked the code and knows when the end will come. Secondly, Jesus' teaching in this passage is about how we are to live our lives in the meantime. We are to live our lives awake! Alert to see God coming to us in every moment. At the very least, we are to accept our own physical mortality and be constantly prepared for it.

Taking It Personally.

· This passage is essentially about living with uncertainty at a very basic level. It could all end tomorrow – for you, for your city, or for everything. Reflect on the uncertainty of life. What lessons might there be for your life of faith?

· Are you inclined to procrastinate – to tell yourself there's plenty of time for that later on? What does this passage say to that attitude?

· Is there something specific that you having been putting off doing – visiting a friend, seeking reconciliation with someone, committing more time to prayer? Perhaps this passage is God's way of prompting you into action?

· This week practise being watchful and alert to see any sign of God's presence in your presence. Make a note of it, and give thanks for it. Pray a prayer of welcome whenever you feel God has come to you. After all, this is the Season of Advent!

November 20 NOTES FOR REFLECTION The Feast of Christ the King

2011-11-19T12:09:00.001+13:00

November 20 NOTES FOR REFLECTION The Feast of Christ the King

Texts: Ezekiel 34:11-16; Ephesians 1:15-23; Matthew 25:31-46

Theme: Final Answer? [Think Chris Tarrant on Who wants to be a Millionaire (U.K.). Is that your final answer? Today, the last Sunday of our present Liturgical Year, we come to give our final answer to the question that confronts us over and over again: who is Jesus?

Introduction. Our answer, of course, is that he is Christ the King; but what exactly do we mean by that? Part of the problem is that we have a rather different view of kings and queens than in former times. We are used to "constitutional monarchs", whose powers are carefully circumscribed by law. Whatever else we mean when he acknowledge the kingship of Christ, we surely do not mean that he is a constitutional figurehead! What we do mean is not easy to put into a word or phrase. Perhaps the best we can do is draw a composite picture based on today's readings. Like David before him, Christ is in one sense a Shepherd-King, the image underlying both our first lesson and the gospel (in part). Something far more all-encompassing is envisaged by our lesson from Ephesians: words like "sovereign", "universal" and "victorious" come to mind (as does the U.K. National Anthem – Send him victorious, happy and glorious, long to reign over us... The gospel adds a further facet to our composite image, that of the head of the judicial system – or president of the International Court of Justice, perhaps, as he will exercise judgment over all nations, while simultaneously acting like a shepherd at the drafting gate.

Background. The question of Jesus' real identity features in almost every episode in the gospel narrative up to and including the Transfiguration. Then it fades from sight until the Passion story begins with Christ's arrest and trial.

Using Luke's gospel as an illustration, we might begin with the Annunciation. Because of Mary's response we tend to focus on the biological question; and on Mary's acceptance of God's will. But the angel gives us some very important information besides. The child's name is to be Jesus; and he will be called Son of the Most High. Even before his conception, there is the angelic clue to the dual nature of Christ. The baby is to be both human (named Jesus) and divine (the Son of the Most High). He is also to ascend the throne of David, but his reign will last for ever. When he is born he is acclaimed by the angel as "Saviour" and "Christ the Lord", but when the shepherds go to the stable what they see is Mary and Joseph and the baby lying in the manger.

The Presentation in the Temple continues the dual theme, as Mary and Joseph fulfil the requirements of the law in respect of the new-born baby, while Simeon the prophet and Anna the prophetess see the divine significance of this baby. Thirty years later Jesus of Nazareth presents himself as one of a large crowd for baptism in the Jordan; but a voice from heaven proclaims "you are my Son, whom I love; in you I am well pleased." St Luke follows with Jesus' genealogy: "he was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph...".

And so to the wilderness where the devil homed in on this very question of identity: "if you are the Son of God..." and we will hear echoes of this in the Passion Narrative: "if you are the king of the Jews, save yourself..."

When he preaches in his hometown the crowds ask themselves, "isn't this the carpenter's son?" before taking offence and trying to throw him over a bluff. When he exorcises demons and evil spirits they know exactly who he is; but everyone else struggles with his identity. His disciples and the admiring crowds are constantly bewildered by the quality of his teaching, his healing gifts and his power over the natural elements. "Who is this man that even the winds and the sea obey him?" His opponents are outraged by his assurance that sinners are forgiven: "who is he to forgive sins; only God may do that!

Along the way Jesus gives himself a variety of titles, the Son of Man being the most common; but he also refers to himself as "the lord of the Sabbath" and the bridegroom, and acknowledge that he has a reputation for being "a drunkard and a glutton" because he doesn't follow the extreme asceticism of John the Baptist. Others call him Rabbi (Teacher) or hail him as a great prophet.

In the Herod's dungeon, beset by doubt, John the Baptist sends emissaries to ask Jesus, "Are you the one who is to come or should we expect someone else"; while upstairs in the palace Herod himself is going slowly mad struggling with the same question: Some were saying John has been raised from the dead, others that Elijah had appeared, and still others that one of the prophets from long ago had come back to life. The disciples had heard the same rumours; but then Jesus asked them, "Who do you say I am?" and Peter spoke for all of them, "You are the Christ."

And so to the Transfiguration where the voice from heaven was heard again: "This is my Son, whom I have chosen; listen to him." And that seemed to have finally settled the issue, until it arises again in the Sanhedrin, and the interrogation before Pilate. As mentioned above, the mockers took their cue from the devil's approach in the wilderness: "He saved others; let him save himself, if he is the Christ of God, the Chosen One." "If you are the king of the Jews save yourself." "Aren't you the Christ? Save yourself and us!" Pilate made his view clear: The notice read 'This is the King of the Jews'; and the centurion at the foot of the cross made up his mind.

Finally, we might note one common theme in all the resurrection appearances: his nearest and dearest had great difficulty recognising him. Is he the gardener? Is he a ghost? Is he really the Lord? Questions of identity surround him still.

Ezekiel. The classic picture of God's pastoral care for his people no doubt inspired Jesus' parable of the Lost Sheep, and, perhaps, today's gospel story. An emphasis is placed on searching out the strays and returning them to the flock. But there is one element in God's approach to animal husbandry that would strike the Kiwi farmer as strange. God will cull, not the weaklings and poor feeders of the flock, but the sleek and the strong. Social justice is a central concern for our Shepherd-God (v.16). Notice, too, the strong strain of separatism and isolationism that runs through this passage, especially verse 13. The universal vision of multiculturalism that we find in Isaiah is not evident here.

Taking It Personally.

· Take some time to ponder this image of pastoral care. Do you find it comforting or overbearing? Is there something of the 'Nanny State syndrome' here? Read Psalm 139 and ponder the same issues.

· Have you had a period in life when you strayed from the flock? Did you have a feeling that someone was searching for you to bring you back? How would you have reacted if someone from the local church had come looking for you?

· How did you get back? Was it your own initiative or was someone else involved? What sort of reception did you get from the rest of the flock?

· Looking back now, do you believe that God was concerned and caring for you while you were straying? Is there any particular experience you can recall that would suggest God was looking after you then?

· Are you concerned for those who have strayed from the flock? What can you do about it?

· Take all these things into prayer.

Ephesians. This is surely one of the most wonderful passages in the whole of Scripture! [In fact, the whole epistle is pretty wonderful!] But also pretty challenging! It is intended to awaken us to the reality of the present, whereas we seem to suppose that much of our relationship with God is on hold until after we have died. As St Paul gives thanks for the believers in Ephesus we learn two great things about them: their faith in the Lord Jesus and their love for all the saints. That's a pretty good start! And yet St Paul seeks more for them. He asks for the spirit of wisdom and revelation for them so that they may know God better. [Notice, he does not pray for an increase in intellectual capacity so that they may know more about God.] Then he prays that "the eyes of your heart may be enlightened" – again, a spiritual rather than a physical faculty – so that they may know the hope to which they have been called and the resurrection power that is available to them. And all this is overseen by the ascension and glorification of Christ in whom all things are brought together, as manifested in the Church. Wow! And wow again!

Taking It Personally.

· This is definitely a passage for lectio divina. Read it through every day this week slowly, word by word, phrase by phrase, as you take it in. Make a note of any particular bit that really strikes you.

· Put yourself in the place of an Ephesian believer hearing this prayer for you. How do you feel about that?

· Reflect on your faith in the Lord Jesus, and your love for all the saints. How do they measure up?

· Pray for yourself what St Paul has prayed for the Ephesians. Ask God for the spirit of wisdom and revelation so that you may know him better.

· How would you describe the hope that you have from your faith.? Read 1 Peter 3:15, and imagine that someone has sincerely asked you to explain why you hope in Christ. How would you respond?

Matthew. There are many puzzles with this story. It probably started life as a straightforward parable, but has somehow become a little more autobiographical as it developed. Track the language as it changes back and forth. For instance, the first three verses, 31-33 are talking about the Son of Man; but verse 34 starts with the king. The people respond by calling him Lord, and that continues with the two exchanges. Meanwhile, the imagery is once again pastoral – the Son of Man/King/Shepherd is standing at the drafting gate, it appears, separating the sheep from the goats – but finishes in classic form with eternal judgment. And at first glance, we are confronted with judgment based on good works – long condemned by the Church as the Pelagian heresy! The key is to be found in Christ's complete identification with the poor and needy. He does not say, "it is as if you did it for me", but "you did it for me".

Taking It Personally.

· Ponder the thought that you, and every other person, is a unique manifestation of Christ. Try this week to remind yourself that when you speak to someone, or have any other interaction with someone, you are speaking to, or interacting with, Christ. Reflect later what difference that made in your attitude with those other people.

· Notice that both groups were surprised. Neither had seen Christ in the people they served or ignored. What can you learn from that?

· Can you still see Christ in someone who reacts ungratefully or rudely towards you? [Not all the poor and needy are also polite and loving!]

· Looking back over the last month, have you been more a sheep or a goat?

NOTES FOR REFLECTION

2011-11-11T13:27:00.001+13:00

November 13 NOTES FOR REFLECTION Remembrance Sunday

Texts: Micah 4:1-5; Romans 8:31-39; John 15:12-17

Theme: A number of possibilities this week. For those with a love of irony, what about The Church Militant (if not Triumphant)? Or if ambiguity is more our thing, we might be tempted to go for The Cost of Obedience. [Think Conscientious Objectors here.] On balance, my pick would be, The Church in Conflict.

Introduction. We have only to glance at the suggested Sentence of Scripture for today to see that my comments on the theme above are hinting at. The Church does not know where to take its stand on issues like this. The 'prescribed' sentence for today is John 15:9: 'As the father has loved me, so I have loved you. Now remain in my love.' What has that to do with Remembrance Sunday? Why not a verse from the Beatitudes: "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God?" Or "Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you?"

Equally we might query the choice of readings. While the wonderful vision of Micah is appropriate, the choice of the other lesson, and of the gospel passage, is less obvious. If we should have something from Romans, why not 12:17-21? As for a gospel passage, what about Luke 6:27-36?

Yet there is enough in these readings to ponder if we will but scratch the surface. First Micah gives us a vision of universal peace almost in spite of himself, as the verses seem to alternate between universalism and narrow nationalism. St Paul writes in the plural "us" and "us all". But who does he have in mind? Only the believing community, or all humanity? For whom did Jesus give his life – only those who believe in him, or all humanity? And our gospel passage also takes this bob-each-way approach. The time-honoured 'Anzac Day' verse about laying down our lives for our friends is nicely balanced by Jesus' advice that to remain his friends we must obey his commands, which include, of course, the commandment to love our enemies, turn the other cheek, etc.

Background. It is undeniable that the Early Church was pacifist in its teaching and practice, even during periods of horrendous persecution. Men and women of faith accepted martyrdom, rather than resort to violence in self-defence; and there are documents from the very early days of Christianity making it clear that Christians could not be soldiers, and vice versa. While it is unlikely this 'purist stance' remained unsullied right through the first three centuries, the adoption of Christianity as the official faith of the Roman Empire in the fourth century brought a complete change of attitude into the Church. Suddenly the Church found itself in a favoured position, protected, and given great privileges, by the Imperial Authorities, which could only be due to the grace of God. From there it was a small step to recognising the Empire as the Kingdom of God on Earth, surrounded by the forces of darkness outside the borders of the Empire. Therefore, it was now God's work to serve in the Imperial Army to defend the empire against its pagan enemies. From forbidding its members to take up arms, the Church began its centuries-long role as the State's chief recruiting agency whenever the nation declared it was at war. In 1940 a Methodist Minister, the Reverend Ormond Burton, was arrested at the Basin Reserve in Wellington, for standing on a wooden box and saying, "Our Lord Jesus Christ said, 'Love your enemies'. On a charge carrying a maximum sentence of 3 months' imprisonment (disturbing the peace!), he was sentenced to nine months and refused a right of appeal. Far from defending its minister, the Church threw him out, and he wasn't allowed back in until the 1950's.

Are there signs of hope today? For me, there is one great sign coming out of Europe. Less than 100 years after the start of the First World War the countries of Europe are once again in economic turmoil. Yet not one of them has suggested that the only way to defend its national interest is to resort to war. War on a massive scale has become literally unthinkable in Europe. In its absence, despite all the nationalistic instincts in each country, there is a general acceptance that co-operation is the only hope of coming out of this situation in reasonable shape. Britain, Germany, and France are leading the charge to protect their own interests by promoting the interests of the others. There's a very long way to go, but we can take heart: Europe has moved a big step forward towards realising Micah's vision in the last 100 years.

Micah. The tension that in some ways is at the heart of our humanity runs through this short passage. It seems to be innate in our human nature to think in terms of "us and them", "friends and enemies". We might (somewhat reluctantly) accept in our heads that there is only one human race, one human family, that we are all children of the one God; yet that is denied by just about every belief system we hold, including our religious, political and economic ones. In the same way, while Micah's vision is universal in scope, it is still clouded by narrow, nationalistic spectacles. Verse 1 lays claim on God's behalf to universal sovereignty; but in verse 2, Jewish hubris takes over. The Lord becomes "the God of Jacob"; the law emanates from Zion, the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. In verse 3 the wonderful vision of universal peace and the cessation of warfare is spelt out in glorious detail. In verse 4, the vision includes peace within the nation, as each citizen is assured of the means of economic security. But in verse 5 the idea of one world under the sovereignty of the one and only God, gives way to a sickeningly modern liberal outburst of politically correct religious pluralism. What evidence is there that peace will ever come about in that way?

Taking It Personally.

· What is your most fundamental identity? Are you a human being, who happens to be a particular gender, born in a particular country, speaking a particular language?

· Is your first loyalty to "your country" or to the world?

· Do you agree that Europe is showing some signs of moving beyond war as a means of resolving disputes? Does that argue in favour of globalisation or against it?

· Is patriotism a virtue or a vice?

· Are such institutions as the U.N. and the International Courts of Justice in accordance with Micah's vision or not?

· Is Micah's vision an Old Testament version of the Kingdom of God, which we pray for every time we pray the Lord's Prayer?

· Would you like to end today's session by praying, 'Our Father in heaven...Micah's vision come to be, on earth as in heaven...?

Romans. We must remember that this is an extract from a letter written by St Paul to his fellow Christians – that is, it is intended for in-house dissemination only. Any lapse from the purity of universalism may be attributed to this. St Paul says that God is "for us". We are used to the Christmas proclamation that God is with us – Emmanuel – but what does it mean to claim that God is for us? If we understand it to mean that God is for all humanity – that God loves all humanity and seeks what is best for us all, then we can say a grateful Amen to St Paul's teaching. But the danger of this phrase becomes all too apparent in times of war. A God who is for us becomes a God who is on our side and against our enemies. Verse 32 should act as a counter-balance. Christ died for the sins of the whole world, and not just for the sins of those who believe in him: 1 John 2:2. Yet St Paul in the very next verse talks of "those whom God has chosen", implying that some are "in" and others are "out". We can forgive him this lapse in the light of the magnificent verses 37-39!

Taking It Personally.

· Do you believe that God is for you? What experience can you recall on which to base this belief?

· Has someone brought an accusation against you – a word of criticism of some sort? How did you react? How do you feel now as you recall the occasion? Does this passage help you to deal with that episode?

· Remind yourself that right now Christ is interceding for you with the Father? What would you like him to ask for on your behalf? Offer a prayer of thanksgiving for Christ's prayers for you.

· Ponder verses 37-39 over and over again. Come back to them many times during the week – perhaps even memorise them. Repeat them to yourself whenever you need some "divine therapy".

John. Presumably this passage has been chosen for verse 13: Greater love has no one than this, to lay down one's life for one's friends. This and the even stronger passage in John 10:17-18 are often dragged out for "war service" despite the fact that they were never intended to be used for such a purpose. While there have been individual cases of extreme heroism involving the sacrifice of one's own life to save the lives of others, the vast majority of deaths in wartime are "accidental" – a case of sheer bad luck. Far from wishing to lay down their lives for their friends, real servicemen (and women) have the usual desire to live and to get home in one piece as soon as possible. Moreover, the stumbling-block for those who wish to misuse this passage in this way remains huge. Jesus says that the way to remain friends with him is to obey his commands. These commands, of course, have a very "pacifist" tone: they include loving our enemies and praying for those who persecute us. And we have the example of his own behaviour when the armed Temple guards came to arrest him. He refused to put up any resistance, and ordered Peter to put away his sword. Everything he taught and did can be summed up in that one command with which this passage ends: Love each other. War is the ultimate negation of love.

Taking It Personally.

· How do you feel about the pacifist tone of these notes? Does it annoy you? Do you agree or disagree that Jesus was a pacifist?

· Do you consider yourself a peacemaker? In times of personal conflict are you the first to seek a peaceful resolution?

· If Jesus means that we should lay down our lives in service to others, how do you measure up?

· Would you describe yourself as a friend of Jesus? Would you describe Jesus as a friend of yours? Reflect on verse 15. How do you feel about your "change in status". Use this verse as the basis of your prayer today as you talk with Jesus as one friend to another.

NOTES FOR REFLECTION

2011-11-04T17:39:00.001+13:00

November 6 NOTES FOR REFLECTION Pentecost 21

Texts: Amos 5:18-24; 1 Thessalonians 4:9-18; Matthew 25:13

Theme: Not easy to put into words today. Perhaps "For Your Urgent Attention", except that it sounds like the heading to a scam email! What we are dealing with is "the end of the age" in one form or another. Perhaps "The Last of Many Comings" might suggest the approach I'm intending to take. Rather than preparing for the "Final Examination" (actually, given the time of the year, that wouldn't be a bad choice of theme!), I want to stress that God in Christ is continually coming to us, if only we are prepared and ready to encounter him.

Introduction. In Old Testament times there had developed an idea of a time of final accountability to God, usually described by the phrase "The Day of the Lord". It took various forms; sometimes it seems that Israel as the chosen people of God would escape judgment, and the foreign nations would cop the lot. At other times it seems that Israel was to be especially judged because, being the people of God, she was accountable to God in a unique way. With the coming of the Christian era, the "Day of the Lord metamorphosed" into Christ's return (popularly but incorrectly called "the Second Coming"). With that change we move from judgment to salvation.

Background. Metropolitan Anthony, one of my favourite spiritual writers, favours the word "encounter" to describe those tantalisingly brief moments when we sense the presence of God or Christ with us; and he says that every such encounter carries with it an element of judgment. The classic text that perfectly illustrates the point is Luke 5:8, where Peter suddenly realises who Jesus is and falls at his feet saying, "Go away from me, Lord, I am a sinful man." Metropolitan Anthony believes that God will not reveal himself to us until we are ready to receive that revelation: "it is an act of his infinite mercy to me not to be present to me while I am yet not capable of sustaining his coming". Meditation on a Theme, p.38.

In the following passage (ibid, p.47), Metropolitan Anthony extends this concept of encounter to the meeting of others:

An encounter is rarely experienced, if you give it its full meaning. People's paths cross, they come up against each other – how many pass us by in the course of a single day without seeing us? And how many are those at whom we look with unseeing eyes, to whom we address neither a look, nor word, nor smile? And yet, everyone of those people was a Presence, an image of the living God, whom God may have sent to us with a message or to receive a message from God through us, a word, a gesture, a look of acknowledgment, of compassion, of understanding. To be carried past one another in the street or in life, by the crowd or by chance, is not yet an encounter. We must learn to look and see – to look attentively, thoughtfully, taking in the features of a face, its expression, the message of a countenance and of the eyes. We must learn, each of us...to see one another in depth, looking patiently, as long as necessary, in order to see who it is who stands before us.

Amos. In one of the most scathing attacks in the prophetic books Amos excoriates the complacency of the self-righteous. They are looking forward to the Day of the Lord (the Day of Judgment) because they are sure that their religious practices will have won enough Brownie points with God to ensure a favourable outcome. But God abhors all their empty religious ceremonies and rituals because they are not offered from the heart. What God wants of his people is true righteousness, manifested as justice.

Taking It Personally.

· Do you look forward to the Day of the Lord with excitement, hope, fear, curiosity,

disbelief, or none of the above?

· How might God view the worship we offer in our churches? Do you enter into it wholeheartedly, or somewhat mechanically?

· What do you understand by God's call for "justice"? Do you consider yourself a just person?

· How do you feel about the "Occupy Wall Street" movement? Does the term "Equity for Humanity" sound like something God might be calling for in this passage?

· What can you offer back to God in response to this challenging passage?

Thessalonians. Here is another take on this whole issue. It is very clear from the Scriptures that the infant Church expected Christ's return at any moment. As months and then years passed with no such return questions started to arise, along with a great concern about those who die before Christ comes back. Will they miss out on the salvation Christ will bring with him? St Paul assures them that this will not be so. Indeed, "the dead in Christ will rise first". [v. 16] I don't think we are expected to pay too much attention to the precise imagery Paul uses here. [This is, perhaps, the very first letter he wrote, and there is a certain primitiveness about his style and theology. Contrast this with his more mature thought in 1 Corinthians 15.]

Taking It Personally.

· Is this aspect of our Christian faith of burning interest to you, or do you give it little or any thought?

· How would you answer the question put to St Paul if a child asked you "what has happened to Granny?"

· Do you find this passage encouraging? Who might you encourage with these words? [v.18]

Matthew. Matthew starts this new section of his gospel with a thematic statement at 24:36: No one knows about that day or hour [of Jesus' return], not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. Then he records a group of 5 related parables, all dealing in different ways with the sudden return of someone and the need to be alert and ready for this unexpected return. Today's parable is one of that group. By today's wedding practices, the story strikes us as odd in detail. And many of us get upset about the unwillingness of the wise ones to share their oil with their less prudent counterparts. But, of course, this parable is not about the need to be generous givers to those in need; it is about the requirement to be alert and ready to meet Christ whenever he is ready to come to us. It is a warning against spiritual procrastination – the idea that we will give some thought to spiritual well-being later – when we've got more time, when we're less busy with more important matters, etc.

The reference to the oil may be related to the (rather surprising need) for wedding garments in the Parable of the Wedding Banquet (Matthew 22:12). We have to be ready, prepared, and not just in the right place at the right time. Some commentators suggest that the supply of oil represents our accumulation of good works, but that can't be right. That would be a gospel of good works. It's more likely to refer to our preparation by prayer and practice, making us able to see God when he comes to us. That cannot be acquired from others: spiritual practice is something we have to do for ourselves.

Taking It Personally.

· Read the passage from Metropolitan Anthony above. Do you really encounter those you meet – or are you more like ships passing in the night?

· Imagine you are sitting in a waiting room outside a closed door marked "God". How long are you willing to sit and wait?

· What are your feelings as you wait?

· When the door opens how do you feel?

· Do you feel sorry for the "foolish" ones? If not, what do you feel towards them?

· Are you ever guilty of spiritual procrastination? Next time you catch yourself at it, take a moment to construct "an apology for absence" and present it in prayer to God.

NOTES FOR REFLECTION

2011-10-28T16:08:00.001+13:00

October 30 NOTES FOR REFLECTION All Saints' Sunday

Texts: Revelation 7:9-17; 1 John 3:1-3; Matthew 5:1-12

Theme: Imitating, Not Idolising. We honour our saints as examples to be followed, not idols to be placed on pedestals and worshipped.

Introduction. The first thing to notice about today's readings is the absence of a lesson from the Old Testament. If we think of saints as great heroes of the faith, we would find this omission surprising. There are, of course, a large number of great heroes of our faith history in the Old Testament. But look up a Concordance and you will find a clue: the one I use has only 1 reference to "saint" in the whole Old Testament. It is very much a New Testament term. But the same book also reminds me that it is a post-resurrection New Testament term. It gives only 1 instance of its use in the gospels. And there's one more thing to note about its usage in the New Testament: it is almost always used in the plural – "saints" rather than "a saint". So what does the term mean? "Saints" are those people who, through faith in Jesus Christ, have been sanctified by the gift of the Holy Spirit. In other words, "saints" is a synonym for "Christians". Today, we celebrate ourselves and all our fellow Christians!

We begin with a glimpse of the eternal destiny of saints, courtesy of the great seer St John the Divine. The saints are there in the presence of God, wearing their white (baptismal) robes. They are already multitudinous, but there's always room for more. Our second lesson acts as a bridge between now and then, here and there, earth and heaven. We are already children of God, but the best is yet to come. St John does not know the details: all he can say for certain is that we will see God face to face. In the meantime, our calling is to purify ourselves, by living the life outlined in the Beatitudes given by Jesus and recorded in today's gospel passage.

Background. Most of us can remember a time in our youth when we had a hero or heroine: a sports star, perhaps, or a film star, or someone in a book, or even someone in our family. My first hero was a man called Albert Hooper, and I first came upon him when I was five. My mother had noticed that I was keen on kicking a ball around, so she started taking me to watch the local football team in our home town of Newquay in Cornwall. Albert Hooper was the goalkeeper, and from the very first time I saw him I knew that that was what I wanted to be – a goalkeeper like Albert Hooper. No doubt my Mother expected the phase to pass, but when it didn't she knitted me a little yellow goalkeeper's jersey just like the one Albert wore; and every Saturday when the team was playing at home I would wear my little yellow jersey and I would stand behind my hero's goal, even changing ends at half-time. After a while Albert noticed me and from then on he always greeted me nicely, as if we were great mates. And about 13 years later, at the tender age of 18, I ran onto that same field and took my place as the goalkeeper for the Newquay team.

The point of that story is this. My little 5-year-old self was a lot wiser than my present-day self. He knew that heroes are for imitating, not idolising. Think about that word "idolising" for a moment. If we make idols out of our heroes, we are not merely guilty of idolatry: we are rendering them safe. We place them out of our reach. We tell ourselves that they are exceptional and we could never be like them, so they present no challenge to us. I could have done that with Albert Hooper when I was 5. To me he was the best goalkeeper in the whole wide world! Yet that inspired me to do everything I could to become like him. It took me 12-13 years, but I made it!

How do we treat our saints? Alas, we idolise them, don't we? First of all, we treasure miraculous stories about them, making them larger than life, and far beyond our ability to imitate them. So we are excused from even trying. Yet the Scriptures tell us two things of relevance here: we must not commit idolatry and we must become imitators. Go back to the Concordance and you will find a number of entries for "imitate" and its correlates. St Paul does not hesitate to exhort the Corinthians and the Philippians to imitate him: 1 Corinthians 4:16; 11:1; Philippians 3:17. He also said quite a bit to the Thessalonians about imitating himself, the Lord, and the churches of God in Jesus Christ : 1 Thessalonians 1:6-7; 2:14; 2 Thessalonians 3:7, 9. The author of the Letter to the Hebrews urged the faithful to imitate the faith of their leaders (Hebrews 13:7); and St John urged his followers to imitate what is good: 3 John 11. And then there's Ephesians 5:1: "Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children, and live in love." IMITATE GOD!

The old practice of naming a child after a saint, or giving a child a saint's name on baptism, carried with it the hope that the child would grow up to be like that saint. We might also think about our practice of dedicating our individual churches to particular saints. St Barnabas, the encourager of others; St John the apostle of love; St Mary the model of faithful obedience; and St Stephen, the joyful martyr. Perhaps each congregation could ponder how well we imitate our patron saint, or do we simply idolise them and render them innocuous?

Revelation. This passage is part of the astonishing vision of life beyond the curtain of time. It follows the famous reference to 144, 000 servants of God who were about to be sealed on their foreheads. We are very clearly told that these are representatives from the 12 tribes of Israel; not the elect few who are the only ones to receive salvation, as one or two sects have argued down the ages. Now comes "a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language". The language is surely intended to suggest to us the fulfilment of the Abrahamic covenant. They are waving palm branches, perhaps to suggest Christ's entry into Jerusalem. Most importantly, they are all wearing white robes – surely intended to refer to the white robes given to people following their baptism. In baptism we enter into the death of Christ – hence the robes have been made white "in the blood of the Lamb". And they are beyond all pain and suffering.

Taking It Personally.

· Do you have a mental vision of heaven? How does it compare with the one we are given here?

· Note that the promise of God is always "I will be with you" (or perhaps "you will be with me"), whether it's with Moses in Egypt or the martyred saints in heaven. Is that enough for you? What more do you want?

· Note how the great multitude seems to be united in one voice and in service to God. All ethnic, national, and other divisions have been overcome. How do you feel about that?

John. Today's passage from John's First letter is surely one of the most wonderful in all Scripture! It is a progress report on the transformation of the saints from our natural selves into something far more glorious. And the process is already underway. Note the tense in the first verse: it is not a promise for the future: we are already "children of God". We are already two natures in one person, human by natural descent and divine by the grace of God. And, as the commercials love to say, that's not all! Something even more glorious is still in store for us, although we do not yet know what it is. Just as children often grow to be more like their parents with the passing years, it seem that something similar happens to us, the children of God. We become more and more like God (in whose image and likeness, of course, we are created). Notice, in passing, the link between verse 3, and verse 8 of today's gospel passage: to see God we must become pure in heart.

Taking It Personally.

· This is a perfect passage for slow, meditative reading. Let each word, each phrase, sink in to your consciousness. Come back to it many times over the coming week. Ask God to give you the grace to believe it.

· When you are next before a mirror remind yourself that you are looking at a child of God. How do you feel about that?

· Note the opening thought in this passage: God has "lavished" love on you. If you have any particular hurt from your past that is troubling you,bring it into the presence of this great love and ask for healing.

Matthew. The implication is that Jesus withdrew from the crowds, and addressed this famous teaching to his disciples. Certainly it makes no sense to those who do not believe in God. Notice that there seems to be a mix of "being" and "doing" here, but the emphasis is on the former. It is about being moulded into the person God created us to be. It is about being imitators of Christ, or having the same mind as Christ. It is about the way saints are to grow into the glory of God. Notice that in verses 3 and 10 the present tense is used, while in the other verses the "reward" follows the event. Above all, notice how this "charter" turns on its head the values of our country at this time.

Taking It Personally.

· Use this passage as a personal checklist. How are you doing?

· Which of these beatitudes do you find the most challenging? Why? What can you do about it? Is there someone you could talk to about it?

· To what extent (if any) are you going to use this list as a checklist for assessing policies and programmes put forward in the coming General Election?

· We have already noted the connection between 1 John 3:3 and verse 8 of this passage. Now reflect on the connection between verse 1 of that passage and verse 9 of this passage. As a child of God how might you carry out the ministry of peacemaker in your present circumstances?

NOTES FOR REFLECTION

2011-10-15T11:10:00.001+13:00

October 16 NOTES FOR REFLECTION Pentecost 18

Texts: Isaiah 45:1-7; 1 Thessalonians 1:1-10; Matthew 22:15-22

Theme: Two Sides of the Same Coin? Coins can be used to express diametric opposites: "on the other side of the coin..." and equivalence: "two sides of the same coin".

Introduction. In the Western World we tend to favour dual thinking, the either/or approach. We think in terms of right or wrong, black or white, good or bad, winners or losers, strong or weak. We naturally assume that today's gospel passage is about the political world or the spiritual realm; but is it? And what are we to make of this passage from Isaiah? Could God really be using a foreign king to further his divine purposes? Is God really the creator of darkness as well as light; and does God really send disaster as well as prosperity? And where does the epistle fit into all this with the people of Thessalonica becoming renowned for their conversion from one mindset (polytheism, Greek secularism, etc) to a very different one (faith in Christ). There is something in all this about paradox and mystery – which is to say, there is something in all this about God.

Background. There is no doubt that Cyrus was a real historical figure. He rose to power in Persia around 550 B.C., and proved himself a brilliant leader and military strategist. He began expanding his power beyond his national boundaries in 547, and within 2 years he had taken over most of the peninsula of Asia Minor. In 539 he captured Babylon, before that the great power in the region. Among his first acts was to grant freedom to many captive people held in Babylon. He decreed that any Jewish captive who wished to do so could return home to Jerusalem; and he even returned the sacred vessels that had been looted by the Babylonians when they conquered Jerusalem. In fact, he showed the same generous attitude to people of other nationalities and faiths, but that is not mentioned in the Bible: these are, after all, the Hebrew Scriptures telling Israel's story.

Glance back to the end of chapter 44 and you will find these words: "who says of Cyrus 'he is my shepherd and will accomplish all that I please'; he will say of Jerusalem, 'Let it be rebuilt', and of the temple, 'Let its foundations be laid'. This has given rise to much debate over the timing of this prophecy in relation to the actual event. There are 3 possibilities:

· It was written before the event as inspired prophecy:

· It was written before the event by a politically shrewd observer who could read the 'signs of the time':

· It was written after the event, with the benefit of hindsight.

The issue of tax raised in the gospel passage was a very important one. Jerusalem was often under foreign domination and required to pay tribute money to the overlords of the day. But in 6 A.D. the Roman occupiers had imposed a temple tax; effectively a cut of all money given as offering to the Temple had to be given to the Roman authorities. This had so enraged some Jews that there had been a violent uprising: to take money from the Temple was to rob God. The Zealots in Jesus' time still held to this line so it was a very important issue, a political 'hot potato'.

It might be useful to think of our own way of dividing issues up into separate compartments. Is the oil-spill off Tauranga a transport issue for Stephen Joyce to handle, or an environmental issue for Nick Smith? Is the sole aim of Fonterra to maximise returns to farmers, or, bearing in mind the importance of milk in a healthy diet for growing children, should Fonterra have a responsibility to keep down the local price of milk? Is it either/or or both/and that should guide our thinking?

Isaiah. The first shock is that Cyrus, a foreigner, Gentile, leader of a pagan nation, is referred to as God's "Anointed", meaning "Messiah" or "Christ"! On the other side of the coin (so to speak!), Cyrus' great military successes are ascribed to God (vv.2-4). God has summoned (called) Cyrus by name (as we have been called), and has even bestowed on him a title of great honour. And all this even though, we are assured twice, Cyrus has never acknowledge God. Even all-conquering foreign kings are under the governance of God for there is none like him in the whole world. In God there is no duality: God is both/and, not either/or. He creates both light and darkness, prosperity and disaster.

Taking It Personally.

· Looking back over your life, can you see God's involvement in it even when you were quite unaware that God was at work in and with you? Was there a time when you did not "acknowledge" God?

· Many have claimed that the dramatic fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of Communism was God's doing, working through people like Mikail Gorbachev. In the light of this passage what do you think of claims such as these?

· How do you feel about the statement by Isaiah that God is responsible for darkness and light, disaster and prosperity? (If you are tempted to assume that 'good' people get the prosperity and 'bad' people get the disaster, remind yourself of Job!)

· Where was God in the Pike River Mine disaster, the Christchurch earthquakes, or the Tauranga oil-spill?

Thessalonians. This may well be the earliest letter we have from St Paul. He visited Thessalonica (modern-day Salonika) on his second missionary journey. The city was large and important, with a busy sea-port and all the dubious behaviour that went with that. It was also on an important trade route, the Via Egnatia, and had a large Jewish community with a synagogue. When many people started to be converted to the new faith it aroused deep hostility in the Jewish community, and Paul was driven out of the city by them. Widespread persecution of the new converts followed; yet many remained firm in their faith and this became widely known in the area. Hence Paul writes to them warmly, commending them for their faith, and lauding them as great examples to other struggling faith communities.

Taking It Personally.

· In your prayers do you regularly give thanks for particular people or groups, family friends, workmates, your local church community, your neighbourhood, etc?

· Is there someone you seek to imitate as a person of faith? Who have been or are examples of faithful people for you? Have you given thanks to God for them?

· Have you in turn become a model of faith for others to imitate? Has the gospel rang out from you; is your faith well-known to people who know you well?

Matthew. Recall again that this is in Holy Week, after the cleansing of the Temple, when Jesus has upset the money traders and others making money from the pilgrims in the Temple. Notice, too, that this is the first of three issues raised with Jesus, before he raises one of his own. Thus, he is asked about paying taxes, the resurrection life in relation to divorcees, and the greatest of all the commandments. He raises the issue of the Davidic descent of the Messiah. It's all rather tedious stuff, as the religious hierarchy and an assortment of powerful allies make one last attempt to trap him into self-incrimination.

Today the Pharisees and the Herodians team up. Not natural allies, as the latter support the puppet-king, Herod, and favour collaboration with the Roman overlords, and the Pharisees do not. [Which means, of course, that the Herodians would favour paying taxes to Caesar, and the Pharisees would not.] After an opening flourish of nauseating flattery they put their question in classic binary mode: is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, yes or no? Jesus begins his response by making it clear he knows exactly what they're up to, and then finesses them by asking for a coin used in the payment of taxes. The implication is that Jesus and his disciples do not have such a coin and therefore cannot pay the tax, whereas his questioners do have one and could pay the tax.

The coin bears an image of Tiberius Caesar [emperor from 14-37A.D.], and the inscription read: "Tiberius, son of the divine Augustus." Such a claim to divinity (or descent from divinity) was blasphemous to the Jews. Jesus' response uses the word "render" (not merely "give"). It is a technical word meaning to pay a debt owed to the payee. Thus Jesus is saying, if you owe something to Caesar pay him what you owe; likewise, whatever you owe to God repay that debt.

The subtlety of all this is two-fold. First, none of us can ever repay the enormous debt we owe to God. Secondly, the coin belongs to Tiberius because it bears his image. But we bear God's image, so we belong to God. God's claim over us is total; Caesar's claim, if any, is a few coins.

Taking It Personally.

· To what extent do you separate your religious beliefs from your business decisions? Do you live in two separate realms, the secular and the spiritual, or is there only one?

· Are you an either/or person or a both/and person generally?

· Take out a coin and look at it. Look at the Queen's head on it. Remind yourself it bears her image. Now remind yourself whose image you bear. Stay with that thought for some time. How do you feel about it?

· How do you feel about paying taxes? Are you glad of the opportunity to share in providing health care and education to others, or do you begrudge it and seek ways to minimise your tax liability?

· Do you agree or disagree that these are valid questions of faith?

NOTES FOR REFLECTION

2011-10-08T11:17:00.001+13:00

October 9 NOTES FOR REFLECTION Pentecost 16

Texts: Isaiah 25:1-9; Philippians 4:1-9; Matthew 22:1-12

Theme: R.S.V.P. In other words, it's all about our response to the King's invitation – better known as God's grace.

Introduction. In the broader picture the gospel narrative today is, and in recent weeks has been, about authority and our willingness or otherwise to accept it. Related to that is the ongoing question of identity. The teachers of the law and the elders questioned Jesus' authority: now we have invited guests throwing their invitations back in a denial of the King's authority over them. Who is this king that expects them to drop everything and attend his son's wedding feast? The passage from Isaiah is set in the context of rebellious enemy states having been brought into submission, and now being open to God's gracious invitation to become one with his people. All nations are under God's authority. In the epistle, St Paul writes as one having authority to a local church in which personal agendas are damaging the community's witness. Their response will depend, in part, on who they think he is: an Apostle or an interfering busybody? Does he have the authority to tell them what to do?

Background. We might think about our own Royal Wedding, which all seems so long ago now, but, in fact, it was at the end of April. The invitations to that event were greatly sought after, we were assured! It is unlikely that any fortunate recipient made light of it; even less likely that anyone declined it on the ground of having better things to do with his/her time!

We might also see some connections between a more recent event, one much closer to home. The kingdom of heaven, we might say, is like "Party Central" or "God's Fanzone", open to everybody who wants to turn up: however, patrons who are inappropriately dressed (not wearing official sponsor's products) will be ejected.

There's also the lovely (but rather provocative) story about the Vicar who started missing the odd Sunday morning service. When Vestry finally challenged him about this he produced a series of explanations: he missed one Sunday because a friend he hadn't seen in years turned up unexpectedly on his doorstep so he stayed home to spend time with him; another, because it started to rain rather heavily and the church always felt so cold in bad weather; a third because it was such a lovely day he took the opportunity to play a round of golf; and the fourth, because his wife was away visiting her sister, so he needed to look after the children. After hearing all this and deliberating for some time, Vestry resolved to warn him that if he continued to behave like the parishioners they would have no alternative but to ask the Bishop to dismiss him.

Isaiah. One of the key ideas running through the whole Book of Isaiah is the universal reach of God's salvation. Until his time, the prevailing view was that different nations had different gods: Yahweh was the God of Israel but had no "jurisdiction" outside her borders. Then sometime around the 8^th to 7^th centuries B.C. a change of thinking developed. As the idea of monotheism took hold, it became clear that Yahweh could not be limited by national boundaries. He was still the God of Israel, irrevocably bound to Israel by the Abrahamic Covenant, etc, but through Israel he would bring salvation to all nations. In this passage we see evidence of this shift. Isaiah begins in the first person singular: "you are my God; I will exalt you". Then he speaks of God overcoming "foreigners", "strong peoples", and "ruthless nations", representative of the traditional view that everyone else was Israel's enemy and therefore an enemy of Yahweh. But then (v.6) comes a wonderful invitation addressed to "all peoples", "all nations", and "all faces". By verse 8, God's people are "from all the earth".

Taking It Personally.

· Do you prefer small gatherings of people you know or large crowds of all sorts? When you receive an invitation to a social function how concerned are you about who else may have been invited?

· On Christmas Day, would you prefer to have dinner at home with family and friends, or join in a community "open-to-all" type celebration?

· Do you agree with Isaiah that God has done "marvellous things"? Such as what?

· Having pondered those marvellous things, spend some time in prayer extolling him and praising his name.

Philippians. St Paul is clearly writing to a real congregation of real people! Even among those who ministered alongside Paul a personal dispute has arisen. Paul does not ignore it or try to make light of it: he acknowledges it and names the participants. Nor does he take sides. Instead, he urges them to settle their differences, and the rest of the congregation to help them reconcile. They should all focus their attention, their energies and their hearts on God, in worship and prayer, and fill their minds with all that is good and positive. That is the way to establish and experience the perfect peace of God.

Taking It Personally.

· Are you at ease and at peace with each of the other members of your local church, or are there "issues" needing to be addressed?

· How might other members of the congregation help in promoting any necessary reconciliation?

· Is your gentleness evident to all?

· Are you anxious or worried about anything?

· Are you presently experiencing the peace of God that passes all understanding?

· Do you sometimes catch yourself thinking negatively?

· Review the last week. To what extent have you succeeded in putting into practice the things that you have learned from St Paul's writings?

Matthew. We continue Jesus' teaching in Holy Week, only days (and perhaps only hours) from his capture and crucifixion. Although introduced as a "kingdom parable" this one is very much a "judgment parable". There is an uncompromising division between those who receive salvation (or, more accurately, those who accept it) and those who do not. Some of the language is harsh, even brutal. And the plot verges on melodrama in places: burning a whole city does seem something of an over-reaction to what was, at worst, a social snub. But the central message is clear: God's invitation is open to all, but each must actually accept it. A reply is required.

The image of the wedding feast is common, reaching its climax in the wedding feast of the Lamb. We're in eschatological territory here. As in the Parable of the Vineyard, the treatment meted out to the King's servants equates to the treatment of Israel's prophets over the centuries. Those who received their invitations did not just politely decline them; they made light of them, preferred to pursue their own agendas. This was a terrible insult to the dignity and authority of the King.

The new batch of "guests" was a very mixed bag. It included "the good and the bad", dealing a grievous blow to all those who believe that entry into heaven depends on the quality of our behaviour. Two difficulties with this story have baffled commentators for years. The first concerns the "man there who was not wearing wedding clothes". As he had been rounded up off the street it's hard to see how he (or any of the others) could be. Among many possible explanations perhaps the strongest two are these:

· The literal approach. It has been suggested that the custom for such weddings was for the host (the King) to provide wedding garments for the guests as they arrived. Perhaps this guy had refused to "dress up like a penguin" - that is, his attitude was hostile.

· The metaphorical approach. To enter into God's presence we must "put on Christ". This guy tried to enter as himself rather than "in Christ".

Taking It Personally.

· Recall the last time you received a social invitation. Did you accept it gladly, accept it reluctantly out of social convention, decline it on 'diplomatic' grounds, or simply decline it? How did you feel about the invitation and your response to it?

· Recall the royal wedding in April (William and Catherine), and the speculation beforehand about who was on the guest list. How would you feel if a recipient of such an invitation had made light of it, perhaps by trying to sell it on TradeMe, or joking about it on YouTube?

· Ponder the tough language in verses 7 and 13 – remember this is Jesus speaking). How do you feel about it?

· Can you recall a social occasion at which you felt inappropriately dressed? How did you feel about it?

· Does it matter what you wear to church? Is it a sign of respect to God, or are you more concerned about what others may think of you?

Dog Collars the Order of the Day

2011-10-07T11:43:00.001+13:00

St Stephen's Anglican Church ,Hampden

Pet Service held on Sun 2 Oct 2011 at 2pm

Dog Collars the Order of the Day

It could have been the weather. It could have been the Bishop's visit. It could even have been the need to seek comfort in the wake of Dan Carter's injury.

Whatever it was, it resulted in a wonderful gathering of 48 human beings, 14 dogs and two budgies in St Stephen's Anglican Church in Hampden on Sunday afternoon for the annual Pet Service in honour of St Francis. They came from as far afield as Waitati in the south and Oamaru in the north.

At the beginning of the service pet owners introduced their dogs and budgies .The largest dog was a leonburger, with daushounds, poodles , a 15 year old Jack Russell, springer spaniels, and two all black labradors sitting in the church with their owners.

The service was a mixture of the usual and the decidedly unusual, with hymns, readings, and prayers before and after a keenly contested Canine and Feline quiz between two equally inventive teams.

In his sermon, Bishop Kelvin Wright spoke of the pet that had had the most profound effect on him – a rabbit called Chester who had joined the Wright family when he was Vicar of St John's, Roslyn. The Bishop described how his relationship with Chester had grown into one that could only be described as friendship. "When I looked into Chester's eyes and Chester returned my gaze, I knew him as a fellow creature, not a thing – a manifestation of God's creative and loving power. Chester reminded me that all creatures have a God-given dignity worthy of human respect."

After the service in which the pets present were blessed, and those that had passed away were remembered, certificates were awarded in some very imaginative categories of pet; and the dogs were rewarded for their impeccable 'Sunday-best' behaviour with some tasty nibbles, kindly donated by Oamaru Vet Services. Then it was the humans' turn, with a scrumptious afternoon tea in the hall.

The service was led by Rev Roger Barker, Interim Priest of the Parish of East Otago, and Alistair Wright, from St Barnabas Church in Warrington, provided the musical accompaniment on the organ.

by Rev Roger Barker

October 2 NOTES FOR REFLECTION Pentecost 16

2011-10-01T11:38:00.001+13:00

October 2 NOTES FOR REFLECTION Pentecost 16

Texts: Isaiah 5:1-7; Philippians 3:4b-14; Matthew 21:33-46

Theme: Something like "Facing the Inevitable". Judgment is sure and unavoidable. What hope is there for us?

Introduction. There comes a time when time runs out. Our past catches up with us. That which we always intended to do one day has not been done. Judgment is upon us. A man of great wealth has run out of reasons for delay: he is declared bankrupt. In the sixth week of his trial on multiple fraud charges another man shocks even his lawyers by changing his plea to guilty. In both cases a day of judgment has arrived. So to for Israel. Even God has given up on his people. They must now accept the consequences of their unfaithfulness. St Paul faced such a moment on the Road to Damascus. Everything he had sincerely believed put him right with God turned out to be wrong. Fortunately for him (and for all of us!) he got the message and repented. The tenants in the vineyard did not: they followed the time-honoured course of committing one crime to cover up another and so on. Their punishment will follow. They have killed the only person who could have saved them if only they had been prepared to accept him as their (land)Lord.

Background. A young man who had been a stalwart in the local church throughout his teenage years – often playing the organ and leading the singing – in his early twenties suddenly discovered the joy of courting and stopped attending church. Discussing this one day with the Vicar, his mother, who was very involved in the church herself, commented: "But I'm not worried, of course – he's got plenty of time to come back." "How do you know that?" the Vicar asked her.

God shows us enormous forbearance, but the teaching of Scripture is clear. It has an end.

Isaiah. The first 5 chapters of the Book of Isaiah form a preface to the rest. Throughout those chapters the metaphor of the vineyard is used in three different ways. In 1:8 it identifies the faithful remnant that God reserves to himself within the otherwise faithless people. In 3:12-4.1 the elders and leaders of the people stand accused by God of having ruined his vineyard by –

· Plundering the poor

· Crushing his people, and

· Grinding the faces of the poor.

But now the prophet faces the seeming inevitability of divine judgment. The vineyard has become the place where total destruction must be pronounced. The hope in 1:26-27 has gone: as has the cleansing and new creation in 4:2-6. This time even God has run out of ideas: what more could be done? Sin has taken hope away: nothing is left but gathering darkness.

Vines have only one use – to produce good grapes. If they fail to do that they are of no value: see Ezekiel 15:2-5.

The Feast of Tabernacles followed the gathering in of the grape harvest. It has been suggested that might have provided the background for Isaiah's song.

Notice the careful structure of the song: 1-2: the singer sings of his friend; 3-4: the singer sings as his friend; 5-6: the singer reveals the identity of his friend; 7: the singer reveals the identity of the vineyard.

Taking It Personally.

· Recall an instance when you lavished time and energy on a particular project (cooking, making something, sowing something, etc) only to be extremely disappointed with the outcome. How did that feel?

· How did you respond? Did you try again, or did you abandon the exercise in disgust?

· What about a child, grandchild, or perhaps a pet? Have you felt let down, unrewarded for all the love, care and commitment you have given?

· Has God done everything possible for you? What more could he have done? How might he feel about the outcome?

Philippians. This passage is one of the most important of Paul's personal testimonies: see also Galatians 1:13-24; 1 Timothy 1:12-16; Acts 22:1-21; 26:1-23. This passage is a model for Christian discipleship. He begins by an honest assessment of himself; his Jewish pedigree is impeccable, but he had placed his faith in that pedigree; and he had believed that his righteousness was earned by his study of and zeal for the Law. This forms the first part of today's passage, dealing with his pre-conversion identity and belief system. In verses 7-14 he shows how much has changed on his conversion to Christ. For him, nothing has any lasting value compared with knowing Christ – not "about" Christ. Righteousness comes, not through zealous adherence to the Law, but through faith in Christ. He wants nothing more than to know (that is, experience) –

· Christ

· The power of Christ's resurrection, and

· The sharing in Christ's death and resurrection.

Conversion is a process, not an event. Paul has not yet achieved all these things. He is becoming more Christ-like: he is not yet like Christ. So "Forgetting what is behind and straining towards what is ahead I press on towards the goal."

Taking It Personally.

· How important is your relationship with Christ? Can you say with Paul that no one and nothing else even comes close to the value you attach to knowing Christ?

· What have you lost through your faith in Christ?

· Have you experienced the power of Christ's resurrection in your life?

· Look back 10 years. Are you more Christ-like now than you were then?

· How willing and able are you to forget what is behind and strain towards what is ahead? Are you convinced that the best is yet to come?

Matthew. This parable is clearly based on today's passage from Isaiah. The details in v.33 play no role in the development of the story, and serve the purpose of reminding his audience (the chief priests and elders) of the Isaiah passage, which they knew was about the judgment of Israel by God. It follows on immediately after last week's passage, and so is set in Jerusalem in Holy Week (after the Triumphal Entry and the Cleansing of the Temple). The chief priests and the elders were members of the ruling class, and would have within their ranks many absentee landlords who would naturally sympathise with the landlord in the parable. They would certainly not tolerate such behaviour from their own tenants! Hence, they are suckered – forced to pass judgment on themselves by the question in v.40.

The reference to "harvest time" in v.34 is code for the time of Judgment. The treatment handed out to the servants in vv.35-6 reflects the treatment traditionally handed out to the prophets of Israel. Many such tenancies of the time may well have passed down through the generations: tenants with an eye to the future would have wanted good relations with the current landlord's son and heir: v.37. The reasoning of these tenants in v.38 is decidedly wobbly in terms of succession law, but serves the purposes of the narrative. The quotation in verse 42 is from psalm 118:22-3. The implication seems to be that just as builders can fail to recognise good stone when they see it, so they (the experts in the Law) have failed to recognise the Son of God about whom the Law testifies. In v.43 there is a rare reference (rare for Matthew) to "kingdom of God" rather than "kingdom of Heaven", perhaps indicating that this verse did not originate with Matthew. Note, too, the direct tone in this verse: the kingdom of God will be taken away from "you". Story-time is over and the gloves are off! In verse 44 a distinction seems to be drawn between those who trip over the stone, who may be redeemed, and those on whom it falls (judgment) who will be destroyed. In verse 45 the reference to the Pharisees is inconsistent with v.23.

Taking It Personally.

· Look back over the past week. What judgment would you pass on yourself?

· Do you ever have a sense of God's absence – as if he had gone away on a journey?

· Does God's apparent absence worry or frighten you – or is it sometimes more of a relief?

· As you read or hear his parables, do you sometimes feel Jesus is talking about you? Which parable(s) in particular?

September 25 NOTES FOR REFLECTION Pentecost 15

2011-09-24T18:29:00.001+12:00

September 25 NOTES FOR REFLECTION Pentecost 15

Texts: Ezekiel 18:1-4, 25-32; Philippians 2:1-13; Matthew 21:23-33

Theme: I suggest "A Change of Mind". At the literal level that applies pretty well to the tale of the two sons in the gospel passage. But in the broader sense, repentance is a change of mindset or attitude, which both lessons talk about.

Introduction. God makes all things new. Fresh starts, fresh ways of thinking and looking at things. Pick yourself up, dust yourself down, and start all over again, as the old song had it. Not great music, perhaps, but sound theology. Repentance (Ezekiel), kenosis – self-emptying (Philippians), and essence rather than form (Matthew) are all ways in which this idea of being open to the new plays out in practice.

Background. There is a specialist Christian ministry group offering to set us free from "generational sin". This is not meant in the sense that politicians talk of generational poverty, unemployment or delinquency. It means that the idea denounced in our first lesson today that we can suffer the penalty for sins committed by our ancestors is still not dead over 2,500 years later! I have on more than one occasion been "advised" by a well-meaning (though not well-informed) Christian that X is suffering because his "Great Uncle Charlie" was a Freemason! "Forget the former things, do not dwell on the past...' (Isaiah 43:18!

Every parent will have had experience of a child saying one thing and doing or not doing something else! Jesus' story would immediately have heads nodding.

Ezekiel. Even those who believe that we are punished for the sins of our forefathers consider it is unjust – and such a view is, of course, critical of God's law. Their complaint is that God's law on this matter is unjust. But it is also a very useful defence: I am not the sinner; it was my Great Uncle Charlie who sinned. So this passage is really aimed, not so much at defending God against their criticism of his law, but at blowing this would-be defence out of the water. You are being punished for your own sins, not Great Uncle Charlie's, so grow up, take responsibility for your own faults, and repent. However, we are not simply dealing with a common proverb here: see Exodus 20:5: for I, the Lord your God am a jealous God punishing the children for the sins of the parents to the third and fourth generations of those who hate me, but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.

Repentance is the way out of the rut, the way back to God. It is the way to "get a new heart and a new spirit" (v.31). This is much more than confession of particular sins: this is a whole transformation of attitude and personality. There is also a warning against "reverse repentance": if the righteous person turns to sin his former righteous self will not save him. In a real sense we choose whether or not to be saved. Freewill and salvation are intimately linked. (Obvious connection with the story of the two sons.)

Important to note that God does not take pleasure in the death of anyone. God is not in the business of meeting a quota! His will is that all will be saved.

Taking It Personally.

· Consider your genetic inheritance. Are you aware of any weakness or disability you have inherited? How do you feel about that? If not, have you given thanks for your good genes?

· Consider your upbringing. Are you aware of any adverse effects on your personality, attitudes, etc? How do you feel about that? Have you ever caught yourself blaming your parents, grandparents, etc for some negative trait in your character?

· Are you inclined to explain away your shortcomings and failures by blaming past experiences of any kind? Is there "baggage" you need to let go?

· Would you like to be set free from any part of your past? What might such liberation entail? Which Bible stories come to mind as you ponder these questions?

Philippians. The centre of this reading is the much-loved "hymn of Christ's humility". But this is preceded with Paul's teaching on the relationship between believers within the Body of Christ. He starts with the "benefits" of being in Christ – encouragement, comfort, fellowship, etc; then exhorts the believers to be "like-minded". Not that we must agree on every point, but that we should be "one in spirit and purpose". This calls for less "I" and more "we"; less "me" and more "us". Perhaps our democratic upbringing encourages each of us to push our own barrows in the hope that all our competing interests can somehow be mediated through the democratic process. But in the church there should be no competing interest, because each of us should be as concerned with the interests of others as we are with our own. So, out with self ambition and vain conceit, and in with humility.

In short, out attitude should be the same as Christ's. The key concept here is "kenosis" – Christ emptied himself of all his divine rights and prerogatives, and made room for God and other people. He gave himself entirely to do his Father's will in all things and at all times. "...yet not my will but yours be done" (Matthew 26:39; Luke 22:42; see also Hebrews 10:7; and the Lord's Prayer "your will be done".

Taking It Personally.

· Reflect on your present relationship in and with Christ? Do you draw encouragement from it; do you gain comfort from his love, and fellowship from his Spirit? Are you more tender and compassionate towards others because of your faith?

· Reflect on your relationship with others in your local church. Are you ever tempted to push your own barrow? Do you consider them better (more Christlike) than yourself? Are you as mindful of their best interests as of your own?

· Would you describe yourself as humble? How would you feel if someone else described you in that way?

Matthew. Suddenly, we are in Jerusalem. We are past the triumphant entry (Palm Sunday and all that) and past the cleansing of the Temple. It's probably that episode more than anything else that has caused the chief priests and the elders to come to Jesus and demand to know what authority he has to do these things, and from whom? From the very beginning this issue of Jesus' authority has been bubbling away. Early on we were told that the crowds marvelled at his teaching, because he taught as one having authority, and not as the teachers of the law who relied on precedents and rulers from other scholars: Matthew 7:29; Mark 1:27.

Jesus is reluctant to give a direct answer; he is not accountable to them. Instead, he asks a question of his own concerning the authority of John the Baptist. When they kick for touch, so does he.

His authority does not arise from his training, education and experience, but from his identity. This provides our link with the parable of the two sons. Neither son questions his father's authority for giving the command he does: He is the father and that is the source of his authority over them. In refusing to do as he is told, the first son rejects his father's authority and thereby rejects his father. But then he changes his mind – he repents – and thereby restores his relationship with his father. The second son does everything in reverse. At the end the test is, which son is in right relationship with his father?

Obedience, in the religious sense, is recognising who God is and accepting his authority over our lives. In refusing to listen to John the Baptist who was God's prophet (authorised spokesman) the religious leaders are rejecting God's authority; in heeding John's message, the prostitutes and publicans are accepting God's authority in their lives.

Taking It Personally.

· Can you recall an occasion when someone challenged your authority – "Who do you think you are?" How did you respond?

· What is your general attitude towards those in authority?

· Which of the two sons are you most like?

· How is God's authority over you manifested in your daily life?

All Creatures Great and Small!

2011-09-23T10:19:00.001+12:00

All Creatures Great and Small! - Thanksgiving Service for Pets at St Stephen's Hampden 2pm on Sunday 2^nd October. All pets and owners welcome!

NOTES FOR REFLECTION PENTECOST 14

2011-09-16T14:47:00.001+12:00

September 18 NOTES FOR REFLECTION PENTECOST 14

Theme. I suggest something like "The Sting of God's Grace". We are used to being told how fortunate we are to be the recipients of God's grace. Today we are challenged to recognise that part of our human nature that is not quite so thrilled when some thoroughly undeserving person receives that same grace.

Introduction. Two great stories today, both clear in their meaning and requiring little exposition. Jonah may be guilty of a little re-writing of recent history, in his assertion that the reason why he fled to Tarshish (Spain) was because he knew that the Ninevites would repent and be saved. They were, after all, Israel's enemies, so a more likely initial concern for Jonah may have been a natural fear for his own safety. However, the point of the story is clear enough: he wants God's favour for himself, and God's disfavour for his enemies. The Parable of the Vineyard has a similar twist. The workers hired first object to the master's generosity to others, even though they are receiving what they were promised. St Paul's plea is that, whatever happens, in good fortune or bad ("for better or for worse"), we stand fast in the faith, for only our relationship with Christ truly matters.

Background. The famous childish cry, "That's not fair!" sums up these stories today. Children have an innate expectation that they will be treated fairly, and protest vigorously if they feel that they have been hard done by. They rarely have any concern if some other child is the victim of injustice.

The story is told of God's horror on discovering that so far only one person had made it into heaven. He summoned St Peter to explain. St Peter insisted that it was God's fault: God had set the entrance standard too high. Only one person had managed to comply with all ten commandments throughout his entire life. God reflected on this, and then agreed to reduce the requirement from 10 to 5. Millions then became eligible. On hearing about the change the one resident of heaven was heard to yell, "That's not fair!"

Another story – this one true. In a bible study group the conversation turned to a recent gruesome murder in the locality. The offender pleaded guilty, expressed deep remorse, and hoped that one day the victim's family might find it in their hearts to forgive him. One of the group, a lifelong member of the Church, asked what would happen to him eternally if he truly repented. When told that he would receive God's mercy, she protested: "You mean, that scumbag would get the same deal I'll get after a lifetime of service to the church?"

Jonah. It may be worth noting this story is set in modern-day Iraq. Jonah, a Jew, is called to go there and warn the locals that they are on the wrong track – to call them to repentance. Jonah wants none of that and takes ship to modern-day Spain, with near-fatal consequences. Despite his near-death experience his inner nature does not seem to have been transformed for the better. His obedience is grudging, and he hopes with all his heart that his call to repentance will be rejected. Indeed, he sits down to watch what he hopes will be their mass extermination, concerned only with his personal well-being. Even when challenged by God he puts up robust resistance. He is, if nothing else, one of the most honest people we come across in the Scriptures.

Taking It Personally.

· How much of a Jonah is in you? Can you recall an occasion on which you felt cross because someone did not get their just desserts?

· Are you as quick to give thanks when things go well for you as you are to complain when they do not?

· Notice that the story ends with an unanswered question. What unanswered questions do you have as you read this story?

Philippians. St Paul is in prison and in chains. He is quite clear that this is a direct consequence of his proclamation of his faith in Christ. He is well aware of the danger he faces – he could be executed. Far from being terrified at the prospect, he calmly weighs up whether he would prefer to die, and so be with the Lord immediately, or remain alive so that he can continue his ministry. On balance, he thinks the latter option is preferable because it is in the interests of others. Whatever happens (and his implication is that nothing of a worldly nature matters too much), the important thing is to stand firm in the faith, and to conduct ourselves in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ.

Taking It Personally.

· Note the blunt realism of Paul's approach. Take a few moments to ponder his physical situation as he writes this message. Then read this passage through again. How would you describe Paul's feelings at this time?

· Notice his reference to joy in verses 24 and 25. How is it possible to be joyful in such dismal personal circumstances?

· Reflect on your own conduct over the last week. Has it been worthy of the gospel of Jesus Christ?

Matthew. Another of Jesus' major parables, and perhaps the one that is most complete. It is self-explanatory – even the disciples seem to get it! It is a kingdom parable – this is what the kingdom of heaven is like. Some of the features include the fact that all the workers respond positively when called, the first and the last. No one gets less than he is entitled to. A denarius is usually described as the labourer's daily rate of pay: it is perhaps better to describe it as the average daily cost of living for a labourer and his dependents. Thus, each worker in this story has his needs met regardless of how long he worked. "Give us today our daily bread." A question not often asked in respect of this parable is this: if the vineyard represents the kingdom of heaven and the landowner is God, should we not be envious of those first hired, because they entered into the presence of God earlier than the others? We are assuming the opposite, but why? Notice there is no harsh condemnation at the end of this parable, as there was with the parable of the unmerciful servant. The landowner simply explains his position and asks another unanswerable question – in fact, two unanswerable questions (v.15).

Taking It Personally.

· Where do your sympathies lie? Do you find yourself on the 'wrong side of this parable' again?

· How might a Christian be guided by this parable in an employment situation? Should it matter if a fellow employee appears to be on a higher rate for the same work, so long as the employer is paying the agreed amount to the Christian employee?

· Does generosity to one person always imply injustice to another?

· Is this just another example of the unrealism of the kingdom of heaven compared to the ways of the world? Should we confine such biblical teaching to the Church, and not seek to apply it to the secular world?

NOTES FOR RELECTION

2011-09-09T14:09:00.000+12:00

September 11 NOTES FOR RELECTION Pentecost 13

Texts: Genesis 50:15-21; Romans 14:1-12; Matthew 18:21-35

Theme: This week it picks itself. It is at the heart of the Lord's Prayer, and at the core of his teaching. The unforgiving are not forgiven. God's love may be unconditional, but his forgiveness is not. We are forgiven to the same extent that we forgive others.

Introduction. There is probably no more difficult challenge to those of us who try to follow Christ's teaching than this apparently indissoluble link between our forgiveness of others and God's forgiveness of us. No wonder it tends to bring out the legalistic hair-splitting side of our nature, so well represented by Peter in today's gospel passage. Recall that this passage follows on the teaching about dealing with an offending party within the community of faith. Peter wants to know about the serial offender: how many times should we put up with it until we finally give up on him? His suggestion of seven strikes and you're out seems pretty generous by our standards; but Jesus blows the whole idea of such counting and record-keeping out f the water. (Love, says St Paul keeps no record of wrongs: 1 Corinthians 13:5). Likewise, Joseph embodies the grace of God in contrast to the worldly approach of his brothers. Ultimately, says St Paul, we can leave it all to God as all of us will be called to account by him.

Background. In his book Living Prayer Metropolitan Anthony has a chapter on the Lord's Prayer. He draws a fascinating parallel between the development of the prayer, read from the end back to the beginning(!), and the Exodus journey. Here is an extract of what he writes about the petition 'Forgive us our trespasses...":

There is one thing that stands as a line of demarcation between Egypt and the desert, between slavery and freedom; it is a moment when we act decisively and become new people, establishing ourselves in an absolutely new moral situation. In terms of geography it was the Red Sea, in terms of the Lord's Prayer it is 'Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive...' This 'as we forgive' is the moment when we take our salvation into our own hands, because whatever God does depends on what we do; and this is terribly important in terms of ordinary life. If these people who are moving out of Egypt into the promised land take with them, out of the land of Egypt, their fears, their resentments, their hatreds, their grievances, they will be slaves in the promised land. They will not be freemen, even in the making. And this is why at the demarcation line between the trials of fire and the beguilement of old habits, stands this absolute condition that God never relaxes: as you forgive, the measure which you use will be used for you; and as you forgive, you will be forgiven; what you do not forgive will be held against you. It is not that God does not want to forgive, but if we come unforgiving, we check the mystery of love, we refuse it and there is no place for us in the kingdom. We cannot go farther if we are not forgiven, and we cannot be forgiven as long as we have not forgiven everyone who has wronged us. This is quite sharp and real and precise, and no one has the right to imagine that he is in the kingdom of God, that he belongs to it, if there is still unforgiveness in his heart. To forgive one's enemies is the first, the most elementary characteristic of a Christian; failing this, we are not yet Christian at all, but we are still wandering in the scorching wilderness of Sinai.

Tough stuff indeed! A failure to forgive is a failure to love; a refusal to be reconciled is a breach of fellowship or communion. To understand the eternal consequences of that we have only to reflect on the story of Dives and Lazarus (Luke 16:18-31).

Genesis. A wonderfully dramatic conclusion to the long and all-too-human saga of the Bible's most dysfunctional family, whose members became the founding fathers of the 12 tribes of Israel! Jesus surely had this episode in mind when he told the Parable of the Prodigal Son. Like the son, these brothers realise that they have got themselves in a hopeless position. They have surely forfeited all right to fraternal love, so they devise a survival strategy. They concoct a story about their father's dying wish, and when they are brought into Joseph's presence they declare themselves his slaves rather than his brothers. But Joseph, the servant of God, is gracious to them, and assures them of his care and protection for them and their children.

Taking It Personally.

· Take a moment to recall the enormity of the ill-treatment Joseph's brothers had inflicted on him. How would you describe it?

· Reflect on your own family relationships. Are you estranged from any family member? Do you feel any resentment towards any member for past behaviour towards you?

· Are you aware of any occasion on which some wrong was done against you and God subsequently used that to good purpose? Does that make it any easier to forgive the wrongdoer?

Romans. This reading departs somewhat from our main theme. It deals mainly with our tendency to judge our fellow believers on somewhat peripheral matters. Whenever we catch ourselves thinking, 'If he was a real Christian he wouldn't have done that', we should re-read this passage. It's that sort of attitude that St Paul is taking aim at. He opposes it on three grounds. First, on relatively unimportant issues (meat-eating is one of his examples) the unity of the fellowship is too important to risk in argument. Secondly, every Christian is a servant of the Lord. It is not our place to judge someone else' servant: that is a matter between the servant and the master. Thirdly, each of us must give our own account to God.

But there are some connecting threads between these ideas and our theme of forgiveness. Forgiveness pre-supposes some element of judgment: I cannot forgive someone unless I understand that he has offended against me. And here is a question to ponder: does our forgiveness wipe clean only the offence against us, leaving the offender to make his own account to God; or does our forgiveness also wipe out the offence against God? [See Matthew 6:14-15; 16:19; and 18:18]

Taking It Personally.

· Are you inclined to be critical of other Christians whose beliefs and practices differ from your own?

· How do you distinguish between "disputable matters" (v.1) and core, non-negotiable ones?

· How do you feel about the prospect of giving an account of yourself to God?

· If you do not already do this, consider ending each day for a week conducting a brief review of the day and giving an account of yourself to God for that day [a practice sometimes called "an examen of conscience"].

Matthew. Surely one of the hardest and most direct of all the parables. It covers all three classes of parable, kingdom, grace, and judgment. It shows the conduct required of us to live in the Kingdom of Heaven. All the details are grossly exaggerated. We're talking Bernie Madoff figures here! No servant could possibly have run up such a huge debt; and certainly any promise to repay, even by instalments, is complete nonsense. The whole point is to stress the extraordinary mercy shown by the King in forgiving the debt; and equally, the paltry sum owed to the servant by his fellow servant. The plea for patience made by each servant is the same; so again the comparison is between the attitude of the King one the one hand and the first servant on the other. Legally, the story doesn't work too well: once the debt had been forgiven the King could not reinstate it – it had ceased to exist. But this story is not a case study in contract law: it's about the response required of the recipients of God's grace. The servant's failure to extend forgiveness means that he has rejected the grace he received; the consequence of that is that he condemns himself to hell. Verse 35 makes it all too clear what Jesus is really warning us about.

Taking It Personally.

· Pray the petition "Forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sin against us" slowly several times. Then re-read this story.

· Ask God to draw to mind any matter that you may need to address by forgiving someone else.

· Re-read the passage quoted above by Metropolitan Anthony. Do you agree or disagree with the importance he attaches to this subject. Why?