gregoryjenks

Author: Gregory C. Jenks

  • Advent 2C (9 December 2012)

    Contents

    Lectionary

    • Baruch 5:1-9 (or Malachi 3:1-4) and Luke 1:68-79
    • Philippians 1:3-11
    • Luke 3:1-6

     

    First Reading: The Forerunner

    The book of Malachi (literally, “My messenger”) is the last of the prophetic texts that comprise the Scroll of the Twelve in the Hebrew Bible. The Jewish canon has three parts:

    • Torah (5 scrolls of Moses)
    • Prophets (4 x Former Prophets + 4 x Latter Prophets)
    • Writings (books of different genres that were sacred to Jewish communities around the turn of the eras)

    The Prophets included two very different series of books:

    • What we are more likely to think of as Historical Books (Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings), following the classification of the ancient Greek versions of the Bible, are regarded as prophetic texts in the normative Jewish tradition. Seeing these texts as prophetic writings rather than as historical narratives can open up new ways of approaching these books. They are narratives with an agenda – a prophetic agenda – and do not claim to be critical histories in the modern sense of that term.
    • Matching those four books of the Former Prophets were four great scrolls of the Latter Prophets: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and The Twelve. Each of these scrolls are really compilation albums, gathering up materials connected in some way or other with the legacy of the various named prophets. We note that the Jewish tradition does not distinguish between the “Major” and “Minor” prophets as if size matters. Rather, the majority of the shorter prophetic texts are gathered into a single large scroll to form a body of 12 prophetic witnesses. (The book of Daniel provides an interesting exception, since Jewish tradition does not treat as a prophetic text and assigns it to the Writings.)

    The Scroll of the Twelve comprised the following texts:

    • Hosea
    • Joel
    • Amos
    • Obadiah
    • Jonah
    • Micah
    • Nahum
    • Habakkuk
    • Zephaniah
    • Haggai
    • Zechariah
    • Malachi

    These are all relatively short texts when compared with the collections associated with Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel.

    The twelfth book – Malachi – may have been created by separating a portion of text that originally formed part of Zechariah in order to create, albeit artificially – the symbolic number of twelve prophets. It condemns various signs of decadence among the clergy and the wider society of the prophet’s time (perhaps during the first half of the 5C BCE). As seems always to be the case in apocalyptic literature, the remedy was not seen in political or religious reform but in a dramatic divine intervention:

    See, I am sending my messenger to prepare the way before me, and the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to his temple. The messenger of the covenant in whom you delight—indeed, he is coming, says the LORD of hosts. But who can endure the day of his coming, and who can stand when he appears? For he is like a refiner’s fire and like fullers’ soap; he will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver, and he will purify the descendants of Levi and refine them like gold and silver, until they present offerings to the LORD in righteousness. Then the offering of Judah and Jerusalem will be pleasing to the LORD as in the days of old and as in former years. (Mal 3:1-4 NRSV)

    In later Jewish tradition, the end-time prophetic sent as the harbinger of the divine Advent would develop as several biblical figures were combined in one form or another:

    • a prophet like Moses (Deuteronomy 18)
    • Elijah returning from heaven (2 Kings 2 and Malachi 4)
    • the voice crying in the wilderness from Isaiah 40
    • the anonymous messenger of Malachi 3

     

    Second Reading: The day of Jesus Christ

    Philippians is one of the seven Pauline letters that are generally accepted as authentic, although even this brief letter may be a composite created from fragments of more than one letter. The passage set for this Sunday is presumably chosen because of its repeated reference to the day of Christ:

    I thank my God every time I remember you, constantly praying with joy in every one of my prayers for all of you, because of your sharing in the gospel from the first day until now. I am confident of this, that the one who began a good work among you will bring it to completion by the day of Jesus Christ. It is right for me to think this way about all of you, because you hold me in your heart, for all of you share in God’s grace with me, both in my imprisonment and in the defense and confirmation of the gospel. For God is my witness, how I long for all of you with the compassion of Christ Jesus. And this is my prayer, that your love may overflow more and more with knowledge and full insight to help you to determine what is best, so that in the day of Christ you may be pure and blameless, having produced the harvest of righteousness that comes through Jesus Christ for the glory and praise of God. (Phil 1:3-11 NRSV)

    Paul is working with similar categories to the unknown author of Malachi, but his perspective is quite different. He celebrates the faithfulness of his audience and anticipates their vindication on the day of visitation by the divine Lord.

    Gospel: John the Baptiser in Luke-Acts

    John the Baptiser

    In A Marginal Jew (vol. 2: “Mentor, Message and Miracles”), John Meier describes John the Baptist as one of two historical figures that stand at either end of Jesus’ life like bookends. The other is Pontius Pilate. We know of each figure from independent historical sources, although the popular image of both is shaped by Christian tradition that speaks of them only from the perspective of their relationship to Jesus.

    The NT Gospels provide three major blocks of material about John, the Jewish apocalyptic prophet who was a contemporary of Jesus and may also have been something of a mentor to him:

    • Infancy narratives (Luke 1-2)
    • John’s activity culminating in the baptism of Jesus (found in all 4 Gospels)
    • Questions posed by John about Jesus (Luke 7:18-35 || Matt 11:2-19, “Q”)

    John’s death is related in Mark 6:17-29 and more briefly in Matt 14:3-12. There are also a few other passages that mention John or his disciples, sometimes in dispute with Jesus and sometimes in favorable terms.

    The following passage in the first-century Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus, is especially valuable as all our other descriptions of John come from Christian sources and might be expected to promote Jesus while playing down the significance of John:

    [116] Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod’s army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist: for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing [with water] would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away [or the remission] of some sins [only], but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness. Now when [many] others came in crowds about him, for they were very greatly moved [or pleased] by hearing his words, Herod, who feared lest the great influence John had over the people might put it into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion, (for they seemed ready to do any thing he should advise,) thought it best, by putting him to death, to prevent any mischief he might cause, and not bring himself into difficulties, by sparing a man who might make him repent of it when it would be too late. Accordingly he was sent a prisoner, out of Herod’s suspicious temper, to Macherus, the castle I before mentioned, and was there put to death. Now the Jews had an opinion that the destruction of this army was sent as a punishment upon Herod, and a mark of God’s displeasure to him. Antiquities of the Jewish People, 18.116-19: Perseus Digital Library

    We see from Acts 19 that there were followers of John within Jewish circles late into the 1C (or even into the beginning of the 2C), and that they were something of a rival religious community to emerging Christianity.

    John the Baptist in Luke-Acts

    Luke presents John as filling a God-given role in preparing for the ministry of Jesus. He develops the infancy traditions of John and Jesus in parallel to one another:

    • Scene 1 – John’s miraculous conception (Luke 1:5-25)
    • Scene 2 – Jesus’ miraculous conception (Luke 1:26-38)
    • Scene 3 – Mary visits Elizabeth (Luke 1:39-56)
    • Scene 4 – John’s birth and naming (Luke 1:57-80)
    • Scene 5 – Jesus’ birth and naming (Luke 2:1-21)
    • Scene 6 – Presentation in Temple (Luke 2:22-40)
    • Scene 7 – 12-year old Jesus in Temple (Luke 2:41-52)

    As Luke continues his presentation of Christianity in the two volumes we know as Luke-Acts, he gives John the Baptist more attention than in any other NT writing:

    Luke 3:1-22 provides an extensive description of John prior to the baptism of Jesus (of which we read just the opening words this week).

    In 5:33-39 Luke uses the material from Mark about the divergence in religious practice between John’s disciples (“always fasting and offering prayers”) and Jesus’ disciples (“yours just eat and drink”). Instead of reading that simply as a question directed to Jesus by the crowds, perhaps it should be understood (as Luke’s readers most likely appreciated) as a reference to the sustained rivalry between John’s people and the Jesus people? Did John’s disciples observe more traditional Jewish practices, while the Jesus people gathered for Eucharists in which the fellowship of the kingdom was experienced (but which their critics derided as “just eat and drink”).

    Luke 7:18-35 directly addresses the relationship of John and Jesus. Luke asserts the primacy of Jesus, while affirming the importance of John. Yet Luke is also making the point that the least significant person in the Kingdom is greater than John. Once again the contrast between the asceticism of John’s followers and the exuberant celebrations of the Jesus people is clear.

    Luke 9:7-9,18-21 preserves a tradition that some thought Jesus to be John returned to life following his murder by Herod Antipas. When introducing the Lord’s Prayer (Luke 11:1), Luke has the disciples request Jesus to teach them how to pray just like John had taught his disciples how to pray. This detail is only found in Luke. Matthew’s account simply has Jesus deciding to give some instruction on prayer (and the contrast is not with the prayer tradition of John’s people, but with those of the Gentiles). Once again we glimpse a profound tension between John’s followers and the Jesus movement.

    Luke 16:16 treats John as the final prophet, and the one whose ministry marks the transition from the time of Law and the Prophets. In contrast, Luke presents Jesus as the one ushering in the Kingdom era. Luke’s version of this tradition differs significantly from Matthew’s (Matt 11:1-15): Matthew dates the breaking in of God’s Kingdom “from the time of John the Baptist until now.” He also explicitly identifies John with the Elijah figure expected to appear at the end of time. Luke does not allow John to be the Elijah figure since he will keep that function for Jesus himself.

    In the Book of Acts the first of several references to John is found in Acts 1:4-5. Here (as if anticipating 19:1-7) Jesus contrasts John, who baptized with water, to the coming “baptism with the Holy Spirit.”

    Jesus’ baptism by John is mentioned as the beginning of Jesus’ ministry in key speeches Luke creates for Peter and Paul in his narrative: Peter calling for a new apostle to replace Judas (1:21-22), Peter preaching to Cornelius (10:34-38), and Paul’s sermon to the Pisidian Jews (13:23-25).

    In Acts 11:15-17, Luke has Peter cite the difference between John’s water baptism and the Spirit baptism of early Christianity when defending his decision to baptize Cornelius and his household.

    The second-last reference to John the Baptist occurs in Acts 18:24-28. In this passage two of Paul’s associates put a fellow Christian missionary through a crash course in theology. Apollos “had been taught the way of the Lord and was on fire with the Spirit.” Better still, “he used to speak and teach about Jesus correctly.” However, Apollos had one shortcoming: “he knew only the baptism of John.”

    Finally we have Acts 19:1-7, where the disciples of John need to move beyond John’s “baptism of repentance” (presumably expressed in fasting and prayers?), to a more eucharistic faith that celebrates the gift of the Spirit at the shared table (“just eating and drinking” to their detractors?). In this unique passage, Luke portrays Paul coming across a small community that is centered around the teachings of John the Baptist. This is the only time that the NT admits such groups existed and were rivals to the Jesus communities within Judaism. This episode allows Luke to assert the primacy of the Jesus movement over John’s followers: John’s people (described as disciples) are quite unaware of the Holy Spirit until Paul lays hands on them. Like the conversion of the first Gentiles (Acts 10), there is miraculous confirmation of their inclusion in the kingdom as they speak in tongues and prophesy. Significantly, Luke tells us there were about 12 people involved: sufficient for a properly ordered apostolic community.

    Needless to say, we do not have any direct evidence of how John or his own disciples understood his place in the scheme of things.

     

    John’s Message in Luke 3

    Luke’s description of John’s message is outlined in Luke 3:1-20:

    [A] First of all, Luke carefully locates John by reference to several public figures that might be known to his audience:

    3:1 In the fifteenth year of the reign of Emperor Tiberius, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, and Herod was ruler of Galilee, and his brother Philip ruler of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias ruler of Abilene, 2 during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the wilderness. 3 He went into all the region around the Jordan, proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins …

    In contrast, notice how Mark and Matthew introduce John the Baptist, without even the infancy traditions that precede his public activity in Luke-Acts:

    Mark 1:4 John the baptizer appeared in the wilderness, proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. 5 And people from the whole Judean countryside and all the people of Jerusalem were going out to him, and were baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins. 6 Now John was clothed with camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist, and he ate locusts and wild honey.

    =Matt 3:1: In those days John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness of Judea, proclaiming, 2″Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near.” 3 This is the one of whom the prophet Isaiah spoke when he said, “The voice of one crying out in the wilderness: ‘Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.’” 4 Now John wore clothing of camel’s hair with a leather belt around his waist, and his food was locusts and wild honey. 5 Then the people of Jerusalem and all Judea were going out to him, and all the region along the Jordan, 6 and they were baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins.

    [B] Then Luke follows Mark and Matthew, by interpreting John through the lens of Isaiah 40 (and correcting Mark’s inaccurate inclusion of words from Malachi as well as Isaiah):

    as it is written in the book of the words of the prophet Isaiah,
    “The voice of one crying out in the wilderness:
    “Prepare the way of the Lord,
    make his paths straight.
    Every valley shall be filled,
    and every mountain and hill shall be made low,
    and the crooked shall be made straight,
    and the rough ways made smooth;
    and all flesh shall see the salvation of God.’”

    [C] At this point, Luke introduces material not found in his earlier sources, as he describes the message proclaimed by John and indicates how it was received by the people:

    7 John said to the crowds that came out to be baptized by him, “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? 8 Bear fruits worthy of repentance. Do not begin to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our ancestor’; for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham. 9 Even now the ax is lying at the root of the trees; every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.”
    10 And the crowds asked him, “What then should we do?” 11 In reply he said to them, “Whoever has two coats must share with anyone who has none; and whoever has food must do likewise.” 12 Even tax collectors came to be baptized, and they asked him, “Teacher, what should we do?” 13 He said to them, “Collect no more than the amount prescribed for you.” 14 Soldiers also asked him, “And we, what should we do?” He said to them, “Do not extort money from anyone by threats or false accusation, and be satisfied with your wages.”

    [D] In words reminiscent of his description in the Gospel of John (1:26-27 & 3:28-30), Luke portrays John as looking for someone greater to succeed him and act as God’s agent of judgment:

    15 As the people were filled with expectation, and all were questioning in their hearts concerning John, whether he might be the Messiah, 16 John answered all of them by saying, “I baptize you with water; but one who is more powerful than I is coming; I am not worthy to untie the thong of his sandals. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. 17 His winnowing fork is in his hand, to clear his threshing floor and to gather the wheat into his granary; but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.”

    [E] Finally, Luke notes that a corrupt Herodian prince had ordered John’s execution — an event he refrains from describing, unlike Mark (6:17-29) and Matthew (14:3-12a). He mentions this outcome twice (see also Luke 9:7-9) but seems to play it down. It was perhaps a fate that might have suggested to Luke’s readers that there was something of the rebel about both Jesus and his mentor, John. Luke seems to have been at some pains to represent both John and Jesus as model citizens with a pedigree that featured family connections in Jerusalem and its Temple.

    18 So, with many other exhortations, he proclaimed the good news to the people. 19 But Herod the ruler, who had been rebuked by him because of Herodias, his brother’s wife, and because of all the evil things that Herod had done, 20 added to them all by shutting up John in prison.

     

    Jesus Database

     

    Liturgies and Prayers

    For liturgies and sermons each week, shaped by a progressive theology, check Rex Hunt’s web site

    Other recommended sites include:

     

    Music Suggestions

    See David MacGregor’s Together to Celebrate site for recommendations from a variety of contemporary genre.

  • Advent 1C (2 December 2012)

    Contents

    Lectionary

    • Jeremiah 33:14–16 and Psalm 25:1–10
    • 1 Thessalonians 3:9–13
    • Luke 21:25–36

     

    Introduction – Celebrating the One Who Comes

    During the period that begins on the fourth Sunday before Christmas Day, communities that observe Advent have an opportunity to reflect on a significant dimension of faith: God as the Anticipated One.

    So much of religion seems to be concerned with the past. Tradition plays a large (and vital) role in most people’s spirituality. Intense debates rage over the historicity of certain (alleged) events from the past. The creedal and liturgical formulations that so largely define contemporary forms of faith are themselves legacies from the past. The Scriptures, necessarily, are documents of the distant past rather than ring binders in which we are expected to collect future issues from an ongoing series.

    Christmas itself is a celebration of a particular past event: the birth of Jesus. Even if we consider the canonical stories to be symbolic narratives that disseminate theology more than history, there is little doubt that Jesus was born. Anyone whose death is well attested can be assumed to have been born.

    Advent is unique in that it celebrates the incomplete and the not-yet. Advent draws us beyond a fascination with the past, and invites us to consider the possibility that the God of sacred tradition might also be a part of our immediate experience, as well as having something far greater to reveal in the future. Advent can name the reality that we do not have the final word. There is always more to God, and to life, than what we have seen so far.

    Advent is not simply a preparation to celebrate Christmas. It is an invitation to welcome the One Who Comes. It is rightly designated a prophetic season, for this is a time to identify with the prophets of all times as people who have ears to hear and eyes to see; people who are awake to the possibilities of God’s dynamic presence in our own circumstances.

    Over the four Sundays of Advent this year, as we begin a year that will focus especially on the Gospel of Luke, the themes will be as follows:

    • Seeing beyond the horizon of humanity (Luke 21:25-36)
    • John the Baptist: prepare the way of the Lord (Luke 3:1-6)
    • Responding to prophetic voices (Luke 3:7-18)
    • The child of promise (Luke 1:39-45)

     

     

    First Reading: The days are surely coming …

    The brief passage from Jeremiah 33 designated for the first reading for RC and RCL communities, captures the essence of the Advent theme. It looks to a future time of blessing when a Davidic ruler will executive justice and righteousness in the land.

    Several aspects of an ancient world view are encapsulated in this brief text:

    • The idea of the ruler as a divine delegate who serves as an agent to implement divine justice. Such a “lord” is acclaimed as “savior” (Greek: soter) and celebrated as a divine “son” of the community’s patron deity (“God our Father”). Notice, in Paul’s formula from 1 Thessalonians, how these ideas are applied to God and Jesus by the earliest Christian communities known to us.
    • The role of the prophetic oracle promising dynastic succession as a guarantee of divine blessing.
    • The powerful tradition of Davidic descent for an authentic claim to Jewish leadership.

    A text such as this can also invite us to think about the role of prophecy in ancient Israel and in post-biblical times:

    • The original prophet seems to have been a recognized figure who could be invited to speak a word “from the LORD.” Such characters could be on the ruler’s staff, and receive their living from the state. But they could also be independent charismatic figures who sometimes acted in opposition to the ruler and the official cult.
    • In time prophetic texts are produced: a scroll for Isaiah, a scroll for Jeremiah, a scroll for Ezekiel, and another collecting the words of “the Twelve” into a single work. These “Latter Prophets” excluded Daniel, but were matched by another set of “Former Prophets:” Joshua, Judges, Samuel & Kings. The origins of the Latter Prophets are a puzzle, but each of the four scrolls appears to be an anthology of texts designed to fashion a self-conscious prophetic voice apart from the historical deeds and words of the named prophet. What, if anything, was the relationship between the historical figure of Isaiah or Amos and the books that have become their legacy to humanity?
    • Centuries later when Tiglath-Pileser and Nebuchadnezzar are but vague memories, the prophetic texts are appropriated in new circumstances. Often they were reduced to catalogues of predictions and employed in theological confrontations between opposing factions of the pious. At times they tapped deep wellsprings of the human spirit. The prophetic books of Scripture have been both springs of fresh water and poisoned wells fostering hatred between different human communities.

    The difference may depend on the spirit in which we approach these texts. When approached with an Advent mind \set — in anticipation that the God Who Comes is also the God Beyond All Names and the God who has yet more (new) truths to reveal — these ancient texts can draw us into the liberty of the children of God.

     

    Zechariah 14:4-9 – On that day

    The ECUSA lectionary designates Zech 14:4-9 as the first reading. This passage provides another example of Jewish apocalyptic anticipating a collapse of the natural order as the eschatalogical moment draws near:

    On that day his feet shall stand on the Mount of Olives, which lies before Jerusalem on the east; and the Mount of Olives shall be split in two from east to west by a very wide valley; so that one half of the Mount shall withdraw northward, and the other half southward. And you shall flee by the valley of the Lord’s mountain, for the valley between the mountains shall reach to Azal; and you shall flee as you fled from the earthquake in the days of King Uzziah of Judah. Then the LORD my God will come, and all the holy ones with him. On that day there shall not be either cold or frost. And there shall be continuous day (it is known to the LORD), not day and not night, for at evening time there shall be light. On that day living waters shall flow out from Jerusalem, half of them to the eastern sea and half of them to the western sea; it shall continue in summer as in winter. And the LORD will become king over all the earth; on that day the LORD will be one and his name one.

    This passage has many affinities with the Apocalyptic Discourse in Mark 13=Luke 21=Matt 24 and also with Paul’s apocalyptic instruction as seen in 1 Thessalonians.

     

    Second Reading: Ready for the coming of our Lord Jesus

    Advent themes are not central to this passage from 1 Thessalonians 3, but that makes this an even more significant passage for gaining a perspective on Paul’s own thorough-going apocalypticism. Even when not especially focusing on such issues, Paul reveals by his choice of words how deep is his debt to older prophetic and apocalyptic texts.

    Notice Paul’s familiar way of mentioning God and Jesus in the same phrase. As also seen in the opening and closing formulae of his letters, Paul limits “God” to “the Father” while typically speaking of Jesus as “our Lord.” The following examples come from the opening paragraphs of Paul’s letters:

    1 Thessalonians 1
    Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy, To the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ: Grace to you and peace.

    Galatians 1
    Paul an apostle—sent neither by human commission nor from human authorities, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead—and all the members of God’s family who are with me, To the churches of Galatia: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, who gave himself for our sins to set us free from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, to whom be the glory forever and ever. Amen.

    1 Corinthians 1
    Paul, called to be an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and our brother Sosthenes, To the church of God that is in Corinth, to those who are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, together with all those who in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, both their Lord and ours: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

    2 Corinthians 1
    Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy our brother, To the church of God that is in Corinth, including all the saints throughout Achaia: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and the God of all consolation, …

    Philippians 1
    Paul and Timothy, servants of Christ Jesus, To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are in Philippi, with the bishops and deacons: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

    Romans 1
    Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy scriptures, the gospel concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh and was declared to be Son of God with power according to the spirit of holiness by resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord, through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith among all the Gentiles for the sake of his name, including yourselves who are called to belong to Jesus Christ, To all God’s beloved in Rome, who are called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

    Philemon
    Paul, a prisoner of Christ Jesus, and Timothy our brother, To Philemon our dear friend and co-worker, to Apphia our sister, to Archippus our fellow soldier, and to the church in your house: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

    These phrases have become familiar religious texts to us, but in 1C they were formulations that reflected current political terminology. They represented not so much a subordination of Jesus to God as an elevation of Jesus over against the emperor. Such talk could cost people their lives. And it did.

    Finally, it is worth noting how Paul recycles older ideas. The reference to “the coming of our Lord Jesus …” in 1 Thess 3:13 can be placed alongside the tradition already known to us from Daniel 7 and Zechariah 14:

    Dan 7:13-14 – As I watched in the night visions, I saw one like a human being coming with the clouds of heaven. And he came to the Ancient One and was presented before him. To him was given dominion and glory and kingship, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that shall not pass away, and his kingship is one that shall never be destroyed.

    Zech 14:5 – Then the LORD my God will come, and all the holy ones with him.

    1Thess 3:13 – that you may be blameless before our God and Father at the coming of our Lord Jesus with all his saints (Greek: hagioi = holy ones, or angels).

    2Thess 1:7 – … when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels

     

     

    Gospel: Natural calamities and the End

    The core of this week’s Gospel, and the only portion used in the RC lectionary, is Luke 21:25-28:

    There will be signs in the sun, the moon, and the stars, and on the earth distress among nations confused by the roaring of the sea and the waves. People will faint from fear and foreboding of what is coming upon the world, for the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then they will see ‘the Son of Man coming in a cloud’ with power and great glory. Now when these things begin to take place, stand up and raise your heads, because your redemption is drawing near.

    The ECUSA and RCL selections include the following “parable” of the fig tree (which is not really a typical parable and lacks the hallmarks of a classic Jesus’ saying) and the RCL also includes vss 34-36 (a concluding call to personal watchfulness lest one be caught unawares by “that day”).

    Luke 21 represents a re-working of the apocalyptic discourse taken from Mark 13. Both Matthew and Luke have taken over this tradition from Mark and each given it a slight edit to focus on themes of concern to their communities.

    Underlying this portion of the discourse is the common view of the world as a structure put in place — and kept there — by divine command. The ancient priestly account of creation (Gen 1:1-2:4a) assumes that the natural condition of the world without God’s intervention is watery chaos. As part of creation, God separates the waters and sets boundaries to restrain the sea (often imagined as a fearsome Dragon or some other “monster of the Deep”). When God later punishes the world for human sin, in the flood story, in effect the divine ordering that kept creation in place is suspended. The waters flood back in and destroy everything God has made — except for the handful of people and animals on board the Ark.

    These images may derive from the irrigated agricultural societies of ancient Mesopotamia, where human life was sustained by a constant struggle with river and sea. The levy banks that were essential for irrigation imposed a human order on nature. But the floods could sweep them all away, and sea monsters (crocodiles) could emerge from the deep to devour the unwitting farmer. Ancient archetypes are to be found in these biblical texts. The dragon in Revelation 12 and its servant, the “monster from the sea” in Revelation 13, are 1C Christian expressions of the same primal mythology.

    In this week’s Gospel, the created order is imagined as coming apart prior to the arrival of the Son of Man. This is an ancient expression of the eternal human wish for order and predictability. That deep desire for order allowed the Nazis to take power in a Germany weakened by its defeat in World War One and devastated by economic distress. The current “war on terror” may be playing into some of the same ancient dreams of a savior/ruler who could eradicate chaos and guarantee the regular cycles of “normal life.”

    Although Jesus does not seem to have invoked these mythological themes in his own prophetic role as the child of Wisdom/Sophia, his followers soon reverted to traditional apocalyptic categories to celebrate his significance for them and to quieten their own deep-seated fears. In early Christian apocalyptic texts, the Christ figure always takes on the role of the conquering hero who saves God’s people. In most other respects, Christian apocalypses are indistinguishable from their Jewish antecedents.

    In the Synoptic Apocalyptic Discourse, the image of “a son of Man” (ie, one in human form) from Daniel 7 has now been reinterpreted as a specific individual coming from God to rescue the elect, rather than as a positive metaphor for the covenant people in contrast to the monstrous beasts that emerge from the sea and were used as symbols for Israel’s imperial oppressors:

    • Dan 7:4 – lion with eagle’s wings (Babylon)
    • Dan 7:5 – bear (Medes)
    • Dan 7:6 – leopard (Persia)
    • Dan 7:7 – ten horned monster (Alexander and the Greeks)
    • Dan 7:13 – human-like figure (Michael=Israel)

    The original referent of the one like a human being in Dan 7:13 was probably Michael, an Archangel once thought to have special responsibilities to protect the people of God (see also Dan 12:1 and his similar role on Rev 12:7-9). In Daniel 7, Michael represents the people of God who will receive an eternal empire. Over the 200 years or so between Daniel 7 and the earliest Christian apocalypses (see Mark 13 and parallels, Didache 16, Revelation to John, and 2 Thessalonians 2), this figure ceases to be a metaphor for the nation and becomes an heroic individual sent from heaven to rescue God’s people. We can trace something of this transformation in the earlier layers of 1 Enoch, a book long revered by the Ethiopian church but now known to have been influential in Jewish circles such as the Qumran community.

    These ancient apocalyptic texts reflect the best historical and scientific knowledge of their time. While often understood as the literature of the marginalized, their authors must have been well educated. They had both the skills and the time needed for literary efforts, and their writings sometimes drew on current descriptions of the physical universe as well as historical archives.

    The ancient imagery of a collapsing cosmic infrastructure no longer speaks to us, but we can still ask what ways of speaking about justice and hope do speak to the contemporary person? How do we “sing the Lord’s song” in this strange 21C world in which we find ourselves? What does faithfulness mean for us — here and now?

     

     

    Jesus Database

    • 002 Jesus Apocalyptic Return: (1) 1 Thess 4:13-18; (2) Did. 16:6-8; (3) Matt 24:30a; (4) Mark 13:24-27 = Matt 24:29,30b-31 = Luke 21:25-28; (5a) Rev 1:7; (5b) Rev 1:13; (5c) Rev 14:14; (6) John 19:37.
    • 007 Of Davids Lineage: (1a) Rom 1:3; (1b) 2 Tim 2:8; (2) Matt 2:1-12; (3) Luke 2:1-20; (4) John 7:41-42; (5a) Ign. Smyrn. 1:1a; (5b) Ign. Eph. 18:2c; (5c) Ign. Trall. 9:1a.
    • 188 The Unknown Time: (1a) Mark 13:33-37; (1b) Matt 24:42; (1c) Matt 25:13; (2) Luke 12:35-38; (3) Luke 21:34-36; (4) Did. 16:1.
    • 265 Within this Generation: (1) Mark 13:28-32 = Matt 24:32-36 = Luke 21:29-33.

     

     

    Liturgies and Prayers

    For liturgies and sermons each week, shaped by a progressive theology, check Rex Hunt’s web site. See also:

    • Advent Wreath – a liturgy for the Advent Wreath on Australian themes and prepared by Rex Hunt, Canberra (Australia)

    Other recommended sites include:

     

    Music Suggestions

    See David MacGregor’s Together to Celebrate site for recommendations from a variety of contemporary genre.

  • Pentecost 26B (Reign of Christ) (25 November 2012)

    Contents

    Lectionary

    • 2Samuel 23:1-7 and Psalm 132:1-12, (13-18) (or Daniel 7:9-10, 13-14 & Psalm 93)
    • Revelation 1:4b-8
    • John 18:33-37

     

    What kind of kingdom? What kind of king?

    At this time of the year the lectionaries invite us to explore and reflect upon the theme of Jesus and the kingdom of God. It is sometimes taken for granted that the Bible has a well-developed and consistent idea about the kingdom of God, and that this theme which was so central in the teachings of Jesus has its roots in the Hebrew Bible or Old Testament.

    First Reading: A davidic model?

    The NT theme of “kingdom of God” can also get tangled up with the ancient Jewish idea of a Davidic messiah, a royal prince descended from the line of David and coming at the end of time to rescue God’s people.

    This week’s readings provide several strands that come from this rich theological thread:

    • 2Sam 23:1-7 (RCL first reading) extols David as “the anointed (Messiah) of God” and someone who rules over the people justly.
    • Its companion text, Psalm 132, celebrates the memory of David as the faithful servant of Yahweh, who promises David that he will always have a son ruling over God’s people from Jerusalem.
    • The first reading for ECUSA and RC lectionaries (Daniel 7:9-10,13-14) is an apocalyptic vision narrative in which the seer has access to the divine court above the sky. God (“the Ancient One”) takes his seat on a throne of fire as thousands of spiritual courtiers stand in attendance. The people of God are imagined as a figure in human form (unlike the monstrous beasts representing the non-Jewish empires in earlier verses of Dan 7) who comes into the very presence of God, riding on the clouds like some ancient deity, to receive “dominion and glory and kingship” in an empire that will never fade or decline. This is clearly a dream of future greatness for the people as a whole (not as individuals) and on a scale that no human empire has ever been able to achieve and sustain. The kingdom, however, is the empire of God’s covenant people, not the empire or commonwealth of God that Jesus proclaimed.
    • The psalm chosen as a reflection on that reading (Psalm 93) celebrates the kingship of God, not the great human empire of God’s people in Daniel 7. This slippage between human empire and the kingdom of God tends to confuse our grasp of the biblical traditions, and to blend separate strands into a single undifferentiated — and unbiblical — hybrid.

    Second Reading: The true witness

    All three major Western lectionaries draw on the Apocalypse of John for the second reading. Here — in the imagination of an early Christian visionary — Jesus has taken the place of God as the one seated on the throne. The titles ascribed to Jesus tell us a great deal about how some 1C Christians understood Jesus: the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. Notice how that triple set of titles relates to the liturgical acclamation so widely used in contemporary liturgies:

    the faithful witness
    = Christ has died
    = historical Jesus, a Jewish radical religious figure executed by Rome

    the firstborn of the dead
    = Christ is risen
    = Jesus as “risen Lord,” a continuing presence in Christian experience

    the ruler of the kings of the earth
    = Christ will come again
    = Jesus as agent of divine judgment on the “powers that be”

    In this Christian re-interpretation of the symbols and themes from Daniel 7, we find that the concept of a collective empire for God’s holy ones survives in the idea that Christians have been created as a kingdom of priests who serve the God of Jesus. In a neat reversal of the “one in human form” who traveled to God on the clouds in Daniel 7, Jesus is now expected to travel on the clouds as he comes from God to judge the nations.

     

    Gospel Reading: A different kind of kingdom

    John 18 provides the classic scene in which Pilate asks Jesus, “Are you the Jewish king?” Jesus’ reply, as imagined by the writer of John’s Gospel, is to claim a realm that is of a different order of reality than either Roman empire or Jewish commonwealth:

    My kingdom is not from this world.
    If my kingdom were from this world,
    my followers would be fighting to keep me from being handed over to the Jews.
    But as it is, my kingdom is not from here. …
    For this I was born, and for this I came into the world,
    to testify to the truth.
    Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to my voice.

     

    Kingdom of God?

    The phrase “kingdom of God” or “kingdom of heaven” is a hallmark of Jesus’ teachings in the Gospels, but (surprisingly to many people) is not found in the Old Testament. We get close to the idea of an eschatological “kingdom of God” in the late post-exilic texts. (Zechariah 14:9 reads, “And the Lord will become king over all the earth; on that day the Lord will be one and his name one.”) While ancient rabbinic texts interpreted this verse as a reference to the inauguration of God’s kingdom, the precise phrase is not found here — or anywhere else in the Hebrew Bible.

    Yahweh, the God of ancient Israel, is often described as a king. Psalm 93 is a good example of that practice. It also seems likely that in many of the new year festival, Yahweh was acclaimed as king with the refrain, “Yahweh reigns!” There are also some references to the people of Israel as the nation over whom God rules. The prophetic resistance to monarchy may reflect ancient religious traditions that could not accept a human ruler having such divine prerogatives.

    In “DOING and UNDOING the WORD: Jesus and the Dialectics of Christology.” [Forum 3.2 (Fall 2000) 321-56], Mahlon Smith comments on the role of divine kingship in ancient Israel:

    (3) Autocracy vs. autonomy. The basic connotation of the concept of basileia (“kingdom”) is the office and authority of a basileus (“king”): i.e., one who is in absolute control of a particular social situation. No imperium extends any further than its emperor’s ability “to command” (imperare). That is why nations in antiquity had no recognized fixed territorial boundaries. Anyone who exercised enough autonomous authority could at any time challenge the autocratic claims of the strongest of kings and establish his (or, at least in a few cases, her) own “kingdom.” It made no sense in antiquity for someone to recognize a “kingdom” where someone was not currently in control. Thus, ancient Israelites could maintain their independence from domination by human despots only by insisting that their “god” — the power that set them free of domination by other humans — was still the real “king” even in situations where others temporarily asserted suzerainty. The prophetic “visions” of the majesty of YHWH enthroned on high were formulated for specific political situations in which foreign tyrants — Assyria’s Tiglath-Pilesar in the case of Isaiah; Babylon’s Nebuchadrezzar in the case of Ezekiel — threatened to compromise or crush Jewish cultural and political independence. Current affairs might not provide visible evidence of YHWH’s dominion. But even for the most devout Yahwist, a “god” whose current “kingdom” was only in heaven would be neither really King nor truly God. YHWH’s “kingdom” was still effective on earth, incarnate in anyone who maintained a fifth column resistance to the autocratic claims of current tyrants who tried to enslave the Jewish spirit and make Jews abandon or forget their ideal of freedom.

    The empire of God?

    The Jesus Seminar has generated some controversy as a result of its decision to translate basileia tou theou (“kingdom of God”) as “God’s imperial rule” or the “empire of God.” That controversy is not a bad thing if it provokes people to think beyond the familiar English expression in search of its original meaning for both Jesus and his listeners.

    Darryl Schmidt, a key member of the translation team for the Jesus Seminar publications, describes the challenge posed by this central theological term:

    Among the phrases most crucial to Mark’s narrative, none is more central, yet hotly debated, than Jesus’ use of “the basileia of God.” This expression encompasses the activity of God as sovereign ruler, the sphere over which God rules, and the nature of the “rulership” that characterizes all of that. It involves various aspects of “empire,” “sovereignty,” “rule,” “reign,” “domain,” and “kingship.”

    … The challenge for translators is to find a way to capture these various dimensions in a set of related expressions in English capable of functioning at several levels. … basileia must be translated differently according to its narrative context. When the image is a realm to enter or belong to, “God’s domain” is used: “It is better for you to enter God’s domain one-eyed than to be thrown into Gehenna with both eyes” (9:47); “You are far from God’s domain” (12:34). When the focus is the exercise of God’s sovereignty, “God’s imperial rule” was chosen: “God’s imperial rule is closing in” (1:15); “Some of those standing here won’t ever taste death before they see God’s imperial rule set in with power!” (9:1). When basileia is not related to “God,” other translations are “government” (3:24), “kingdom” (11:10), and “empire” (13:8). [The Gospel of Mark. 1990:33f]

     

    A kingdom of nobodies?

    The immediate social and political reality in which Jesus made such distinctive use of basileia to theou was the all-pervasive presence of the Roman imperium or, in Greek, basileia. The basileia of God that featured in the parables and aphorisms was not a time-honored religious metaphor, but a self-conscious alternative social reality to the Roman Empire.

    This divine commonwealth was both a counter image and a parody of the harsh realities of everyday life in the Roman world.

    In the essay cited earlier, Mahlon Smith adds to our appreciation of the subversive quality of the basileia in Jesus’ preaching. Smith has described the divine commonwealth as a “kingless kingdom,” a “beggars’ opera” and an “unsupervised kindergarten” in which there are no carers on duty:

    (1) Kingless kingdom. The language of hierarchy and social subservience is part of the baggage that Jesus inherited from a cultural environment that he, like any other historical individual, neither invented nor chose. Absolute rulers called “king,” “emperor” or a wide range of other titles that expressed the idea of totalitarian control were an accepted political fact of life in the ancient Near East. The rule — not just the reign — of kings was the rule rather than the exception. Emerging within that world early Israel had established a constitution that was a noble social experiment: a society with no single human ruler. Israelites’ independence from subjugation to surrounding kingdoms was to be guaranteed by the principle that they recognize no one as “lord” except the power that had liberated them from servitude to Egypt, an empire which — in legend at least — had been a model of totalitarian power with a king who was worshipped as a divine incarnation. Early Israel’s dialectical resistance to such a social system was embedded in refusal to represent its “god” in the form of any human or other creature. Instead of an idol, the artifact originally at the center of its worship represented an empty throne. While neither that social experiment nor Israelite independence was eventually able to withstand external or internal pressures, regular ritual reminders imbedded in the minds of at least some Israelites an idealized memory of a system in which there was no king, no master, no lord except that invisible power, or “god,” that liberates people from subjection to any social hierarchy. Jesus’ pronouncements about God’s kingdom being the property of paupers (ptóchoi) and pre-schoolers (paidia) presuppose precisely such a social system.

    (2) Beggars opera. To call ptóchoi (lit. “beggars”) “fortunate” (makarios) is an absolute contradiction in terms in a world where at least some are wealthy. But the obverse side of that makarism is Jesus’ pronouncement that a camel can squeeze through a needle’s eye more easily than a wealthy person can get into God’s “kingdom” (basileia). Crossan has called this a “kingdom of nobodies.” It is perhaps more accurately styled a society of have-nots. If the imperium of God is the treasure or precious gem that one must sell everything to possess, then only those who have literally nothing can ever hope to possess it. In a society where everyone is a beggar, no one is superior to anyone else. The only “Lord” is the benign Providence that gives every creature its daily “bread.” That is a role Jesus never claimed for himself. Rather than pose as anyone’s “lord,” Jesus identified himself with the homeless. Like them he did not even have a place to sleep, much less a throne. Still, he reminds his fellow Jewish peasants who bear the burden of imperial and temple taxes that it is their good fortune that the God of their tradition is one who frees people from slavery to wealth, yet feeds and clothes them as he does the least of the wild creatures. A world where everyone is a hobo but no one need worry where the next meal is coming from is truly a beggar’s opera. Its basic plot is that the only prince is the pauper. In such a “kingdom” everyone is equal and free; and any tramp is king of the road. Gospel narratives indicate that Jesus put this way of life into practice. So, historically speaking, the only people who would be in an appropriate social position to call him “lord” would be those few who, barefoot, penniless, and without provisions abandon(ed) all their property to follow his lead. Anyone who imagines him to display a different persona after Easter — one with royal possessions and power — is (or was) worshipping a different Jesus, an unhistorical hypostasis.

    (4) Unsupervised kindergarten. Born into a world where Israelite ideals were difficult to maintain in the face of the pervasiveness of Greek culture and Roman military and economic imperialism, any Jew other than Jesus might have mimicked and elaborated the ancient prophetic descriptions of YHWH’s hierarchical heavenly domain. And several did. But there is no reliable evidence that the historical Jesus chose this tack. Rather, he paradoxically depicted God’s basileia as the possession of paidia — i.e., children under the age of seven – and insisted that only those who mimicked paidia had access to it. Preachers and theologians have long romanticized or allegorized this pronouncement. But no one who has ever lived with a child in this age bracket or tried to teach kindergarten could honestly maintain that what Jesus really meant was that people should be innocent or absolutely dependent or obedient or display unqualified trust. If there is anything a pre-schooler, whatever its culture, is not, it is all of the above. So, if Jesus meant any of these, he chose the wrong metaphor. Pre-schoolers are notoriously and innately independent- minded and hard to control. That is precisely why classic pedagogy stressed the need for strict discipline. But Jesus’ pronouncement leaves no space in God’s basileia for any pedagogue other than the benign Papa (Abba) who provides his offspring’s daily nourishment and tolerates the bad along with the good. Instead of depicting this Parent as a strict disciplinarian dedicated to reforming his children, Jesus portrayed him as one who celebrates the homecoming of the wayward child who had lost everything he had given him. Jesus, for his part, did not volunteer to act as supervisor of such urchins. Instead of posing as a teacher, Jesus thanked his Abba for revealing to infants (népia) — i.e., children who are not ready for any instruction — what sages per se cannot see. Infants are not passive subjects; they demand attention and do what they — not any parents — want. So, if the synoptic anecdote that portrays Jesus as identifying himself as a paidion is a Markan fiction, at least it is what R. W. Funk terms a “true fiction”: a story that accurately illustrates the logic and attitude of Jesus himself. The historical Jesus was a Jewish Peter Pan, who warned his fellow homeless “boys” (and “girls”?) against acting like educated — supposedly grown-up — scholars who seek personal recognition and vie for places of honor for themselves. Thus, the only people who were (or are) in an appropriate position to proclaim Jesus as their “master” (kyrios) and themselves as his “students” (mathétai) would be those who follow(ed) his example of childish autonomy, even if that meant defying parents and older siblings and defaulting on the most basic honor children owe their natural fathers: a decent burial. Crossan is certainly correct, therefore, to characterize Jesus as a “rebel with a cause.” For, far from demanding that others recognize him as their master, Jesus encouraged youngsters to assert their own autonomy vis-à-vis even domestic autocratic hierarchy. He did not offer to save them from the consequences.

     

    Jesus Database

     

    Liturgies and Prayers

    For liturgies and sermons each week, shaped by a progressive theology, check Rex Hunt’s web site

    Other recommended sites include:

     

    Music Suggestions

    See David MacGregor’s Together to Celebrate site for recommendations from a variety of contemporary genre.

  • Insignificant God

    A prayer for Tuesday in Holy Week

    Mysterious, pervasive and persuasive God,
    ever present in our lives,
    yet seemingly insignificant and ineffectual.
    Underwhelming when we want to be impressed,
    inexplicable when we seek the answers to life’s questions,
    your foolishness is wiser than our best wisdom
    and your vulnerability disarms our bravado.
    Teach us how to follow and serve your Christ,
    to surrender ourselves into your purposes
    like a grain of wheat that falls into the earth,
    dies,
    and bears much fruit. Amen.

     © 2012 Gregory C. Jenks

  • Blessed are those who hunger and thirst

    A prayer for the Third Sunday of Lent (Year C)

    Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
    for they will be filled.

    Living Lord, you spread a table before us,
    and draw water for us from the well of salvation.
    Give us the passion to embrace your invitation,
    to respond whole-heartedly to your summons,
    and to enter deeply into the waters of repentance.

    Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
    for they will be filled.          Amen.                                                     [Matt 5:6]

    © 2012 Gregory C. Jenks

  • Pray for the peace of Jerusalem

    Psalm 122:6 calls upon people of faith to pray for the peace of Jerusalem.

    Like me, I am sure you are watching with alarm as the tensions between the Hamas administration in the Gaza strip and Israel have reached a flashpoint in the last few days.

    Let’s pray and work for a non-violent resolution to the problems shared by Israelis and Palestinians as each community seeks a way to build sustainable and just futures for themselves and their children in the land that so many of us revere as the Holy Land.

    Inshallah, God willing, the people of power will find a way to step back from this brink, and just maybe this glimpse into the abyss will motivate people of goodwill to seek an outcome that allows both communities to fulfil their dreams in the land they must now share.

    Too many Jewish and Arab mothers will be crying for their lost children unless somehow those with the capacity to shape the future do so with an eye to reconciliation, justice and peace. Security for the Jewish communities, and for Israel as a distinctively Jewish nation, is a necessary element in that long term vision. So too, it seems to me, is justice for the dispossessed and hope for the disillusioned.

    Surely this conflict will soon abate, and the work of reconstruction and reconciliation will begin afresh.

    In the meantime, let’s focus our love and prayers on the beautiful people of Israel and Palestine, all of whom have suffered too long from the wounds created by the political and military decisions of previous generations over the past one hundred years.

    Let us pray for the peace of Jerusalem, for the peace of Gaza, and for the peace and well-being of every village, settlement and town in all of Israel/Palestine.

    May the guns and missiles soon fall silent, and may the winter rains wash away the bitterness of the recent past as people move into a shared future.

    Kyrie eleison / Lord, have mercy.

Exit mobile version