Wednesday, May 29, 2013

Horizons (Mid-week Message)



Fr. Tony’s Mid-week Message
May 29, 2013
Horizons

“Churches that become passionate about people outside their walls will be far more effective than churches that are passionate about keeping the few people they have inside their walls. Better still, you will have a healthier church. We call individuals who are fixated on their wants and needs selfish and immature. Selfless and mature churches will have an impact because of their passion for people God cares about.”  --Carrie Nieuwhof 

Most writers on the subject of what makes Churches grow and prosper agree that Churches need to be focused beyond themselves.  In addition, while they need to be flexible and able to respond quickly to changes in the communities about them—that means they need to be able to change rapidly themselves—their ability to attract younger worshipers and the previously un-churched depends directly on their being authentic and true to their own beliefs, traditions, and calling. 

Jesus said that we must lose ourselves in order to find ourselves; we must be willing to sacrifice all to bring near God’s Reign; we must seek first God’s Reign and God’s justice, and all else will be added to this.  This applies to communities and congregations as well as individuals.      

It is a matter of perspective.  If our horizon is the border of the Church grounds or the denomination, we have a narrow view indeed, and we will see newcomers merely as raw material for ministry staffing and as pockets to dip into for budget replenishment.  And the newcomers will sense this and flee.  If our horizon is as broad as God’s creation, we will see those outside the ambit of our parish church as fellow travelers with us, as children of God whom we must serve, and to whom we must bring the joys of the Gospel.   And newcomers will have a sense that here is community that has a lot to offer them.  Christ, as ever, remains the focal point on such a broad horizon to which all our lines of perspective are drawn.

Grace and Peace,

Fr. Tony+

Sunday, May 26, 2013

The Great Dance (Trinity C)




“The Great Dance”
Feast of the Holy Trinity (Year C)
26 May 2013
Homily
Parish Church of Trinity, Ashland
The Rev. Dr. Anthony Hutchinson, Rector


God, take away our hearts of stone
 and give us hearts of flesh. Amen.

A couple of weeks ago, Elena and I were hiking up to Upper Table Rock.  We saw great variety of wildflowers, many of which I misidentified with little pocket guide to North American wildflowers, but which Dr. Frank Lang later helped me to identify correctly. 

One of the ones I got right was the trillium:  a delicate white flower made up of a three pointed leaf-like bracts surmounted by three pointed white petals and centered with golden stamens and pistils, also organized in three.  All the groupings of three attach to a single stem and root.  The juxtaposition of the bracts and petals make a shape like a Star of David.    Trillium Ovatum, or the Pacific or Western Trillium, is so common in Oregon’s springtime forests that it is often mistakenly called the Oregon State Flower, while this legislature-bestowed honor actually belongs to the Oregon Grape.   


The trillium is definitely our Trinity Church flower, though we can never use this wildflower in our altar arrangements: they must not be picked in the wild, given their fragility and general risks to their habitat.   Its groupings of three joined to one remind us of the Holy Trinity, which gives our parish its name.  A few years ago, Trinity had an Arts Sunday with poems and short stories written by parishioners, some now gone and some still here, including Ed and Mary Brubaker, Charles Armstrong, Michael and Charlotte Foley, Gloria Boyd, John Garver, and Carol Howser.  The small book that resulted was called—what else?—Trillium. 

The doctrine of the Holy Trinity is difficult and generally seen as not particularly accessible.  This is due in large part to the fact that it is an abstract idea, without much story or narrative attached.   The doctrine of the Trinity generally describes God in eternal being, outside of time.  Story and narrative require time for a sequence of events, cause and effect, tension and resolution.  Stories move us; abstract ideas absent story, not so much.   And then the math doesn’t seem to add up:  1 + 1 + 1 = 1? 

It is important to remember that the Trinity isn't just "Three guys up in heaven," who actually are one.  The word describes a process, a dynamism, a mystery in what we call the Divine. 

Frederick Buechner writes:  

“The much-maligned doctrine of the Trinity is an assertion that, appearances to the contrary notwithstanding, there is only one God. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit mean that the mystery beyond us, the mystery among us, and the mystery within us are all the same mystery. Thus the Trinity is a way of saying something about us and the way we experience God. The Trinity is also a way of saying something about God and the way he is within himself, i.e., God does not need the Creation in order to have something to love because within himself love happens. In other words, the love God is love not as a noun but as a verb. This verb is reflexive as well as transitive. If the idea of God as both Three and One seems far-fetched and obfuscating, look in the mirror someday.

“There is (a) the interior life known only to yourself and those you choose to communicate it to (the Father). There is (b) the visible face which in some measure reflects that inner life (the Son). And there is (c) the invisible power you have in order to communicate that interior life in such a way that others do not merely know about it, but know it in the sense of its becoming part of who they are (the Holy Spirit). Yet what you are looking at in the mirror is clearly and indivisibly the one and only You” (originally published in Wishful Thinking).  

St. Augustine in his great Treatise De Trinitate wrote that the doctrine of the Trinity is another way of saying that “God is Love.”  He is clear that this does not mean simply that what we know as “love” is God, but rather that within God, God as God is, is self-giving social interaction.  This is the true form and source of what we know as “love,” or at least what we know as “love” as it ought to be. God, as both our origin and source as well as our end and goal, is also the source of all our love and what all our love tends toward.  

One of the Cappadocian Fathers who developed the doctrine of the Trinity in fourth century Gregory of Nazanianus, first used the word perichoreisis, or “a dancing about” to describe the dynamic beauty of the interaction of the between the persons of the Godhead (Epistle 101). 

Here, perhaps, is an image that helps bring narrative into the abstractions of the doctrine.  Dance can be seen as a series of steps, interactions such as leading and following, with a flow and rhythm, a building and climax, just as a story.  But it can also be seen as an entirety, a single event or doing, and thus can translate well the timelessness of the abstraction of the doctrine. 

A Dance of Love:  this is one of the ways of thinking that makes “Trinity” accessible to me.  It also brings close the doctrine to the name of our Church here in Ashland.  A Dance of Love: mutual self-giving, self-sacrifice, listening, loving, occasionally leading or challenging.  Losing oneself in order to find oneself.  A Dance of Love. 

Jesus prayed for all believers before his death, “I pray … that all might be one, as you, Father are in me, and I in you; I pray that they may be one in us” (John 17:20-21).  Living in the Spirit transforms us, and makes us one.  This makes us each more authentically ourselves. 

One of the great things about this parish is the amount that people are invested, the amount of ownership people have of the ministries and service of the Church.   We all share in a common ministry, and most try to respond to God’s call.  Trinity parish is well named:  The Father (or Mother, if you prefer) brings us together here and bids us to live and to awaken.  The Son (or Child) calls us follow him: declare the Happy News of God’s Reign, serve others, comfort and help the sick, shelter and clothe and feed the poor.  The Spirit gives us power to do more than we can do ourselves, breaks down barriers between us, and gives us hearts to love, and reverently worship and rejoice. 

Thanks be to God. 

In the name of Christ,  Amen.

Wednesday, May 22, 2013

One Christ, One Spirit, One People (Mid-week Message)

 
Fr. Tony’s Midweek Message
May 22, 2013
One Christ, one Spirit, one People
 
St. Paul, writing to the members of the Church in Ephesus in Asia Minor, made the case that the resurrection of Christ cancels out and abolishes all divisions and factions among the earth’s people, at least among those who are “in Christ.”   Writing to a contentious congregation that had been divided between devout law-observant Jews, and intentionally non-Jewish gentiles, between many groups that considered they had the way of righteousness and that the others were hopelessly alienated from God’s intentions, Paul said that just as Christ’s victory over death removes sin, failure, and guilt, it also removes faction, sect, and clique.  He writes (my paraphrase): 

“You were dead through the trespasses and failures in which you once lived, following those about you in the way they go, marching after the ruler who appears powerful but is just so much empty air, that spirit now still at work among those who stubbornly resist God.   All of us once lived as part of them, driven by the urges of our self that resists God, at the mercy of its desires and senses, and as a result we naturally were damaged goods, like all the rest of them.  But God, rich in mercy, out of great love for us even when we were dead through our lack of respect of boundaries, brought us to life again along with Christ—it’s God’s grace that rescues you—and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places, all in Christ Jesus,  so that in the ages to come he might show his immeasurably rich grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus…

But now, in Christ Jesus, you who once were far away from each other have been brought together by the blood of Christ.  For he is our peace; in his flesh he has made both groups into one and has broken down the dividing wall, that is, any hostility between us … So he came and proclaimed peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near; for through him both of us have access to the Father through one Spirit.  So then none of you are any longer strangers and aliens, but rather you are citizens with the saints and also members of the household of God, built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the cornerstone.  In him the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord; in whom you also are built together spiritually into a dwelling place for God.” (Eph. 2:1-20). 

Where God’s Spirit dwells, there is love, and there is peace.  There may not be a monotone unison, but there is harmony, on occasion perhaps seasoned with dissonance. 

Grace and Peace, 

Fr. Tony+

Sunday, May 19, 2013

'Other' No More (Pentecost C)





“‘Other’ No More”
Feast of Pentecost (Whitsunday); Year C
19 May 2013
Homily
Parish Church of Trinity, Ashland
The Rev. Dr. Anthony Hutchinson, Rector

God, take away our hearts of stone
 and give us hearts of flesh. Amen.

When Elena and I  were last living in China, British Prime Minister David Cameron made an official visit the week of November 11, 2010, Remembrance Day.  British custom is to wear small red paper poppies to honor the dead of the First World War, the masses who died in trench warfare and buried in military cemeteries where, “the poppies grow between the crosses, row on row.”  When Cameron and his ministers showed up wearing the small poppies, the Chinese Foreign Ministry lodged a protest asking that they remove them:  they were offensive and hurt the feelings of 1.4 billion Chinese citizens. 

The British were completely befuddled.  "Gobsmacked" was the term, I think, I heard from colleagues at the British Embassy.  The sale of paper poppies supports veterans’ groups in the U.K.: they are seen as a harmless way of showing one’s love of country, supporting the troops, mourning the dead, and perhaps even saying that war is wrong.  Cameron is reported to have replied, “You’ve got to be kidding.  This is a joke, right?”

But it was not a joke.  2010, you see, was the 150th anniversary of second Opium War between Britain and China, in which British forces burned to the ground one of the great cultural treasures of China—indeed, of the whole world—the Yuanmingyuan, or the Old Imperial Summer Palace.  Many Chinese see the ruins, still maintained in glorious disrepair in Northwest Beijing as a symbol of Chinese humiliation at the hand of morally inferior Europeans.   British-poppies-opium, get it?  The Chinese did not want media images of British leaders wearing poppies on such an anniversary triggering anti-British and anti-Chinese government protests from enraged patriotic Chinese citizens.


The Chinese leaders were horrified that their guests had to be reminded of the history:  did they count so little in British eyes that these visitors had never even heard of the Yuanmingyuan?  The British for their part were shocked that the Chinese did not understand the deep resonances of the paper poppies for the British public and the absolute political impossibility of an elected British leader taking one off on the week of Remembrance Day to “kowtow” to Beijing.  “Your protest hurts the feelings of 62 million Britons,” one wag reportedly said. 

Chinese nationalism thus ran headlong into British nationalism:  Cameron loudly said he and his ministers would wear the poppies, regardless. Chinese censors quietly ordered their media to not publish photos showing the poppies.

The story shows how profoundly differently one can see the world, understand symbols and events, and attribute motives depending on your cultural tradition.  Different languages only amplify this and make the differences all the sharper and more confusing.

What divides us and separates us?  What makes it difficult to understand each other, and misinterpret each other’s words, actions, and motives?  Differences in culture and language are clearly major points of division, as is not sharing the same stories about the past.  But also mere difference in gender, economic class, education, upbringing, religious or philosophical outlook, and sexual orientation are also big.

The problem, however, is deeper than this.  It is rooted in the way our brains  are hard-wired.  Researchers on the development of the brain in early childhood have recognized that a chief element of our becoming able to make distinctions in interpreting faces, their expressions, and the sounds they make (language) is the brain’s tendency early on to block out less-frequently-encountered faces or language as “other,” and not worthy of the same amount of effort.   Only thus is the brain able to refine and tune the complicated business of understanding verbal and non-verbal cues in communication.  Six-month-old children of whatever culture or race tend to react more attentively and discriminatingly to faces of the colors, shapes, and setting the children are most exposed to, while bracketing out the less familiar, and tending to give them the cold shoulder.   When a person of European-extraction says “all Chinese look alike to me,” we might think that this is just a artifact of bigotry.  But there is an actual neurological reason behind such statements:  our brains tend to process faces of types with which we are unfamiliar or less familiar generically and not individually.  Living in China and in Africa, I have hear friends in both places admit with a bit of embarrassment, “All you whites tend to look the same to me.”

Similarly, the sounds, rhythms, and accents of the languages used regularly in the home pique the child’s interest, as shown in elevated brain-wave activity.  The sounds and rhythms of other languages increasingly are treated as so much meaningless noise by 3-month to 12-month old brains.  Where there is some brain defect that interferes with this normal process and the young brain is unable to filter and block such sounds out as ‘foreign’, the child’s ability to learn its mother language is usually seriously damaged or destroyed.



Today’s reading from the Hebrew Scriptures, on the Tower of Babel, gives an ancient folk story that tries to account for the differences in languages and cultures.  But in its telling, the story gives us an example of attitudes and judgments rooted in division and tribalism rather than in its remedy.  The story is told from the point of view of a nomadic or agrarian Hebrew living in the land of Canaan.  The narrator looks east toward Mesopotamia, that great cradle of early civilization and one of the first city-states to become a transnational empire, Babel, as Babylon was called in Hebrew.  He notes the strange practices of that land:  where any sensible person uses stone and mortar as building materials, these people use bricks and pitch!  And they gather together into a great city rather than staying connected to the land and their flocks!  A Babylonian ziggurat, or temple tower, is caricatured and becomes an effort of these arrogant city dwellers to build a tower to heaven to displace God.  There is a whole bunch of xenophobia and tribalism buried in this story, as becomes clear with the pun of its good-old-boy humor punch line.  God decides to destroy the tower and disperse the urbanites by confusing their language.  The Hebrew word for confuse is close to the Hebrew name for the city. Thus the moral of this “Just So” story is this: “That is why they called the City Babylon, because God caused them to babble on to each other!”   

Though we may be neurologically and natively inclined to exclude the strange and rule out the “other,” this story itself shows how fear, and a self-seeking desire for the familiar helps turn our hard-wiring into bigotry and chauvinism, which then can be attributed to God himself.

But God has better things in store for us.  The Acts story of the coming of the Spirit on the Day of Pentecost, is about God’s undoing of the confusion of languages at Babel.

We saw last week that even though his Gospel places the Ascension on the evening of Easter, Luke retells the story with a new setting 40 days later (Luke 1:3).   Today’s story, set ten days later, is also probably Luke’s effort to put into a narrative scene an early Christian experience that was perhaps something more complicated.

Paul’s letters tell us that early Christians experienced the Spirit in community by some kind of ecstatic utterance that he calls at one point “tongues of angels,” vocalizations that absent someone else to interpret them were meaningless (1 Cor. 13:1; 14:6-19).  As Paul tells it, he prevailed upon Peter and the “pillars” of the Church to accept believing Gentiles as full members without requiring them to become Jews because he pointed out that the Jewish Christians themselves weren’t very good Jews (Galatians 2:14).   But Luke-Acts puts it more positively:  Peter convinces the leaders to include Gentiles because they all saw that Gentile believers equally shared in the gifts of the Holy Spirit. (Acts 1-15).    Luke sums up the process he narrates at length in Acts 1-15 by placing the coming of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost and making it the ultimate undoing of the Confusion of Languages and the scattering of peoples.   

For Luke, where Babel divides and separates, Pentecost rejoins and brings together.  Where Babel unties, Pentecost unites.  Where Babel confuses languages, Pentecost infuses power to speak them. Where Babel excludes, Pentecost includes.

Luke recasts the ecstatic speaking in angelic tongues of the early Christians in Paul’s letters into the miraculous speaking of other people’s languages, breaking down the barrier between Jews and Gentiles, the very Gentiles who are to be fully included in the Church. 

Living in the Spirit means engaging with the new, the foreign, the strange, the ‘other.’  It means getting to know strange faces and making them familiar enough that they no longer all look alike.  It is putting aside the fear that is the foundation of all tribalism, sectarianism, faction, and distaste for the new, the strange.  It is the way God leads us to give and affirming and thankful “yes” to life in all its variety and glory, and put away any stingy and defensive “no.”    

Tribalism, chauvinism, racism, faction, and division come from fear, self-seeking, and that part of us that resists God.   Paul urges us, in contrast, “Live by the Spirit.  … the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control” (Gal 5: 16-23). And he says that if we live in the spirit, God’s power, “working in us, can do infinitely more than we can ask or imagine” (Ephesians 3:20-21). 

This week, I want each of us to reflect on areas where we are saying “no” to the foreign, and “not so fast!” to the other.  Let’s ask ourselves seriously whether this is really what God has in mind.  Reach out, break down barriers, and make more familiar what was a puzzle to us.  Let us pray for the Spirit to remove from us undue fear, and to create in us a new heart, and empower us to say “yes,” and “welcome.” 

In the name of Christ,  Amen.






Wednesday, May 15, 2013

The Holy Spirit in the Creed (Mid-week)




Fr. Tony’s Midweek Message
May 15, 2013
The Holy Spirit in the Creed

This coming Sunday is Pentecost, the celebration commemorating the coming of the Holy Spirit upon the early Church.  Everyone in the parish is encouraged to wear red to help us remember the “tongues of fire” that came upon the early Christians as the Spirit was poured out upon them. 

In the last few months you may have noticed in our Sunday bulletins that the words of the Rite 2 Nicene Creed are slightly different from those found in the Prayer Book.  For instance, “and was made man” now reads “and became truly human” as a better and more gender-inclusive rendering of the Greek καὶ ἐνανθρωπήσαντα and Latin et homo factus est.  All these changes have been approved and recommended by the General Convention of the Episcopal Church and that is why we have adopted them in our order of service. 

The section about the Holy Spirit has the most of the authorized changes: 

“We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of Life, who proceeds from the Father [and the Son] [[brackets added]],  who [[instead of he’ later in the phrase]] with the Father and Son is worshipped and glorified, who [[instead of ‘He’]] has spoken through the Prophets.” 

The shift from “he” to “who,” again, is more gender-inclusive and a better translation of the Greek and Latin.  The word for “Spirit” is masculine in Latin, but neuter in Greek and feminine in Hebrew.  The Creed in Greek and Latin does not repeat the pronoun. 

The addition of brackets around “and the Son” reflects a deep and divisive problem of long-standing in the Church. 

Our “Nicene” Creed comes from one affirmed by the Council of Nicaea in 325 C.E. and its revision by the Council of Constantinople in 381 C.E. The words for “and the Son” appear in neither of these Creeds.  The word Filioque (“and from the Son”) was added to the Latin Creed probably by a local council in the Western Church in 410 C.E., without any authorization from a Church-wide (“ecumenical”) Council.  The addition, however, was later approved by the Bishop of Rome.   The Eastern Church rejected the addition saying that only an ecumenical council could change a creed approved by two ecumenical councils.  The Filioque became one of the two causes of the split between the Eastern and Western Churches in 1054 C.E.  The other was papal authority and the claim by the See of Rome that it had the authority to change the form of the Creed without approval of an Ecumenical Council. 

The New Testament is somewhat ambiguous on the matter.  The words of the original Creed “who proceeds from the Father” are based on John 15:26, which says the comforter “comes forth from the Father.”  John 14:25 has Jesus saying “the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name.”  John 20:22  says Jesus "breathed on them and said: Receive the Holy Spirit.")  Galatians 4:6, Romans 8:9, Philippians 1:19 calls the Holy Spirit "the Spirit of the Son", "the Spirit of Christ", "the Spirit of Jesus Christ."  Perhaps the best way to summarize all these somewhat contradictory passages is to say that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father through the Son.  But such wording has never been proposed or approved in Council of the United Church.  

In 1978 the Anglican Communion’s Lambeth Conference suggested that all member churches of the Communion “consider omitting the Filioque from the Nicene Creed.”   In 1985 the General Convention of The Episcopal Church recommended that the Filioque clause should be removed from the Nicene Creed in the Episcopal Prayer Book and approved rites, if this were endorsed by the 1988 Lambeth Council.  In 1988 the Lambeth Conference recommended that national provinces in their future Prayer Books delete the Filioque.   This was reaffirmed by the 1993 joint meeting of the Anglican Primates and Anglican Consultative Council.  At its 1994 General Convention, the Episcopal Church reaffirmed its intention to remove the words "and the son" from the Nicene Creed in the next revision of its Book of Common Prayer.   In the meantime, use of the Creed without the clause, or with the clause in brackets is authorized.

In the Roman Church, when Pope Francis was inaugurated two months ago, for the first time in 1,000 years the Patriarch of Constantinople attended the service.  The Gospel was chanted in Greek.  When the Creed was said, the Filioque was omitted. 

In light of all this, and as a sign of Christian unity and solidarity, the Worship Committee of Trinity Parish agreed unanimously last month to drop the Filioque (the bracketed phrase) from the Creed altogether in our public worship.  So this coming Sunday, when we celebrate the coming of the Holy Spirit, we will affirm simply “We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of Life, who proceeds from the Father, who with the Father and Son is worshipped and glorified…”

This step is aimed at greater Christian inclusiveness and less parochialism (and focus on the Western tradition alone).  It is done with full authorization from the National Church and the International Communion. 

So in addition to wearing red, please make sure you read carefully as you recite the Creed. 

Peace and Grace,
Fr. Tony+ 


Sunday, May 12, 2013

Gone from Our Sight (Ascension Sunday)



“Gone from Our Sight”
Feast of the Ascension (Year C)
12 May 2013
Homily
Parish Church of Trinity, Ashland
The Rev. Dr. Anthony Hutchinson, Rector

God, take away our hearts of stone
 and give us hearts of flesh. Amen.

When I was a boy and I heard the story of Jesus’ ascension told in Church, I pictured it very literally:  Jesus took an invisible elevator of sorts up, up, up until he was beyond the sight of his disciples.    The two angels came and added, “you saw him go that way, and that’s the way he’ll come back.”  I understood this to mean Jesus taking the celestial elevator down, down, down, back to us here.   The descent was accompanied with appropriate clouds and lightning, and angelic choirs playing trumpets.

When I was eight years old (this dates me), my literalism ran into a problem named Yuri Gagarin, the first person to orbit the earth.  A Soviet Cosmonaut publicly pushing his nation’s official atheism, he was famously quoted as describing the earth from orbit in the heavens as a stunningly beautiful blue, and then adding, “I looked and looked 
but I didn't see God.”


 “Well of course,” I said to myself.  “He was up in the sky, not in heaven! He was in space, not where God and Jesus are seated!” 

That was probably the start of me moving from the literalist doctrines of my childhood denomination to becoming an Episcopalian.  I had learned in a small way that the Bible tells its truth mainly through stories composed of images and metaphors:  had Commander Gagarin’s heart been right, maybe he would have “seen God” (note the metaphor) in the stunning beauty of the earth from space.
 
The readings today about the ascension of Jesus, one from the Book of Acts and one from the Gospel of Luke, were both written by the same author.    Acts is volume two of a two part series of which the Gospel of Luke is volume one.   Luke, a meticulous author whose Greek style is the best of the New Testament, wrote them.    The Gospel Reading has the resurrected Jesus ascending to heaven the evening of Easter Sunday after he has appeared to the disciples and eaten fish with them and then walked with them out of the city as far as Bethany (Luke 24: 42, 50).  The Acts passage places it forty days after Easter (Acts 1: 3, 9).   In the original publication of Luke-Acts, before the Gospel of John was interposed, these two passages were juxtaposed against each other by the careful author.  Why? 

Luke at the beginning of his Gospel says he will give an “orderly account of events that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed on to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word” (Luke 1: 1-2).   Luke’s is an orderly retelling of stories of events by eyewitnesses passed on through the early preaching in the Church.  It is not intended to be a literal, perfect chronicle.  The detail in Jesus’ saying in today’s Gospel, “You will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth” gives the narrative plan for the Book of Acts:  stories of preaching in Jerusalem, Judea, and Samaria, and then through the gentile world, even to Rome, then called the “end (note singular) of the earth.”   


His juxtaposing the two stories of Ascension is deliberate.  The first one concludes the Gospel narrative and brings that volume to an end.  For purposes of narrative order, he must place the first on Easter evening. The second one begins the narrative of the Church after Jesus.   For narrative purposes, he places it after a period of  Jesus’ “appearing to them forty days, and speaking about the kingdom of God” (Acts 1:3).

The detail “forty days” tips off any sensitive reader that Luke’s editorial hand here is bringing an “orderly account” to the stories he has received.  The number is symbolic of a completed period in God’s hand:  forty days and night for Noah’s flood, forty days and night in the wilderness fasting, etc.  

The point is this:  When Jesus died, everyone knew he was dead.    And everyone knows without a doubt that when you’re dead, you’re dead.  Dead people don’t come back, except maybe in people’s imaginations, dreams, or as some kind of spectral vision, as the “ghosts” of folk traditions.  They don’t come back as such. 

But when Jesus was killed, about a day and half later he came to his disciples in such a form that they had a very hard time figuring out what was going on.  Here was a Jesus much more tangible, much more alive than they had ever seen him.  It took several of them a time before they even recognized that this new, more-than-alive being before them as Jesus (Luke 24:16; John 20:14; Matthew 28:17). 

Reflecting on their experience and their scriptures, they later associated what had happened with an image in the later prophetic books and the image-rich, coded persecution literature called apocalyptic, books like Daniel and the later Revelation of John.  The image is that at the end of time, when God acts definitively to set things right in this messed-up world of ours, God will bring to life again the people who had suffered horrible deaths because they had only been faithful to God’s religion, the martyrs.  They would be created anew, fully alive and happy, in a new world, where everything is as God truly intends.  The Book of Daniel says they come forth from their graves and “shine like the stars of heaven” (Dan. 12:3).  Jesus’ disciples found that this obscure image—the resurrection of the martyred righteous at the end of time—this described this strange thing they had seen in Jesus’ death and subsequent bodily reappearances.   “Resurrection” is not merely a resuscitation of a corpse; it is God’s act of populating the new creation he intends to replace this defective world.   

One of the earliest formulations of this faith in the New Testament is found in the letter to the Corinthians (15:3-9):  there Paul says he passes on what he was taught, that 1) Christ suffered and died for us in accordance with the (Hebrew) scriptures, 2) on the third day he was raised, and 3) that he appeared, first to Cephas (Peter) and the Twelve, then to James and the apostles, then to over 500 Christians at once in a large gathering, and then to Paul himself (here he moves from tradition to his own story), the “least of the apostles.”   This earliest citation of the early apostolic preaching tradition makes use of the technical “was raised from the dead,” a reference to this idea of the coming forth of the righteous dead at the end of time. 

But the risen Jesus did not continue to appear to his followers as a matter of course.   Paul recognizes this when he says that when the risen Lord appeared to him, it was “last of all."  He adds that his experience, later that all the others, made him like  “something born at the wrong time.” (1 Cor. 15:8).  

 

The image of Jesus “going back up to heaven” early on became a symbol for when such appearances generally stopped.  Various authors in the New Testament treat the matter differently. 

The longer ending of Mark has the risen Lord sitting at a meal with disciples, after which he is “taken up into heaven to sit at the right hand of God” (Mark 16:19). 

Matthew has the disciples return to Galilee where they see the risen Lord on a mountain (Moses receiving the Law imagery is big in Matthew), and he gives them what we call today the “Great Commission” to preach the Gospel to every nation (Matt. 24:50). 

As we have seen in today’s readings, Luke in his Gospel places it on Easter evening in Bethany, while in Acts he places it forty days later and ten days before the descent of the Spirit at Pentecost. 

John, as always, is the maverick.  For him, the moment that Jesus is lifted up into glory is the moment of his suffering and death on the cross (John 3:14; 8:28; 12:32).  In John, there is no Pentecost, but on Easter evening Jesus breathes his spirit onto his disciples (John 20:22). 

The different writers make the same point in different ways, with different stories:  Jesus may be hidden from our sight, but this is because of our defective sight, not because he is not here.  In Acts’ image of the clouds surrounding the Ascension, it is because we are unable to see through the bright clouds that surround him. 

So the next time someone belittles you by saying they take the Bible literally while you do not, just remember that the Bible itself often asks us to read it in more than literal ways.  

And may we all pursue the spiritual disciplines of daily prayer and reflection, and quiet but steady amendment of life, to help us have the kind of hearts that can see through the brightness. 

In the name of Christ,  Amen.

Wednesday, May 8, 2013

Julian of Norwich (May 8)



Fr. Tony’s Mid-week Message
St. Julian of Norwich, Anchoress and Mystic

Today is the feast day of Lady Julian, author of the Showings (or Revelations) of Divine Love, a classic of Western Spirituality that was written in Middle English, not Latin. 

Born at the time of the Black Death, a series of Bubonic Plague infections that ultimately killed perhaps 2 out of three Europeans, and of the Papal Schism (where competing popes ruled the Church from Avignon and Rome), Julian based her spirituality in a desire to share in our Lord’s sufferings.  A series of visions she had after receiving the last rites of the church when she herself was about to die from a fevered illness was the basis of the Showings.    She saw in vision Jesus holding in his hand a hazelnut, fragile and easily broken, that she soon recognized was the created universe.  A voice repeated, “God made it, God loves it, God keeps it.”  Also, “All shall be well, and all shall be well and all manner of thing shall be well.”

Other famous sayings of Lady Julian include: “And from the time that [the vision] was shown, I desired often to know what our Lord's meaning was. And fifteen years and more afterward I was answered in my spiritual understanding, thus: 'Would you know your Lord's meaning in this thing? Know it well, love was his meaning. Who showed it to you? Love. What did he show you? Love. Why did he show it? For love. Keep yourself therein and you shall know and understand more in the same. But you shall never know nor understand any other thing, forever.'

“Thus I was taught that love was our Lord's meaning. And I saw quite clearly in this and in all, that before God made us, he loved us, which love was never slaked nor ever shall be. And in this love he has done all his work, and in this love he has made all things profitable to us. And in this love our life is everlasting. In our creation we had a beginning. But the love wherein he made us was in him with no beginning. And all this shall be seen in God without end ...”

“[God] said not 'Thou shalt not be tempest-tossed, thou shalt not be travailed, thou shalt not be diseased'; but rather, [God] said, 'Thou shalt not be overcome.”

“The greatest honor we can give Almighty God is to live gladly because of the knowledge of his love.”

“Our Savior is our true Mother in whom we are endlessly born and out of whom we shall never come.”

Grace and Peace,
Fr. Tony+

Thursday, May 2, 2013

Being Present (Mid-week Message)



"Blessed are the single-hearted, for they shall see God."  (Matthew 5:8)  "Martha, Martha, you are distracted by many things.  One thing only is necessary."  (Luke 10:41-42)

Being present and putting your whole mind into the task or activity at hand is one of the key elements of Western and Eastern contemplative practice.  Being "in the moment" is a constitutive element in being happy and finding God in our hearts.   And this is not merely limited to such things as meditation or prayer.  Meister Eckhart taught that the true contemplative must focus on the next task at hand and put his/her heart into the doing of it.  

Vietnamese Buddhist monk Thich Nhat Hanh (who was a friend of Thomas Merton) wrote the following: 
"To my mind, the idea that doing dishes is unpleasant can occur only when you aren't doing them.

"If I am incapable of washing dishes joyfully, if I want to finish them quickly so I can go and have a cup of tea, I will be equally incapable of drinking the tea joyfully."
Let us not let our hearts and minds be distracted.  Focus on the next right thing we need to do. 
Grace and peace.