Imagining the impossible

“…for God all things are possible” (Mark 10:27)

Mark 10:17-31 (Year B: 20^th Sunday after Trinity, 14^th October, 2018)

Another tough discourse...

So you thought that last week’s discussion about divorce and remarriage tough. Following the gospel of Mark, it gets tougher now with a discussion about poverty, riches and wealth. The last thing we might want to hear is another plea for belt-tightening after all that (most) people went through during The Great Recession of 2008-2013 (ish).

A man approaches Jesus, in this story, and asks for guidance on what he needs to do to be saved. Living in a religious society of that time, people were very concerned about being on ‘the right side of God’ and making it to the finishing line. Such a concern and anxiety was not uncommon until recent times when religious observance and faith were very much central to the lives of ordinary people especially on this island.

Rich people, or not so rich people, went about doing certain things – attending church, participating in the sacraments, giving to charity, attending to their daily duties and family obligations and so on.  It was commonly believed in the majority Christian tradition that a single person or a young person might consider a ‘higher calling’ to follow a celibate religious life and ‘renounce’ some of the normal attractions of living by giving away their material possessions and following what are called the evangelical counsels of poverty, chastity and obedience (and, alas, as events and revelations unfolded we discovered that adherence to these counsels left a lot to be desired).

A question was asked by a man – a rich and young man at that (drawing also on the gospel of Matthew): what must I do to be saved? The response by Jesus is more radical and more subtle than we might gather on a first reading of this story. The following may be asked or noted:

What were the reactions of those around Jesus according to Mark’s version?
The young man who made the request of Jesus was ‘shocked’ and went away ‘sad’. Why?
The disciples on hearing Jesus’ words were ‘perplexed’ and then ‘greatly astounded’. Why?
What is our reaction when we listen very carefully to the Word of God in today’s troubled world?

Hearing the challenge afresh today...

Writing some years ago, the late Rev. Michael Paul Gallagher, SJ, had the following observation:

Our excited society keeps us busy with trivia and incapable of pausing to hear the cries of others.

Are we falling into the same trap?  Those cries for help may be thousands of kilometres away on the borders of Europe or they may be right next to us now.

Once again, we hear of more hardship and trouble for those will follow Jesus unreservedly. Tagged on to this week’s story is the third prediction of Jesus’ death and persecution. It will entail condemnation to death, surrender to those who will mistreat us; mockery, physical attacks and, ultimately, death. This type of scenario may seem remote to us in the comforts of Northern Europe. But, we need to be reminded of the fragility and persecution awaiting people on grounds of religion, ethnicity, class, sexual orientation or simply because they do not fit with the agenda of those who wield power. In the coming years, millions will seek refuge in Europe as conditions deteriorate in the neighbouring continents due to war, famine, fanaticism and the slow, gradual asphyxiation of climate change. We are living on borrowed time on this sick planet as some hoard possessions and power to the detriment of others. 

The message of Jesus has never been so relevant to us today.

The problem is not wealth in itself but whether we see and use wealth as ‘our’ possession or something granted us individually or collectively to be used for others – for those we love most closely and to whom we are bound by commitments and those in our communities and in our world. We are talking, here, about God’s capital in a world where everyone needs to be loved.

The rich man, in this Sunday’s story, sought ‘perfection’ in the doing of the Law.  Jesus’ answer, as recounted in both Mark and in Matthew, draws his attention (and of those listening on) to the horizontal or social and inter-personal aspect of the law – to respect our parents, to bear no hatred against others, to be faithful to our commitments, to be truthful and honest and so on. In other words, the key to the first three commandments is through loving our neighbour – our real flesh and blood neighbour in the here and now – next to us in the present moment of life and beside us under the same roof, on the street, on a train etc. Therein lies perfection in the Law.  But, the young man wanted more than this perfection and Jesus gave him a different kind of perfection challenge – let go of everything you cling to in life meaning honour, status, perks, comforts and follow me. In other words we can follow a perfect and all-sufficient way by obeying the ‘don’ts’ as outlined in the 10 commandments. But, we can also obey the ‘do’s’ by giving away all that we have – life, attachments and clinging to power – and follow Jesus with our whole heart. For that purpose, we do not necessarily have to take religious vows in the consecrated life – wholesome, necessary and welcome as that is for a minority of disciples so called and so affirmed by the church. To repeat the key message: we can be as perfect as anyone if we are prepared to give our life for another.

A literal call for some..

It is hardly surprising that many throughout Christian history interpreted stories and teachings such as the one found in today’s passage in a very literal sense. Such impulses gave rise to movements into the ‘desert’ associated with monastic life. In a way the monastic life that sprung up in the early centuries were protest movements at a time when Christianity was about to go native in Rome and attain to a position of social respectability in a coalition of influence, power and preferment. Some might suggest that Christianity is still trying to recover from this great fall! And the reformation of the 16^th and 17^th century did not necessarily help in de-coupling outward Christian religion from alliances with worldly powers (and being itself a worldly political power at times).

And a calling to all of us here and now..

Many are those who felt a call to not only go into the desert but to go into the streets and byways where people live and toil among the poor, the oppressed and the marginalised. Not everyone has this call – at least not for a lifetime. But, everyone has an opportunity to grow in love where they are planted. Every deed, every commitment and every initiative has meaning from the smallest to the heroic.  Moreover, love of the poor which is so evident throughout the gospels and the Bible demands not just ‘charity’ in the sense that this term has come to be used, but a thorough analysis and effective social action to address the roots of poverty, injustice and oppression. We do well to read and hear, again, the prophet Amos (5:10-12) who speaks about inequality, oppression and neglect of fundamental human rights in his day. The worship of money and the oppression of the poor makes a mockery of worship because God is especially on the side of the poor and the oppressed. This is what Matthew was on about in chapter 25:31-46 of that gospel when he outlines what matters at the end of our lives. And the prophet Amos (8:4-6) wasn’t mincing his words in this passage:

Hear this, you that trample on the needy, and bring to ruin the poor of the land, saying, “When will the new moon be over so that we may sell grain; and the sabbath, so that we may offer wheat for sale?  We will make the ephah small and the shekel great, and practice deceit with false balances, buying the poor for silver and the needy for a pair of sandals, and selling the sweepings of the wheat.

Discipleship that is awake to the politics of oppression..

Do the warnings of Amos carry relevance in today’s world and in today’s churches?  Have we focussed too much on the mechanics of sex and not enough on social justice?  And do we console ourselves and our consciences with ‘charity’ when those who are oppressed need to be liberated and need to take ownership of the means of their economic emancipation? Is our religion in conformity with biblical values of social justice, compassion and practical assistance? Do we know what poverty is really like? Have we ever had the experience of not being able to pay rent or mortgage, skipping meals, lighting candles when the electricity has been cut off for non-payment of a bill and facing the embarrassment of not being able to send a child on a school trip?

Poverty takes many forms and many were surprised to find themselves in poverty when their job was lost or their business folded up following the credit crunch and economic downturn of 2008-2010. Still others, live in a cycle of inter-generational poverty which seems extremely difficult to break out of.

It seems to me that recent debates about‘welfare reform’ in many European countries including the UK and Ireland has been shaped more by 19^th century notions of deserving poor and philanthropic benevolence with a State that works to defend the interests of corporations, bond-holders and well-to-do citizens than those who have nobody to speak for themselves and are not the subject of pre-electoral competition for votes. Witness the global trend towards ever lower taxes on the high-income and high-worth citizens, on corporations while increasing numbers live in precarious living conditions where work, income and pensions are less secure than ever. This is not to deny the huge improvements in living standards, health and education that have occurred in the last 100 years. However, there is another side to the story of global capitalism that people concerned about social justice and sustainable development need to start caring about much more.

And it is never too late to start (again)..

We might be near the end of our days bedridden and highly dependent but we can continue to follow Jesus on the road to freedom by showing interest in everyone around us and by prayer.  Who knows? Our loving, our hoping and our living in this way may be generating new love, new hope and new life in those near and far.

Some day we might wake up and see the world around us and the ‘smell the roses’. For that to happen we need to approach the throne of grace on our knees like the rich young man mindful that – with God nothing is impossible.

Time and time again God works in our lives not according to our timetables or plans but in his way. The social and political become personal and the personal becomes political. We are made for communion in a broken world.  If we trust we will find surprise after surprise as God meets us in places of unbelievable tenderness and compassion. But, we must know that the way of discipleship leads through much suffering and difficulty as Jesus made clear to the disciples who still didn’t get it. Do we get it?

Ever faithful to love

“…Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.’ (Mark 10:9))

Mark 10:2-16 (Year B: 19^th Sunday after Trinity, 7^th October, 2018)

Jesus doesn’t mince his words...

Every so often we run into a difficult passage in the gospel. This is one of them.

Divorce, remarriage and family fluidity is a marked feature of 21^st century societies. I guess that few, if any, among us do not know someone who has gone through marital separation. It could be a brother, a sister, one’s own parents, a work colleague, our next door neighbour. In some cases, we may be among those who have experienced separation. Here, in Ireland, there has been a marked increase in the extent of marital breakdown even though it has not reached anywhere near the same proportions found in other western societies – yet at any rate.

What are we to make of this passage of Mark? Mark reports a conversation between Jesus and the Pharisees. Jesus answers a question they put in clear, uncompromising and un-nuanced words as follows:

‘Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.’ (verses 11-12):

No ifs, no buts, no qualifications.

Jesus was responding to a question posed by some Pharisees who came to him to question and test him.  The context was set by the ‘Hillelites’ and the ‘Shammaites’. The followers of Rabbi Hillel were 1^st century religious liberals who permitted divorce ‘for any cause’. The followers of Shammai permitted it only for adultery.  The latter were the 1^st century religious conservatives who took a narrower and possibly more literal interpretation of Deuteronomy 24:1-4. The labels might be different but the broad nature of religious controversy has not changed in 2,000 years! 

Jesus’s response (to be found here in Mark as well as in the gospel of Matthew) came as a surprise to his hearers. He just rules out divorce altogether and goes back to the very beginning, in Genesis, to explain that lasting union was and still remains the plan of God whereby a man and a woman become one flesh or one body – with all that it entails spiritually, psychologically and physically. While the Jews of Jesus’ time held marriage in high regard, divorce was widespread and it wreaked havoc on women, in particular, given the absence of legal rights and legal initiative for them. This sets the social and cultural context in which Jesus takes a ‘hard line’ on divorce.

Any exceptions?...

The parallel reference in Matthew is a little more nuanced (Matthew 19:9)

And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for unchastity, and marries another commits adultery.

There are a variety of interpretations of the expression ‘except for unchastity’ in Matthew. It may be concluded that scholars differ on the exact meaning of the term. Some – especially Roman Catholic scholars - argue that it reflects a specifically Jewish context in which a man had the right to divorce a woman before a marriage was consummated if it emerges only after a marriage that the woman had not been a virgin (this might explain why Joseph the spouse of Mary had initially planned on ‘divorcing’ her when he learned that she was pregnant but then changed his mind after matters were clarified for him in a dream). If this is the case, it might explain the inclusion of ‘unchastity’ (the Greek word is ‘porneia’) in Matthew but not in Mark. According to this explanation Jesus would have used the word adultery if he meant it. Rather, he was referring, so it is claimed, to a specific exception where a marriage was not consummated and the marriage vows or contract was not, therefore, valid. Some Eastern Catholic churches (e.g. Greek) might allow divorce in cases of adultery – presumably on the grounds of the Matthean ‘unchastity’ clause to be found in Matthew 19:9 (see for example here). Among Protestant denominations, nowadays, divorce and remarriage are generally accepted (although in some cases more tolerated than accepted).

The mere fact that there was some type of exception, in Matthew, suggests that the early Christian community had to deal with the matter in a compassionate and rational way given the realities facing the emerging Christian community as families were split over the new religion and as a variety of mores and practices characterised the pagan world in which Judeo-Christians lived. Matthew’s account of what Jesus said differs from Mark in two ways:

• The exception clause is to be found in Matthew but not in Mark.
• The unique reference to a woman initiating a divorce, in Mark, which was unknown among Jews at that time.

Clearly, the audiences and the context in Matthew and Mark differ somewhat. Matthew was probably writing for a Jewish community while Mark had more a gentile audience in mind familiar with Roman laws and practices.

But, a compassionate Jesus ever and always...

Returning to Mark, we see an uncompromising stance by Jesus on divorce.  Divorce was, and still is today, a huge trauma for many. In the hugely different culture of Jesus’ time women were very much relegated to a vulnerable and insecure rank in society. It is still that way today in many parts of the world. In opposing divorce we see a compassionate Jesus who recognised the havoc that divorce can inflict on people – not least women and children. The choice of verses 13 to 16 about the blessing of children in today’s passage to follow the teaching on divorce may be no accident.  Jesus seems to go further than many of his peers by indicating a clear equality in marriage in that he balances the role of women and men in Mark 10:11-12.  This contrasts with the one-side question posed by the Pharisees where only the man could issue a divorce summons.  Women were in an inferior position in every way according to this view. That inequality is directly challenged in the response of Jesus.

Six possible responses…

How do we align the clear gospel teaching found in Mark with our own experience of living today? A number of responses are possible:

1. Ignore the gospels along with the Christian message entirely as irrelevant and pre-modern (typically the response of many in today’s world);
2. Locate some particular sayings of Jesus as belonging to a different cultural milieu and which are no longer relevant;
3. Use the tools of scholarly research and discourse to manoeuvre around ‘difficult passages’ (this might involve saying ‘this is how the evangelist reported it but Jesus didn’t quite mean it that way’ or ‘the Greek word for this or that term could mean different things’ or ‘the context is set by extraneous factors that blunt an isolated passage quotation’ and so on).
4. Take the passage pretty much at face value (notwithstanding scholarly caveats above) and say ‘that was then and now is now ….’ (in other words ignore it and preach a sermon on something else once a year when the topic comes up in Matthew, Mark or Luke).
5. Accept the passage as is stands but place it alongside other passages emphasising a wide range of values and considerations but always returning to the central value of compassion and mercy present in Jesus.
6. Take the passage as conforming to a literal, legalistic and absolute prohibition on divorce always, everywhere and no matter what because ‘the bible says so’ and/or ‘tradition says or and the Church has always taught so’. (This is like saying that according to section 9 subsection 4(a) of the Law, divorce is never allowed – never.)

There may be other solutions to the above! In my case, I tend towards response number 5, above.  I distrust absolutist and legalist approaches using isolated Gospel passages as ammunition to uphold particular stances. At the same time, I do not go along with the ultra-liberal approach of making the gospel fit whatever you want it to mean. In practice, we can read the scriptures with –

• The foundation of trust and faith in God-who-is-love.
• The common sense of people living in a messy world.
• The compassion of people who care deeply for others.
• The experience of living which teaches us.

Add to this benefits of good scholarly research and insights down the ages from others who read, digested and lived the Word.

A need for balance and clarity..

The point is that a relationship of intimacy, commitment and openness to life is the foundation of much human well-being and happiness. It is also a foundation rock for communities and societies. It is, typically, the milieu in which children can grow, develop and experience the warmth of love so that they too can live lives of meaning and love and give in turn. Whatever, disrupts this is bad for people and societies. Lack of love, communication, trust and faithfulness wreaks havoc on people and much unhappiness exists in the world because of this. I suggest that marriage break-up is a factor (interacting with other factors) in regards to mental ill-health and, in some cases, poverty, homelessness and addiction).

At the same time, it is a sad reality that for many reasons married relationships fail. Humans are not perfect and, yes, God asks us to be faithful and to embrace our cross, but, not at the price of destroying our own health and peace. In some cases, marital breakdown may involve systematic and repeated coercion, violence and abuse. In other cases, the causes may be less dramatic but no less significant in undermining the stability of a union. When this happens it is a tragedy – above all for the couple involved. But, it may signal circumstances outside the control of the couple as well as factors relevant to each one’s history, mental baggage, attitude and behaviour. And, then, there is just plain bad behaviour – systematic, repeated and calculating. However, we must not judge any one person or relationship. We never know the full story.

And what if, after many years of trying and recourse to help a relationship remains destructive? What then?

And if people find themselves in a new life-affirming committed relationship, what then?

And what if, as one writer put it: ‘What humans wrongly joined together, let God rightly separate?’ However, the same writer reminds us that: ‘committing adultery is not an abstract, moral sin. It is a real, hurtful action against one’s God-joined partner’ (Vitalis Hoffman).

(In recent years, the Roman Catholic Church has been heavily divided over some issues and questions raised in Amoris Laetitia concerning pastoral discretion in admitting divorced or remarried Catholics to Holy Communion.  That debate will run and run.)

The four pillars...

The lesson of Mark 1-16 as well as Matthew 19:1-12 is that the scriptures need to be read ‘on our knees’ so to speak and with an open heart and a discerning and learning mind.  Scripture is ‘over all’ and yet is must be received each time in the light of tradition, reason and experience. After all, tradition (oral and written), reason and experience were the soil in which the Word was sown and continues to be sown and to grow in our fields today. Scripture is sufficient. However, its full meaning gradually unfolds in the lived experience of Christians over the ages.

To conclude on a positive note: it would appear that most families and most lifelong commitments are happy for the most part – trials and tribulations notwithstanding along the way. This also seems to be true of those who, for one reason or another, find themselves in a second union.  After all, the starting point for Jesus’ positive affirmation of marriage is found in Genesis 2:18 where we are reminded that it is not good for one to be alone (unless by choice, calling or force of circumstances).

The wounds of life come with blessings and the blessings of life come with wounds. The wounds of broken relationships and broken trust remain even if healed of their sharpest impact over time. We may always confide in God whose mercy has no limits unlike that of others whom we have hurt or who have hurt us.

We must realise that, in the majority of situations and families, love prevails over all difficulties and there is a huge amount to be thankful for in the mystery of lifelong love ‘for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, until death do us part.’ This is what the author of Mark affirms so strongly in reporting the answer Jesus gave to the Pharisees of his time.

postscript: For a thoughtful and thought-provoking consideration of the matters discussed above, see a Blog by Rev Patrick Comerford here.

Not one of us?

“Whoever is not against us is for us” (Mark 9:40)

Mark 9:38-50 (Year B: 18^th Sunday after Trinity)

Encountering differences among those with whom we interact...

This passage welds together two stories: one about an exorcist ‘who was not one of us’ and whom the disciples thought of as competing with Jesus; the other about the need for discipline and sacrifice in the following of Jesus. In a way, both stories form two sides of the one coin.

In our lives we encounter many people who are different by reason of temperament, religion, politics, ethnic background or other characteristics. And dare one say theology, too. The world and human life would be very boring were it to be otherwise. However, when it comes to religion we can be especially fussy about whom we associate with and who we admit to the club. Moreover, religion – contrary to its root meaning in Latin, religare – to bind together – can and does become a source of animosity and division. One of the big surprises of the 21st century is that religion is very back in global political discourse contrary to the predictions of many thinkers and sages. It is back with a vengeance and not always in ways that many of us would want or have ever expected. Witness the rise of particular fundamentalisms across the globe. Witness the rise of a certain type of self-righteous, compassion-less and doctrinaire Christianity that imposes its views on others and condemns and excludes those within the Christian family for allegedly unbiblical or non-orthodox (I believe the term is heterodox!) teaching.

Confronted with an exorcist who was doing the same works, so it seemed, as Jesus was doing, the disciples wondered what to do about the outsider. There are those who ‘do not follow us’ but seem to share many of our values and even some of our ideas and goals. What should be our response? Without hesitation or qualification we should work with others for the common good on those issues and concerns that connect to us regardless of their religion or outlook. Clearly, there are some people and causes we should never work with no matter how incidental a few areas of commonality may arise. This goes without explanation and it does not need to be spelt out further, here.

The role of witness...

In the course of my work (my day job!) I encounter a wide range of persons who have no time for organised religion or things associated with religion. Yet, I collaborate and associate with many of these on projects of practical application especially in the area of research and knowledge. I sense that the shared values on social progress are sufficient reason to work with others towards shared goals. Christians need to come out of the closet not by preaching God at people on the street corner or at the coffee break but by being active, engaged, concerned and cooperative in efforts to tackle injustice and make for a better world. In this way a spark of the light that is within us will shine out and, perhaps, others might be drawn to ask ‘Why?’.  Every journey in faith starts with a simple question, a conversation and a listening ear. What a privilege for us prepared to rise to the challenge!

Climate change and environmental concerns are a good example...

Take the area of climate change and the environment. The 2015 encyclical, Laudato Si, of Pope Francis has identified a major moral challenge which should unite movements, governments and peoples at global level. Yet, we find not a few Christians denying climate change – in the face of overwhelming scientific evidence. For them, the fact that persons or movements they do not like are championing the cause of the environment is enough reason to be sceptical or negative or indifferent. Moreover, there are powerful commercial and national interests at work to disrupt and oppose international agreement on carbon emissions. Here is an area where those ‘who are not against us are for us’. 

Many are very concerned about the precious gift of life from the first stage of human life and rightly so. If only the same concerns were extended as passionately and as systemically to every stage of human life as we continue to thrash the planet and leave a world that will be scarcely habitable for future generations.

In welcoming others of different persuasions and backgrounds we welcome Christ in our neighbour. Without realising it we may end up ‘entertaining angels’ (Hebrews 13:2). Every act of kindness no matter how small counts especially when the person next to us is passing through trials. The ‘cup of water’, referred to in this Gospel passage, may be some act of kindness or practical act of help that we can give someone.

But how can we do this if we are imprisoned by our doubts and our attachments to this or that idea, comfort or material possession? This is where radical discipleship comes in.  The words attributed to Jesus in Mark certainly strike us hard:

 if your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life lame than to have two feet and to be thrown into hell. (verses 45-46)

This is a good example of not taking every line of scripture absolutely literally but, rather, understanding the underlying point being made and situating it alongside the whole of the scriptures!  The point is that whatever part of our thinking or behaviour leads us down paths that are destructive and harmful then we should not hesitate to cut these off.  An example might refer to patterns of behaviour where people stay up or work until a late hour only to get up extra early the following morning to try and beat the traffic or get more work in.  The result might be a systematic tiredness that the person is not even so much aware of any more. And the result of tiredness is, very often, irritability, poor judgment, rash statements and actions and worse still accidents on the road or elsewhere. And the point is?  Setting out to deprive ourselves of sleep is not only a bad idea but, quite possibly an example of an ‘occasion of sin’. We need our sleep and rest because we have a duty of care to our bodies, our minds and our relationships.  Of course, a young parent of a new born baby (or a teenager!) might object by saying ‘one has no choice the matter’. Indeed. And the same might be said of those who are homeless or those who simply cannot sleep for one reason or another. Let it be said that where we have the opportunity to get adequate rest we ought to avail of it and get our priorities right! And that is only one example. Cutting of a leg here or a hand there might mean closing down TV and internet for an hour before going to bed or just planning in an hour of restful walking in the countryside alone or with another some Sunday afternoon.

The role of witness...

Returning to the main story, there is much to lead us astray including in appropriate behaviour and thinking that spoils many a committed relationship. However, we need to open our God-given eyes (assuming we can see at all) and use our hands and feet (assuming we have such faculties) to do good; to avoid evil and to live life to the full the way God intended it to be lived. This brings us back to where the story started – there are many in the world that we need to work with and not against.  Losing some of our own preciousness and insecurity is part of the radical call of Jesus found in the gospels and here in Mark.

(words above = 1,284)

WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

Further reading: notes and questions, verse by verse (Mark 9:38-50)

Preliminaries

Three topics are brought together in this selection from Mark: a challenge to closed mentalities, the importance of every act of kindness and thoughtfulness and the ever present threat of serious threat in the church. All of this has salience at this time across the Christian Church and Churches. We see the devastating impact of the abuse of children (why is the demeaning term ‘minors’ still in use?).  it has devastated so many lives and, because of inaction and cover-up, has undermined the teaching credibility of the whole universal Church. By infecting one part of the Christian family, especially, we are all impacted by the loss of trust, credibility and affection.

38-40: challenging closed minds

‘John said to him, ‘Teacher, we saw someone casting out demons in your name, and we tried to stop him, because he was not following us.’ But Jesus said, ‘Do not stop him; for no one who does a deed of power in my name will be able soon afterwards to speak evil of me. Whoever is not against us is for us.’

The idea that someone from another denomination or tribe could act virtuously or even be a channel of God’s grace makes for uncomfortable hearing for some. Not only that, but it may happen that spiritual healing arises from ‘unauthorised’ persons or situations. The key question is whether or not people are healed and truly set free. It is so easy to fall into the fallacy of the self-referential church full of its own correctness, superiority and uniqueness. The ‘one true church’ syndrome has exacted so much harm to the Body of Christ. And, with it, the mentality of excluding those not authorised or approved to participate fully in the mission to serve this world and one another. It is a deep-rooted malaise. We must be ever vigilant and every ready to confront such mentalities even at the cost of much hostility and misunderstanding.

41 the importance of even just one kind act

‘For truly I tell you, whoever gives you a cup of water to drink because you bear the name of Christ will by no means lose the reward.’

We may despair, at times, about the state of the world and the church. However, right now, in this place and at this time there is someone right beside you. Now is the time to listen, to observe, to speak (having listened and seen carefully) and to act. It may be a small thing or not so small. At least I can do this or say that. Anything is better than nothing. Positive acts of kindness is infinitely better than negative.

42-48 Radical and firm in the face of scandal

‘If any of you put a stumbling-block before one of these little ones who believe in me, it would be better for you if a great millstone were hung around your neck and you were thrown into the sea. If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life maimed than to have two hands and to go to hell, to the unquenchable fire. And if your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life lame than to have two feet and to be thrown into hell. And if your eye causes you to stumble, tear it out; it is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and to be thrown into hell, where their worm never dies, and the fire is never quenched.’

Scandals are never far at any time in the world of church. However, this century has opened up a huge chasm. The churches were already in deep trouble. The scandals engendered by the various mind-sets facilitated the carrying out of great evil.

This passage, clearly, comprises statements and counsels not to be taken literally but no less seriously. If only persons in authority had acted to root out, expose and exclude profound evil reported to them!  Rather, the voices of the little ones and the voices of dissenters and those accused (incorrectly) as disloyal were excluded. Again and again, Jesus speaks of the ‘Kingdom of God’ as a reality that is very close but towards which we are striving as ‘yet to come’. ‘Church’ should enable us to enter the kingdom of heaven together. However, Jesus did not preach church. Rather, he preached kingdom. We ought never to forget this.

The ‘gehenna’ or ‘hell’ mentioned in verse 47 calls to mind the gê-ben-hinnom or ‘Valley of the Son of Hinnom’ (Joshua 15:8), a ravine south of Jerusalem, where human sacrifices were once offered to Molech.  The image of burning fires symbolised it as a place of torment and evil. It could be a scene from Schindler’s List (and which closed with the wonderful scene of those who were saved placing stones on the grave of one, Oskar Schindler, on the southern slopes of Mount Zion).

49-50  The quality of discipleship

 ‘For everyone will be salted with fire. Salt is good; but if salt has lost its saltiness, how can you season it? Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace with one another.’

Some versions of the Bible translate verse 49 as follow: ‘For every one shall be salted with fire, and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt.’ (King James Version).

Let us pray, hope and strive that we might be salted with good fire and that we might be good salt in a world that is often lost and swamped in Gehenna. What a beautiful closing line for this passage: ‘and be at peace with one another’ (50). Amen

Born to servant leadership

“Whoever wants to be first must be last of all and servant of all.” (Mark 9:35)

                                                            pic:http://cronkitehhh.jmc.asu.edu/blog/2013/10/consider-servant-leader

Mark 9:30-37 (Year B: 17th Sunday after Trinity, 23 September, 2018)

Whoever leads must be servant of all..

At the heart of this story is a tension between leadership and service. The disciples hanker after a type of leadership that means sitting in a position of honour and authority.  Not infrequently, people like positions of authority and honour.

States, companies, associations, churches and other human organisations create titles of honour, places of special honour, conditions of privilege and roles of authority in decision-making.  Many churches – up until recent times – had pews or seats specially reserved for Lord so-and-so or for the mayor or state dignitary (in the case of a Cathedral). This was quite apart from one-off reservations in cases of special celebrations including for example funerals. And the whole lay-out of medieval churches spoke of social hierarchy with the Lord Bishop sitting on a throne (usually) far too big for him and a sanctuary and choir reserved for those next to the bishop followed by a nave where, presumably, the great and good sat towards the top while the great unwashed knelt or stood (usually the latter in medieval times) towards the back. Even up until recent times, it was not uncommon for the men folk in many rural parishes in Ireland to congregate somewhere around the porch at the entrance to a church where, technically, they ‘heard’ mass! (Indeed, they may have heard it far more profoundly and effectively than many inside the building. We should never judge).

Such is life and such is church and what Jesus found the disciples up to in arguing about positions and greatness is not at all surprising if we know anything about modern-day ecclesiastical politics.

Conflicts start over little things hiding in front of positions..

Many a war and many a feud has started over what, at first sight, might have seemed a secondary and less important matter.  However, deep beneath the ‘position’ adopted by people are values, beliefs, needs, hurts and wants that shape and drive human behaviour. A lot of the time we are not even conscious of these drivers.  In this context, reactions of the disciples to Jesus’ talk of cross, suffering and rejection doesn’t fit with their preconceived ideas of a powerful messianic saviour. Moreover, it doesn’t fit with their agenda which is about promotion and the pleasure of leading.

The idea of servant leadership is about leaders who are appointed or who emerge to serve – if necessary to the point of giving their lives in loving service. Now, authority is necessary and with it some differentiation of roles and responsibilities. Inevitably there is a hierarchy of responsible power. However, the prevailing ethos and practice among the authorities of Jesus’ time – just as today – is characterised by values of dominance, control, an imbalanced power-over-others, self-assertion over others and the value of wanting the limelight that goes with such positions. Rare is the leader who doesn’t want to lead or be in authority but is compelled or drawn to respond to a call to service in a world crying out for servant leadership.

Competition for kudos in the game of honour drives many to behaviour that distorts the very idea of vocation to leadership. Instead, the focus is on titles, procedures, control and how many dollars or Euros is in the budget over which one has jurisdiction. Such competition may start early on via facebook or later through linkedin or twitter! Success and fame go with the number of ‘followers’ or ‘friends’.  But, being ‘friends’ with Jesus and others through him and being ‘followers’ of the master who lived and died to serve all is a whole different scene.

A practical lesson in greatness..

Mark’s passage moves quickly to an illustration of what wisdom and leadership really involve. He takes a child and declares that anyone who welcomes a child welcomes the gospel. Matthew (18:4) goes further and declares that:

Whoever becomes humble like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

Putting children in the centre to illustrate a point about leadership would not have fit with the prevailing culture. Notions of children’s right were unheard of. A contemporary illustration of these gospel narratives is in the practice adopted in the community of Taizé in France where the Prior (the first in the community) takes the last seat in the central section of the make-shift wooden church of the resurrection. Accompanying him is a child or children who process to the service of prayer at the beginning. These telling symbols and gestures are important because much of the way we have ‘done church’ over the centuries seems at odds with the values of the gospel as outlined here in Mark as well as in the other three gospels. If only these values were absorbed and practiced we would be in a far better place today.

This road before me

 “those who lose their life for my sake, and for the sake of the gospel, will save it” (Mark8:35)

Mark 8:27-35 (Year B: 16^th Sunday after Trinity, 16^th September, 2018)

Three short passages are combined into one by Mark and by the liturgists for this Sunday’s Gospel reading. First, Peter declares (for all of us in our turn) that Jesus is indeed The Christ. Secondly, Jesus spells out what is in store for him and against which Peter rebels for a moment. Finally, Jesus spells out what is in store for each of us today who might follow him.

A gospel for losers..

At the core of these three short passages is a question followed by a series of answers followed by a warning and an invitation. ‘Who do you say that I am’ can have two meanings:

The question that fascinates thinkers, seekers, philosophers, sociologists, anthropologists, theologians ….

The question about what the person of Jesus – the real flesh and blood person of 2,000 years ago and the Messiah declared, crucified, risen and present today through faith – means to me this morning as I board the train, walk into a building and grab a sandwich at midday.

Both questions are important but without the second question we are fooling ourselves ….

Mark doesn’t waste words. He might have been a journalist were he writing today….short, one liner, the Point….. He quotes Jesus: ‘for those who want to save their life will lose it’. The flip side is that ‘those who lose their life for my sake, and for the sake of the gospel, will save it.’. What does this losing mean? 

We can listen to the witness of those early disciples who were prepared to face opposition, expulsion and marginalisation if they were lucky (?) enough to avoid torture and death. And the witness of disciples over the  centuries was not different. In today’s world we are reminded regularly of the plight of followers of Jesus – and millions of others – in various parts of their world who literally have their heads cut off for being ‘Nazarenes’.  Choice about following Jesus and living by his values might seem like a private and cosy matter for those of living in fortress Europe and living in the wealthier and freer part of the globe when it comes to all things we take for granted. But, for many millions choosing to stand by their beliefs and stay where they are serving in the communities and families where they have been planted can carry an awful price.

To lose everything can apply not just to material possessions but also to your very own dignity, standing and respect.  Ultimately, the stigma of being a prisoner, a refugee or an ‘alien’ is the ultimate degradation and loss.

The way of thinking revealed by Jesus in this passage of Mark is more than just challenging. It was challenging for Peter who would not hear of the cross and the way of much suffering. Yet, it is Peter – again – who speaks up and takes the lead where others drew back and waited. The impetuous, reckless, sometimes faithless Peter who sticks his neck out only to have it pushed back – in this case by attracting the undiplomatic expression ‘get behind me Satan’ (verse 33). I have sympathy for Peter. At least he tried and tried again and got up each time …. even when he betrayed Jesus for a time.

And what of us?..

This road – that Jesus must follow – will be the same road that his disciples will follow. And what of us?

Losing something we didn’t want in the first place is one thing. Losing something precious, good and prized is another matter. Sometimes, we are called to ‘lose our lives’ for the sake of the gospel and its values. In the chapters that follow in Mark the announcement of the coming passion is repeated – much to the consternation and lack of understanding of those hearing.

Often it is not that we reject the cross but, rather, this particular cross which is not ideal or savoury!  It may be that we want to choose our own cross our way not in ways that take us by surprise and come like the wind ‘from the North-West’ (‘an ghaoth aniar aduaidh’ as the saying goes in Irish Gaelic). If only we could get to choose our own cross, life would be easier to anticipate, plan and regulate!

One thing is certain – in the life of discipleship as well as every other life – suffering is unavoidable. We can see it as part of the journey towards the full light of resurrection or we can stay in the dark cursing it and wishing it were otherwise. But, none of this takes from the point that suffering is suffering anytime and anywhere. It does not help those suffering to hear others make light of it or over-spiritualise it. Our task as disciples of Jesus who walked this road before us is to bear with the sufferings that come our way and work to alleviate the suffering in others around us.

Not quite what we expected..

We await some good in our lives. When it comes it is not what we had expected. It is like that in this story. People expected a Messiah who would be a mighty king, a popular or not so popular prophet and so on. Nobody expected a suffering servant who would die a disgraceful death on a dumping ground outside the capital city.

This road before me..

The mood of Mark 8 is captured, for me, in that haunting poem written by the well known Irish poet, mystic and political rebel, Pádraic Pearse. While I do not think that I would have been a supporter of his, politically, I am always deeply touched by his depth of insight, feeling and courage. (There is more than a hint of the suffering servant Isaiah in this poem).

Ideal (by Pádraic Pearse and translated by Thomas McDonagh)

Naked I saw thee,

O beauty of beauty!

And I blinded my eyes

For fear I should flinch.

I heard thy music,

O sweetness of sweetness!

And I shut my ears

For fear I should fail.

I kissed thy lips

O sweetness of sweetness!

And I hardened my heart

For fear of my ruin.

And I blinded my eyes

And my heart I shut

I hardened my heart

And my love I quenched

I turned my back

On the dream I had shaped

And to this road before me

My face I turned

I set my face

To the road here before me

To the work that I see

To the death that I shall meet

++++

Or, in the original it is as follows:

Fornocht do chonac thú,
a áille na háille,
is do dhallas mo shúil
ar eagla go stánfainn.

Do chualas do cheol,
a bhinnenabinne,
is do dhúnasmochluas
areagla go gclisfinn.

Do bhlaiseas do bhéal
a mhilsenamilse,
is do chruasmochroí
areaglamomhillte.

Do dhallasmoshúil,
is mochluas do dhúnas;
do chruasmochroí,
is momhian do mhúchas.

Do thugasmochúl
ar an aisling do chumas,
‘s ar an ród so romham
m’aghaidh do thugas.

Do thugasmoghnúis
ar an ród so romham,
ar an ngníomh do-chim,
‘s ar an mbás do gheobhad.

Open to new possibilities

“…Be opened” (Mark 7:34)

Mark 7:24-37 (Year B: 15^th Sunday after Trinity, 9^th September 2018)

A raw request..

Actions speak louder than words. Yet, words are powerful agents. In this gospel passage, we hear the word Ephphatha meaning ‘Be opened’ in the Aramaic language spoken by Jesus.  Very occasionally the gospel writers report the actual word – in Aramaic – spoken by Jesus to give extra effect and depth to what is being recounted. It is like a story in which we imitate the accent or mannerism of the person about whom we are talking. In this case Jesus said Ephphatha ‘with a deep sigh’. With a deep sigh from the cross Jesus would say Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani– ‘my God, my God why have you forsaken me?’(Matthew 27:46).  In this way, a simple and powerful question or request to the Father by Jesus is given extra flavour by repeating it in the original techni-colour.

In anguish a person who was ‘deaf’ and ‘could hardly talk’ was brought to Jesus by strangers in a strange land known as the ten cities (Decapolis). It follows another miracle story (verses 24-30) in alien territory involving a gentile Syrophoenician woman who prevailed on Jesus to cure her daughter (mothers can be persuasive). As happens again and again in the gospels, Jesus walks straight into a situation of acute human distress and need. By now he has acquired some reputation as a healer and dispenser of wisdom. So, when desperate, as the strangers were, they plead with Jesus for help (they ‘begged’ him). The pattern is familiar to us as we read and think about the gospels. It is often composed of five steps:

1. A situation of human distress and need.
2. Pleading sometimes accompanied by a primitive trust or faith.
3. A vigorous and swift response by Jesus often accompanied by a discrete but effective physical outward sign.
4. Healing or rescue often signalled by a miraculous event.
5. A response by these looking on but especially by those healed, rescued or nourished – puzzlement, fear, joy, praise, scandal as the case may be.

Transposed to today..

Applied today in our little world where do we find such stories at work?

1.      In this story, we find ourselves in the company of Jesus who is travelling through ‘foreign territory’. It would be like someone from (Catholic/nationalist) Falls Road walking through the (Protestant/loyalist) Shankill Road in Belfast, Ireland, or vice versa. Let’s say someone doing such a thing would not delay and would probably keep their mouth shut!

2.      Enter someone who is deaf and mainly dumb – the ultimate loneliness of someone who cannot hear or communicate. What to do? The story of Helen Keller captured in a film many years ago tells the story of a young girl who was deaf and dumb but, against all the odds and with the heroic help of an Anne Sullivan learned to communicate. Helen Keller became a famous writer and speaker having learned how to communicate, somehow, with others. She learned to read people’s lips by use of her hands. Using braille she learned to read extensively (she wrote and published 12 books in her lifetime). Acts of faith, perseverance, kindness and determination meant that Helen Keller blossomed and flourished and provided inspiration to millions as well as practical help in developing services for people with disabilities. How many other Helen Kellers might there be today in our world even given a chance?

3.      Jesus is captivated by compassion. He is compassion walking on two feet who brings life and healing so that ‘the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers[a] are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the poor have good news brought to them’  (Matthew 11:5). Jesus acts swiftly to take the man aside ‘in private’ and he uses spittle, touch and prayer from the depth of his heart to perform a healing (while this might not have passed 21^st century Health Authority protocols we should be aware that, apparently, spittle was believed to have medicinal value in primitive societies). 

4.      In this story the miracle is deeply personal to the one healed. Sight and hearing and speech are restored in one go. Life would never be the same again for the one healed. Who was this man? What was his name? Was he even Jewish?  Where was he when Jesus was crucified? Did he become a disciple afterwards?

5.      Many are the reactions of those who have witnessed the power of a loving God in their lives and that of others. But, some will always remain hostile, sceptical or indifferent.  The important lesson, here, is that Jesus kept moving onwards (Jerusalem was to be his ultimate destination here on earth). Many were ‘overwhelmed’ by what Jesus had done. They commented that ‘He has done everything well;’ (verse 37).

In many respects this was a low-key miracle. Sure enough it was an extraordinary and miraculous healing of someone who had been blind and deaf for most (all?) of his life. However, the man was only one person. For everyone healed there were at least another hundred or two in the Decapolis who were not.  And, Jesus insisted on keeping the whole matter private and undisclosed possibly to avoid premature reactions and misunderstanding about who he was and why had come. Jesus preached, healed and loved one person at a time and one moment at a time. What he did he did well (verse 37) but he did not usher in a perfect world or outcome. Rather, in keeping with his humanity and divinity he did what was required of love –  person by person and moment by moment.  In other words, we could say that he loved perfectly in an imperfect world that remains imperfect. Such is God-in-humanity.

And inspiring out actions and thoughts..

In a poem attributed to Waldo Emerson, there is an application of this to those in search of healing such as the strangers in the Decapolis:

To laugh often and much; to win the respect of intelligent people and the affection of children; to earn the appreciation of honest critics and to endure the betrayal of false friends; to appreciate beauty and to find the best in others; to leave the world a bit better, whether by a healthy child or a garden patch or a redeemed social condition; to know even one life has breathed easier because you have lived, this is to have succeeded.

However, the attribution is said to be properly to a Bessie A. Stanley:

He has achieved success who has lived well, laughed often, and loved much;Who has enjoyed the trust of pure women, the respect of intelligent men and the love of little children;Who has filled his niche and accomplished his task;Who has never lacked appreciation of Earth's beauty or failed to express it;Who has left the world better than he found it,Whether an improved poppy, a perfect poem, or a rescued soul;Who has always looked for the best in others and given them the best he had;Whose life was an inspiration;Whose memory a benediction.

And so it was for Helen Keller and her helper and associate Anne Sullivan.

Some questions today:

Are we in need of healing spiritually because we think we hear and see but we don’t?How do we respond to situations of acute human distress in the immediate world around us?  (Here is a clip that conveys an extraordinary encounter involving a child whose father had died)Where do we see the discrete healing power of God at work?
What is our response to healing when we see and experience it at first hand?Do the stories of the gospel come alive for us now?

Upside down and outside in

“…Listen to me, all of you, and understand” (Mark 7:14)

Mark 7:1-23 (Year B: 14^th Sunday after Trinity, 2^nd September, 2018)

Why is that religion, like politics, generates so much controversy? In this week’s passage from the Gospel of Mark, Jesus does not mince his words on objections raised by his critics.  He takes on the traditions of the elders of his time. They had turned certain traditions, interpretations and rules into absolutes while disregarding the core of Godly commandments centered on justice, compassion and truth.

Even today, some folk attach a lot of importance to appearance, ritual and customs as the defining points of their religion.  These things offer comfort and come from the deep wells of ‘tradition’. More than that, adherence to particular customs helps distinguish ‘us’ from ‘them’. (Well, if the others drive on the right hand side of the road and use metric measures, we do it differently around here. Anyway, it is up to them to change……).

The habits of a lifetime and the traditions of the ancestors shape deep ravines in our minds and memories. ‘It was always like that here’ and ‘that’s the way it is done here’ seems to be the guiding principle.

We underestimate, at our peril, the extent of ‘unwritten rules’ in many organisations, families and situations. Let’s call it Culture. And culture is important. But, we do not need to be slaves to culture because culture evolves through the experience of human communities. But, we should be mindful of the important role of culture in shaping public discourse as well as our own faith tradition.

Culture shapes our interpretations of texts whether from the sacred scriptures or other sources.  And these texts reflect cultural norms at the time they were written – even under divine inspiration. The decision about which texts are ‘canonical’ (definitely included in the Bible) reflects debates, controversies and competing points of view in the Church decades and centuries after the time of Jesus.  The Bible – as we know it – evolved out of stories and many books and texts and letters and poems. A 21^st century Christian in Europe will not read and receive the sacred scriptures in quite the same way as a 16^th century Christian in Europe never mind one in Africa now or 1,500 years ago. Let’s not confuse what is cultural and temporary from what is eternal and unchangeable. God, alone, is unchangeable and certain and sure. We must be open to God’s Holy Spirit in scripture, tradition and shared experience and right reasoning.

Notions of what is right and what is pure continue to influence religious debate in our day. The notion of religious purity may concern notions of what are appropriate and what are not appropriate expressions of sexuality, for example. It may also concern various practices and ways of behaviour quite apart from sexual behaviour which continue to preoccupy religious people even in today’s world.

In Old Testament times, the notion of purity was very often tied up with not worshiping idols or not partaking in the sacrifices or rituals of others as well as abstaining from various foods as well as keeping away from impure things like persons afflicted with leprosy or not touching dead bodies, etc.

In the gospels we hear about the Pharisees, the scribes and the doctors of the law snooping around and watching to observe and catch out the disciples of Jesus in some infringement of their religious codes. Their focus was on purity, exclusion and censor.  Religion, for them, was about staying on the right side of God by adhering to the traditions, regulations and understandings of the elders. Jesus, in one salvo, dispels their claims and criticisms by invoking the solid tradition of the prophets and Isaiah, in particular, who abhorred a religion of formalism and external compliance but lacked the core of compassion, decency and honesty.

It would be all too easy to read this passage of Mark and, indeed, the entire gospels as a confrontation between Jesus, the Messiah, and the old Jewish religion complete with legalism and particularism.  The actual situation is more complex as Christianity emerged from within the Jewish faith. The problem today, as when these gospels were written, is not in the detail of the laws as much as in the order of importance beginning with the simple but overwhelming truth that God is love and on this very same love which requires us to love our neighbour hangs ‘all the law and the prophets’ (Matthew 22:40).

It is worth recalling what the passage of Isaiah quoted by Jesus says:

The Lord said: Because these people draw near with their mouths and honour me with their lips, while their hearts are far from me, and their worship of me is a human commandment learned by rote. Isaiah 29:13

Pretty damning then; pretty damning now? What do you think?

In the upside-down and outside-in world of false religion, God is placed at the service of human ideology and notions. This ideology becomes god in a way that mocks the very idea of the living God-who-is-love.  Outer compliance becomes the test of faith and fidelity while the inner heart is ‘full of dead men’s bones’. Later in the gospel of Matthew Jesus tells us (Matt 23:27):

Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which on the outside look beautiful, but inside they are full of the bones of the dead and of all kinds of filth.

The things that defile us come from within and Jesus gives a non-exhaustive list of examples (v21-22):

…..fornication, theft, murder, adultery, avarice, wickedness, deceit, licentiousness, envy, slander, pride, folly…..

Take slander.  How often are people slandered in conversations – even ordinary every-day conversations? How often we join in especially when it comes to public figures whom we don’t even know or have never met face to face. To refer to someone as a ‘traitor’ or having betrayed a cause or a relationship carries a huge burden of responsibility on our part because we put ourselves in the seat of God. Thankfully God is not anywhere near the merciless judges that we can sometimes be – confident in our own correctness and convinced about others on the basis of the most partial of evidence and oblivious to what it might be like to really ‘walk in the shoes of another’.

Down through the ages, the very mindset criticised by Jesus has been widespread in the various Christian churches. Under guise of correctness and doctrinal purity, some were hounded, persecuted, excluded, ridiculed, judged and put outside the camp of the saved. Much cruelty was, and is, practiced in the name of religion and, sadly, in the name of Christ.

Were there intelligent life on Mars and were a Martian to arrive on earth in 2018, ‘it’ might be forgiven for thinking that the main concern of religious persons – many Christians certainly being no exception – is sex.  In the recent decades more controversies, splits, expulsions, silencings, dissenting publications, resolutions, instructions and more besides have been generated by sex and things to do with sex.  At least, nowadays, Christians no longer kill each other over doctrines to do with the role of faith and good works. Rather, instead, we squabble over sex.

Now, the areas of sexuality, intimacy, commitment, marriage and family are vital parts of human living and it would be altogether astonishing if the bible had nothing to say about these matters and how lives can and should be formed to bring glory to God and well-being to his people (the two being entirely mutually reinforcing). It has much to say about these matters and we should hear, pray and study what it is that is said, across the Bible, about sex, marriage and inter-personal relationships.  Indeed, stable, loving and committed relationships – of which marriage is the ideal – are a key foundation of personal, familial and societal well-being and cohesion.

However, there is more to living, and right living at that, than just the mechanics of sex – important and vital as that is to live in accordance with God’s will in every area of life. 

If one thing is astonishing about religious controversy in the early 21^st Century it is how much attention is given sex compared to other matters such as the great social injustices of our day – environmental destruction, poverty, racism, wars, oppression as well as a denial of all sorts of human rights.  Of course, churches and Christians are often to the fore in speaking about these wider social and ecological matters and seeking change as well as being to the fore in directly tackling these problems. However, I suggest that there is still an imbalance when it comes to public discourse.

For too many people, fear is the guiding force of their religious observance. It is a question of fear of punishment, fear of disgrace, fear of the road not taken and the risk not embraced.

We would do well to listen again and understand (verse 14).