Scripture Text (NRSV)
9:38 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."
9:39 But Jesus said, "Do not stop him; for no one who does a deed of
power in my name will be able soon afterward to speak evil of me.
9:40 Whoever is not against us is for us.
9:41 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.
9:42 "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.
9:43 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.
9:45 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.
9:47 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,
9:48 where their worm never dies, and the fire is never quenched.
9:49 "For everyone will be salted with fire.
9:50 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."
Comments:
9:42 "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.
"little ones" It seems like this term would speak about those who are
just beginning a journey in faith. Ones of small infant faith, no
matter what the age.
I think you could make a case for that. Jesus had just been speaking
about "being first/last." He immediately talks about welcoming "one
such child." Later, in 10:13-16, he talks about the kingdom belonging
to children and whomever doesn't receive the kingdom *as* a little
child, etc."
I've always felt that receiving the kingdom "*as* a little child,"
really means "in the manner of...;" i.e. fully trusting, open, etc.
So, yes, I think you could easily make a case that Jesus' words in
9:42 can refer to infant believers.
Dan in AK
I think this passage must tie in w/ your are the salt of the earth. We
must bring a certain excitement to our lives, we must flavor the world
we live in w/ Christ himself. How do we do that? How do we encourage
others to do it? ......just looking ahead.....and thinking
This is a bit of a troubling passage. The maiming issue is tough! I'm
not sure what to do with the idea of maiming oneself. I have decided
to focus on the positive position of Jesus (cf. vs. 40.)
I find it interesting how we often define our friends in the negative.
Too often we seem to say, "if you're not for me...." instead of taking
note of others' work based as Jesus did.
Isn't it interesting the juxapositioning of water in vs 41 and salt in
vs. 50 and with fire in vss 43ff?
Because of several reasons, we are using this text a week early, so I
do not get the benefit of your posts this week.
Good luck to you all
Steve in NC
Wouldn't you have loved the opportunity to ask Jesus what he meant by
this? Was he being literal? (I tend to think not, mostly because he
was so rarely literal...) Why those specific body parts and not, say,
the mouth? Why is there an unquenchable fire at all? Why do some seem
to receive grace and not others? Yes, I've worked out some answers to
these questions over time (some of which have changed...) ... but I'd
still like to ask Jesus what he had in mind.
pondering ...
Squeeze
A little early reading on this text has told me this much: the lopping
off of body parts refers to being willing to sacrifice anything that
gets in our way to God. If, for example, our best friend is a
stumbling block to our relationship with God and keeps us from
following Jesus, it is better to cut off the friendship, hard as that
is to do. Jesus did say at another point that families would be
divided over him........and also that we cannot serve two masters.
Better to choose the Master and find eternal life.
And all my sources agree with the idea of "little ones" being new
believers, such as the disciples themselves. The Jewish authorities
had rejected Jesus, but the people - at least at this point - were
welcoming. Some were even trying to help his ministry, much to the
consternation of John and the rest.
I think, right now anyway, that I'm going to concentrate on the
"whoever is not against us is for us" concept. It is something that
needs to be talked about in this congregation. There is some measure
of distain for non-Protestants felt here, which I find detrimental to
the Kingdom. As I have stated before, there is also distain felt by
the Literal Biblers for the Spirit of the Texters. Whoever is not
against us is with us, folks! There are too many walls that divide us!
Our zeal for the Kingdom is getting watered down (de-salted?) by all
these little side issues. We will be of no value to anyone unless and
until we get back in line as one of the "little ones" who just want to
follow and help serve in the name of Jesus Christ.
I could certainly have used you all in my pulpit this week. I gave a
weak sermon, even though I had lots of material to work with. Poor
planning of my time. Oh well......
KyHoosierCat
Me again. I am reminded of the situation my mother faced as a young
bride. My father had indicated to her an interest in the Christian
faith and attending church while they were dating and while they were
engaged. He used to walk to her home every Sunday morning to escort
Mom and Grandma to Church. Once they were married, Mom said to Dad one
Sunday morning "Hurry up or we'll be late for Church." My dad replied
he wasn't going, didn't intend to go back, thought church and religion
were bunk and always had. Mom was flabbergasted and didn't know what
to do. Finally, she gathered up her backbone and announced to him "You
can do whatever you want, but you will not - NOT - interfere with my
church attendance or any practice of my faith. If there are children
of this marriage, you will not interfere with their CE or church
experiences. If you do, you will be a divorced man. Is that clear?" It
was clear. We were raised in church by a mighty determined disciple of
Christ while our dad sat home and did whatever......he never once
suggested alternate activities on Sunday mornings or evenings. It was
a tough call for my Mom, I'm sure, but she felt her very first calling
was to be faithful to God, then to her husband....to the point of
actually being willing to sacrifice the latter for the sake of the
former. "If your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off......."
KHC
KyHoosierCat- Take heart, a weak sermon has it moments! Cut yourself
some slack. I was off lectionary this last week. It is good to be
back. Nancy-Wi
KY,
Relax, a weak sermon only gives the Holy Spirit free reign. I have had
many a weak sermons. I even began one such sermon one day with the "if
you get anything today it has nothing to do with me." It was amazing
what they heard, cause I am not sure I said any of the things they
said. Faith my dear. Someone heard God's word. God's grace will
prevail
tammy in texas
Salted with fire... I put out many fires with salt. ( pretty lousy
cook since seminary).. But what kind of fire are we salted with
here... Maybe the Holy Spirit? or with challenges... this scripture
says to me that being a Christian isn't the easy life, but a rich
fullfilling life. The following line makes more sense, if the Holy
Spirit abides in us as salt. Nancy-Wi
In v 38-39 it seems to say that it doesn't matter what name is above
the church door - what matters is in the heart. v40-41 says that what
is in the heart is service unto others in the name of Jesus. I agree
that v42 is speaking to young believers. I know some believers that
though they have been in the faith for a while they are still young -
they haven't done much growing. v43-48 - Jesus seems to be telling the
'little ones' what could be a stumbling block - "If your hand -
relating to the things that you do that are not according to Jesus'
teachigns. "If your foot - the places that you go that are not
according to Jesus' teachings. "IF your eye - the things that we see -
watch - read etc.. that are not according to Jesus' teachings. All
things that others can place before you OR you place before yourself
as stumbling blocks. I like the idea of being salted by the fire of
the Holy Spirit to go out into the world with the name of Jesus to
serve & welcome (last weeks text) Just some early thoughts mzinwv
The congregation I serve has great people, but also a history of
depending on the pastors to do most of the ministry. A speaker this
past week pointed out that often the pastors are the "cork in the
bottle" that prevent people from really living out their calling as
Christians. Could it be that we as pastors are often the disciples,
jealously guarding the work of ministry, and that Jesus is asking us
here to see that many of the people are already doing deeds of power
and that more would do so if we do not discourage them? Is there a way
to help people see that it would be far better for the "controllers"
in the church to cut their hands off than to keep controlling
(dictating that only pastors do ministry)? KB in WA
The congregation I serve has great people, but also a history of
depending on the pastors to do most of the ministry. A speaker this
past week pointed out that often the pastors are the "cork in the
bottle" that prevent people from really living out their calling as
Christians. Could it be that we as pastors are often the disciples,
jealously guarding the work of ministry, and that Jesus is asking us
here to see that many of the people are already doing deeds of power
and that more would do so if we do not discourage them? Is there a way
to help people see that it would be far better for the "controllers"
in the church to cut their hands off than to keep controlling
(dictating that only pastors do ministry)? KB in WA
I was going to preach the Mark text this week from the angle of
serving Christ with single mindedness, but in rereading it this week,
it seems to me that much of it is about avoiding hell. This makes me
uncomfortable, because I have never preached a hellfire and brimstone
sermon. I have approached preaching with the belief that most people
live in or near hell (unawareness of the presence of God) and they
really need to be offered glimpses of Heaven. Still, I want to be
truthful about the text. Is anyone else struggling with how to address
this point? Preaching in Arkansas
Thanks KyHoosierCat for your comments. I'm in need of some
illustrations in support of ecumenicism.
Last week I took a partial break from the lectionary. Used Psalm 1 one
living the good & Godly life, but my main text was in response to a
nearby church marquee that quoted the Scripture, "Homosexuals will not
inherit the kingdom". While that was in the Bible sure enough, I have
a different view of making it the focus of a church's ministry. I
responded with my own marquee paraphrasing Romans 8:39 "Nothing can
separate us from the love of God". I decried people judging folks who
need to be in church and proposed letting the Scripture and the Holy
Spirit do the convicting. I went into the futility of any of us being
able to live a totally pure life, how we could never measure up to
Psalm 1. Then I explored Romans 8:35-39 for the counterpoint of Jesus'
grace.
All that being said as a preamble to the fact that I especially need
to, in the interest of balance, explore this week the value of other
Christians' teachings, even when they disagree with our own. My "unfavored"
church had a view that was Biblically supported. Therefore, I can
embrace their pastor and members as brothers and sisters in Christ,
even as we disagree on points of interpretation or application of the
Scriptures.
Looking forward to reading the posts this week.
Peace & blessings
Rich in Bama
Early Monday ramblings, I thought about putting this with esther...
and like the salted with fire thing...All last week That Garth Brooks
tune, Standing outside the Fire was in my head, ever have a song do
you that way LOL. I think the Lyrics fit this passage. Are we standing
outside the fire, doing nothing, afraid of Holy Spirit, because it
means you got to give up a little control, we dont like that do we?
Esther got in the Fire, God blessed her and used her... The Outsider
got in the fire, and Jesus used him/her. Clerically Blonde in West
Ohio
In verse 39, Jesus says that "no one who does a deed of power in my
name will be able soon afterward to speak evil of me." The man was
casting out demons in Jesus' name. In Acts 19:13-17, the 7 sons of
Sceva try to cast out a demon using Jesus' name ("In the name of
Jesus, whom Paul preaches") with quite different results. In Acts,
they are using the name of Jesus as a magical talisman - no faith
required, the man that Paul preaches. They were, in a way, already
speaking evil of Jesus by the way they used his name. Someone doing a
deed "in" Jesus' name (giving him the honor?) would have at least some
faith in the person of Christ and would not be able to speak evil of
him. Just some thought early in the week on who is with us and who
says they are with us. Mike in Soddy Daisy, TN
Well, we do know that in some cultures even today, punishment for
theft is the surgical removal of the offending hand. Twice caught? The
other hand goes. Third time caught? Off with the head. Could it be
that this teaching is not exclusively Christian, and that it was a
common teaching in many different places? Some DID and still DO take
it literally. Just thinking aloud here.....
KHC
Preaching in Arkansas, this may be a dumb idea, but would you consider
a sermon based on the premise that if causing someone to sin is an
abomination, then being a guide who leads people away from sinfulness
- removes the stumbling blocks - is praiseworthy? If using your hand
(foot, eyes, whatever) to perpetuate evil is utterly distained by God,
then using your hand (foot, eyes, whatever) to perpetuate the good is
absolutely pleasing to God? Not that good works win our salvation, of
course. But, doing what is pleasing to God is certainly something
Jesus would approve, indeed encourages us to do. And frankly, to my
mind, that perspective fits into this text a whole lot more smoothly
than all this reference to hell and unquenchable fires. Jesus is
talking about giving a cup of cold water to someone, then launches
into talk of millstones around necks? I'm feeling some real sympathy
for the confused and slow-witted disciples!
May be simplistic thinking, but that's me! And, I'm one of those who
sees the spirit of the text rather than the literal text, so I may
read something into it that nobody else feels is in there. That's a
hurdle I fall over fairly often.
KyHoosierCat
I am intrigued by the concern (jealousy???) of the disciples with
those who aren't part of their inner circle doing ministry in Christ's
name. Sometimes, it is hard for us clergy types, as well as our
congregations to see other churches, especially those who see and do
things differently) attracting more folks than we do. It is easy to
criticize them for watering down the gospel or for using gimmicks.
What would happen if we could rejoice in their "successes" and
celebrate them as co-workers in God's kingdom who are simply caring
for a different kind of flock? On the suggestion of a colleague, I am
going to visit with neighborhood pastors this week and ask them what
is exciting in their congregations and celebrate that with them and
our congregation this Sunday. Then, I'm going to celebrate what we are
doing and that together, the Church of Christ does have something to
say and something to offer to our community.
Tom in TN
Tom in TN, I think that's wonderful. It really brings some "meat" to
the last half of verse 50: Have salt in yourselves and be at peace
with one another. I understand "having salt" means to be in
fellowship. Bread served with salt was/is an eastern custom that
showed great hospitality and even bonds of friendship. (in others it
is serving milk and honey, I'm told.) You will be having salt in
yourself when you do this. Bravo!
General stuff: I also understand from my current pile of reading that
being "salted" with fire refers to the Jewish sacrifices. Salt
purified the flesh of the animal, making it more acceptable to God.
So, I guess this is saying we will be purified, cleansed, by fire??
This image takes me to Malachi 3 ("For he is like a refiner's fire")
where the sons of Levi will be purified, cleansed of their sins and
made more fit for their work. Not killed, not left in the flames
forever, but purified by "fire". Are the fires of Malachi and Mark
related, or are they separate things?
There are probably 20 sermons to be written from this text.
KHC
I feel stupid now. I didn't read the James passage before I suggested
a reversal of the text to Preaching in Arkansas. James does that very
thing at the close of the current Epistle text. Sorry about that!
KHC,
You are right there are cultures that still practice this. In
Australian indigenous cultures it has long been an established
cultural practice to take a life for a life. Thankfully, (I think)
English law now precedes tribal law, but there are still strong
demands for payback.
In Jewish history it was known as the law of "lex talionis". "An eye
for an eye, tooth for a tooth, etc" And in a way this was the first
attempt at a civilised way to end disputes. Before that it was
anything goes.
The difference in the way it is presented in Mark is that it is
directed back to the individual person to do it to themselves. Jesus
was taking the law of "lex talionis" and indicating that it really
only works when a person takes responsibility for their own
requirements in relationships.
I think he was saying, "We are to fulfil the law by ensuring we never
get into a position, where they have to cut one of our hands off, or
pluck one of our eyes out. We are to not allow ourselves to become an
obstacle to anyone receiving the grace of God. It is a discipline to
be able to do these things.
Still a lot of work to do on this I know, but its a start. Thanks for
the early input.
Regards,
KGB in Aussie
KGB in Aussie,
I like your take on self-discipline, leading to the possibility that
we can all enter heaven even with all our appendages intact because we
chose to not use them for sinful endeavors.
However, another thought about Lex Talionis. That was, as you said, an
EYE for an EYE.... not a hand for the wallet you stole. Lex Talionis
would say "You stole my TV, I can steal your TV." This idea of cutting
body parts off seems to me to be a new form of law beyond the Lex
Talionis. It does, however, seem to be more lenient that the other OT
law - death for a wide array of sins.
Small quibble. But like I said, I really like your understanding of
self control. Paul would fully agree with you, too! I think self
control is the final in his list of Fruits of the Spirit, isn't it?
KHC
The metaphors and hyperboles come rushing at us in this gospel. It is
difficult even to call it gospel. Cut it off? Good news? So many texts
in these autumn days seem so hard to preach to a people whom we are
just thankful are still showing up. So many are searching for a word
that comforts and yet here is a word that cuts into our dulled
sensibilities. It is almost as if Jesus believes that this is all a
matter of life and death. And so it is.
We are not simply learning about body parts here; we are hearing of
the dangers of keeping someone from a relationship with our Lord. We
are hearing a warning to the organized faithful of being too organized
or rigid. We are led to wonder whom we might be keeping from speaking
or enacting God's word outside the camp or even in our midst. Are we a
living, organic body of Christ or a calcified institution more jealous
for our status positions than jealous for the gospel? Have we cut
others off from the gift of God's embrace?
We encounter the passion and strong will of Jesus to open up
categories of "us and them" so that our loyalties and our imaginations
and actions instead seek to join the journey through death to life. On
this day the word points to those providing cups of water to the
thirsty and to those speaking and acting for life outside of camp or
even out of turn. It even commends risking limb and breath so that
others may see, walk, hear, and taste that God is good - all for the
sake of God's will for life and for a future of shalom.
This week's narrative begins with a continuation of disciples'
squabbling. The exorcism that the disciples had been unable to do (Mk
9.17-18) is done by an anonymous exorcist who invokes the name of
Jesus as the source of power behind the deed. Instead of celebrating
the healing and the potential new partnership with this healer,
however, the disciples react negatively. They say, "He was not
following us." Note that last word carefully. It is not "you," as in
he was not following Jesus, but "us." He is not one of the twelve, not
of the inner circle.
How does Jesus respond? "Whoever is not against us is for us." In
stark contrast to the disciple's use of the word "us," Jesus uses the
language of "us" as a way of opening community, not closing it.
Partnership in the gospel is not about turf or cliques, but actions
that free people from powers and conditions that deny them full
participation in life.
The warning in verse 42 has to do with placing a "stumbling block" (in
Greek, skandalon from which we get the word scandal) before "little
ones." Consider the implications of the disciples' attitude about the
healing if the term "little ones" refers to those new to the faith.
Here is this person who has just performed a powerful act of healing
in the name of Jesus. The person is, in word and deed, a follower of
Jesus. Would that person or those witnessing the events join the
community of disciples, given their attitude? Would you join a church
that tried to stop you from doing what you felt Jesus called you to
do? How do our communities today send messages similar to the attitude
of the disciples to those who might wish to join us?
From verse 43 onward, the passage in Mark takes difficult turns that
defy simplistic or literal interpretations. One note is clearly
sounded: causes of stumbling in one's faith walk are to be avoided at
all costs. In keeping with a Semitic style of teaching that employs
hyperbole (as in camels that go through the eyes of needles), Jesus
uses extreme metaphors to underscore that nothing should stand in the
way of one's discipleship.
In the final verses, the imagery of salt is invoked in association
with being at peace with one another. The use of salt as a
preservative may play into this association, since peace would help
"preserve" community that seeks to hold diverse persons and groups
together in a single body. Salt was also used in meals that sealed
covenants in the Hebrew Scriptures. "Whoever is not against us is for
us" strikes a covenant in need of ratification whenever the temptation
is to draw lines tighter than Jesus would.
In the time Mark wrote, persecution may have encouraged a "tightening
of the circle" of community and fostered uncertainty about who could
be trusted. Informers could be dangerous. This context adds a new
dimension to the language of "cutting off" and "tearing out." It seems
to have been a very complicated matter to determine who was for and
who was against the community. Yet, to his time and to ours, Mark
recalls Jesus' urgings toward a hospitable community, where "whoever
is not against us is for us" opens doors to partnerships in the
gospel's works.
Dear Tom in TN- I like the idea of thanking God for churches that are
growing and receiving new members- but what concerns me is that many
of these same churches are teaching judgment.
My best friend told me a few years ago that "you must have
misunderstood God becasue God doesn't call women to be pastors". My
youth who are exposed to all sorts of Christianity on the internet ask
me "My friends say that the BIble woman are not supposed to be
pastors".
This passage is about opening doors, yes? Not pushing away people so
they can't have relationship- does this mean the homosexuals too? I am
willing to say yes- but many are willing to say no--
just thinking alous
Michele in PA
I'm working from the premise of Esther as well - She takes up
Mordechi's challenge to 'do something' about a bad situation. Jesus
challenges us to 'do something' about the things that would keep us
from Him/the Kingdom......
Michele in PA, I'll sure let Tom in TN speak for himself, but I wanted
to reply, too. I fully agree there are aspects of "other" Christian
churches' teachings I do not agree with. Hoo boy, are there ever! But
this passage does not call us to agree with them, only to accept all
ministries as valid ministries if they are carried out in the name of
Jesus Christ. It is apparent whoever is telling you that you
misunderstood your calling does not interpret Scripture as we do, but
we cannot completely dismiss their Church as "against Christ", either.
I deal with a similar problem in my own congregation with a handful of
members all upset if I don't teach the children that Noah was a real
man who singlehandedly built a seaworthy craft as big as a factory
building. They think that makes me a pagan, and therefore dismiss
anything else I have to say as equally anti-God.
There is much we could pick apart in each other's denominations, but
the whole reason this DPS Forum works is because we are all focused on
the same thing - bringing Jesus Christ once again into the hearts of
our members. We don't ask if you have a bishop or are autonomous, if
you kneel to pray, how you feel about gays in leadership positions, or
anything else that would rend us into fragments. We celebrate our
common search for making the Divine comprehensible to our seeking
members. So too, I think the search to discover what Things of the
Kingdom are happening in neighboring churches underscores the unity we
have in Jesus Christ, in spite of our differences.
October 5th is World Communion Sunday and, at least in the PC(USA), it
is also Peacemaking Sunday. I see this passage and Tom in TN's plan as
excellent lead-ups to this day of celebrating community.
I am a woman of opinion, and voice it even when not asked. I mean no
offense in any of my posts.
KyHoosierCat
The Episcopal Church's lectionary ends this lesson at v. 48.... So, of
course, I'm drawn to v. 49. What do you suppose it means that
"everyone will be salted with fire"?
Wondering as I wander....
Eric in OH
I plan to preach on salt losing its saltiness. A member of the
congregation has requested special prayers (she has just returned from
Ghana where her mother was killed last summer in a car accident). I
would like to preach on salt as a healing agent--the salt in our tears
heals the wounds in our hearts. As a community we are called to
respond to the tears of one another (very tough for the staunch, "keep
an upper tight lip" folks in my denomination. In his way, I hope to
tie the sermon into the James text. However, I haven't been able to
find very much about the verse "if salt loses its saltiness..." Can
anyone point me toward some on-line resources, story ideas, etc.?
Thanks, Roberta
My Senior quote in my High School yearbook was "A good laugh is a dry
cleaning while a good cry is a wet wash". Thor somebody said that. If
you are interested in his name, I can look it up.
Something I just read about salt is that the Biblical people often
mixed it with sand for food preservation (ugh!) and purification of
sacrifice purposes. So, salt losing its saltiness made sense to the
hearers of Jesus' words. The more sand and the less salt in the mix,
the more worthless it became. It was on its way to becoming the
"chaff", so to speak.
KHC
I have not contributed to the discussion before although I have read
many contributions with interest. In doing some work on this passage I
ran across a piece done by Wm. Williamon that sparked my interest and
then I followed up with other commentaries. Jesus is finishing up his
teaching in Galilee and heading for Jerusalem and the cross (a main
theme in Mark). He talks about "hell" although the Greek term is
Gehenna. Gehenna was a valley outside of Jerusalem that had been the
place where children were sacrificed to the god Molech. King Josiah
had stopped the practice and the valley had become a huge garbage dump
full of pestilence and where fires burned continually in an effort to
keep the refuse contained. When Jesus said Gehenna the disciples would
have instantly pictured what he was talking about. Soon Jesus would
face the cross. In our Apostles Creed we talk of Jesus descending into
hell. As Willimon suggests Jesus was going to face his own entrance
into the valley of Gehenna. It kind of puts a new light on the
statement, "We will all be salted with fire." KT in IA
Can you imagine eating salt only on Sunday? Christianity is not a one
day a week thing either.
Hello all,
I just returned from a wonderful Pastor's Prayer Retreat in the
Cascade Mountains on Washington. It was a wonderful time of rest,
reflection, prayer, lectio Divina, A labyrinth at all times of the
day, including darkness, where the stars looked like we could reach
out and touch them, and we saw Mars. It was great! I feel uplifted for
another week of ministry! On my way home, I was going over all that we
talked about and listening to one of my favorite CD's, Revival in
Belfast, and listened to this one song that I think speaks to this
passage. "When It's All Been Said And Done."
When it's all been said and done, There is just one thing that
matters, Did I do my best to live for truth, Did I live my life for
you.
When it's all been said and done, All my treasures will mean nothing,
Only what I've done for love's reward, Will stand the test of time.
Lord, your mercy is so great, That you look beyond our weakness, And
find purest gold in mirey clay, making sinners into saints.
I will always sing your praise, Here on earth and ever after, For
you've shown me what is my true home, When it's all been said and
done, You're my life, when life is done.
When it's all been said and done, There is just one thing that
matters, Did I do my best to live for truth? Did I live my life for
you? Lord, I live my life for you.
Robin Mark
Add some Ullian pipes and pennywhistle and you have a gorgeous celtic
song of worship!
Hope it speaks to you as it has to me.
Susan in Wa.
"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,..."
I find it awkward to read this as one of my eyes has already been
removed! It happened a matter of days before I arrived at my present
appointment, thus for 8 years the folks of the church know that I only
have one eye. The other one is plastic. The first time I read this,
some people said they felt uncomfortable as the lesson unfolded. One
person wanted to know if I saw this as my punishment for some sin I
had committed. I assured him that I did not see it that way. But I
understand the lesson differently. I am extreemly thankful for the eye
that I still have. In reflecting on this passage, I can say that I may
select what I look at, and what beauty I see. I have a vital
appreciation for vision and also know that even this passive
activity(seeing)can be abused. What we do matters! How we interact
with life matters. When we use our basic gifts to bring harm to
others, damage is done. In my seeing I give glory to God, especially I
travel the parish by the sea.
A W-G rocky coast Me.
I am afraid I have to admit I have participated in criticizing
hardnosers (as KyHoosierCat called them). I've often compared them to
the Pharisees of the Gospel. (I am part of a liberal denomination in
Canada).
It hasn't been one-sided either. The minister of the Pentecostal
church greeted me last year at the ministerial meeting not with
"Hello, how are you?" but with criticism of my denomination's ministry
Yet in the last few months we have been gifted by amazing financial
generosity from the Pentecostal Church. Now I'm reading this passage
about whoever is for us is not against us. I'm sure God is reminding
me again not to be judgmental, and to see the good that every
Christian accomplishes. I have to stop being critical of hardnosers.
One other thing about this passsage. This business of lopping off
limbs is similar to the Koran injunctive where one is advised to lop
the hand off the offender so that he can be saved. In the Bible
however, the injunctive is personal. We're not told to lop off
anyone's hands but our own. We are to be judgemental of ourselves, but
NOT of others.
I'm late (funeral out of town) this week - so I'm just now getting
through the posts.
HoosierCat wrote for example, our best friend is a stumbling block to
our relationship with God and keeps us from following Jesus, it is
better to cut off the friendship, hard as that is to do. Jesus did say
at another point that families would be divided over him........and
also that we cannot serve two masters. Better to choose the Master and
find eternal life.
HoosierCat, you surprise me! Seems like a big scramble to get
ourselves into Heaven.
Then again, I have a friendship where I don't feel free to fully
demonstrate my beliefs for fear of offending her. Perhaps you're
suggesting that, to apply your comments to my own case, I would do
well to decide whether her touchiness is actually a stumbling block to
my own faith, or an entrypoint for witnessing to her.
BTW - I tried to email you and it was delayed and then eventually
returned to me.
Sally in GA
KB in WA -
As a high-energy person with a great deal of creativity and gumption
who is serving in a not-so-creative, staid, and low-energy church, I
tell you this story:
Since I'm so high-energy and will get bored without enough to do, I
used to attend BOTH UMW circle meetings. Of course, when various
subjects came up, I found ways to do ministry - and met great
resistance! I was invited to, and attended, the UMW executive board
meetings, and again found plenty of things our UMW could do, and again
was met with resistance - and the phrase, "Sally, you're being
unrealistic about what we can do, and the church shouldn't grow ont he
backs of women."
So, I stopped attending the one UMW circle, and the only reason I
attend the other one is because there's only a few of them still alive
and it's kind of a boost for them. Anyways, I cited needing "family
time," and it caused some feelings of not really hostility, but not
really good feelings, either. Invited some sarcastic comments, and the
like.
It was ~hard~ for me, because I'm bored without enough to do, but I
stuck to my guns and sat on my hands, and bit a hole through my
tongue, and walked away when I could, and feigned ignorance when asked
for advice - and that particular UMW circle is KICKING BUTT this
month!!!! It took a whole year, but they've started taking
initiative!!!! If I would have suggested a mere fraction of the things
they've got planned in October, it would have been "unrealistic," they
would have been "too old," and the like. You get the idea.
If your right hand - and my energy and creativity in ministry is my
right hand - causes a stumbling block, cut it off.
Sally in GA
Lex Talionis presumes that the only reason human beings behave
themselves is to avoid punishment.
I do believe Jesus is asking for more here.
Me again - still getting through the posts. Sally in gA
I, too, am getting a late start this week, pastor's conference...
Glad to see our friend has returned, welcome back!
I'm seeing in this text something a little different. Maybe Jesus is
using a kind of psychology here when he says, "If your hand causes you
to stumble, cut it off... And if your foot causes you to stumble, cut
it off...7 And if your eye causes you to stumble, tear it out..."
Maybe he's trying to get us past our tendency to make excuses, to
blame someone or something else for our sin.
Remember, "The devil made me do it"?
"It wasn't really me who sinned, it was my hand, I just couldn't
control it. Or maybe it was my eye that drove me to commit adultery,
or my feet that that just walked right in when I knew I should stay
away."
Maybe Jesus is saying, "Come on, people, your sin is your own, and if
you insist on blaming your hand, then cut off that hand, and see what
life will be like without it, see if you are free from sin then."
Don't think I could get a whole sermon out of that, but it might make
a part...
Michelle
KHC, I appreciate your comments on my dilemma, and I am going to
benefit from them. They have merit on their own, but their benefit to
me is in the wording you chose, and how that wording might help me
acknowledge the references to hell. I am not going to talk about Hell,
per se, but I am going to treat these references to Hell in the way
you put it, and say that "to perpetuate evil is utterly disdained by
God."I think that captures for me what Jesus was really getting at and
will allow me to focus on "how to be holy" rather than on "how to stay
out of hell". Preaching in Arkansas
Just a little bit on being salted with fire...
Salt is used not only as a flavoring, but as a preservative. Either
one would fit here, we are flavored by our sufferings, we are
preserved through them as well. The fire could refer to our
sufferings...
Or to the Holy Spirit, which fits better if you go on through to verse
50 as well.
Sometimes, it is necessary to read further than our lectionaries
prescribe, as the Spirit leads!
Michelle
Anonymous - oh, don'tcha just hate that?
It happens to me, too - and add to it folks like the guy who wouldn't
even shake my hand as I held it out when introduced to him, but
greeted me with, "So, you think you're a preacher, huh?" Then there
was the time when ~the look~ came over another preacher's face when I
was introduced and I expected ~the question~ and was surprised instead
with this question, "are you educated?" the clear implication was that
education is a stumbling block to ministry.
Sally - again, and I'm outta here, I promise! I had a lot of catching
up to do. :-)
Hi Sally in GA,
Hmmmm....I've received several e-mails from DPSers since posting my
address......don't know why yours was returned. kyhoosiercat@hotmail.com
Try again when you can, please. I'd love to hear from you.
I've moved from that initial response to the text to my predominant
thought - even if I don't much care for what others may do in the name
of Christ, they may very well have a function in the overall scheme of
God's Kingdom. It is not our place to cast aspersions on the beliefs
or practices of other Christians, if what they do is done with a
sincere desire to follow their understanding of Christ. I cannot begin
to tell you how very humbling this is to me. I will be struggling to
get the words out this Sunday not because I don't believe them, but
because they speak DIRECTLY to my heart and my self-satisfied egotism
that whispers in my ear that since I'm "educated in these things", I
hold the only - the correct - view. OUCH. But the acid test will be
how do I begin to put this humbling lesson into practice after Sunday
is over? I fear I will fail and will fall right back into my "Me vs.
Them" mentality. Will I continue to consider the Bible Literalists as
"naive"? Will I still feel compelled to "explain things" to them?
Double OUCH. Am I preaching this text this way for the right reasons?
It's a whirlwind of thoughts.....
KHC
Thanks "mzinwv" for your comments on feet, hand, and eye. That has my
mind churning... Sin is a reality in the life of all believer's - new
and old. Any discussion/preaching on this would benefit all Xtns. And
I really appreciate the comments of KGB to round this discussion
out... Aren't we really only capable of changing our own behavior -
not someone else's?
"Preaching in Arkansas" - I agree. I've always thought that hell is
living out of relationship with God. Many in my church believe
otherwise. In fact, not too many weeks ago one group got to discussing
whether Jesus "descended into hell" (as the Creed once phrased it).
One person felt very outnumbered because she believed Jesus had gone
to free the captives there. It seems other in the discussion were
somehow equating Jesus going to hell meaning that he had sinned... Oye!
More later. Amma in FL
"You have to be pretty clumsy for your hand or your eye to cause you
to stumble. jw in tx"
Thanks for the laugh. I was hiking last week on the north shore of
Lake Superior in MN. I stumbled because my eyes were not on the path.
Sometime I stumbled because my hand was also in the wrong place and
caught on a tree that somehow leaped out of the forest into my way...
Stumbling is often a matter of inattentiveness to your way... Nancy-Wi
Have we cut others off from the gift of God's embrace?
Good Question- I would say a resounding yes! The embrace of God is
felt on many levels, personel and corporate... I also believe that
some use others as an excuse to refuse to embrace God for what ever
rationale.. that's all for now folks. Nancy-Wi
Susan in Wa. Thanks for the song. I hope I can find a CD with it on.
I have been working with Spiritual Wisdom (two weeks ago) last week
with living the light. This week I am going to tie it together with
how to live the life using this passage.
I have been using the statement "to end both sermons"; "You just may
be the Best Christian Someone met this week." I am using so far(!) the
gifts are tools to be used for the purpose of living out Christ.
The other quote I have used in both sermons is from from Brennan
Mannings who wrote the prelude to dc talk's "Jesus Freak" CD, in which
he says, "The greatest single cause of atheism in the world today is
Christians who profess Jesus with their lips, then walk out the door
and deny him with their lifestyles. That is what an unbelieving world
simply finds unbelievable."
A not so gentle hint as to how not to shine the light. Nancy-Wi
(feeling a bit chatty today!)
Hello all,
Wow! It's not a good thing to miss a day or two of these discussions!
Between power outages and a looong presbytery meeting yesterday, I've
not been here since Sunday afternoon. So I, too, am catching up --- 22
pages of discussion!
I think my first read has only been solidified into where I'll be
going this week -- the Insiders and the Outsiders. Many of you have
already expressed good solid thoughts, so I won't repeat. Yesterday's
meeting though hit home on it big time. My presbytery is in a huge
debate about a "creative" new church development that is causing quite
a stir. There are various motives behind the stirrers, I fear, and
I've not been here long enough to understand all the dynamics.
But, it was one more place where I felt like we were being the
insiders and trying to keep the outsiders out. And it got hurtful and
nasty on top of all that, so not a satisfying meeting in the least.
Then, at last week's session meeting, we talked about "user donations"
from non-church members for weddings or memorial services in the
Sanctuary. Who is "inside" -- the member? the spouse of a member? the
parent, child, aunt, where does the list go? If we're not going to
hold to the rule, why have one? Ah, a good question.
I admit that this will be difficult to preach for me too (like KHC,
it's speaking way too close to home). I have a tendency to feel that
if I've worked so hard for something, it's hard to see it simply
handed to someone else. Not a nice attribute.
One of my main purposes in going to a seminary not of my denomination
was to hear the diversity and better appreciate it. That was easy.
There are other places where this insider/outsider thing slips in so
softly that I don't even realize it's there, coming out of my mouth or
my heart. Ah, me.
MM in PA
Last week in response to the disciple’s internal question about who
among them was the greatest, I lifted the servant ministry of people
in our congregation who get little glory or recognition. This week in
response to the statement about for and against us I will lift up the
various ministries of other churches in our community and honor them
for the work they do even though the are not “one of us”. I will
probably also expand a bit to honor the good works of those who don’t
even name God. i.e. businesses who support youth programs etc.
I see the stumbling blocks as anything that keeps people from doing
the good that God places on their hearts - A lot of good squelched by
bureaucracy and committees. You have to get approval for this and a
permit for that. How many good ideas in the church are lost in
committee approval?
Steve Hermes, Lander WY
I would agree that we should not judge other churches. I belong to a
denomination which sees unity as its polar star. However, some of
these other and growing churches are very judgmental. They profess
unity, but what they are looking for is uniformity. One example is a
defrocked Church of God pastor who held unity services, claiming a
lack of unity in his community. However, in spite of repeated
invitations both verbal and written, he refused to attend ministerial
meetings. When local pastors did not support his meetings, which were
half over when an article appeared in the local paper, he condemned
them as "unsaved." My most direct personal experience is with pastors
of the Wesleyan (not United Methodist), who say they are for church
unity and then have "secret" prayer meetings and claim unity only in
"holiness." None of these churches celebrate World Wide Communion
Sunday. I am not condemning any of these churches. I affirm their
right to believe as they do and to worship in their own style, but I
don't like being told that I am unsaved or spiritually immature just
because my church is different from theirs. PH in OH
One of my favorite words to describe churches like PH in OH mentions
is "insular". When we feel we are the final bastions of rightness left
in the world, we are afraid that we can be sullied simply by
associating with others. So, we circle our wagons and shoot arrows at
everyone outside the safety zone. We can zing the "outsiders" with
abandon because we are safely tucked inside our truth. It is fear more
than anything else, I think - fear of mixing our pure "salt" with the
"sand" of other beliefs and practices. So, while some of us may see
this text as welcoming others who don't see things as we do, it is
possible that there are those in the Christian community who would
view this text as support for the "keeping it pure by keeping it
separate" philosophy. Just a thought.
KyHoosierCat - who will wind down soon.
Hi all.
Thanks for the thoughts!
Here's my attempt to pour gasoline on the fire of our discussion...
(everybody duck!!)
Does verse 40, "Whoever is not against us is for us," not also apply
to those around us who are not Christian?
Please don't go ballistic!! At least, not yet!
I'm NOT espousing a Universalism which speaks of "all religions being
the same." I'm espousing a universaliam in terms of CS Lewis in Mere
Christianity, Book 2, chapter 1, "The Rival Conceptions of God."
Christians share points of contact with other religious groups, some
similarities which can be shared, some perspectives which we can
proclaim together.
For example, Lewis points out that we ALL believe in some kind of
divinity, upon whom we are dependent. In the face of the atheistic
consumerism by which we are surrounded (and in which we participate!),
standing with those who believe we are dependent might be a very
prophetic witness. Not easy! Not necessarily popular! But just maybe
faithful.
I hope this doesn't come across as trying to "gloss over" differences.
They are real, and need to be addressed with much prayer and grace.
But it strikes me that this might be one more instance of the Reign of
God being bigger, MUCH bigger that we usually assume.
Ok, you can go ballistic now! :-)
Rick in Canada, eh?
I think I too will use this discussion about insiders and outsiders--
this has been a great discussion...
someone asked about the use of salt as a healer- I grew up near the
ocean- and I can remember people saying that going swiming in the
ocean with a wound was the best thing you could for it!(as long as no
sharks around- coastal NH/ME doesn't see many of them)
Peace Michele in PA
Rick in Canada,
Not going ballistic at all! Krister Stendahl who was the Lutheran
Bishop of Sweden and a wonderful theologian actually uses this very
text to support openness to pluralistic understanding of the world. He
says that Christians have too long preached the King and forgotten
about the Kingdom. The mission is to create the Kingdom as God would
have it, not create an earthly world of Chrisitans. And some
non-Christians are much better at working for God's justice than we
Christians are. He goes on to say that if we are all salt, then what
would we have to season? It would not be very good to live in a salt
mine.
We can't let religion get in the way of letting God's will be done on
earth as it is in heaven.
It does usually creep people out though. We have to unravel a lot of
what we have been taught through the years. jw in tx
Hey DPSers!
Great discussion this week! It has been hard for me to concentrate on
this text. The first time I really had to deal with it was when I was
doing CPE in New Hampshire. I was in the Admissions Unit at the New
Hampshire Psychiatric Hospital. I dealt with many sex offenders and
this text was always brought up by them. It was always interesting for
me to have them quote this scripture to me in light of what they had
done to others and themselves. Cutting off that which had caused a
stumbling block for them was always a topic of conversation. Sometimes
the conversation was unreal and sometimes it was disheartening...but
there I was in the midst of it.
I am a bit intrigued with "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." What do you all make of this part of the
passage? For some reason, one not really defined for me right now,
this is tugging at me to spend some time on. Any ideas?
Thanks for all your contributions!
PJ in WI
Salt as a healing agent - very true; and bath salts (vs. oils) are
regaining popularity.
Yet, in v. 50, Jesus asks "if salt has lost its saltiness, how can you
~season~ it?" I'm more inclined to think Jesus is using this analogy
to mean flavor.
Have salt in yourselves and be at peace; have the flavor of Christ.
Sally
Rick in Canada, eh? (love that! Being from a Canadian family....)
Anyway, I'm with you on the problem with narrow thinking. I greatly
respect the fact that all religions are based on the same basic
premises of Deity and social justice. So, in a meager attempt to
introduce my congregants to a glimpse of the other major world
religions, I did a weeknight series on that topic. We covered Judaism,
Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism. I showed where we have similar ideas, where
we differ. They listened, or I thought there were listening. I opened
it up for conversation. The main gist of the response was "They don't
believe in Jesus. They are not saved. What they teach is just wrong."
That was the end of the discussion. No thought to the good that comes
from teachings of the Quran or from the Buddah. A few had trouble with
the Hebrew Canon, if you can imagine that! (My mistake was calling it
the Hebrew Scriptures, not the Old Testament)
OK, I thought, next time we'll do a study of different branches of the
Christian Church. We studied the Quakers, Mormons, Roman Catholicism
and our very close associates, the United Methodists. The only one
that got a passing grade as far as acceptable beliefs and practices
was the UMC. Yet ALL are Christian groups full of people who have made
profession of faith in Jesus and have therefore been saved. So
apparently THAT is NOT the criterion for acceptance either. Nobody
gets in the inner circle unless that person fills some pretty diligent
requirements, and those requirements are whatever we decide they are.
I guess it's that Narrow Gate analogy we've taken to the extreme. Just
who do we think we are, deciding who is and who is not acceptable to
God?
KHC
Nancy in Wi,
Go to Amazon.com and type in Revival in Belfast and it will go
straight to the links for it. I saw one last night for $1.90 or
something like that! There is also a second CD by the same guy about
Healing.You can also try Half.com, through Ebay. They have great
prices.I can't think of the Title right now, even though I have it! (
I should be too young to be so forgetful! LOL) But both are wonderful.
The depth of the words are wonderful.
Susan in Wa.
It seems to me that with all that Jesus has taught the disciples in
the last passages about the Pharisees, that they would quickly
recognize their own actions as somehow Pharisaical. But then, don't we
all do the same thing? Talk about how judgemental the Pharisees are,
and how they miss the boat, and then we get competitive with the
church down the street, for doing things in the new way.
The debate our church is in right now is getting a new hymnal. I guess
a couple of years before I arrived there was a huge hoopla about it,
and so now that the topic has come to the surface again, we are being
warned to not begin the debate. Ironically, the warning is being
issued by the pianist, who happens to severely dislike contemporary
music. Their idea of contemporary music is a folder of songs that I
sang in High School youth group about 30 years ago! But whether the
contemporary music or the hymns are the music of preference in style,
I fail to see why we cannot pay attention to the words, and what they
are saying about our faith. "If it isn't against us, it is for us."
Susan in Wa.
THOUGHTS AND A QUESTION
The readings in Numbers and Mark point to issues which raddle the
walls of the church. It is the issue of scarcity verses abundance. Who
is the Spirit meant for? Is Moses the only one to be anointed? Why is
Joshua so upset. Does he fear that he may be losing some of his power,
authority? Why does John and the disciples complain? Are they the only
ones who can heal in the Messiah's name? Why can't the disciples just
follow Jesus, instead of worrying about whether or not they are being
followed (wow, this is close to home). Is the Spirit only to anoint
Jesus and the Twelve?
Why do we hold on to our place, our power, our authority? Why can't we
share it? Are we afraid there is not enough to go around?
What would happen if we simply said to our people, "hey, you know
what, all I hear from you is complaint after complaint. The organ is
too loud, the church is too cold! No one ever talks about ministry and
mission. I am sick and tired of listening to you. God didn't bring me
here to listen to all your murmuring. What are you really afraid of?
What if the Spirit got loose? What if there was more than you could
ever amagine. Why do we embrace scarcity and not abundance. God wishes
to fill us with all things. You know what, I am going to step back. If
things fall apart, well that will be fine. If things really matter to
you, then you will pick up the slack. Only then will the HOly Spirit
begin to move.
Now for the question:
In the Roman Catholic Church, and in some Anglican churches, salt is
given either at baptism or at confirmation. What is the significance
of the salt, besides "preservation".
Thanks, tom in ga (presently in Linden, Virginia)
Since nobody is posting on the Esther site and I can't either (for
some strange reason), I'll post here in the hopes that someone else is
talking about Esther as well. Actually it ties in to the Mark text
which says, "Whoever is not against us is for us." Esther had to be
more than "not against". She was asked to take a positive stand for
her people.
In my liberal church we have a number of passive Christians who are
"not against" anything. But there are times when we do have to take a
stand. The story of Esther reminds us that evil is real (in the form
of Haaman), and to be passive can mean death. I don't want to apply
this necesarrily to standing against things, fighting terrorists for
example, but rather to standing for something positive, like the cup
of cold water, faithfulness, truth, as Esther stood up for her people.
Sometimes God calls us to be courageous and risk something.
Is anybody out there preaching on Esther?
DGinNYC
Tom in GA, I just read something on this yesterday. I think I was
looking in the Interpreter's Bible Dictionary under Salt. Anyway, my
notes say this:
"....custom of rubbing a newborn with salt (Ezekiel 16:4) may have
been medicinal in purpose, but may have been to safeguard against
demonic influences."
Also, "a covenant of salt (Numbers 18:19 and II Chronicles 13:5) = a
permanent covenant"
So, Baptism - often infant, beginning of a permanent covenant.
Confirmation - another permanent covenant being made......
Salt was one of the provisions of the Temple "so the priest could make
pleasing sacrifices" (Ezra 6:9)
I also checked my pre-Vatican II Catholic Faith book and it mentions
putting salt in the mouth of the person being baptized, but does not
say why. It says it can be omitted, if desired.
KHC
DGinNYC
Like they say you have to stand for something or you'll fall for
anything.
More on salt at baptism: listing of the chief ceremonies used in
solemn baptism - #2 is the "placing of salt in the mouth to signify
the wisdom imparted by faith"
Seems to be some sort of Catechism - Question #647
A W-G rockycoast Me.'s description of seeing with one eye(you can
select what you look at; vital appreciation for vision) makes me aware
of the grace that is also present in Jesus'"judgment" saying on
eliminating those parts of the body that are stumbling blocks to
faith. Understanding that Jesus is speaking metaphorically, I am
exploring the paradox of how we can become "whole" people by being
without an eye or hand....or relationship...or behavior....or
opinion...(this also works into the insider/outsider theme).
It's still incubating.
HSO in Ga
Sally in GA wrote;
"Lex Talionis presumes that the only reason human beings behave
themselves is to avoid punishment. I do believe Jesus is asking for
more here. "
I agree.
Both these methods apply after the event. You can only take an eye,
after an eye has been removed. You have to remove your foot after it
causes you to stumble. They would both appear to be reactive.
But I believe there is a subtle difference in what Jesus proposes.
Jesus wants us to be proactive about our engagement with life, and in
our relationships. Stumbling, obstacles can only occur if we have not
been vigilant in our decisions prior to the event happening.
He reminds us regularly in the gospels, "Be prepared, be alert, be
awake." This week's text are all warnings by Jesus, of how easy it is
to slip in the spiritual life of love.
Love can slip easily from us, and it is virtually impossible to
recover lost time and words.
There is an imperative in here to not just do what is necessary, but
to be actively doing what exceeds expectation.
Can I add my thoughts then to the issue of "salt". "Salting" something
was an old term for seeding it, or setting it up. eg; "Salting a
mine", was about planting gold so that it might seem worth more than
it really was.
If I had to paraphrase Jesus's closing point "for everyone will be
salted with fire", I would probably say something like, "for everyone
one who endures pain for anothers sake, gains deeper meaning in their
own life."
I sometimes wish, I had the opportunity though to personally sit with
Jesus, and have him explain all this to me. I can only pray, I am even
close to the path. Absolutely fascinating material.
Thanks everyone for salting me this week. Too much.
Regards, KGB
DGCin NYC Yes, ther are those of us who will preach on Esther. My
sermon title is "For Such a Time As This" and I will talk about how we
don't always understand why certain things happen but that those times
later can be seen as turning points or ways of impacting others. That
God was with us even when we couldn't necessarily see or understand
it.
dchinks
Hi all.
A quick thought about the Esther reading.
As has been mentioned, "God" isn't mentioned in this book. Yet we see
God behind the scenes, as it were, bringing about yet another rescue
of the chosen people.
Might this be a chance to reference the gospel reading, "Whoever is
not against us is for us."
Even if God isn't overtly mentioned, might not God still be operating
behind the scenes, behind the actions or intentions of others, working
to bring about the reign of love that is promised? Can we, dare we
pray that our eyes be opened to see, our ears be opened to hear the
wind blowing where it will?
Rick in Canada, eh?
Tom in GA Your thoughts have been helpful. This Sunday we kick off our
annual stewardship drive. I have been trying to tease a stewardship
theme out of these lections for Sunday. Even though the pledge drive
focuses on returning the treasure God has bestowed upon us to God's
work in the world...in fact, all that we do is stewardship, including
time and talent...Genesis tells us that we have been created to be in
relationship with God, others and the rest of creation...in fact to be
stewards of the latter...We have all been given wonderful gifts to be
used, not for ourselves, but for co-creating with God and through
God's grace, right relationships with others. Those gifts are not
restricted to folks with Reverend in front of their names. The
baptismal covenant calls us, each and every one, to ministry: to
declare by word and deed the good news of God in Christ Jesus, to seek
to serve Christ in all person, respecting the dignitiy of every human
being, to strive for justice and peace among all people. My
congregation is predominently retirees, so I frequently hear, when
folks are asked to do something, "Been there, done that, got the
t-shirt, I'm retired." ARRRRGGGGHHH!!!!! I'm not too sure about
declaring from the pulpit that "I mad and not going to take it
anymore!" I do think we clergy tend to enable folks by stepping up to
the plate to take up the slack when others don't. We then become the
ones who short circuit the ministries of others. I'm getting a late
start this week too, so any insights from y'all would be great! Susan
in GA
A little (very little, probably) humor to get into the seriousness of
the topic:
A Pirate Captain with an eyepatch, peg leg and a hook on his right
hand stood on a dock, watching his crew load provisions on board his
ship. A little boy came up to him and said, "How did you lose your
leg?" "Durin' a storm, a wave pushed me overboard and a shark bit it
off." "And how'd ya lose your right hand?" "I was in a battle with
another pirate captain, and he cut me hand off just before I sent him
to Davy Jones' locker!" "And what happened to your eye?" the kid
asked. "I got a bug in me eye and went to rub it with me right hand!"
the pirate captain said.
Thanks for all your ideas. It's Thursday and I'm starting to gear up
for Sunday. A couple of thoughts:
I was taught in Church History that Origen read the parallel passage
in Matthew, and having suffered from the Cardinal Sin of Lust for a
long time, followed literally what Jesus said. After he had recovered
from altering himself he found the sin of lust still remained in his
heart...and it was at that point that his reliance upon Christ to
combat temptation and sin began.
Jesus is not telling us to maim ourselves; he's using the exaggerated
hyperbole of the ancient Near East to drive home the need for a
radical change in our orientation toward sin. Jesus is the one who
makes us able to cut off sin at the core: "...and save us to the
uttermost, 'til we can sin no more."
A devout Christian man I knew came to Christ and wanted to quit
smoking. He prayed but could not make himself stop. Every time he lit
up a cigarette he said, "Lord, please help me. You know I don't want
to do this." It took him years, but in the end he stopped, by the
grace of Christ. Before the invention of crack coccaine, it was said
that nicotine was a more addictive substance than powdered coccaine,
and a more difficult addiction to overcome.
"I can do all things through him who strengthens me." Phil. 4:13
Da Rev in Connecticut
Susan in GA and others:
Many thanks.
Yes, these lessons fit in well with stewardship and discipleship (are
they not in eschatological moment the same?} I don't think one can
begin to discuss the financial treasure house, but I do think you can
begin to talk about committment, time, talent, and what is expected to
live Christian lives: Out of what do we live, a Spirit limited
(scarcity) by our narrow vision, and our refusal to act (hand, eye,
foot) or is the Spirit that empowers us abundant and freeing opening
up to action and embracing our ministries. It seems to me that as soon
as we are free to do, our murmuring stops.
Our little Episcopal parish has been living on the transition boundary
of a program size congregation, still very happy however being a
pastoral size - apathy rules here and we are very comfortable in our
indifference. It is a kind of passive agressive mentality that "damn
it" we don't wish to grow. The Great Commission is for someone else.
After 9 years, I think I have been patient with this way of being or
not-being, and it is time to begin to challenge the congregation to
see something else besides their own image. So keep us in your
prayers. The readings are about stewardship of souls. One biblical
scholar said that the disciples were not interested so much in
following Jesus as they were about being followed. It seems to me that
once we stop worrying about our people and rest in the call that
shapes us all will be well. These readings begin to help turn the
ship!
Good luck, tom in ga
(Many thanks for the salty thoughts)
Dear Michelle in PA,
Celebrating what others do in the name of Jesus even in spite of our
theological differences, I think, is a good thing, and I think that is
what Jesus was trying to get across to his disciples. I may not agree
with a particular theological stance some communities of faith have on
issues such as sexual orientation & practice, or the place of women in
ministry, but they probably don't agree with some of my theological
views either. What we can both agree on and celebrate is our common
ministry in Christ. The PCUSA and my guess is other denominations as
well, have spent far too much time arguing about our differences
(within the same denominational family) which could have been spent
doing ministry in Christ's name.
Tom in TN
