Scripture Text (NRSV)
Nehemiah 8:1-3, 5-6, 8-10
8:1 all the people gathered together into the square before the Water
Gate. They told the scribe Ezra to bring the book of the law of Moses,
which the LORD had given to Israel.
8:2 Accordingly, the priest Ezra brought the law before the assembly,
both men and women and all who could hear with understanding. This was
on the first day of the seventh month.
8:3 He read from it facing the square before the Water Gate from early
morning until midday, in the presence of the men and the women and
those who could understand; and the ears of all the people were
attentive to the book of the law.
8:5 And Ezra opened the book in the sight of all the people, for he
was standing above all the people; and when he opened it, all the
people stood up.
8:6 Then Ezra blessed the LORD, the great God, and all the people
answered, "Amen, Amen," lifting up their hands. Then they bowed their
heads and worshiped the LORD with their faces to the ground.
8:8 So they read from the book, from the law of God, with
interpretation. They gave the sense, so that the people understood the
reading.
8:9 And Nehemiah, who was the governor, and Ezra the priest and
scribe, and the Levites who taught the people said to all the people,
"This day is holy to the LORD your God; do not mourn or weep." For all
the people wept when they heard the words of the law.
8:10 Then he said to them, "Go your way, eat the fat and drink sweet
wine and send portions of them to those for whom nothing is prepared,
for this day is holy to our LORD; and do not be grieved, for the joy
of the LORD is your strength."
Comments:
In this classic revival at Watergate, we can observe the following:
1) The people initiated with their hunger for God's Word (v.1), their
ears were attentive (v.3), and they paid respect by standing up to
hear (v.5), they even weep (v.9)
2) The audience were those who "with understanding" (v2) and later,
those who "could understand" (v3) - sounds like adults and children. -
But even so, they also required interpretation for understanding (v.8)
3) The leaders set the schedule (pick 1st day of 7th month), lead in
reading and teaching with reverence (his character in Ezra 7:10 had a
lot to do with his efects on the people). The leaders also prescribe
proper responses for the people as well ("joyful instead of mourning"
v.9-10)
The application was obviously simple: how are we as congregation
responding to the Word? How am I as leader responding to the Word? If
I am not evoted to His Word as Ezra who "set his heart to study the
law of the LORD and to practice it, and to teach His statutes and
ordinances in Israel", what is my chance of seeing the power of the
Word among my people?
May I be the man of your Word, Lord.
Coho, Midway City
The people in this scripture actually wanted to hear the word of the
Lord. What portion of the people who come to our services are actually
listening and take it seriously? It was the word of the Lord that
convicted the people. PH in OH
PH in OH - I sometimes get that attitude, too. In fact, I'm going
through a phase right now where I'm questioning, "If preaching isn't
for transforming (and thus a behavioral change in the listeners), then
is it for anything at all?" And, of course, then it begs questions
like "Am I preaching so that MY will be done?" and "What kind of
behavioral change is expected?" Simple "conviction of sin" is TOO
simple - what sins, and defined by whom.
The people said "Amen, Amen" and were moved to bow their faces to the
ground. It appears by their weeping that they were convicted of sin.
Was their behavior changed ultimately?
The human condition certainly didn't change.
Sally in GA
The exiles have returned. Under Nehemiah they have rebuilt the city of
Jerusalem and its walls. Now the people ask Ezra, the priest, to read
the law of Moses to them in the public square. Whey they hear it they
weep for their sins, for the long years in exile, and for the joy of
the Lord that was their strength.
What does it mean to remember? It may mean to re-form or to regroup.
The people of Israel who were listening to Ezra on the day recounted
in this text might have been summoned back to a time when the nation
was united and they followed kings who led with integrity. As the
people listen to the voice of Ezra, it may have revived in them hopes
that they could re-member themselves into one people again. Disjointed
and broken for so many years, God's word comes into their midst, and
reminds them to whom they belong, calling them to come together again
into a faithful community.
Imagine the scene: a huge crowd awaits as Ezra climbs the steps to the
platform in the middle of the square. As he opens the book to read
from the Torah, the crowd becomes quiet. After Ezra blesses God, the
people prostrate themselves upon the ground and worship. Ezra's aids
move among the people, helping them to understand the words Ezra is
reading. Among the praises of the people, another sound begins to
emerge — weeping. It is beautiful and unrestrained, bursting out of
the collective need of the people to know God once again. As if in a
benediction, Ezra pronounces to them "God is your strength" (8.10).
The people hear the promise of God for them and with it the call to
give to those who have nothing.
After this, the Jewish people began more and more to draw strength
from God's word. Although the temple, and the leadership of the king
were still important, increasingly the people themselves began to
study what the Law meant for their lives and their communities. They
began to understand themselves to be a re-formed and renewed people to
whom God speaks blessings and benedictions, and calls to action.
The scripture reveals the Lord. Out of the scriptures comes his
epiphany. Call it the Word epiphany. Jesus' scripture reading in the
synagogue set the stage. When Jesus said, "This is about me!" then the
epiphany—the great Aha!—began. It took the next years before those who
saw him could know the whole salvation story. Now we search the
scriptures to learn and know, for "it is they that testify on my
behalf" (Jn 5.39).
The lesson from Nehemiah suggests another epiphany, an epiphany we
experience. For the exiles who had returned it was a law of Moses
epiphany. For us, Sunday after Sunday, call it the liturgy epiphany.
The assembly, "all who could hear with understanding," gathered, as we
do on a Sunday. There are some among us who can't yet understand, some
who sleep. But for those who understand, a marvelous thing is
happening. In the lesson, Ezra read from scriptures "and the ears of
all the people were attentive to the book of the law" (Neh 8.3). When
Ezra opened the book "all the people stood up" as we do today when the
gospel is announced. Then "they read from the book, from the law of
God, with interpretation." Like a sermon? "They gave the sense, so
that the people understood the reading" (v. 8).
Is there a parallel in our services to the way the people reacted?
"All the people wept when they heard the words of the law" (v. 9).
They shed tears over their captivity and tears of joy at their return
to their land. We rejoice at the presence of the Lord where we two or
three are gathered together. Ours is a eucharist, a giving of thanks,
as our Lord says again, "This is my body give for you" and "This is my
blood shed for you and for many." We give thanks, we remember, and we
experience epiphany.
I believe that the nearest modern-day parallel to this story is the
response of the USA and its citizens in response to 9/11. From Tuesday
to Friday, my church was filled with people at prayer, and primarily
people whom I had never met. On Sunday, there were still lots of
people coming to hear a word from the Lord. That heightened interest
had waned considerably by the third week. Now over two years later, I
beleive that we got one family coming to church who first came in
response to the terrorist crisis. I will always ask myself if there
were not some way that I could have kept some of those people coming
to church. I don't know. Why were Israel's people open to the word of
the Lord on the first day of the seventh month? Did their enthusiasm
stick? -Dale in Chattanooga
Yeah, Dale, I wonder stuff like that, too.
I wonder if it was "A lasting impression" on them, when, as our
unsigned post-er mentions, they are convicted of their past sins and
weep.
That weeping is from conviction - and perhaps from joy as well. ...
But did it stick?
Sally
I'm chuckling now remembering a time when the Episcopal Lectionary had
this passage appointed for the day -- without the editing-out of vv. 4
and 7 which include the names of the elders who stood with Ezra as he
read from the Law. A lay reader was reading the lesson and when he got
to those verses he edited "on the fly" -- "on his right were .... some
men" and "on his left were ... some other men."
Good thought of the RCL editors to leave those verses out, although we
are deprived of the fun of listening to ancient Hebrew names being
mangled.
Blessings, Eric in OH
v 3 ... "the ears of all the people were attentive to the book of the
law."
Off the top of my head, it seems sin takes one of 2 forms:
attentiveness to the book of the Law without attentiveness to the book
of grace (metaphorically speaking) - and attentiveness to the
metaphorical book of grace (the Word of grace) without attentiveness
to the book of the Law. And an infinite number of "in-betweens" we
find to mangle it all up!
And how in a desire to do good we do bad.
Sally
PH in OH, Amen! Sometimes I feel like I could stop in the middle of my
sermon - in the middle of a sentence and no one would notice. They're
there because it is Sunday and that's what they do on Sunday. rdofnd
IDEAS: · The people hearing the Law read (Book of Moses) after their
return from exile at first thought it to be a word of condemnation;
they wept and mourned upon hearing it. Not a bad or wrong reaction in
a sense, for they recognized the shortfall between Torah and their
lives—indeed the shortfall that had led to their exile from their
homeland as punishment and consequence. · But Ezra the priest and the
Levites interpret the text for the people, and Ezra explains that it
doesn’t compel weeping and sorrow, but that the people should go home
to feast and rejoice—and even to bring portions to those who had not
gathered in the congregation that morning—for God wanted his joy to be
theirs, and to make them strong. · How many worshipers come to
churches today expecting to hear only condemnation from God and God’s
spokespeople? It is imperative that they leave knowing of God’s
joy—which is meant for them too! · It might be argued that Israel
could now share in joy because they had already served their
punishment (exile) and paid for their sins; we cannot expect God to
shower joy upon us when we are still living in our sins. Ah, but our
punishment has been served! Our debt has been paid! Jesus took care of
it for us—once and for all—and because of Jesus, God wants us to know
not his wrath but his love, his grace, his joy, his strength.
Just some early thoughts-- Heidi in MN
When I read this passage I am reminded of a girl, lay person sitting
in young adult sunday school class in her local church...Boy, that was
long ago!
I remember that These people gathered and stood for hours. And they
stood for word read, their tradition. I thought then and now, We fuss
is the preacher goes over 20 mins, and most of us sit on padded pews!
These Weepings were, I perceive sorrowful and joyful...Sorriful
because a recognition of their sins and transgressions,Joy because of
forgiveness. Represented in that portion of food,drink, raisons to
each household.
God does give us ourportions and care! Good News!
Did it stick, this revival message? Well, As I think back a an early
20 something girl in Sunday School, struggling with call and finding
her way. I heard the words on this scroll... years later I preach! So
did it stick?
~@#%$&~ (formally Clerically Blonde, LOL)
Josh turner, new Country star has a song to fit "Long Black Train" I
think I may try to sing this for special music... Josh is a
Baritone...old sounding traditional country...I am a soprano...relate
the song to Scroll-messages of Neh. and Jesus... ~#$%*~
Sally & Dale, you raise some thought-provoking questions. Did the
peoples' behavior change? In the short-term, yes ultimately, no. I
believe you can make a case for tracing the beginnings of the movement
which finally led to the Pharisaic movement to the time of the return
- the view that the captivity had come because the people had
abandoned God & God's Torah, the renewed realization here, as they
hear the Torah read, of how far they had strayed from its teaching, a
renewed sense of zeal for God's Torah. This was a good thing, leading
to a renewed sense of God's purpose in their lives, a desire to please
God, a new awareness of their call to be God's people. But, "human
nature" being what it is, this new-found piety & purpose eventually
led to self-righteousness and a slavish adherence to the Law for the
Law's sake instead of as a guide for righteous living.
Human nature is always like that. We have a knack for taking the best
plans, even God's plan, and making them about us and how well we think
we can carry out the plan. That is the root of all sin - the pride of
saving ourselves. I think Nehemiah gets at the heart of true righteous
living, for he doesn't say, "The Law of the Lord is your strength."
Rather striking, to think about it, considering the occasion upon
which Nehemiah comments. Human nature will always try to make any
salvation plan dependent on OUR actions. Faith, by its very nature,
depends on GOD'S action. God's joy, in loving us, in leading us, in
calling us to love him, in OUR joyful response to God's call, whether
the call comes through Law or direct divine revelation or a man named
Jesus, we are reminded that our salvation is in God's hands. Trusting
God's loving work in our lives is all that's required of us.
P.S. I have yet to have my foot surgery. EKG abnormalities forced me
to see a cardiologist first. That has been done, my heart has been
cleared, & my surgery is rescheduled for 2/2. Please continue to
remember me in your prayers, brothers & sisters. Blessings on you all.
Ken in WV
I'm considering a pun for the title: "The Water Gate Scandal." My
misgiving is that it sounds political, or anti-Republican. The sermon
itself won't be - the scandal is that people repented and did a 180
and, coupled with the I Cor's text now means that putting the Lord
first is honoring all gifts ... (this isn't a clear summary, but I
think hte gist is there). But I was 10 when Watergate broke and 12
when Nixon resigned, and while I didn't understand the particulars, I
remember that it was heated! Especially post-Vietnam.
So, tell me, folks who remember this - if you were to read this title
on the marquee - would it seem like I'm reopening old wounds?
Sally
Nah - scratch that. Too cutesy and not really pertinent to the
direction I'm headed.
Sally - sorry to keep posting like this.
Sally, The Water Gate Scandal - I like it! I think an interesting
contrast is that when Ezra opened the scripture to them, the people
wept. When Jesus opened the scripture in the synagogue, the people
stared and became angry. Was it because Ezra was telling them an old
thing, and that Jesus was telling them a new thing? Since this is the
same God and the same spirit, how is it that the gifts are varied? How
is it that the emotional responses run the gamut?
MrBill <\\><
MrBill, I like the connection you made of the Ezra congregation
weeping and rejoicing at the sound of the word, Jesus' congregation
getting angry...and then there's my congregation (and many others) who
just get bored. I'd rather they got angry...at least they would be
actively interacting with the word of God.
It seems that part of the reason for the weeping of Ezra's cong. is
that the people had been without the Word for so long. It reminds me
of countries where the Bible was banned and stories of just how much
Christians treasure and will take risks to hear the Word. Here almost
every household owns a bible...but no one reads it (ok few). The Bible
is now available in every colour, fabric, version, size and flavour
imaginable but it has probably never had so little attention.
"a Bible that is falling apart is usually owned by someone who isn't"
KBinAB
The community life of the covenant people must be shaped and ordered
according to the word of God, or it cannot be God's community. The
church is not held together by ties of blood or soil or politics. Its
members have no necessary common economic or social interests. But two
things they share--their common redemption by God and their common
commitment, therefore, to obey the Lord who has redeemed them. If the
church does not remember what God has done for it, as Israel did not
remember before Ezra read the Scriptures in public, or if it refuses
to follow God's commandments and becomes instead like the society
around it, as Israel had become before the time of Ezra, then it
ceases to be the redeemed community and becomes just another social
group.
At the basis of the church's life, therefore, stand the Holy
Scriptures. It is through the Scriptures alone that the church hears
of its redemption. And it is through the Scriptures alone that the
church learns what is consequently required of it. The Scriptures
mediate to us both gospel and law, and both are necessary for our
response to our Lord.
Elizabeth R. Achtemeier
Examples of hurried exegesis and "word-association" preaching filled
the pulpits of the U.S. a few decades ago when this text was read and
preached. The stories of Ezra's Water Gate and Nixon's Watergate may
be symptomatic of the sin rampant in both lands, but aside from the
name, that is the only connection. This passage is about the law--the
reading, the hearing, and the obeying of it. The law is for all: "men
and women and all who could hear with understanding." The scene cries
out for attention. There is a drama to it as Ezra opens the Torah: all
eyes are on him and "all the ears of the people were attentive to the
book of the law." What preacher would not be jealous?
One could easily concentrate on the people in this story: Ezra reading
the law, the Levites helping to interpret it, the people weeping as
they comprehend its meaning, and finally the feasting and partying
when Ezra makes clear the function of the law. For the Jew it is
indeed good news. Civil law may not be good news, but God's law can be
and is. This is one reason James Sanders talks of Torah as gospel.
Surely the days is holy when news such as this is delivered. What else
is there to do but celebrate? Of course, we stand on this side of the
cross. Jesus Christ fulfills that law and goes beyond it--even more
reason for Christians to rejoice. Calvin's third use of the law is a
call to obedience in response to the salvation offered in Jesus
Christ. Here the believer is called to lead a joyous, holy life as a
result of God's mercy.
Finally, one cannot talk about the law without talking about God who
is the giver of the law. No matter how much we want to preach the
people and their reactions to Ezra's preaching, a sermon on this
passage cannot avoid bringing people to an awareness of God's presence
and action in the law.
William J. Carl III
Is anyone familiar with which denominations traditionally stand for
the reading of the Scripture? I attended a memorial service for a
fellow minister at a United Pentecostal Church the other night and was
surprised when they stood for the reading from the book of Job. (KJV
of course.)
PKFlyer in Texas
PKFlyer asked, "Is anyone familiar with which denominations
traditionally stand for the reading of the Scripture?"
In the Episcopal/Anglican tradition we stand for the reading of the
Gospel when it is read at Holy Communion. Otherwise, we sit for the
reading of scripture.
Blessings, Eric in OH
Eric, The only two churches that stand to my knowledge is the
Episcopal and Catholic and then only for the gospel. PH in OH
Reading these wonderful comments, I'm reminded of the old Southern
gospel song about "returning" to faith much like these exiled Hebrews
of old:
"I have returned to the God of my childhood, to the same simple faith
as a child I once knew. Like the prodical son, I longed for my loved
ones, for the comforts of home and the God I out grew.
I have returned to the God of my Mother. With unfailing faith for a
child of her heart. She said 'bring them up the way that You want
them, and then when they're grown, they'll never depart.'
I have returned to the God of my father...I have returned to the
Yahweh of Judah."
JD in DC
MrBill <\\>< The responses run the gamet becuse we, alass are human!
The wonders of wonders is that even in our humaness, God continues to
forgive and bless us if we just return to God as the Israelites did!
Such good thoughts and insightes! I have had a week long ministerial
study and gathering and came home very ill, and I am blessed that you
all have given me some fodder in my fuddelness. Bless you all!
Shalom, Rev. Nancy in NE, USA
PK Flyer & Eric: Some United Methodist congregations stand for the
gospel reading. We have done so at our WV Annual Conference worship
services for a number of years, and my church does so also. Ken in WV
Reason informs; Longing transforms.
Sally in gA
RE: Standing for the reading
I am one of 2 co-pastors in our DOC congregation. It is also the
church where I grew up. When my co-pastor first came, he tried the
standing for the gospel reading, and it wasn't well received. Recently
he has started it up again and does it when it is his sunday to
preach, and I haven't been asking the congregation to stand on my
sundays. This has become confusing. Last Sunday, he explained the
reason for standing. He said it had to do with respect and honor. He
told a story about learning to standing when the colors process into a
stadium (something he didn't know about until he was an adult). He
implied that he was teaching us the "proper" thing to do. Now the
question is, what shall I do this Sunday, when I read the gospel. I
don't believe it is necessary to stand. Any help?
Sorry if this is a sidebar issue. Just didn't know where else to
solicity advice, and the issue of standing was already on the table.
Pam in San Bernardino
Solicity? New words about.
Obviously I meant solicit.
Pam
Pam, that's a really tough one! I'm never very big on doing the
"proper" thing. The issues seems to me more one of being on the same
page as your co-pastor -- which is important. I don't think it would
be good if one had them stand and the other not. If you had a worship
committee of some sort I would suggest that a good and informed
discussion be taken up with them and that they make the final
decision.
To me the point is not showing the Bible/gospel respect, the point is
how can we facilitate people hearing and being transformed by the
reading. I don't think the Bible should be treated like a flag. On
it's own it has no value. People have been treating their
grandmother's leather bound Bible with as much respect as fine china
and it meant that a lot of people have beautiful Bibles, but has it
done them or it any good? It is only valuable and alive when it comes
alive in us. So if people will listen more carefully because they are
standing...have them stand. If people will recieve it better projected
on power-point go for it. KBinAB
KBinAB said, "I don't think the Bible should be treated like a flag.
On it's own it has no value."
Are you suggesting that a flag has value on it's own? I would say the
Bible has more intrinsic value than a flag does. Interesting point of
departure.
Anyway, on that standing thing, Pam. You and your co-pastor need to
get on the same wavelength! Do one or the other but don't play
tug-o-war with the congregation.
In the Episcopal Church there is no question about standing during the
reading of the Gospel - the rubrics of the Book of Common Prayer
specify "all standing" during the Gospel lesson and have done so since
the first BCP was published in 1549.
Our big "stand vs. some-other-posture" issue is during the prayer of
consecration at Holy Communion. Clergy would like to see congregations
stand -- but we have this long, long habit of kneeling. Trying to
break that conditioning is really tough.
Whatever posture one decides to go for -- do it consistantly. So you
and your co-pastor really need to come to a mutual understanding.
Blessings, Eric in OH
We Lutherans stand for the Gospel too.
Tom in Ontario
Thank you for your guidance on this standing issue. Unfortunately, our
Worship Department hasn't begun functioning yet, after a long period
without one. In the meantime, my co-pastor and I both have such strong
feelings, that we had agreed to disagree. I don't like the disunity,
but the standing feels like a step toward catholocism which is not
something that makes most of us comfortable, and that is why I've kept
away from it. Now dear Catholic friends, please do not misinterpret my
desire to avoid Catholic practices. It isn't a matter of correct or
not correct, but our traditions have been quite different.
Anyway, in light of trying to keep things more unified, would the
phrase, "All who wish are invited to stand for the reading of the
gospel" seem too wishy washy? I'm trying to find a compromise for this
Sunday at the very least. And then I think we do need to call together
a worship department meeting to look at this and other issues.
Thank you all for your patient support.
Pam in San Bernardino
Pam asked, "Anyway, in light of trying to keep things more unified,
would the phrase, "All who wish are invited to stand for the reading
of the gospel" seem too wishy washy? I'm trying to find a compromise
for this Sunday at the very least. And then I think we do need to call
together a worship department meeting to look at this and other
issues."
No, not wishy washy at all. My former bishop, in an attempt to be
sensitive to those in wheelchairs or with other mobility issues, would
always invite people to stand with something like, "Those who are
able, shall we rise for <prayer, Gospel, whatever>?" I think you have
reached a good compromise. The Book of Common Prayer contains such a
compromise for the consecration of the Elements at Communion: "The
People stand or kneel." (I'm told that the BCP editors intended the
rubric to be read like a dictionary -- the first option preferred, the
latter permitted.) For the Gospel Lesson, however, there's no option
-- it simply says "all standing."
Anyway, I think your compromise solution is elegant.
Blessing, Eric in OH
