Mark 1:29-39

In the Gospel of Mark words and themes are repeated over and over again. There seems to be an urgency or immediacy about what Jesus does - almost without thinking of the cost or repercussions. Mark uses words meaning ‘immediately’ or ‘as soon as’ at least 39 times - As soon as they left the synagogue, they entered the house of Simon and Andrew - Now Simon’s mother in law was laid aside fever stricken and at once they told Jesus about her. As soon as something is sorted Mark presents Jesus as moving on immediately to the next person or place.

The word aphiemi ‘to leave’ occurs a number of times in the first two chapters of Marks Gospel- ‘Immediately Jesus called the disciples they left their nets and their boats and families (1:18, 20).’ And approaching her Jesus took her by the hand and raised her up and the fever left her and she began to serve them (1:31).’

There is a letting go of something in order to move on, whether that is a letting go by someone of something, or a demon letting go of a person, or a person letting go of sin or sin letting go of a person, or sickness letting go of a person or a person letting go of sickness, or  people letting go of a way of life. The sin is left behind, the fever leaves the woman behind, the fever moves on, the woman moves on, the demon moves on. Just as Jesus immediately moves on so there seems to be the expectation that people will move on too –‘And sternly warning him Jesus sent him away at once (1:43).’

Mark presents Jesus as one who seems to immediately know the way things should be with people – people should be free. Jesus freed people from the control of demons, illness and sin but beyond these was another level of control that Jesus sought to reveal as controlling people, a double bind, and this was the religious interpretation of the day. In the way it was interpreted people were actually excluded from their communities rather than included when they needed them most.

Through our prayers for healing we may not always be able to help free people from illness or possession or sin but we can always and immediately free them from religious bondage. It can often be religious bondage that is keeping people from experiencing life to the full and preventing them from moving on.

Brian Stoffregen (http://www.crossmarks.com/brian/mark1x29.htm) sees forgiveness as ‘Not letting what happened in the past control my life in the present.’ Religion should reflect the liberating ministry of Jesus and not use what has happened in peoples’ lives in the past to control them and prevent them from living life to the full in the present.

So what have I/we to leave behind? What have I/we to move on to? What is preventing me/us from living life in the present?

Mark 1:21-28

Some episodes of Doctor Who remind me of stories about Jesus. The presence of the Doctor seems to disturb things that are hidden and secret, things that control the minds and hearts and even the bodies of not just individuals but the population of entire worlds. As soon as Jesus enters the synagogue in Capernaum something that has been hidden, something that may not have been noticed before or something presenting in a certain way reveals itself more clearly. It seems to respond to the teaching of Jesus, it recognises who he is and the authority he possesses. Just as the name of the Doctor is feared throughout the universe the name of Jesus is also known, but the knowing causes a reaction… a disturbance … a transformation.

How does a story like this relate to us? When some people read this story and other stories about exorcisms they can get exceedingly worried that they could be possessed by some evil spirit and not know it. There is a sense in which I think we are all possessed and can be totally unaware of it or be choosing to ignore the unease, the disturbance it causes within us and how it expresses itself in the world.

One has to ask who really was possessed in the stories about Jesus. Was it just some individuals who were possessed and to be pitied or were these individuals acting as a prophetic voice? Were these individuals more in tune with who Jesus was and the authority of his teaching than the Scribes and other religious leaders and the people themselves? Were they in tune with the need for transformation, of throwing off the religious and cultural shackles imposed by religious leaders and political leaders to control and manipulate for their purposes and gain.

It astounds me that we can be so immune to or unaware of what may be controlling us, much of the history of the church testifies to that and much of our history has been written by the victors, those who did the oppressing, those who expelled the weaker ones, the minorities, the women as witches, the heretics, the dissidents, the speakers up for justice, those who cried foul!

St. Paul cries out ‘who will rescue me (us) from this body of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! (Romans 7:24, 25)

The kingdom of God which Jesus spoke of and ushered in challenges all the power that we would desperately hang on to. The confession of faith by all possessed by power is a crying out for the transformation of all things without and within.

I finish with the lyrics of a Nick Cave song which I have just heard on ABC 2 Australia – a concert of cover versions of his songs

There is a Kingdom

Just like a bird that sings up the sun

In a dawn so very dark

Such is my faith for you

Such is my faith

And all the world's darkness can't swallow up

A single spark

Such is my love for you

Such is my love

There is a kingdom

There is a king

And he lives without

And he lives within

The starry heavens above me

The moral law within

So the world appears

So the world appears

This day so sweet

It will never come again

So the world appears

Through this mist of tears

There is a kingdom

There is a king

And he lives without

And he lives within

Luke 1: 26-38 and Matthew 1:18-25

Luke 1:26-38 and Matthew 1:18-25

“Look the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call him Emmanuel” which means God is with us. Matthew 1:23.

The Vicar of Dibley was checking out a prospective boyfriend. She asked whether he was a regular church attendee and he replied that he was a C and E kind of person. The vicar was getting very excited about his potential and chipped in, “You mean C of E (Church of England)?” But the man replied “No, Christmas and Easter”.

I always find preaching on Christmas day or Easter Sunday more challenging than other Sundays because the congregation is made up of the usual Sunday worshippers plus people who only came to church at Christmas or Easter. The expectation for many preachers is that they will preach to the unconverted rather than to the converted, to produce a message targeting a wider audience than the faithful. On such occasions I have always sought to speak meaningfully to everyone but the fear is that I could end up speaking to no one. Who really knows why people turn up to church at Christmas? There are many reasons. The story of the birth of Jesus is but one of the many stories that make up the meaning of Christmas for people along with Santa Claus, giving, presents, Christmas lights, food, snow, heat, alcohol, fights, loneliness etc.

This year I don’t have to worry about that as I am not speaking on Christmas day or Christmas Eve. I don’t have to worry that my message is making no sense to the C and Es (Christmas and Easters) so I am going to talk about the virgin birth. How you may ask has that got anything to do with our lives? I’m not sure that it does.

This is the fourth Sunday in Advent and the focus reading for today is Luke 1:26-38 the story foretelling Jesus’ birth. An angel, Gabriel, comes to visit a virgin who was engaged to a man called Joseph. The virgin’s name was Mary. And the angel said to her, “Greetings favoured one, the Lord is with you.” You will conceive in your womb and bear a son who will be called the Son of the most high and his kingdom will have no end. Mary asked, “How can this be, since I am a virgin?” The angel continued, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the most high will overshadow you, therefore the child to be born will be holy, he will be called the son of God.” Mary responded, “Here I am, the servant of the Lord, let it be with me according to your word.”

Matthew’s Gospel also tells the story of the foretelling of the birth of Jesus. Matthew 1:18-25 - But before they lived together, she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit. An angel appeared to Joseph and said, “Don’t be afraid to marry Mary for the child conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. She will bear a son, and you are to name him Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.” All this took place to fulfil what had been spoken by the Lord through the prophet: “Look, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call him Emmanuel,” which means God with us. The story says that Joseph did as he was told and had no sexual relations with Mary until she had born a son and he named him Jesus.

Luke and Matthew seem to want to emphasise the non sexual origins of Jesus and the virginity of Mary whereas this is not important to John or Mark in their Gospels. Why the fuss over the virginity of Mary? Were these non-sexual origins written back into these Gospels for a reason by the early church to perhaps to emphasise that Jesus was both human and divine, the child of a male God and a female human - The male giver and the female receiver. In a patriarchal church worshipping a male God, Mary has been held up as the counter balance, a feminine heroine, a role model. Thus the rise of Mariology in the Roman Catholic Church, to help find a place for women in the church. Dogmatic tradition likes to emphasise the virgin birth. But it is not Mary who is venerated but her virginity rendering her womb as just a vessel rather than her as a willing collaborator. Where did the idea come from? From Greek/Roman mythology? When we talk of Jesus being born of a virgin, are we looking for a pure, sinless person? Are we saying that someone who has not had sex is not sinful?

So what can we get from those readings that might help us in the living of life today? It is hard to get one’s head around them. Does it really matter whether or not we believe in the virgin birth of Jesus? What difference does it make to who Jesus was and is?  Does a virgin birth make Jesus more human or more divine?

While both Luke and Matthew seem to stress the virginity of Mary and the lack of sex in the conception of Jesus, Mark and John have no interest in the birth of Jesus at all. Mark’s Gospel starts… The beginning of the good news of Jesus Christ, the son of God and Mark begins with the proclamation of John the Baptist. John’s Gospel starts… In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. Paul doesn’t mention it in his letters. For Mark the beginning occurs in the wilderness, for John the beginning is eternal. The Word was always there. Jesus doesn’t begin with a sperm but has been there from all time. In the birth of Jesus the Word is made flesh.

Born from the Spirit as well as born from Mary. But alongside the emphasis on the virginal status of Mary both Luke and Matthew speak of the Holy Spirit. Matthew says… she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit and a second time says… the child conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. Luke says the Holy Spirit will come upon you…

In John the virgin birth is not mentioned but birth from the Spirit is.  John 1 says that the Word born as a child of God through the spirit gave power to others to become children of God - children who were born not of flesh and blood but of God. John 3 speaks about being born from above or being born again, a second time, a spiritual birth. For John it is not Christ’s birth that is important but our being born of God, being born from above.

So what can I say that may be helpful to both regular attendees and C and Es?

1. Christmas is about giving – giving birth

Just as Mary was willing to collaborate with the Holy Spirit in giving birth to Christ as the son of God, so our collaboration with the Holy Spirit not only enables us to become children of God but also to be collaborators with the Holy Spirit in the rebirth of the whole creation; collaborating in giving birth to God’s life in the present world, in the present age, in the present moment.

2. Christmas is about presents – being present - the present of presence

The greatest present you can give anyone is your presence, being present.

The greatest gift you can give the world is yourself, wholly, fully, attentive.

Imagine giving everyone your full undivided attention. Imagine listening to what the other was saying without formulating in one’s mind what one’s answer or response was going to be. Imagine responding with questions of interest and inquiry rather than answers.

In the Gospel stories I can imagine the sense of presence that people felt by Jesus being present to them when they encountered him in their lives.

Reflecting on the angel’s comforting words to Mary, ‘The Lord is with you.’ Perhaps we could pray, ‘May I be with you. May my words, my thoughts, my deeds be with you, now at this present moment and at the hour of my (your) death.

(These thoughts drew heavily on Jurgen Moltmann’s book ‘The way of Jesus Christ’ SCM Books)

Taking the SEX out of Sex-mas! | The Pangea Blog

Taking the SEX out of Sex-mas! | The Pangea Blog:

'via Blog this'

Carl Gregg

Carl Gregg:

'via Blog this'

Matthew 10:40-42

The Little Ones

When we refer to 'the little ones' we are usually referring to children in an affectionate way. However, we live in a world where we do not always care for 'the little ones' or respect their rights and the vulnerable position they are in when dependent on adults to protect them. This week I was shocked to see in the news the arrest of an eight year old girl who had seemingly been ordered to detonate a bomb in her backpack amidst a crowd of people. On the ABC television programme 'Am I normal' I was also shocked to see a man who confessed to being a paedophile talk of children aged eight having the right to be in a sexual relationship with an adult.

When Jesus refers to his disciples (grown ups) as 'the little ones' he is describing the vulnerable position they are in when they take the gospel to the villages and towns of Israel. They go not like soldiers, crusading, forcing, inflicting, or demanding their equipment to be carried a mile as the Roman soldiers did, nor do they go like religious leaders insisting respect for their position in society. They go like children, little ones, helpless, homeless, dependent on those who would welcome them with some food, or shelter, or clothing, or even a cup of water. Their lack of being equipped for the journey caused them to be dependent on the kindness of those they met on the way. "Take no gold, or silver, or copper... no bag for the journey, or two tunics, or sandals or a staff... (Matthew 10:9)"

At the core of this passage is not the message of an individually driven Christianity, one that promises reward for the individual, but a message that says that the central purpose of those who follow Jesus is that of looking after people. At the centre of both emerging and progressive theologies is the view that Christianity is firstly something that is lived, the theology is but a description of it. The disciples like Jesus went about the country firstly living their faith, and this dependence on others, this vulnerability, was not only something that was lived, it also spoke more than words could say: that power and position are laid aside when following the teaching and person of Jesus. So often we seek a position of power and authority from which we can influence the world, a position from which we can teach and preach. Jesus seems to send us out as 'little ones' identifying with people who are poor and helpless, calling up for mercy and kindness to be shown.

I view many of the sayings of Jesus as hyperbole. Jesus greatly exaggerates to make a point. In calling the disciples 'little ones', Jesus is indeed exaggerating to make a point. Will we hear the words of Jesus? Will we be willing to be considered 'little ones'?

Matthew 28:16-20

The placing of Trinity Sunday after Pentecost Sunday in the church calendar always seems strange to me. Pentecost celebrates the life Jesus lived now beginning its journey, travelling through the lives of his followers throughout the world. Pentecost speaks of freedom, liberation, creativity, wonder, colour, joy, diversity, transformation, renewal, grace, forgiveness, peace. It is contagious, inebriating, overwhelming, carried by the winds, free, flowing, turning the world upside down, lifting up the down trodden, passionate and so much more. Trinity comes like applying the brakes full on. "Hang on before you go further you need sound doctrine. When you baptise, when you explain this pentecostal wonder and it's connection to baptism, explain that it is baptism in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."

This 'trinitarian' formula seems out of place here in Matthew's Gospel. Neither Mark not Luke have it in their Gospels.  It seems from the book of Acts that people were baptised in the name of Jesus only (Acts 10:48; 19:5). Could it have been inserted at a later date?  Could it be that the formula was inserted back into the Gospel by the early church rather than the Gospel giving the formula in the first place? Why?

Unless the words 'in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit' are used at baptism, some Christian denominations will not accept that a baptism has been properly administered and a person will not be accepted as part of that denomination.

The formula is used to distinguish which God is being spoken about and the appropriate way or what is considered the orthodox way for Christians to think of God. Why limit the words in the baptismal formula to these words, why not baptise 'in the name of the father and of the Son and of the Holy spirit, and of love and forgiveness and grace' and so on? It seems a bit strange to build a whole doctrine based on one verse of scripture and then pin one's life to it or use it as a dividing point rather than an including point. I think it very important that the church today emphasises inclusion, what we share in common, a common experience, an experience of Jesus, a common concern for the world, rather than emphasising difference and therefore exclusion.

In the wider scheme of things surely it is not the formula that is most important but the experience, the discipleship. The love of God, the love of the world, the discipleship comes first and then trying to make sense of the believing.

Do I spend too much time trying to figure out the theology? Would my life be fuller, richer, more meaningful, more helpful to others and this world in which I live by spending more of my time living the life that Jesus speaks, that which we name as discipleship?