Thoughts going in, Sunday May 3rd, Easter 5

[Jesus said] I am the true vine, and my Father is the vinegrower. ²He removes every branch in me that bears no fruit. Every branch that bears fruit he prunes to make it bear more fruit. ³You have already been cleansed by the word that I have spoken to you. ⁴Abide in me as I abide in you. Just as the branch cannot bear fruit by itself unless it abides in the vine, neither can you unless you abide in me. ⁵I am the vine, you are the branches. Those who abide in me and I in them bear much fruit, because apart from me you can do nothing. ⁶Whoever does not abide in me is thrown away like a branch and withers; such branches are gathered, thrown into the fire, and burned. ⁷If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, ask for whatever you wish, and it will be done for you. ⁸My Father is glorified by this, that you bear much fruit and become my disciples. (John 15:1-8)

            In the 5th week of Easter we encounter yet another of the famous "I am" statements of Jesus so prevalent in John's gospel. Before we take a wide-angle view, this is the sort of reading that can benefit from a slow-motion phrase-by-phrase approach.

            Vs 1 I am the true (alethinos) vine...  Greek, like Latin and English has levels of 'truth.' There is truth, as in, a statement containing no lies; and there is also truth in the sense of being the one genuine in a sea of counterfeits. The Greek alethinos carries the latter 'one genuine' meaning. Whatever else the statement means on Jesus' lips, he is saying that he is the one genuine "vine" when measured against all other possibilities.

            I suppose the next most pressing question would be to what is Jesus comparing himself? If he is the true/alethinos vine, what is/are the false vine(s)? As some of the older commentators point out, the statement occurs after the last meal when they would've drank from the fruit of the vine. So perhaps Jesus is just using a metaphor based on nature. This could be a valid statement, though not carrying much theological weight. Others mention that Israel had always used 'vine imagery' as part of its national identity. Coinage minted during the Maccabean era (Israel's last gasp at independence), for instance, had a vine on it. In this sense Jesus could be saying he is the true vine/true Israel. This is a truth that we see most fully expressed in Matthew's gospel where at every turn Jesus is the 'faithful son.' He is called out of Egypt (Mt 2:15) but he does not fail his wilderness test, etc.

            And as Barclay points out: One of the glories of the Temple was the great golden vine upon the front of the Holy Place. Many a great man had counted it an honour to give gold to mould a new bunch of grapes or even a new grape on to that vine. The vine was part and parcel of Jewish imagery, and the very symbol of Israel. In short, that huge golden vine was symbolic of the Temple. Hence, Jesus could be identifying HIMSELF as the true vine/true temple; the true place where God is present with humanity (Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up, Jn 2:19). This last option is especially interesting to consider when we take into account the point that John wrote his gospel for a worshiping community mixed with believing Jews and Gentile converts in a post-Temple world (the Temple was destroyed in 70AD).  While emergent rabbinic Judaism was scrambling to try to re-define the religion around the synagogue and Torah, the community of Jesus was trying to re-define the religion around worship of HIM. He is the true/alethinos vine in comparison to all others.

            Vss 2-3, the pruning of the Father. The word translated as 'prune' is katharos. It's where we get our word catharsis (a purifying release) from. Hence, the KJV version of the text reads: every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth. The picture that Jesus is painting is very organic. Branches (believers) attached to the Vine (Jesus) are a good thing; being so attached causes a joyous outcome of fruit production which, in turn, enlists the loving attention of the Father/gardener to prune/purge the branches (believers) so as to be able to produce more. It is a sad thing to me that this is so easily thought of in negative terms: pruning = pain, bearing fruit = hard work. Think of how good it feels and how energizing it is when the student takes off a heavy backpack; think of how much better you feel and how much more energy you have if/when you drop that 10 or 20 pounds you've been struggling to lose. Within the metaphor, being pruned is a happy/freeing/energizing/liberating experience for the fruit-bearing branch.

            Vs 5 apart from me you can do nothing. In approaching this statement, we have to remember the context. Jesus is not saying that atheists are incapable of doing anything. They can tie their shoes, they can get groceries, they can do great works of civic good. In the Greek the verb form of dunamis is used. As I've often pointed out, this is where we get our word 'dynamite.' The point Jesus is making is that the self-contained POWER to make things happen in terms of fruit-bearing is not something that we come by naturally; we need to be attached to him.

            In closing, there are a lot of other remarks I could make.... but as these Sundays of Easter are about exploring the meaning of the baptized life at ground level, it's worth pointing out that this Sunday's emphasis is all about fruit-bearing; and staying 'plugged in' to the creative source of power that enables fruit-bearing. This is the circle-logic that we see so often in John's gospel. If you're bearing fruit, you must be abiding in Him. If you're not abiding in him, then whatever you think that stuff is that you're bearing, it ain't fruit. On the other hand, if you're abiding in him, there WILL be fruit; there is no such thing as a fruitless-abiding-in-Jesus believer. In my Air Force days, now and then I'd encounter a page in a technical manual that would contain only the words: this page left intentionally blank. The page was only a place-holder. John completely rules out the possibility of being a place-holder, intentionally blank, Christian.

Cheers,

T.M.

Thoughts going in, Sunday April 26th, Easter 4

11 [Jesus said] "I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. 12 The hired hand, who is not the shepherd and does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and runs away—and the wolf snatches them and scatters them. 13 The hired hand runs away because a hired hand does not care for the sheep. 14 I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, 15 just as the Father knows me and I know the Father. And I lay down my life for the sheep. 16 I have other sheep that do not belong to this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd. 17 For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life in order to take it up again. 18 No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it up again. I have received this command from my Father.” (John 10:11-18)

            This Sunday marks the 4th Sunday of Easter; it's one of the most 'predictable' Sundays of the year. It's always designated as "Good Shepherd Sunday." Reason being, the gospel of the day always comes from John chapter 10. Interestingly, in Year A of the 3-yr series, the passage is John 10:1-10; in Year B it's vss 11-18, and in Year C it's vss 22-30. To my mind, it's one of the best examples of the 3-yr series working well. The entire passage, from vss 1-30 has 'good shepherding' themes, but by breaking it down into three chunks, it enables different nuances to be brought out throughout the three-year cycle.

            Another fascinating thing about this passage has to do with the 'themes' that are percolating in the background. The first theme is at the textual level. This is a 'long discourse' in a gospel chocked full of long discourses. In John a long discourse inevitably follows on the heals of an important event. You might say it's John's "teaching style." In the case of the Good Shepherd discourse, the 'event' was the man born blind who was healed by Jesus.... on the Sabbath. This passage culminates with the following dialog: 26 They said to him, “What did he do to you? How did he open your eyes?” 27 He answered them, “I have told you already, and you would not listen. Why do you want to hear it again? Do you also want to become his disciples?” 28 Then they reviled him, saying, “You are his disciple, but we are disciples of Moses. 29 We know that God has spoken to Moses, but as for this man, we do not know where he comes from.” 30 The man answered, “Here is an astonishing thing! You do not know where he comes from, and yet he opened my eyes. 31 We know that God does not listen to sinners, but he does listen to one who worships him and obeys his will. 32 Never since the world began has it been heard that anyone opened the eyes of a person born blind. 33 If this man were not from God, he could do nothing.” 34 They answered him, “You were born entirely in sins, and are you trying to teach us?” And they drove him out. (9:26-34)

            After the healed man has been driven out (of the synagogue), he encounters Jesus again and worships him (vs 38). THIS is the back-story to the Good Shepherd discourse. In other words, part of what makes Jesus the "good shepherd" is that he doesn't drive people out! He doesn't behave like the Pharisees.

            Another thing....this passage needs to be read through the lens of the first century back/forth polemic that would've existed between the New Testament church and emergent Judaism. This is now moving into the 2nd level, the narrative level; the level of the story as arranged for its reading audience, and as heard by that audience. It becomes more than just an 'account' of something that happened between Jesus and the Pharisees a generation ago; it is also a window into what is happening currently in the life of faith; there is a struggle over the mantle of WHO represents God's covenant people--the synagogue of Jesus followers who include both Jews and Gentiles accepting that Jesus is the Messiah, or the synagogue of the Rabbis who like the Pharisees in the story, not only reject Jesus but constitute the opposite of "good shepherds?"

            This is the sort of thing that I think is (a) fascinating, but also (b) un-preachable today. This just is NOT our milieu. The Church is not locked in polemical debate with Judaism. We're miles and miles downstream from that first century conflict. The two are now distinctly separate religions. Historically, it's good to know that this was not always the case, but that now brings us to the question of WHAT to do with this passage and HOW to preach it in the 21st century?

            I think this is where we come to our 3rd thematic level.... and it's something we've been exploring this year, and that's the theme of "Mystagogy." In other words, how does this passage fit thematically in the WHOLE series of Easter passages that use the scriptures and liturgy to teach us something about living the baptized life? In that sense, it seems to me that the passage has two important things to say about being baptismally joined to the Good Shepherd: (1) such joining provides safety and security from the ravages outside the fold (the wolf) and (2) from incompetence and unhelpfulness within the fold (the hireling). In other words, these two categories in our day would be the 'wolfish' things that morally and ethically pull us away from God and devour us; the sin that so easily besets us as the book of Hebrews says, AND the false-shepherd/bad-shepherd/hireling-shepherd things we turn to in order to find comfort or give our lives 'meaning'... that in the long run... fail in their promises. These could be anything from false religion, God-less philosophy, materialism, careerism, and total pleasure-seeking hedonism.

            The point John is making in this narrative... and the mystagogical thing for us to celebrate is that Jesus 'wasn't' the good shepherd who gave his life for the sheep.... PAST TENSE... but Jesus IS the good shepherd... still ... present tense.

Cheers,

T.M.

Thoughts going in, Sunday April 19th, Easter 3

35 Then they told what had happened on the road, and how he had been made known to them in the breaking of the bread. 36 While they were talking about this, Jesus himself stood among them and said to them, “Peace be with you.” 37 They were startled and terrified, and thought that they were seeing a ghost. 38 He said to them, “Why are you frightened, and why do doubts arise in your hearts? 39 Look at my hands and my feet; see that it is I myself. Touch me and see; for a ghost does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.” 40 And when he had said this, he showed them his hands and his feet. 41 While in their joy they were disbelieving and still wondering, he said to them, “Have you anything here to eat?” 42 They gave him a piece of broiled fish, 43 and he took it and ate in their presence. 44 Then he said to them, “These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you—that everything written about me in the law of Moses, the prophets, and the psalms must be fulfilled.” 45 Then he opened their minds to understand the scriptures, 46 and he said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Messiah is to suffer and to rise from the dead on the third day, 47 and that repentance and forgiveness of sins is to be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. 48 You are witnesses of these things.

            Before I make my remarks on this passage, I have to say a thing or two about the choice of the text. This is "year B" of the 3yr lectionary (series of readings). Year A for this Sunday has the first half of the Emmaus Road disciples story culminating with verse 35. Year B (our current year) picks up with the story in vs 36 and continues to vs 48. Year C uses John 21:1-19, the story of the disciple's post-resurrection encounter with Jesus on the shore; he cooks breakfast for them, and Peter is restored (the do you love me? feed my sheep episode). I've always disliked the year B version of the Gospel reading because it leaves out the crucial part from vs 35. I suppose some could say that the intent is to have us focus on something different during year B. However, it's noteworthy that vs 35 appears in both year A (at the end) and B (at the beginning) in the Roman Catholic lectionary. All of this is my way of saying that I have empowered myself to include vs 35 in our reading this week.

            And it really boils down to that whole 'mystagogy' thing that we were looking at last week. The Easter readings that appear on our lectionary were chosen with a certain idea in mind; they are all intended to TEACH. I suppose that's not exactly news.... as the whole Bible is intended to teach; however, the gospel readings for the Sundays of Easter are intended to teach in concert with each other. They are intended to shine a spotlight on different facets of the baptized life, all together. This is mystagogical teaching. Last week's big mystagogical teaching was on restoration, or what I in my sermon called the life of the "second chance." John told the story of Jesus giving authority to the Church to forgive sins, (aka restoration) and then he immediately followed that up with an in-house example. Thomas, one of their own number, needed to be restored. As I say, that was the focus last week.

            This week, the 3rd Sunday of Easter, it really doesn't matter which year of the cycle we're on, the theme of eating with Jesus is in there somewhere. And in saying that, we really don't have to look too hard to find the mystagogical point of the day: it is table fellowship.

            This is a concept that is pretty foreign to most of us. The current economic climate of increasing wage disparity and ascendance of 'haves' at the expense of the 'have-nots' over the past 25 years notwithstanding, we still live in what can be termed a land of plenty. While we may not eat our favorite meal every day, most of us do not go to bed hungry. 45,000 total strangers can sit together and eat a hotdog while watching a baseball game. Food, for us, is almost a trivial matter. This was not the case in the culture of Jesus' day. Food was more than just the stuff you cram into your mouth; food was the very SYMBOL of survival; of LIFE. And sharing a meal together was an intimate undertaking. To sit at a chieftain’s table and eat with him was to become part of his family--at least temporarily.  Table fellowship was a bond.

            The gospels tell the story of Jesus and his disciples; of how they travel together, teach and learn together; and eat together. Sitting at table with Jesus meant being able to hear his sayings and learn from him; it meant being able to be close to him; it meant being able to take their concerns to him; and most of all, sitting at table with him meant intimacy... membership in the family circle gathered around him.

            For those who were members of that first community of followers, it would've seemed like all of that came crashing down on Good Friday. Their teacher, their rabbi, their LORD had been betrayed, arrested, beaten and executed. It's all over. And to be clear... it's not just that the informative picnic lunches with him are over, but so is that intimate relationship; that sense that in being close to Jesus through the shared meal, they were somehow getting closer to His Father in heaven. Over. It's all over.

            But wait. Maybe not. And that's the whole mystagogical focus of the 3rd Sunday of Easter. Jesus died, but didn't stay dead. He arose. And this both changes everything, AND keeps everything the same. The meals will continue. The intimacy will continue. The closeness will continue. The familiarity will continue--especially in terms of that idea of getting close to him in this meal means getting close to his Father in heaven. That part is all the same. But now the doors will be flung wide open in terms of where and how often this can happen. He is risen, and that changes everything. Now these meals with Christ can be held simultaneously, all over the world, every Sunday, or even every day. And as this week's passage points out, in this meal we continue to encounter Jesus; we continue to have our minds opened to understand the Scriptures (vs 45), and we continue to be witnesses  of all of the things God has done for us.

            Like many passages of scripture there is a depth and richness to this passage. On the surface it looks like a simple snack story. They give the resurrected Jesus a piece of broiled fish (vs 42). But when we plumb the depths of a passage like this, an image develops: the image of St. Luke's little community of late 1st century believers ... a little community gathered weekly around the stories of Jesus, around the meal of remembrance, and around the sharing of their own testimonies of what God has done for them. They were a community convinced that the risen Jesus was with them, most fully and particularly IN THAT MEAL. And here we are 2000 years later, just like them.

            People always ask me... and maybe you've wondered yourself... why do I have to come to church? Can't I worship God out in nature? And I always answer the same way. YES. You can worship God out in nature. But you can only have that closeness with Christ at the meal. And you don't get that meal out in nature, you get it in here, gathered around table, with your fellow beleievers.

Cheers,

T.M.

Thoughts going in, Sunday April 12th Easter 2

¹⁹When it was evening on that day, the first day of the week, and the doors of the house where the disciples had met were locked for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you." ²⁰After he said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples rejoiced when they saw the Lord. ²¹Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, so I send you." ²²When he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit. ²³If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained." ²⁴But Thomas (who was called the Twin), one of the twelve, was not with them when Jesus came. ²⁵So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord." But he said to them, "Unless I see the mark of the nails in his hands, and put my finger in the mark of the nails and my hand in his side, I will not believe." ²⁶A week later his disciples were again in the house, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were shut, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you." ²⁷Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here and see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it in my side. Do not doubt but believe." ²⁸Thomas answered him, "My Lord and my God!" ²⁹Jesus said to him, "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have come to believe." ³⁰Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book. ³¹But these are written so that you may come to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that through believing you may have life in his name. (John 20:19-31)

            "Sundays and Seasons" online states: The Easter season is a week of weeks, seven Sundays when we play in the mystery of Christ's presence, mostly through the Gospel of John. Today we gather with the disciples on the first Easter, and Jesus breathes the Spirit on us. With Thomas we ask for a sign, and Jesus offers us his wounded self in the broken bread. From frightened individuals we are transformed into a community of open doors, peace, forgiveness, and material sharing such that no one among us is in need. Other online commentaries focus on the 'mystagogical' aspects of the season of Easter. One Catholic source says: Traditionally mystagogy extends throughout the Easter season, until the feast of Pentecost. This is a period of accompaniment for new Catholics as they discover what it means to fully participate in the sacramental mysteries of the Church. The newly baptized are called “neophytes,” from the Greek words meaning “new plant,” because the faith has been newly planted in them. Even though their catechetical preparation has been completed, they still have much to learn about what it means to live as Catholic Christians. Things often look different from the inside! Once they find themselves really on the inside, the neophytes often have more questions about living a life of faith. They need the ongoing support of the community so that the faith newly planted in them can grow deep roots.

            Point being, it doesn't matter that we're not Roman Catholic, or that we may not use terms like 'mystagogy' and 'neophite.' It doesn't even really matter too much that we may have had no baptisms on Easter. The lectionary we're on... and the readings chosen for the Sundays of Easter **assume** this mindset. Backing up a step, Lent *assumes preparation for baptism and/or renewal of baptismal vows... and Easter *assumes growth in this baptismal life.

            With that in mind, the Gospel for the 2nd Sunday of Easter has several themes worth exploring. There is the theme of living one's faith in a hostile world: and the doors of the house where the disciples had met were locked for fear of the Jews (v19a). There's the theme of experiencing Jesus in community: Jesus came and stood among them (v19b). There's the theme of the office of the keys--the truth that we can audibly HEAR that our sins are forgiven: If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained (v23), and as the catechism says: this is just as valid and certain in heaven as if Christ had spoken these words to us himself. There is the theme of 'doubt'.... which, in reality, is unbelief; the NRSV mistranslates this word. To be clear, Thomas does not doubt. Jesus specifically tells him not to be UNBELIEVING but BELIEVING. Jesus is then quoted as saying something that applies to every disciple from John's original readers to us today: Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have come to believe (v29). To which, the Gospel writer adds: Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book. But these are written so that you may come to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that through believing you may have life in his name (vss 30-31). In other words, the WAY a person believes without seeing is through these written things...aka The Word.

            As a whole, the passage sums up the life of faith nicely. It IS FAITH. Unlike those first disciples, we will worship someone that we don't see with our physical eyes. But like them, our faith will have its ups and downs. In down times, we confess and receive forgiveness, knowing that our sins have been forgiven. And we draw our greatest nourishment in the faith from THE WORD.

Cheers,

T.M.