2^nd Sunday in Advent, 4^th December 2011

St Michael and All Angels, Brighton

Isa 40:1-11, 2 Pet 3:8-15a, Mk 1:1-8

+ In the name of God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Amen

It’s Christmas time again! Yes, it’s that time of year when, wherever you turn, you simply can’t escape the fact that it’s Christmas. Those lovely twinkling lights that I walk past on North Street as I make my way from Kemptown these last couple of weeks. The adverts on the TV helpfully reminding us to go to this store or the other to buy the latest “must have” presents. And of course the annual treat of turning the radio on and hearing Mariah Carey singing “All I Want for Christmas is You”. It’s all a wonderful reminder that we are in the Christmas season!

Except of course that we are not. Not yet! We may be forgiven for thinking that we are. Because, although we know that Christmas is on its way, it’s not here yet! As Father Raymond reminded us last week, we are in a period of preparation in these weeks leading up to the birth of Jesus. So perhaps to go mad with excitement just now is a little premature!

Advent is a time of preparation and anticipation, and each week during Advent has its own particular focus, and on this Second Sunday of Advent the church focuses upon the “Prophets”. Those giants of the Old Testament who often perhaps seem so stern and foreboding! The popular image of the prophet is often that of a crazy eyed religious zealot making stern pronouncements in the name of a God who seems to be continually mad at the way people have moved away from him. There is the reputation that prophets sometimes have as a sort of divine fortune teller, yet to reduce their role to something not far removed from the astrology column of a newspaper does a great disservice to their real significance.

What both the gospel and the Old Testament reading that it echo’s this morning emphasise, is the role of the prophet of one who prepares. One who lays the land, who gets the people ready. The gospel opens with the declaration, “See, I am sending my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way; the voice of one crying out in the wilderness; “Prepare the way of the Lord” (Mk 1:2-3). It speaks of course, of John the Baptist whose role it was to declare the coming of Christ and get the people ready for the one who was to come.

Now, while I’m certainly no building engineer or architect, I’m pretty sure that this wonderful building we worship in today didn’t just appear overnight. Plans were drawn up, the land was made ready and foundations were dug. Each step in the process took time, and without any particular component the actual building just would not have been able to take place. To just hastily erect a church (or any building) without a very thorough period of preparation would have simply been a recipe for disaster.

 I’m sure many of you have been here when the wind is blowing hard outside up here on a hill; I’ve had that experience myself a few times over the last couple of weeks. The creaks and strange noises that often happen at such times give us all the more reason to be thankful for all the careful preparation and planning that went into the building of this place.

What if Jesus had just suddenly appeared completely out of the blue? What if the Bible we have today consisted solely of the twenty seven books of the New Testament and nothing else? No historical context, no back-story, simply the sudden appearance of a baby in a manger who turns out to be the Son of God! How very different our story would look then. Yet the whole of the Bible in its many different ways prepares for, and leads up to, the coming of the one who, in the Incarnation, brings God into the messiness of our world. Over generations the ground was laid and made ready until the time was right for the event that was to change the whole of creation.

I have to confess, I’m not the greatest in the world at waiting for things. There are times like going on holiday, my birthday.....and yes, even Christmas when I’m like a big kid and just want it to happen now! Occasions like these are among the few times that even now I actually bounce out of bed in the morning at some unearthly hour full of excitement and wanting it to happen now. Loathe sometimes as I may be to admit it, the build-up, preparation and anticipation is all part of what makes these times so special. They don’t just suddenly appear as isolated moments in our life.

Here in this Second Week of Advent we come together not simply as a group of individuals, but as a community. A community on a shared journey of wonder and discovery as we gradually get closer to the moment when God came and dwelt amongst us, sharing our humanity and inviting us to be partakers of his divinity. Let us not rush that journey. When all around us seem to be frantically looking for instant satisfaction, let us take a moment to slow down and savour this time of waiting. Step away, even if it is only for a few minutes each day from the busyness of our everyday life and be still with our Lord. A time of reflection, of anticipation. A time of joy.....and yes, of gradual excitement. Events such as the Beach Hut Advent Calendar on Hove sea-front over the next few weeks are an excellent opportunity to present the Advent story  as one of looking forward with hope to our Lord’s coming. May those who visit the beach huts come away with a sense of wonder and excitement at the message they hear.

As John the Baptist prepared the way for Christ, let us prepare ourselves for Christ. Both as we celebrate his Incarnation as a helpless infant in a manger, and as we look forward to his coming again as we heard in the epistle reading. As the writer of the epistle exhorts each of us, “Therefore, beloved, while you are waiting for these things, strive to be found by him at peace, without spot or blemish; and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation” (2 Pet 2:14-15a).

+ In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.  AMEN

Tantum Ergo

This is quickly becoming one of my favourite service. Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament and Benediction. Thanks to my placement in St Michael and All Angels. Truly wonderful.

Christ the King!

Vespers and Benediction, Sunday 20^th November 2011

CHRIST THE KING

+ In the name of God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Amen.

Today, as you know, we celebrate the feast of Christ the King. This particular Sunday marks the end of the church’s year, and is, I think, a fitting culmination to all that has gone before throughout the year. It is a reminder that ultimately Christ is sovereign over not only humankind, but all of creation!

We have journeyed with Christ over the year as we celebrated with joy his coming amongst us in the Incarnation. We have listened to the familiar stories of his ministry amongst the poor and oppressed. We have walked with him during Holy Week as the terrible events that were to happen unfolded. And we have wept and mourned with his mother and his disciples as he suffered his execution upon a cross. So far, it is not really looking very promising is it? This isn’t what is supposed to happen to a great King!

Yet, with his resurrection from the dead a few days later everything was changed! No longer did the power of death have any hold over him! Forty days later he ascended into heaven where, as we recall each week in the creed, he “sits at the right hand of the Father”. “He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end”. Quite a contrast to say the least, from the seemingly ignominious ending of his earthly life.

The history of the world is full of leaders who have ruled over their people in many different ways. From those who are relatively obscure and almost forgotten right through to those who through their deeds have become infamous, and whose names and actions are still recalled centuries later. Schoolchildren are taught (or at least they were when I was at school) about historic rulers such as Napoleon, Caesar, King Henry the Eighth......the list can go on, and I’m sure we can think of examples even today. Sometimes those who ruled over their subjects were relatively benign, history however tends to remember more those who ruled through tyranny and coercion, fear and intimidation.

Most people around the world no longer live under the rule of a King (or Queen), and even fewer live under an absolute monarchy, where the Monarch exercises complete power over the people and their lives. Certainly here in Britain, much of the monarchs power is limited and of a symbolic nature, and none of us live in fear of a tyrannical ruler. Yet it wasn’t always so. In centuries gone by the King’s word was law and the repercussions for disobedience could be very serious indeed. If the King wanted for himself the land on which you lived he was quite easily able to simply take it and woe betides anyone who was to stand in his way.

Kingdoms were so often built up by military might and conquest. It could be something as obvious as a naked grab for more land, or an attempt to subdue and conquer a group of people and put them under the iron grip of the so-called “victor”.

So very different from the picture we have of Christ the King in the readings set for today. Far from being one who sought glory and power, in his ministry he had none of the trappings that would usually go along with being born to rule. He was born in a stable. He seemed to have no permanent home. His followers were few, and the authorities viewed him with suspicion at best and downright hatred at worst. His earthly life was one of servant-hood and obedience to the will of his Father. In becoming man he entered fully into human experience. In assuming human nature he emptied himself and came down to our level, yet at all times he remained fully receptive to the will of his Father. He knew what it was like to walk in the footsteps of those he lived amongst. Not too many kings are known for living life actually amongst their subjects. Too often they are put up on pedestals of untouchability and seem completely out of reach of ordinary people.

 In Saint Paul’s Letter to the Ephesians we read of him having been exalted to the very presence of the Father and having a place that is far above anything that could be imagined by any earthly ruler as the head over all things (Eph 1:20-23). This is the position that was his simply on account of his shared divinity with the Father, yet it was something that unlike earthly rulers he did not ever use for his own advantage.

Jesus himself describes in Matthew’s gospel the scene that will take place upon his return (Matt 25:31-44). In highly symbolic and graphic language we hear of him holding all the nations of the world in judgement according to their deeds. In words which echo the Beatitudes he invites into his kingdom all who fed the hungry, cared for the sick and welcomed the stranger. His kingdom is one that had its beginnings in his ministry on earth. It is not one which cares much for position or prestige. It is a kingdom that is based upon love, compassion and justice. A world away from the rulings of those who depend on military might or brute force. 

In the words of St Teresa of Avila,

“ Christ has no body but yours,
No hands, no feet on earth but yours,
Yours are the eyes with which he looks
Compassion on this world,
Yours are the feet with which he walks to do good,
Yours are the hands, with which he blesses all the world.”

We kneel and adore Christ in a few moments in the Blessed Sacrament. We come to worship the servant-king who gave so completely of himself and invites us each to be partakers of his divinity.  May we each be the ones who as part of his body reach out to others and help bring them into the presence of the King whom we adore.

AMEN

Living in the Spirit (Video)

Life in the Spirit

In the name of God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, Amen.

Families come in so many different shapes and sizes, and no two are the same. Most of us have experience of belonging to a family, and although at times getting along with one another is tricky, and sometimes simply impossible, there is often a link that remains there that continues to somehow bind us together. Paul uses the image of the family in our reading from Romans as he speaks of those who are led by the “Spirit of God” as being “children of God” (Rom 8:14). He speaks of a familiarity and intimacy with God as he goes on to describe the assurance that the Spirit of God gives each of us in our own spirit that we are indeed much loved children of God.

The whole section leading up to this reading is sub-titled “Life in the Spirit”. I wonder what thoughts come into your head when you think about that. What does it mean to live in the spirit? The phrase that someone is “too heavenly-minded to be of any earthly use” may come to mind. We may know of people who, although they may have a particularly intense closeness and devotion to God sometimes almost seem as though they are on a completely different plane to the rest of us. Is that what it means to live in the Spirit? To become so completely focused and immersed in prayer and studying God’s word that everything else just seems so unimportant? Somehow I don’t think so! Vital though prayer and study of the Bible is, it is not by doing those things that we suddenly are able to become some kind of spiritual Superman or Superwoman.

During the services of baptism and confirmation a particular emphasis is made upon the role of the Holy Spirit. It is the Spirit who gives new life and new birth. Part of the prayer said by the bishop for those about to be confirmed has these words:

Let your Holy Spirit rest upon them:

the Spirit of wisdom and understanding;

the Spirit of counsel and inward strength;

the Spirit of knowledge and true godliness;

and let their delight be in the fear of the Lord.

This is the Spirit that each of us receives at our baptism, and is acknowledged more fully during our confirmation. The Holy Spirit indwells within us as we live out our lives in the world..........not apart from the world, but in it, and engaging with all its complexities and messiness.  As I have mentioned before, we live and relate to one another through community, that may be the church community, but it is also our work community, our social group community, our neighbourhood community, our family community. Very few of us are going to be called to live in isolation, shut away from the world and reliant only on prayer to get by.

Last autumn as part of my reader training I was fortunate enough to go on a Quiet Day that was held at St Julian’s Church in Southwick. This beautiful medieval church once had an “anchorite cell” attached to it, in which once would have lived a hermit whose life was devoted solely to prayer and devotion to the things of God. It’s difficult these days to imagine what the conditions must have been like. Day in and day out, for weeks, months and years willingly being in just that one place, with only the occasional glimpse of what passed for everyday life. Passers by and pilgrims would stop at the small window that was the anchorite’s only link to the outside world and seek spiritual counsel and guidance. I suspect for most of us such an extreme form of isolation would very seriously threaten our sanity. Yet, what was it that sustained these people as they sought to follow the will of God in their solitude? I suspect it was the same Spirit of wisdom, understanding and inward strength mentioned in the confirmation prayer that kept them going and maintained their focus.

Yet, like I said, most of us won’t be called to such an ascetic life. For some of us our daily routine will involve getting up at some unearthly hour to get ready for work, or to take the kids to school. For others there might be appointments to keep or meetings to go to. It is the ordinary, simple things of our everyday life.....the way sometimes that life might seem to just plod on with nothing much really happening. Is this really what it is like for us to be living in the Spirit? Surely it should be more exciting than this?

Well no, not necessarily. Living the Christian life doesn’t always come with guaranteed excitement. I’m sure that there are probably a few of us here who breathe a sigh of relief about that! To live in the Spirit is to be filled with the Spirit and then go out and get involved in the hum-drum, sometimes messy, but often so very ordinary parts of our communities as we live out the gospel through our words and deeds. To live in the Spirit is to allow the Spirit to shine through us, daily, so that in whatever we do, whatever we say, there is something of Christ within us, reaching beyond ourselves to others.

Far from being some kind of super-spiritual ideal that seems almost impossible to achieve, life in the Spirit is here, for us now! We are children of God, loved and cherished by him and set free from fear and condemnation. It is for us to live out that life, and share it with others. For some that may be by getting involved in something like Sea Sunday last week at the Marina and being a very visible presence of the church. For others it may just be in going about their everyday business, quietly living out the good news of the gospel. But however we experience this life.....this inward strength, in our sharing it with others we still have a huge reservoir of it that we can draw upon ourselves. Our sharing with others, rather than diminishing it for ourselves, actually strengthens it as we live out the fruits of the Holy Spirit in our daily lives.

In the name of God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

AMEN

Reflections upon Atonement

The doctrine of the Atonement

In the time since I began my reader training programme, one of the things that has most caught my interest is the great variety of views regarding the atonement. It is a doctrine that strikes at the very heart of what the Christian faith is all about, yet there is no singular view of what exactly the atonement is or what it achieves. The reading I have done displays a very wide range of opinion on the subject, some of it quite contentious at times.

In his book Christian Theology, Alister McGrath has much to say on the subject. He categorises the main views on atonement into four distinct (but not exclusive) areas.[1]

·        The cross as a sacrifice

·        The cross as a victory

·        The cross and forgiveness

·        The cross as a demonstration of God’s love

These four basic categories are used by many other theologians also, and demonstrate the main ways in which atonement doctrine is interpreted.  The different theories could each warrant an essay in themselves. The view that is particularly dominant (certainly in evangelical circles) is that of sacrifice.  This theory holds that Christ was sacrificed in order to placate an angry God who required a perfect, unblemished offering in order to satisfy his wrath at the misdeeds of the human race.  A variant on this theme is known as “penal substitution” where Jesus receives the penalty for the sin of the world on behalf of humanity.

The concept of penal substitution has been much debated in recent years, most notably in the UK with the publication of The Lost Message of Jesus by Steve Chalke. Chalke was castigated by many in the evangelical community with his comment that “The fact is the cross isn’t a form of cosmic child abuse – a vengeful Father, punishing his Son for an offence he has not even committed”.[2] This remark parallels what Joel Green and Mark Baker say in Recovering the Scandal of the Cross as they quote Beverley Harrison and Carter Hayward, “As the classical portrait of the punitive character of this divine-human transaction, Anselm of Canterbury’s doctrine of atonement....probably represents the sadomasochism of Christian teaching at its most transparent”. God plays the role of the sadist who wilfully inflicts punishment and Jesus embraces the character of the masochist who willingly suffers it”.[3]  Outlandish as this statement may seem I think it sums up how the sacrificial/satisfaction theory of atonement is open to interpretation that can lead one to view God as nothing more than a divine psychopath who is intent on causing pain and punishment on somebody who he fully knows is innocent of any wrongdoing. God in effect demands that an act of violence be performed upon his own Son in order that his indignation be soothed away before he is prepared to grant mercy to lesser mortals.

Mike Higton in Christian Doctrine appears to be slightly sympathetic to Chalke’s charge of “cosmic child abuse”. However, he suggests that by acting together as they do they “provide in their shared mercy the substitute that their shared justice demands”.[4] The position here is that rather than Jesus being subject to the unreasonable demands of the Father, the decision to act is one that is made jointly by both Father and Son.

Given my early Christian background of strongly evangelical Methodist, this view of the atonement was pretty much the only one I was exposed to. I was blissfully unaware of any other way of interpreting the death of Christ upon the cross. So far as I was concerned Jesus died on the cross to pay the penalty for my sins.....a penalty that I should have paid. And God had orchestrated it to be so! It seemed to be quite straight-forward.

The view that held sway in the early church was that of the cross as a victory, often termed “Christus Victor”. This interpretation saw the death and subsequent resurrection of Christ in terms of spiritual warfare against Satan and his forces. McGrath suggests that rather than this actually being a theory of atonement as such “it is more an expression of confidence in the difference that Christ’s death and resurrection have made”.[5] As such it provides groundwork for other atonement theories such as that of ransom as put forward by Origen and Gregory the Great. This states that the devil had acquired “rights” over sinful humanity and the only way this could be broken was by payment of a ransom (Christ). This payment of Christ to the devil would satisfy divine justice yet in being unaware that Jesus was divine as well as human the devil would be overstepping the boundaries and thus forfeit all rights he had to a claim on humanity. Gregory uses the idea of Jesus as some kind of divine bait waiting for the devil to bite and be hooked. The problem that arises here though is that this particular view may lead God open to a charge of deceit (which would go against his own nature) against the devil in order to achieve the desired outcome.

Daniel L. Migliore in Faith Seeking Understanding seems to be more sympathetic to the idea of the atonement being seen as a demonstration of God’s love, as earlier mentioned also by McGrath. Often known as the “moral influence” theory and originally put forward by Abelard, this posits the idea that the reconciliation of humanity to God is effected through the compelling love of Christ which will then be worked out in the life of the transformed believer.[6] Migliore stresses the “unconditional nature and transforming power of God’s love”[7]  which demands a response of some kind on our part.

Each of these theories of atonement have something to offer the debate over what the death and resurrection of Christ means and how this is achieved. I no longer accept without question as I once did the seemingly dogmatic view that Jesus was punished on my behalf as put forward in the penal substitution argument. My own leanings tend towards that of the moral influence theory of the atonement as the ultimate act of love by which we too through Christ are able to be reconciled to God. As mentioned earlier however, each of the different theories intersect with one another at various points, and I do take on board the idea that there are elements of each that are able to be present within the doctrine of the atonement.

---

[1] McGrath, p320-335

[2] Chalke, p182

[3] Green & Baker, p91-92

[4] Higton, p278

[5] McGrath, p322-323

[6] Migliore, p185

[7] Migliore, p185

Are we good stewards? (video)

Are we good stewards?

Sermon 19^th September 2010

In the name of God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Amen

In today’s gospel reading we hear what is probably one of the most puzzling of all of Jesus’ parables. It is often sub-titled “The Parable of the Dishonest Manager”. Taken at face value, it tells the story of a man who, when faced with dismissal from his work, tries to lessen the effects of losing his job by calling in his employer’s debts in such a way that benefits him, and maintains his social standing. We might expect his employer to react angrily at the way this man has used his position to feather his own nest, yet his boss appears to be quite impressed with his ingenuity and initiative. In spite of his dodgy dealing he receives praise instead of reproach from the very person against whom he has acted. It’s a strange story that goes against our sense of natural justice. Why should he be praised for behaving in this way?

The main motivation of this character seems to be a desire to save face. He is a manager, and therefore will have some level of responsibility. He may well have staff under him and property to care for, though he doesn’t seem to be doing a very good job of it, as he is described as having “squandered” his master’s property! He acts as he does so that people may continue to welcome him into their homes. To him at that time, it may have seemed a very sensible thing to do. He had to somehow maintain his position in society; even if he was to lose his job.

Social status and wealth were very closely connected in Roman times, and all throughout history, right up until today we can see the importance people put upon how they appear in the eyes of others. Those who did not achieve positions of wealth and great influence were often looked down upon by those who did. After all, surely increased wealth was a sign of God’s blessing? It’s something we even see today in some churches that teach as long as you follow the will of God, you shall prosper materially.....the so called “prosperity gospel”.

The Bible has much to say about wealth and how it can be used as well as mis-used. Throughout the Old Testament we often read of the prophets raging against the injustice of the rich using their wealth in order to trample over the poor and maintain their own position. The prophet Amos is one of the most vocal about this as he denounces the greed and self-serving attitude of those who have become rich at the expense of the poor. Jesus himself often contrasts the greed of those who seek to exploit the poor with those who choose to pursue the riches of God. It’s not the wealth or riches itself that is the issue, but rather the attitude that lies behind it. It is the acquisition of wealth for its own sake that we see rebuked by Jesus, not the good stewardship of money that can be used in an honourable way to benefit others.

We hear Jesus in the gospel reading saying, “Whoever is faithful in a very little is faithful also in much; and whoever is dishonest in a very little is dishonest also in much”. If we can’t manage to be good stewards of what we do have, how can we expect to be trusted with anything greater? Jesus turns the idea of what constitutes true riches on its head. Not for him the accumulation of material things at the expense of what he regards as the true riches found in the Kingdom of God. He points us always towards a higher way of living, that of using what we do have, in the service of others for the glory of God.

We recently marked “Talent Sunday” when everybody who was at the service that week was given a ten pound note, along with the challenge to use it in a way that would benefit the church and society. It isn’t a competition to see who comes back with the greatest return on the money, but rather an opportunity to reflect and put into practice in a small way what it is to be entrusted with the smaller things.  The church is entrusted with the spiritual care of those who are the children of God, which includes each of us sitting here today, in churches throughout the land, and I believe also those who would never even consider walking through the doors of a church building. A measure of the suitability of the church to be given the responsibility of guiding people in the ways of God is in how it behaves towards those who are on the margins. How can we be entrusted with the care of people’s souls if we do not also meet their most basic human needs?

Here at St George’s we are a community I think that does try to reach out in a practical way to those within the wider community. We have been entrusted with a building that we make available for use by those whom we live amongst. The crypt centre downstairs is used daily by many community groups seeking to meet the needs of a hugely diverse group of people. It is in the demonstration of practical love that people are able to see something of Christ in us. By using what we have around us in the service of others we can bring glory to God.

All of us are called to serve and give something of ourselves in some way or another. Whatever gifts we each have can be used to serve those around us and God. Everybody sitting here today has their own particular way in which they are called to serve God. It’s certainly not something that is restricted to the clergy or those who are in licensed ministry. Today we are recognising those who have been called to serve in helping administer the Eucharist. It is a privilege to be able to serve the Sacrament to others, to be used by God as a vessel by which others are able to meet with him.  By being entrusted with the honour of what to many may seem the relatively simple act of assisting in the distribution of the Sacrament, those who do so allow themselves to be used as vessels through which the love, grace and true richness of God is able to flow.

AMEN

Pentecost 2011 (Video) First Sermon

Entering Into the Relationship of the Trinity (Video)

The Kingdom of Heaven is Near

Entering into the relationship of the Trinity

Trinity Sunday, 19^th June 2011

Isaiah 40:20-17, 27-31; 2 Corinthians 13:11-13 & Matthew 28:16-20

In the name of God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Amen.

Relationships are curious things! Often quite tricky and complex. When looked at in very close detail it is often difficult to pinpoint exactly how or why they work, but without them our lives would be vastly different from how they are today. I’m not just speaking about the kind of relationship we may have with a spouse or partner, important though they are. We are all involved in relationships of some kind in our daily lives in the way we relate to and interact  with other people. Sometimes those relationships may be relatively superficial with people who we barely know, or just know as a passing acquaintance.

 Most people will be familiar with the kind of relationships that build up in the workplace. Relationships of employer/employee and the tension and difficulties that can sometimes occur there. Relationships built with colleagues over time as friendships grow and a sense of working together towards a shared goal is achieved. And of course the relationships within a family. Father, mother, son, daughter, grandparents, and so it goes on.

 All our relationships work in very different ways, and have very different dynamics, yet there is no doubt about the reality of them. We may struggle at times to put into words exactly what makes them tick, but on the whole we value them and function much more effectively when we have people we can relate to on some level.

Today, being “Trinity Sunday” is the day set aside by the church for considering the most complex and puzzling relationship of all, that of God as “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit” and how we can fit into that relationship. Since almost the very beginning of the church theologians have wrestled with the question of how one God can at the same time be three quite separate persons. That is certainly not a question that I’m able to give any quick answers to.

  Every Sunday we say together the words of the Nicene Creed, in which we affirm our faith in one God. A God who, according to the words of the creed is Father, Son and Holy Spirit.  There is nowhere in the Bible where the word “Trinity” occurs, and nowhere where it is explicitly spelled out either. Yet throughout scripture we see examples of how the three persons of the Trinity work together in such close unity, that there is little doubt about the closeness of the relationship between them.

In both the gospel and the reading from 2 Corinthians we have the two most often used passages that point us towards an understanding of the Trinity. Matthew’s gospel tells of the disciples meeting the risen Jesus who tells them, “All authority on heaven and earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” (Matt 28:18-19). And in Paul’s closing words to the Corinthians he urges them to live in peace and unity with one another as he says the words that I’m sure we all know, “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with all of you” (2 Cor 13:14).

Both of those passages speak of reaching out beyond the comfort our own boundaries and self-interest to others. We are called out to relate to others, and to share what we know of the love and grace of God with one another.....and beyond that, with the world, and with those we meet. And we are to do this in the name of the one who has relationship right at the very core of his being

Our reading from Isaiah speaks of the everlasting God as our Creator.  Many people find it more helpful to think in terms of God as “Creator, Redeemer and Sustainer” than in the traditional terms of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. And we certainly get an image here of a God who is active in Creation and who strengthens and upholds the weak and the powerless. Even at the very beginning of creation we start to see the first signs of God operating in relationship. Genesis speaks of the Spirit sweeping over the face of the waters. John’s gospel tells us of “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” as his introduction to who Jesus was, emphasising that right at the very start there was a partnership of equals in operation here.

At the beginning of his ministry during his baptism, we have the familiar image of the Holy Spirit descending in the form of a dove upon Jesus while a voice from heaven calls out “You are my beloved Son, with you I am well pleased” (Mk 1:11). As he prepares to enter into his public ministry of reaching out to those in need he receives this very public affirmation from above.

Before his death Jesus had already told them that when he had gone the Holy Spirit would come to comfort and sustain them (Jn 14:26), and last week we celebrated Pentecost when the Holy Spirit came upon the disciples in power.

The narrative of the Bible all the way through is one that speaks of a God who is interested in relationship. A God who is actively involved with his creation, of which we are all a part, and who does not stand at a great distance. In the Old Testament we see the development of God’s relationship with the people of Israel through his covenant with them as he takes them through the dark years of the wilderness. Even in their times of rebellion and disbelief he is still reaching out to them in love. In the New Testament we see in the incarnation, death and resurrection of Jesus the ultimate act of love for a world that so often seems turned in on itself and oblivious to anyone’s needs but their own. And we are given in that reading from 2 Corinthians the perfect template to how we as Christians should aim to live in relationship with one another in a way that mirrors the harmony of the relationship in the Trinity. It is when we are able to be Jesus for others in the things we do or say, when we reach out to those who feel broken and when we allow the Spirit to guide us to say the right words of comfort to somebody. It is then that we are able to enter in some way into the relationship of the Trinity.

As I mentioned at the beginning, understanding how and why relationships work as they do is not always easy. Sometimes the only thing to do is to just get stuck in and be the hands, eyes, and ears of Jesus for someone. Understanding the relationship of the Trinity is something that people far greater than me have struggled with, and all the analysis in the world cannot beat actually experiencing and being a part of that relationship for ourselves, because that is when it becomes more real to us.

May each of us open ourselves to be used as vessels of God’s love and grace to all who we meet, and may our relationships mirror that which we see in God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

AMEN

The Paradox of Jesus, Human and Divine!

Presentation on Christology and Incarnation

Given to Tutor Group 6^th June 2011

For many in the church the creeds are where they look to for some kind of definitive “Statement of Faith”. Each Sunday most of us recite the Nicene Creed, setting out an outline of what is widely considered to be the most basic tenets of our Christian faith. In fact the largest part of the Nicene Creed itself actually speaks about the person of Christ himself. Pretty unsurprising I suppose, given that at the very core of what Christianity is all about, the person of Jesus Christ takes centre stage. The Athanasian Creed also, though used much less than the Nicene Creed, speaks a great deal about who Christ is and how he relates to the other two persons of the Trinity. I want to take the creeds as a framework by which to examine different aspects of Christology and Incarnation, how the view of the church was developed, and how it fits into the church we are part of today. When we study Christology we examine the nature and person of Christ himself, rather than the work he does through salvation and the atonement.

The section about Christ in the Nicene Creed makes a big deal of both the divinity and humanity of Jesus in equal measure. We say the words week by week, yet how often do we actually take time to think through exactly what it is that we are saying? At one and the same time he was both God, and man! The main discussion in Christology centres on this one point....the union of the divine and human in one person, Jesus Christ.

One of the earliest protagonists that brought the subject into the debate was Arius, who gave his name to what later became known as Arianism. His basic train of thought was that the Son and the Father are not of the same essence, and that the Son was created by the Father. The Son however is the foremost of all creation, but being a creature himself, there must have been a time when he did not exist. For Arius there was no real sense in which Jesus could be divine, as that particular attribute could only be applied to the Father. God was so “other” that it was absolutely unthinkable to Arius for him to enter into the messiness of human history and take on our humanity for himself. Jesus, as one who had been created experienced emotion, fear, pain and change just as we do. This, according to Arius is something that was impossible for an unchanging, essentially non-interventionist God to do.

 The two main schools of thought, one from Alexandria and the other from Antioch had very different views on the matter. In simplified terms the Alexandrian view was one that emphasised the union of the human and the divine in Christ, while the Antiochian view saw much more of a distinction between the two natures.

McGrath devotes a section to describing both these opposing ways of looking at who Christ was. He speaks (p227) of the Alexandrian emphasis of the Logos assuming human nature. He gives the example of how in the writings of the Old Testament prophets, the Logos was seen as “dwelling within humanity” as though he is somehow separate, yet at the same time a part of humankind. In John’s gospel (Jn 1:1) we see the “Word”, the “Logos”, who was there at the very beginning of time described in terms that immediately identify him with God. There is no separation evident here between the two. The entirety of this prologue is about setting the scene, so that the reader is completely aware that the Logos and God are one and the same, and that in contrast to simply dwelling within humanity, he actually took on the very nature of humanity (Jn 1:14) in becoming flesh. Jesus was the eternal “Word” who was already fully united with the Father before the Incarnation.

It is useful at this point to speak of “homiousios” (of like substance), and “homoousis” (of same substance). In 381 when the Nicene Creed was formally agreed upon the idea of the Father and Son as being of the “same” substance rather than merely similar became the accepted orthodoxy. This joining together of the two natures of Christ, both the divine and the human became known as the “Hypostatic Union”.

In Antiochian thought however this emphasis on the union of the two natures of Christ by the Alexandrians, the divine and the human led to too much mingling of the two. There needed to be a way to draw a distinct line between them. Again, McGrath speaks of how these two aspects of Christ are almost like two “watertight compartments” (p 219), not interacting with each other in any way. So God in the Antiochian view did become human, but it was only in the specific individual person of Jesus that this humanity was manifest rather than God actually assuming a general innate human nature himself.  According to this way of thinking Christ was a single, unified human being, apart from his relationship to God.

The Christology that we see in the three synoptic gospels tends to concentrate on the humanity of Christ, his way of relating to those around him. John’s gospel on the other hand places the emphasis more on his divinity, and while not ignoring his interactions with others, his miracles or his story-telling focuses more on his divinity. He does not focus so much on the “how” Jesus came into the world as the other gospels do. Put together though, the four gospels as a whole help us to a fuller understanding of who Jesus is, in a way that just looking at them individually can’t do.

The early church spent years debating the nature of Christ before eventually reaching a general consensus, which we now see in creeds such as the Nicene Creed. Alternative Christologies such as Arianism, which saw Christ as a subordinate creation of the Father or Gnosticism, which spiritualised him to the extent of almost denying his physical reality were defeated in the process and were so far as the early leaders concerned, heresies to be stamped out.

As well as our understanding Jesus coming from the creeds, for many people, particularly perhaps those who are not always as familiar with the language and ideas that the church uses, an image is often built up in the use of hymns or carols. The carol “Once in Royal David’s City” is, I think a good example of this. Especially in the second verse it speaks very clearly of the Incarnation, making very clear that this child that had been born was no ordinary person, but also at the same time God in human form. He was born of a human mother just as any other person is, yet he was also something beyond that. The hymn speaks of both his humanity and his divinity, as it traces his childhood in a pattern that is probably not unfamiliar to us today. Yet it also speaks of him as being “God and Lord of all”, and of being the one who redeems us. Maybe rather than the complex words of theologians and scholars, and even the creeds this is where the ordinary person in the street, who doesn’t come to church too often gets their image of who Jesus is. Often though it ends up with a slushy, romanticised image of Jesus as some kind of sanitised, meek and mild individual who though he may be human in a nice fluffy kind of way doesn’t seem to have too much of the divine about him.

Migliore tells us that “God acts, suffers and triumphs in and through Jesus”, a concept that brings to mind the paradox between the human and the divine. In not simply identifying with, but actually being fully human Jesus was able to suffer, yet how could this be so if he was also God? It brings us back to the Arian view that God cannot experience suffering without it diminishing his own divinity. Yet it follows that if, as we state in the creeds, Jesus is just as fully God as he was human, then it is God himself who was crucified, and God himself who died, fully experiencing, albeit in the most extreme form, what it is to be human.

There is a definite tension between a God who is all powerful and divine, and a God (in Christ) who experienced what it is to be human more fully than even we can appreciate. It is almost seems as though there are two competing and opposite personalities each trying to be as prominent as the other. It may well seem to be a bit of a cop-out, but it truly is a mystery how both these natures of Christ can remain distinct, yet at the same time fully joined and inseparable. Our human instinct is to continue to search for answers even when they are not always as forthcoming as we would like.

(Discussion followed)

The Practice of the Prescence of God by Brother Lawrence: A Review

The Practice of the Presence of God by Brother Lawrence

The Practice of the Presence of God is a book that is attributed to Brother Lawrence, though it is primarily a collection of letters he had written to people in need of spiritual counselling. It also includes a number of conversations recorded by a M. Beaufort as well as a piece by the same man reflecting upon the life and character of Brother Lawrence, a few seemingly random “collected thoughts” and a number of short pieces by Brother Lawrence that have been sub-titled “Ways of Attaining the Presence of God”.

Far from being a theologian of great learning, Brother Lawrence was in fact a simple lay brother in a French Carmelite monastery and had previously been a soldier in the army. He had undergone a conversion experience after coming across a barren tree in the winter and coming to the realisation that in spite of appearances to the contrary, come the spring and summer the tree would once again flourish with new life. Feeling at that time as lifeless as the tree appeared to be, he still had hope that in God’s own time he would eventually be restored to spiritual health. Upon leaving the army he entered into the monastery where he changed his name from his original “Nicolas Herman” to “Lawrence of the Resurrection”. His role in the monastery was as a simple “kitchen-hand” performing some of the most menial and tedious tasks in the community.

He came to believe that everything, no matter how seemingly mundane, could be a way of serving God and a vehicle of obtaining God’s grace. The book could almost be subtitled “The God of the Little Things”, as Brother Lawrence’s approach was to see the work of God in what was often regarded as the small and unimportant things as well as the grander side of life. The opening sentence in the book sums up his whole attitude “It matters not to me what I do, or what I suffer, so long as I abide lovingly united to God’s will ---- that is my whole business”.[1] The constant thread that runs through the book is one of finding total fulfilment through the submission of every part of his life to the will of God.

In the constant busyness of our everyday lives it can often seem difficult to find “quality” time to spend with God. Brother Lawrence seems to overcome this obstacle by seeking to devote ALL of his time and actions towards God. “How can we be with him unless our thoughts are ever of Him? How can he be in our thoughts unless we form a holy habit of abiding in His presence, there asking for the grace we need each moment of our life”?[2]  In the noise and clatter of the kitchen and the often menial duties he was required to perform, he discovered the ability to know that God was present at all times, and in all things. It was sensing the presence of God with him at all times that seemed to bring him to such profound peace, both within himself as well as with God.

The back cover of the book says “Amid his pots and pans, Brother Lawrence became so noted for his serenity and joy while he worked at the most menial kitchen tasks that cardinals and theologians came to see him and learn his secret, even the pope of the day is said to have visited him”.[3] For a simple uneducated layman to have such people wanting to know the secret of his relationship with God was certainly something out of the ordinary.

The book describes how due to his closeness to God Brother Lawrence had no need of a spiritual confessor. He was certainly conscious of the times when he failed to have God at the forefront of his thoughts and when he fell into sin. His strategy for dealing with it was to simply confess directly to God in the knowledge that he had been forgiven and then to move on with his aim of being in God’s Presence at all times.

The letters that he wrote were written for specific people with specific issues including a Prioress. He strives to encourage the recipients of these letters to constantly place themselves in the hands of God. He describes the struggle of his first ten years in religious life where he often felt unworthy of God’s love, with his past sins often tormenting him (possibly a sort of “dark night” experience). He recognises that by putting himself completely in the hands of God he can be transformed into the person God wants him to be. In his letters to people suffering from a variety of ailments Brother Lawrence does not so much as to offer the hope of healing to people as that they be given the strength from God to endure their suffering by feeling the presence of God with them at all times and being completely focused upon Him. In one letter he actually says, “I do not pray that you will be delivered from your pains, but I pray God earnestly that He will give you strength and patience to bear them as long as He pleases”.[4] Certainly as he neared his own death he did not seek respite from his pain, rather he sought to identify his suffering with that of Christ and in doing so was more able to enter fully into God’s will for him.

The book does give pause for thought at how God can be in ALL aspects of life, no matter how mundane or painful it may be at the time. Brother Lawrence seems to be suggesting that God is always present with us even in our suffering; we simply need to recognise that and allow God to work in us as He will. I’m not sure that many of us could ever attain the depth of what it is to know the Presence of God as constantly as Brother Lawrence, but it’s certainly a goal worth aiming for no matter how slowly we may get there.

---

[1] Lawrence, p13

[2] Lawrence, p16

[3] Lawrence, Back cover

[4] Lawrence, p107