The Christian Edifice Complex: Body as Temple of the Holy Spirit

3 Lent B      March 11, 2012

Exodus 20:1-17  Psalm 19

1 Corinthians 1:18-25   John 2:13-22

 Lectionary Link

  Doctor Freud was one who reached into Greek tragedy to name unconscious and repressed forces of what he called the Oedipus Complex.  Being one who is too easily entertained by puns, I, of course, can not resist naming the unconscious forces that influence what we feel about buildings.  That unconscious force would be called, with all apologies to Doctor Freud, the Edifice Complex.  Certainly architects in their love of buildings could be said to have an Edifice Complex but when we look at the history of Israel, we might notice an Edifice Complex in how the people of Israel have felt about their Temple.

  We might pose for us the question?  What is that makes a place, a building or a location sacred or special?  Why is that people have psychological and spiritually moving experiences in certain places or buildings?  We can talk about the sense of natural awe of places; the majesty of the ocean or of the mountains or of places like the Grand Canyon.  Nature awe makes certain places special because they can evoke a feeling of the sublime, a sense of our own smallness in contrast with great expanse and great power.  The sense of being dwarfed by a place makes a place special.  But what about things made with human ingenuity and hands?  What about a building?  What makes the Capitol building in Washington D.C. special?  What would Rome and the Vatican be without St. Peter’s Basilica?  What is it that makes us stand in awe when we enter a great Gothic Cathedral Church?  A Church building or Temple or Mosque is made with human ingenuity and craftsmanship and they create an enclosed environment that seems to be a microcosm of the great expansive universe.  When they are built and when they house the human activity of both private and corporate prayers they come to be called sacred space, and a place where prayers seem to have a greater sense of apparent validity.  And becoming sacred space, such buildings become very important symbols in the identity of the community of people who come to these spaces.

  If a place can become a sacred space, can it lose its sacredness?  What has happened to old stately Gothic church buildings in city neighborhoods that no longer have members to attend the building?  If they can’t become historic protected sites, they can become “secularized” or made non-sacred spaces, even though there may be people still alive who still regard their sacred experiences in those place.

  What is the nature of sacred space?  Is sacred space the special dwelling place on earth of God in a temporal location or building?  Or is it designated as sacred because of the experience of faithful people who come to gather to prayer in a certain place?  Historically probably both have contributed to the designation of a place being sacred.

  There is also something very practical about sacred places; they come into being because of what we call human institutions; such institutions are the overall organizations that can finance and develop the sacred building and provide for its up keep and for the worship activity associated with the sacred building.  Today, tourists can become very cynical when visiting the sacred places of the world.  Why?  One can go to Rome or Jerusalem and be put off by the apparent crass commercialization of all of the Holy Places.  Everything has a price and there is an entire trinket industry that lives off crowds who come to visit the sacred spaces.

  For the people who came to inhabit Palestine, Jerusalem became a holy city and what made Jerusalem a holy city was the Mount Zion where Solomon built the first Temple on the place where they believed that Abraham had been asked to offer his son Isaac as a sacrifice.

  The Temple was completely destroyed when the Israelites were carried into captivity to the conquering lands of the East.  It was rebuilt under the direction of Ezra.  It went through many renovations and during the era of Jesus it was expanded as a part of a public works project supported by the Roman government.  So, lots of employment was provided for the people of Jerusalem in the Temple complex construction projects.

  Judaism and modern rabbinic Judaism had to develop different religious expressions in times when the Temple had been destroyed.  The followers of Christ developed into being able to thrive as a community of faith when the Temple was destroyed for the last time in the year 70 of the Common Era. 

  What did the sect of Christian Judaism become after the Temple was destroyed?  How did they understand themselves surviving without a Temple?  They understood that just like the Jews in a former time of being without a Temple, that God’s presence could not be limited or localized to a building.

  In the Gospel of John which was edited several decades after the Temple of destroyed, Jesus is presented as being offended by the crass commercialism of the Temple Complex.  Economics and Institutional politics were detracting from the worship focus of the Temple.  By protesting in such a way, Jesus was hitting at the source of revenue of many people in Jerusalem and such a protest would have offended both the Jews and Romans.

  Beyond our ability to know exactly what happened in the cleansing of the Temple, what we might discern is the purpose of reporting this event by the writer of John’s Gospel.  What this author is writing about in the early part of the second century is the process of mystification that took place in how the person of Jesus of Nazareth became the social reality of what we know to be the body of Christ or the church.  Here is the progression; the Temple of God’s dwelling on earth was transferred to the body of Jesus of Nazareth.  God’s presence dwelled most intensely in the body of Jesus whom Christians proclaimed as Messiah and Son of God.  And when the body of Jesus was no longer seen his body was mystically transferred to the fellowship or community of people who knew themselves to be in a continuing relationship with Jesus as the Risen Christ.  The Gospel of John states that Jesus is the Vine and his disciples are the branches as a metaphor for the inner relationship between Christ and the church.

  Today, we need not worry that much about our edifice complex with our holy places, unless they are distraction from the goal of being in communion with the risen Christ who dwells within us in a mystical way.

  Today, we are invited to know and experience the presence Christ in all of the times and places of our lives.  And following St. Paul, we are to know our own bodies as temples of the Holy Spirit.  So get used to being a nomadic temple to carry the presence of Christ into our world.  Amen.

Body of Christ; Temple of the Holy Spirit

3 Lent B      March 11, 2012

Exodus 20:1-17  Psalm 19
1 Corinthians 1:18-25   John 2:13-22

 Lectionary Link

  What is the United States of America?  Is it a geographical location?  Is it the citizenry?  Is it the sum total of the historical events of all of her people?  Is it the flag and all of the symbols of this corporate fiction?  America is nowhere specifically but everywhere in general and as such is a mystical body.  How do mystical or corporate groups come into being and become even more than the sum of their parts?

  The earliest writings of the New Testament are the writings of St. Paul.  In his writings one can find the development of the symbolism of the “body.”  For St. Paul, the individual body of the believer is the Temple of the Holy Spirit.  Remember St. Paul’s writings were written before the Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed in the year 70.  St. Paul also wrote that together, the followers of Jesus were being built as a holy Temple unto the Lord.  St. Paul also wrote that the church is, “The Body of Christ.”  The Eucharistic bread is the body of Christ, and when we partake of the Eucharistic bread we are participating in the dynamic process of mystification whereby we constitute the continuing body of Christ.  The symbolism of Paul and Peter and other

Christians were then placed into narratives of the life and sayings of Jesus of Nazareth.  This narrative or story was an effective way of teaching the beliefs of the early church about Christ and about the identity of the church.  These teaching narratives are what we call the four Gospels.

  This is but a prelude for understanding our Gospel reading from John.  The Gospel of John was the last Gospel to be written with portions of it coming from perhaps as late as the first two decades of the second century.  Since it is the latest, one can expect that the theological reflection and symbols of John’s Gospel are most highly developed.  The writer uses the same technique as a historical novelist; the writer writes later practices into a former narrative as a way to illustrate and explain the origins of certain practices.  The writer of John’s Gospel already knows what has happened in the 6-8 decades after Jesus lived.

  What did the church of John’s Gospel know?  They knew that the temple in Jerusalem had been destroyed.  They knew that Christians had separated from the synagogue around the year 80.  They knew that their community consisted of both Jews and Gentiles.  They knew that they could no longer see and touch Jesus, but they were fascinated and baffled that his teachings and his Spirit could still be a current reality in their lives.  They were trying to make sense of how Jesus, who had died and could no longer be seen, could be such a vital part of their experience.  They were trying to teach and explain why the reality of Christ was so real even though Jesus of Nazareth could no longer be seen.  So they used the narrative and the sayings of Jesus as a way of teaching about the reality of their current experience of the risen Christ.

  The temple in Jerusalem was the sacred dwelling place of God.  If God resided anywhere on earth, in the Hebrew religion, God resided in the holiest of Holy in the inner sanctum of the temple.  But God’s people had to face a rather stark question?  Why would God let the residing place of God on earth be destroyed?  Why would God not protect the divine place of residence on earth?  The answer to this question had been given before by the prophets.  They said if God’s priests and people profane God’s house then God would not honor them with the divine presence.  In some way, when an old paradigm in religion does not work, then an explanation must be given for a new vision of faith, a new vision of what God is now doing in this world.

  So how do we understand the symbolism in the narrative of Jesus cleansing the temple?  The Body of Jesus of Nazareth was the place where the fullness of God’s dwelling could be found; and when this body was destroyed, it was rebuilt in three days.  The body of Jesus was resurrected and became known in the experience of each follower of Jesus, who knew his or her body as the temple of the Holy Spirit.  And collectively, the early followers of Jesus knew their gathering as the continuing presence of Christ on earth, because he was resurrected and alive in their midst.  Is this myth or fiction?  I would say it is mystification.  No less than the fiction of the reality of our country, but this is the spiritual reality of the church.  How can one deny the reality or the realness of this experience if we and billions of others throughout the age have partaken of this reality of the risen Lord?  If this is but myth and fiction, then it is pretty powerful stuff.  There has been no more powerful trans-historical reality than what we have called the body of Christ.  One may deny its relevance but it is sheer denial, because one is born into the reality of risen Christ whether one knows it or not.  Two thousand plus years of the realness of Christ in the lives of people from all around the world cannot be dismissed simply by personal denial.

   Today, you and I may not teach the reality of the risen Christ in our lives in the same way in which the early church did.  And we are free to look for new metaphors and new language to tell about the reality of how God’s presences have touched our lives.  Some people use the Bible to limit how we can talk about God and Christ; I believe that Bible provides us with early models of how to talk about the reality of Christ in the hope that you and I will be inspired to find the reality of Christ in our lives within the very tapestry of our history and life experience in our time and place.

  If this Gospel teaches us anything, it teaches about God doing new things.  The temple building may have been destroyed, but God’s residence within human experience did not pass away with the destruction of temple building.  The body of Jesus was crucified on the cross and placed in a tomb; where did God reside more intensely than in the body of Jesus?  But when the body of Jesus was taken from this life, did God lose the divine residence in life forever?  Indeed not, in fact a new understanding of God was born and in that understanding God resided everywhere but especially intensely in the lives of those who intentionally invite God to be found and known in their lives.  And so God dwelling in the temple in Jerusalem, gives way to God residing in the life of Jesus of Nazareth, gives way to God residing everywhere but especially in hearts that wish to overcome estrangement from God.

  I believe that this new teaching was the old teaching; why?  Because God’s residence with us has been from creation; it has just taken a very long time for us to come to know it.

  Jesus Christ made this intention of God from creation fully known and that is our Gospel truth.  God wants to make the divine reality known in each and everyone of us.  Let us today in this Eucharist be renewed in being the body of Christ, the continued presence of Christ in our time and place.  Amen.

Jesus, as Subtle but Profound Messiah

2 Lent B      March 4, 2012

Genesis 17:1-7, 15-16 Psalm 22:22-30
Romans 4:13-25  Mark 8:31-38

 Lectionary Link

   In Church history, the apostle Peter became quite a heroic leader for the early Jesus Movement.  But Peter is remembered in the Gospels for more than his heroism.  The Gospels do not always present him in his heroic mode.  One might say that he is presented in his learning mode.  In the Gospel presentation, Peter like all of the disciples is presented in the process of learning from Jesus.  It is sometimes surprising that the disciples are often presented more like Snow White's seven dwarves than as Christian heroes.  So to use metaphors from education, they are presented as stumbling students and not as learned professors.

  Why would the early Christian writers present the disciples living as students of Jesus in such   unenlightened states?  We are tempted to read the Gospels as a blow by blow historical narrative rather than seeing that the writers had teaching points that they wanted to get across to their readers or listeners.  The Gospel writers used narrative scenarios/events in the life of Jesus and his disciples to instruct their readers about their teaching points.

  A more direct method of teaching might be just to write a more intellectual treatise on why Jesus of Nazareth was the messiah in the setting of his time. (Modern theologians and preachers could bore you to death with such scholarly presentations with fifty pages of footnotes copiously citing all sources for all of the theories and counter theories).    But just as Jesus used the indirect method of parables to teach his listeners, the Gospel writers used the story or narrative of Jesus and his disciple to teach their message to their listeners.  The narrative method of teaching has the advantage of catching the reader or listener in the immediacy of what could be called a primary naiveté, an immediate response to story rather than thinking about what the writer wants us to learn from the story.  Using stories to teach is an effective and tricky method way of teaching and lots of really witty people have done it from Mark Twain to Will Rogers to Garrison Keillor.

  A topic du jour for the writer and readers of our appointed Gospel has to do with the nature of the Messiah.  What is the nature of the Messiah?  Peter was a Jew and a famous follower of Rabbi Jesus.  Peter came to understand that Jesus was the Messiah but he had to learn about the nature of the Messiah.  For many Jews in years before and after the appearance of Jesus, there was an expectation for a great figure like David who would arrive on the scene and lead the people of Israel to independence and greatness.  At the very least, the Messiah would bring deliverance to a captive people Israel.  In this regard, one would have to say that such a Messiah did not arrive to the people of Israel until our modern era; the 1948 declaration that re-established the State of Israel and the string of military victories whereby Israel has protected and expanded their borders.  And now Israel has that kind of Messianic power in possessing nuclear weapons.  A triumphant militaristic Messiah Complex with weapons even greater than King David had has now come to Israel.

  Peter, the great leader of the church, is presented as one who understood the Messiah to be more of a triumphant military figure.  But the Christian movement was not successful because the early Christians possessed armies and weapons.  The Christian Movement was successful because it showed itself to be the Kingdom of God on this earth through a strange counter-logic, the logic of suffering.

  In the Socratic-like dialog of the Gospel conversation, Jesus was teaching another kind of meaning for the Messiah than the meaning that Peter wanted.  Peter in his lack of understanding is stating the view of many of his fellow Jews about the nature of the Messiah.  “Jesus began to teach his disciples that the Son of Man must undergo great suffering, and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests, and the scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again. He said all this quite openly. And Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him.”  And what did Jesus say about this militaristic view of the Messiah?  Well, he said to Peter, “Get behind me Satan.  You are thinking in a very logical human way, but that is not the way of the Messiah.”

  What is the way of the Messiah as it came to be understood by the writer of the Gospel of Mark?  The way of the Messiah is the way of taking up one’s cross.  The kingdom of God is an interior process within the lives of people who are progressively changing their lives through the power of death and resurrection.  The transformation of the world happens one person at a time as each person realizes this process of repentance that can take place within one’s life.

  The literal cross of Jesus and the meaning of the resurrection of Jesus had become in the early community an interior spiritual methodology.  How can I change my life?  How can I quit doing things that I don’t want to do?  How can I do things that I want to do?  The death and resurrection of Christ became the symbol of the interior change in the lives of people and it was anchored upon this person, Jesus of Nazareth.

  Why was this message of Jesus catching fire and spreading?  Why did many people suffer so much and endure suffering because of this message?  Where did they get the courage to suffer so much?  People with this interior courage stood against the Roman power; they had courage to confess Jesus to be the Son of God and Messiah even while the Roman citizenry professed their Caesars to be divine beings with divine lineages.

  We can understand the Gospel for today as a teaching tool.  You and I live in an age when we’ve seen what we call Christianity become associated with a series of world empires.  We’ve seen Christianity expand because of colonialism.  Today, you and I have to admit that our context is much different than the context from which the Gospel writers wrote.  We understand the more militaristic messianic notion because we live in the nation of a world power that protects our Christian rights.

  I believe where you and I can reconnect with the intended meaning of the Gospel of Mark is to deny our “group identity” and receive this Gospel in the personal mode. 

  The laws of the Empire, even the American Empire can force upon me lots of behaviors in my life, but as all of us know, the laws of our Empire cannot reach the places in me to transform my life.  We can be law abiding citizen and still not know the sense of esteem that would be called abundant life.  And this is where we come to the genius of the Gospel; it is a way of grace given for the transformation of our lives in a way that cannot be accomplished by the external laws of our country.  And that is why it is relevant good news for us today.

  This Gospel is an invitation to the gradual transformation of our lives so that we can know the sublime experience of abundant life which cannot be accounted for in any other way except through knowing the gift of God’s grace.  I believe that the Gospel invites us to this subtle, but profound experience of the Messiah today.  Amen.

Gospel Puppet Show: What kind of Messiah Is Jesus?

2 Lent B      March 4, 2012

Puppet Show Script


Puppet dialogue between Roary the Lion and Miss Penny

Roary the Lion (holding a soccer ball and sobbing): Wah…Wah….Wah….Wah….

Miss Penny: What’s wrong Roary, why are you crying?  Have you been playing soccer?

Roary the Lion:  Wah, Wah, Wah, Wah, Wah, Wah…

Miss Penny:  Roary, I think you need a hug… Calm down now and talk to me.  Can you tell me what’s wrong?  Did you have soccer game?

Roary the Lion: Wah, Wah, Wah, Wah……

Miss Penny: Roary,  I’m here to help you.   Let try to help you.  May be I can help you get your happy roar back.  Will you let me try?

Roary the Lion:  Wah…Wah….okay but I’m not too happy.

Miss Penny:  What happened to make you so sad?  I’ve never heard a lion cry so loudly?

Roary the Lion:  Well, I played soccer today and our team lost the game, 4 to zero.  And I was the leading scorer.

Miss Penny: Well that’s good isn’t it?

Roary the Lion: No..no…no…I scored two goals for the other team.   Wah…Wah And I’m so embarrassed.  Why did that happen to me?  And why did my team lose?

Miss Penny:  Well, let’s see if we can learn something from you and your soccer game?  All of us will be winners if we can learn from you and your soccer game?  Will you help us all?

Roary the Lion:  Okay but I don’t know how my losing a soccer game can help others.

Miss Penny: Was anyone happy after your soccer game ended?

Roary the Lion:  The winning team were happy, of course.

Miss Penny:  When it rains really hard the farmer is happy to get rain for his corn and his wheat.  But if the same rain comes in the middle of the baseball game, the teams are sad because they have to stop playing baseball.  You see the same rain made some people happy and made some people sad.

Roary the Lion:  So that’s like every soccer game; if one team wins the other team loses.

Miss Penny:  Yes and life is like that some times there are things that make us happy and there are things that make us sad.

Roary the Lion: I don’t like to be sad.  What good is sadness?

Miss Penny:  It is not fun to be sad but being sad can turn out to be good?

Roary the Lion: How can being sad turn out to be good?

Miss Penny:  Well, let us remember the Gospel story today.  Peter was upset at Jesus.  Peter only wanted Jesus to be a strong King.  Peter did not want Jesus to ever suffer.  He did not want Jesus to ever feel sad.

Roary the Lion:  That’s right!  Jesus told Peter that some very sad things were going to happen to Jesus.  He told Peter that he was going to suffer and even die.

Miss Penny:  And Jesus said that Peter had to understand life better.  He said that Peter needed to understand that life is made up of wins and losses.  Life is made up of sickness and health.  Life is made up of happiness and sadness.

Roary the Lion:  So to learn how to live is to learn how to live with both.  But I prefer to win.  I would rather be happy.  I don’t ever want to be sick.

Miss Penny:  I know Roary,  but what good can come from sadness, loss and sickness?

Roary the Lion:  I don’t know Miss Penny.  It would take a great magician to turn sickness into health, happiness into sadness and losing into winning.

Miss Penny:  Well, Jesus is better than the greatest magician.  And he showed us how to do one of his greatest tricks.

Roary the Lion:  I like magic.  What is the greatest trick?

Miss Penny:  Roary, the next time you play a soccer game and when you win the game, what are you going to say to the little boy who lost the game to your team?

Roary the Lion:  Well, I’m going try to make him feel better.  I’m going to tell him that I lost a game too and it was very sad.  I going to tell him that he played a good game.   And I’m going to tell him that is more important that we have fun playing the game than if we win.

Miss Penny:  Why would you say those nice things to him Roary?

Roary the Lion:  Well, because I know what it is to lose and be sad.  So I want to help someone else when they are sad.

Miss Penny:  And Roary, that is the magic of Jesus.  Because you were sad, you knew how to help a boy who also was sad.  And that was the message that Jesus was trying to teach Peter.

Roary the Lion:  So God can help us better because God gave his Son Jesus to suffer too.  And so we can know that God is with us when we are sad.

Miss Penny:  Bingo!  Now do you see how your loss and your sadness can turn out to be winning.  You always win when you are able to help others.

Roary the Lion:  Miss Penny do you think that the boys and girls can learn this too.  I’m shy, could you ask them?

Miss Penny:  Boys and Girls, do you see how Jesus taught us the meaning of suffering and sadness?  We can turn our sadness into happiness and winning because what really makes us happy in life is to be able to help someone else.  Have you learned the lesson from the Gospel today.  Can you say, Amen?  Amen.  Can you say bye, bye to Roary?

Dying to Live Again and in New Ways

2 Lent B      March 4, 2012

Genesis 17:1-7, 15-16 Psalm 22:22-30
Romans 4:13-25  Mark 8:31-38

Lectionary Link

  Imagine that you are a rabbi who has become a follower of Jesus Christ.  And not only a follower of Jesus but a missionary apostle of Jesus Christ.  Jesus was a Jew who lived within the religious setting of Judaism.  But Rabbi Paul came to proclaim the early Christian version of Judaism and he took the message of Jesus way beyond Judaism; he took the message of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles.  And in so doing, an eventual split occurred as Christianity became a distinct faith community that was no longer regarded by the Jews to be under the umbrella of Judaism.   Saul who had his name change to Paul, was on his way to Rome and he penned a letter to the church in Rome, from perhaps the city of Corinth.  He had met people from Rome who informed him about the competition in the various church gatherings in Rome.  Some followers of Jesus were Jews who thought that all followers of Christ had to adopt all of the customs of Judaism.  Some followers of Christ in Rome were Gentiles and they did not think that it was necessary to conform to all of the Jewish ritual customs, such as the dietary rules and the practice of circumcision.

  St. Paul wrote a long letter to deal with the competition between Jewish and Gentile Christians.  He used extensive argumentation to appeal to both communities to keep them together.  St. Paul used history and reason to appeal to the Jews to show how the Torah actually provided for people of faith, who were not Jews.  St. Paul asked, “Was Abraham a Jew?”  Well, no he wasn’t because he pre-existed the birth of the Israelite people.  Did Abraham have a covenant with God, even before the Israelites had a covenant with God?  Well, yes, Abraham was before Moses and the giving of the Law.  So was the faith of Abraham, without the benefit of the Law, as valid as the faith of Moses and his successors who had the benefit of the Law?  Yes, of course.  Paul’s argument is really rhetorical because he is assuming the answers are accepted by his fellow Jews.

   So how can the outcast Gentiles be accepted into the faith without the benefit of following all of the practices of Judaism?  Well, the greatest Patriarch of all, Abraham had a name-changing covenant and so did his wife.  Abram to Abraham, Sarai to Sarah and the changing of the names signified that they would be Father and Mother of countless people, who like them, would be people of faith.  They believed God and it was accounted as being pleasing and accepted to God. The Israelite heirs of Abraham who followed the Law and accepted Christ were pleasing to God, but also the Gentiles who accepted Christ, can be pleasing to God without following all of the laws of Judaism, since they in some ways are like Abraham.

  This letter of Paul became passed around and read and preserved and it was voted into the book of Books by the later church and so Paul’s letter when read in the church, has an epitaph, “The word of the Lord.”

  And we who are neither Jews nor even Gentiles in the ways in which the people in Rome were, wondered how infallible such specific words in a particular context can be?  Perhaps what is really infallible in the Bible is the godly intent of the writers, not the specific details of words that relate to the particular setting.

  Our efforts to live the life of Christ now are not infallible in the details of our words and action but they are infallible if our motive is love and good will.

  What seems to be the infallible essence of the Bible is that God in many ways and times and place is calling people into loving relationship with God and with each other.  The ways, deeds and words will always be less than perfect; what is perfect is the heart and deeds of people who want to be accepted by God, not in their own way but in the way that God presents to them.

  The Christian or Christians or Christo-Jews who wrote the Gospel of Mark were writing a narrative form of a spiritual reality that had become practiced in their community.  How was Jesus of Nazareth the Messiah?  And was it important to have the correct answer?  Peter represented the one who is a Jew who confesses Jesus to be the Messiah but does not understand what kind of Messiah he was.  Many Jews believed that the Messiah had to be a triumphant conquering king like David who would intervene with great power for his people.  The writer of the Gospel of Mark was certain that Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah, but not because he would be a conquering king; rather he was a suffering servant on behalf of the world.

  And the suffering servant, Jesus, who suffered even unto death upon a cross, would provide the spiritual metaphor for everyone who wanted to change their lives for the better and find acceptance with God.

  So, taking up one’s cross and following Jesus became the metaphor, the teaching and catch phrase for the method of spiritual change that was occurring in the lives of the early Christians.

  These were people who wrestled with perennial questions that face each and every soul?  How can I become better than I am?  And if I know I am to become better, where do I get the power to make it happen?  And how do I become better without it simply being a matter of being proud about my own accomplishments?  How do I get better without ruining the accomplishment through a supreme act of pride?

  The method is dying to ourselves so that we might live again in a new and better way.  One Greek word for life is psuche and this refers to the interior life of the soul; our soul life has to let go of habits of mind, emotion and will, to take on new ways of thinking, feeling and acting.  And in taking on these new ways of thinking we attain to a more abundant life, called in the New Testament, zoe  life.  And this life is experienced as God’s gift to us; it is experienced as the presence of God’s Spirit within us as a higher power to help us become our fuller selves through surpassing our selves in future states.

  The people of the community of the Gospel of Mark, believed that there was power in the dying of Jesus on the Cross that could become the power in their lives in dying to what was keeping them enslaved.  They also believed that the power that God granted for Jesus to live again is the same power that allowed each person to renew their lives with new living, new joy, new possibilities.  The Gospel writer of Mark encoded this spiritual reality in the Christ narrative.

  And this narrative was relevant to their community; it was relevant to the Roman community, and it is relevant to us.

  What this means is that there are no outcasts?  Not Gentile, not Jew, not male, not female.  Why?  Because in acknowledging the power of the death of Christ as a grace and power within our own souls, we in any condition can humble our selves to receive a higher power to overcome what controls us, and receive resurrection higher power to take on a new experience of abundant life.

  And we need not get complacent or stuck in any form of abundant life; since the process is on-going.  We live in this process of dying to our tendency to make idols in our habits of mind and feelings.  We also live in the process of resurrection freedom to take on new habits of mind, feeling and choice.  And this process is open to anyone and since it is open to all, there can be no outcasts. 

  Would that we at St. John’s would be devoted more to this process of grace in our souls, than to any particular ritual style that we might prefer.  Our ritual only celebrates the grace in our souls.

  So during Lent, we take up our cross in the circumstances of our lives, because we are hopeful that the power of the death of Jesus will also be a power in us to leave what we need to leave, and take up the new and abundant life that is promised us by the presence of God’s Spirit.

  By taking up our cross and following Christ, we are not outcasts to God; and since it is offered to everyone, we can never make anyone an outcast from God’s grace in Christ.  Amen.

The Good as Temptation from the Better or the Best

1 Lent B      February 26, 2012

Gen. 9:8-17           Ps    25:1-9   

1 Peter 3:18-22         Mark 1:9-13

Lectionary Link

  The Gospel of Mark, the earliest written Gospel, does not give us the Christmas story with the narratives of the birth of Jesus.  It begins with the baptism of Jesus, an event when His Father declared in a loud voice that Jesus is His Son.   The voice of God the Father spoke to Jesus about his very identity.  God the Father said, “You my beloved Son!”  And God the Father said to Jesus, “I am well pleased with you.”

  And what does the third member of the Trinity do?  “The Spirit immediately drove Jesus into the wilderness.”  He was there for forty days, he was tempted by Satan, he was with the wild beasts, and the angels waited on him.  The Gospels of Luke and Matthew give us more details of the temptation, but not the Gospel of Mark.

  In the Eucharistic preface for the Lenten season, we profess a belief about Jesus that is expressed in the letter to the Hebrews: “He was tempted in every way as we are, yet did not sin.”  Jesus was tempted as a sign of God being with us in our temptations in life.

  Our belief that Jesus did not sin does not mean that we believe that he could not sin.  We might question as to why he submitted to the baptism of John the Baptist which was a baptism of repentance from sin.  If Jesus had no sin to repent of, why did he need to be baptized?  It was not so much a need to be baptized as his choice of solidarity within that particular community of John the Baptist.  We have learned to read the Gospels from the view point of a risen, cosmic, global Christ, and we need to set that view aside as we return to the details of the narrative of the particular events in the life of the historical figure, Jesus of Nazareth.

  While we have standards or rules that govern sin, such as the Ten Commandments, often the laws and rules have more to do with the practice of each community adjudicating in the ways in which they believe justice and community order can best be implemented.  But the law of perfection as presented by Christ has less to do with avoiding public penalty and more to do with the individual path of excellence that each of us is placed upon in finding out what God’s will is for our lives.

  The sin for Jesus was to be tempted into taking alternate routes in his life.  Jesus could have chosen lots of good and great things in his life, but if they were not the will of God the Father, they would have been sin.

  The temptation of Jesus in wilderness, perhaps, was to get Jesus to do other good things in his life that were not the will of God the Father.  It is harder temptation to be faced with good things in our lives that are not the best thing for our lives.  I suspect that the decisions that haunt us the most are the decisions where we chose good things in place of better things.  In our vocations we can make good decisions based upon good reasons of financial security but our souls can end up being burned out in jobs that do not gives us the excitement of creativity.

  The will of God the Father for Jesus was his ministry and how his genius was to be expressed in his life work.  The temptation of Jesus in the wilderness was to be a time of preparation for his life ministry.  During his time of preparation he was to face within himself a simulation of lots of alternative routes for his life.  Where one possesses genius, one can be tempted towards megalomania or inflations of the ego.  One can easily be tempted to do things from the wrong motives.

   We assume that Jesus did not have human companionship when he was driven by the Spirit into the wilderness.  But we are told that he was not alone.  He was with the beasts.  Jesus was tempted to fear the dynamic of predator-prey relationship that is found in the natural orders.  He was faced with the reality that this world is not always a natural friendly place to be.

  Jesus was also tempted by Satan.  Satan is a personified figure who appears in the interior life to accuse.  Satan is the one who tried to convince Jesus to go down other paths of success.  “Jesus, you are so brilliant; with Machiavellian brilliance you can persuade and outwit others and become a political leader.  Use your genius as an expression of political power.”  In other places Satan is called the devil, or diabolos (hence the Spanish Diablo).  A diabollo is the opposite of a symbol.  Diabollo means to throw into or generate confusion. The reality of Satan is the experience of maladjusted relationship between our interior life and exterior life.  It is literally “ a voice within myself turned against myself” in what is best for me and for my world.

   Symbollon means to throw together.  We get the word “Symbol” from this Greek word. A symbol is a type of sign; it puts together an action with an icon.  When the confusion of chaos can be funneled into a symbol or sign, then one has meaning, a direction and a message.  The ministers of the symbol for Jesus in the wilderness were the angels.  The literal meaning of angel is a messenger.   The angels waited upon Jesus in the wilderness.  In the midst of the confusion of many paths offered to Jesus the sign was offered to him about the direction for his life.  He was able to sort out from the confusion of many interior confusing interior voices, the will of God his Father.

  Today, we need to take a lesson from the temptation of Jesus.  How can you and I become the hero of our own interior lives?  How can we live with ourselves in such a way that we find God’s messages leading us to relate our interior lives with our exterior lives in peaceful and creative ways?  How can we learn to choose what is better for our lives over what appears to be merely good for our lives?

  We may feel good in our lives for not killing, not stealing and not lying, in the juridical sense of those activities.  But where is the excess of my lifestyle diminishing the lives of others?  Where is my excess a robbing of the bare minimum for others?   Where is my failure to learn more allowing me to simply live in “partial truths?”  Living in partial truths because of our refusal to learn is a different sort of lie that we easily absolve our selves of.

  What we can learn from the temptation of Jesus is the continual internal dynamics from which can arise new paths of excellence for us in our lives and surely those new paths of excellence include the betterment for the people in this world.

  We have begun the forty days of Lent.  Let us see where the Spirit of God drives us in these days.  Let us confront all of our good options in our lives that may be hindrances to what is better for our life and our world.  And let us find God’s angels, God’s messengers, to help us choose what is better for us as we are in the process of always remaking our lives through the transformation known as repentance.  Let us look to the once tempted but now risen Christ who stands as symbol of each of us surpassing our self in excellence in a future state.  Amen.

Roary's Yacht or Noah's Ark?

1 Lent B      February 26, 2012

Gen. 9:8-17           Ps    25:1-9   

1 Peter 3:18-22         Mark 1:9-13

Puppet character: Roary the Lion

Prop: Picture of Noah's Ark and rainbow in the sky

R: Roar..Roar…Roar…Roar….I’m Roary the Lion. My mom told me not to roar; she said that it spread my bad breath when I roared.  When I sing I only know one word…Roar….Do you want to Roar with me?

R: I got a picture here that I keep in my cave bedroom.  It is picture of a big boat.  In fact it is a ship.  It like a big ocean liner.  Do you know what call this boat?  I call it Roary’s Yacht.  Yes, that’s Roary’s Yacht.

Fr. P: That’s not true Roary.  That big ship is called Noah Ark.  Please tell the true story about Noah’s Ark.

Roary:  Father Phil, Now stay down in your hole and don’t come back out.

 

Fr. P:  Okay Roary but just tell the truth.

R: Okay, this boat is not Roary’s yacht, it is Noah’s ark.   Noah was a man who lived a long time ago.  He heard God tell him that there was going to be a great flood.  But God told him to build a big boat so that he could live through the flood.  God told Noah to build the boat big enough so animals could stay alive too.  Do you think that means that God loves animals?  

Anyway, when it started to rain, Noah loaded his family and lots of animals on his ark.  And it started to rain and rain and rain.  It rained for 40 days and nights and the water floated this big ark.  But Noah’s family and all of the animals lived safely on the ark.  We were safe on the ark but it was not comfortable like an cruise on an ocean liner.  Can you imagine the smell living on a boat with hundreds of animals?  Have you ever heard a hippopotamus snore?  Now that really does rock the boat.

When it stopped raining, we waited for the water to go; and soon there was no water to float the boat and it was time for everyone to get off the ark and build new homes and find new places to live.

But do you know what happened after we got off the big boat.  We looked into the sky and we saw this carpet of colors.  Do you know what that carpet of color is called?  Look behind me in the sky.  This carpet of color is called a rainbow.  And I love rainbows.  Rainbows make me very happy because they have all of the main colors.  Can you say, Red, Orange, Yellow, Green, Blue, Indigo and violet.  Those are the seven colors of the rainbow.

But Noah said that rainbow was a special promise from God.  He said the rainbow was God’s promise never to destroy the earth.  Why, because the earth is God’s creation and God loves the earth.

God loved the world so much that he sent his Son Jesus to help us to live better. 

Jesus did some very difficult things in his life.  He faced some very hard tests.  And he did so that we can face the hard tests of our lives.  Since Jesus passed all of the hard tests of his life, he can help us to pass the hard tests of our lives too.  Can you remember to pray and ask Jesus for help when things are hard or difficult in your life?  Okay, Fr. Phil, it time for you to come out of your hole…..bye, bye even…Remember the story about Noah and always be thankful for rainbows and remember God’s promise of love.