Sunday 10th July

IST SERMON               

MORNING HOLY COMMUNION                         TRINITY 7               Preacher: Rev Lynn Mckeon

Colossians 1: 1-14                                                                                                                                 
Luke 10: 25-37

This morning’s parable of Jesus from our gospel reading this morning is as topical and controversial today as it was to those who first heard him. Jesus’ audience would have been very familiar with tales of hapless victims, robbed or murdered on that very road. Even today it isn’t the kind of road to take the   family on a Sunday afternoon picnic. So Jesus had their attention. Christ talked about violence and danger - and we certainly have plenty of that today. He talked about crime, racial discrimination, fear and hatred. 

In this parable we also see neglect and concern, we see love and mercy. We know very well what the parable says, but what does it mean? The hermeneutical key is in the wounded traveller's condition. It is not a curious  incidental. Jesus says he was unconscious and naked.  These details are skilfully woven into the story to create the tension that is at the heart of the drama.  The Middle Eastern world was made up of various ethnic-religious communities. You could identify the stranger ahead of you in two ways. By their accent and their clothing. In the first century the various ethnic communities within Palestine used an amazing array of dialects and languages. In addition to Hebrew, one could find settled communities using Aramaic, Greek, Samaritan, Phoenician, Arabic, Nabatean, and Latin. Not without reason was the north known as the Galilee of the Gentiles. No one travelling a major highway in  Palestine could be sure that the stranger he might meet would be a fellow Jew. But a short greeting would reveal his language or dialect if their clothing had not already given their nationality away. But what of the man in this story? Jesus tells us he is stripped of his outer clothes and is unconscious. He is thereby reduced to a mere human being. It was such a person that the robbers left beside the road. So who will turn aside to offer aid?  Let’s spend a few moments considering the characters involved in this story and their attitudes toward the man travelling from Jerusalem to Jericho.                   

Firstly to the thieves: He was a victim to exploit. The thieves did not see a fellow human being made in the image of God. They saw someone they could exploit. It did not matter what happened to him, as long as they got what they wanted. Their philosophy was "What's yours is mine - I'll take it". God gave us things to use and people to love.  We live in a culture that has got it round the other way.  Jesus Christ never exploited a person. He always gives back more than he asks for. He always leaves a person in better shape than when He found them. If he wounds, he also heals. We must beware of looking at people and thinking "what can he do for me?" We may not mug people to steal their money, but we can so easily hurt people with our words and actions.  To the thieves this man was a victim to exploit.      

Then to the Priest and Levite: He was a nuisance to avoid. Jericho was a priestly city, a place where many of the priestly families lived. It is the oldest continuously inhabited city in the world. It has a warm mild climate all year.  Before 1967, many of the oil rich sheiks from the Gulf States would spend their winters in Jericho. By comparison, Jerusalem is cold and exposed in winter. So Jericho was the place to live, and priests and Levites would regularly frequent this road on their way to and from the Temple.  Of all people one would have expected them to help this poor man. The priest was most probably riding.  Priests were drawn from the upper class of society.  They constituted the privileged elite of Jewish society. In the Middle East no one with any status in the community takes a seventeen mile hike through the desert.  The poor walk. Everyone else rode.

So what excuses might the priest have offered had he been caught on a security camera travelling by on the other side? "I've got to remain pure in order to serve God".  When confronted by a stripped and unconscious person the priest faced a dilemma. How could he help someone who might be a sinner? His religious laws forbade him to go within four metres of a dead person in case he became defiled. Then he wouldn’t be able to perform his duties. His peers would have applauded him for not stopping so that he could perform the higher work for God.

Perhaps he thought, “It's not my problem”.  Maybe it was. Why didn't the religious leaders do something about the dangerous road? Cain asked, "Am I my brother's keeper?  The answer is "Yes, regardless of your sister or brother’s race or colour."   Perhaps he was afraid of an ambush.  May be it was, maybe it wasn't. What mattered was the person in need. If we allow fear to determine our actions we will be paralysed from serving God.  Maybe he thought “Let somebody else do it” The priest could have said, "the Levite coming up behind me, he can stop, I don't need to." But then the Levite could then have thought, "The priest didn't do anything, so why should I?"

You and I can always find somebody to point to as an excuse for our own neglect. Failure to act when we should is just as sinful as to act when we shouldn't. If we go through life wanting our own way, then other people will always be a nuisance because they will get in our way. But if we go through life with our eyes open seeking opportunities to share the love of Christ, then every nuisance, every encounter becomes a divine appointment, an opportunity to serve God. To the robbers this man was a victim to exploit. To the priest and Levite he was a nuisance to avoid.   

To the Lawyer: he was a problem to discuss. Jesus told the story in reply to a lawyer's question. The lawyer was an expert in religious law. Israel lived under religious law in a similar way as Sharia law is imposed in some countries with a Muslim majority. He was then a professional theologian.  The lawyer wanted to test Jesus on a point of law. To win an argument. Jesus turns the conversation round to teach a fundamental truth about concrete action. The lawyer was safe with theories, "who is my neighbour?"  He was threatened with the reply "What would you have done in this story?  What kind of neighbour are you?”  To the robbers this man was a victim to exploit.  To the priest and Levite he was a nuisance to avoid. To the Lawyer he was a problem to discuss.

To the Inn Keeper: he was a customer to serve. I don’t criticise the inn keeper. He had his inn to manage, and that kept him busy. But I want to use the inn keeper to illustrate the fact that many Christians serve, or rather serve particular people because it is their job and they get paid to do it. Maybe the inn keeper would have helped the man without the Samaritan’s two silver coins, and the assurance of more if it was needed. We don't know. That was not the main point of Jesus story, but it is worth noting that the inn keeper took the money. So let’s follow through on the implications. How far are we willing to serve as long as it is convenient and won't cost us anything? Fine as long as it doesn’t interfere with my agenda? Fine as long as I can be reimbursed for that expenditure? Motive has a great deal to do with ministry. The Pharisees prayed, gave tithes and fasted - all acceptable religious practices, but the motive of some, says Jesus, was to gain the praise of people, not to glorify God. If I only serve because I am paid to do it then I am more like the inn keeper than the Samaritan, for I am treating you as a client rather than a human being. Of the five attitudes demonstrated in this passage, only one was acceptable, and that belonged to a foreigner. When Jesus uttered the phrase, "But a certain Samaritan...." I'm convinced His Jewish audience were shocked.   

The Jews and Samaritans had no dealings with one another. Every morning, a pious Jew thanked God in his prayers that the Lord had not made him a woman, a Gentile or a Samaritan. A Gentile might conceivably become a Jewish proselyte but not a Samaritan. They were lost eternally. The last person you would expect to help a Jew would be a Samaritan.  I'm sure his audience expected Jesus to say "when the Samaritan came along he took one look at the man and … finished him off."          

The concept of "ethnic cleansing" may be a recent addition to the vocabulary but the actions it describes have been going on for thousands of years. There was no love lost between Jews and Samaritans. Jesus might just as well have been describing the action of a Serb toward a Croat in Bosnia, or a Greek toward a Turk on Cyprus, or a Palestinian toward an Israeli settler on the West Bank.   Contrary to their expectation, Jesus elevates a despised Samaritan, as the one who did not permit racial or religious barriers to hinder him from helping this unknown victim.        

To the Samaritan: he was a neighbour to love. The Samaritan did not blame the injured person for the collective attitudes of either race, and use that as an excuse for doing nothing. He dared to act as a concerned individual, in three specific ways. He showed compassion: “But a Samaritan, as he travelled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him.” (Luke 10:33) This word means much more than passing pity. The original has with it the connotation of being deeply moved inside. It is the word used to describe the way the Lord feels about lost sinners. Compassion describes the way God feels about us.  When we show compassion we are merely demonstrating our family likeness. He showed compassion.

He took the initiative: “He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him.” (Luke 10:34)                    

The Samaritan could have excused himself. He was a foreigner in a hostile country. He was alone and vulnerable, but Agape, God's love does not look for excuses, it looks beyond obstacles. It does not ask why, but why not? The Samaritan cleansed the victim’s wounds with wine and soothed them with oil. He bound up the wounds so they would begin to heal. He took the man to the inn to recover and promised to return to pay the bill. The lawyer was willing to talk, the Samaritan took the initiative. He demonstrated compassion. He took the initiative and, thirdly He bore the cost: “The next day he took out two silver coins and gave them to the innkeeper.  'Look after him,' he said, 'and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.'” (Luke 10:35).  He interrupted his schedule to help this man. It may have made him late for a business appointment, it may have delayed him from seeing his family. But he paid the cost. What did he have to gain from this personally? Nothing - except the joy and strength that come when you do God's will. When you serve in love without expecting recognition or reward. What did the Samaritan show? Compassion, initiative, sacrifice.

Jesus said, "Which of these three do you think was a neighbour to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?" (Luke 10:36) When Jesus asked the lawyer which of the three was a neighbour to the victim, the lawyer gave the correct answer but he would not even bring himself to use the word "Samaritan".  He was still resisting Jesus attempt to reach his heart. I wonder whether we have got the message?

This morning, with continued anxiety over possible terrorist attacks, perhaps we would do well as the question - who is my neighbour? For Jesus teaches that we cannot separate our relationship with God from our responsibility toward those he brings across our path. The lawyer wanted Jesus to define the limits of his responsibility of neighbourliness. He wanted Jesus to identify those he had to be a neighbour to and those he could ignore.  

Jesus turned the question round.  The question is not ‘to whom need I be a neighbour?’ But rather ‘what kind of neighbour am I?’ - to anyone I meet? I invite you to join a revolution this week. Carry out acts of compassion and mercy - especially toward those who are different, those who are the outsiders, those who are the strangers. Whoever the Lord brings across your path. Your assignment from Jesus is really very simple: “Go and do likewise.” (Luke 10:37)

 

2ND SERMON

EVENING PRAYER                        TRINITY 7         Preacher:  Fran Powis

Psalm 77                                          
Mark 7 verses 1—23

I kept a hospital appointment on Thursday afternoon for a check-up on my eyes. I was pleasantly surprised that the consultant discharged me, as he had said previously that he would check my sight until around Christmas time to make sure everything was o.k. Now it may be that funding constraints caused the change of mind, however he seemed genuinely pleased with my healing and was happy to let me know that should I suffer any further problems I only have to ring the eye clinic for advice, which reassured me.

With this good news in mind I couldn’t understand why I awoke on Friday feeling a little gloomy and downhearted, rather like our psalmist in this evening’s reading. Verses 1 & 2 say, “I cried out to God for help; I cried out to God to hear me. When I was in distress, I sought the Lord; at night I stretched out untiring hands and my soul refused to be comforted”.

Bear with me, things do improve. In Sacred for this psalm (Psalm 77), Rev Philip Moon quotes Stephen Cottrell, Bishop of Chelmsford, as having offered this reflection, “I look to those virtuous habits, those spiritual disciplines which will not only sustain me, but nurture me in that sense that God is with me. And so I say to myself, ‘if each day I can hear God speaking to me in scripture; if each day I can speak with God in prayer and listen to his word for me; if each day I can behold God in a broken piece of bread—then I might start seeing him all over the place and in all kinds of unexpected people. And I’ll know he is with me always’.”

It is in beginning a good habit with little steps that we find our way forward.

There seems to be a gloomy outlook in the country at the moment, for those who voted for Brexit in the recent EU Referendum you would think that they would be buoyant and looking to the future with excitement, but, whether it is the media’s slant on current issues or we are floundering because we are rudderless at the moment without a committed Prime Minister to lead us, I am not sure. But if we try out Bishop Cottrell’s solution and listen to God for his advice rather than listen to news bulletins, we may make better progress.

Our Lord did not allow the Pharisees to put a dampener on his teaching of his disciples nor allow their enjoyment of their time listening to, and learning from, him to be to be curtailed by their criticisms.

The disciples were accused of not being ritually clean when they ate. The rituals for the cleaning of hands and utensils had become very complex under the man-made laws that the synagogue rulers had inflicted on the people. Mark went into a certain amount of detail here showing that his audience were Gentiles rather than Jews who wouldn’t need this explaining to them, and we may find all this quite acceptable with our health and safety rules on hygiene when dealing with food.

Jesus loved to quote the Old Testament scriptures to his accusers and he did so here, in verses 6 & 7, from Isaiah 29:13 he said, “These people honour me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men”.

Jesus went on to turn the tables on his accusers again by adding in verse 8, “You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men”.

Jesus advises his accusers, and us, to examine our hearts for our true motives in all we do. So we look at those who lead our country and we wonder whatever happened to integrity and truth.

Having read ‘The Servant Queen’, it seems that we can look to our head of state for that integrity, would that our political leaders will learn from her good example, and this is what our Lord advocates, that we should walk humbly with him, follow his example and love those around us. I fear that this is a step too far for some people and they do not honour the people as having as much worth as themselves, in other words they treat us like fools.

In verse 11 of our Psalm, the author begins to come out of his depression, “I will remember the deeds of the Lord; yes, I will remember your miracles of long ago. I will meditate on all your works and consider all your mighty deeds”.

The psalmist reflects on how God, using Moses and Aaron, led his people out of Egypt, holding back the Red Sea to allow them to cross, verse 19 says, “Your path led through the sea, your way through the mighty waters, though your footprints were not seen”.

Having been reassured that God leads our footsteps through unknown territory we can turn to what traditions we need to follow and what truths we see in Jesus’ words.

In verse 15 from Mark chapter 7 Jesus tells us that nothing outside a man makes him unclean, what is troubling is what is in our hearts, and therefore what comes out of us, through our mouths and our actions. Jesus repeated this lesson to the disciples after they left the crowd in verse 17.

It is our thoughts that tend to be unclean and the way we live our lives when we don’t abide by Jesus’ teaching.

Mark enjoys quoting Jesus’ Aramaic words and expressions, demonstrating that his knowledge comes from eyewitness accounts, probably Peter’s as the narrative usually mentions Peter’s presence at these events, this also gives us an idea of how much Jesus’ precise words were treasured.

Jesus directs that we don’t get caught up in abiding by manmade traditions for the sake of it, but that we should regularly review what we do and why we do it, especially where our worship is concerned. Here we can consider how, as a generalisation, in the Catholic faith tradition is very important and for Protestants it is scripture that is valued.

Do we stop to consider how some of our regular words and actions may impact on those who may be new and therefore unfamiliar with our church and our services? Do we need to pare down anything that we do because ‘we always have’, rather than using words and actions that have a truer meaning because they are thought through periodically.

There may be someone sitting in the pews this evening who would like to question something that I take for granted and am quite happy with. You may, for example, question these Churchwardens Wands, are they merely a sign of status or did they originate with a purpose and is that purpose still valid in today’s society?

However the dispute between Jesus and the Pharisees in this story is more about how the law makers have found ways to circumvent God’s code for a good life they have found a way to free people from their obligation to their parents, as in the Fifth Commandment to ‘Honour your father and mother’. The man-made law states that if peoples’ wealth is designated as God’s then this absolves them from paying to care for or look after their parents.

The hypocrisy is what Jesus abhors, giving money to God in order to avoid helping parents as God has decreed makes a mockery of God’s law.

Our desire should be to follow in Jesus’ footsteps, to listen to his word and obey it, not to try and find ways around it.

As Stephen Cottrell said, “I look to those virtuous habits, those spiritual disciplines which will not only sustain me, but nurture me in that sense that God is with me. And so I say to myself, ‘if each day I can hear God speaking to me in scripture; if each day I can speak with God in prayer and listen to his word for me; if each day I can behold God in a broken piece of bread—then I might start seeing him all over the place and in all kinds of unexpected people. And I’ll know he is with me always’.”             

Amen.