Easter Blessings

A very blessed Easter.  May the risen Lord bless you today and always.

Passion Week

Just after Jesus raises Lazrus the mood and scene in the Gospel of John shifts dramatically.  The joy of Lazrus becomes Jesus losing his patience with Judas over ointment, riding a donkey into Jerusalem, berating Greeks, and advising people to walk while they have light.  The image of Jesus smiling and rejoicing with the family of Lazrus becomes a Jesus being very intolerant to others.  Intolerant I think is the perfect word that fits the gospel reading today.

Jesus was a tolerant person there is no doubt.  Jesus chose for his Apostles the worst society could offer.   Jesus chose a fisherman, they were seen as drunken, surly, disrespectful, and cheating the weights of their catches.  Jesus chose a tax collector, they were in conspiracy with the Romans to cheat Jews out of their hard earned wages, they consorted with the Pharisee to extract the Temple Taxes, and they sided with the Herodians to keep Israel's king on good standing with Rome, Pharisee, and Jews.  Tax collectors were seen as those who would sell their mothers if the price was right.  The other apostles were simple shepherds, farmers, laborers, and tradesmen.

Jesus suddenly shows an intolerant side.  Jesus admonishes Greeks for their wanting Jesus to speak to them. "What do wish me to say?  Father take this form me.  This is why I was born, to fulfill my Father's will and glorify His name."  Jesus begins to berate the Pharisee for being hypocrites.  He accuses the scribes of being dishonest and translating to show favor to Rome and Herod at the expense of Jews.  He tells the Sadducee that they are liars, thieves, and conspirators to keep Israel under Roman control.  Jesus even lashes out at the people of Jerusalem for tolerating all the cheating, lying, and corruption.  Jesus becomes very intolerant, and it is sin that He is intolerant at.

For too long Israel had tolerated sin to take hold.  For too long people had become tolerant of sin but intolerant of the Word of God.  For too long sin was seen as business as usual and living in covenant with God as being wrong.  Sound familiar?  Does this not sound like today.  Continually we are admonished to be tolerant of sin.  We are to be tolerant of sexual immorality, the murder of babies, poverty, laziness, and a whole host of other sins.  We are to be tolerant of sin because we are not to judge.  This is plain wrong.

Let me make this clear: Be intolerant of sin.  Tell sinners that sin is sin.  That is not being intolerant that is being honest.  That is advancing the Gospel.  Moses was not tolerant of slavery.  Joshua was not tolerant of those choosing against God's laws.  Nathan was not tolerant of David's sins.  Elijah was not tolerant of breaking the Sabbath.  Isaiah was not tolerant of Israel's infidelity.  Daniel was not tolerant of being told not to pray to the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.  The Maccabees were not tolerant of being told not to observe the Passover.  In all these cases the people of God were intolerant.

Jesus was intolerant of Israel allowing the Temple to be defiled.  Jesus was intolerant of Herod's double dealing against Israel.  Jesus was intolerant of Judah selling itself off for profit from foreign invaders from Rome.  Jesus was intolerant of Jews being unfaithful to God, His Father.  It had to end and Jesus was the final answer from God.  Jesus was to be final perfect Passover lamb sacrificed.  A new covenant and final was to be given by God.  This time the Gentile would be saved with the Jew.  All humanity was to be brought into God's salvation - by the suffering, death, and resurrection of Jesus.

It for this reason that the Apostles became intolerant to those who rejected Jesus.  The intolerance of early Christians made them choose death before disavowing their faith.  Intolerance made St. Francis found an order of friars that cared for the poor, sick, and disenfranchised.  Intolerance made St. Ignatius found an order that would educate the poor.  Intolerance made Martin Luther demand reforms that would return Christianity to worship and away from corruption.  Intolerance made Martin Luther King Jr lay down his life for justice.  Believe me, Christians are called to be intolerant.

We are called to be the light of the world.  To fulfill this call from Christ we must become intolerant to sin and become tolerant to what Passion Week stands for - the call of Jesus to fulfill His Father's will.  We fulfill this by turning away from sin and turning to Christ.  We do this by sacrificing our way and turning to Christ's way.  We do this by humbly walking with Christ and doing justice.  That is our call of Passion Week.

Welcome Bishop Piers

Bishop Lyle Piers
Bishop of the Midwest, Congregational Episcopal Church

Today at Highland Meadows Church we welcomed Bishop Lyle Piers of the Diocese of the Midwest.  We thank Bishop Piers for a very moving homily covering a difficult topic.  We also thank Bishop Piers for staying after the service to share time with our congregation.  May the Lord bless Bishop as he travels through Texas and Arkansas with Bishop Duff the next week.

The Blame Falls On Me

By Bishop Lyle Piers

Bishop of Province 5 (Diocese of the Midwest)

David, David, David what did you do? You killed Uriah to hide the fact you and Bathsheba committed adultery. You and she had a child who ended up paying the price for your sin. David you were a murdering, adultering son of a so an so, but what does it say about God to take the life of a child who had nothing to do with the sins of you and Bathsheba? What kind of a monster do we worship? Is it justice that the innocent pay for the sins of others?

Well, let us take a moment to calm down and read what 2 Samuel 12 tells us. Yes, David hears Nathan relate a story of a lamb that was stolen from a poor man by a rich man who had many flocks. Yes, David shows anger when he hears of this. David demands not only the death of the thief but also that the poor man be recompensated. Nathan points to the fact David is the rich man in the story. David had choice of all single women in Israel and instead chose the wife of one of his men. Then has Uriah killed to hide his sin. Then as punishment God says the child of David and Bathsheba shall be taken by illness after it is born.

Again, God is punishing the innocent for the sin of another. Why not put David and/or Bathsheba to death? Why the innocent child? Well look at Deuteronomy 17:6, there must be witnesses to the adultery to put one or both to death. There were no witnesses, only David and Bathsheba knew. God would not break His own stipulations. With that resolved, why the child? It seems there was a gross injustice on the part of God.

Perhaps, but consider this: Without the intervention of God in the first place the adultery of David King of Israel who was supposed be without reproach would never have been known to Nathan the Prophet or the Rabbinical Council of Israel. David would have hidden it and it would have festered against David and Israel to judgment before God. Remember, Israel as a whole agreed to be responsible for the sins of the King of Israel. Saul sinned and Israel paid for it by a civil war that pitted followers of Saul against the followers of David. Saul's own son Jonathan turned against him to follow David. Consider also, millions of infants died during the flood in Genesis 7. Today innocent people die and innocent people suffer. The fact of this shows not that God is indifferent or malevolent, but that God may not be fair but is just. Fairness is not God's goal but justice is.

The child of David and Bathsheba was born. David performed extraordinary fasting and prayer to have God relent His verdict. It did not work. When God decides we can fast and pray all we wish, but the will of God is going to be done. That is justice, not fairness. Consider the logic we use as humans: Death is always wrong. Not so fast with this. Hear me out.

Death is not always wrong nor is it always bad. My own mother suffered so badly with cancer it was a relief when the Lord in His mercy took her home. She wailed in pain her last days. It tore our hearts to see and hear her suffer. Her death and many other deaths like hers are not wrong or bad, but may be seen as an act of mercy by a loving God. The children taken in the flood were victims of grave sins committed against them by sinful adults. It says rape ran wild through the land. The same for the children killed by Joshua in the conquest of Canaan. Children were known to be sacrifices for Baal and other gods. Incest was a right of fathers as was the rape of unmarried girls to rich men. Humans were doing far worse to children, so much so one could say their death ordained by God was an act of mercy. See this through the lens of justice and not fairness. God was taking His vengeance on the sinners but showing His mercy to the innocent. The children got Heaven and the sinning adults got Hell. That is God's justice.

Now look at the child of David and Bathsheba and consider this: This child is the product of adultery of the King of Israel. What right will this child have both then and as an adult? The child would have zero rights and would most likely would have been put to death after David's death. This child could have no claim, ever, to David's or Bathsheba's names. This person would have been an outcast in all levels of Israeli society. While the child was taken by God, David and Bathsheba had their hearts tore out. They paid for their sins. David was under the curse of the sword the rest of his life as well. The child was spared a life of misery while David was punished as fully as God could. So much so that many times we read David begging God afterward to take his life. God left David to live a long, long life. Bathsheba we are told mourned this child the rest of her life. While we think an innocent child suffered, actually David suffered greatly. The child died of fever and went immediately to God's arms. David spent the rest of his life suffering to keep Bathsheba, to keep his sons alive, to keep Israel united, and to keep his own life.

David came to realize that the blame for all his suffering fell on him. David for the rest of his life called to God for deliverance from his guilt and to forgive his sin. God did, when David died. God made David live the rest of his life in repentance. And David we are told was a man after God's heart. As are we all. God also allowed His Son to be beaten, humiliated, and crucified for our sins. Crucifixion was the most shameful death a Jew could suffer. The proper sentence for a Jew was to be stoned by fellow Jews. To be crucified by Gentiles was the most shameful death a Jew could suffer. A sign that God's Son was achieving something far beyond Jew and Gentile understanding. Jesus may have died, but the story did not end there. Jesus rose to the Father's glory and took His place on the throne of Heaven. The story did not end there for the child of David and Bathsheba in 2 Samuel either. That child was taken into the very Kingdom of God. His little eyes opened to see the King of all the Universe looking back at him. That child got the glory and David got the struggle. That child got freedom and David got slavery to his own sins.

Just when we think our logic makes sense we come to realize God's is far beyond our own. Death is not always bad nor wrong. Sometimes death is all God has to be merciful. “O Blessed Day when we arise to our Savior's glory. When our eyes behold the salvation story.” Remember that hymn? It tells of when we see Jesus greet us in Heaven with His outstretched arms, we see the nail marks and know our Savior lives. We shall know also that we live, so O Blessed Day. We also sing, “Death where is thy sting? Hell where is thy grip? The Savior has ransomed and set free all who sing.” God does not give death, God frees from death. To be in God's Kingdom is to be more alive than any who live on this planet. To live in God's presence is to be alive with a life of eternity. That is a life worth living. A life worth living here is to look to that blessed day we shall behold our Savior and know our Savior lives.

Death for a Christian is freedom and the first step to resurrection. What we shall not have on this Earth we gain far more in Heaven. What life shall be taken here is given in eternity in Heaven. Which would you choose: Heaven for eternity or an hour here? Give me Heaven and you can stay here. Right? See now what I am saying. Let me sing at the King's throne and you can sing in church. Let me behold my Savior and you can behold church furnishings. O blessed day of our dear Lord's rising. Just think, men we shall have our hair back. Ladies, you all will have those figures back. We wills shine brighter than the brightest star and we will look at one another and say, “Look at you! You never looked so good!You go on with your blessed self child.” And we will respond, “O I'm going on alright, going right to the Throne of Jesus to behold my blessings.” O blessed day! Here endeth the lesson. Amen.

The Battle of the Two Me

Romans 7:14-25

This passage of scripture seems to be pretty straight forward.  Paul is battling two people.  The inner Paul who seeks to do good, and the Paul of the human who seems to do wrong no matter how hard he wishes to please God.  It seems the classic struggle of flesh vs spirit that dominates scripture especially in the Old Testament.

Further reading though seems to bring a different view.  Each time one rereads this passage a new insight seems to come to mind.  The first time I read this passage I admit that the classic flesh vs spirit struggle was plain to see.  Then on second reading it seems what Paul was writing is that one side we have the saved Christian struggling to do good in a world dominated by temptations.  It is only the grace of Christ that saves us.

A third reading brought something new and fresh to me.  I asked this, "Who is the I Paul is speaking of?"  It does not seem to be the saved Paul who is apostle and witness of Jesus.  It seems Paul is addressing someone other than himself.  With this I broke down verse by verse and this is the result.  I think it a very solid meditation for Lent.

Paul is not describing his Christian experience or his pre-Christian experience, then he must be describing a non-Christian experience.  However, it cannot be simply any non-Christian whom he is describing; the "I" of 7:14-25 is too specifically defined for that to be so.  Also, the non-Christian whom Paul describes seems to have a rather Christian understanding of the inability of the law to bring about obedience to that law.  I believe that at this point Gerd Theissen's comments about Paul's use of the fictive "I," are helpful here.  The non-Christian whom Paul describes is not any one person or grouping of people; rather, he is a figment of Paul's imagination.  The "I" of whom Paul speaks is a non-Christian as seen through Paul's eyes, which explains why such a person would have such a Christian view of his non-Christian condition.

But still he is not just any non-Christian.  At this point I must disagree with the suggestion put forward by many that Paul is envisioning humanity as a corporate Adam.  While I do agree that Paul would quite firmly depict all humanity apart from Christ as being "fleshly, sold under sin," the imaginary non-Christian whom Paul is viewing through Christian eyes is much too aware of the importance, if not the true function, of the law to be simply any Gentile who lives "apart from the law" (Romans 2:12).  I believe rather that Paul is musing about the condition of his fellow Jews, who lay claim to the law without understanding what its real purpose is, who try to do the good while all the time missing the point of justification by faith in Christ, not by works of the law.  

Of course, the Jews themselves are not thinking this way any more than did Paul think this way before he trusted Christ.  His description in 7:14-25 is not a psychological depiction of the agony the Jew feels while trying to obey the law; if it were, the entire Jewish nation would have been rushing to faith in Christ for relief from their struggle!  Paul's description is more pointedly the Christian awareness of the inability of humanity apart from God to do what is good, which, in the final analysis, would be to come to Christ on our own and by our own efforts.  The purpose of the law is to lead people to Christ for justification (cf. Galatians 3:23- 24), and the ultimate irony and tragedy of the power of sin is its leading people to look to their own "lawfulness" for justification instead.  It is much like confusing a highway exit sign on I35 that reads "DALLAS NEXT 13 EXITS" with the city itself; the sign points to the destination, but it is by no means itself the destination, and to pull to a stop and chain oneself to the sign is in fact to miss the destination.  And, Paul would say, the ultimate tragedy is that the people who have chained themselves to the sign (and who are thereby blocking the road for others) aren't even aware that they have missed the whole point of the journey, which is the main reason why he grieves so earnestly for his fellow Jews in 9:1 and wishes that somehow he could take their place so that they might know the justification which God had always intended for them. 

       Verse 14: "For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am fleshly, sold under sin."  When Paul says, "I am fleshly," he is describing the non-Christian as he or she is seen by the Christian.  The contrast between the spiritual and the fleshly is here just as certain as it is in Romans 8:5-11, where Paul insists that to be in the Spirit makes it impossible for one to be in the flesh also, and vice versa.  The condition of being sold under sin refers not to observable misdeeds but rather to the most central truth about a person outside of Christ.

        Verse 15: "For that which I am doing I do not know; for I am not practicing this 

thing which I wish, but I am doing this thing which I hate."  Rather than being a confession of bewilderment over why one goes on committing "the same old sins" even as a Christian or a non-Christian's lament over his inability to keep the law, this statement reflects a truth which is hopelessly invisible to the person outside of Christ.  It is not that "I" do not understand what "I" am doing; "I" don't even know what "I" am doing.  In "my" striving to fulfill the law "I" am completely oblivious to the fact that "I" am failing to do what "I" in fact want to do, which is to fulfill the law by coming to faith in Christ.  "I" end up doing what "I" hate without even realizing it.  "I" am not misinformed; "I" am blind.

        Verse 16: "But if I am doing this thing which I do not wish, I agree with the law that it is good."  Since the person in Paul's mind wants to fulfill the law, even if in his own distorted way, his failure to do so is his unwitting testimony that the law is indeed good, since his failure is the performing of the very evil that he seeks to avoid.

        Verse 17: "But now no longer am I doing it, but sin which dwells in me."  Only a Christian could make a statement like this; no one of his or her own flesh could conclude that they are under the total mastery of sin, for the deception of sin is that it is possible to overcome sin by trying to keep the law.

        Verse 18: "For I know that good does not dwell in me, that is, in my flesh; for to will is at hand in me, but to work the good is not."  Paul is not here stating that there is a duality within the non-Christian about whom he is musing, for "flesh" is not merely one part of a person apart from Christ but rather is all that the person is.  The will to please God is short-circuited by the presence of sin to such an extent that the person is completely unable to do what he wishes -- and he or she doesn't even know it.

        Verses 19-20: "For I am not doing the good which I wish, but I am practicing this evil which I do not wish.  But if I am doing this thing which I do not wish, I am no longer doing it but sin which dwells in me."  Here Paul restates what he has already pointed out in verses 15 and 17, thereby forming an inclusio around verse eighteen, which is the heart of the human condition apart from Christ.

        Verse 21: "I find then the law, in me who wishes to do good, that evil is at hand with me."  "Wishes to do good" are no match for the law of evil and indeed only fuel that law, since the "wishing" is going on "in the flesh," in the whole person enslaved to sin.

        Verses 22-23: "For I rejoice with the law of God according to the inner humanity, but I see another law in my members at war with the law of my mind and imprisoning me to the law of sin which is in my members."  This statement must not be taken to indicate that there is a "spark of good" even within sinful humanity, for the rejoicing with God's law that is mentioned is a rejoicing that, as Paul says in 10:2, "is not according to knowledge."  Rather, it is according to the law of sin which imprisons the would-be God-pleaser.

        Verses 24-25a: "I am a wretched man; who will deliver me from the body of this death?  But thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!"  Again, no non-Christian in his zeal for the law would say this.  More likely, he would say with Paul the Pharisee that, according to the righteousness of the law, he was found blameless.  The wretchedness of humanity apart from God is not apparent to that humanity; only the Spirit can enlighten one that Jesus Christ alone can liberate a person from the unsuspected prison of sin.

        Verse 25b: "Consequently, then, I myself with the mind am serving the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin."  The pathetic state of religious and non-religious humanity apart from Christ becomes obvious.  The non-Christian truly believes that he or she is serving God, while in reality it is sin that is the master, wreaking its destruction through the person's flesh, which, for humanity apart from Christ, is all there is.

As people who are "spiritual," not "fleshly," we need not fall helplessly before the onslaught of sin (which was our life before Christ) but may with full confidence place our trust in Christ, through whom we have been freed from sin.  Whereas before we had no choice but to go on doing the evil that we hated and not the good that we wished, now there is a choice.  If we should go on living as if we did not know Christ, as if we had not been freed from sin, then this does not mean that we are expressing our deepest nature, because our deepest nature is now that of Christ, not sin.  Rather, we would be living as people who were "nearsighted and blind, forgetful of the cleansing of past sins" (2 Peter 3:9).  

This observation brings us back to where we started, for the second epistle of Peter warned us at the beginning that some things in Paul's letters are difficult to understand!  Nevertheless, one thing is certain: because of Christ, we may, as people freed from sin, "not let sin exercise dominion in our mortal bodies, to make us obey its passions" (Romans 6:12); instead, we may "present ourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, and our members to God as instruments of righteousness" (6:13).  This is both the hope of joyful service to God and the guarantee thereof.