Audio Link and Sermon Manuscript for Sunday, August 22nd

If you'd like to listen to my sermon from worship on Sunday, August 22nd, 2010, please click the link below and download the audio file: 


http://www.box.net/shared/smhzjzi3p3


The sermon manuscript follows below: 



The Twenty-First Sunday of Ordinary Time; August 22, 2010
Park Avenue Presbyterian Church; Des Moines, Iowa
Texts: Jeremiah 1: 4-10
Psalm 71: 1-6
Hebrews 12: 18-29
Luke 13: 10-17 *

“Reprioritizing Antics”

--} I wonder… which Jesus it was that the crowds saw? Was it the Jesus the woman crippled by a spirit for 18 years saw when she was healed? Jesus—the “healer;” Jesus—the “miracle-worker;” Jesus—the restorer? Or was it the Jesus witnessed by the indignant leader of the synagogue—crippled apparently by his own values about Sabbath observances—seeing Jesus helping the “daughter of Abraham” by healing her on the Sabbath—“breaking the law”, so-to-speak? Jesus—the “law-breaker;” Jesus—the “rabble-rouser;” Jesus—the “trouble-maker”? And which is the Jesus that we see… today?

Inevitably, this choice of vision or “how” we see the story, determines not only “what” we see but therefore, “what” this passage might mean for US, too. Just what did the crowds “see” and understand. Did they see Jesus, the one who can heal people—like the daughter of Abraham, crippled by that spirit for 18 years; so that we can say, “Jesus heals people,” or maybe even, “Jesus can heal us”? Did they “see” Jesus making Sabbath exceptions—with authority to simply set aside long-standing Sabbath rules, or who can even re-legislate the law on God’s behalf or the people’s behalf? Or, did the crowds “see” Jesus as someone coming to show that God’s laws and rituals can change over time as new things become more important; observing too how quickly Jesus “noticed” this woman and sought to fix her problem—no questions asked? Jesus does this; but do we?

So I wonder… did the crowds rejoice at the “healing” and other acts of kindness Jesus was doing; …or did they rejoice because Jesus was building bridges over the walls that divided people—walls that other people had worked very hard to build in the first place? Would the people who witnessed Jesus’ antics first-hand be thinking about the broader implications of these acts? Not only that the woman was healed, but the conflict of the “healing” with long-held Sabbath observances? How should we see it? And do we think about the ramifications for our own time and place?

What long-held traditions might be “at risk” if we simply went about healing and fixing things, declaring and laying on hands—like Jesus does? Which Jesus do we really see?


But we’ve beheld these kinds of healings before—you and I. At the beginning of Jesus’ ministry on the shores of the Sea of Galilee, in Nazareth, along the Jordan River—Jesus laying on hands, declaring one way or another “faith has healed,” and not everyone was happy. We’ve also watched Jesus flaunt other ritual observances and Sabbath laws. So is there something that makes this healing or this Sabbath rule-breaking different or more important? What is Jesus really up to?

I believe Jesus is here-by inviting us to consider that the Kingdom of God is about setting people free. Whether it be physical ailments, demonic spirits, repressive Sabbath laws, or bad theology—the Kingdom of God calls into question our non-participation in the granting of freedom and new life.

I also believe Jesus is here-by inviting us to consider that time-honored laws, rituals, and traditions also require having our priorities straight about them. As Jesus demonstrates clearly, a right-ordering of our traditional observances reveals God’s Kingdom principles. In the Kingdom of God, a woman’s health and ability to participate in community rank higher than what is considered “work” on the Sabbath, or the “convenience” of the synagogue leadership. This may mean that someone has to work on the Sabbath, yes—but people already have to work on the Sabbath; this might mean that healing people or “setting people free” is also a Sabbath ritual that brings joy to the kingdom of God.

I also believe that to simply give the day and the argument over to Jesus and act as if his antics are really “no big deal,” seems to miss the point. The objection raised by the leader of the synagogue is a fair one; and Jesus isn’t saying, “it doesn’t matter.” Instead, Jesus is saying, “it isn’t the highest priority.” Here, the needs of “a daughter of Abraham” trump the prohibition against healing on a Sabbath; because as Jesus “sees,” healing this woman is at least as necessary or even MORE important as the care-taking of the livestock. For Jesus, Sabbath laws are generous about leading an animal to drink on the Sabbath; it is equally generous about the necessity of “healing.” Both are necessary. Jesus is saying similarly to the community of faith, “neglect anyone’s needs, and you neglect your relationship with God.” Both are necessary.



Yet, to arrive at “this” conclusion… that BOTH the healing and a deferment of the rules are required—leaves US in a strange place. Do we realize what Luke is declaring for us? Asking us to lay hands not only on a “breaking of the rules,” but that we might also go out of our way to “release” the bonds of those who are en-captured? And the risks may be extraordinary.

• Who are the people it is “necessary” for us to intervene for, to touch with our hands or otherwise release; for whom our action is REQUIRED?
• Which rules of ours ought to be deferred by our same hands, so that the reign of God might become more real to us and be revealed by us?

Thus, mustn’t we not only consider the plight, but also seek to lay our hands on those such as these—in a manner like unto Jesus:

• Like the children of undocumented workers, who need the resources of education and health-care; who have been brought into our country because they are CHILDREN, not to flaunt our laws and cause us pain, but because their parents believed in a better way of life?
• Of whom we’ve been told, “it will cost US too much.”
• Of whom we’ve been told, “it’s against the law.”
• Of whom we’ve been told, “they don’t deserve our help.”

• Like Palestinians and Israelis, whose leaders authorize the use of weapons and force, who threaten life and property in the discourse and violence of war.
• Yet both Israeli sons and daughters are heirs of Abraham; so, too, Palestinian children.
• To both sides, God promises “faithfulness.”
• Yet, we’re often told, we have to “choose one life over the other.”

• Or dare I mention the host of other peoples and issues about which we might dare withhold the touch of our hands—afraid others might criticize our purposeful faith in Jesus:
• That people who lose their job means you didn’t work hard enough, do well enough, and don’t deserve a third chance, or fourth—even if your children fall victim to your circumstances; [I met someone last week who’s husband was on his fourth job THIS YEAR—because of various layoffs]
• We love helping CROSS Ministries, and the back to school supply drive, but did you know that in order to receive supplies, people have to first “prove” they are poor enough to participate?
• Devastated people in Haiti; devastated people in Pakistan; we were moved to generosity by one tragedy, not so much by the other.
• Healthcare, afforded to some of us, but not all of us—at least not in the same way or at the same cost.
• Or all those places where we’ve put up walls against certain kinds of people, for whom we don’t want “equality” to be truly shared, because of race, creed, orientation, or income.

So I wonder… if too often you and I are too comfortable “seeing” that it’s Jesus who heals people. That fact that “Jesus does it,” means we don’t have to. “Jesus heals people”—as if our attitude were like the synagogue leader declaring, “come on the other six days to be healed!” Or that we see Jesus proposing a change in the rules—as if anything goes, as long as we have a good reason—so that we are utterly unaccountable for any of our actions. Sunday worship: optional. Tithing: doesn’t have to mean 10% of our income—just as long as we give something in the offering, right? Or, “As long as my needs are met in worship, I don’t have to care about other people’s needs.” And too often, you and I “see” only one side or the other—whichever is our advantage, using the one to block the other. That BOTH would be NECESSARY, REQUIRED—freedom for the en-captured AND reprioritizing the rules? We hope not.


But Jesus, I believe, would very much have us reprioritize how we “see,” what is needed, and how we might respond. His antics aren’t one or the other, but demonstrate fully what the reign of God is all about. He acts—not to oppose the synagogue or Sabbath rituals—but will not neglect the obvious needs of the one held crippled, either. He is not held back by any force—demonic or human, worldly or divine. He offers the reign of God as if it were simply due—no more waiting required. And he gives notice to those who would stand in the way. But is this what the crowd is rejoicing over Jesus “about”? And if it is, what things might still be in our way—so that we can rejoice, too?


--+ Friends, God sent his son, the Christ, who declares for us the Kingdom of God—as if it were simply due, no questions asked. He not only tells us about it, he shows us what it’s like—even, what it MEANS. Setting people free; sometimes, understanding the rules rightly-ordered. Thanks be to God—who shows us the way. AMEN.