One of the changes that Martin Luther made to the worship practices of his day was to move the lectern, from which the word of God was read and from which the homily was delivered, from the side of the sanctuary to the center. For Luther, this move symbolized the central importance of the proclamation of the word in the Christian life. The term we normally use for this act of proclamation, the "sermon," comes from a Latin word that means "word." When men or women step into the pulpit to speak, they are not merely speaking their own words, they are speaking the word of God, or so goes the theory. How do we know whether the words we hear on Sunday morning are truly the prophetic words of God? Under what other circumstances might we expect to hear the prophetic word? The first question is roughly equivalent to the question, how do we know who is a true prophet? Our reading today says that one way to tell a false prophet is to see in whose name he or she speaks. Using that criterion, there are undoubtedly many false prophets in the world today. For example, those who urge allegiance to country over God are false prophets. Those who argue that an American life is worth more to God than the life of someone of a different nationality are false prophets. Those who claim that God cares more about Christians than about Jews, Muslims, Hindus, or atheists are false prophets. Those who state that riches are a sure sign of God's blessings are false prophets. In short, anyone who advocates worshiping the false gods of nationalism, religious affiliation, or wealth are false prophets. The scripture also indicates that those who speak in the name of the true God but do so without legitimate direction from God are also false prophets. These people are sometimes harder to detect. In fact, sometimes these people are we ourselves. It's all too easy to believe that we have a direct channel into God's chamber of secrets, but our own prejudices, presuppositions, and obtuseness often deafen us to hearing the true voice of God. So should we keep silent? No, when we believe God is speaking to us, it is our duty as Christians to let others know what we think God is saying. However, we should always do so with an attitude of humility, recognizing that our understanding of God and God's word is being focused through the prism of our own worldview and outlook on life, a point of view that is never completely free from impurities. Martin Luther was onto something when he moved the pulpit to the center of the sanctuary. People need to hear the word of God, particularly in today's world where so many disparate voices are claiming to speak for God. As prophetic Christians, it is our obligation to speak out forcefully yet winsomely, with conviction, passion, humor, and humility. People need to hear God's word today, and, by the grace of God, we can speak it.
The stunning victory by Hamas in the Palestinian elections this week was a surprise to almost everyone in the world, including the Palestinians themselves. The Israeli cabinet huddled with their prime minister to figure out how to respond to this "earthquake." In the U.S., President Bush said that he was glad that democratic elections had taken place without violence, but he also said that the U.S. would not deal with Hamas unless it changed its attitude toward Israel. In Palestine, members of the Fatah party were shocked by their loss at the polls, and they lashed out at their leaders for their perceived failures of leadership. Members of Hamas itself seemed unprepared to take power, appearing disorganized and unsure of what to do. It will be interesting to see what happens next in the region, though few see the Hamas victory as a good sign, at least in the short term. There are those who read the words of the psalmist--"God has shown his people the power of his works, in giving them the heritage of the nations"--as being fulfilled in the creation of the nation of Israel in 1948. Some of these people believe that God wants Israel to control not only the current territory controlled by Israel, but also the Gaza strip and the West Bank. In other words, they believe more or less the same thing as the Hamas charter states, except Hamas thinks that Palestinians, not Israelis, should control the whole land. People who advocate the annihilation of either Israel or Palestine by the other group apparently overlook the following verse in this psalm: "The works of his hands are faithful and just; all his precepts are trustworthy." At this stage of history, in 2006, what does justice demand in the Middle East? We cannot turn back the clock to the days before the foundation of Israel, or before the flood of Jewish immigrants entered the land beginning in the late 19th century, or to the days of the Ottoman Empire, or to the kingdom of David and Solomon. We have to deal with the situation here and now, with Jews, Muslims, and Christians; Israelis and Palestinians; living side by side in the same small area of this planet. The ideal situation would be one in which international borders between Israel and Palestine meant very little, because the two nations were not only at peace, they were valued allies and partners in trade, culture, and regional cooperation. Since this ideal is unlikely to be realized anytime soon, in the interim those of us who believe in justice can support efforts at dialog and trust-building that lead toward the formation of an independent, viable Palestinian state that lives at peace with its neighbor Israel. Does Hamas have the political will or the courageous leadership to work with equally brave and resolute partners on the Israeli side? Only time will tell. In the meantime, people of goodwill around the world can continue to pray for peace and justice, and we can remind ourselves and our friends on both sides that "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom; all those who practice it have a good understanding."
For another discussion of this passage, click here.
Fifty or sixty years ago, it was not uncommon for Christians in certain conservative churches to look askance at all those who played cards, played any game with dice (including Monopoly!), drank alcohol, danced, or allowed teenaged boys and girls to swim in the same pool at the same time (so-called "mixed bathing"). Their opposition to alcohol in particular was so pronounced that many would not even eat in a restaurant that served beer or wine. As times changed, more "enlightened" Christians relented on the card playing, dancing, and mixed bathing. Even concerning alcohol they were ready to concede that, since Jesus turned water into wine, one could hardly call it evil. They still strongly opposed the drinking of alcoholic beverages, however, primarily on the grounds that one always had to be concerned about "the weaker brother." I remember a testimony that a fellow church member gave about going to a company picnic and carrying around a plastic cup of iced tea. When people began to kid him about his drinking (beer was served in the same cups), he began to wonder if he should avoid drinking even iced tea in that context, so that people wouldn't get the wrong idea. I believe that what Paul said about concern for our fellow believer is important, but I also believe that concern for the "weaker believer" has been used as an excuse for "stronger believers" to continue to push their cultural preferences, for which even they admit there is no biblical mandate, on other people. "Strong" and "weak" believers are not distinguished by what they believe. One "strong" believer can be opposed to dancing, while another "strong" believer has no problem with it. "Strong" in this context implies a level of spiritual maturity and understanding of Christianity based on an extended period of experience in the faith. "Strong" believers who believe different things should be able to discuss their differences of opinion openly and respectfully, recognizing that their particular view of Christianity is not normative for others. Another example of the interplay between "strong" and "weak" involves teaching children and young people about the Bible. Adult teachers can usually be assumed to be relatively "strong" Christians, whereas young people cannot. Does this mean that teachers should water down their opinions about specific Bible stories? Well, yes and no. There probably are certain bits of theological understanding that most children are not yet ready to hear. On the other hand, youth teachers shouldn't feel obligated to teach a literal view of the book of Jonah, for example, if they believe it to be a parable. Learning the truth about Christianity (as the teacher perceives it) won't hurt anyone's faith, but can only serve to strengthen it. Mature Christians should definitely consider the message that our words and deeds project to new believers, but we shouldn't feel obligated to retreat into outmoded, even fundamentalist, modes of belief or behavior in order not to offend others. We might be surprised how relieved younger believers will be to realize that Christianity is not all about "thou shalt nots" and literal readings of the Bible.
When we think of Jesus, as what sort of a person would we characterize him? Do we think of him first of all as the divine Son of God? Do we think of him as a teacher? Do we think of him as an apocalyptic prophet? When Mark (or whoever composed the gospel) sat down to write about the life of Jesus, the first public act that he described in detail was when Jesus cast an unclean spirit out of man in a synagogue. The early part of the Gospel of Mark continues with many incidents of healing, and only later in the narrative does Jesus establish himself as a teacher, and he is called Son of God only after his death on the cross (with the possible exception of Mark 1:1, where the text is disputed). When Mark began to write his gospel, there were probably other accounts of Jesus' life already in existence, at least some of which consisted almost entirely of Jesus' sayings. At the same time, either written or well-established oral accounts of Jesus' passion also predate Mark's gospel. Mark seems to have created something new: a narrative framework for the life of Jesus which emphasized his role as a healer, alongside his teaching and sacrificial death and resurrection. It is noteworthy that the Jesus of Mark heals before he teaches. By framing his story in this way, Mark says that Jesus' acts of compassion provide legitimacy to his teachings. Jesus is not someone who merely makes claims about the kingdom of God. Jesus is someone who brings about the kingdom of God through deeds of power and love. It is easy for Christians today to say that we love those in need, but what do we do to show it? If we care about people with mental illness, many of whom live on the streets, what have we done to alleviate the homeless problem (and I don't mean the problems that homeless people create, but the problem that there are so many who are homeless). If we care about poverty, what have we done to address the issue either locally, nationally, or globally? Do our deeds match our words? Do they set a framework within which our words can be evaluated? Or are we mostly hot air? Jesus provides an example for everyone who longs to make a difference in the world today: act first, speak later.