Decisions and Commitment: September 2010 Lectionary
15th Sunday after Pentecost – September 5, 2010
Deuteronomy 30:15-20 and Luke 14:25-33
The themes for today are decisions and commitment – topics not everyone is comfortable with. In the Hebrew Scripture, Moses sets before his people choices that will result in life or death. Luke records that Jesus called his followers to decide between discipleship and life itself.
Deuteronomy, the fifth book of the Pentateuch, is presented as Moses’ farewell address to the people. It is a re-telling of the journey of the Hebrews from Mount Horeb (Mount Sinai) to the border of Canaan. The events of the journey had been covered in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers, but, in this book, Moses reminds the people of God’s leadership at the critical time before they pass into the Promised Land. (The title of the book acknowledges the repetition; Deuteronomy means second law.) Today’s reading occurs at the end of Moses’ speech and presents the Hebrews with the opportunity to respond to all that God had done.
Moses has reminded the assembly about God’s power and grace; in effect, he has told the Chosen People that they are the Chosen People. Now he tells them to act like it. Note that the people’s entry into Canaan is not dependant upon their obedience. God has told them that they will cross the Jordan and they will. But Moses calls them to consider how they will live in the land that God is giving them.
There is a difference between “free choice” and “inconsequential choice”. After the Exodus, the reception of the Law, and forty years of wandering, God’s promise is about to be fulfilled. Powerful acts of God have made the Hebrews significant people – they have important decisions to make. Their choices will result in life or death, prosperity or adversity but the momentous decisions will be made by the ex-slaves who have been given greatness and freedom. They will not be able to claim their former insignificance as a protection from responsibility. They have the authority to make a binding decision that will result in commitments that transcend their lifetimes. After twenty-nine chapters of recounting what God had done, Moses told the people what they must do in response. Verses 19 & 20 charge the Hebrews to choose life, love God, obey him, and hold fast to him.
The Gospel reading from Luke continues the theme of decisions that require commitment. Just before this section, Jesus has told the parable of the householder who crowded his banquet with the poor, crippled, blind, and lame. Now Jesus tells the “large crowds” who “were travelling with him” that they must make hard decisions. Just as in the above reading, when Moses told the ex-slaves that they were now people of responsibility, Jesus tells the crowd that they have received God’s grace and, as grace-filled people, must live as dedicated disciples.
The use of the word hate in this reading puts the preacher on the defensive. The prospect of telling a congregation that Christians are asked to hate their parents and children can result in sermons that are dedicated to softening the shock. Jesus says, “Whoever comes to me and does not hate” (The Greek word is μισεω; and, yes, it means hate.) “father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and even life itself, cannot be my disciple.” When Matthew tells the story he uses less objectionable wording: “Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me…” but the point remains. Only one thing can be most important.
The most thorough definition of sin is: misplaced trust.
There are many good things people want and work for. We even pray for them and it is appropriate to do so. Education, health, security, courage, wisdom and family are all wholesome things that are desired by responsible people. However, if we trust any of those things more than we trust God, they have gotten out of order and they will get our lives out of order. Jesus makes a fact of life painfully clear. In the relationship of people with God there is no neutrality; people must choose who or what is fundamental. Technology, communication, transportation, and electronic calendars let people crowd more and more things into their lives – but, ultimately, only one thing can be most important. If it is not God then people trust something less to give their lives meaning. Whatever modern-day idol it is may be a very good thing, but it defines a life as less than God’s creation.
16th Sunday after Pentecost – September 12, 2010
Exodus 32:7-14 and Luke 15:1-10
God is beleaguered by people who insist that they can take care of themselves. Today’s readings give two more examples from the long, sorry history of humanity’s failed attempts at autonomy and God’s (sometimes not-so-patient) reminders that we are his people only because of his grace and persistence. Idols, whether golden calves or self-righteousness, do not save or restore God’s people.
After giving Moses the Ten Commandments in Chapter 20 of the Book of Exodus, God spends the next ten chapters developing the theme of how he wants his people to live. The last verse of Chapter 31 tells us that God gave Moses two stone tablets written with his (God’s) very own finger. Then the scene changes to the bottom of Mount Sinai and things are not going well. “When the people saw that Moses delayed to come down from the mountain…” (32:1) Bertrand Russell noted, “Boredom is a vital problem for the moralist, since at least half the sins of mankind are caused by the fear of it.” (The Conquest of Happiness) The Hebrews had gotten bored. Moses was out of sight and it is hard to believe in a god who is not doing anything observable. They decided to take matters into their own hands and commissioned Aaron to make a golden calf for them – presumably because they were righteous, religious people who needed a god.
It is at this point in the story that today’s reading begins; notice how quickly God separates himself from the people and their idol. “The Lord said to Moses, ‘Go down at once! Your people, whom you brought up out of the land of Egypt, have acted perversely; they have been quick to turn aside from the way that I commanded them; they have cast for themselves an image of a calf, and have worshiped it and sacrificed to it, and said, ‘These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt!’” God names the Hebrews as Moses’ people, not God’s. Nevertheless, in the space of only two verses, God twice identifies the liberation of the people from Egyptian slavery as the key to knowing who is or is not God. It is in saving his people that God lives his relationship with them.
Moses intercedes for the people (throwing in yet another reference to bringing the people out of slavery – but this time changing the deed back to the work of God instead of either Moses or the golden calf). Moses asks God for clemency and suggests that God consider his own reputation in the opinion of the Egyptians and Moses reminds God of the covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. “And the Lord changed his mind about the disaster that he planned to bring on his people. “ The statement that God changed his mind is possibly a clearer indication of his power than the act of bringing the slaves out of Egypt. At first glance, it might seem that a static God would be a sign of strength and it would seem to be reassuring to believe that God never changed. However, if God never changed people would have nothing to hope for. Faith is a relationship with a living God who responds to the needs of his people. Such a God is not predictable, but sinful people need grace more than they need predictability. People need a God who will come find them no matter how far they have strayed or how lost they have become – but that gets us into the next lesson.
Luke groups three parables together around the theme of being lost – a lost sheep, a lost coin, and a lost son. The first two are included in the lesson assigned for today. These two parables of seeking the lost are told in the context of Pharisees and scribes disapproving of Jesus because he associated with tax collectors and sinners (lost people). The oblivious peevishness of Jesus’ self-righteous critics is reminiscent of the impatient, forgetful Hebrews at the foot of Mount Sinai. Moses was receiving God’s direction for his people; Jesus was bringing God’s love into the lives of those who wanted it. In both cases smug observers objected and decided to set their own direction.
Jesus responds with two parables. First, he tells of the reckless shepherd who does not play it safe and watch over the ninety-nine sheep that stay where they belong. The one sheep that is lost is the focus of the shepherd and he goes to find that sheep. Next, Jesus tells of a woman who lost one of ten coins. (This is one of the times that a feminine image is used to describe the work of God.) The woman persists until she has recovered the coin. In both cases, the recovery of the lost is cause for great celebration.
Again, the source of joy is change. Ninety-nine sheep that stay in the fold and nine coins that are where they belong are right and proper. However, the power of God goes beyond being satisfied with things that are right. The power of God makes things better. God’s grace continues to grow, strengthen, and create and that is the cause of joy in heaven.
17th Sunday after Pentecost – September 19, 2010
Amos 8:4-7 and Luke 16:1-13
Today’s readings from the Hebrew Scriptures and the New Testament are separated by more than seven centuries but the issue remains unchanged: Greed is pervasive. The Bible does not say that greed does not work. Indeed, if the accumulation of money is one’s priority, the old standbys of cheating and under-the-table dealings will bring in money. But Jesus reminds us that there is no security in money. Only God can be trusted.
In the first lesson, the Prophet Amos denounces those who continue to build up wealth while the poor and needy are left in want. It is likely that Amos’ message was unwelcome. He called for reform during the reign of Jeroboam II which was a peaceful, prosperous time. A messenger of change might get a hearing when people are distressed, uncertain, and afraid, but asking affluent, comfortable people to turn their lives around is an uphill battle. Amos was faithful to his task and his words still speak today.
Amos singles out the practice of perverting the festival of the new moon. It was established in Numbers 28:11-15 as a monthly sacrifice to support the people’s relationship with God. As with the Sabbath Day, it was to be a time of rest and renewal. Instead of strengthening their relationship with God, business people saw the festival as an obstacle to making more money. Furthermore, they measured their produce with inaccurate scales and they sold debris mixed in with wheat. With no other authority than justice, Amos called the wealthy people to change.
Today, we can make no better argument than Amos made. God’s people can offer no incentive of power, wealth, or security as a motivation to abandon greed and provide for the poor and weak. We can only offer the authority of God’s justice.
The reading from the Gospel of Luke presents the puzzling story of a financial manager who lost his master’s money then, through shady dealings, made friends with his master’s debtors so they would offer him hospitality after he had lost his job. No one in this parable acts in a way that should be imitated. The central character, the financial manager, is first incompetent and then dishonest. The master, whose money has been squandered away, is said to commend the manager – evidently on the basis of the manager’s ruthless sense of self-preservation. The statements in Luke 16:10-13 are clear and helpful, but it is difficult to see how they are based on the preceding parable. Jesus’ statements at the end of the reading call his listeners to be faithful with what has been entrusted to them.
The final verse returns to the theme of choice and commitment, this time in the context of God and money. As with the reading from Luke’s gospel two Sundays ago when the context was God and family, Jesus states that there can only be one priority. “You cannot serve God and wealth.” As he did when he said “Whoever does not carry the cross and follow me cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:27) Jesus again uses the word “cannot”, as opposed to “should not”. It is an objective fact, not a moral choice. Only God is trustworthy.
18th Sunday after Pentecost – September 26, 2010
Amos 6:1a, 4-7 and Luke 16:19-31
Today’s readings return to the theme of extravagant wealth and God’s care for the poor.
Amos is back for the second week in a row. This time he does not describe the plight of the poor; he describes the decadence of the rich. Nothing is left out; Amos rehearses the lavish furniture, music, food, wine, and anointing oil. The prosperous residents of Israel apparently had no goal beyond their own comfort and they fulfilled that goal admirably. So, they were not mindful of the coming disaster that Amos was predicting with the warning “the ruin of Joseph”. (Joseph was recognized as the ancestor of the tribes of Manasseh and Ephraim. His name was used by Amos to refer to the people in the north.)
This reading concludes with an irony. The self-indulgent rich people of Israel considered themselves to be the leading citizens. Therefore, Amos predicts that they will lead the way into exile.
It is easy to imagine the antagonism Amos must have generated with his calls for justice from the comfortable and secure. It is not unlike calling for justice in the twenty-first century industrialized world. The church is to proclaim that only God is trustworthy and all brothers and sisters are responsible for the general welfare. The message is still not well received. Prosperous times can blur priorities; other interests and concerns can begin to crowd forward and demand attention. A person who trusts himself or herself to be the sole arbiter of what is most important will soon have difficulty distinguishing between their values and their passing desires. It is often difficult to trust God with his demands for fairness, selflessness, and sacrifice.
The parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man is found only in Luke. Another distinctive feature is that this is the only parable in which some of the characters receive proper names. It is easy to see why this story is paired with the reading from the Hebrew Scriptures; the rich man would have fit in well with the indolent, wealthy people of Amos’ day. This parable takes the lesson one step further. While Amos decried that people would trust wealth more than God, this parable seems to assert that wealth, itself, is intrinsically bad and poverty is salutary. The point of view would be in keeping with Luke’s version of The Beatitudes that declares “Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God. Blessed are you who are hungry now, for you will be filled.” (Luke 6:20-21)
In the Kingdom of God values are reversed. Lazarus, who was poor, hungry, and diseased, was welcomed into the comforting embrace of Abraham. Meanwhile, the rich man was consigned to the flames of Hades. The rich man was not described as being particularly evil; his sin was indifference. He had the means to help Lazarus and did not do it. Now, just as Lazarus longed for crumbs from the rich man’s table, the rich man longed for water to cool his tongue. Unable to get a drink, the rich man asked that Lazarus be sent to warn his brothers about the penalty of Hades. (He does not want to send them an exhortation to strive for justice; he wants to warn them about the punishment for not being just.) Abraham said that scripture carried the message quite adequately. The rich man argued that an attention-getting return from the dead would convince his brothers but Abraham was not persuaded. He said scripture was reliable and, if it did not convince the brothers, neither would a resurrection.
The dispute between Abraham and the rich man continues today. Copies of the Bible are readily available and Bible study groups meet regularly in even modestly-sized communities. Yet, there are people who ignore opportunities to read “Moses and the prophets” all the while calling for something spectacular in the hope that it will convince people of God’s direction and grace. Abraham was right; the novelty of even a resurrection wears off eventually. It has been two thousand years since the last one and the church often finds itself looking for a novel way to get people’s attention.
God’s people are heirs to thousands of years of proclaiming God’s truth in the face of rebelliousness, self-righteousness, confusion, and indifference – our own and that of other people. The steadfast voice of Abraham calling us to listen to the ancient words of God is still a source of comfort.
