Sermon: Following Jesus

Lectionary: Proper 8(C)

Text: Luke 9:51-62

Sermon

After Jesus provided food for more than five thousand people, expectation of a conquering Messiah was high. But instead of announcing a conquering kingdom, Jesus told his disciples that he would suffer and be killed. He said to them, “If any wish to come after me, let them deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me. ²⁴ For those who want to save their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake will save it. ²⁵ For what does it profit them if they gain the whole world but lose or forfeit themselves?” (Luke 9:23-25 NRSVue)

Following this Peter, James, and John accompanied Jesus where he was transfigured atop a mountain and where Moses and Elijah appeared next to Jesus. They heard a voice from a cloud speak to them saying, “This is my Son, my Chosen, listen to him.” (Luke 9:35b)

These events provide key narrative contexts through which today’s gospel reading can be interpreted. “Whose words and actions do we follow?” and “What does following Jesus mean?” are the implied questions beneath what we heard.

From a literary perspective, the reading today contains strong echoes and allusions to several stories concerning the last days of Elijah and the call of Elisha.[1]

2 Kings 2:1 begins, “Now when the LORD was about to take Elijah up to heaven…” echoing what Luke wrote, “When the days drew near for him to be taken up…”

In 2 Kings 1, Elijah calls down fire from heaven to destroy two groups of Samaritan messengers.

In the call of Elisha found in 1 Kings 19, Elisha is called while plowing a field. Elisha says to Elijah, “Let me kiss my father and my mother, then I will follow you.” Elijah gives permission for Elisha to do so.

Elijah and Elisha are two prophets who preside over a period in Israel’s history where God works visibly and mightily to provide for and intervene on Israel’s behalf.

Jesus’ miraculous feeding of a crowd, warnings about costs of following him, his transfiguration, and his announcement of his imminent “being taken up” signaled to the disciples that something big was about to happen. However, the path and destination of Jesus would be quite different from what the disciples hoped for and expected.

Luke 9:51 to 19:28 is the largest unit in the Lucan gospel. It is referred to as the travel document or narrative since it details Jesus’ movement from Galilee to where he enters Jerusalem on what we call the Triumphal Entry. This section is Luke’s collection of events and teachings of Jesus to future disciples about what it means to follow Jesus and carry on the work of his gospel.

Let’s dig into today’s text more closely and see what else we might uncover.

First point to note is that when Jesus is rejected by a Samaritan village, he just moves on. James and John wanted to respond with violence and vengeance, as Elijah had done in their history, but Jesus does not permit it. Luke attributes the rejection due to Jesus having set his face toward Jerusalem. What this means is that the Samaritans appear to have rejected Jesus because of his convictions and what he expected to happen once he got to Jerusalem.

Some questions for us regarding this are, how willing are we to walk away from rejection without responding in kind or worse? Are we willing to let go of violence and vengeance altogether as a response, even when it challenges and threatens our core convictions? Are we willing to respect the freedom and agency of others and not attempt to force our beliefs and ways onto those who aren’t willing?

The next part of the reading contains three interactions. The first and third are about an individual coming to Jesus asking to follow him. The middle one is Jesus calling a person to follow him.

Let’s review the first interaction:

⁵⁷ As they were going along the road, someone said to him, “I will follow you wherever you go.” ⁵⁸ And Jesus said to him, “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head.” (Luke 9:57-58)

This can be interpreted as Jesus describing some of the privations that might be experienced because of following him. It might be Jesus asking if this individual has counted the costs. It might be a naïve individual, upon seeing the popularity of Jesus, wants to join the bandwagon.

But there could be more. Jesus’ reply uses the term “foxes” and “birds of the air.” The “fox” was a symbol for Ammonites, and Jesus called Herod Antipas “that fox.” The “birds of the air” was a phrase used to refer to gentile nations.[2] In a veiled fashion, Jesus may have been querying this would-be follower if he really wanted to follow someone who was against the political and power structures of the world. Perhaps this individual was politically connected, or perhaps thought Jesus could be the means to it. Jesus dismantles any kind of political and power ambitions of this person.

For us, the same question is posed. Do we see Jesus and Christianity as a means for acquiring political power and wealth. Because if so, we are misguided. If someone is promising that kind of influence, we should be questioning whether the Christianity they espouse is the one of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, or something else.

The second interaction reads as follows:

 ⁵⁹ To another he said, “Follow me.” But he said, “Lord, first let me go and bury my father.” ⁶⁰ And Jesus said to him, “Let the dead bury their own dead, but as for you, go and proclaim the kingdom of God.” (Luke 9:59-60)

This has caused consternation among interpreters. On the one hand, interpreters have taken this to be entirely metaphorical, speaking about spiritual life and death. On the other hand, interpreters refer to a cultural practice of multiple burying events and interpret this text as referring to a second burial after the body has fully decomposed.

However, Levine, Brettler, and Bailey state that the phrasing used here strongly implies that no one has died yet.[3],[4] They explain that “Let me go and bury” is a Middle Eastern idiom used to mean “let me go and serve my father while he is alive.” Honoring one’s parents is part of the Ten Commandments, given by Moses. It is an important pillar in maintaining family and community. What Jesus is telling this individual is that following him supersedes cultural values, it supersedes even what Moses wrote down as words received from God.

But reading between the lines, it sounds like this individual is making excuses. He seems to want the praise and acknowledgment of following Jesus, but on his own terms. He wants to follow Jesus only when it is convenient.

The third interaction has some similarities to the previous. This reads:

⁶¹ Another said, “I will follow you, Lord, but let me first say farewell to those at my home.” ⁶² And Jesus said to him, “No one who puts a hand to the plow and looks back is fit for the kingdom of God.” (Luke 9:61-62)

Whereas Elijah allowed Elisha to go back to his father and mother and leave plowing, in this text Jesus does not. Just as Jesus is greater than Moses, Jesus is greater than Elijah. The precedent set by Elijah in his call to Elisha as disciple is superseded by Jesus making new and greater demands of his disciples.

We might wonder why Jesus doesn’t even allow a quick farewell. The problem is how a Greek word is translated and what we think that means. The word ἀποτάξασθαι is translated “say farewell” here but it is better translated “take leave of” (which is how this word is translated everywhere else in the New Testament) and which can also mean “renounce.” Kenneth Bailey writes that what this means in practice is that the person is asking to return to his home and community and ask for permission to leave and follow Jesus, knowing full well that the community will not.[5]

Like the second individual, the third individual expresses performative discipleship. He wants the accolades and admiration of those who are watching and listening, but he knows that at the end of the day, he does not have to give up anything.

Taken together, our reading indicates several aspects of following Jesus. It opposes power, might, wealth, violence and vengeance upon which the world’s political, social, economic, and religious systems are built. The way of Jesus’ gospel of peace, love, and inclusion supersedes all previous religious and spiritual traditions. Following Jesus may mean having to renounce community and family ties, if they are opposed to his ways. Following Jesus is not a road to comfort, power, and wealth. It can lead to rejection, persecution, and death.

In the three dialogues Jesus had with would-be disciples, their response is not recorded. Luke asks his readers to place themselves — us —in their places. How will we respond?

References

Bailey, K. E. (1976, 1980). Poet & Peasant and Through Peasant Eyes (Combined Edition). Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans.

Levine, A.-J., & Brettler, M. Z. (2011, 2017). The Jewish Annotated New Testament, 2nd ed. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press.

 

 

---

[1] 1 Kings 19:15-21; 2 Kings 1:2-16, 2:1-12.

[2] (Bailey, 1976, 1980)

[3] (Levine & Brettler, 2011, 2017)

[4]  (Bailey, 1976, 1980)

[5] (Bailey, 1976, 1980)

Sermon: Power Over the Demons of Empire

Lectionary Year C, Proper 7 (12)

Text: Luke 8:26-39

Exorcism of the Gerasene Demoniac

As the fire of the Holy Spirit given at Pentecost continued to empower and encourage the disciples, they spread the good news of Jesus Christ throughout Jerusalem, Judea, and even to Samaria. But was the gospel limited to Jews and those who converted to Judaism? Was the gospel another interpretation of Judaism, or was it destined to become something else? Did Jesus set any example or precedent in bringing his work and message outside of the Jews?

This year’s lectionary readings do not include the development of the first-generation Christians found in the book of Acts. But today’s gospel reading from Luke could be interpreted as both a foreshadowing and a summary of what Luke will elaborate upon in his second volume, the book of the Acts of the Apostles.

In the Lucan text, prior to our reading, Jesus told two parables. One was the parable of the sower, and the second was the parable of the lit lamp. Both parables are interested in how the gospel is spread and received. We might see today’s reading as an illustration of the concepts found in the parables.

Some time after that, Jesus decides to take his disciples from one side of the lake to the other side. During the sailing, they are caught in a sudden storm, which Jesus calms and the disciples are awed and amazed. This showed Jesus’ command of natural forces, and more specifically the sea, which to the ancient mind was often associated with primordial chaos and the abyss, the dwelling place of demons.

With this brief background and setting the scene, we are ready to look more closely into today’s text.

The first detail to note is that they sailed to the Gerasenes’ land and that Luke specifically adds that it “is across the lake from Galilee.” Archaeologists and scholars aren’t sure why Luke uses Gerasa, which if the city is intended, is about 30 miles away from the lake. Perhaps Luke used the name because it was one of the most prominent cities in the area and would be better known than a more obscure one. The city itself was thoroughly Hellenistic and Roman. Luke’s use of “across the lake” adds to the emphasis that what will be narrated is thoroughly outside Jewish territory. One commentary noted that it was so outside the borders of acceptable Jewish travel that not even the religious leaders monitoring Jesus accompanied him to keep tabs on him.

The next detail to note is how the man (who is unnamed) addresses Jesus. This man calls Jesus “Son of the Most High God.” Note, too, that in Luke chapter 4, when Jesus encounters another man with a demon, this man addresses Jesus with a similar title, “the holy one from God.” In this case, the setting was a Jewish synagogue. The difference, as minor as it might sound to our ears, is a huge difference. “The holy one from God” is most likely one of Jewish descriptions for the Messiah. “Son of the Most Hight God” was a title used by Romans for Caesar.

Then Jesus asks the man for his name. The reply given is “Legion.” The first point to note is that it was believed that using the name of an entity conferred power over them. So, the man tries to use the true identity and title of Jesus to gain power over him. But instead, Jesus asks the name of the man, and he is forced to give away his name. In this power struggle, it is shown that Jesus is more powerful than the demons.

The second point to note is that legion is a Roman military term, denoting a large unit of soldiers, numbering 5,000 to 6,000 in strength. By contrasting the power of a Roman legion to Jesus, it shows that Jesus’ power can conquer Rome and the empire. It may also imply that the man’s condition is caused by the empire and its powers. Empires and politics always oppress the many so that a few can enjoy its benefits and pleasures.

To show further that Jesus is in command, the demons must ask permission of Jesus to take any further action. And their request is to be sent to the large herd of pigs nearby. When the demons enter the pigs, they run to the sea and drown themselves. The demons ironically end up in the abyss which they were trying to avoid.

This area was also known for the agriculture necessary to feed the Roman armies in the area. By mentioning the herd of pigs, the narrative further emphasizes the foreignness of this land. No respectable Jew would come anywhere close to pigs, yet here Jesus is not too far from them.

Readers have been troubled by Jesus allowing the destruction of so many pigs, and there is no good answer. But if we read it as symbolizing a power struggle and demonstration of Jesus’ strength over creation, it may not make it more palatable to our sensibilities, but it may help us understand the message that was intended.

The Jews of that time are known to refer to Rome and Romans as pigs and swine. Pigs and swine were considered unclean and unholy. It would not have troubled Jews if an entire herd of swine drowned themselves. It might even be a cause for celebration, having both symbolically and economically ruined the Romans.

The scene moves forward and now the man who was formerly naked, homeless, and unable to control himself is sitting at the feet of Jesus, clothed and in control of himself. The position in which he is pictured is that of a disciple learning from a teacher.

When the people of the surrounding area come to see what has happened and see this change, they are in awe. Those who saw Jeus’ power restore the man described to others how the event transpired. And then they were all filled with fear and asked Jesus to leave the area.

There are a few more things to note on this point. First, the gospel of Jesus Christ is not good news to everyone. It can cause some to recoil and turn away. Perhaps the people could only see economic devastation that Jesus caused and could not or would not see alternatives to their future. Secondly, the gospel often does result in social, economic, religious, and political turmoil. It is often easier to live with the devil (or demon) that we know than to be thrown into a completely new and unknown situation. Thirdly, notice that Jesus simply accepts the peoples’ request. He respects their choice and does not try to force himself on them.

As Jesus and the disciples prepare to leave, the man asks to be taken along. But Jesus says, “Return home and tell the story of what God has done for you.” And that is what he did. The man is restored to social belonging, given a home, and given a mission.

Here we see two ways of participating in the gospel work. The first is to go tell the story of how Jesus has changed your life. This witnessing activity plants seeds. The second way is through the process of discipleship, one learns how to tend to the seeds that germinate, sprout, and grow. The man was sent to plant seeds. The disciples returned with Jesus to continue to learn his ways so that they could become caretakers of the early Christian church.

I think that this narrative of the demon possessed man and Jesus is a deliberate satire aiming several pillars of the Roman empire, starting with its head, Caesar, moving to its military, and then to its economy. It shows that Jesus Christ is greater than Rome. It shows that the gospel flips on its head those things that the empire values. The gospel extends beyond a small region or people group, encompassing more than the Roman empire. However, it also reveals that the gospel is not always welcomed. That is to be expected, and one should not force the gospel onto others.

The gospel is opposed to empire, in whatever form and age it appears. Are we on the side of the oppressed or the oppressors? Are we more interested in preserving our comfort at the expense of the humanity of others? How much do the demons of power, privilege, wealth, comfort, respectability, fear, anxiety, and so on, control our decisions and our lives?

May Christ give us the ability to trust him to free us from our bondage to the demons of this world so that we can become fully human, created in the image of God. 

Sermon: Confidence in Joy

Joy, from Aspects of Daily Life, from Art in the Christian Tradition, a project of the Vanderbilt Divinity Library, Nashville, TN. https://diglib.library.vanderbilt.edu/act-imagelink.pl?RC=56048 [retrieved December 12, 2021]. Original source: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:55-aspetti_di_vita_quotidiana,_gioia,Taccuino_Sanitatis,_Cas.jpg.

Texts: Zephaniah 3:14-20, Isaiah12:2-6, Philippians 4:4-7, Luke 3:7-18
Lectionary Year C, Advent 3

Introduction

The Third Sunday of Advent, with its theme as joy has an interesting history. The period we are currently experiencing that we call Advent, originally was known as St. Martin’s Lent. It was just like the Lent season before Easter, being 40 days long and of a similar penitential nature and with an accompanying fast. It most likely arose around the fifth century. It appears to have been shortened to the current four weeks around the ninth century, and by the twelfth century the fast had been replaced by simple abstinence. The Third Sunday of Advent is similar to Lent’s Fourth Sunday, known as Laetare Sunday, which is also a break during the solemn period for a day of celebration and joy. The liturgical color of purple, or sometime deep blue, of the Advent season is broken for this one Sunday by the use of pink or rose color. This is the reason why in some Advent candle sets, you will see a single pink candle lit on the third Sunday.[1]

I bring this up because I was curious about today’s set of readings. Three of them clearly are about rejoicing, but the gospel reading from Luke continues where it left off last Sunday with a theme primarily of repentance. At least one takeaway then, is that amidst this time of individual and corporate reflection, introspection, and repentance, we also need to take time out to express and experience joy.

But also what may be of interest are the circumstances surrounding the writing of each of the three texts where rejoicing figures prominently.

Textual Contexts

Zephaniah

The prophetic writing of Zephaniah locates itself in the seventh century BCE, during the reign of King Josiah of Judah. There is tenuous calm for the nation of Judah and in the city of Jerusalem. But there are growing threats from Assyria and Babylon. And within Jerusalem, the prophet sees evil and corruption in the royal court and inside the Temple itself. Judgment is prophesied for Judah and Jerusalem.[2] What we heard this morning from this prophet’s text is the very final words – reactions from the people after God rescues and restores a remnant back to Jerusalem. It is joy that arrives with a backdrop of judgment and suffering. Joy is something that people can claim and experience, even among still-fresh memories and reminders of crisis and loss.

Isaiah

The psalm reading from Isaiah is placed at the end of the first section of Isaiah. This section, like Zephaniah, contains oracles of judgment against Judah. The enumerations of evil and corruption are far more extensive and detailed than in Zephaniah. They go through the motions of religious piety, but their hearts are full of evil. They think that their piety will keep them safe from God’s judgments, all the while pursuing greed and riches at the expense of the poor, widows, and orphans. Judgment is proclaimed against Judah and Jerusalem. It is at the end of this that a repentant remnant is prophesied to return and there will be joy.

Although today’s psalm is placed at the end of this first section of Isaiah, scholars place the actual writing of the text during the exile into Babylon.[3] That makes the composition and the text of this psalm even more pointed since they were written while experiencing the very judgments that were prophesied, yet he still anticipates deliverance and joy.

Philippians

The reading from Philippians is generally accepted to have been written by Paul while he was in a dungeon in Rome. The portion we heard certainly speaks about joy, but it is not just there but throughout the entire epistle. Paul does not dwell much on his own, immediate circumstances. His concern is with how the gospel is spreading, with the Christian community in Philippi, and how to continue in joy.

What is Joy?

The common thread in these three readings is about joy and rejoicing while amidst sometimes extreme personal troubles and distress. How is it possible to have joy when the world seems to be, or is, falling apart?

I did some searches on the web to see what opinions existed in regards to differences between joy and happiness. As might be expected, opinions ranged widely. Some think there aren’t any meaningful differences. Some think that happiness is a subset of joy, or vice versa. And then there are opinions that note that they are related, but they are not the same. I also learned that joy and happiness are very fuzzy concepts. Even the American Psychological Association’s dictionary[4] entries did not add much clarity to any difference that might exist. There doesn’t seem to be a formal description of what joy is and what happiness is.

Here are excerpts from a selection of articles I read –

Happiness usually involves a victory for the self. Joy tends to involve the transcendence of self. Happiness comes from accomplishments. Joy comes when your heart is in another.[5]

Joy often comes from encounters with people—pouring pancake batter with a young child, or feeling a lover’s fingertips skim your back as you enter a door.[6]

Earthly and material things are at the base of happiness… Where happiness is created externally, joy is created internally. Joy comes from being thankful, grateful, and through appreciation. It comes from giving, caring for others, spiritual experiences, and a moral lifestyle.[7]

… the consensus of the majority is that your happiness depends on various external factors. Happiness is an emotion that you experience as it happens to you… Joy needs you to connect – this connection is often with other people or things in your lives, such as people, pets, hobby, creation, etc.[8]

The common threads I see in the above opinions is that happiness tends to be more of your reaction to what happens to you, personally. Joy, on the other hand, seems to come from investments made into, and relationships with other people, and from our own internal integrity with ethics and morals that we express to the outside.

Repentance and Joy?

Considering these characteristics where joy is often found and experienced, perhaps our gospel text in Luke isn’t so out of place after all. We have heard three specific examples of what John the Baptist meant when he preached repentance. To review, here is the text again:

¹⁰ And the crowds asked him, “What then should we do?” ¹¹ In reply he said to them, “Whoever has two coats must share with anyone who has none; and whoever has food must do likewise.” ¹² Even tax collectors came to be baptized, and they asked him, “Teacher, what should we do?” ¹³ He said to them, “Collect no more than the amount prescribed for you.” ¹⁴ Soldiers also asked him, “And we, what should we do?” He said to them, “Do not extort money from anyone by threats or false accusation, and be satisfied with your wages.” Luke 3:10-14 (NRSV)

Episcopal priest Jaime Edwards-Acton notes that this really isn’t a high bar that John sets.[9] I think that we have often gotten the idea in our minds that repentance is a huge deal and difficult, but these texts have John telling people who come to ask him specific instructions that basically to be moral and ethical in dealing with one another, and to be compassionate and caring. “Just be a decent person,” John seems to be saying.

John isn’t calling for radical life change. He doesn’t tell tax collectors to stop collecting taxes. Taxes are needed to fund government services. A person may not agree with everything that the officials do with the taxes, but they still support necessary services. In John’s time, they were used to fund the Roman occupation. But John does not tell anyone to stop collecting or paying taxes. He just tells the tax collectors to only collect what is officially needed and no more. Be tax collectors of integrity and ethics, John says.

John does not tell the soldiers to resign from the armed forces, or in John’s case, law enforcement as well. Armed forces and law enforcement are necessary to keep the peace. John’s admonishment to them is that they should not use their position to extort money, take bribes, accuse someone falsely, and satisfy their greed in that manner. John tells them to be ethical soldiers of the empire. Become soldiers with integrity.

For the masses, he tells them that if they have more than they need, and see someone in need, to simply share. He does not tell the crowd that they have to become poor and needy themselves. Be decent, compassionate neighbors, he instructs.

This is essentially what the prophets were also calling on the people to do. The prophets’ messages were that the people already had instructions on how they were to live. Don’t just agree that they are good, but put those instructions into actual life activities, they proclaimed. Live lives of integrity where beliefs and action are congruent, is the message.

Confidence in Joy

From the prophets in the Bible, Jesus, the apostles, and many more throughout history and indeed with us today – many who suffer hardships nevertheless are filled with joy.

Here lies what I believe is the key to a joy-filled life. Joy is found in being connected with other people, looking after their well-being, being empathetic with one another, being generous to whatever extent is feasible, and living a life of integrity with Christian ethics and values.

Hardships and suffering cannot negate joy. In fact, joy may be one of the key ingredients that allows us to get through life and all its twists and turns and survive difficulties and tragedies. As the author of Hebrews wrote about Jesus,

​¹ Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight and the sin that clings so closely, and let us run with perseverance the race that is set before us, ² looking to Jesus the pioneer and perfecter of our faith, who for the sake of the joy that was set before him endured the cross, disregarding its shame, and has taken his seat at the right hand of the throne of God. Hebrews 12:1-2 (NRSV)

The author of Hebrews tells us that it was joy of seeing the redeemed, including us, that carried Jesus through the crucifixion.

Joy is not just a happy emotion or feeling. It is a deep-seated confidence that all will resolve to justice and righteousness in Christ. And we have each been given a part to play in this drama through our generosity and integrity in our relationship with one another.

In conclusion, let me repeat today’s reading from Philippians and continue a couple more verses beyond it.

⁴ Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. ⁵ Let your gentleness be known to everyone. The Lord is near. ⁶ Do not worry about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. ⁷ And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.

⁸ Finally, beloved, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is pleasing, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence and if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things. ⁹ Keep on doing the things that you have learned and received and heard and seen in me, and the God of peace will be with you. Philippians 4:4-9 (NRSV)

---

[1] Catholic Encyclopedia (1913)/Gaudete Sunday - Wikisource, the free online library

[2] Feasting on the Word Commentary, Year C, Volume 1. Essays for Advent 3.

[3] Ibid.

[4] APA Dictionary of Psychology

[5] Brooks, David. Opinion | The Difference Between Happiness and Joy - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

[6] Bogost, Ian. Why Joy Is Better Than Happiness - The Atlantic

[7] Abbate, Bill. How to Embrace Happiness and Joy in Your Life | by Bill Abbate | ILLUMINATION | Medium

[8] Andre. Psychology of Joy vs. Happiness – Psychology Educator

[9] Liberation Lectionary Year C, Advent 3, posted Dec. 7, 2021 – https://fb.watch/9Rb9I6Rl5m/

 

Move Forward and Rebuild

Lectionary Year C, Proper 27
OT Reading: Haggai 1:15b-2:9

Sermon at First Presbyterian Church, Petersburg, Alaska on November 6, 2016.

Introduction

When we look around and observe the world around us, it’s difficult not to see the many problems, troubles, conflicts, divisions, and plain ugliness that seem omnipresent. There seem to be no easy solutions; and sometimes we wonder if there are any solutions at all. In the more pessimistic recesses of our minds, we think that maybe the world has gone so off track that it is on an irreversible downward trend into utter chaos and wreckage.

Many, faced with such a dark and uncertain future, understandably look to the past — when things seemed to be better, when things seemed more certain, when things and people seemed to be in their proper places, when there seemed to be order and predictability. And the temptation to try to recreate the past grows strong.

Nostalgia

There is a term for this which you’ve probably guessed; it is nostalgia. Alan R. Hirsch describes nostalgia as a yearning for an idealized past — “a longing for a sanitized impression of the past, what in psychoanalysis is referred to as a screen memory — not a true recreation of the past, but rather a combination of many different memories, all integrated together, and in the process all negative emotions filtered out.” (http://elitedaily.com/life/science-behind-nostalgia-love-much/673184/)

That sounds negative, but studies have found that nostalgia can help people cope with negative life events, depression, and even eases facing death.

Here are a few paragraphs in a New York Times article from 2013:

Nostalgia does have its painful side — it’s a bittersweet emotion — but the net effect is to make life seem more meaningful and death less frightening. When people speak wistfully of the past, they typically become more optimistic and inspired about the future.

“Nostalgia serves a crucial existential function,” Dr. Routledge says. “It brings to mind cherished experiences that assure us we are valued people who have meaningful lives. Some of our research shows that people who regularly engage in nostalgia are better at coping with concerns about death.”

“Nostalgia helps us deal with transitions,” Dr. Hepper says. “The young adults are just moving away from home and or starting their first jobs, so they fall back on memories of family Christmases, pets and friends in school.”

(http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/09/science/what-is-nostalgia-good-for-quite-a-bit-research-shows.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0)

Scientific American reports “situations that trigger negative emotions, feelings of loneliness, and perceptions of meaninglessness cause people to become nostalgic.” (https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/mind-guest-blog/the-rehabilitation-of-an-old-emotion-a-new-science-of-nostalgia/)

Dr. Hal McDonald, in Psychology Today (https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/time-travelling-apollo/201606/the-two-faces-nostalgia) describes two kinds of nostalgia. The first is restorative nostalgia, in which the person tries to recreate (or restore) the past into the present. The second is reflective nostalgia, in which the person savors the experience without trying to recreate it.

He writes:

These two types of nostalgia represent fundamentally different attitudes toward the past, and it is this difference that largely determines whether our memories of those happy days of yore will evoke feelings of joy or of sadness…

Restorative nostalgia is really a kind of homesickness—a homesickness for the past—more akin to the original pathological definition of nostalgia than to our current view of the term…

Reflective nostalgia, on the other hand, accepts the fact that the past is, in fact, past, and rather than trying to recreate a special past experience, savors the emotions evoked by its recollection.  This acknowledgment of the irretrievability of our autobiographical past provides an aesthetic distance that allows us to enjoy a memory in the same way that we enjoy a movie or a good book.

As you might guess, the latter, reflective nostalgia, is a more healthy response than the former, which tries to recreate (in vain) an idealized past.

Back from Exile

This brings us to the return of the Jews from exile in Babylon. Or at least a few of them. The prophet Jeremiah, early in the exile, had written and told them:

5 “Build homes, and plan to stay. Plant gardens, and eat the food they produce. 6 Marry and have children. Then find spouses for them so that you may have many grandchildren. Multiply! Do not dwindle away! 7 And work for the peace and prosperity of the city where I sent you into exile. Pray to the Lord for it, for its welfare will determine your welfare.” (Jeremiah 29:5-7 NLT)

Many had settled in Babylon and felt no need to return to their ancestral lands and face inevitable hardships there.

Cyrus had decreed that the Jews could return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple there. But the work had not really begun. The people went and worked on their individual homes and fields. The prophets had prophesied that their return would result in blessings (c.f. Ezekiel), but the people only saw reminders of destruction, desolation, and daily experienced difficulties.

Nearly twenty years had passed. And now the prophet Haggai rose to declare to the people that the current sad state of affairs was due to their neglect in rebuilding the Temple.

Not the Prosperity Gospel

At this point it should be said that Haggai could be used to support a prosperity gospel: i.e., that God blesses those who contribute toward his demands, and curses those who neglect him.

But it is important to note that the ancient temple is not equivalent to the present day churches or denominations. Neither should the temple be limited to spiritual and religious facets of individual and societal life.

The ancient temple was the center of religious, spiritual, social, and economic life. It was the hub of community and connections. A healthy temple meant healthy society and community. It was the place of celebrations. It was where relationships between human and deity, and between humans were restored and strengthened.

I think it can be difficult for Westerners, particularly Americans, to understand how the temple could be the center of so much of community. We value individualism, we tend to strictly segregate different spheres of our lives, and religion is certainly in a decline. But at least from anecdotal, personal experience that I’ve had in Japan large temples and shrines still form a major part of the economy through tourism and festivals; they are still focus of major celebrations and places where families and community come together; where life’s petitions, dreams, and goals are offered up.

When Haggai claims that the peoples’ neglect of the temple was the cause of their life problems, we can see how that can be reasonable logic. Haggai’s accusation is that the people were so concerned about their individual survival and comfort that they had neglected the well-being of the community. It is not the prosperity gospel, at least not in the present-day sense of the phrase in which God blesses individuals in a quid pro quo fashion. Rather it is a declaration that when the community looks after everyone in the community, God can multiple the sum of their efforts for the good of the entire community.

What is Wealth?

Stanley Hauerwas, at Duke University, drawing from Millbank and Pabst, theologians and philosophers, to describe wealth in terms of

goods that can be shared together such as intimacy, trust, beauty. The goods that should determine how we live are embedded in the practices of honour and reciprocity which are developed over time through the habits sustained by a tradition. The formation of such traditions depends on the existence of people of wisdom who can provide the judgments necessary for responding to new challenges while remaining faithful to the past.

People who so live do not think their first task in life is to become more wealthy or powerful as individuals. Rather wealth is best thought of as what we share in common, such as parks, or practices to which all have access, such as medicine. In other words, the post-liberal strategy is exactly the opposite of the liberal assumption that assumes that social practices of mutual assistance should be eliminated, while at the same time encouraging our desires for wealth and prestige. The liberal desire for the well-being of the individual not only ignores the goods built on gift relations, but in effect destroys the habits that make such relations possible.

(http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2016/11/02/4567512.htm)

Exhortation Heeded, But Things Don’t Look Good

The people heed Haggai’s words and begin the process of temple reconstruction. About two months later, Haggai offers a new word, the passage that was read this morning.

It appears that the people have been hard at work, but progress is slow. And what they have to show for it isn’t much. It is also possible that among the people are some elderly Jews who remember the first temple. Whether it is they, or the younger generation recalling the stories of old about the first temple, what they see before them is sorely lacking. They are discouraged. If their well-being and future rely upon God accepting the results of their construction, it doesn’t look very good. They have good reason to be concerned.

Suffering from Restorative Nostalgia

The people are suffering from the first, bad kind of nostalgia: restorative nostalgia. They want to recreate the new temple to resemble the first in its physical and religious grandeur. That’s, after all, what Ezekiel appears to have prophesied.

This kind of nostalgia can cause harm in many ways. It can halt progress — because the new can’t possibly be as good as the old, why bother? People can get stuck in the past. It can lead to feelings of depression and discouragement.

Or it can cause people to turn against each other — I know how it’s supposed to look like, so why can’t you just obey my instructions? Or, I know better than you, I’m the expert, so your opinions and ideas are worthless. Or, are you trying to sabotage the project with your less-than-perfect plans? People become divided, one group against another.

God Invites Reflective Nostalgia

Through Haggai, God offers a word of reflective nostalgia — the good kind of nostalgia. Haggai reminds the people of God’s faithfulness in their lives. The past cannot be recreated; but the past offers reminders that can strengthen and encourage the people to move forward.

God says, “I am with you.” He declares, “My spirit remains among you, just as I promised when you came out of Egypt. So do not be afraid.”

It is an invitation to remember how God has been with them, all the way from their beginnings in Egypt. It is an invitation to reflect on the power and strength of God to sustain and deliver.

It is a declaration that God does not dwell in the past but he is always a part of the present. God cannot be summoned by recreating the past. The people must move forward to where God is taking them.

God Is Found Where His People Work

God is already among them. The temple isn’t where God resides. God is where the people are doing the work of restoring God’s glory by their efforts to rebuild, restore, and heal community.

The returned exiles seemed to think God couldn’t come and bless them until the temple was complete and functional; and that the degree of blessing depended on the physical magnificence of the structure. What they heard was that their very efforts were where God could be present and manifest his glory.

Haggai exhorts the people to do the work. As long as they are doing the work of building community to reflect God’s image, God will be with them and bless them. Other nations will hear and wonder. They will be curious and come. And peace will be the result.

Fantasy or Reality?

Does this sound too good to be true? Is Haggai describing a fantasy?

I think the key point to remember is that the work we do for God is not to secure blessings for ourselves, or for our families, or for our church, but to bless the whole world. When Abram was first called by God, the blessings offered to him were so that the entire world would be blessed through him. I believe that is still God’s desire and his purpose for the church.

I think for far too long the church has been preoccupied with her own security and place in the world. Like the returned exiles during their first twenty years, the church is too often concerned about accounting and finances, membership rolls, and her pursuit of temporal influence and power. Too often the church neglects the people and community just outside her, sometimes literal, walls.

I believe the words of Haggai are still relevant for the church today. We need to rebuild the temple — no, not necessarily the physical church or congregations — but the image of God that we who claim to be followers of Christ represent to the world. The church must rebuild the picture of God that those outside her metaphorical walls see inside.

Is that impossible? Is that too hard? Has the image been so destroyed that it can’t be rebuilt? Is the destruction and desolation too much to bear?

Haggai’s words should still ring true for us today. God is with us. Just as he rescued Israel from Egypt, brought the exiles back from Babylon, helped them rebuild the second temple, gave us his perfect image in Jesus Christ, and sustained the church through two millennia, his Spirit remains to strengthen and lead us today. “Do not be afraid,” God commands.

Rebuild God’s Temple Today

We can rebuild God’s temple in our world today. We can restore the image of Jesus Christ that has been destroyed by religionists. We do it through our love, compassion, and faithfulness to the people of this community. We do it through our efforts to foster harmony and peace among peoples, especially among those with whom we disagree. We do it through our attitudes and actions that value people and relationships first.

We were placed on this earth to bless others. We were saved by Christ so that we would know his purpose and be given the power and strength to do this difficult but rewarding work. We have been given the ministry of reconciliation, of rebuilding people and relationships that have been broken. Let us come together and work together to restore the image and glory of God in his temple, the church, us.