Weebles Wobble But They Don't Fall Down

Here is my sermon from Sunday. The text was Romans

Some of you have heard this before, but when I was growing up and would spend time with my grandparents, to try and get me to eat my vegetables, my grandfather would always say “it’ll put hair on your chest.” I never considered that an acceptable argument for doing something I didn’t want to do, and will note I still don’t. But that’s what I always think of when I hear Paul’s words that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character and character produces hope and hope does not disappoint.” But if that’s what it takes to get hope, wouldn’t you rather pass? Not that I don’t want to live without hope, but I don’t want to suffer either, and let’s also note that anytime someone says about something that it will build character, you can be pretty sure that it too will be an unpleasant experience, like having to eat your vegetables as a child. And so, with that, we move on to today’s toy, the Weeble. And again credit is due to Ron Hunter, Jr. and Michael Waddell for their inspiration for this series.

This is the newest of all the toys we will look at, and thus one that many of you did not grow up with because it wasn’t yet invented, but one that your children, or perhaps grandchildren did grow up playing with. It also happens to be the only toy we will look at that has not been inducted into the National Toy Hall of Fame. But it is based upon a much older toy. The television show Romper Room, which began in 1953, introduced a clown punching bag that was weighed down by sand at the bottom so that when you punched it, it wouldn’t stay down but would right itself so you could punch it again, and keep going. Nothing violent about that. And some of you may know the toy because there was a duplicate that had Bozo the clown on it. When toy manufacturer Hasbro purchased Romper Room in 1969, they wanted to market the punching bag idea, with a twist, and so they shrunk it down, made it solid, and shaped it like an egg, and thus was born, in 1971, the Weeble. And what made them so unique was not only their shape, but the fact that when they got knocked over, that because of the weighting, that gravity would cause them to right themselves, thus creating the famous advertising slogan that “Weebles wobble but they don’t fall down.” Allegedly this helped introduce children to basic physics, perhaps a stretch, but it is there. Now I will note, first that I couldn’t find any reason why they were called Weebles, perhaps just because they wobble, and second now they are much shorter and squatter than the originals, allegedly because the originals posed a choking hazard, although that seems like a huge stretch to me, not because kid’s wouldn’t put them in their mouths, but because they were still really big and I can’t imagine a child actually being able to get it stuck in their throat, but there we are. And so that leads us back not really to the idea of suffering so much as to the idea of resilience because Weebles wobble but they don’t fall down.

Do Not Judge

Here is my message from Sunday. The text was Matthew 7:1-5:

Of all of the injunctions of things that Jesus tells us not to do, which is what we are currently spending our time doing, today’s injunction “do not judge,” is probably the most famous. And it’s well known not just amongst Christians, and we’re going to get to some more obscure injunctions in a few weeks, but it’s also well known amongst non-Christians as well. They might not know who said it, or where it’s found in the Bible, but the definitely know that Christians are not supposed to judge. and so, as rebuttals go, it might be one of the most popular to get thrown back to the church, or at Christians, and often, in my opinion, quite rightfully so. And we deserve it much of the time, and what often makes it worse then is how some respond to that accusation. I remember one public scandal in which that accusation was made, and a prominent religious leader of the time said, and I roughly quote, “What Jesus was saying was that we all judge, and we will all be judged, and so it’s okay to judge.” and I hope that your jaw hits the floor hearing that, as mine did when it was said, because that is not at all what Jesus was saying. And so, the way that Christians and non-Christians alike tend to use this passage shows that people don’t really understand what Jesus was saying here, or in Luke where it also appears as part of what is known there as the Sermon on the plain. So, what does Jesus mean when he tells us “Do not judge.”

Now as I have said many times before, the entirety of the New Testament is written in Greek, while the Hebrew Bible is written in Hebrew. But in the Greek not only do all the words run together, and thus translators have to make decisions about what words are actually there. but there is also no punctuation and so they also have to make decisions about what punctuation to put in, and that matters here. Because we here this statement as do not judge period. Or even we could say exclamation point. And we could take that as the absolute, as we have done with do not be afraid or do not doubt. But that’s not what we actually have here. Instead, it says, do not doubt comma, which symbolizes a break or a pause, really, it’s where we take a breath when we are saying it out loud, and then it continues with some qualifiers. Do not judge, comma, so that you may not be judged. Now we could argue whether that comma is appropriate or not, although every translation I looked up had a comma so there seems to be consensus on it, and it makes sense within the context of what comes next. Because Jesus continues, “for with the judgment you make you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get.”  That means if you judge, which really is when you judge since we all do it to some degree, and we’ll come back to that, then God will use that same standard against you. And others can to as well. And so, just for a wild example, a hypothetical if you will, if you were to say make fun of the Boston Red Sox for being in last place in your division, but then your team starts playing terribly and they end up in last place, then what’s going to happen? Then they are going to make fun of you, and that’s only fair. Or we might say what goes around comes around, or that the chickens will come home to roost. So how we judge others is how others will then judge us, or could judge or, perhaps, should judge us. But even more importantly it’s how we will be judged by God as well.

Sacramental

Here is my message from Sunday. The text was 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 and Luke 3:15-17, 21-22:

In 1736, John Wesley and his brother Charles came to the colony of Georgia, having been invited by James Oglethorpe, the founder of the colony, to preach to the English and native populations. When they arrived, they found things to be different than they had expected, and Charles returned to London after just a few months. But John decided to stay and began to fall in love with a member of his congregation by the name of Sophia Hopkey. Although most people expected them to get married, through a series of miscommunications, Sophy ended up marrying someone else, whom she had apparently also been seeing. As you might imagine, John was a little less than pleased, and when she showed up to church John took the opportunity to publicly rebuke her and then refused to serve her communion. This caused quite a stir, and her husband brought charges against Wesley for defamation. And then it gets even worse because not only was the judge of the colony known to be an ill-tempered despot, but he also happened to be Sophy’s uncle and allegedly bribed the grand jury to make sure that charges were brought. Wesley rightly reading the tea leaves decided to leave Georgia soon thereafter. And that story becomes important because later Wesley himself will also be denied communion, although then it will be because he was not considered to be a true Christian, which will impact Methodist theology on the sacraments.

We continue in our series on what Methodists believe. And while I said last week that we were only going to look at stuff that was unique to Methodism, rather than all our beliefs, that’s not really true for today, or not fully true, because there are some things that we believe as part of the sacraments that are broader than just Methodism. When it comes to the sacraments, we, along with most Protestant churches practice two, communion and baptism. That stands in contrast mainly against the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches which have seven sacraments. Protestants practice just two because during the protestant reformation Luther said he sought to follow only those sacraments in which Jesus participated and also commanded us to do. And while a lot more could be said about that, I’m not going to, so we can get into beliefs about baptism, which could be its own message as well.

Give Us This Day Our Daily Bread

Here is my message from Sunday. The scripture passages were Isaiah 55:1-12 and Matthew 6:5-13:

Bread is not as much of a staple in our diets as it used to be, especially if you, like me, have a doctor who is constantly telling you to cut out the cards, or perhaps you’ve even eliminated bread altogether from your diet, either because of allergies or for dieting reasons. And so for us, asking for our daily bread, which is the petition we move onto today in our look at the Lord’s Prayer, might seem just a little out of touch, not part of our daily reality. Although when you go to a restaurant and they bring good bread to the table, and I’m not talking about the artisanal stuff or those that are so hard on the outside that a turtle could use it as a shell. I’m talking soft, warm bread, melting with butter, and if it has pasta accompanying it, which my doctor also says I should be avoiding, that can be like heaven. And since I see some of you shaking your heads and salivating like Pavlov has just rung his famous bell, I know that you know what I’m talking about. But, that’s more often the exception to the rule these days.

It’s not like we don’t consider bread important, after all when we are talking about amazing inventions, we don’t compare it to the invention of fire or the wheel or even the printing press. Instead what do we say? It’s the greatest thing since? Sliced bread. Apparently sliced bread is the high point of human existence. But, unlike today, bread was a staple in the ancient world. It would have been found in every meal, and it wasn’t just a side, it would have been the main course. It would have been accompanied by fruits and vegetables, and occasionally, but rarely, especially for the poor, meat would have been present. In fact, because of its ubiquity the word bread could be used for food in general, not just bread. But, bread was also more than just about bread, because it also represented hospitality. When strangers or friends appear, bread is brought out as part of the table. We even still say the same thing, as we talk about breaking bread together. Which means sharing a meal, and there’s something special that happens over a meal. When we share a meal together, or with someone else, there’s a bond that comes into place that few other things can do, and I think that’s a portion of what Jesus is talking about here. And yet, of course there is so much more to it as well, because there is a direct practicality to it.

Gallows Humor

Here is my message from Maundy Thursday. The text was Romans 8:18-25, 31-39:

In the remarkable documentary Capturing the Friedmans, director Andrew Jarecki tells the story of the Friedman family of New York who get caught up in the preschool child molestation prosecutions, or we might say persecutions, of the 1980s. The father, Arnold, and later his son, Jesse, are both arrested and plead guilty to the charges that are made against them. But, the film does a great job in exploring the idea of justice and truth, and how the criminal justice system doesn’t always seek those things, and more importantly about the stories we make up and tell ourselves to justify the positions we have taken, even if the evidence doesn’t actually match what we say. But, there is one scene in the documentary, which consists of home movies the family took about their lives during this time, that hits home for today. Just before entering the courthouse for sentencing, the brothers are all standing outside the courtroom joking around with each other. The prosecutors witnessed this activity happening from a distance and said that it just proved their guilt, because if they were innocent they would not have laughing before this serious event taking place. In other words, their view of the issue impacted how they saw and interpreted what was happening. But in response to that accusation, one of the brothers said obviously the prosecutor had never heard of gallows humor, the humor we have when things appear desperate or even hopeless. The humor we have at times when we have to laugh otherwise we would have to cry.

Since today is also April fool’s day, it got me thinking about that film and the idea of humor in dark situations, and it made me wonder if there was any gallows humor on this night in Jesus’ life. On the surface it doesn’t appear to be so, it’s all pretty serious, at least according to our accounts.  And yet, I have to imagine that there had to have been something happening, not only because we tell jokes in situations like this just to cut the tension, but also because of the traditions of Judaism, after all it’s not like Jewish comedians are a rare thing. I think some of this comes about, and the plethora of Jewish comics, comes about because there is something about suffering that leads to humor. I think that’s why there is such a strong comedic tradition in black culture in our country as well. Suffering leads to humor. If you look at the background of many comedians, not all, but many, you’ll find some tragic events that have occurred in their history that have led them to tell jokes, because the alternative was to break down. Stephen Colbert’s father and two brothers were killed in a plane crash and he said it became his job to make his mother laugh. Indeed, the whole reason Jarecki came upon the story of the Friedmans was because he was doing a documentary on children’s party clowns in New York City, and David Friedman was one of the best. Suffering leads to humor.

Gluttony Versus Those Who Hunger and Thirst for Righteousness

 Here is my message from Sunday. The text was Matthew 6:25-34:

One of the accusations that was leveled against Jesus, both by opponents, and even somewhat by supporters was that he was a glutton. This accusation was especially true when compared against John the Baptist. We are told that John was living an ascetic lifestyle wearing a camelhair cloak, which wasn’t very comfortable, and that he ate locusts with wild honey. I’m thinking the honey was a dipping sauce. That is a very different picture than what we see of Jesus, and in fact John’s disciples come and ask why it is that they are fasting while Jesus and the disciples are not. To which Jesus says that someday they will fast, but they should feast while the bridegroom is still with them. The accusation that Jesus was a glutton was a slur used against him to try and denigrate him and his message, more than a reality. But, it does appear that it was fun to be around Jesus, at least most of the time, and as I said in this week’s newsletter, we have lots of stories of Jesus eating with the disciples and with others.

Eating, breaking bread, was important to Jesus and a part of his witness about the Kingdom of God, and we still talk about the feasting that Jesus is preparing for us, and yet what we see in that is the judgments about his behavior could be made. We still see that today because of the seven deadly sins, the one that many people feel comfortable making a judgment about, especially when it comes to others, is the sin of gluttony. Most people just assume that people are overweight because they are gluttonous, and while gluttony does have something to do with overeating, it doesn’t really have anything to do with obesity. The two are not necessarily connected. You can be gluttonous and skinny. And we have to remember that when it was the poor who were skinny that having a little meat on your bones was said to represent divine favor, virtue and nobility. Oh how things change.

Companion and Compassion

This Sunday is World Communion Sunday, a time for us to gather at the table with Christians all over the world. It has been the tradition of this congregation to have different breads representing different cultures for people to choose for the bread being offered for this celebration. We obviously cannot do that this year, but we can still be at the table, even when we can’t be together.

Sharing a meal is an important thing. There are lots of stories telling us of Jesus sharing a meal with others. There is something that happens when we share a meal with someone else, or break bread with them. We enter into a different relationship with them. Indeed, the word companion literally means “with bread.” A companion is someone with whom you have shared a meal.

That is part of the reason why communion is so significant for us. It is the time in which we can come together and share a meal together as a congregation. It is a time that we are re-membered as one body in Christ and are reminded not just of Christ’s saving actions on our behalf but that we also don’t do this alone.

This leads us to one more significant word: Compassion. Normally when we talk about passion, it means something like having a strong emotion. But, an older meaning was that of suffering, which is why we talk about the passion of Christ. And so compassion literally means “to suffer with.” That too is part of who we are called to be, and something we do as we share a meal together, and as we support one another in the faith.

At the One Board two months ago, I shared that every church says they are welcoming and they are caring, but, obviously, not every church actually does those things. We have stipulated that one of our core values is that we are compassionate and caring, and I think we actually do live into that. Are we perfect? No. There is always room to grow, but one of the things that has impressed me is the way that you do reach out and help each other in times of need, and in times of celebration.

If you are worshipping from home this Sunday, I would encourage you to stop by the church to pick up communion elements, regular or gluten free, so that as we celebrate World Communion Sunday, we may indeed be compassionate companions in this journey of faith.

Traveling the Prayer Paths: At the Table

Here is my sermon for Sunday. The text was Luke 22:14-23:

Today’s passage of Luke’s account of Jesus’ last meal might be a great scripture for today, or perhaps it’s even a terrible one for today, given where we are as a community, a state, a nation and a world in dealing with the coronavirus. Perhaps it’s good because it sort of encapsulates the darkness of that night and the unknown future, at least for the disciples. And perhaps it’s not good because Jesus seems to indicate that he knew how things would turn out. But regardless of which it is, it is an important piece of scripture because it is part of what we still practice liturgically in communion as part of worship even today, although there were lots of conversations going on in the wider church this week about whether to serve communion or not and how to serve it because of fears of touch and contamination and the unknown. I truly wish there were some easy answers to these questions, because it would make this job a lot easier, but there are not, and what we are really focusing on for today is not communion itself, or at least not all of it, but the prayer that Jesus gives, as part of our series in traveling the prayer paths of Jesus, and looking at where, when and how Jesus prays.

But before that a quick recap and correction. We began with the idea and need of going off to a quiet place to pray by ourselves, just as Jesus did, in order to reconnect with God and recharge ourselves spiritually and even physically in order to do the ministry in the world that we are called to do. This time can be a short period of time or even days, depending on what’s happening and what we have to dedicate to this time. Then last week we moved onto the prayers that we offer as part of our ordinary life, and it’s here that I want to add a correction. As I was thinking about the message, which was based on Jesus’ healing of a boy with what appears to be epilepsy, and he said that the reason the disciples couldn’t heal the boy was because it could only be done through prayer. And so I talked about the necessity of prayer for the impossible things in our lives. And that could have given the impression to some that bad things in our lives could, or perhaps did happen simply because we didn’t pray, or didn’t say the right words, or that we might not have prayed hard enough. And if only you had done that, then the outcome would have been different. And that was not what I intended at all, or what I meant to say, and so I apologize for that potential misunderstanding. This is a message for a different day, and perhaps as part of next week, but I don’t believe that prayer works that way, or that God works that way. Instead, my point was about the need for prayer in our lives and that we should be praying for others, and that those could be just short burst prayers or arrow prayers, short prayers given to others, like those trapped in endless lines at Smith’s, and especially for the employees. But that we also need to be praying for God’s help in all situations, especially those that we think are impossible. That should be part of our prayer practice.

The Kindness Challenge: Breaking Bread

Here is my sermon from Sunday. The text was Luke 22:14-23:

A little more than two week’s ago, former presidents Bush and Obama made speeches about the current political atmosphere in the country. Obama said “Why are we deliberately trying to misunderstand each other and be cruel to each other and put each other down? That’s not who we are!” while Bush the younger said “We have seen our discourse degraded by casual cruelty…. Bullying and prejudice in our public life sets a national tone, provides permission for cruelty and bigotry, and compromises the moral education of children. The only way to pass along civic values is to first live up to them.” Now, this decline in civility has been building up for a long time, and is clearly found in more than just politics. Just turn on the television and we see people screaming at each other on cooking shows. I’ve spent some time in kitchens, and every kitchen I’ve been in that type of behavior would not be tolerated, but it makes for good television. There is a reason why we don’t have a show called the sweetest housewives of Beverly Hills, because that’s not exciting, and people don’t want to watch two political commentators agree with each other. Instead we’d rather watch people be oppositional, except we’ve moved passed just disagreeing to being disagreeable. And as much as we say that we don’t like it and we want it to be better, the truth is our behavior says exactly the opposite because people are watching these shows.

In the Breaking of Bread

Here is my sermon from Sunday. The text was Luke 24:13-35:

In the Protestant tradition, we have two things which we consider to be sacraments, baptism and communion. This stands in contrast to the seven sacraments in the Roman Catholic and the Orthodox traditions. During the protestant reformation, the seven were narrowed down to two because these are both things that Jesus commanded that we do and also things in which Jesus also participated. And what we see in scripture is that the early church continued and participated in both of these things from the earliest days, and so in today’s scripture readings we find both of them, or at least a form of them, taking place. The first is Peter’s call to baptism in which 3000 people are baptized, which makes me think about the logistics of baptizing 3000 people in one day, and while we never are actually told that the disciples are ever baptized, we presume that they were, maybe by John the Baptist, or perhaps by Jesus, but this becomes an important and identifying aspect of the early church that obviously continues through to today. And then we have Jesus implement the practice of communion on his last night with the disciples, which we know from the writings of Paul continued to be a significant act in the early church, and we have at least a part of a communion meal in today’s passage from Luke.

Even though we are now several weeks past Easter, in today’s passage we find ourselves back on Easter morning, with two followers of Jesus who are traveling out to the town of Emmaus which is said to be some seven miles from Jerusalem, although some manuscript traditions say 19 miles, although where the town is, is unknown because there is no record of a town by that name, although there is much speculation of where it might have been. But, it’s entirely possible, and we’ll return to this idea, that we’re not supposed to know, that it’s supposed to be sort of any town, a generic town, one that is meant to represent our town, or a place where we can put ourselves in the role of making this journey. But regardless of where it is, on Easter morning, they have heard that Jesus’ body was not there, and that the women, or at the very least Mary, have encountered the risen Christ, but, like the other disciples, they don’t appear to believe it yet. They’ve heard it but have not processed it, have not accepted it, it has not taken root in their hearts and mind. And so, they set out going home and as they are making their way, they are discussing the events, although the Greek word used here could also be translated as arguing, when Jesus appears before them. Except, like in other versions of the resurrection story, they don’t know that it is Jesus.

Judge Not

Here is my sermon from Sunday. The text was Matthew 7:1-5:

We continue today in our series on the things Jesus commanded us not to do with the one that is probably the most famous. It is certainly the one that the most people outside of the church know of, even if they don’t know that it was Jesus who said it, or even where to find it, but they do know that the Bible says “Do not judge.”  As a result it is a phrase that gets thrown back at the church and Christians on a fairly regular basis, and in my opinion often rightfully so.  But in the ways it is used by non-Christians it is clear that they don’t understand what Jesus was actually saying, but more importantly for us as Christians, it is also clear that many of us do not understand what the statement means for us as individuals or as a church.  So what does Jesus mean when he says that we are not to judge?

First we have to understand and remember what one of Jesus’ biggest pet peeves was, which was hypocrisy.  One definition of hypocrisy says it is “the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform.” So one of Jesus’ constant complaints was that some of the religious leaders and religious groups were looking at what others we doing, finding what they did did not rise to the same level as themselves and therefore condemning them, while simultaneously ignoring all the areas in which they were violating the law or not living up to and into the same standards that they themselves were promoting.

Judas

Here is my sermon from Sunday. Part four in our series on the people of the passion. The text was Luke 22:1-6, 14-16, 21-27, 47-53:

In one of the most dramatic scenes in theater, Julius Caesar is attacked by those conspiring against him, including his beloved friend Brutus, and Caesar utters the words that have echoed down to us since the day that Shakespeare first wrote them, “et tu, Brute?”  Then Caesar says words that are just as important, but not as well known, “then fall, Caesar.”  That might be one of the most famous scenes of betrayal in history, except, of course, for the one we just heard between Jesus and Judas, but I have to be honest and say that I think that Judas might be one of the most tragic and misunderstood characters of history, maybe especially in Judas’ understanding of himself.

Often in the New Testament, people’s names will tell us something about who they are.  While there are several Judases in the gospels, including another disciple, the Judas we are focusing on today is referred to as Judas Iscariot, or Judas of Iscariot, Judas the one called Iscariot, among several others, not only so we can tell him apart from the other Judases, but also to give us some information, but the problem is we don’t really know what that means.  The answer you are most likely to find is that Iscariot may mean “man of Kerioth”, a town recorded in the book of Joshua as being in southern Israel, but there are some problems with this identification.  The first is that there is no indication that the town of Kerioth still existed 1200 years after Joshua mentions it, as there is no record of it during the time of Jesus. The other problem is that all of the other disciples’ were from Galilee, where Jesus is from, so what would someone from southern Judea be doing up in Galilee?  Does that mean it’s impossible, of course not, and if it that is true, it would mean that Judas was different and separate from the other disciples from the very beginning.

Some scholars have speculated that Iscariot may mean that Judas was a member of a group of zealots called the sicarrii.  We know that at least one other disciple, Simon, but not Simon Peter, was called a zealot, but the sicarrii were a special group who assassinated other Jews whom they saw as collaborators with the Romans, including the high priest Jonathan, using hidden knives, from where they get their name.  Another option is that Iscariot comes from an Aramaic word meaning “red color,” so maybe Judas was a red head, and we all know about red heads.  In the end, where most scholars who have worked on this issue end up, is that while they may have their personal preference, the truth is that we simply don’t know what the term Iscariot means and it may even be that 40 plus years after the facts that even the writers of the gospels no longer knew what it meant either.

Getting Close To God

Here is my sermon from Sunday. The text was Exodus 34:29-35 and Luke 9:28-42:

We start today with a confession.  This week we will celebrate Ash Wednesday, although perhaps celebrate is the wrong word to use, but in the Christian calendar the last Sunday before Ash Wednesday is known as Transfiguration Sunday, the day in which we hear one of the accounts of Jesus’ transfiguration on the mountain with three disciples.  A few weeks ago as I was doing worship planning, I wasn’t really thinking about this being the last Sunday before Lent, and so turned to the lectionary readings for today, and said, “Oh man, I don’t want to preach on the transfiguration again this year.”  While nowhere near as significant for most people, this story is sort of like Christmas and Easter in that it comes around every single year and we preachers get to a point and think, “what can I possibly say about this that hasn’t already been said.”  So my intention was to ignore Jesus on the mountain and instead talk about Moses on the mountain, which is also one of the traditional  readings for today.  But as I began to think about it more and more, I found myself seeing the connections and similarities between these two stories, and because God has a sense of humor, found myself coming back to preaching about the transfiguration, while at the same time trying to ignore it, because what I felt a pull towards in these two stories was not really what happens on the mountaintop, but instead what happens afterwards.

Moses has been up on the mountain talking with God, want to guess for how many days? 40.  And he comes down with the two tablets with the ten commandments in his hands.  This is actually the second set of tablets because he had shattered the first set he was given when he came down off the mountain and found that the people had constructed a golden calf and were worshipping it.  So Moses goes and meets with God again and comes down with a new set, which are the ones that end up in the Ark of the Covenant which makes Indiana Jones necessary.  But, when he comes off the mountain this time, in addition to the tablets, Moses’ face is also glowing from being in the presence of God, and the people are afraid to come near him, so Moses ends up putting a veil on his face, not to protect the people from what they see, but in order to try and quell their fear about what it means.  To put a distance between them and the presence of God.  Moses takes of the veil when he is with God, but then puts it on when he is with the people.  As an aside, when this passage was translated into Latin for the Vulgate, which is the Latin Bible, Jerome translated the word glows as horns, which is not really as strange as it may sound based on the Hebrew here, but that’s why sometimes you’ll see Moses as being portrayed with horns on his head, Michelangelo.

In The Breaking Of The Bread

Here is my sermon from Sunday.  The text was Luke 24:13-35:

In our Easter celebration I said that to really understand the Easter moment is to not really think about what happened in its details, but instead to simply experience that proclamation of hope, that momentous moment when everything was changed, to let it flow over us like water.  This morning’s passage is a continuation of that Easter message.  Even though we are now two weeks past Easter, we must remember that we are still in what is known as Eastertide because Easter is actually celebrated for 50 days, but today’s passage takes place on Easter morning, as these two men are leaving Jerusalem in order to go to Emmaus.  But let me back up for just a moment to remind us all of Luke’s version of the Easter story.  On Easter morning, Mary, and several other women, went to the tomb with spices they had prepared for the body, but when they get there the body is not there, and then two men appear to them, and while they are not called angels that is what we might call them, and then tell them that Jesus is not there, that he has been raised from the dead, and so the women all run off to tell the disciples, and, in Luke’s words, “all the rest,”  what they had seen.  Not believing the women, Peter ran to the tomb and he too saw that it was empty.

In the ancient world there were several groups of people who were not allowed to testify in court because it was said that their testimony was not believable, that is they were liars by nature.  One of those groups was shepherds, and this Luke having shepherds making a proclamation about the birth of Jesus is unique, and anyone want to make a guess about another group of people who were not allowed to testify?  That’s right, women, and so the women also making the first proclamation that Jesus is risen is also a very unique characteristic of the Christian story, and probably one of the reasons why Peter doesn’t believe what they have to say and so he needs proof for himself, much like Thomas did in the passage we heard last week.  After all this has happened, then we are told at the beginning of today’s passage that “two of them,” presumably two who are included in that portion of all the rest who were told about the resurrection, are going to a village called Emmaus.

The story of the walk to Emmaus is the longest and most fully developed of all the Easter accounts we find in the gospels, and yet we really don’t know anything about these men. We are told that one of them is named Cleopas, but the other man remains unnamed, and this is the only story we have from them.  While it appears that they had something to do with the followers of Jesus, we have not heard about Cleopas before and he never appears again.  These are just two ordinary men traveling to some ordinary town, and we really don’t even know much about it.  Emmaus is not a town we know of as existing in Palestine during this time, except from this story.  We don’t know where it was and we don’t even know how far away from Jerusalem it was.  While the passage we heard today says 7 miles, there are discrepancies in the Greek manuscripts we have giving different distances, including some that say it was 19 miles away.  Our best manuscripts say 7, and the fact that they travel there and back all in one day has led scholars to use the 7 mile distance in their translations.  But again that is to get bogged down in the details rather than in what the story is actually trying to convey to us today.

Communion

Imagine if you were hosting a dinner party and you knew you had people coming who had specific allergies, or who didn’t eat certain things. Would you, as the host, decide to ignore that and make things you knew your guests could not eat? Or would you, instead, try and make a meal in which everyone was eating and sharing the same food? I suspect the second scenario is the more likely because that is one of the responsibilities, and one of the gifts, of being a host.

Last spring the staff made the decision to begin using gluten free bread during communion. We made this decision for several different reasons. However, for me, one of them was the most important. During the communion liturgy when we raise the bread and break it we say that we all become one body because we all partake of the one loaf. This is not the case when we offer two different breads because we are not all partaking of the one loaf. We decided that it was important symbolically and theologically that we change this so that we could all be using the same bread, that we could live into the words of the liturgy and we could welcome all.

Repeatedly throughout scripture Christ is criticized for welcoming and eating with people that others wanted nothing to do with, those who were outside the “norm.” Jesus welcomed and invited everyone to his table, and so we want to make sure that we are doing the same at Christ’s table for communion. Although the church may appear to be the host of communion, that is actually incorrect, because it is the Lord’s Supper. Christ is the host and the invitation comes from Him.

Now I know that there have been complaints about the taste as well as the consistency of the bread. To be honest I don’t think it tastes all that great myself. But, I do not feel that it is an imposition on me to have to occasionally take a small piece of this bread so that we can all partake of the same bread together. Instead, I feel it is something I undertake joyfully knowing that Christ is the host, and just like when we host in our homes, Christ wants everyone to feel welcomed and invited.

We have also heard rumors that there are some who are refusing to either receive the elements or who come forward but then do not eat the bread. This troubles us, but I pray that we will all remember that communion is not about us as individuals. Instead, it is a communion, which literally means a “sharing.” It is a communal exercise. It is about us as a body of Christ remembering Christ’s actions on our behalf, and also about us being re-membered, that is once again becoming one body because we all partake of the one loaf.

We continue to search for a recipe which will give us the best tasting bread we can have, which also remains gluten free. If you have a recipe you would like us to try, or if you would like to help us bake communion bread, please be in touch with either Pastor Joel or myself. And then let us, each and every one of us, as we gather together this Sunday to celebrate World Communion Sunday, break one loaf and become one body.