This passage occurs as a New Testament Lesson in the RCL
"Pentecost"/"Ordinary"/"Proper" Season, Year A, most recently September 2018. It also occurs at other points in the Lectionary, including Palm Sunday.
A separate post looking at Philippians 2:5-11 is here.
Summary:
This is a very rich passage. By itself it stands as one the most powerful description of Christ and his work. Worth pointing out though is that Paul continues to build off the imagery the rest of his letter to discuss not simply Christ's work on the cross, but also Christ's work on us. He changed his shape (μορφη) into humility but will co-shape (συμμορφος) ours into glory, not simply through his suffering, but even our own.
Key words:
μορφη ("shape" or "form"; 7, 8) If you look up this word, you will find it appears twice in Philippians, once in verse 7 and once in verse 8. Jesus had the form/shape of God; took the form/shape of a human. Sounds good. However, later on in Philippians, Paul comes back to this word, but using it with the prefix συν (the -n becomes a -m...see note below) . First, in verse 3:10 where he says that he is being συμμορφιζομαι-ed into Christ's death and later when he is being συμμορφος with Christ's resurrected body (3:28). Paul moves from talking about the form of Christ to the co-formation of the believer, both into suffering, death and then resurrection. I think the word μορφη can be used to guide one's reflections on the whole letter: The transformation of Jesus creates the transformation of the believer. To put it another way, I see Philippians as Paul's personal exposition on his line in Romans 8:17: If children, then heirs, heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ -- if, in fact, we suffer with him so that we may also be glorified with him.
εκενωσεν and κενοδοξια ("emptied" from κενω, 7; conceit, 3) Much is made from κενω, which means to empty. I find it interesting that Paul gives warning just a bit earlier about conceit, literally false glory. The only way to true glory, for Christ and for us, is through suffering and death.
κατεργαζομαι ("work out", 2:12; from kata (intensifier) and erg-oo (to work)) One possible meaning for this verb is simply "achieve" but another one is "to work up," ie, to make use of; fields, for example, are worked on to make them ready for harvest. This verse can be problematic in that it makes it sound like our salvation is our responsibility. However, Paul's never verse, 2:13, makes it clear that God is the author of our salvation. I think in this case, Paul uses salvation (σωτηρια) to describe our entire relationship with God in Jesus Christ, specifically the process of dying and rising. It is worth noting that the verb here (and also for "co-form" (see above) are in the present tense, suggesting this an on-going process.
A really geeky language point:
Grammar/translation: The morphing "n"
When someone learns Hebrew, they learn verbs like n-t-n, which means to give. They then try to read these in the Bible and discover it hardly ever exists in that form and most often the "n"s drop out in conjugation so that words like y-t-l-m mean he gives or something like this. This is true in Greek; alas, the problem is not Hebrew, but the letter "n", which has a soft sound. It tends to morph into other sounds. This actually happens in Latin. For example, con is the prefix for "with" But notice how often that "n" disappears or morphs: communication, cooperation, combat, comfort, command, corroberate. This happens in Greek, especially when verbs add the prefix συν. The weakness of the "n" sound is also shown in the fact that its moveable (ie not very necessary).
This is why συμμορφος is spelled as it is, instead of συνμορφος!
Tuesday, September 26, 2017
Monday, August 28, 2017
Track vs Field: The unchurched and churched
Reformation 500 and the unchurched
This summer my congregation did a great deal of research into the unchurched in our community. This was part of our celebration of the 500th anniversary of the Reformation. We are thinking about the call of the Holy Spirit to continue to reform the church, in this case, our congregation. One of our projects was to build a "Thesis 96" wall outside our church. We invited people in the church and community to write their statement (or thesis) to the church. It has been really awesome to see what people have written. But that is for another day!
Our hope through the Thesis 96 project and our Reformation 500 celebrations is to consider -- what prevents people from accessing God's grace in our culture, specifically our community, today? How could be better reach out to the unchurched in our community.
Track vs Field Understanding
Back to the unchurched. I confess that I often end up with a view of the unchurched and churched that looks something like this:
In this view, there are unchurched and churched people. Each group is divided into two subgroups: The unchurched has people that are really opposed to the Gospel (we'll call them atheists) and people that are somewhat open ("seekers"); the churched has people that come ("participants") and those that really are involved ("elders"). We could nuance this chart, maybe adding a few more arrow segments, but basically the idea is to move people from left to right. If they are questioning, get them in the door. If they are in the door, get them involved. There are tons of books written to give churches tools as to how to make this conveyor belt process work.
There are also tons of blogs/books written as to why people are drifting from right to left on this chart! Given this mentality, it is easy to feel like we are fighting an impossible task, running right into the head waters of our culture that is increasingly ambivalent, if not hostile to church, institutions and in many ways, commitments.
As we did research, which included looking at data and talking to people in our community, it occurred to me that this track or linear view was really inadequate for our task. I want to propose a more "field" than "track" view of the churched and unchurched.
In reality, there are many reasons why people are unchurched. Some of it comes out of opposition to the church or the idea of God. Frankly though, survey after survey shows that most Americans do not consider themselves strident atheists. Most people instead are out of church totally or most Sundays for a variety of reasons
- They moved to a new community or had a huge change in their family situation
- They were burned out on their church
- They were abused by their church
- They have never been to church and have never been invited (7 out of 10 unchurched people has never been invited)
- They work on Sundays or have made a commitment to their child's sporting "career."
Furthermore, there are lots of ways that people plug into church
- Some people are "all in" - "elders" who come nearly every Sunday and serve in leadership
- Some are homebound members
- Some connect only with certain areas of ministry - education or social ministry or a particular outreach of the church
- Some come when they are can, but are really busy
- Some connect only online
- Some travel extensively and are only plugged in when they are in town
In short, we do not have two or even four groups that could fit on a line. There are people all over the highway in terms of church involvement or not.
General Motors' Maven
General Motors has a subdivision called Maven, which is providing short term rentals of GM cars. It is designed to compete with ZipCar. General Motors has come to the conclusion that for certain phases of life, people want access to a car, but neither want nor can afford ownership. In some cities, people use Maven for weekend getaways, in other cities people use Maven to get across town and still in other cities people use it as their vehicle for money making through Uber! What is most striking though is that General Motors does not simply think this kind of car utilization is for a phase of life; it acknowledges that many people will never own a car, but will be interested in using a car. General Motors set up Maven so that even if people are not buying cars, they can still make a profit in the car industry!
To put this perspective back into our discussion about churched and unchurched, I think we should realize that just like many people today will not own cars, but will still use them, many people in our congregation will not be "all in" and may, in fact, never be "all in" but they will still be in the sphere of our congregation. Just like people are automobiles for different reasons and to different extents, the people who come into our congregation will engage in different ways. This does not mean they are bad or incomplete Christians or even that they only have a consumer mentality, but their life set up prevents them from being "all in."
Creating paths instead of a track
Rather than trying to move everyone along some mythical church conveyer belt, I suggest we embrace a far scarier task: Providing more (personalized!) paths to faith development. Let's assume that young families are not going to come more than twice a month. How can we help them pray at night with their kids? Let's assume that homebound members cannot serve on committees. How can we keep them connected and feeling a part of the decision making process at the church? Let's assume that the person who only comes to play in the handbell choir is unlikely to come for anything else. How can we make that 6 hours a month she commits to the church as faith filled as possible?
The goal of making disciples may ultimately have a linear or clear trajectory, namely, helping people see their relationship with God in terms of transformation rather than transaction. However, the map of people's engagement with the church is anything but linear. To put it another way, I feel liberated - my job is not simply to move people from an increasing pool of unchurched to a shrinking pool of churched. My task is to help the congregation figure out "faith paths" that can move people toward a deeper commitment to their Lord and the church, acknowledging this will not necessarily look "all in" from a church perspective. This does not mean that serving Jesus demands anything less than "all in"; rather, this acknowledges that being "all in" to Jesus will manifest itself in a variety of levels of engagement with the church, particularly one congregation.
Tuesday, August 8, 2017
1 Kings 19:1-18
The narrative lectionary year 4 includes this passage for All Saints Sunday. It also occurs a number of times in the Revised Common Lectionary (or at least portions of it).
Summary: If you are preaching All Saints, what a great image of a saint: discouraged, yet fed through the tangible word to obedient yet difficult service. Theology of the cross, reformation and vocation all in one. One could even get to spiritual warfare and anfechtung through the voices that Elijah heres in the messengers.
What I find interesting in the Hebrew this week is the use of the word "soul" or "life." The Hebrew (and LXX) use words that we often translate as soul. Yet the death would be very physical; furthermore, the treatment is very physical. Back to all saints: our sainthood is lived out and revived in this world.
Key Words:
נוח ("nuach"; "rest" vs 3) Elijah does not ditch his servant, but rather gives him rest. This word is where the name "Noah" comes from.
נגע ("naga"; "touch", vs 5 and 7) This word can mean touch or strike. Did the angel touch him or prod him? What was this touch like?
נפש ("nephish"; vs 10 and throughout). The word nephish here, sometimes translated soul, is the word used for "life"; a reminder, as always, that our pseudo-Greek worldvied of souls and bodies is not Hebrew (nor Biblical!) Elijah's soul needs food and water! This relates to other words and ideas in this section -- eat, touch, even hear!
דממה ("dammah"; "silent voice" vs 12). The NSRV translates this phrase as "sheer silence." Yet the Bible seems to suggest it is a small whisper.
Translation issues:
vs. 2: "If"/"let" and the jussive mood.
If you read the Hebrew, you will not find the words "if" when Jezebel speaks, "May the gods do X if I have not done Y." The reason is that the verbs, "do" and "add", are in the jussive mood. Greek grammars all call is subjuntive mood, but Hebrew Grammars call it different names based on the person (ie type of subject, I, you, or he/she/it). The long and short of it, the Hebrew here is a hypothetical folded into a vow. "May the gods kill me if I don't kill you."
Hebrew consectuive verbs.
vs. 3 Hebrew has no adverbs, really. Instead it places verbs in a consecutive fashion. In this case, you have "he was afraid, he was standing and he was going." Or more accurately, "He was going in a fearful and standing way" or even better "He immediately ran scared."
vs.5 Based on the two consecutive verbs, "get up" and "eat," we can red the "get up" as an adverb. Ths, Elijah is not told to stand up and eat, but rather, eat immediately.
Summary: If you are preaching All Saints, what a great image of a saint: discouraged, yet fed through the tangible word to obedient yet difficult service. Theology of the cross, reformation and vocation all in one. One could even get to spiritual warfare and anfechtung through the voices that Elijah heres in the messengers.
What I find interesting in the Hebrew this week is the use of the word "soul" or "life." The Hebrew (and LXX) use words that we often translate as soul. Yet the death would be very physical; furthermore, the treatment is very physical. Back to all saints: our sainthood is lived out and revived in this world.
Key Words:
נוח ("nuach"; "rest" vs 3) Elijah does not ditch his servant, but rather gives him rest. This word is where the name "Noah" comes from.
נגע ("naga"; "touch", vs 5 and 7) This word can mean touch or strike. Did the angel touch him or prod him? What was this touch like?
נפש ("nephish"; vs 10 and throughout). The word nephish here, sometimes translated soul, is the word used for "life"; a reminder, as always, that our pseudo-Greek worldvied of souls and bodies is not Hebrew (nor Biblical!) Elijah's soul needs food and water! This relates to other words and ideas in this section -- eat, touch, even hear!
דממה ("dammah"; "silent voice" vs 12). The NSRV translates this phrase as "sheer silence." Yet the Bible seems to suggest it is a small whisper.
Translation issues:
vs. 2: "If"/"let" and the jussive mood.
If you read the Hebrew, you will not find the words "if" when Jezebel speaks, "May the gods do X if I have not done Y." The reason is that the verbs, "do" and "add", are in the jussive mood. Greek grammars all call is subjuntive mood, but Hebrew Grammars call it different names based on the person (ie type of subject, I, you, or he/she/it). The long and short of it, the Hebrew here is a hypothetical folded into a vow. "May the gods kill me if I don't kill you."
Hebrew consectuive verbs.
vs. 3 Hebrew has no adverbs, really. Instead it places verbs in a consecutive fashion. In this case, you have "he was afraid, he was standing and he was going." Or more accurately, "He was going in a fearful and standing way" or even better "He immediately ran scared."
vs.5 Based on the two consecutive verbs, "get up" and "eat," we can red the "get up" as an adverb. Ths, Elijah is not told to stand up and eat, but rather, eat immediately.
Matthew 14:22-33
This passage occurs in the Revised Common Lectionary, Year A, most recently August 13, 2017
Summary: This passage provides wonderful image of faith: so powerful, yet so fragile. Faith can move mountains. This is good news. The better news is that Jesus comes to us amid the storm. The best news, I think, is that Jesus lets us stay in the boat when we only have little faith.
Key Words
απολυση (meaning "release", 14:22) Jesus here "releases" the crowd. Prior to the feeding of the 5,000, the disciples wanted Jesus to release the crowd. Now that they have been fed, he is releasing them. Also interesting is that now Jesus must compel (ηναγκασεν, from αναγκαζω) them to leave as well.
προσευξασθαι (meaning "to pray", 14:23) The verb to "pray" is a middle voice verb. Typically middle voice means the object and subject are the same, in that the subject is doing the verb to itself (for instance, shaving would be a good candidate in English for a middle voice verb!) This would suggest that prayer involves some sort of movement, externally or internally, to prepare oneself for prayer. I remember once I was invited "to assume the posture of prayer."
βασανιζομενον (participle form of βασανιζω meaning "torment"; 14:24) This word can even mean torture (as in the the beast is basanized at the end of Revelation)
θαρεσειτε (meaning "be of good cheer, 14:27) I am fascinated by this. Is Jesus here commanding faith? Is it possible for the individual to suddenly turn one's disposition around? I believe here that we are saved from this dilemma when we realize that the next words of Jesus to Peter are pure promise: εγω ειμι. "I am" says Jesus. "I am" is not simple a declaration that Jesus is present, but that Jesus is God, for εγω ειμι is the same of God. As Jesus says this, he reveals to Peter that he is indeed God and he is with Peter. Without the promise of his presence and divinity, Jesus words to Peter would be cruel. Why can Peter take courage? Because Jesus is there with him, not because Peter needs to "get it together."
ει συ ει (meaning "since it is you", 14:28). The word "ει" is often translated "if." However, its translation is really governed by the tense of the verb to which it is linked. If it is linked with a subjunctive tense verb, then it is building a hypothetical case; if it is linked with an indicative tense verb, then it is building a true case. Here it is used with an indicative verb, meaning Peter believes it is a true condition: Since it is you, command me. [In the case of A, which is a true scenario, then B; rather than: In the case of A, which may or may not be true, then B]
ολιγοπιστε (from ολιγ meaning "few" and πιστε meaning "faith", "of little faith", 14:33) A gracious reminder that we can still be in the boat with Jesus and only have a little faith. Having lots of faith is not a requirement for journeying with Jesus.
Summary: This passage provides wonderful image of faith: so powerful, yet so fragile. Faith can move mountains. This is good news. The better news is that Jesus comes to us amid the storm. The best news, I think, is that Jesus lets us stay in the boat when we only have little faith.
Key Words
απολυση (meaning "release", 14:22) Jesus here "releases" the crowd. Prior to the feeding of the 5,000, the disciples wanted Jesus to release the crowd. Now that they have been fed, he is releasing them. Also interesting is that now Jesus must compel (ηναγκασεν, from αναγκαζω) them to leave as well.
προσευξασθαι (meaning "to pray", 14:23) The verb to "pray" is a middle voice verb. Typically middle voice means the object and subject are the same, in that the subject is doing the verb to itself (for instance, shaving would be a good candidate in English for a middle voice verb!) This would suggest that prayer involves some sort of movement, externally or internally, to prepare oneself for prayer. I remember once I was invited "to assume the posture of prayer."
βασανιζομενον (participle form of βασανιζω meaning "torment"; 14:24) This word can even mean torture (as in the the beast is basanized at the end of Revelation)
θαρεσειτε (meaning "be of good cheer, 14:27) I am fascinated by this. Is Jesus here commanding faith? Is it possible for the individual to suddenly turn one's disposition around? I believe here that we are saved from this dilemma when we realize that the next words of Jesus to Peter are pure promise: εγω ειμι. "I am" says Jesus. "I am" is not simple a declaration that Jesus is present, but that Jesus is God, for εγω ειμι is the same of God. As Jesus says this, he reveals to Peter that he is indeed God and he is with Peter. Without the promise of his presence and divinity, Jesus words to Peter would be cruel. Why can Peter take courage? Because Jesus is there with him, not because Peter needs to "get it together."
ει συ ει (meaning "since it is you", 14:28). The word "ει" is often translated "if." However, its translation is really governed by the tense of the verb to which it is linked. If it is linked with a subjunctive tense verb, then it is building a hypothetical case; if it is linked with an indicative tense verb, then it is building a true case. Here it is used with an indicative verb, meaning Peter believes it is a true condition: Since it is you, command me. [In the case of A, which is a true scenario, then B; rather than: In the case of A, which may or may not be true, then B]
ολιγοπιστε (from ολιγ meaning "few" and πιστε meaning "faith", "of little faith", 14:33) A gracious reminder that we can still be in the boat with Jesus and only have a little faith. Having lots of faith is not a requirement for journeying with Jesus.
Tuesday, August 1, 2017
Matthew 14:13-21
This passage occurs in the Revised Common Lectionary, Year A, most recently in August 2017.
Summary: The feeding stories are very familiar. The basic point of the passage should not be lost: Jesus has compassion on people and feeds them. We are called, in spite of obstacles, to do likewise. That said, there are some beautiful wrinkles in the Greek that will hopefully open up your imagination for preaching!
Key words
κατά ιδιον (meaning "by himself", 14:13) After hearing the news of Herod and John, Jesus is probably feeling many emotions. For the first time in the Gospel, Jesus wants to go off by himself. Matthew really emphasizes how much Jesus wants to get away: by himself, in the wilderness, in a boat.
σπλαγχνισθη (from σπλαγχνιζομαι, meaning "compassion", 14:14) Jesus has compassion -- which in Greek literally reads "Jesus intestine someone." The word for compassion in Greek is intestines because when you have compassion your stomach turns over. The nature of Jesus is on full display -- grieving he wants to be alone, yet seeing the crowd his guts churn. You can decide whether this is the human or divine in Jesus...or both!
θεραπεω (therapeo, meaning "heal", 14:14) I've written about the word therapy elsewhere, but I simply want to point out today the link between therapy and compassion. Jesus desire to do therapy arises out of his compassion. In spite of the fact that Jesus is exhausted, his compassion moves not simply his mind, his heart, or even his intestines, but his whole body. Sometimes we get to move into ministry from a position of strength. Sometimes we are called into ministry when depleted. (By ministry I don't just mean ordained ministry, but the call to minister given to all Christians)
απολυσον (from απολυω, meaning "release", 14:15) The disciples ask Jesus to "release" or apoluoo the people. Perhaps a haunting question: Do you think the disciples are worried about Jesus needing rest, the crowd needing food or them needing an emotional and physical break from the people? I suggest the later... Sadly, they want to send the people back to the place where they came from, to the city. Frankly, I empathize with the disciples here. The task of ministry can be overwhelming.
δοτε (aorist form of δίδωμι, meaning "give", 14:16): In this case, the verb δοτε is in the aorist. This is the same tense of the verb that is used in the Lord's prayer, "Give us this day." Jesus taught his disciples to pray to God to give them their daily bread. Now he commands them to give others daily bread. The aorist form of the verb also provides insight. The aorist tense suggests a one time event. Jesus is not asking the disciples to worry about the crowd's consistent daily needs, simply to worry about this one night. Perhaps this suggests that the disciples, in their worry about future provision, are forgetting their task is in the present.
ουκ ("no" or "not", 14:17) The disciples response to Jesus begins with the word no and reveals their sense of scarcity. They focus on what they do not have. [Grammar note: the word ουκ ends in κ because it comes before a vowel]
φερετε...αυτους ("carry them", 14:18) Okay...I am going out on a limb here. The Greek here literally reads, "Carry them to me." Normally we assume that Jesus is referring to the bread and the fish. Which is probably true. But I was struck by the fact that the next motion in the passage involves the people. Perhaps Jesus is telling the disciples: "Bring the people to me." This opens up a few sermon possibilities: First, that our purpose is always to bring people to Christ; second, that Jesus believes the crowd has more and that once they come close they will actually be moved to share..."
λαβων ευλογησεν κλασας εδωκεν ( take, bless, broke and gave, 14:19) These words appear again in Matthew 26:26, when Jesus is hosting the last supper/first Holy Communion.
[missing word here, 14:19. The disciples now give the food to the crowd; however, the verb give is missing. It literally reads "The disciples (to) the crowds." Maybe the disciples also took the bread and broke it and give it...and not just gave it!
εχορτασθησαν (from χορταζω, meaning "to fill", 14:20) The word here for "fill" is related to the word for grass -- the crowd sat on the grass "chortos" and later was "chortazo"-ed. Perhaps a subtle reminder that God's abundance is always there -- even in the midst of a "herma" (wilderness, vs 13; and 15) and when the "oora" (hour) has past (vs 15).
Summary: The feeding stories are very familiar. The basic point of the passage should not be lost: Jesus has compassion on people and feeds them. We are called, in spite of obstacles, to do likewise. That said, there are some beautiful wrinkles in the Greek that will hopefully open up your imagination for preaching!
Key words
κατά ιδιον (meaning "by himself", 14:13) After hearing the news of Herod and John, Jesus is probably feeling many emotions. For the first time in the Gospel, Jesus wants to go off by himself. Matthew really emphasizes how much Jesus wants to get away: by himself, in the wilderness, in a boat.
σπλαγχνισθη (from σπλαγχνιζομαι, meaning "compassion", 14:14) Jesus has compassion -- which in Greek literally reads "Jesus intestine someone." The word for compassion in Greek is intestines because when you have compassion your stomach turns over. The nature of Jesus is on full display -- grieving he wants to be alone, yet seeing the crowd his guts churn. You can decide whether this is the human or divine in Jesus...or both!
θεραπεω (therapeo, meaning "heal", 14:14) I've written about the word therapy elsewhere, but I simply want to point out today the link between therapy and compassion. Jesus desire to do therapy arises out of his compassion. In spite of the fact that Jesus is exhausted, his compassion moves not simply his mind, his heart, or even his intestines, but his whole body. Sometimes we get to move into ministry from a position of strength. Sometimes we are called into ministry when depleted. (By ministry I don't just mean ordained ministry, but the call to minister given to all Christians)
απολυσον (from απολυω, meaning "release", 14:15) The disciples ask Jesus to "release" or apoluoo the people. Perhaps a haunting question: Do you think the disciples are worried about Jesus needing rest, the crowd needing food or them needing an emotional and physical break from the people? I suggest the later... Sadly, they want to send the people back to the place where they came from, to the city. Frankly, I empathize with the disciples here. The task of ministry can be overwhelming.
δοτε (aorist form of δίδωμι, meaning "give", 14:16): In this case, the verb δοτε is in the aorist. This is the same tense of the verb that is used in the Lord's prayer, "Give us this day." Jesus taught his disciples to pray to God to give them their daily bread. Now he commands them to give others daily bread. The aorist form of the verb also provides insight. The aorist tense suggests a one time event. Jesus is not asking the disciples to worry about the crowd's consistent daily needs, simply to worry about this one night. Perhaps this suggests that the disciples, in their worry about future provision, are forgetting their task is in the present.
ουκ ("no" or "not", 14:17) The disciples response to Jesus begins with the word no and reveals their sense of scarcity. They focus on what they do not have. [Grammar note: the word ουκ ends in κ because it comes before a vowel]
φερετε...αυτους ("carry them", 14:18) Okay...I am going out on a limb here. The Greek here literally reads, "Carry them to me." Normally we assume that Jesus is referring to the bread and the fish. Which is probably true. But I was struck by the fact that the next motion in the passage involves the people. Perhaps Jesus is telling the disciples: "Bring the people to me." This opens up a few sermon possibilities: First, that our purpose is always to bring people to Christ; second, that Jesus believes the crowd has more and that once they come close they will actually be moved to share..."
λαβων ευλογησεν κλασας εδωκεν ( take, bless, broke and gave, 14:19) These words appear again in Matthew 26:26, when Jesus is hosting the last supper/first Holy Communion.
[missing word here, 14:19. The disciples now give the food to the crowd; however, the verb give is missing. It literally reads "The disciples (to) the crowds." Maybe the disciples also took the bread and broke it and give it...and not just gave it!
εχορτασθησαν (from χορταζω, meaning "to fill", 14:20) The word here for "fill" is related to the word for grass -- the crowd sat on the grass "chortos" and later was "chortazo"-ed. Perhaps a subtle reminder that God's abundance is always there -- even in the midst of a "herma" (wilderness, vs 13; and 15) and when the "oora" (hour) has past (vs 15).
Monday, July 31, 2017
Genesis 32:22-31
This passage is found in the Narrative Lectionary, Year 2 (Most recently Sept 27, 2015)
This passage is also found in the Revised Common Lectionary at points during Pentecost season., most recently October 2016 and August 2017.
Summary: This passage is rich with names and their meanings. But don't get distracted by all of this. The main action is not in the words, but in the dirt! God is getting down and dirty with Jacob, wrestling away. God will stop at nothing to transform us [insert segue to cross], so that, quoting Luther, "I might be his own!"
Key words:
בד (pronounced "bad", meaning "alone", 32:24) Jacob's being alone harkens back to the first case of man being alone in the Bible, namely the Garden of Eden (2:18). A few contrasts and connections:
- Cause of loneliness: Adam did not have a partner yet; Jacob has alienated his loved ones (his brother; his uncle)
- God meets dust: In Genesis 2, God creates out of the dust; in Genesis 32, God "gets dusty" (see below)
- God blesses through creation: In the Garden, God creates a woman; in Genesis 32, God creates a humble Jacob, ready to love, forgive, be forgiven.
אבק ("abaq", meaning to wrestle; literally dust, 32:24) It is worth pointing out that the word for wrestle is related to the word for dust (they are the same spelling and root.) To wrestle is literally to get dusty. God gets down and dirty with Jacob to transform him.
יעקב ("Yakov" or "Jacob", 32:27) The name Jacob means "he cheats" or "he steals." I've read before that names had power in the ancient word; knowing the name gave one authority over another. I still think this is true when I teach children. Once I know there names, I can much more easily manage their behavior! The point is that Jacob's revelation of his name was giving God power over him; but it also reveals humility because Jacob's name was a confession of sin.
שרית (conjugated form of שרה, "Sarah", meaning "strive", 32:28) This is fascinating. The root word of "Israel" (ישראל) is "Sarah" (שרה), which means strive/struggle. Of all the patriarchs and people in the Bible, Israel has the name Sarah in it!! As a side note, the full meaning of the word is hard to ascertain because it is not used that often in the Bible. Sarah certainly embodies the striving and struggling as much as anyone in the OT.
As a curious side note, the first example of the name is "Israel" in recorded history is from 1200 BC Egypt: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merneptah_Stele
יכל ("yacal", meaning "able", 32:28) This is fascinating verb because it simply means "can" and "is able." I think the translation of "prevail" is far too strong. I think endure is much better translation. I think it is worth pointing out that the only victory over God in life (again, I just "endure" as a better verb) is through submitting to God.
פניאל ("Peniel" meaning "face of God", 32:30) What I would like to point out here is that most English translations leave this as Peniel. The Greek (LXX) leaves it as "the place he saw God." This brings up a great question about Old Testament translation -- when do we translate the meaning of names and places and when do we leave them as is? (Do we expect people to read footnotes!)
This passage is also found in the Revised Common Lectionary at points during Pentecost season., most recently October 2016 and August 2017.
Summary: This passage is rich with names and their meanings. But don't get distracted by all of this. The main action is not in the words, but in the dirt! God is getting down and dirty with Jacob, wrestling away. God will stop at nothing to transform us [insert segue to cross], so that, quoting Luther, "I might be his own!"
Key words:
בד (pronounced "bad", meaning "alone", 32:24) Jacob's being alone harkens back to the first case of man being alone in the Bible, namely the Garden of Eden (2:18). A few contrasts and connections:
- Cause of loneliness: Adam did not have a partner yet; Jacob has alienated his loved ones (his brother; his uncle)
- God meets dust: In Genesis 2, God creates out of the dust; in Genesis 32, God "gets dusty" (see below)
- God blesses through creation: In the Garden, God creates a woman; in Genesis 32, God creates a humble Jacob, ready to love, forgive, be forgiven.
אבק ("abaq", meaning to wrestle; literally dust, 32:24) It is worth pointing out that the word for wrestle is related to the word for dust (they are the same spelling and root.) To wrestle is literally to get dusty. God gets down and dirty with Jacob to transform him.
יעקב ("Yakov" or "Jacob", 32:27) The name Jacob means "he cheats" or "he steals." I've read before that names had power in the ancient word; knowing the name gave one authority over another. I still think this is true when I teach children. Once I know there names, I can much more easily manage their behavior! The point is that Jacob's revelation of his name was giving God power over him; but it also reveals humility because Jacob's name was a confession of sin.
שרית (conjugated form of שרה, "Sarah", meaning "strive", 32:28) This is fascinating. The root word of "Israel" (ישראל) is "Sarah" (שרה), which means strive/struggle. Of all the patriarchs and people in the Bible, Israel has the name Sarah in it!! As a side note, the full meaning of the word is hard to ascertain because it is not used that often in the Bible. Sarah certainly embodies the striving and struggling as much as anyone in the OT.
As a curious side note, the first example of the name is "Israel" in recorded history is from 1200 BC Egypt: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merneptah_Stele
יכל ("yacal", meaning "able", 32:28) This is fascinating verb because it simply means "can" and "is able." I think the translation of "prevail" is far too strong. I think endure is much better translation. I think it is worth pointing out that the only victory over God in life (again, I just "endure" as a better verb) is through submitting to God.
פניאל ("Peniel" meaning "face of God", 32:30) What I would like to point out here is that most English translations leave this as Peniel. The Greek (LXX) leaves it as "the place he saw God." This brings up a great question about Old Testament translation -- when do we translate the meaning of names and places and when do we leave them as is? (Do we expect people to read footnotes!)
Friday, July 21, 2017
Freedom of a Christian Sermon Series
Here is a proposal for a sermon series on freedom of a Christian. Feel free to use. I would really love some help creating adult Sunday school materials. Email me if you are interested!
Date Oct 22
Gospel Matthew 22:15-22 (Paying taxes; rendering to Caesar)
Theme Freedom is both a freedom from…and a freedom for
Quick Take The culture tells us that freedom is about autonomy, the freedom, really the right, to do what we want. Scripture teaches us that while we are radically free before God in Christ, we are radically bound -- freed for -- service to our neighbor. This sermon will lay out this tension and unpack the trajectory of the series: what freedom in Christ really looks like.
Possible OT Story David fights Goliath (1 Samuel 17)
Possible Psalm Psalm 41
Date Oct 29 Reformation
Gospel John 8:31-36 (Freedom in truth)
Theme Freedom to repent
Quick Take The culture tells us that sin is arachaic concept. As we have abandoned the concept of sin, we have become no less judgmental of a culture. In fact, most people (especially parents) experience tremendous guilt each day. In Christ we are free to confess our sins and live in the hope of God's ensuring grace that can carry us and even transform us. We are justified by God in Christ alone. This means that no one has a right to judge us, except for THE judge, who has declared us loved.
Possible OT Story David's Fall (2 Samuel 11-12)
Possible Psalm Psalm 51
Date Nov 5 All Saints
Gospel Matthew 5:1-12 (Beatitudes)
Theme Freedom to grieve
Quick Take The culture tells us to celebrate the death of loved ones, who are, in some weird way, still with us. We shame guilt and expect productivity to abound. As Christians who believe in the resurrection, we know that we will see our loved ones again. This means we are not simply saying goodbye, but until we meet again. This hope allows us to grieve them not being here now.
Possible OT Story Naomi and Daughters (Ruth 1)
Possible Psalm Psalm 4, 6
Date Nov 12
Gospel Matthew 25:1-13 (Parable of the Bridesmaids)
Theme Freedom to wait
Quick Take The culture tells us that we can have what we want, and have it now. In Christ we have the hope to wait -- to be mindful of the present even!
Possible OT Story Joseph in prison (Genesis 40)
Possible Psalm Psalm 27/40
Date Nov 19
Gospel Matthew 25:14-30 (Parable of the Talents)
Theme Freedom to give
Quick Take The culture tells us that life is about consumption. Christ teachs us that live is about giving it away…and seeing it multiply!
Possible OT Story Widow at Zarapheth (1 Kings 17)
Possible Psalm Psalm 23/24
Date Nov 26 Christ the King
Gospel Matthew 25:31-46 (Parable of the Sheep and Goats)
Theme Freedom to praise
Quick Take The culture tells us we are physical beings whose fulfillment is found in self-exploration and actualization. In Christ we learn that our ultimate destiny is a life time of service that leads to an eternity of praise. We can let go and fall into the embrace of a loving God, from whom all blessings flow.
Possible OT Story Miriam (Exodus 15)
Possible Psalm Psalm 150
Thursday, June 29, 2017
Potential Sermon Series
I am thinking about doing a sermons series on Freedom of a Christian this fall, in conjunction with the 500th anniversary of the reformation. My hope would be to think more concrete about the actual freedoms we have as a Christian
- The freedom to grieve
- The freedom to fail
- The freedom to "be ourselves"
- The freedom to love
In short, I think Luther correctly interprets Scripture by pointing toward our radical and amazing freedom in Christ. I just want to unpack this a bit.
I would aim for a 5 to 6 week preaching series. I would like to offer adult education classes on the same material for Sunday morning Bible study (something along the lines of this: http://www.stpaullititz.net/smallcatechism.html). Perhaps we would look at the Galatians (and Luther's commentary) alongside of this for the Bible study.
Let me know if this is of interest to you. I've included below the list of Gospel passages for this time period.
Rob
- The freedom to grieve
- The freedom to fail
- The freedom to "be ourselves"
- The freedom to love
In short, I think Luther correctly interprets Scripture by pointing toward our radical and amazing freedom in Christ. I just want to unpack this a bit.
I would aim for a 5 to 6 week preaching series. I would like to offer adult education classes on the same material for Sunday morning Bible study (something along the lines of this: http://www.stpaullititz.net/smallcatechism.html). Perhaps we would look at the Galatians (and Luther's commentary) alongside of this for the Bible study.
Let me know if this is of interest to you. I've included below the list of Gospel passages for this time period.
Rob
| 1-Oct | Matthew 21:23-32 | Jesus challenges temple teachers |
| 7-Oct | Matthew 21:33-46 | Parable of the Vineyard |
| 15-Oct | Matthew 22:1-14 | Parable of a (harsh) banquet |
| 22-Oct | Matthew 22:15-22 | Paying taxes; rendering to Ceasar |
| 29-Oct | Matthew 22:34-46 | Jesus teaches on the law and being greater than David |
| 5-Nov | Matthew 23:1-12 | Love of false and fancy things |
| or | Matthew 5:1-12 | Beatitudes |
| 12-Nov | Matthew 25:1-13 | Bridesmaids |
| 19-Nov | Matthew 25:14-30 | Talents |
| 26-Nov | Matthew 25:31-46 | Sheep and Goats |
Wednesday, May 17, 2017
1 Peter 3:13-22
his verse appears in the RCL for Easter 6A, most recently May 21, 2017
Summary: The Greek in this passage is quite difficult, so much so, in fact, that it reads more like a puzzle. I've tried to identify some meaningful pieces of the puzzle. Once you put them together, you get a clear image: God saves us; our job is to do good and share the good news. Repeat: God saves. I also explore the meaning of the some of the key words.
Key words:
ζηλωται ("zealotai", adjective meaning "be zealous", 3:13) The word for "be eager" is "zelotehs," ie, be a zealot. It is a reminder that we are not simply encouraged to do good, but hunger for righteousness!
τον φοβον αυτων (meaning "the fear of them, 3:14) Interestingly, this phrase is translated, "Do not fear what they fear." But it literally reads, "Do not fear their fear..." in an age of fear, this perhaps a more helpful translation!
απολογια (apology, meaning "defense", 3:15) The word for defense here is "apologia" (ie apology); the word here for "reason/accounting" is "logos." In some ways our apology for the faith, our defense is not simply a negative word but finally is the logos, or Christ. In other words, we are not really defending something but giving away the word, who is Christ.
απαξ ("hapax" (rough breathing) meaning "once and for all", 3:18) Basic idea: Jesus does not have to die again.
ζωοποιηθεις ("zoo-poietheis" meaning "make alive", 3:18) There is also another word in this verse: "zoopoie-oo." "To make alive." This verb in the New Testament appears almost exclusively in the context of the Spirit. Furthermore, it is only God who makes alive! Yet in the previous verse, we were called to "do good" (agathopoie-oo). A reminder of our calling -- do good and give a witness; and the Spirit's calling - to make alive.
αντιτυπον ("antitype" meaning "prefigure", 3:21) The word for "prefigured" is "antitupos" (anti here does not mean apposed but pre)
σωζει ("sozo" meaning "save", 3:21) The verb "save," used in conjunction with Baptism, is in the present tense. This means that it does not simply save at one point, but continues to save us (a nice tie in then with the Gospel lesson about continual repentance).
συνειδησεως and επερωτημα (3:21) The real question is what does the phrase "an appeal (επερωτημα) of a good conscience (συνειδησεως ) to God" mean. There is a lot of ink written about this construction; the word "appeal" is a less frequent word, making its intrepretation more challenging. I suggest this verse is not about works-righteousness or some sort of baptismal pledge. It seems clear that the overall thrust of the passage is on the work of God through the resurrection to create life. And in the end, if justification by faith means the death of the sinner and the resurrection of the new creation, certainly this creation has a clear conscience before God. Regardless, Baptism saves us through the resurrection of God; there is no sense that our good works save us!
Grammar Review: When a sentence becomes a puzzle
3:13 This sentence is complex one in Greek; 1st of all, the word for "do bad" is a substantive participle; the word for "good" is substantive adjective (the good) and the verbs are all out of order...In this case, one might really need to look at other translations even to get started. Break down what one knows and then see if one can put it together:
Και τις ο κακωσαν υμας εαν του αγαθου ζηλωται γενησθε
Και and
τις The accent marks will tell you if it is a pronoun (any, a, certain) or a question (who/what/where). In this case, you have a question mark at the end, so it makes it easier to figure out it is a question.
ο κακωσαν υμας The one who does you bad/harm
εαν If
του αγαθου of the good. Why is this in the genitive?
ζηλωται ...it looks like a verb, but it means 'zealous' In this case we can go back and figure out that seeking and good go together: seeking the good
γενησθε are (in subjunctive) That this is in the second person tells us that the subject of the sentence is "you."
So...And what the one who does you harm if of the good seeking you are?
Or "What becomes of the one doing bad to you if you are doing good?
Phew! Again, break down what you know and use other translations to help!
Summary: The Greek in this passage is quite difficult, so much so, in fact, that it reads more like a puzzle. I've tried to identify some meaningful pieces of the puzzle. Once you put them together, you get a clear image: God saves us; our job is to do good and share the good news. Repeat: God saves. I also explore the meaning of the some of the key words.
Key words:
ζηλωται ("zealotai", adjective meaning "be zealous", 3:13) The word for "be eager" is "zelotehs," ie, be a zealot. It is a reminder that we are not simply encouraged to do good, but hunger for righteousness!
τον φοβον αυτων (meaning "the fear of them, 3:14) Interestingly, this phrase is translated, "Do not fear what they fear." But it literally reads, "Do not fear their fear..." in an age of fear, this perhaps a more helpful translation!
απολογια (apology, meaning "defense", 3:15) The word for defense here is "apologia" (ie apology); the word here for "reason/accounting" is "logos." In some ways our apology for the faith, our defense is not simply a negative word but finally is the logos, or Christ. In other words, we are not really defending something but giving away the word, who is Christ.
απαξ ("hapax" (rough breathing) meaning "once and for all", 3:18) Basic idea: Jesus does not have to die again.
ζωοποιηθεις ("zoo-poietheis" meaning "make alive", 3:18) There is also another word in this verse: "zoopoie-oo." "To make alive." This verb in the New Testament appears almost exclusively in the context of the Spirit. Furthermore, it is only God who makes alive! Yet in the previous verse, we were called to "do good" (agathopoie-oo). A reminder of our calling -- do good and give a witness; and the Spirit's calling - to make alive.
αντιτυπον ("antitype" meaning "prefigure", 3:21) The word for "prefigured" is "antitupos" (anti here does not mean apposed but pre)
σωζει ("sozo" meaning "save", 3:21) The verb "save," used in conjunction with Baptism, is in the present tense. This means that it does not simply save at one point, but continues to save us (a nice tie in then with the Gospel lesson about continual repentance).
συνειδησεως and επερωτημα (3:21) The real question is what does the phrase "an appeal (επερωτημα) of a good conscience (συνειδησεως ) to God" mean. There is a lot of ink written about this construction; the word "appeal" is a less frequent word, making its intrepretation more challenging. I suggest this verse is not about works-righteousness or some sort of baptismal pledge. It seems clear that the overall thrust of the passage is on the work of God through the resurrection to create life. And in the end, if justification by faith means the death of the sinner and the resurrection of the new creation, certainly this creation has a clear conscience before God. Regardless, Baptism saves us through the resurrection of God; there is no sense that our good works save us!
Grammar Review: When a sentence becomes a puzzle
3:13 This sentence is complex one in Greek; 1st of all, the word for "do bad" is a substantive participle; the word for "good" is substantive adjective (the good) and the verbs are all out of order...In this case, one might really need to look at other translations even to get started. Break down what one knows and then see if one can put it together:
Και τις ο κακωσαν υμας εαν του αγαθου ζηλωται γενησθε
Και and
τις The accent marks will tell you if it is a pronoun (any, a, certain) or a question (who/what/where). In this case, you have a question mark at the end, so it makes it easier to figure out it is a question.
ο κακωσαν υμας The one who does you bad/harm
εαν If
του αγαθου of the good. Why is this in the genitive?
ζηλωται ...it looks like a verb, but it means 'zealous' In this case we can go back and figure out that seeking and good go together: seeking the good
γενησθε are (in subjunctive) That this is in the second person tells us that the subject of the sentence is "you."
So...And what the one who does you harm if of the good seeking you are?
Or "What becomes of the one doing bad to you if you are doing good?
Phew! Again, break down what you know and use other translations to help!
Monday, May 15, 2017
Acts 17:16-31
This passage is found in the Narrative Lectionary, Year 4 (Most recently May 18, 2014)
This passage, really Acts 17:22-31, is also found in the Revised Common Lectionary, Easter 6A)
Here is some commentary on the speech: http://lectionarygreek.blogspot.com/2011/05/acts-1722-31.html
Also, here is a link from my travels to the aeropagus a number of years ago:
http://www.zionsjonestown.com/paul/athens/areopagus.htm
In this blog post I focus on the terms Epicurean and Stoic. I think we all know many of these two stripes
Επικουριος (17:18)
Basically: Lead a "happy" life, which consists not in lust but in moderation and keeping one's nose clean. The gods exist, but don't interfere with human life; talk of good life makes sense, but talk of judgement and other-worldly salvation makes no sense.
NET Bible:
An Epicurean was a follower of the philosophy of Epicurus, who founded a school in Athens about 300 B.C. Although the Epicureans saw the aim of life as pleasure, they were not strictly hedonists, because they defined pleasure as the absence of pain. Along with this, they desired the avoidance of trouble and freedom from annoyances. They saw organized religion as evil, especially the belief that the gods punished evildoers in an afterlife. In keeping with this, they were unable to accept Paul's teaching about the resurrection.
Wikipedia:
Epicurus believed that what he called "pleasure" is the greatest good, but the way to attain such pleasure is to live modestly and to gain knowledge of the workings of the world and the limits of one's desires. This led one to attain a state of tranquility (ataraxia) and freedom from fear, as well as absence of bodily pain (aponia). The combination of these two states is supposed to constitute happiness in its highest form. Although Epicureanism is a form of hedonism, insofar as it declares pleasure to be the sole intrinsic good, its conception of absence of pain as the greatest pleasure and its advocacy of a simple life make it different from "hedonism" as it is commonly understood.
Epicureans do not deny the existence of God, simply that the gods have moved on and are unconcerned with human life; His materialism led him to a general attack on superstition and divine intervention.
Στοικος (17:18)
Basically, lead a virtuous life. This is difficult, but seed of good in each of us can be fostered to overcome evil. God is in everything. Although at odds with Epricureans, both stress an avoidance of passion.
NET Bible:
A Stoic was a follower of the philosophy founded by Zeno (342-270 B.C.), a Phoenician who came to Athens and modified the philosophical system of the Cynics he found there. The Stoics rejected the Epicurean ideal of pleasure, stressing virtue instead. The Stoics emphasized responsibility for voluntary actions and believed risks were worth taking, but thought the actual attainment of virtue was difficult. They also believed in providence.
Wiki on Scotism vs Christianity:
The major difference between the two philosophies is Stoicism's pantheism, in which God is never fully transcendent but always immanent. God as the world-creating entity is personalized in Christian thought, but Stoicism equates God with the totality of the universe, which was deeply contrary to Christianity. The only incarnation in Stoicism is that each person has part of the logos within. Stoicism, unlike Christianity, does not posit a beginning or end to the universe.
Stoic writings such as the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius have been highly regarded by many Christians throughout the centuries. The Stoic ideal of dispassion is accepted to this day as the perfect moral state by the Eastern Orthodox Church. Saint Ambrose of Milan was known for applying Stoic philosophy to his theology.
also:
σπερμολογος (17:18): Seed talker, but more literally, sperm-logos. For someone who simply picks up scraps of info; a babbler.
κατειδωλον (17:16): Full of idols. kata intensifies words!
This passage, really Acts 17:22-31, is also found in the Revised Common Lectionary, Easter 6A)
Here is some commentary on the speech: http://lectionarygreek.blogspot.com/2011/05/acts-1722-31.html
Also, here is a link from my travels to the aeropagus a number of years ago:
http://www.zionsjonestown.com/paul/athens/areopagus.htm
In this blog post I focus on the terms Epicurean and Stoic. I think we all know many of these two stripes
Επικουριος (17:18)
Basically: Lead a "happy" life, which consists not in lust but in moderation and keeping one's nose clean. The gods exist, but don't interfere with human life; talk of good life makes sense, but talk of judgement and other-worldly salvation makes no sense.
NET Bible:
An Epicurean was a follower of the philosophy of Epicurus, who founded a school in Athens about 300 B.C. Although the Epicureans saw the aim of life as pleasure, they were not strictly hedonists, because they defined pleasure as the absence of pain. Along with this, they desired the avoidance of trouble and freedom from annoyances. They saw organized religion as evil, especially the belief that the gods punished evildoers in an afterlife. In keeping with this, they were unable to accept Paul's teaching about the resurrection.
Wikipedia:
Epicurus believed that what he called "pleasure" is the greatest good, but the way to attain such pleasure is to live modestly and to gain knowledge of the workings of the world and the limits of one's desires. This led one to attain a state of tranquility (ataraxia) and freedom from fear, as well as absence of bodily pain (aponia). The combination of these two states is supposed to constitute happiness in its highest form. Although Epicureanism is a form of hedonism, insofar as it declares pleasure to be the sole intrinsic good, its conception of absence of pain as the greatest pleasure and its advocacy of a simple life make it different from "hedonism" as it is commonly understood.
Epicureans do not deny the existence of God, simply that the gods have moved on and are unconcerned with human life; His materialism led him to a general attack on superstition and divine intervention.
Στοικος (17:18)
Basically, lead a virtuous life. This is difficult, but seed of good in each of us can be fostered to overcome evil. God is in everything. Although at odds with Epricureans, both stress an avoidance of passion.
NET Bible:
A Stoic was a follower of the philosophy founded by Zeno (342-270 B.C.), a Phoenician who came to Athens and modified the philosophical system of the Cynics he found there. The Stoics rejected the Epicurean ideal of pleasure, stressing virtue instead. The Stoics emphasized responsibility for voluntary actions and believed risks were worth taking, but thought the actual attainment of virtue was difficult. They also believed in providence.
Wiki on Scotism vs Christianity:
The major difference between the two philosophies is Stoicism's pantheism, in which God is never fully transcendent but always immanent. God as the world-creating entity is personalized in Christian thought, but Stoicism equates God with the totality of the universe, which was deeply contrary to Christianity. The only incarnation in Stoicism is that each person has part of the logos within. Stoicism, unlike Christianity, does not posit a beginning or end to the universe.
Stoic writings such as the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius have been highly regarded by many Christians throughout the centuries. The Stoic ideal of dispassion is accepted to this day as the perfect moral state by the Eastern Orthodox Church. Saint Ambrose of Milan was known for applying Stoic philosophy to his theology.
also:
σπερμολογος (17:18): Seed talker, but more literally, sperm-logos. For someone who simply picks up scraps of info; a babbler.
κατειδωλον (17:16): Full of idols. kata intensifies words!
Friday, March 17, 2017
The economics of church decline (and rebirth?)
So we've all read countless blog posts about all of the sociological and cultural reasons the mainline church is dying. I would like to take a different approach, one based on economics (and one that focuses on my denomination). I do this because I believe that economics may help us see the necessity of certain solutions.
I also write this on St. Patrick's Day, because I believe that part of the secret to the Irish monks was their capacity to develop an economic model that allowed for mission.
Economics is all about supply and demand...and we have a supply problem
Right now, the Lutheran denomination that I am a part of, the ELCA, is facing a huge crisis of supply in terms of its pastors. This year there are far, far fewer pastors available for placement than in previous years (Like we have enough pastors for less than 1/2 of vacancies we have). This is sadly not an aberration, but a trend. Furthermore, we are just about to face a huge way of boomer pastor retirements. We are probably producing a third of the pastors we need to.
I'm sure we could find numerous blogs that talk about all the cultural reasons why younger people don't want to go to Seminary. I want to propose a simpler and economic solution: It costs too much money. Seminary requires three years of study and unit of Clinical Pastoral Education. There is also an internship year that offers a monthly income of $1,600+housing if you have to move. Even though many Seminary students get scholarship help for tuition, the real cost of Seminary is simply living for those years without significant income. When I worked in the financial aid office at my seminary, we estimated that tuition only represented 1/3 of the total costs of Seminary. I had friends that graduated with 5 figures of debt from health insurance alone. And that was 10 years ago! It is also worth remembering that Seminary bills come on top of existing loans that many people have from undergraduate. It is not uncommon for students to come out with $80 to $100K of debt. (At 5% for ten years, that is $850 a month). My sense is that we've been saying this for years, namely, that Seminaries are too expensive and that debts are too high. I think the people not in Seminary heard us!
(Sad irony, the church wants to become more diverse. To the extent to which wealth and race are correlated in our country (which they are), we end up pricing out non-white students at a faster rate than we price out white students).
(Second side point: Many people talk of bi-vocational pastors -- "tent-making" to use Biblical language. I am really skeptical of the desire or capacity of people to accrue so much debt and go through so much education for a part-time gig.)
Solutions proposed help, but not enough
I want to commend some of the solutions: Trim overhead at seminaries through various mergers; allow more students to work at churches during seminary; give students financial coaching to improve the personal finances. While such moves are noble (and surprisingly painful), we cannot cut costs by ten or even twenty percent and double the Seminary student population. We would need solutions that cut the cost of Seminary by 50 to 60% -- like entirely new models, such as, say a national seminary that had one room satellites in every synod.
I confess a fair amount of grief as I write this. I had a "Hogwarts-like" experience at Seminary. But I truly believe those days are over. The solutions we are engineering will not provide the necessary and drastic reductions in cost we need.
Furthermore, we also will need a huge number of non-pastors who will assume theological, pastoral and programmatic leadership. How can we train them at low cost?
We also have a demand problem
We also are facing a huge shift in the demand for pastors. Let's do some basic math. For many years 80-100 people in weekly worship attendance was a stable number for congregations. At this size, you could afford a pastor. You probably had a sexton, an organist and a secretary, all of whom were part-time and one of whom was (quasi)-volunteer. It was tough but it worked. This number worked out well because 100 people in weekly worship probably equated to about 150 people significantly involved in the ministry. 150 people is a nice number for a tribe. One pastor can connect this many people.
Then health insurance costs started spiraling. This really impacted congregations. Even if you took in the same amount (adjusted for inflation) with 80-100 in weekly worship, you could not meet your budget any more. Health insurance for most churches is 10K greater than it was 20 years ago (again, even adjusted for inflation). Again, even if you had as many people (which most churches don't), giving the same amount (most churches have lost money to skyrocketing number of non-profits), and you didn't have the massive deferred maintenance bills from building expansions in the 1960s and 1980s (you are lucky), you would still find yourself short. You probably need 120 to 130 people in weekly worship to now afford a full-time pastor with full-time benefits.
But this is problematic because this begins to be a larger tribe than one pastor can handle. Especially if you consider that most people come to church less frequently than they did (but still consider themselves integral to the congregation). That 125 per week needed to pay the bills equals 200 to 250 people who are involved in the ministry. Which, even for a raging extrovert, is too large for pastoral care.
My point here is that we are beyond the need for a good stewardship series and even better discipleship. In every industry there are stable size points. Our stable size points shifted drastically in the last 20 years. We must shift how we approach our basic models of ministry.
Impact of these shifts
Congregations have done a number of things to cope with this problem: cut their minister's compensation (making them 3/4 time; hoping they have a spouse who can pick up the health insurance costs); added online giving; tried stewardship campaigns; deferred maintenance even more; begun living off endowments; or cutting mission support, especially money to the larger church.
All is not lost: The healthiest churches, including pastoral size ones, are figuring our ways to create secondary income sources, partner with other ministries to share staff and developing lay leaders to take on traditional pastoral roles. But the fact is that the basic model -- one pastor, one congregation, one building (especially an old one) does not add up any more. There have to be other income streams, additional staff or volunteers taking on significant leadership. Congregations need to find strategic partners to share costs, resources and staff. This may mean our church looks like it did 100 years ago, with far more 2 and 3 point parishes. Or it may mean our church looks like it did 250 years ago when ordained clergy were the aberration and not the norm.
While this analysis focuses on pastoral size congregations (which were the bread and butter of my denomination), the same math is hurting larger congregations and smaller congregations. Larger congregations are moving to a point where they have fewer and fewer full time staff and more part-time staff. Smaller congregations are often calling part-time retirees who are on Medicare; or they find themselves needing to move from a two-point to a three-point parish to pay for a pastor, which means they now have a video sermon on Sunday.
In short, while the overall size of the church has decreased, the demand for pastors has decreased even faster as the math tilts against congregations.
A new equilibrium?
So, we may end up with an equilibrium point where we have fewer pastor spots and fewer pastors. Good right? No, actually pretty horrible! What to do with all of the churches that don't have pastors, especially smaller churches? How to make pastoral size churches feasible? How to staff large churches when associates become so rare? How do we give future leaders the time and community they need to mature into strong proclaimers of the Gospel?
What I would like to see happen:
1) We implode the seminary system to produce something drastically cheaper.
2) We expand drastically the number of lay-ministers/TEEM pastors who do not need the full seminary to lead worship at our smallest congregations.
3) We do mission starts that from the beginning focus on cooperative ministry and sustainability, recognizing that the hoped for norm -- the traditional pastoral size model -- is not viable.
4) We begin fostering and authorizing lay leadership to assume an incredible number of tasks reserved for pastors, especially related to pastoral care and even worship.
5) Congregational leaders will be blessed with the patience to renew our congregations; we will also be blessed with the courage to try to new models.
6) Congregations find ways to partner with other churches, non-profits and even businesses to create not simply economically stable situations, but ones that are oriented toward mission.
7) The Holy Spirit revives our congregations and our people grow in faith, hope and love.
What I think will happen
1) Money to the synod and national church will continue to dry up. DRY UP. Large congregations will replace the synods and national church as the leadership in what remains of the denomination.
2) Large churches will use seminaries less and less and begin training their own leaders.
3) Small churches will worship without pastors or they will close. Many pastors who are currently sent to rural or poor congregations only serve three years in those places (statistics on this are pretty strong). Pastors out of seminary will skip this step and go right to larger congregations in wealthier communities.
4) We will talk about minority and poverty ministry, but the only places that will be able to afford attractive calls will be wealthy and primarily white communities. Healthy congregations will grow as the vast majority of congregations shrink.
I also write this on St. Patrick's Day, because I believe that part of the secret to the Irish monks was their capacity to develop an economic model that allowed for mission.
Economics is all about supply and demand...and we have a supply problem
Right now, the Lutheran denomination that I am a part of, the ELCA, is facing a huge crisis of supply in terms of its pastors. This year there are far, far fewer pastors available for placement than in previous years (Like we have enough pastors for less than 1/2 of vacancies we have). This is sadly not an aberration, but a trend. Furthermore, we are just about to face a huge way of boomer pastor retirements. We are probably producing a third of the pastors we need to.
I'm sure we could find numerous blogs that talk about all the cultural reasons why younger people don't want to go to Seminary. I want to propose a simpler and economic solution: It costs too much money. Seminary requires three years of study and unit of Clinical Pastoral Education. There is also an internship year that offers a monthly income of $1,600+housing if you have to move. Even though many Seminary students get scholarship help for tuition, the real cost of Seminary is simply living for those years without significant income. When I worked in the financial aid office at my seminary, we estimated that tuition only represented 1/3 of the total costs of Seminary. I had friends that graduated with 5 figures of debt from health insurance alone. And that was 10 years ago! It is also worth remembering that Seminary bills come on top of existing loans that many people have from undergraduate. It is not uncommon for students to come out with $80 to $100K of debt. (At 5% for ten years, that is $850 a month). My sense is that we've been saying this for years, namely, that Seminaries are too expensive and that debts are too high. I think the people not in Seminary heard us!
(Sad irony, the church wants to become more diverse. To the extent to which wealth and race are correlated in our country (which they are), we end up pricing out non-white students at a faster rate than we price out white students).
(Second side point: Many people talk of bi-vocational pastors -- "tent-making" to use Biblical language. I am really skeptical of the desire or capacity of people to accrue so much debt and go through so much education for a part-time gig.)
Solutions proposed help, but not enough
I want to commend some of the solutions: Trim overhead at seminaries through various mergers; allow more students to work at churches during seminary; give students financial coaching to improve the personal finances. While such moves are noble (and surprisingly painful), we cannot cut costs by ten or even twenty percent and double the Seminary student population. We would need solutions that cut the cost of Seminary by 50 to 60% -- like entirely new models, such as, say a national seminary that had one room satellites in every synod.
I confess a fair amount of grief as I write this. I had a "Hogwarts-like" experience at Seminary. But I truly believe those days are over. The solutions we are engineering will not provide the necessary and drastic reductions in cost we need.
Furthermore, we also will need a huge number of non-pastors who will assume theological, pastoral and programmatic leadership. How can we train them at low cost?
We also have a demand problem
We also are facing a huge shift in the demand for pastors. Let's do some basic math. For many years 80-100 people in weekly worship attendance was a stable number for congregations. At this size, you could afford a pastor. You probably had a sexton, an organist and a secretary, all of whom were part-time and one of whom was (quasi)-volunteer. It was tough but it worked. This number worked out well because 100 people in weekly worship probably equated to about 150 people significantly involved in the ministry. 150 people is a nice number for a tribe. One pastor can connect this many people.
Then health insurance costs started spiraling. This really impacted congregations. Even if you took in the same amount (adjusted for inflation) with 80-100 in weekly worship, you could not meet your budget any more. Health insurance for most churches is 10K greater than it was 20 years ago (again, even adjusted for inflation). Again, even if you had as many people (which most churches don't), giving the same amount (most churches have lost money to skyrocketing number of non-profits), and you didn't have the massive deferred maintenance bills from building expansions in the 1960s and 1980s (you are lucky), you would still find yourself short. You probably need 120 to 130 people in weekly worship to now afford a full-time pastor with full-time benefits.
But this is problematic because this begins to be a larger tribe than one pastor can handle. Especially if you consider that most people come to church less frequently than they did (but still consider themselves integral to the congregation). That 125 per week needed to pay the bills equals 200 to 250 people who are involved in the ministry. Which, even for a raging extrovert, is too large for pastoral care.
My point here is that we are beyond the need for a good stewardship series and even better discipleship. In every industry there are stable size points. Our stable size points shifted drastically in the last 20 years. We must shift how we approach our basic models of ministry.
Impact of these shifts
Congregations have done a number of things to cope with this problem: cut their minister's compensation (making them 3/4 time; hoping they have a spouse who can pick up the health insurance costs); added online giving; tried stewardship campaigns; deferred maintenance even more; begun living off endowments; or cutting mission support, especially money to the larger church.
All is not lost: The healthiest churches, including pastoral size ones, are figuring our ways to create secondary income sources, partner with other ministries to share staff and developing lay leaders to take on traditional pastoral roles. But the fact is that the basic model -- one pastor, one congregation, one building (especially an old one) does not add up any more. There have to be other income streams, additional staff or volunteers taking on significant leadership. Congregations need to find strategic partners to share costs, resources and staff. This may mean our church looks like it did 100 years ago, with far more 2 and 3 point parishes. Or it may mean our church looks like it did 250 years ago when ordained clergy were the aberration and not the norm.
While this analysis focuses on pastoral size congregations (which were the bread and butter of my denomination), the same math is hurting larger congregations and smaller congregations. Larger congregations are moving to a point where they have fewer and fewer full time staff and more part-time staff. Smaller congregations are often calling part-time retirees who are on Medicare; or they find themselves needing to move from a two-point to a three-point parish to pay for a pastor, which means they now have a video sermon on Sunday.
In short, while the overall size of the church has decreased, the demand for pastors has decreased even faster as the math tilts against congregations.
A new equilibrium?
So, we may end up with an equilibrium point where we have fewer pastor spots and fewer pastors. Good right? No, actually pretty horrible! What to do with all of the churches that don't have pastors, especially smaller churches? How to make pastoral size churches feasible? How to staff large churches when associates become so rare? How do we give future leaders the time and community they need to mature into strong proclaimers of the Gospel?
What I would like to see happen:
1) We implode the seminary system to produce something drastically cheaper.
2) We expand drastically the number of lay-ministers/TEEM pastors who do not need the full seminary to lead worship at our smallest congregations.
3) We do mission starts that from the beginning focus on cooperative ministry and sustainability, recognizing that the hoped for norm -- the traditional pastoral size model -- is not viable.
4) We begin fostering and authorizing lay leadership to assume an incredible number of tasks reserved for pastors, especially related to pastoral care and even worship.
5) Congregational leaders will be blessed with the patience to renew our congregations; we will also be blessed with the courage to try to new models.
6) Congregations find ways to partner with other churches, non-profits and even businesses to create not simply economically stable situations, but ones that are oriented toward mission.
7) The Holy Spirit revives our congregations and our people grow in faith, hope and love.
What I think will happen
1) Money to the synod and national church will continue to dry up. DRY UP. Large congregations will replace the synods and national church as the leadership in what remains of the denomination.
2) Large churches will use seminaries less and less and begin training their own leaders.
3) Small churches will worship without pastors or they will close. Many pastors who are currently sent to rural or poor congregations only serve three years in those places (statistics on this are pretty strong). Pastors out of seminary will skip this step and go right to larger congregations in wealthier communities.
4) We will talk about minority and poverty ministry, but the only places that will be able to afford attractive calls will be wealthy and primarily white communities. Healthy congregations will grow as the vast majority of congregations shrink.
Saturday, March 4, 2017
Genesis 12
This passage occurs in the Narrative Lectionary, year 1 (most recently Oct 14, 2014); it also occurs in the RCL during Lent (Year A), most recently March 13, 2017.
Summary: Abraham was asked to do a lot. The English gets you here ('to a land I will show you' isn't very much to go on); the Hebrew intensifies this. As I continue to read this story, I am also reflecting a lot on what "bless" means. I do not think one can walk away, in this or other stories, from the material nature of blessings in the Bible. However, the Bible already shows the direction of God's blessing, namely, our neighbor. Perhaps if we wanted to be most Lutheran, we would argue that the true blessing is the promise that allows one to live by faith.
Key words
לך-לך ("lake - la - kah", "go immediately," vs 1) This is often translated simply as "go." It literally means "go-go" or "get up and go." In Hebrew, when you have two verbs in a row, the first verb is often adverbial, as in "in a 'getting up' kind of way, go." Or, more poetically: "Immediatedly go." The whole section in the Hebrew Bible is called "Lake-la-kah." (The Hebrew Bible didn't use chapters; instead it divided up scrolls into sections, naming them after a key word near the beginning of the section) Also, Abraham will be given this same command in Genesis 22, the binding of Isaac.
One wonders if the angel's commands to Paul (then Saul) in chapter 9 of Acts are the same -- "Get up and go" in the sense of "go immediately."
Grammatically: Keep an eye out for dual verb commands in the Bible; they may reflect a Hebrew way of speaking whereby one verb functions as an adverb.
Theologically: God isn't about discernment in this passage, but about decision. There is a sense of immediacy!
בת-אב ("bet av", "father's house," vs 1) This term means way more than simply "dad's house." It was the fundamental social unit and reality of a person's life. Here is a website with pictures:
http://www.penn.museum/sites/Canaan/Home%26Family.html
I think for us in the West today, it is impossible to understand the impact of traditional and family on a person's psyche and worldview, and thus the significance of God's command.
ברך ("baruch", "bless", vs 2,3) The first point I want to address is the meaning of the word baruch. In Genesis, blessing can often be assoicated with material prosperity:
* Genesis 39:5 From the time that he made him overseer in his house and over all that he had, the LORD blessed the Egyptian's house for Joseph's sake; the blessing of the LORD was on all that he had, in house and field.
* Genesis 26:3 Reside in this land as an alien, and I will be with you, and will bless you; for to you and to your descendants I will give all these lands, and I will fulfill the oath that I swore to your father Abraham.
* See also Genesis 30:27
It also refers to children and descendents:
* Genesis 1:22 God blessed them, saying, "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth."
* Genesis 17:16 I will bless her and will surely give you a son by her. I will bless her so that she will be the mother of nations; kings of peoples will come from her."
* Genesis 22:17 I will indeed bless you, and I will make your offspring as numerous as the stars of heaven and as the sand that is on the seashore. And your offspring shall possess the gate of their enemies,
I would argue though, if you press the Bible harder, you discover that blessing means something more than a big house and big family.
It also means fundamental human relationships based on complentary differences (yes family, but not necessarily size!)
* Genesis 5:2 Male and female he created them, and he blessed them and named them "Humankind" when they were created
Rest
* Genesis 2:3 So God blessed the seventh day and hallowed it, because on it God rested from all the work that he had done in creation.
God's peace and presence
* Numbers 6:23-27 23 Speak to Aaron and his sons, saying, Thus you shall bless the Israelites: You shall say to them, 24 The LORD bless you and keep you; 25 the LORD make his face to shine upon you, and be gracious to you; 26 the LORD lift up his countenance upon you, and give you peace. 27 So they shall put my name on the Israelites, and I will bless them.
Ultimately though, I do not think one can de-materialize the nature of blessings. I think what good pastors and theologians can do is direct this blessing back to the neighbor:
* Deuteronomy 14:28-29 28 Every third year you shall bring out the full tithe of your produce for that year, and store it within your towns; 29 the Levites, because they have no allotment or inheritance with you, as well as the resident aliens, the orphans, and the widows in your towns, may come and eat their fill so that the LORD your God may bless you in all the work that you undertake.
Or simply as God says here in Genesis 12 -- the whole world is to be blessed by Abraham!
Lastly, there is a rather technical point here about the translation here having to do with verb forms in Hebrew. The question is whether to treat the verb bless as a passive (the nations will be blessed by Abraham) or reflexive, "in Abraham (or his name) all the nations will bless themselves." The Greek goes with the passive here and that is how this passage is traditionally translated. That seems fair and good, but perhaps it is also worth asking: How do we actively bless ourselves through Abraham and his legacy?
NET Bible notes:
Summary: Abraham was asked to do a lot. The English gets you here ('to a land I will show you' isn't very much to go on); the Hebrew intensifies this. As I continue to read this story, I am also reflecting a lot on what "bless" means. I do not think one can walk away, in this or other stories, from the material nature of blessings in the Bible. However, the Bible already shows the direction of God's blessing, namely, our neighbor. Perhaps if we wanted to be most Lutheran, we would argue that the true blessing is the promise that allows one to live by faith.
Key words
לך-לך ("lake - la - kah", "go immediately," vs 1) This is often translated simply as "go." It literally means "go-go" or "get up and go." In Hebrew, when you have two verbs in a row, the first verb is often adverbial, as in "in a 'getting up' kind of way, go." Or, more poetically: "Immediatedly go." The whole section in the Hebrew Bible is called "Lake-la-kah." (The Hebrew Bible didn't use chapters; instead it divided up scrolls into sections, naming them after a key word near the beginning of the section) Also, Abraham will be given this same command in Genesis 22, the binding of Isaac.
One wonders if the angel's commands to Paul (then Saul) in chapter 9 of Acts are the same -- "Get up and go" in the sense of "go immediately."
Grammatically: Keep an eye out for dual verb commands in the Bible; they may reflect a Hebrew way of speaking whereby one verb functions as an adverb.
Theologically: God isn't about discernment in this passage, but about decision. There is a sense of immediacy!
בת-אב ("bet av", "father's house," vs 1) This term means way more than simply "dad's house." It was the fundamental social unit and reality of a person's life. Here is a website with pictures:
http://www.penn.museum/sites/Canaan/Home%26Family.html
I think for us in the West today, it is impossible to understand the impact of traditional and family on a person's psyche and worldview, and thus the significance of God's command.
ברך ("baruch", "bless", vs 2,3) The first point I want to address is the meaning of the word baruch. In Genesis, blessing can often be assoicated with material prosperity:
* Genesis 39:5 From the time that he made him overseer in his house and over all that he had, the LORD blessed the Egyptian's house for Joseph's sake; the blessing of the LORD was on all that he had, in house and field.
* Genesis 26:3 Reside in this land as an alien, and I will be with you, and will bless you; for to you and to your descendants I will give all these lands, and I will fulfill the oath that I swore to your father Abraham.
* See also Genesis 30:27
It also refers to children and descendents:
* Genesis 1:22 God blessed them, saying, "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth."
* Genesis 17:16 I will bless her and will surely give you a son by her. I will bless her so that she will be the mother of nations; kings of peoples will come from her."
* Genesis 22:17 I will indeed bless you, and I will make your offspring as numerous as the stars of heaven and as the sand that is on the seashore. And your offspring shall possess the gate of their enemies,
I would argue though, if you press the Bible harder, you discover that blessing means something more than a big house and big family.
It also means fundamental human relationships based on complentary differences (yes family, but not necessarily size!)
* Genesis 5:2 Male and female he created them, and he blessed them and named them "Humankind" when they were created
Rest
* Genesis 2:3 So God blessed the seventh day and hallowed it, because on it God rested from all the work that he had done in creation.
God's peace and presence
* Numbers 6:23-27 23 Speak to Aaron and his sons, saying, Thus you shall bless the Israelites: You shall say to them, 24 The LORD bless you and keep you; 25 the LORD make his face to shine upon you, and be gracious to you; 26 the LORD lift up his countenance upon you, and give you peace. 27 So they shall put my name on the Israelites, and I will bless them.
Ultimately though, I do not think one can de-materialize the nature of blessings. I think what good pastors and theologians can do is direct this blessing back to the neighbor:
* Deuteronomy 14:28-29 28 Every third year you shall bring out the full tithe of your produce for that year, and store it within your towns; 29 the Levites, because they have no allotment or inheritance with you, as well as the resident aliens, the orphans, and the widows in your towns, may come and eat their fill so that the LORD your God may bless you in all the work that you undertake.
Or simply as God says here in Genesis 12 -- the whole world is to be blessed by Abraham!
Lastly, there is a rather technical point here about the translation here having to do with verb forms in Hebrew. The question is whether to treat the verb bless as a passive (the nations will be blessed by Abraham) or reflexive, "in Abraham (or his name) all the nations will bless themselves." The Greek goes with the passive here and that is how this passage is traditionally translated. That seems fair and good, but perhaps it is also worth asking: How do we actively bless ourselves through Abraham and his legacy?
NET Bible notes:
Theoretically the Niphal can be translated either as passive or reflexive/reciprocal. (The Niphal of "bless" is only used in formulations of the Abrahamic covenant. See Gen 12:2; 18:18; 28:14.) Traditionally the verb is taken as passive here, as if Abram were going to be a channel or source of blessing. But in later formulations of the Abrahamic covenant (see Gen 22:18; 26:4) the Hitpael replaces this Niphal form, suggesting a translation "will bless [i.e., "pronounce blessings on"] themselves [or "one another"]." The Hitpael of "bless" is used with a reflexive/reciprocal sense in Deut 29:18; Ps 72:17; Isa 65:16; Jer 4:2. Gen 12:2 predicts that Abram will be held up as a paradigm of divine blessing and that people will use his name in their blessing formulae. For examples of blessing formulae utilizing an individual as an example of blessing see Gen 48:20 and Ruth 4:11.
קלל and אאר ("qalal" and "arar", "curse", vs 2) These words, although both translated similarly in English as "curse", are different. The first, qalal, means "treat lightly" in the sense of "disrespect" or "disgrace." The second, arar, means remove from blessing. Rather than think of this verse than as those who swear mean things at Abraham will have bad things happen to them, its probably better to think of it this way: Because Abraham is a blessing, and an agent of blessing, from God, to disregard Abraham is to remove oneself from God's potential blessings. The question is whether the Bible (God really) means all the blessings in the world, or the blessings from Abraham. I'd be inclined to the latter. In short, the Bible does not seem to be indicating quite as harsh as a sentence as "curse those who curse you" suggests, but it does offer a warning.
Tuesday, February 14, 2017
Matthew 5:38-48
This passage occurs in the Epiphany season of the Revised Common Lectionary (Year A), most recently February 2017.
Summary: Once again, Jesus offers us challenging words. He calls us as a church, as the community of disciples, to act differently than the rest of the world. He calls us to turn the other cheek; to love our neighbor and to give without counting the costs. Yet he also points to the cross and God's act of self-giving. Jesus is the one who will be slapped (ῤαπιζω), his coat (ιματιον) will be taken and finally Simon will be put into service (αγγαρευσω) to carry Jesus' cross. Furthermore, Jesus will teach his disciples not simply to "give" but to pray to the heavenly father to "give" them their daily bread. Lastly, the very gentiles (εθνικος) Jesus seems to chastise will be those Jesus calls us to baptize. Read in isolation, these verses are simply moral exhortation, but read in the context of the whole, they powerfully remind us of the Gospel.
ῤαπιζει ("slap," 5:39; 26:67) A rather rare word in the Bible (4x). Interestingly though, the word comes back in Matthew's Gospel during the passion when Jesus is the one who is slapped. (Ι included the accent mark to make it clear that the word is pronounced with a "her" at the beginning.)
ιματιον ("coat" 5:40, 27:31, 27:35) A very common word in the Bible. Like ῤαπιζω, this word comes back into Matthew's Gospel during the passion when they take Jesus' coat.
αγγαρευσει ("put into service", 5:41, 27:32) The word only appears twice in the Bible, both times in Matthew's Gospel. Here and in the passion narrative, when Simon or Cyrene is "put into service" to carry the cross. Someone was asked to go the mile; now a "second" has come in its place.
δος ("give," aorist imperative of διδημι, 5:42; very common but also 6:11). Jesus exhorts us to give to people who ask from us. The same verb (in the same form) will appear only a bit later in the Sermon on the Mount, when Jesus teaches us how to pray, telling us to δος to God for our daily bread. We are to live out of generosity, only dependent on God's graciousness.
διωκοντων ("persecute" or "persue," present participle of διωκω, 5:44) The Gospel of Matthew never specifices that Jesus is himself persecuted, although the story clearly demonstrates that he is. In fact, Jesus warns the disciples that they will be persecuted (10:23, 23:34).
εθνικος ("Gentile" or "Pagan," gentile as an adjective; 5:47) Just a reminder of how "raw" the word for "Gentile" is: Ethnic. Gentile sounds so clean to us; I don't think it sounded this way in Greek! Also, even though Jesus may disparriage the gentiles now, he will finally tell us to baptize them ("the nations") in his name!
Aorist tense as pastoral advice??
One mysterious issue I cannot solve is this: Generally, the verbs describing the response of others are in the present tense; while the verb commanding our response are in the aorist tense -- for example the one "striking" us in the present tense, suggesting on-going action; we are commanded to "turn" the other check is in the aorist tense, suggesting this is a one time event. Perhaps even Jesus here reminds us the limits of our passive response to the world's violence? In comparison, the commands to love and pray are on-going. I wonder if there is a real pastoral approach here to individuals (as opposed to systems) who are cruel to us -- in the short term, we are called to suffer abuse, but in the long term we are called to remove ourselves from the situation, only to offer prayers.
[Note, even more unusually, Jesus does tell us that we are to go the second mile continually. This one I cannot figure out.]
Grammar + Translation: Matthew 5:40
Translating participles when they connect with other verbs.
και τω θελοντι σοι κριθηναι και τον χιτωνα σου λαβειν, αφες αυτω και το ιματιον
NRSV and if anyone wants to sue you and take your coat, give your cloak as well;
The second half of the sentence is more straight-forward: αφες αυτω και το ιματιον
As usual, look for your subject and verb. You don't have an obvious subject; this is because the verb "αφες" is an imperative (command) so, like English, you don't necessarily state the subject ("Give" instead of "You give"). It is important to recognize this as the subject (within the verb) because το ιματιον also could look like a subject. το ιματιον (the coat) looks the same in the accustative or nominative! But once you have the subject verb figured out, you have "forgive/permit/allow αυτω και the coat." αυτω here is in the dative and simply means "to/for/with him." Now we have "permit him και the coat." The και is probably best here translated as "even," so you end up with "permit him even the coat."
The first-half is where the action is: και τω θελοντι σοι κριθηναι και τον χιτωνα σου λαβειν
You have three verbs: θελοντι, κριθηναι, λαβειν
The first is a participle; the other two are verbs.
τω θελοντι is a substantive participle, which we translate as "the one who does X." In this case, "the one who wants." Now, the word "want" in both Greek and English is a helper verb (sometimes called modal); it often takes another verb. I want to eat, for example. The other verbs that it does with are in the infinitive. And...wow...look, the other verbs in this sentence are in the infinitive! So the outline of the sentence is: "The one who wants to judge and take." But we run into a problem here. The verb κριθηναι is in the passive. "be judged." The one who wants to be judged doesn't make sense. But if we add back in the σοι it helps a bit: "The one who wants you to be judged." Or as dictionaries suggest, κριθηναι, should be translated (because it is passive) as "bring before court." So, "The one who wants to sue you." Then the second half becomes easy: "Take your coat." Do you see why σου becomes "your"?
Participles can act as helper verbs! This can be confusing, but when you have verbs llike θελω, you should always look for another verb!
Summary: Once again, Jesus offers us challenging words. He calls us as a church, as the community of disciples, to act differently than the rest of the world. He calls us to turn the other cheek; to love our neighbor and to give without counting the costs. Yet he also points to the cross and God's act of self-giving. Jesus is the one who will be slapped (ῤαπιζω), his coat (ιματιον) will be taken and finally Simon will be put into service (αγγαρευσω) to carry Jesus' cross. Furthermore, Jesus will teach his disciples not simply to "give" but to pray to the heavenly father to "give" them their daily bread. Lastly, the very gentiles (εθνικος) Jesus seems to chastise will be those Jesus calls us to baptize. Read in isolation, these verses are simply moral exhortation, but read in the context of the whole, they powerfully remind us of the Gospel.
ῤαπιζει ("slap," 5:39; 26:67) A rather rare word in the Bible (4x). Interestingly though, the word comes back in Matthew's Gospel during the passion when Jesus is the one who is slapped. (Ι included the accent mark to make it clear that the word is pronounced with a "her" at the beginning.)
ιματιον ("coat" 5:40, 27:31, 27:35) A very common word in the Bible. Like ῤαπιζω, this word comes back into Matthew's Gospel during the passion when they take Jesus' coat.
αγγαρευσει ("put into service", 5:41, 27:32) The word only appears twice in the Bible, both times in Matthew's Gospel. Here and in the passion narrative, when Simon or Cyrene is "put into service" to carry the cross. Someone was asked to go the mile; now a "second" has come in its place.
δος ("give," aorist imperative of διδημι, 5:42; very common but also 6:11). Jesus exhorts us to give to people who ask from us. The same verb (in the same form) will appear only a bit later in the Sermon on the Mount, when Jesus teaches us how to pray, telling us to δος to God for our daily bread. We are to live out of generosity, only dependent on God's graciousness.
διωκοντων ("persecute" or "persue," present participle of διωκω, 5:44) The Gospel of Matthew never specifices that Jesus is himself persecuted, although the story clearly demonstrates that he is. In fact, Jesus warns the disciples that they will be persecuted (10:23, 23:34).
εθνικος ("Gentile" or "Pagan," gentile as an adjective; 5:47) Just a reminder of how "raw" the word for "Gentile" is: Ethnic. Gentile sounds so clean to us; I don't think it sounded this way in Greek! Also, even though Jesus may disparriage the gentiles now, he will finally tell us to baptize them ("the nations") in his name!
Aorist tense as pastoral advice??
One mysterious issue I cannot solve is this: Generally, the verbs describing the response of others are in the present tense; while the verb commanding our response are in the aorist tense -- for example the one "striking" us in the present tense, suggesting on-going action; we are commanded to "turn" the other check is in the aorist tense, suggesting this is a one time event. Perhaps even Jesus here reminds us the limits of our passive response to the world's violence? In comparison, the commands to love and pray are on-going. I wonder if there is a real pastoral approach here to individuals (as opposed to systems) who are cruel to us -- in the short term, we are called to suffer abuse, but in the long term we are called to remove ourselves from the situation, only to offer prayers.
[Note, even more unusually, Jesus does tell us that we are to go the second mile continually. This one I cannot figure out.]
Grammar + Translation: Matthew 5:40
Translating participles when they connect with other verbs.
και τω θελοντι σοι κριθηναι και τον χιτωνα σου λαβειν, αφες αυτω και το ιματιον
NRSV and if anyone wants to sue you and take your coat, give your cloak as well;
The second half of the sentence is more straight-forward: αφες αυτω και το ιματιον
As usual, look for your subject and verb. You don't have an obvious subject; this is because the verb "αφες" is an imperative (command) so, like English, you don't necessarily state the subject ("Give" instead of "You give"). It is important to recognize this as the subject (within the verb) because το ιματιον also could look like a subject. το ιματιον (the coat) looks the same in the accustative or nominative! But once you have the subject verb figured out, you have "forgive/permit/allow αυτω και the coat." αυτω here is in the dative and simply means "to/for/with him." Now we have "permit him και the coat." The και is probably best here translated as "even," so you end up with "permit him even the coat."
The first-half is where the action is: και τω θελοντι σοι κριθηναι και τον χιτωνα σου λαβειν
You have three verbs: θελοντι, κριθηναι, λαβειν
The first is a participle; the other two are verbs.
τω θελοντι is a substantive participle, which we translate as "the one who does X." In this case, "the one who wants." Now, the word "want" in both Greek and English is a helper verb (sometimes called modal); it often takes another verb. I want to eat, for example. The other verbs that it does with are in the infinitive. And...wow...look, the other verbs in this sentence are in the infinitive! So the outline of the sentence is: "The one who wants to judge and take." But we run into a problem here. The verb κριθηναι is in the passive. "be judged." The one who wants to be judged doesn't make sense. But if we add back in the σοι it helps a bit: "The one who wants you to be judged." Or as dictionaries suggest, κριθηναι, should be translated (because it is passive) as "bring before court." So, "The one who wants to sue you." Then the second half becomes easy: "Take your coat." Do you see why σου becomes "your"?
Participles can act as helper verbs! This can be confusing, but when you have verbs llike θελω, you should always look for another verb!