16 Pentecost, Year A

“ROCKY, MY HERO (PART II)”
Proper 17 -- Jeremiah 15: 15 – 21; Psalm 26: 1 – 8; Romans 12: 1 – 8; Matthew 16: 21 – 27
A sermon by The Rev. Gene Tucker, given at Trinity Church, Mt. Vernon, IL; Sunday, August 31st, 2008

“Rocky, my hero!”

Today, we pick up the second part of the discourse between Jesus and His disciples in which Jesus had begun the conversation by asking “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” Remember that Simon earned his nickname, Peter, for his response, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God!”

These two passages, Peter’s confession last week, and Peter’s utter failure today are linked together., for they are part of the same scene.

Recall with me that the disciples had parroted back to Jesus some of the answers they’ve heard in their travels, saying, “Some say John the Baptist, others say Elijah, and some say Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”

Then Jesus narrows the question some more, directing its focus squarely on the disciples. He says, “But you, who do you say that I am?”[1]

And it’s Simon who blurts out in response, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God!”

So Simon becomes better known to generations of Christians as Peter (his nickname, essentially), or Petros in Greek, which means “rock”), for Peter is a “rock”

It is on this “rock” (which might be either Peter himself, or the confession of faith) that Jesus will build His church, we read last week.

But now, the “rock”, Peter, has become a stumbling block. Jesus describes the downside of Peter’s s qualities of steadfastness and immovability….They are now in the way of Jesus’ road to Jerusalem, where He tells them He will “suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes.”

And so, we hear Jesus utter some of the most famous words ever spoken, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance (“stumbling block” in Greek) to me; for you are not on the side of God, but of men.”

We should stop at this point and ponder why Peter reacted as he did to this, the first prediction of Jesus’ coming suffering and death (there are three more such predictions in Matthew).

A number of possibilities offer themselves as clues to Peter’s motivation. Perhaps we’d be safe, knowing what human nature is like, in listing the following as possibilities:

• Peter may have heard only the first part of Jesus’ statement about suffering. He may have reacted so quickly that he didn’t hear the part about “being raised on the third day.”[2]
  
  
• Did Peter respond out of love? Naturally, we would all shudder at such a statement from a person we’d been with for a long while, a person we’d grown to love.
  
  
• Was it selfishness that motivated Peter? Was he looking for a Messiah who would be a military conqueror, the one who would liberate God’s people from the oppressive yoke of Roman occupation?
  
  
• Peter might have had his own agenda (certainly, Jesus’ response seems to indicate as much), which might have included ideas about a Messiah that also included his own selfish wish for power and position for himself in the coming kingdom.[3]

It’s clear from Jesus’ response that Peter and the other disciples had a lot to learn about Jesus’ identity as the Messiah, the Christ, the Anointed One of God.

At the point of today’s exchange, the disciples have learned something of Jesus’ identity. The sources of learning up to this point have been Jesus’ teaching and the miraculous works He had done in their presence. Surely, Jesus’ words and Jesus’ acts were part of the divine revelation that Jesus refers to in His response to Peter, “Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven.”

But the way of discipleship, the way of the cross, is also part of the learning process Jesus outlines. “Get behind me,” Jesus says. Those are words of discipleship… “Follow me”, Jesus is saying, adding the word, “Satan”. You see, “Satan” is the word for “enemy” in Hebrew. So Jesus seems to be telling Peter “Don’t be an enemy of the ways of God.”

Knowing the ways of God comes through two main sources:

• God’s revelation: God reveals Himself in the pages of Holy Scripture, and in the work of the Holy Spirit who works on our minds and our spirits to reveal God’s nature and God’s ways to us.
  
  
• Discipleship: Discipleship is essentially the process of “Living it out”, day-by-day, walking in the footsteps of the Lord, even when those footsteps seem to lead down a dangerous, lonely, and downward path. Remember with me that there would have been no Easter Sunday morning without Good Friday. At times, our walk with God seems to lead in uncertain directions, but one lesson we can gain from Jesus suffering and death is that God is always in charge, and God’s ways lead to results that far exceed our own expectations.

“Rocky, my hero!”

That’s been our theme these past two Sundays, as we watch Peter excel, and then fail. Peter is like the student that no one can figure out….It’s as if Peter could be chosen as the student “Most Likely to Succeed”, but then the one who winds up in Detention for misbehaving.

Peter’s walk with the Lord is our walk….Which one of us hasn’t climbed to the heights of knowing God and proclaiming him in all His glory, majesty and power, only to slip from those heights into the muck at the bottom of the valley below?

Isn’t our walk with God often one step forward, but then two giant steps backward, just like Peter’s?

Aren’t we just like Peter, motivated by selfish desires, by the limited vision of our own agendas, by a misguided love of the Lord that demands that God’s ways be aligned firmly with our own expectations (instead of the other way around), and by a hasty response to God which fails to hear all of God’s message to us?

Aren’t we just like Peter, the “rock” whose worthy characteristics of stability and steadfastness can just as easily be turned into obstacles to God’s workings?

But remember that there was hope for Peter. Peter had to learn to walk behind Jesus as a disciple, following the Lord instead of standing in front of Him, blocking the way. That lesson was, for Peter, perhaps one of the hardest part of learning about God and God’s ways. It is often the hardest lesson for us to learn, as well. For we want to be in control, to have our needs and our agenda taken care of.

The hope for Peter turned out to be the way of the cross, the rocky road of following Jesus, day-by-day, learning and living out the good news of God in Jesus Christ.

For Peter, our hero, was faithful to the Lord, even to the point of death (on a cross, tradition tells us, crucified outside Rome, head down). For that faithfulness, Peter is known for being the “rock”.

This Collect from the Book of Common Prayer (page 56) says it best:

“Almighty God, whose most dear Son went not up to joy but first he suffered pain, and entered not into glory before He was crucified: Mercifully grant that we, walking in the way of the cross, may find it none other that the way of life and peace; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.”

May God grant us the wisdom to learn from His revelation, made known to us in the person and work of Jesus Christ. May God grant us the patience to faithful disciples of the Lord, walking in His ways.

AMEN.

____________________________________________

[1] The word “you” is repeated in the Greek for emphasis, as noted last week.
[2] However, we should remember that “being raised on the third day” would have been puzzling to Peter and the other disciples. After all, they had not yet experienced the power of Jesus’ resurrection. Remember, we 21st century Christians have an overall perspective (called the “Reader’s perspective”) that those first disciples didn’t have during Jesus’ earthly ministry.
[3] See Luke 22: 24 – 30, where the disciples argue about who is the greatest among them. This passage is but one of many records of such disputes.

15 Pentecost, Year A

“ROCKY, MY HERO (PART I)”
Proper 16 -- Isaiah 51: 1 – 6; Psalm 138; Romans 11: 33 – 36; Matthew 16: 13 – 20
A sermon by The Rev. Gene Tucker, given at Trinity Church, Mt. Vernon, IL; Sunday, August 24th, 2008

“Rocky, my hero!”

OK, you may be asking yourself, “Who is ‘Rocky’?”

Why, “Peter”, of course!

You see, we know St. Peter more by the nickname (Peter) that Jesus gave him than we do by his given name, which is “Simon”.

Peter’s confession[1] of Jesus as the Messiah,[2] the Christ,[3] is a pivotal occurrence in the Gospels. Peter, as usual, leads the way in acknowledging Jesus as “the Messiah, the Son of the living God”, even as he does in many other cases (stepping over the side of the boat into the water, e.g.)

So, let’s unpack this text a little….

At the outset, I will admit to you that this sermon will seem a whole lot more like an expository Bible study than a sermon which is intended to urge and exhort us to deeper hunger for God and the eternal truths that Jesus Christ comes to convey. But I have a motive: you see, next Sunday’s Gospel text is that which immediately follows the text we read today, Peter’s confession, and it is the text in which we hear Jesus’ rebuke of Peter, “Get behind me, Satan, for you are on the side of men, and not of God.”

The two passages are linked together, and together, they paint a picture of Simon Peter that ought to encourage each of us in our faith walk with God. For, you see, Peter is not only the “rock” upon which the Lord Jesus will build His Church, but Peter is the example of our own walk with God. So, for both reasons, Peter is “Rocky, my hero!”.

So now, let’s dive into this text we have before us today….

The first thing we ought to notice is the setting for the exchange Matthew lays before us: Caesarea Philippi. A city located on the southwestern slope of Mt. Hermon, it is quite a ways north and a bit east of the Sea of Galilee. So, just as we saw last week in our reading about the encounter Jesus had with the Canaanite woman near the region of Tyre and Sidon, Jesus is again outside “normal” Jewish territory. In fact, in Jesus’ day, Caesarea Philippi was a Gentile area. In a sense, Peter’s confession of Jesus as “The Messiah, the Son of the living God” presages Peter’s confession of Jesus to the Gentiles,[4] which would take Peter even as far as Rome itself.

Next, we should notice the narrowing focus of the conversation as Jesus leads His disciples into a deeper understanding of His identity and mission. It lays out this way as to human beings and Jesus' identity:

Vs. 13 -- “Who do men say the Son of Man is?”
Vs. 15 -- “You, who do you (pl.) I am?”

-Peter’s confession-

Vs. 17 --“Blessed are you [Peter] (sgl), for flesh & blood has not revealed this to you (sgl), but my Father in heaven”

The net effect of the text is to bring Jesus’ identity front and center with each individual disciple (including us), narrowing it from the abstract and from “what others think” about Jesus, down to the concrete, and to what our own confession is.

While we are in this part of the text, we might pause for a moment to examine the answers the various disciples give Jesus as to the things they have overheard in their travels about Jesus’ identity: John the Baptist was thought by King Herod (the Tetrarch) to be resurrected in the person of Jesus (see Matthew 14: 1 – 2); Elijah was translated into heaven (see II Kings 2: 1 – 18), but would herald the coming of Messiah (an apparently popular hope among the Jews, based on Malachi 4: 5), while Jeremiah prophesied at a time when the nation of Judah was threatened by outside powers (Babylon), just as God’s people were threatened by the outside power of Rome. Finally, “one of the prophets” mirrors the question that John the Baptist was asked by the Jews in John 1: 21.[5]

Now, let us turn our attention to Peter’s confession itself:

The first thing we notice is the presence of the definite article “the” along with the title “Messiah”. Some of the ancient Church fathers noticed its presence as well. Apparently, Peter identifies Jesus with a particular and peculiar identity and purpose, saying “you are the Christ” (not just “a Christ”).

“Christ” (or the Hebrew equivalent, “Messiah”) means “anointed one”, coming from the verb (in each language) “to anoint”. Anointing in the Old Testament period was an act of pouring oil on the head of a person, thereby signifying God’s selection of the person for a special and unique purpose. God’s favor rested on the “anointed one”, who was commissioned to do a specific act or to undertake a specific role. In the Old Testament, persons who were anointed were usually kings and priests.

In this regard, it is interesting to note that Jesus’ kingship is emphasized by Matthew in his recording of the visit of the Magi, who come asking, “Where is the one who has been born king of the Jews?”[6] Luke also takes time to point out that Joseph and Mary made their journey from Nazareth to Bethelehem because Joseph was “of the house and lineage of David.”[7] Finally, with regard to kingship, note that the sign that Pilate placed above Jesus’ cross said, “Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews”.

As to the matter of priesthood, Jesus’ priesthood is a major theme of the Letter to the Hebrews (see chapter seven of Hebrews, particularly).

Now we should consider the second part of Peter’s confession, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”

Peter repeats what the disciples had said when Jesus got into the boat after walking on the water. There, as the wind and the waves subsided, they worshipped Him, saying, “Truly, you are the Son of God.”[8] Note that Jesus confirms Peter’s identification, responding by saying that Peter’s acknowledgment is not the work of any human agency or authority, by saying “flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.”

Now, we turn to that part of Jesus’ pronouncement which follows Peter’s confession. Here, we read, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona,[9] for flesh and blood[10] has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.” It should be noted that Jesus’ blessing, given to Peter, is the only individual blessing recorded in the New Testament for any one disciple.

Next, Jesus says some things that have been the focus of major attention down through the years, as scholars from the Roman Catholic, Anglican, Protestant and Greek Orthodox traditions have wrestled with its significance. Jesus continues, “And I tell you, you are Peter,[11] and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death[12] shall not prevail against it.”

The difference of conviction about Jesus’ pronouncement to Peter, where He says, “and on this rock I will build my Church”, centers on the exact nature of Peter’s role and place in the overall scheme of things.

Let’s pause here for awhile….By virtue of the special and unique blessing that Peter alone received, it is clear that Peter occupies a pivotal and unique role in the foundation of the Church. But what role, exactly? Clearly, Peter leads the way once the Resurrection has taken place, as he puts aside his bumbling and erratic ways to become the chief spokesman for the infant Church. Look briefly at Peter’s bold sermon, given on the Day of Pentecost, for proof of this leadership.[13]

The debate in years past between Roman Catholic, Anglican, Protestant and Greek Orthodox scholars has centered around Peter’s role….Roman Catholics would say that Peter’s role is central to the church’s foundation and future life, a role that is assumed by each successor to Peter, the Bishop of Rome, or, as he is better known, the Pope. In response, other scholars would maintain that Jesus was referring to the confession that Peter made, saying that it is Peter’s confession itself that is the “rock” upon which the church will be built, not Peter himself.

Put in secular terms, we might see these conceptions from a different angle if we compare the role George Washington had in founding the United States, acting as its Commander of the Continental Army, and then as its first President. The question arises in connection with Washington’s leadership just as it has with Peter: Was Washington’s role unique and unrepeatable by virtue of his presence at the founding of the new nation, even though other leaders would come along in due course who would assume the mantle of the Presidency? (That would summarize – generally - the Protestant/Anglican/Greek Orthodox view.) The contrasting view would be that Washington’s role as leader and particularly as President created an office and a mantle which is directly assumed by each successive holder of the office (the generally held Roman Catholic view).

In years past, the differing convictions about Jesus’ meaning about Peter’s role and Peter’s confession has been the source of division. Happily, much of the difficulty and division is behind much of the Christian family today.

At least we can be sure that Jesus responds to Peter’s confession of His identity as “The Messiah” by nicknaming him “Peter”, much as we would nickname someone who is bold, forthright and trustworthy by calling him, “Rocky” today.

As we look at the remainder of Jesus’ statement, we should note that it is Jesus, not Peter, who will build the Church, and that the powers of death (the Revised Standard Version’s translation) will never overpower and destroy it. Scholars are quick to note that this does not mean that the Church will be free of the influences of evil, or that it will enjoy a peaceful and prosperous existence in this world. Even a cursory look at Christian history will confirm that neither condition has been the Church’s lot to enjoy for very long.

Then, the last part of Jesus’ statement says, “I will give you (singular) the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” Apparently, here Jesus is giving Peter a leadership role, a role that entails the preservation of correct teaching (the phrase, “bind – loose” is traditional rabbinical talk for proper teaching). Connected to the maintenance of proper teaching is an understanding in Matthew’s Gospel that proper teaching and the following of that teaching is the way by which the Kingdom is entered.

We Christians who follow the “catholic faith”[14] maintain the tradition of authorized teachers who are charged with the maintenance of proper teaching. These guardians of the deposit of faith are the bishops,[15] who are successors to the Apostles, having received the laying-on-of-hands that stretches back down through the centuries from the first century and the original Apostles to our bishops today. Bishops are, therefore, successors in a real sense to Peter and the other Apostles, and are to be “guardians of the faith”, as well as shepherds to the flock of Christ.

“Rocky, my hero!” is the phrase we began with today.

Peter, the “rock” earned his nickname as a direct result of his confession of Jesus as “the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”

What Peter might have understood exactly by his use of the term “Messiah” to describe Jesus isn’t exactly clear. Could he have been thinking about Jesus as a warrior king like David who united God’s people as they’d never been before? Could he have been thinking of Jesus as a liberator from oppression, Roman oppression? Could he have been thinking of Jesus as a priestly mediator between God and God’s people? All of these concepts fit what Peter undoubtedly knew from Old Testament people who had been anointed to fill a specific function or office with God’s blessing and commission.

It is clear from the next part of chapter sixteen that Peter’s concept of “Messiah” differed from Jesus’ concept.

And it is to that part of the story of “Rocky, my hero (Part II)” that we will turn next Sunday.

Meanwhile, Jesus’ question confronts us, just as it did those original disciples nearly 2,000 years ago, “But you, who do you say that I am?”[16]

AMEN.

_________________________________________________


[1] Our Church Year devotes a Holy Day to Peter’s Confession: January 18th.
[2] The title which is derived from Hebrew.
[3] This title is equivalent to the Hebrew (both titles being derived from the verb “to anoint”) in Greek.
[4] See Acts 10: 1 – 48 for the account of Peter’s proclamation of the Gospel to Cornelius, the first Gentile to come to faith.
[5] The return of one of the ancient prophets was, apparently, part of the popular expectation that God’s purposes would be fulfilled in the end times.
[6] Matthew 2: 2
[7] Luke 2: 4
[8] Matthew 14: 33
[9] “Simon Bar-Jona” simply means “Simon, son of Jonah (probably actually John)”.
[10] That is to say, human agency or imagination
[11] Peter is derived from the Greek petros, where is means “rock”.
[12] Literally in the Greek, “the gates of Hades”
[13] Acts 2: 14 - 39
[14] “Catholic” meaning “universal”
[15] Bishops are assisted in their role as authorized teachers by priests.
[16] The word “you” is repeated in the Greek, just as I have rendered it here, for emphasis.

14 Pentecost, Year A

“PESKY PERSEVERANCE”
Proper 15 -- Isaiah 56: 1 – 7; Psalm 67; Romans 11: 13 – 15, 29 – 32; Matthew 15: 21 – 28
A sermon by The Rev. Gene Tucker, given at Trinity Church, Mt. Vernon, IL; Sunday, August 17th, 2008

Ever meet or encounter a pest?

If you’re a parent, or have had occasion to be around children for any length of time, you have. Remember how a child can be a pest, constantly begging for something, becoming “irksome” in the process?

Children often tend to focus on one thing at a time. Sometimes, that “one thing” can become the defining reality in their lives. So, in response, they will nag a grownup in their lives until they get what they want (or are sent away for awhile).

They become “pesky”, a word the dictionary defines as “irksome” or “bothersome”, a word that’s derived from the word “pest”.

“Pesky” is a word that could describe the Canaanite woman who came to Jesus, seeking help for her daughter. “Persistant” is another word that would accurately describe her crusade to get deliverance for her daughter, for she did not take “No” for an answer, but came back again and again, even to the point of using Jesus’ response to turn the argument in her favor.

“Pesky persistence” is that unrelenting quest to ask for help from the Lord, for as long and and as often as it takes to get that help. The Canaanite woman is a testimony to faith, for she recognized Jesus’ ability to deliver her daughter from all that afflicted her.

Let’s unpack this Gospel reading just a bit.

We begin, as we often do, with the context of today’s passage: Jesus has left the area around the Sea of Galilee, and has headed north and west toward the coastal area of the Mediterranean Sea (the area of modern Lebanon). In so doing, He seems to be heading away from the traditional area of Palestine, that area in which the Jews of His day lived. He’s going into Gentile territory.

On this journey away, He encounters the Canaanite woman, a person who is descended from the inhabitants of Palestine before the ancient Israelites entered it on their way from Egypt into the Promised Land, 1,400 years before.

We would do well to pause here for a moment and set the cultural context of today’s encounter: The Canaanite woman is an outsider, on three accounts: 1. She is a Canaanite, not a Jew (and therefore, she is a Gentile), 2. She lives outside the Jewish territory, and 3. She is a woman.

Culturally, Jews would have had nothing to do with any Gentile person, if it could be avoided, and a man would not have spoken to a woman who was not a member of his family in public.

But the woman, driven by her extreme need, breaks through all the cultural barriers that separate her from Jesus and His power to heal. She initiates the conversation. Moreover, she won’t take “No” for an answer: When her entreaty to the disciples produces no response, she approaches Jesus in person. In the process, she endures what seems to be a cultural “slam” against her, for Jesus says that “It isn’t fair to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs.” Jesus’ comment seems to indicate that the food God provides is intended for the children of Israel, and not for Gentiles, those “unclean” peoples who are “unclean” just as dogs were in ancient times.

The woman’s need is no childish matter….Unlike a child, who can focus on one item or idea, and can become a pest in pursuit of whatever it is that has taken hold of their imagination, the Canaanite woman’s focus and resulting “peskiness” comes from the reality of life-and-death, physically and spiritually, for her daughter.

What are we to make of this Canaanite woman’s “great faith”?

What lessons are there for us?

We can draw many lessons from her example. I offer the following:

1. There are no atheists on foxholes: Many of you will recognize this old Army phrase from previous sermons. The truth of the statement stands, however….When things become a matter of life-and-death in our lives, we often remember – and turn to – God. Unfortunately, for many people, that’s the only time they remember to turn to God, only when the needs that intrude into our lives become a matter of our very welfare.
   
   
2. Deep need often produces the ability to see God’s power: The Canaanite woman had obviously heard about Jesus and the miraculous healings He had done, even in the remote area (by Jewish standards, at least) in which she lived. The word had “gotten out” about Jesus and the coming of the Kingdom. Interestingly enough, the woman can see Jesus’ power and can demonstrate “great faith” at a time when many Jews had rejected Jesus and His message of the Kingdom.
   
   
3. Indifference (God and ours): Many people think of God as being indifferent to the conditions in the world, and especially to the human condition. That was the classic conviction of the Deists of the 17th and 18th centuries: that God had created the world and everything in it, but then God walked away from the world he had created. Thus, it became easy for men and women to come to the conclusion that we are “pretty much alone down here” on earth. In such circumstances, people can become pretty indifferent to God, living their lives as if there was no God at all, as if there was no reality beyond themselves, their rights and wants.

A few final comments are in order…..

Far from being indifferent to our needs, God seems to be quite willing to listen to our petitions, and to even change His mind, based on the prayers of His faithful people. Consider Abraham’s bargaining with God over the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 18: 22 – 32): Abraham begins by asking if God “will sweep away the righteous with the wicked?” In the process of the back-and-forth between God and Abraham, we read that God agreed, at first, not to destroy the two cities if 50 righteous people could be found there. In the end, God agreed not to destroy them if only ten righteous could be found there. Abraham had succeeded in changing God’s mind!

Somehow, we take God’s unchanging nature and God’s all-powerful character as indications that God would not take the time to be concerned about the circumstances of our lives. But, again, the Scriptures present another picture. The proof can be seen in the sending of God’s only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ, to intervene in the affairs of this world. It’s important to remember that it is God’s reaching out to us in the person and work of Jesus Christ that sets Christianity apart from all other concepts of the divine in the world. The others tell us we must reach out to God, while Christianity presents the reality of God’s reaching out to us in Jesus Christ. The initiative is God’s!

So, we can risk some “pesky persistence” in our prayer life, offering to God again and again, if need be, the deepest burdens of our hearts. For our deepest needs – the “foxholes” of our lives - can be the place from which we remember that God alone can meet those needs. In the process of offering our needs to God, we are changed as our relationship with God becomes personal, just as the Canaanite woman’s did.

For God the Father is “more ready to hear than we are to pray”[1]. God our Father encourages us with His promise to respond, saying “Ask, and you shall find, knock, and it shall be opened to you, seek, and you will find.” (Matthew 7: 7).

AMEN.

___________________________________________

[1] The Collect for the Day for Proper 22, Book of Common Prayer, 1979, p. 234

13 Pentecost, Year A

“REDEEMED FROM CHAOS”
Proper 14 -- Jonah 2: 1–9; Psalm 29; Romans 9: 1–5; Matthew 14: 22–33
A sermon by The Rev. Gene Tucker, given at Trinity Church, Mt. Vernon, IL; Sunday, August 10th, 2008

Know anyone who “walks on water”?

We used have a saying back during my Army days, “so-and-so ‘walks on water’.”

This phrase was often heard when annual evaluations came out. And it meant, essentially, “so-and-so is ‘perfect’” (or at least as far as the report of their performance in the preceding year was concerned).

(Maybe you’ve heard – or used - this phrase in conversation.)

As we hear this well-known account of Jesus’ walking on the water in the deep morning hours (the fourth watch is from 3:00 – 6:00 AM), we might think this account’s implications are quite clear….We may be tempted to say the “moral of the story” would be to “keep our eyes firmly fixed on Jesus”, if we want to succeed in our spiritual walk with God.

Fair enough….that’s a good lesson to draw out of this incident, for it’s clear that Peter is doing a very good job of walking on water until he begins to notice the wind and the waves which are welling up around him. (Remember that Matthew tells us that the boat the disciples were in was being “beaten” by the waves.) Only then does he begin to sink into the waves.

However, let’s go deeper with this event….and what we ought to consider is the perfect power of God to control the forces of chaos, and to redeem and save His people.

And to do so, may I suggest we begin by looking briefly at the ancient world’s view of the created order….For the ancient world’s understanding of things and how they work significantly influences the meaning of biblical events.

(Remember that God intervenes in human history, teaching us about His will for us and for the world, using the images and thought processes of the time, place and culture in which God’s truth is proclaimed….This is not to say that the timeless truths of God differ from age to age. They don’t. But they are expressed in ways that are connected to the time, place and culture in which they are proclaimed.)

We begin with the account of creation as we read it in Genesis, and we begin with the elements of water and dry land (water figures prominently in today’s Gospel account)…..

In Genesis 1: 2, we read that “the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.” Next, we read that God created light (1: 3 – 5), and then He created the firmament, which separated the “waters from the waters” (1: 6). The firmament separated the waters that were “under the firmament” from the waters that were “above the firmament” (1: 7)

Then, we notice that God gathered the waters “together into one place” (1: 9), and “dry land appeared.” (1: 9).

With the appearance of dry land, the stage is now set for plants (1: 11 – 12), “living creatures” of every kind (1: 24 – 25), and finally, mankind (1: 26 – 27) to take their place upon the land.

Now, fast-forward with me to the account of the Great Flood. In Genesis 7: 11, we read that “all the fountains of the great deep burst forth”, and after the flood was over, the “fountains of the deep and the windows of heaven were closed” (8: 2).

Thus, the Great Flood was cause not only by the rain which fell from the heavens above, but the waters that were under the dry land burst open, flooding the land.

This account illustrates the ancient mindset where the orderliness of creation, and especially the power of water, was concerned: God separated the waters from the dry land, and when He destroyed the earth by flooding it, He allowed the waters under the land to inundate the land (in addition to causing it to rain from the heavens).

Thus, chaos is caused when the orderliness of the created order(dry land in one place, and the waters in another) is upset. Life for humans and animals becomes impossible under these conditions.

(We can see the power of water and its ability to destroy life in the recent flooding that took place in Indiana and in Iowa.)

The Psalms pick up this view of creation. Often, verses in the Psalms will refer to the chaos of being overcome by the flood of waters, and they often depict God’s safety in terms of being “set on a rock that is higher than I”, or in terms of having one’s feet “set on a firm place”.

Consider these selected verses from the Psalms which illustrate the destructive power of water:

69: 1” “Save me, O God, for the waters have come up to my neck.”

124: 1 – 5: “If it had not been the Lord who was on our side, let Israel now say – if it had not been the Lord who was on our side, when men rose up against us, then they would have swallowed us up alive, when their anger was kindled against us; then the flood would have swept us away, the torrent would have gone over us; then over us would have gone the raging waters.”

Now, consider these verses which extol God’s power to deliver us from sinking into the waters (or watery mud):

40: 1 – 2: “I waited patiently for the Lord; He inclined to me and heard my cry. He drew me up from the desolate pit, out of the miry bog, and set my feet upon a rock.”

27: 5: “For He (the Lord) will hide me in his shelter in the day of trouble; He will conceal me under the cover of His tent, He will set me high upon a rock.”

So, we may summarize the ancient view of the world by saying:

• God separated (and keeps separated) the waters under the earth,
  
  
• Chaos ensues when the forces of the water (either below the earth or in a flood or in the seas or in a lake) are unleashed, as in the Great Flood,
  
  
• A firm place to stand is identified with God’s favor. God’s power to save is made manifest in such circumstances.

Now, we are ready to look more closely at today’s Gospel account, with the ancient world’s view of the created order in mind.

First, we notice that the waters are raging, “beating” the boat the disciples were in. (Literally, the Greek implies that the boat was being “tortured” by the waters.) It was a rough ride, for sure. Not only were the disciples alone in the boat, without Jesus (who had gone away to be alone to pray, following the arrival of the news that His cousin, John the Baptist, had been killed by King Herod),[1] but it was the darkest part of the night. And, the storms that so easily came up over the Sea of Galilee (and which are capable of producing very high waves and stormy conditions in a short timeframe) had gripped the boat.

For these disciples, the journey might well have brought some of the verses from the Psalms to mind. Maybe they prayed, “O Lord, don’t let the raging waters and the torrent wash over us!” Chaos, the chaos of unleashed, raging waters, threatened their very lives.

Into this situation Jesus comes, walking on the raging water.

We might pause for a moment at this point and recall God’s power to calm the raging waters…think of the account of the Great Flood….God put the waters under the earth back into their places, restoring order and guaranteeing the continuation of life.

This is the image we might well hold in mind as we see in our own mind’s eye the image of Jesus, walking over the top of the water, as if it were dry and firm ground.

The power of God is made manifest in this act. It is the power of God to create a firm place above the waters of chaos.

The power of God is confirmed in Jesus’ words to the frightened disciples, “Take heart, I am; have no fear!”

Let’s stop right there….why did I render Matthew 14: 27 differently from the Revised Standard Version (RSV), the version of the Bible we usually read every Sunday? After all, the RSV reads, “Take heart, it is I, have no fear!”

The reason is that what Jesus says is, literally, “I am.” That’s how the Greek reads.

“I am”, as in “I am who I am”,[2] spoken to Moses at the burning bush. The great name of God himself, “I am”.

Matthew wants us to hear Jesus’ self-identification….To be sure, this inclusion of the great divine name, “I am” is not as frequent as it is in John’s Gospel account, where we read this divine self-identification much more frequently, but the implication is clear, nonetheless: God is present in Jesus’ control over the waters.

And the disciples confirm God’s presence when they exclaim, “Truly, you are the Son of God.”[3]

So, God’s presence is manifest in Jesus’ power over the waters, and in the stillness which ensues once He enters the boat. The disciples, who were steeped in the Scriptures, recognize the implications of these events when they confirm Jesus’ identity, “You are the Son of God.”

Now, what of Peter and his actions? After all, he is the only human being in recorded history who ever “walked on water.” Or – if we are to be honest about it – he walked on water for a short while, at least.

Peter vacillates between faith and doubt. For that is exactly the word Jesus uses when he asks Peter, “O man of little faith, why did you vacillate?” (The RVS – and most other versions – translate this word as “doubt”, but the more correct meaning is “vacillate”. But “doubt” can mean “to be skeptical” of something, or it can mean to “waver or vacillate”, as it does here.)[4]

So, the Lord’s meaning seems to imply that Peter looked to Jesus, then at the raging waters and the wind, and then back to Jesus, and then at the water and the wind, and so forth.

Peter was caught between an ability to take hold of the demonstrated power of God (Jesus’ walking on the water), by which he was able to jump over the side of the boat (an act that goes against every rational thought for one’s self-preservation), and the reality of the power of water (remember that Peter was a fisherman, a man who knew firsthand and very well the destructive power of water).

So, he vacillates, and begins to sink into the waters, as a result.

“Lord, save me!”, Peter cries out in distress.

What are the implications of today’s reading?

Perhaps the following might be applied to this significant event in Jesus’ earthly ministry:

• Jesus preserves the lives of His saints: Jesus offers safety to Peter twice: in the offer to “come”, as Peter gets out of the boat and begins to walk on the water, and again when He reaches out and pulls Peter from the waters. Jesus also offers safety to the other disciples as the wind and waves subside, once He and Peter are in the boat.
  
  
• The boat offers safety: Think of the boat as firm place, riding on the waters. As such, it preserves life and counteracts the chaotic effects of the water it floats upon (though its ability to do so is limited – remember that the boat, Matthew tells us, was being “beaten” by the waves).
  
  
• Jesus comes, offering safety and the preservation of life in the most unexpected time: No doubt, the disciples thought they were all alone out on the Sea of Galilee, in the deepest and darkest part of the night, their boat working against the wind and being battered by the waves. Yet Jesus comes to them in their distress, saying, “I am”, and adding, “have no fear.”

Put another way, and into our modern context, we might say that Jesus preserves His saints, and He does so by calling us to venture out of the safety of the boat into the chaotic situations of life, situations which may seem a whole lot like the rush of mighty waters that would overwhelm us.

The Church is often seen – in this passage – as a boat.[5] As such, the Church offers life-preserving safety to those within it, for it offers a firm place in the midst of the raging waters. But even the Church’s ultimate welfare is dependent upon Jesus’ power to preserve it by stilling the waters which would destroy it.

When we are called out of the safety of the boat – the Church – into risky situations, only a singular focus on Jesus’ power to save will preserve us. If we vacillate between a focus on Him, and the forces which would drag us under the surface, then we will surely sink. Even then, the cry “Lord, save me!” brings life-giving assistance.

Power to conquer comes through a singular dependence and focus on Jesus, the one who has the God-given power to control the forces of chaos which would destroy us.

Thanks be to God!

AMEN.

_______________________________________________

[1] Matthew 14: 1 - 12
[2] Exodus 3: 14
[3] Matthew 14: 33
[4] M. Eugene Boring’s analysis of this point is most helpful, as it is found in The New Interpreter’s Bible (Nashville: Abingdon, 1995).
[5] Here again, I am indebted to M. Eugene Boring’s analysis of the meaning of this text. The Church, historically, has seen itself as a boat or ship, plying the waters of life and the world.

12 Pentecost, Year A

“FOUR LOAVES AND TWO FISH”
Proper 13 Nehemiah 9: 16 – 20: Psalm 78: 14 – 20, 23 – 25; Romans 8: 35 – 39; Matthew 14: 13 – 21
A sermon by The Rev. Gene Tucker, given at Trinity Church, Mt. Vernon, IL on Sunday, August 3rd, 2008

We come now this morning to the very familiar account of the miracle of Jesus’ feeding a large crowd with four loaves and two fish.

Apparently, this miracle, the mysterious feeding of this large multitude (Matthew tells us it was a group of about 5,000 men, not including the women and children who were also present – making it an even more outstanding miracle), made an enormous impact on the early Church, for all four Gospel accounts record this miracle.[1] In addition, both Matthew and Mark also record another miraculous feeding, that of a crowd of 4,000.[2]

So, let’s look more closely at this event, in which people were fed in a “deserted”[3] place with food that could only have come from God.

We should begin with a look at the context of today’s account….Jesus, having given seven parables about the kingdom of heaven (chapter 13),[4] now withdraws to this “lonely” place after having received word that King Herod had killed John the Baptist.[5] But the crowds who had heard Jesus’ teaching follow Him around the shores of the Sea of Galilee, so that when Jesus sets foot on the shore, they are there, waiting for Him.

Here, we draw our first conclusion from the setting: the obvious fact that the crowds have followed Jesus mean that they have first been taught by Him. Now, in the passage we hear today, they will be fed by Him.

(Hold that thought in your head: teaching and feeding. We’ll come back to that in a minute.)

Now, we notice that Jesus has compassion on the people. Matthew does not tell us why, as he did back in 9: 36, where we read that Jesus had compassion on the crowds, because they were “harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd.”

But we might guess why Jesus had compassion in this instance: the crowds have obviously followed Jesus a good ways, from the western shore of the Sea of Galilee to the eastern shore (though Matthew doesn’t explicitly say it’s the eastern shore…it could have been the northeastern shore, or some other place).

We are probably safe in assuming that this large crowd had followed Jesus because they were looking for something. Perhaps it was a spiritual hunger that was not being met by the corrupt and self-serving leadership in Israel in Jesus’ day. (Matthew will flesh out Jesus’ comments about that leadership in chapter 23, verses 1 – 7.)

Next, we should pause for a moment to notice that, when the disciples come to Jesus to inform him of the sun’s gradual disappearance and the lack of resources for the people to make it through the night, Jesus’ response is to (essentially) bat the ball back into the disciples’ court: “You give them something to eat,” He says.

But notice the disciples’ response, “We have only four loaves and two fish,” they say. (The subtext here is: “We don’t have the means of feeding these people.”)

Now, let’s list the actions that Jesus undertakes with the disciples and the crowd, noting them by the verbs:

The sequence of verbs is: Take …. blessed …. broke …. gave …. ate.

It is significant (and the commentators uniformly point out this fact) that the verbs are nearly identical for this feeding of the 5,000, and the Last Supper (Matthew 26: 20 – 27). Notice the parallels:[6]

Feeding of the 5,000 Last Supper
14: 15: “when it was evening”
14: 19: “sit down”
14: 19: “taking the loaves”
14: 19: “and blessed”
14: 19: “broke the loaves, and gave them to the disciples”
14: 20: “ate”
14: 20: “all”

Last Supper
26: 20: “when it was evening”
26: 20: “took His place (reclined)"[7]
26: 26: “took a loaf of bread”
26: 26: “and after blessing it”
26: 26: “broke it, and gave it to the disciples”
26: 26: “eat”
26: 27: “all”

The parallels are not accidental, apparently….Matthew wants us to “get” the fact that this feeding is a foretaste of the Last Supper. This incident does not exist in spiritual isolation, not by any means.

If so, then what is the meaning of the feeding of the 5,000 with these four loaves and two fish?

Now, I imagine you are wondering why I keep referring to “four loaves”, not five. (Perhaps you’ve been sitting here, listening to this sermon, or reading it, and maybe you’ve been scratching your head, asking yourself, “Father, what’s wrong with your math? The text plainly says that Jesus blessed and broke five loaves, not four!”)

OK, is there something wrong with my math? Can’t I count to five correctly (after all, that’d take only one hand, right?)?

Why the continued reference to four loaves?

Simply this….and I will admit to you that the idea is not at all original…

You see, at the traditional site[8] where the multiplication of the five loaves and fish occurred, there is a church erected over the site. (This is common throughout the Holy Land….holy sites nearly all have churches or chapels erected there.) And in this church, there is a goodly amount of beautiful mosaics, depicting the feeding of the flock.

But, in the mosaics on the floor in front of the altar, there are four loaves and two fish.

Where is the missing loaf?

Can you guess?

I’ll give you a hint: Look again at the parallels in the feeding of the 5,000 and the Last Supper.

Yes, the answer is that the continuing Eucharist, the Holy Communion, the Lord’s Supper, is the missing loaf. The bread, offered week by week at the altar, this bread that is offered, blessed, broken, given, and eaten by all, is the missing loaf! (Did you see the list of verbs? Notice how they track with the verbs in our Eucharistic prayers.)

You see, the Lord Jesus, who is present with us, “wherever two or three are gathered together in His name,” (Matthew 18: 20), and who is present with us “until the close of the age,” (Matthew 28: 20) is present with us in the breaking of the bread, as well.[9]

One final comment is in order: remember that we pointed out that Jesus had taught the crowd, the same crowd that followed Him around the shores of the Sea of Galilee.

Remember that we pointed out that the sequence was: teaching and feeding?

That is the shape of our worship here this Sunday morning….

We gather to hear the Word of God, and are taught by hearing the word read, the word which is then broken and given to all in the sermon (or homily).

Then, we gather around the Lord’s table, where the bread is broken and the wine is poured out and shared by all.

Thus, we are fed by the teaching of the Lord, and then we are fed by the Eucharistic meal He instituted for us, and which He continues to provide to all believers, until the “close of the age.”

Thanks be to God!

AMEN.
________________________________________________

[1] The other accounts may be found in Mark 6: 32 – 44, Luke 9: 10b – 17 and John 6: 1 – 15.
[2] See Mark 8: 1 – 10 and Matthew 15: 32 – 39.
[3] The Revised Standard Version (RSV) translates the Greek word eremos (which means “deserted”) as “lonely”.
[4] Our Gospel readings for the last three Sundays have focused on these parables.
[5] Matthew 14: 1 - 12
[6] This analysis comes from M Eugene Boring’s commentary as it is found in The New Interpreter’s Bible, Volume VIII (Nashville: Abingdon, 1995), p. 324.
[7] The Greek verb actually means “recline”, though it is not always translated that way. The same Greek word, anakeimal, is used in each passage.
[8] This place now carries the name Tabgha.
[9] To be sure, the Eucharistic connection is much stronger in John’s Gospel account, where – in connection with the feeding of the 5,000 we hear Jesus say, “Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him.” (John 6: 56) (NIV)