Pentecost 6, Year C (2016)

Proper 8 ::  I Kings 19: 1–16, 19–21; Psalm 16; Galatians 5: 1, 13–25; Luke 9: 51–62

This is a homily by Fr. Gene Tucker, given at St. John's Church in Huntingdon, Pennsylvania on Sunday, June 26, 2016.

“TOTAL DEDICATION TO GOD’S CALL”

(Homily texts: I Kings 19: 15–16, 19–21 & Luke 9: 51-62)

It’s not often that the Old Testament reading and the Gospel text which are appointed to be read and heard this morning are so well matched, one to the other. But we are blessed to hear the accounts of two individuals who singularly followed God’s call:  The prophet Elisha and the Lord Jesus.

In a sense, the events that came into their lives marked a division point between what had been before, and what followed afterward. Elisha’s call from the prophet Elijah caused him to destroy his teams of oxen and the plowshares he’d been using before Elijah called him and laid his mantle upon him. The destruction of the plows and the teams meant that there was no going back to the way things had been before Elijah’s voice called him into service for God. In much the same way, Luke tells us that Jesus “set his face”[1] to go to Jerusalem, where He will confront the powers-that-were in His day, where He will suffer, die and be raised again on the third day. Jesus’ decision to resolutely head to Jerusalem marks a point-of-decision, making what follows quite different from what had been before.

It occurs to me that one way to describe these points-of-decision is to look at what happens when a person takes the oath of enlistment and becomes a member of the armed services of our country. And – it so happens – that this coming Friday, July 1st, marks the day that (many years ago) I began my U. S. Army basic training at Ft. Dix, New Jersey, so these memories are quite fresh in my mind.

Allow me to use the image of enlisting in the service as a vehicle to describe our Christian response to God’s call.

The beginning of my introduction to Army life began as so all others do, with an oath of enlistment. Then, all of us who’d taken that oath were shipped off to our basic training location.

Like many others, I’d made the mistake of bringing some books with me to basic training. Those books, as well as all other personal items, disappeared, never to be seen again. Even our eyeglasses were changed from civilian-looking ones into acceptable (ugly!) Army-issue ones. It seems to me that this transforming process is a lot like Elisha’s getting rid of every aspect of his old life before God called him into service.

Then, there was that Army-issue haircut, one of the fastest and ugliest I’ve ever had. (I hate to admit it, but I have ridge down the middle of my head, and that Army haircut exposed that defect in my appearance for all to see….photos taken of me in that timeframe are truly dorky!). But getting that haircut was just another part of setting my former life aside. I was a soldier now, property of the U. S. Government, genuine Government Issue (GI). In fact, we often called one another “GI”. The drill sergeants called us “Trainee” (and some other names that my profession does not allow me to repeat!)

As this division point between my former, civilian life and my new life as a soldier got underway, I had to shed every trace of my former, civilian life (possessions, eyeglasses, haircut, e.g.). So, as I face this new life and the challenges that lay ahead, it seemed to me that the best way to get through basic training would be to resolve to master every task and hardship that came along. “Just make the determination to get through this, and to do everything as best you can,” I told myself.

Jesus did the very same thing, setting His face to go to Jerusalem, knowing what would happen there. His determination meant that he would have to steadfastly face all the hardships that would await Him there.

Being a soldier meant that this new identity would be the main, governing one for the remainder of my time on active duty. Oh, yes, I did continue to have other things in my life, things like a family and friends, for example. But the call to military duty surpassed all those other considerations.

Jesus, as he made His way to Jerusalem, didn’t set aside His friends as the time of His ordeal in Jerusalem drew near, for He spent time with Mary and Martha and their brother, Lazarus, in the village of Bethany, which is southeast of Jerusalem as He made His way to the Holy City.

Some Christians are on active duty, for they have taken a vow to totally dedicate themselves to God’s service. Monks and nuns are examples of such a total dedication to God.

But most Christians are not in fulltime, totally-dedicated ministry. They are like members of the reserves of the armed forces or perhaps the National Guard, persons whose lives have a military part and a civilian part.

And therein lies a challenge, for being in part-time ministry to God means that we must balance our dedication to God with the other demands and challenges of life. Yes, we, like those full-time, totally dedicated Christians (like monks and nuns) have taken the oath of enlistment to follow God at our baptisms. But we are called to live out our lives in the everyday world. We are called to “proclaim by Word and example the Good News of God in Christ”, as our Baptismal Covenant states, in the communities in which we live and among the people we rub elbows with.

The challenge for us part-timers is to bring total dedication to our baptismal identity, allowing that new identity (like having a new identity as a soldier) to color every act and every task that comes our way.

May the Lord assist us in that challenge, that we may be “soldiers for God” in the world around us.

AMEN.

---

[1]   The Authorized Version (King James) adds the word “steadfastly” to the phrase “set his face”.

Pentecost 5, Year C (2016)

Proper 7 - Isaiah 65: 1-9; Psalm 22: 18–27; Galatians 3: 23–29; 8: 26-39

This is a homily by Fr. Gene Tucker, given at St. John's Church; Huntingdon, Pennsylvania on Sunday, May 29, 2016.

“THE EFFECTS OF EVIL” (Homily text: Luke 8: 26-39)

Quite often, when we read or hear a text from Holy Scripture, there’s one central theme or idea that is conveyed. That’s not always true, of course, and stating this truth isn’t meant to suggest that we should boil down a passage so as to neglect the details contained in it.

This morning’s Gospel text, which recounts to us Jesus’ encounter with a man who had been possessed by a legion of demons, contains within it a summary of the effects of evil.

To study the ways in which evil – and the Evil One – work, let’s back up to the Book of Genesis, chapter three, to examine just what happened when the Evil One, coming in the form of a serpent, approached Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden:

Recall with me that the serpent suggested that God’s prohibition about eating the fruit of the tree in the midst of the garden wasn’t really the truth God had said it was. Eve takes of the forbidden fruit, then offers it to Adam, and both eat of it. The text then tells us that their eyes were opened. As a result, they both hid themselves from God.

Now, here are the effects of evil we should notice:

·         They both are separated from God,

·         They are separated from one another.

Now, with these two points in mind, let’s look at this morning’s Gospel text.

Luke tells us that the man who was possessed was from the region of Gerasa. Gerasa[1] was located southeast of the Sea of Galilee, and it was Gentile territory. Luke correctly points out that the east side of the Sea of Galilee is a steep hillside, and the man had lived there, alone and out-of-control.

Jesus’ intervention in the man’s life does two things:  (1)  He restores the man to a connection with other people, and (2) He restores the man to a connection with God.

The powers of evil had separated the man from God and from others. Notice that the ways of evil are consistent from the pattern we saw in Genesis to Luke.

Down through time, whenever evil is able to gain a foothold among human beings, the result is separation from God and separation from others.

Let’s consider just two examples from recent history:

The Nazis hated the Jews, and managed to kill about six million of them before the allied nations defeated Nazi Germany and put a stop to the slaughter. Viewed from a very basic level, the Nazis considered the Jews (and others they also hated) as being “other”, that is to say, not one of them. In the process, the common bond of humanity between them and the objects of their hatred was destroyed. And, as history has shown, the Nazis were a totally godless group who engaged in evil of the worst kind. To determine to kill and exterminate a group of people is to engage in totally godless behavior.

Twenty-some years ago, tribal strife broke out in the nation of Rwanda in Africa. Before the genocide was over, about one million people had been killed, many of them hacked to death with machetes. To engage in genocide is to kill others simply because they are the “other”. Separation between groups of people is the result, and separation from the love God expects us to have for others is the other result.

In our own day, the Islamic State, following a radical understanding of Islam, is engaged in brutality against Christians and against other Muslims who follow a different strain of Islam. Their ways are reminiscent of the things the Nazis did some seventy or eighty years ago. ISIS engages in these acts because the objects of their hatred are – in their eyes – the “other”, people who differ from them. As they engage in acts of brutality, they separate themselves from all that is holy and desirable.

Now, the ways of ISIS have come to our own shores, most recently in the massacre at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando. A self-proclaimed admirer of ISIS killed scores of people in what has been described as one of the worst mass shootings in American history. The shooter’s motivation - judging from what has been reported in the news media - stems from a hatred of America and from a particular hatred of the clientele of the Pulse club, which was known to cater to gays and lesbians.

So the effects of evil are seen in the actions of Omar Mateen:  He considered gays and lesbians to be “other”, and so he broke the common bonds of humanity that should connect us one to the other. He also separated himself from the ways of the divine will (whether those ways are the ways of Islam, Judaism or Christianity), for we are called to walk in the ways of peace.

The list I provide in the following paragraph is – I will admit – my own short list of things to consider. Hopefully, what I follows steers clear of politics and political considerations.

Much discussion and reflection has begun in the wake of the Orlando attack. It is essential that we – as a people of this nation – consider the various implications of incidents such as took place a week ago in Orlando. We are called to examine realistically the threat of terrorism, and how best to prevent and thwart future attacks. We should consider how best to prevent those who are motived by hate from gaining the means to kill many people, whether it be with a deadly weapon like an AR-15 assault rifle, or with bombs or some other means. Part of our discussion ought to engage a proper respect for the provisions of the Constitution and for individual freedoms and privacy, balancing those needs with the overall needs of the country and its people. We should work to build a consensus for solutions to the threats posed by ISIS and other radical groups between government and the nation’s citizens.

As we move into the future, we can be sure that whenever the effects of evil are encountered, separation from God and separation from one another will be present.

Perhaps it’s appropriate to close with this prayer:

Almighty God, you have created us in your image, endowing us with reason, wisdom and skill. Enable us to see how dependent we are on our connection to you. Empower us to overcome the differences which might otherwise divide and separate us one from the other. Guide us in the ways of peace. Open our hearts to love others with the love we receive from you. Grant your peace to the families and friends of those who suffer the effects of terrorism, and especially to those loved ones of the victims of the Orlando shootings. Enable us to work to bring your kingdom into being here in earth, even as your kingdom has been established in heaven.  AMEN.

---

[1]   Gerasa’s modern name is Jerash. It is located in which is, today, the nation of Jordan, and it is the most well-preserved Roman city in the world.

Pentecost 4 - Year C (2016)

Proper 6 - II Samuel 11: 26 - 12: 10, 13–15; Psalm 32; Galatians 2: 15–21; Luke 7: 36 – 8: 3

The following is a homily by Fr. Gene Tucker, given at St. John’s Church in Huntingdon, Pennsylvania on Sunday, June 12, 2016.

“THE SALVATION PROCESS”

(Homily text:  Luke 7: 36 – 8: 3)

As I read and study today’s Gospel account, which describes a dinner party to which the Lord had been invited, it occurs to me that what we have before us is a summary of the salvation process, that process by which we come into a saving relationship with God through Jesus Christ.

In our Gospel account, we see two approaches we human beings often take toward God. In essence, there are three approaches, two of which we hear this morning. The three approaches/reactions to God’s existence and call to us are:

•             Pride, arrogance, and a confidence on our own actions and achievements,
•           Indifference/ignorance,
•             Deep need, unworthiness of God’s love and grace, and a sense of our own sinfulness.

Let’s unpack all of this a little.

But before we do, we would do well to notice some details of the dinner party to which Jesus had been invited:

The conduct of dinner parties:  In Jesus’ day, dinner parties were not only for the invited guests, but onlookers could come and watch the progress of the evening. They were also able to hear the conversations that took place. Since dinner parties were usually outside, these onlookers could make contact with the guests, which would explain how the unnamed woman had access to Jesus.

Eating practices:  Diners usually lay on a pillow (or pillows), on their left sides, with their heads toward a low table which was placed in the middle of the guests. So the diners’ feet were extended outward toward the edge of the gathering. This aspect, too, would explain the woman’s ability to bathe Jesus’ feet with her tears.

Now, let’s consider the event itself.

In the culture of Jesus’ day, expectations of proper behavior were well defined. Certain actions conveyed messages that were widely understood. In this context, then, the woman’s actions in making contact with Jesus’ feet conveyed erotic connotations. In addition, letting down her hair in public was taken to indicate that she was not behaving in a proper manner (such actions were usually associated with sexual and moral laxity).

But the Pharisee, Simon (notice that the host is named…usually, the Pharisees, who were among Jesus’ chief enemies, are not named personally in the Gospel accounts) broke societal conventions by not having Jesus’ feet washed, and by not greeting him with the customary ceremonial kiss (was this passive-aggressive behavior?).

Whenever we study or hear a Gospel account, it’s beneficial if we remember that the world Jesus had come into was a world in which the issues of who was clean or unclean were of paramount importance. And so it is that Simon says to himself, “If this man were a prophet, he would have known who and what kind of woman this is who is touching him --- that she is a sinner.” Simon has deduced, from the woman’s actions (and perhaps because he knew who she was in the community) that she was a sinner, an unclean person.

In the context of who is clean and who is not, Jesus becomes unclean by virtue of the woman’s contact with Him. In the world of the first century, to come into contact with something or someone who is unclean is to become unclean onesself.

Of course, the pattern of Jesus’ willingness to make contact with unclean persons is one we see again and again in the Gospel accounts:  He touches lepers, He heals the sick, He hangs out with the tax collectors, the prostitutes and the other “sinners” of His day.

Now that we’ve noticed some aspects of the conventions of Jesus’ culture and time, and have looked at some of the aspects of the dinner party itself, let’s turn to the actions of the unnamed woman and at the actions/attitudes of Simon, the Pharisee:

The woman:  This unnamed person, who – by the estimation of the “clean” persons (like Simon the Pharisee) – is an unclean person, a sinner. She has no merit by which to approach God, for she is unclean. So she comes, casting aside societal convention, throwing aside her pride (for she has no basis to claim any pride). She comes in abject need, in a deep sense of her unworthiness before God. She comes to be restored to a right relationship with God.

Simon the Pharisee:  We see the exact opposite in the actions and attitudes of Simon, the Pharisee. Here we have a self-made man, a person who’s proud of his actions and of his rightness before God, for Simon has done all the “right things”. So the Lord tells Simon that he has been forgiven for little, for he, Simon, has failed to love with generosity.

Today’s Gospel calls us to self-assessment and introspection.

What is our posture toward God?

Are we proud of our achievements, or of the “good things” we do (even in God’s name)? Are we resting comfortably in our status as a baptized person? (Understand that our reliance on God’s promises, made to us in baptism, constitute the bedrock of our relationship with God, so this isn’t an attempt to undercut the centrality of that essential step we must take as part of our walk with God.) If so, then perhaps we’re behaving a bit like Simon, the Pharisee.

On the other hand, are we painfully aware that – apart from Christ’s atoning sacrifice on the cross – we have nothing of worth or value to offer God?  Do we turn, like the unnamed woman in today’s Gospel, to the Lord, seeking forgiveness and restoration? Being able to set aside any basis for acceptance before God is the essential first step in our walk with God. Coming with such empty hands must be done regularly as we allow ourselves to see ourselves as God sees us, as sinners who have been redeemed by Christ.

And, of course, the third approach to God is one of indifference. This is the attitude taken by many on our culture today. And sometimes, an attitude of indifference is closely associated with an attitude of pride, an attitude that says, in effect, “What do I need God for, I’m pretty good just as I am?”.

Today’s Gospel calls us to account for our posture and behavior toward God. May the Holy Spirit enable our introspection.

AMEN.