Lord of Word & Sacrament
- 2 Samuel 24:1-17
- [Luke 14:12-24/]
Sermon
Viewed in the light of contemporary practice and subsequent history, David's refusal to kill Saul when he was afforded the opportunity, not once but twice at least, is an outstanding example of self restraint. The converse, not precisely the opposite, is voluntarism, our willingness to come forward when we would rather not. Sadly, the passage from Luke has a much more familiar ring than that of 1 Samuel: we all know of people who don't come to church because they want to buy new curtains, take a child to football practice, wash the car or enjoy the pleasures of new love. In the light of these two readings I am going to look at the way we think about Word and Sacrament.
Taking up last week's theme, it might seem strange to call for a degree of restraint when considering the Word of God, but that is precisely my case. David's course of action, after all, was pretty obvious. He had been threatened with murder by Saul so frequently that he had fled for his own safety. He had been anointed by Samuel as the new king in the presence of all his family which, de jure at least, meant that Saul was no longer king. He had wandered in exile, forced to live among gentiles and to feign madness, and he therefore had every right to kill Saul. It's obvious.
No it isn't. Nothing is obvious. That is why we all need to exercise a degree of self restraint.
But this is not an exercise for its own sake, because our upbringing tells us that this is the proper way to behave. The underlying point is that we have to make a proper distinction between a careful attempt to discern what god wants and the all too easy exercise of persuading ourselves that God just happens to want what we want. Many years ago when travelling in a small aeroplane in West Africa I heard one missionary say to another: "I was talking to the Lord this morning and he told me that we needed to overhaul our accountancy systems," which, of course, made me wonder what kind of Lord he had; not the one, I supposed, who made heaven and earth nor the one whose son died for us. It is a strange kind of Lord that cares about spreadsheets.
That story, however, illustrates an ever present danger, that we take The Word of God and use it for our own ends instead of allowing it to speak to us. The operative word in that sentence is "allowing", requiring discernment, making a proper distinction between The Word of God and the word of man. It strikes me, for example, that many of those who base the whole of their Christian lives around the Bible have formed a very strange attitude to it. Rather than its being the Word of God which we might understand to be difficult, a different order of text altogether from that which we create ourselves, they treat it as a post enlightenment, rationalist proof text, not dissimilar to a chemistry manual. Personally, I think of The Bible as the history of the dialogue between God, the Chosen people and then the Christian Church; that allows it to have both a sacred and a human dimension; but if you disagree with me because you think that The Bible is the actual, unadulterated Word of God beyond question and simple of interpretation, then there are two questions that must be faced: first, when we change our minds, is that because the Holy Spirit got it wrong first time round or because we got it wrong? Secondly, what limits should we accept on differences in interpretation? This second and serious question is too big for today but it is one which is at the heart of the debate in the Anglican Communion; if I can be a good Anglican believing or opposing women in the priesthood and episcopate; why can't I be a good Anglican believing or not believing that homosexual people can be priests or bishops? Or is the nub of the matter that those who want to be accepted as Anglicans when they oppose women Bishops don't want to grant the same dispensation to those who have no objections to gay bishops? And is the insistence on one concession and the denial of another Biblical or simply political posturing?
But just as my argument from 1 Samuel is in favour of self restraint, the converse behaviour is required by Luke. If we were a church simply of The Word - Sola scriptura - we would read our Bibles and listen to sermons and in spite of the merits of each, what a sad spiritual life that would be. Last week I ended with a description of a church that is physically imperfect but ideally perfect, saying that the two dimensions are fused by the Sacrament of the Eucharist and I want to take that idea further. The power of the Eucharist lies precisely in its impartiality. Over the centuries clerical power brokering has hedged about the central event of our Christian lives with rules: about who can preside, who can distribute and who can receive. At root, of course, Jesus is Priest and victim, working through the agency of the Holy Spirit in the power of The Creator; and Jesus did not run a moral check on the crowds who received food at his hand; and he did not even throw Judas out before the Institution of the Eucharist. In coming willingly to the altar to share the Eucharist we must be careful to remember that it is a Sacrament not a private dining club for those in the know, nor those who think themselves worthy of it. We should look at the action that the host takes in Luke when people refuse to attend his banquet; but we must also look at why people aren't coming into our churches from the highways and byways to rejoice at The Lord's Banquet.
Because we are all so familiar and comfortable with what we do on Sundays, we tend not to see why some people prefer to stay at home. If you attend many Anglican churches - not this one, of course - on a Sunday morning, you might be given a Bible, two hymn books and a sheet with the extra hymns; and another sheet with the Psalm response and Gradual antiphon; and, of course, an envelope for your grateful contribution. You might be treated to a reading on Jewish Temple ritual, a tortured Pauline metaphor about circumcision, a Gospel on eschatology, a sermon about nothing in particular including wry comments on Lectionary design and an announcement about who can and cannot come to the table to share the banquet; and, by the way, English "A" level essential, Greek and sight reading desirable. Afterwards the friendly congregation might treat you to an explanation of why half the adult population isn't capable of being called to serve as Eucharistic Presidents, why gay bishops are such an important item and why much needs doing but can't be done without the PCC, Deanery Synod, Bishops Council, General Synod, Archbishops' Council and, soon enough, the Anglican Covenant.
As a Church of Word and Sacrament we are in deep trouble because we have shoe-horned the Bible into a post Enlightenment straightjacket and turned the banquet into an intellectual obstacle course. In different ways, we need to be open to understanding Word and Sacrament through the power of the Spirit rather than the force of our intellect or simply through the power we can exercise because of our position.
Last week I reminded us that what unites us in Christ is our brokenness which can only be mended by Christ whose instruments of healing are the Word of God and himself given in Eucharist; broken as we are, we must approach The Word with humility and broken as we are, we should approach the Eucharist in simple thankfulness.
Prayers
Can: Lord of Word and Sacrament
Res: Open our hearts
Can: Lord of Word and Sacrament
Res: Open our hearts
Can: Lord of Word and Sacrament
Res: Open our hearts
Lord of Word and Sacrament, we thank you for your Word in Holy Scripture: for theologians and exegetes; for researchers and translators; for preachers and teachers; for students and searchers. Help us to discern your will through your Word rather than imposing our will.
Can: Lord of Word and Sacrament
Res: Open our Hearts
Lord of Word and Sacrament, we thank you for the fellowship of the Holy Eucharist: for the incarnational bridge between God and humanity; for the perpetuating power of Christ's presence; for the impartial power of love; and for the promise of eternal life. Help us to be agents of incarnational witness in our fellowship of the Table and in the world.
Can: Lord of Word and Sacrament
Res: Open our hearts
Lord of word and Sacrament, send the Holy Spirit among us that we may be: humble in discerning your will; lively in celebrating your gifts; penitent for our misuse of power; and sensible of our mission of praise. Help us to be temples of The Spirit and icons of your radiant beauty.
Can: Lord of Word and Sacrament
Res: Open our heart
Lord of Word and Sacrament, re-unite us with all those who have loved you: with pilgrims and prophets; with heroes and hermits; with visionaries and stragglers; with the Virgin Mary and those who thought they were lost.
Can: Lord of Word and Sacrament
Res: Open our Hearts. Amen