Proper 10C: WHO, then, IS my neighbor?

Good Samaritan Showing MercyFIRST LESSON:  Amos 7: 7-17

To read the passage from Amos

The Book of Amos is included among the twelve minor prophets, called “minor” not because they are less significant but because the writings are shorter than Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel.  In ancient Judaism, these shorter prophetic writings were part of one scroll in the Temple.

Supposedly, Amos was called from his life as a shepherd in Judah to speak the word of the Lord to the Northern Kingdom of Israel.  He was probably more likely a person of some standing who traded sheep and goats in the agricultural market. During this time, the Northern Kingdom was experiencing a time of great prosperity under King Jeroboam, and they assumed that their power and privilege was a blessing from God to them as the chosen people.  But in their prosperity, they had forgotten the poor and the suffering and neglected to share their fruits with those in need.  Their religious observance had become rule-driven and devoid of social justice.  This is what prompted Amos’ message.

This passage from Amos is actually a depiction of Amos’ third vision in the midst of a total of five visions.  The vision is of God, the Divine Builder, standing beside a wall with a plumb line.  A plumb line is part of an ancient bit of construction technology, not really necessary with today’s advanced building methods.  The plumb bob is a heavy piece of lead in the shape of an inverted raindrop.  The point of the plumb bob, in perfect line with the plumb line, marks a perfect vertical drop between where the line begins and the ground below.  Used by stonemasons and builders for centuries, it would provide a measure for a perfectly straight wall.  So if something is “out of plumb”, so to speak, it is crooked, imperfect, unsightly, and may even be potentially dangerous.  The point is, sloppiness can skew or distort the entire picture.

So, the vision is of the Lord standing by a perfectly-constructed wall with a divine plumb line that will measure how “plumb” the people are.  According to the prophet, what is out of “plumb”, what is not the way it should be, will fall away.  Amos spells out a dire vision for the future of Israel:  the queen would become a prostitute, the royal children dying by sword, and the people of Israel taken into exile by foreigners.

So Amaziah, the priest of Bethel, reports to King Jeroboam II that Amos is conspiring the king’s death and Israel’s fall.  In doing this, the center of Israel is misunderstood as Jeroboam, and the sanctuary as the king’s.  There is a failure to recognize here that everything is really God’s.  Israel has forgotten its builder.

Amaziah tells Amos to leave and return to Judah and not bother the “status quo” in Israel.  He assumes that Amos is a “professional prophet” that can return and get his bread in Judah.  But Amos was not part of the religious establishment.  His legitimacy as a prophet comes from the fact that he IS an outsider (a herdsman and a dresser of sycamore trees).  Amos’ power is to disturb the status quo with his prophecy.  And in 721 BCE, the Northern Kingdom would fall into the hands of Assyria.

Amos’ words do not deny God’s Presence but rather the people’s (us?) unwillingness to live lives that reflect that presence of justice and mercy.  But God does not close a Divine eye to injustice.  Because, you see, it just doesn’t fit with the vision that God holds for the world and for us.  Amos just had the courage to speak the truth.

 

1)      What is your response to this passage?

2)      What does that image of the “plumb line” mean for you?

3)      How would our own society or our own church or even our own lives fare with this “plumb line” standard of measurement?  How does this speak to our culture today?

4)      Why is it so hard for us to hear and heed prophetic warnings?

5)      What is the difference between a question of perfection and a question of justice?

 

 

NEW TESTAMENT:  Colossians 1: 1-14

To read the passage from Colossians

Colossians is one of those letters that is attributed to Paul but that there are some doubts as to whether or not Paul actually penned the epistle.  It is one of those that is considered a “disputed” letter of Paul.  The practice was not uncommon to attach a teacher or mentor’s name to a work out of respect or reverence.

It begins with the author giving thanks for the faith of the people at Colossae.  The letter is complimentary of them, for they have shown love to others and it goes on by urging them to see themselves as part of something bigger that is expanding as time goes on.  The mention of Epaphras might even indicate that this person is the author of the letter and that he is using it to connect himself to Paul, but that is just speculation by some commentators.

The latter part of the passage that we read begins to reveal a key theme in the entire letter.  Against the claims of intruders who confuse this newfound faith with new theories and demands, the writer prays that the Colossians might have wisdom and knowledge and strength to hold fast in their faith.  He wants them to not get stressed over the intrusion of these other views, but to have peace in their own convictions in God who makes a place of belonging for each of us.

Colossians is written to Gentile Christians and the author is claiming that there is a place for them among the holy and chosen ones of Israel.  They, too, will share in the inheritance of a relationship with God that faith brings.  Here, coming to faith means moving from a system of authority and power into the realm and kingdom of Christ, which is characterized by love.  Here, believers will find redemption and forgiveness of sins.

Some are saying that God’s love is not so free, but depends on religious rites and achievements which must be performed if we are to be sure of getting past the powers which hold sway in this universe. The result can be religious preoccupation with our own destiny. We can become busy trying to justify ourselves and lose our perspective of what faith really is. We can do that by performing religious rites or doing many other things “religiously”. We can even make ourselves busy with overwork (even with church work!) to achieve that sense of being valued and ultimately coming through and finding a place of worth. Colossians is proclaiming a generous love which says: stop all this and believe in grace! You don’t have to become religious in this way. On the contrary, you can be liberated from such religion to be free to respond to God and others and yourselves with joy!  For the writer of this letter, hope in the present is grounded in our hope for the future.

Essentially, the writer is calling the Colossian believers to look at themselves.  What is it that they are known for—being “religious” or being “faithful”, being “good” or being “loving”?  It’s an interesting question.  How is your church described by those on the streets outside?

 

1)      What meaning does this passage hold for you?

2)      What, then, does this passage claim that faith is and what does it claim faith is not?

3)      What does the notion of “inheritance” mean for you?

4)      Why is it so difficult for us to not fall into the presumption that we need to somehow “earn” our place with God by being religious or being good?

5)      For what do you think our church would be known?  How would others characterize us?

 

 

GOSPEL: Luke 10: 25-37

To read the passage from the Gospel According to Luke

This is, of course, a familiar text.  So familiar, in fact, that we may or may not hear it completely.  We know what happens:  a man gets beat up and left for dead; a priest sees him and passes by; a Levite sees him and passes by; a Samaritan sees him and helps him.  The Samaritan wins the contest.

We read that it begins with a test of Jesus, perhaps a way of trying to catch Jesus up in his own words.  Because this well-learned person, this lawyer, this expert in the Law of Moses, already knew the answer to the question before he asked, these words so much a part of the Jewish faith.  “So, then, Jesus, (he asks smugly) what must I do to inherit eternal life?”  “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind.”  Indeed, you shall love God with everything that you are.  And, just as importantly, “you shall love your neighbor as yourself.”

But just having the right answer does not necessarily mean that we know God.  And when the man is told by Jesus to “Go and do,” he responds with his own tripping question.  “And who is my neighbor?”  Because in the learned man’s mind and in the society in which he lived his righteous and good life, some were considered acceptable neighbors and others were not.  Some were considered clean and righteous and worthy of respect according to religious law and some were not.  So, he thought, it is important for Jesus to of course clarify the directive to love your neighbor.  Well, of course, the expected reply would be something like “your relatives and friends; those who live their lives the way you do in respectable and acceptable ways; those who think like you and believe like you—THOSE are your neighbors.

But Jesus, in true Jesus-fashion, turned the assumed law upside down.  Because it is not about laws; it is about love.  And so Jesus tells what is now for us a familiar story.

The road that goes down from Jerusalem to Jericho is 17 miles long, dropping about 3,000 feet.  It is hazardous and filled with thieves and robbers, who beat and strip this man and leave him for dead.  Now note that Jesus leaves the man undescribed.  Jewish listeners would probably have assumed that he was one of them.  But, in all honesty, he could be anyone—no ethnicity, no particular religion, no certain economic status.  All we know about him is that he is just our neighbor.  In essence, Jesus is saying “I do not know his name because it doesn’t matter.  He is anyone who lies in need at life’s roadside.”

The first person that happens by is a priest.  He saw the poor man, but he passed by on the other side.  Now, in defense of the priest, religious law dictated that he could only touch those who were clean unless he washed again before he went to the Temple (but of course, we could beg the question of “How hard would that really have been?”).  Then a Levite passes by, also on the other side of the road.  As one who assisted the priest, perhaps he saw the priest pass by and assumed that he needed to do the same. (But then, that too, is really just an excuse.  If the priest had jumped off the cliff, would the Levite have done that?)

And then a Samaritan approached the wounded man.  Now you have to understand that the relationship between the Samaritans and the Jews was anything but friendly.  Both believed in God and both had a monotheistic understanding of the one true God, the YHWH of their shared belief.  But where the temple of YHWH for the Jews existed on Mount Zion in Jerusalem, the Samaritans instead worshipped God on Mount Gerazim near the ancient city of Shechem.  Though both were bound by the Law of Moses, each believed that their line of priests and their way of religious understanding was the right one.  What began as an argument in semantics some 1,000 years before the birth of Christ had escalated into a relationship based on hatred and violence and the perceived notion that the other was unacceptable.

But here is this Samaritan—an outsider, an undesirable—treating and bandaging the man’s wounds, risking defilement (probably even risking infection).  He then picked up the man and took him to a place of shelter, giving the innkeeper money out of his own pocket for the man’s lodging.  He did more than just supply band-aids, though.  He entered the man’s life and shared his own life with him.  Go and do likewise.

The point is that it is no longer enough just to be nice.  It means that it is not enough to give out the time and money and love that we can spare.  It means that this story is no longer about figuring out who your neighbor is.  It means, rather, that we are called to enter our neighbor’s life and allow them to enter ours.  It means that we realize that, as this passage says, love of God and love of neighbor are inseparable.  It means that we can become “fully human”, “fully made in the image of God” only by allowing ourselves to enter each others’ lives.

There is an African proverb that says, “I am human only because you are human.”  We need to see one another as neighbors in order to experience the community that God created for us.  We are all part of the neighborhood.    We are all called to be a part of each others’ lives.  Go and do likewise.

So, who, then, IS my neighbor?  Whose life am I called to enter and invite to enter mine?  Well, what this parable says is that the question is essentially moot.  Turn and look at the person next to you.  That is your neighbor.  Do you see the woman crossing the street looking for the food pantry?  She is your neighbor.  Do you see the person with whose lifestyle you do not understand, possibly do not condone?  Do you see the child in Africa, hungry with no safe water to drink and no real shelter?  That child is your neighbor.  Turn and look at the person on the other side of you.  Each and every one of God’s children is your neighbor.  Maya Angelou said that “I note the obvious differences between each sort and type.  But we are more alike, my friends, than we are unalike.”  This parable defines everyone—friend, enemy, foreigner, threat—as “neighbor”.  And then tells us, that we shall love our neighbor as ourselves.

And by loving our neighbors with the same intensity and fervor that we love ourselves, there is no longer room for greed, self-promoting egoism, or violence.  There is no longer room for the prioritizing of our resources.  There is no longer room to value one life over another.  The road is no longer wide enough to simply pass by on the other side.  There is no person who is anything less than a neighbor.

Yes, sometimes, being a true neighbor is controversial and even dangerous business.  Sometimes being a neighbor means risking or even giving up part of yourself.  Henri Nouwen said, though, that “only when we have the courage to cross the road and look into one another’s eyes can we see that we are children of the same God and members of the same human family.”

 

1)      What meaning does this passage hold for you?

2)      What preconceived perceptions are usually attached to this story?

3)      With what character do you most identify in this story?

4)      So, who, then, is your neighbor?

 

 

Some Quotes for Further Reflection:

There can be little growth in holiness without growth in a sense of social justice. (Edward Hays)

 

To believe you can approach transcendence without drawing nearer in compassion to suffering humanity is to fool yourself.  There can be no genuine personal religious conversion without a change in social attitude. (William Sloane Coffin, Credo)

 

I note the obvious differences between each sort and type.  But we are more alike, my friends, than we are unalike. (Maya Angelou)

 

 

Closing

O God of every nation, of every race and land, redeem your whole creation with your almighty hand; where hate and fear divide us, and bitter threats are hurled, in love and mercy guide us, and heal our strife-torn world.

 

From search for wealth and power and scorn of truth and right, from trust in bombs that shower destruction through the night, from pride of race and station and blindness to your way, deliver every nation, eternal God, we pray.

 

Keep bright in us the vision of days when war shall cease, when hatred and division give way to love and peace, till dawns the morning glorious when truth and justice reign, and Christ shall rule victorious o’er all the world’s domain.

 

Amen.

(William W. Reid, Jr., “O God of Every Nation”, 1958, UMH # 435)

Proper 9C: Go, Now…

Open doorFIRST LESSON:  2 Kings 5: 1-14

To read the Old Testament lesson

The Books of 1 and 2 Kings originally constitute a single book.  In the Jewish tradition, the work is part of what would be called the “Former Prophets”, which also includes Joshua, Judges, and Samuel, and depicts a prophetic interpretation of Israel’s history from the conquest of Canaan through the end of the monarchies.

Naaman is the chief military commander of the Aramean (or Syrian) army, which during this time was always involved in a contentious and battle-laden relationship with Israel in an effort to gain power over the other army.  Naaman is very accomplished, respected, and, it could be assumed, very wealthy.  He had everything.  But he also suffers from leprosy, which carries a social stigma of being “unclean” and which, in this time, would eventually result in death.  But one of Naaman’s servants, a young Israeli girl who was taken from Israel during one of the battles, suggests that he might be healed by this great prophet in Israel.  So Naaman procures a letter of introduction and request to take to the King of Israel.  (This, in itself, says how important Naaman is if the Syrian king is willing to “risk face” with his rival in an effort to save Naaman.)

So Naaman gathers gold, silver, and trinkets and sets off to Israel.  He stops in front of Elisha’s house for the great healing.  Rather than Elisha, one of Elisha’s messengers comes and tells him to immerse himself in the Jordan River seven times.  Naaman is insulted.  After all, he is important.  Elisha doesn’t even show up and then he sends word for Naaman to jump in the river.  What’s so special about THIS river?  Good grief, if he was going to just jump in the river, he could have done that at home!  He was convinced that he deserved something more.  I mean, really, don’t you have some sort of quick fix to my problem? You are supposed to be this great prophet, after all.  But, encouraged by his servants, his does it and he is healed.  I mean, after all, what does he have to lose?

The point could be made here that the “anonymous people”, rather than the “movers and shakers of the world” are the ones that actually make this story happen.  Once again, God works through the unlikely ones (and even the unnamed ones).  Naaman’s wealth and power turned out to be useless to him.  But he gained real freedom through the unexpected.  When Naaman finally let go of who he envisioned himself to be, what he thought he deserved, and the power that he envisioned himself to have, he was healed.

Following this part of the passage, Naaman realizes that God has healed him and he proclaims his faith in the God of Israel as the one true God.  Essentially, Naaman finally realizes that it’s not about Naaman; it’s about God.  In fact, it was apparent that he was looking for God in all the wrong places.  This is particularly interesting because, when you think about it, Naaman, too, is an outsider.  He now realizes his connection to this God that for the most part was unknown to him before and, just as important, found a God who is open to being God to even the outsiders.

When I became a seminary administrator, a colleague at another school gave me this advice: “People always act from self-interest. When you approach them with a plan, they’ll invariably ask themselves, ‘What’s in it for me?’ Figure out the answer to that before you propose anything, and approach issues accordingly.” Pared to its core, it seemed that my job was to outfox selfish louts bent on advancing their own agendas.  I discovered that my colleague was only partly right. If people acted only from simple self-interest all the time, things would be easy. But it’s more complicated than that. We’re all impelled by a bewildering array of interests, contradictions and passions (self-interest being the friskiest, but not always the strongest), most of which we do not know and never name…

I could have opened my Bible to learn this lesson. Take the story of Naaman in 2 Kings. A proud man muddles toward health, toward a restorative knowledge of God and himself. But he makes progress only by ragged fits and starts. He has a clear self-interest — a cure for the disease that threatens his career, his place in human company, his very life. The people who care about him appeal successfully to that self-interest, but the pull of other passions almost derails him. Naaman craves respect almost more than he wants health. He is so sure he knows what he needs, he almost refuses what God wants to give.

Almost. But not quite. When he doesn’t get the attention he thinks is his due, God waits, letting him vent and strut. No lightning bolt consumes him in mid-rant, no disapproving angel descends. God waits until Naaman acquits himself of the odd human propensity to work against one’s own good. And when, after stalking off, he relents, we see in him what God has seen all along — a man of faith.

And so it was all along. We’d be wrong to regard his healing and conversion as something completely new, a miracle. What God waits for in Naaman is the fitful progress of a transformation under way in Naaman even before he sets foot on the soil of Samaria or in the puny Jordan — a slender opening, first apparent when the great warrior takes advice from women and (how could it have been otherwise?) subdues his disgust at needing help from an enemy’s god.

Grace has established a pulse in him — irregular, perhaps, but not arrested by his unchecked rage. When he finally gives up, lets go, obeys his servants and washes in the water, there isn’t a lot more healing for the river to do. All that remains is for Naaman to meet, knee-deep, the One who engineers his victories and presides over his life. Awash in the revelation, Naaman, “a great man” from the start, becomes Yahweh’s man for good…

God outwaits us while in weakness healing begins. God outwaits us while we locate the fissures of mercy in the heaped debris of fear and anger — and learn to breathe the Spirit’s air. We change and grow, believe and love by grace, the best we can. We are going to the river, whatever the reason or unreason that moves us; we are going to wade right in. Knee-deep in unaccountable love, we’ll meet the One who gives us all our ragged victories and presides over our life. (Excerpt from “Muddling Through (II Kings)”, by J. Mary Luti, The Christian Century, September 23, 1998, available at http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=629.)

 

1)    What is your response to this passage?

2)    Do we often expect more “pomp and circumstance” from God’s works than we get? Do we expect God to come in some “show of power”?

3)    Why is it so much easier for us to recognize God’s work in our lives in hindsight?

4)    What stands in the way of our awareness when God is at work in our lives?

5)    Do you think we are guilty of looking for God in all the wrong places?

6)    What “magic pill” do we expect?

 

 

NEW TESTAMENT:  Galatians 6: (1-6), 7-16

To read the Epistle passage

The community to which Paul addressed our epistle passage was not really that different from us.  There were divisions and factions and religious groups that were sure they were right and were sure that others needed to believe and live the same way they did.  And, like our society, they tended to be a little loud, making sure that their voices were heard above all others.  But Paul was not as concerned about who was right and who was wrong.  Paul’s concern was more about the actual relationships between the people to whom he was writing.

Today’s reading comes from the last chapter of Paul’s letter to the Church at Galatia.  He draws together all of the major themes that he addressed throughout this letter and with these final words, epitomizes the Christian life as bearing one another’s burdens—doing good to all people—and he highlights how the faithful become part of a new creation, which is greater than any laws or rules or understandings.  He even claims that freedom in Christ brings responsibility for the welfare of others.  No longer can one who confesses belief in Christ simply follow the rules; claiming belief in Christ means that one has become devoted to the benefit of others and to the unity of this new Creation.

We face the same problems that the Galatian community did nearly 2,000 years ago.  How can we create this new Creation, this perfect union, so to speak, and still maintain our own identity and our own beliefs as followers of Christ?  The truth is, it is always tempting (as it was for those believers in Galatia) for each of us to make our own experience of God’s truth the experience of God’s truth.  That is the dark side of our humanness, that “fleshy” part, as Paul called it.  But. A.J. Conyers warns that “All religion, and every practice of religion, and in fact all of human life is in danger of being marshaled into the service of the human ego.”

And yet, the true gospel produces a church and a people in which miraculous unity exists with remarkable diversity.  We have been sent out into the whole world, not just to those who look like us, dress like us, think like us, speak like us, spend like us, and vote like us.  Why do you think that is?  I think it may be not just so that we can be a part of recreating those to whom we bring the mission but also so that we can be a part of recreating ourselves.  It is a redefining of what true community is.

Aristotle first defined the word “community” as a group established by persons having shared values.  For Paul, those “shared values” meant working for the good of all in the community.  In the mission field, that would mean that we work for the good of all in the world.  It would also mean that we recognize the value and the need to bring all the voices to the table, to provide a place where all voices can be heard—not just the loudest, not just the majority, and not just those who are in power or those who believe exactly the way we do.  That is the way to reap the plentiful harvest that God has provided.  Because if we neglect to include even one of those voices, our community, this plentiful harvest, this new Creation, is incomplete.

Each and every week, our congregation stands and faces the altar and professes belief in the “holy catholic church” as part of our creed. Notice that it’s a “little c”.  Catholic (with a little c) means universal.  It means a whole.  It means everyone.  It means being part of a world that strives to live in unity.  It means recognizing that sometimes we’ll have to live with a little bit of tension as we try to work differences through.  I am clear, though, that even in the midst of those tensions, God is there, walking us through it.  God doesn’t cram anything down our throats and I don’t think we’re supposed to do that to other people either.  William Sloan Coffin claimed that “diversity may be both the hardest thing to live with and the most dangerous thing to be without.”  I think he was right.  Because you see, that diversity is part of this new Creation.  It is part of what is calling us to grow and change and become more like Christ with each step we take.

And when we allow ourselves the opportunity to experience and share our diversity and perhaps even learn from it a little, we gain an experience of God that is unlike anything that we could have gained on our own.  And nothing creates unity quite like experiencing God together.  In his letter, Paul stops short of blatantly criticizing those with which he disagreed.  For him, unity was not about conformity but, rather, about relationships. William Sloane Coffin once said that “the greatest differences in the world are never between people who believe different things, but between people who believe the same things and differ in their interpretation.” That, too, is a lesson to us. After all, how can we declare ourselves “united in Christ” when we can’t get along even with those that are “like us”?

The truth is, this story of which we are a part is an “upside-down” story. It is not really ours to interpret. It is not really ours on which to pass judgment. It is ours to live.

 

1)    What meaning does this passage hold for you?

2)    What does “unity” mean to you?

3)    Why is it so hard for us to experience unity and concern for each other?

4)    What do you think of the notion of the greatest differences stemming from a difference in interpretation? How true do you think that is?

 

 

GOSPEL: Luke 10: 1-11, 16-20

To read the Gospel passage

Jesus has “set his face to go to Jerusalem,” and he told fellow-travelers that the journey requires their single-minded purpose. Jesus sends seventy ahead of him and prepares them for what lies ahead. The laborers are few and the risks are great. Jesus sends them in pairs with no provisions for the journey. No conversing with those they meet on the road. They will depend on the hospitality of strangers. He instructs them to move on if a town does not welcome them, with a sign of judgment against that place.

Jesus is preparing them for more than just a little inconvenience.  They would be entering a different culture, “hostile” territory, so to speak.  Their own personal comfort wasn’t even an issue.  They were told to “eat what is set before you”.  What does that mean?  Would they not even have a choice anymore?  Think about it—Jesus went to a lot of dinners but he was never the host.  He was always a guest.  Jesus was telling them how to be a guest, how to open themselves to hospitality being given to them.

It is very likely that Jesus instructed his disciples to emulate his own pattern of activity. That entailed travel. He would come to a town or settlement, then would need to find a place to sleep and be looked after. The pattern he sets out for the disciples insists that they travel as poor people, but, unlike the wandering Cynic teachers of his day, not even to carry a begging bag. Instead they were to come only with who they were and await local response. Larger Palestinian houses were such that you could freely enter the front half of the house from outside – it was public space. These disciples would then face the owners with the choice of being part of the kingdom movement by offering hospitality and enjoying its benefits through healing and teaching or of turning away these uninvited would-be guests.

The ancient world had strong customs about hospitality. The mission used these. The result was quite confronting: you either welcomed these people or you turned them away. It was accepted that enemies should not be offered hospitality, but were these enemies or friends? They claimed to be instruments of peace and wholeness, including healing. They claimed to be announcing the reign of God and by their actions, bringing its reality into life in the here and now. To receive them was to receive the one who sent them and to receive him was to receive God, to be open to the kingdom. To reject someone who is not an enemy, to refuse to offer hospitality, was shameful. It brought disgrace and promised misfortune. That is the expectation here, too. Reject these messengers and you reject Jesus; reject Jesus and you reject God; reject God and you invite judgment. Shaking dust off the feet is probably symbolic of such judgment.

When the disciples return, they are excited about their success.  Using apocalyptic imagery, Jesus shifts their focus to the heavenly book of life in which their names are written. This is symbolic way of saying: what matters most is the close relationship you have with God which is its own reward beyond all the successes – because with it you can also live through the failures which inevitably come. He also speaks of Satan falling from heaven, another apocalyptic image used to depict the dethroning of the serpent or the dragon or the powers that be, whatever they are, at the end of the time that we know. Hope comes to fulfillment now when people are liberated from the powers that oppress them.

The passage speaks both to hospitality but also to evangelism of the mission to which we are called.  Is “hospitality” making people feel comfortable or being open to what they bring to the table?  Are we offered hospitality when we are made to feel comfortable or does it mean something else?  And evangelism is not about “selling” Christianity, but sharing a vision of change that invites real participation.

Now, truthfully, I don’t know how literally we should or should not take this Scripture.  (After all, you have to be careful with interpretation, remember?)  Perhaps Jesus is not saying that we should come virtually unprepared; maybe he’s just trying to remind people to leave themselves behind, to leave the trappings that get in the way of who they are and who they are called to become.  Maybe it is yet another reminder that it’s not about us; it’s about God.

 

1)    What meaning does this passage hold for you?

2)    How does this speak to our idea of hospitality?

3)    How does this speak to our idea of “spreading” the Christian mission?

4)    What does it mean to offer yourself completely to someone else’s hospitality—to truly eat what is put before you?

 

 

Some Quotes for Further Reflection:

We must be willing to get rid of the life we’ve planned, so as to have the life that is waiting for us. The old skin has to be shed before the new one can come.  (Joseph Campbell)

 

We are already one. But we imagine that we are not. And what we have to recover is our original unity. What we have to be is what we are. (Thomas Merton)

 

Hospitality invites to prayer before it checks credentials, welcomes to the table before administering the entrance exam. (Patrick Henry, from The Ironic Christian’s Companion)

 

 

Closing

As we gather at your table, as we listen to your word,

help us know, O God, your presence; let our hearts and minds be stirred. Nourish us with sacred story till we claim it as our own;

teach us through this holy banquet how to make Love’s victory known.

 

Gracious Spirit, help us summon other guests to share that feast

where triumphant Love will welcome those who had been last and least. There no more will envy blind us nor will pride our peace destroy,

as we join with saints and angels to repeat the sounding joy.

 

Amen.

(Carl P. Daw, Jr., The Faith We Sing, #2268)