Mark 10:2-16 (NRSV)

2 Some Pharisees came, and to test him they asked, ‘Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?’ ³He answered them, ‘What did Moses command you?’ ⁴They said, ‘Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of dismissal and to divorce her.’ ⁵But Jesus said to them, ‘Because of your hardness of heart he wrote this commandment for you. ⁶But from the beginning of creation, “God made them male and female.” ⁷“For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, ⁸and the two shall become one flesh.” So they are no longer two, but one flesh. ⁹Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.’ ¹⁰ Then in the house the disciples asked him again about this matter.¹¹He said to them, ‘Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her; ¹²and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.’ ¹³ People were bringing little children to him in order that he might touch them; and the disciples spoke sternly to them. ¹⁴But when Jesus saw this, he was indignant and said to them, ‘Let the little children come to me; do not stop them; for it is to such as these that the kingdom of God belongs. ¹⁵Truly I tell you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will never enter it.’ ¹⁶And he took them up in his arms, laid his hands on them, and blessed them.

Readers might have noticed that I often depend on William Barclay for some of what we write. This is one of the main purposes of this exercise; and that is to let this wise biblical scholar inform me as wejourney together. I was comforted when reading the preface to C F D Moule’s commentary on the Gospel. As you know, he was one of the great New Testament scholars of the 20^th Century, being a senior professor at Cambridge. He wrote:

“This small book contains one or two ideas that, I think, are more or less original; but, in the main, it owes so much to others that, if the normal method of acknowledgment had been adopted, it would have consisted largely of footnotes …”

In this passage – which deals with divorce and the blessing of little children - Barclay suggests, is all about the dignity of all people in the sight of God, especially women and children. Divorce was a burning question at the time and the Pharisees were testing Jesus. This could be for a number of reasons: (i) to bring him into conflict with Herod – for this was John the Baptist’s undoing; (ii) it would make him contradict the law of Moses, which would bring him into conflict with the religious authorities because he would be going against ‘sound doctrine’!

The issue was that divorce was very easy for any man, but almost impossible for a woman because they were regarded as mere ‘things’, with no legal rights and at the complete disposal of the male head of the family. A man could divorce his wife on almost any grounds – for some – even a spoilt dish of food – or if he found another woman more attractive!

So, Jesus was striking a blow for women by seeking to restore marriage to the position it ought to have had. Jesus explains that the Law of Moses on this issue was necessary because of the hardness of heart of the people. Barclay suggests that Matthew is right in adding that divorce could be legitimate on the grounds of adultery because this act already breaks the bond and so a divorce merely seals what has already happened.

Marriage is sacred and not merely for one’s pleasure – it is also a big responsibility. It is not only a physical union, but more importantly it is also a spiritual union. Barclay concludes that Jesus was ‘… building a rampart around the home …’

Women are as important as men and children (neglected in Jesus’ day) as well.

It is the most natural thing in the world for Jewish mothers to wish that their children be blessed by a great and distinguished rabbi. It was especially significant for this to happen on the child’s first birthday and it was this sort of thing that was happening as recorded in our reading. Barclay reminds us that it is important to remember that the context of this passage is set at a time when Jesus knew that he was on his way to the Cross. It was at such a time that Jesus had time for children; he took them in his arms, hugged them and probably played with them for a while.

The disciples probably just wanted to protect Jesus; they did not fully understand what was going on, but they probably understood enough to realise that tragedy (at least in their eyes) lay ahead. They did not want Jesus to be ‘bothered’ under the circumstances.

This tells us, yet again, a great deal about Jesus. As Barclay writes: “He was the kind of person who cared for children and for whom children cared.” He probably smiled easily and laughed joyously and so reveals a lot about the human Jesus. Jesus said: “… it is to such that the kingdom of God belongs …” Barclay suggests that Jesus was attracted to the following attributes of children:

(i)                  Humility: Children are embarrassed by prominence and publicity and they have not yet learned to discover the importance of himself;

(ii)                Obedience: A child’s natural instinct is to obey;

(iii)               Trust: Children tend to accept authority and has confidence in other people; they do not expect any people to be ‘bad’ people and believes rather the best about others;

(iv)              Short memory: Children have not yet learned to bear grudges and harbour bitterness; they forget so easily that it is almost that they have nothing to forgive …

This is what the kingdom of God is like!

Denis Nineham states that ‘… like many of the vivid scenes depicted in the Gospels, it contains a good deal more than may, at first, appear …’

It is probably that the disciples wanted to stop the mothers bringing their children to Jesus because they knew he was exhausted and wanted to protect him; but it is also possible that they did not feel that the families concerned were of the right sort thinking, implying that ‘… contact with Jesus is not for those too young to make a responsible decision upon his claims …’ The Church has often done the same thing! I am delighted that, since Gareth’s birth, he has been fully accepted into the Methodist Church. As soon as he was old enough for basic instruction, he has received Holy Communion – and now – he is a regular communicant (at the age of just 11) every week. Wesley claimed that this sacrament is a ‘saving ordinance’ in that it opens one up to the means of grace – and this is my prayer for my son.

Nineham points out that the word used for Jesus response (and translated as ‘indignant’) is nowhere else used for our Lord. He goes on the paint a similar picture to the one offered by Barclay of the characteristics of ‘children’ encouraged by our Lord, but with a different emphasis. Nineham suggests it is NOT the innocence, humility or obedience of children, but the unselfconscious, receptive nature of children and their contentment to be dependent upon others’ care and bounty concluding that ‘… it is this sort of spirit that the kingdom of God must be received …’ This is because becoming a member of the Kingdom is not something that we earn or deserve – is a free and unconditional gift of God; it must simply be accepted inasmuch as it can never be deserved. Nineham is of the view that this passage has been included in the Gospel narrative because it implies this important truth and it implies an aspect of the cost of discipleship – the cost of putting pride aside.

Nineham also includes the interesting observation that confirms why this passage has become integral to our understanding of infant baptism (and why it is used at many of our services when this sacrament is celebrated). He suggests that the role of Jesus is taken on by the presiding minister offering the free gift of God’s grace to those who are powerless in the process. Nineham concludes that the early Church needed this passage in developing their practice and therefore also their theology of infant baptism.

Free – it is all free – because Christ has paid the price for us. Nothing new, but always a wonderful thought!

A sermon based on my latest reflection for this week ...

Mark 9:38-end (NRSV)

Another Exorcist

³⁸ John said to him, ‘Teacher, we saw someone casting out demons in your name, and we tried to stop him, because he was not following us.’³⁹But Jesus said, ‘Do not stop him; for no one who does a deed of power in my name will be able soon afterwards to speak evil of me.⁴⁰Whoever is not against us is for us. ⁴¹For truly I tell you, whoever gives you a cup of water to drink because you bear the name of Christ will by no means lose the reward.

Temptations to Sin

⁴² ‘If any of you put a stumbling-block before one of these little ones who believe in me, it would be better for you if a great millstone were hung around your neck and you were thrown into the sea. ⁴³If your hand causes you to stumble cut it off; it is better for you to enter life maimed than to have two hands and to go to hell, to the unquenchable fire. ⁴⁵And if your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life lame than to have two feet and to be thrown into hell. ⁴⁷And if your eye causes you to stumble, tear it out; it is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and to be thrown into hell, ⁴⁸where their worm never dies, and the fire is never quenched. ⁴⁹ ‘For everyone will be salted with fire. ⁵⁰Salt is good; but if salt has lost its saltiness, how can you season it? Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace with one another.’

My text this morning is written in Mark 9, verse 50b:

‘Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace with one another.’

In this reading we encounter the experience of the disciples (and from other documents the experience of the early Christians) of an exorcist who successfully used the name of Jesus for the purposes of exorcism – but without becoming a Christian. Here, the disciples are troubled by this – and by our Lord’s own solution to the problem – as Nineham suggests: “… an exceedingly tolerant solution, indeed so tolerant as to arouse some doubt of its genuiness …” Nineham is of the view that “… if the first Christians had from the beginning such explicit directives to tolerance, it is hard to account for the very intolerant attitude they seem often to have adopted in such cases …’

I do not have the same difficulty! It would appear to be quite logical that such occasions arose in Jesus’ own time and it is well in line with our Lord’s demeanour to welcome the outsider. As Jesus relies: ‘Do not stop him; for no one who does a deed of power in my name will be able soon afterwards to speak evil of me.⁴⁰Whoever is not against us is for us.’

Tolerance, especially of those whose lives and good and pure, is vital for us as Christians. For those who exhort the name of Jesus and never speak evil of him are indeed ‘… on our side …’ I find this every day as some of the loveliest boys I teach are of other faiths. They revere our Lord – but just do not take the final step of accepting him as we do – as God incarnate. But they see him as being of such great importance that they would never speak evil of him.

Indeed, you might recall, when there have been blasphemous plays about Jesus, it has often been the Muslim community that have protested most vehemently and even challenged us Christians for being too weak to stand up for our Lord.

I also love the way Jesus ends this first section; he focuses on the ordinary, because we humans, often prefer to focus on the spectacular. It is often in the simplest things where the presence of Christ becomes most manifest – giving a thirsty person a drink of water.

Who belongs to God is God’s business. I firmly believe that Jesus is who the New Testament claims him to be because this is my experience and I will never deny it. But the same New Testament claims that when a person loves another in an unselfish way, God is present and they dwell in him and he in them (1 John).

It is too easy to try to argue this passage away as some later addition. I believe our Lord wants us to focus on what matters: living the life of tolerance and acceptance for others, especially those who deeply revere his name, even if they do not go as far as we do and we would want them to do.

In verse 42, Jesus refers to the ‘little ones’ and on the surface we think it is a warning against leading children astray – and indeed, I believe, we as teachers need to beware that we do not do this. With the recent child abuse scandals that have come to our knowledge this verse is particularly apt in highlighting both the vulnerability and inestimable value children are, and it is good that measures are now in place to make sure that all vulnerable people and especially children are protected and safe.

But C F D Moule gives us another dimension and puts it a little differently and suggests “Jesus, or God Himself, comes to us in a small child – that is greatness …” Teachers seems to think that they have ‘arrived’ when they teach predominantly in the 6^th Form; university lecturers and professors are valued more highly by society than other teachers, but Moule makes the important point that Jesus comes to us in all people – but especially in children.

I believe we must beware that we do not consider some people more important than others; rather that ALL people matter. As Moule comments: “Jesus was one of the first ever to see how essentially precious any person is, particularly a young child …” It is true that, in their vulnerability we need to be particularly careful in our treatment of small children, but all people matter and when we see them as the way God comes to us, it revolutionises the way we treat them and our overall experience of them.

I know only too well, that sometimes radical surgery is needed in order to save the health of a body; for as you know I don’t have a duodenum, a gallbladder, most of my pancreas and part of my stomach. Here, Jesus tells us that the same is true for our spiritual lives. It seems pretty obvious that Jesus is speaking symbolically and that he is saying – using typically eastern imagery and hyperbole - that there is a goal in life which is worth any sacrifice necessary to attain it; and this is referred to by Jesus, as ’life’ or interchangeably the ‘kingdom of God’.

Barclay suggests that the Jewish style of parallelism is used by Jesus to explain what he meant by the ‘Kingdom of God’. Barclay explains:

“In parallelism two phrases are set side by side, the one of which either restates the other, or amplifies, explains and develops it.”

This means that one petition is an explanation and amplification of the other. In the Lord’s prayer we therefore have an explanation of what is meant by ‘kingdom of heaven’ and that is ‘… a society upon earth in which God’s will is as perfectly done in earth as it is in Heaven …” i.e. hence on earth as it is in Heaven. To apply this to our passage  it means that it is worth any sacrifice and any discipline or self-denial to do the will of God and that it is only in doing the will of God that ‘… there is real life and ultimate and completely satisfying peace.’

And this can mean drastic surgery!

This passage therefore needs to be taken not literally or purely symbolically, but mostly ‘personally’! It means that it may be necessary to get rid of some habit, to cut out something that might even have become very dear to us, to abandon some pleasure, to be rid of some friendship even in order to become obedient to the will of God. No one can decide this for us; it is something we need to come to terms with ourselves. Barclay explains:

“… if there is anything in our lives which is coming between us and a perfect obedience to the will of God, however dear that thing or person is to us, however much the habit and custom may have made it part of our lives, it must be rooted out.”

This will probably sometimes be painful and drastic, but if we are to know real ‘life’, happiness and fulfilment – it must happen – and we will enter the kingdom of heaven here on earth.

This is such good news and our society needs to be reminded of it. Real life, not mere existence, is to be found when we follow the ways of our Lord. It comes from living the Jesus way and that is for others. I was interested to listen to a Radio 4 programme of an initiative of the Dalai Lama, to challenge people to happiness; and his message is that it comes from leaving self-centredness behind and doing things – good and generous things for others. Jesus was way ahead of the game and this is the message that will recapture the popular mood.

Do simple yet important things for others – deal with their demons and meet their material needs – often simple things like food and drink.

Look after the vulnerable and especially the little children, because in doing so our Lord meets us in that moment.

Get rid of all those things in our lives that make us self-centred, living for ourselves rather than for others – and apply drastic surgery if needs be.

When we do this we add salt to our lives and they become much more tasty and fulfilling. When we do this, we also become attractive to those outside the Church who are hungry and thirsty, looking for refreshment and fulfilment. It is not about the words we use, but our actions that speak louder than words. Let us follow the example of St Francis to his friars: “Everywhere preach the Gospel, but only when necessary use words.” Jesus put it this way:

‘… Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace with one another.’ Amen

Late but here at last ... apologies

Mark 9:38-end (NRSV)

Another Exorcist

³⁸ John said to him, ‘Teacher, we saw someone casting out demons in your name, and we tried to stop him, because he was not following us.’³⁹But Jesus said, ‘Do not stop him; for no one who does a deed of power in my name will be able soon afterwards to speak evil of me.⁴⁰Whoever is not against us is for us. ⁴¹For truly I tell you, whoever gives you a cup of water to drink because you bear the name of Christ will by no means lose the reward.

Temptations to Sin

⁴² ‘If any of you put a stumbling-block before one of these little ones who believe in me, it would be better for you if a great millstone were hung around your neck and you were thrown into the sea. ⁴³If your hand causes you to stumble cut it off; it is better for you to enter life maimed than to have two hands and to go to hell, to the unquenchable fire. ⁴⁵And if your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life lame than to have two feet and to be thrown into hell. ⁴⁷And if your eye causes you to stumble, tear it out; it is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and to be thrown into hell, ⁴⁸where their worm never dies, and the fire is never quenched. ⁴⁹ ‘For everyone will be salted with fire. ⁵⁰Salt is good; but if salt has lost its saltiness, how can you season it? Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace with one another.’

In this reading we encounter the experience of the disciples (and from other documents the experience of the early Christians) of an exorcist who successfully used the name of Jesus for the purposes of exorcism – but without becoming a Christian. Here, the disciples are troubled by this – and by our Lord’s own solution to the problem – as Nineham suggests: “… an exceedingly tolerant solution, indeed so tolerant as to arouse some doubt of its genuiness …” Nineham is of the view that “… if the first Christians had from the beginning such explicit directives to tolerance, it is hard to account for the very intolerant attitude they seem often to have adopted in such cases …’

I do not have the same difficulty! It would appear to be quite logical that such occasions arose in Jesus’ own time and it is well in line with our Lord’s demeanour to welcome the outsider. As Jesus relies: ‘Do not stop him; for no one who does a deed of power in my name will be able soon afterwards to speak evil of me.⁴⁰Whoever is not against us is for us.’

Tolerance, especially of those whose lives and good and pure, is vital for us as Christians. For those who exhort the name of Jesus and never speak evil of him are indeed ‘… on our side …’ I find this every day as some of the loveliest boys I teach are of other faiths. They revere our Lord – but just do not take the final step of accepting him as we do – as God incarnate. But they see him as being of such great importance that they would never speak evil of him.

Indeed, you might recall, when there have been blasphemous plays about Jesus, it has often been the Muslim community that have protested most vehemently and even challenged us Christians for being too weak to stand up for our Lord.

I also love the way Jesus ends this first section; he focuses on the ordinary, because we humans, often prefer to focus on the spectacular. It is often in the simplest things where the presence of Christ becomes most manifest – giving a thirsty person a drink of water.

Who belongs to God is God’s business. I firmly believe that Jesus is who the New Testament claims him to be because this is my experience and I will never deny it. But the same New Testament claims that when a person loves another in an unselfish way, God is present and they dwell in him and he in them (1 John).

It is too easy to try to argue this passage away as some later addition. I believe our Lord wants us to focus on what matters: living the life of tolerance and acceptance for others, especially those who deeply revere his name, even if they do not go as far as we do and we would with them to do.

I know only too well, that sometimes radical surgery is needed in order to save the health of a body; for as you know I don’t have a duodenum, a gallbladder, most of my pancreas and part of my stomach. Here, Jesus tells us that the same is true for our spiritual lives. It seems pretty obvious that Jesus is speaking symbolically and that he is saying – using typically eastern imagery  - that there is a goal in life which is worth  any sacrifice necessary to attain it; and this is referred to by Jesus, as ’life’ or interchangeably the ‘kingdom of God’.

Barclay suggests that the Jewish style of parallelism is used by Jesus to explain what he meant by the ‘Kingdom of God’. Barclay explains:

“In parallelism two phrases are set side by side, the one of which either restates the other, or amplifies, explains and develops it.”

This means that one petition is an explanation and amplification of the other. In the Lord’s prayer we therefore have an explanation of what is meant by ‘kingdom of heaven’ and that is ‘… a society upon earth in which God’s will is as perfectly done in earth as it is in Heaven.” To apply this to our passage  it means that it is worth any sacrifice and any discipline or self-denial to do the will of God and that it is only in doing the will of God that ‘… there is real life and ultimate and completely satisfying peace.’

And this can mean drastic surgery!

This passage therefore needs to be taken not literally or purely symbolically, but mostly ‘personally’! It means that it may be necessary to get rid of some habit, to cut out something that might even have become very dear to us, to abandon some pleasure, to be rid of some friendship even in order to become obedient to the will of God. No one can decide this for us; it is something we need to come to terms with ourselves. Barclay explains:

“… if there is anything in our lives which is coming between us and a perfect obedience to the will of God, however dear that thing or person is to us, however much the habit and custom may have made it part of our lives, it must be rooted out.”

This will probably sometimes be painful and drastic, but if we are to know real ‘life’, happiness and fulfilment – it must happen – and we will enter the kingdom of heaven here on earth.

C F D Moule, the famous New Testament scholar (and teacher of the Archbishop of Canterbury) does not comment at length – as Barclay does - but herewith a few of his thoughts on the Gospel passage for this week.

In verse 42, Jesus refers to the ‘little ones’ and on the surface we think it is a warning against leading children astray – and indeed, I believe, we as teachers need to beware that we do not do this, but Moule puts it a little differently and suggests “Jesus, or God Himself, comes to us in a small child – that is greatness …” Teachers seems to think that they have ‘arrived’ when they teach predominantly in the 6^th Form; university lecturers and professors are valued more highly by society than other teachers, but Moule makes the important point that Jesus comes to us in all people – but especially in children.

But I believe we must beware that we do not consider some people more important than others; rather that ALL people matter. As Moule comments: “Jesus was one of the first ever to see how essentially precious any person is, particularly a young child …” It is true that, in their vulnerability we need to be particularly careful in our treatment of small children, but all people matter and when we see them as the way God comes to us, it revolutionises the way we treat them and our overall experience of them.

The Epistle for next Sunday

James 3.13-4.3, 7-8a

Two Kinds of Wisdom

¹³ Who is wise and understanding among you? Show by your good life that your works are done with gentleness born of wisdom. ¹⁴But if you have bitter envy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not be boastful and false to the truth. ¹⁵Such wisdom does not come down from above, but is earthly, unspiritual, devilish. ¹⁶For where there is envy and selfish ambition, there will also be disorder and wickedness of every kind. ¹⁷But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, willing to yield, full of mercy and good fruits, without a trace of partiality or hypocrisy. ¹⁸And a harvest of righteousness is sown in peace for those who make peace.

Friendship with the World

⁴Those conflicts and disputes among you, where do they come from? Do they not come from your cravings that are at war within you? ²You want something and do not have it; so you commit murder. And you covet something and cannot obtain it; so you engage in disputes and conflicts. You do not have, because you do not ask. 3You ask and do not receive, because you ask wrongly, in order to spend what you get on your pleasures.

⁷Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. 8Draw near to God, and he will draw near to you. Cleanse your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts, you double-minded.

Time constraints have caused me to rely heavily on Barclay for this reflection

It is interesting to see how wisdom and understanding are linked to lifestyle. This is the strongest testimony. I am where I am, theologically, mostly because of the testimony of the lives of those who have ministered to me. Rowan Williams mentioned how he was once very conservative in his views on human sexuality and women priests; but then he looked around and saw the company he was keeping, and he decided to review his ideas. Earthly wisdom seems to vaunt itself and sometimes even pride itself in lavish and selfish lifestyles. People like Bertrand Russell claimed to be such a profound philosopher and indeed was a celebrity of his day; but his personal life was so horrid, that I cannot take him seriously. His ‘opponent’ – on the other hand, F C Coplestone, was such a saint, that even though he is less well known, he is becoming more noted.

We read in this passage a hearkening back to the warning that not many should become teachers. Barclay points out that the scholar and teacher is always under temptation, and in the first instance to arrogance. It was arrogance that was the sin of the Rabbis. The greatest of the Jewish teachers were well aware of this. In ‘The sayings of the Fathers’ we read: “He that is arrogant in decision is foolish, wicked, puffed up in spirit …’ Teachers and especially preachers are therefore in constant danger: they are used to being listened to and having their words accepted; they are used to telling people rather than listening to them. It is difficult to be a preacher and teacher and remain humble.

We are also under temptation to bitterness. Quite often we are men of peace, but our tongues can be as sharp as a razor. It is difficult to argue without passion and to retort without wounding. Barclay writes: “To be utterly convinced of one’s own beliefs without at the same time being bitter to those of others is no easy thing, and yet it is a first necessity of the Christian teacher and scholar.” As we debate things within the Church – it is good to remember this!

Barclay speaks of four characteristics of the WRONG kind of teaching:

·         It is wrong if it is fanatical;

·         It is wrong if it leads to bitterness;

·         It is wrong if it is wrongfully ambitious;

·         It is wrong if it is arrogant.

Real wisdom is of inestimable value, but it is not easy to recognise in today’s world where there are values that are so markedly different to the standards of Christ. James gives us a good reminder of what worldly wisdom is all about, firstly what it is in itself and then he describes it in its effects. Barclay suggests that in itself it is three things:

·         Firstly, it is earthly – it measures success in worldly terms and its aims are worldly;

·         Secondly, it is ‘unspiritual’ - it is characteristic of the natural man. The ancients divided human experience into three parts – body, soul and spirit. At first, we would agree, but they meant something different then. They believed that humans and animals shared both bodies and souls – it was the latter that distinguished both human and animals from other living things; the soul referred to physical life. Today we refer to the ‘soul’ in the same sense as the ancients referred to the ‘spirit’ – that which makes us distinctly human. What James is then saying is that this wrong kind of wisdom is more than an animal kind of thing, or as Barclay suggests: “The wrong kind of wisdom is the wisdom which a man shares with the animals and which is part of his lower nature.”

·         Lastly, it is devilish – its source is not from God, but the devil. It produces, not the kind of people which God delights in, but the kind of situation in which the devil delights.

James then describes how this arrogant and bitter wisdom has an impact on people and communities. Most notably it results in disorder. Instead of bringing people together, it drives them apart; instead of producing peace, it produces strife; instead of producing fellowship it produces disruption in personal relationships. Barclay writes:

“There is a kind of person who is undoubtedly clever; he has an acute brain and a skilful tongue; but his effect in any committee, in any Church, in any group, is to cause trouble, to drive people apart, to stimulate strife, to make trouble, to disturb personal relationships. It is a sobering thing to remember that the wisdom that than man possesses is devilish rather than divine, and that such a man is engaged in Satan’s work and not God’s work.”

We end with James’ description of the nature of true wisdom – as explained in verses 17-18. He uses a number of words to describe it:

·         Pure

·         Peaceable

·         Gentle

·         Willing to yield

·         Full of mercy and good fruits

·         Without a trace of hypocrisy

Wisdom is ‘pure’ - pure enough to approach God because it is cleansed from all ulterior motives, cleansed of the self and so has become pure enough to see God. Barclay comments: “The true wisdom is able to bear the very scrutiny of God.”

Wisdom is peaceable: This is the wisdom that produces right relationships. Clever and arrogant wisdom separates people from each other and takes delight in putting others down. True wisdom brings people closer to each other and so closer to God.

Wisdom is gentle – it knows when it is actually wrong to apply the strict letter of the Law, it knows how to forgive when strict justice gives him the perfect right to condemn. He knows how to make allowances when not to stand up for his rights who knows how to temper justice with mercy that there are greater things in the world than rules and regulations.

Wisdom is ready to yield – not in the sense of being pliable and weak, but in the sense of not being stubborn and of being willing to listen to reason and to appeal. It is not rigid and austere beyond all appeal.

Of course, true wisdom produces the fruits of the Spirit – love, joy peace, patience, gentleness, kindness and self-control and is without hypocrisy.

Barclay is fantastic in his unpacking of the meanings of words and I am once again humbled by his incredible insight and wisdom in this passage.

James describes a world I want to live in – but don’t; he describes the Kingdom of God and that which we, as Christians, ought to be seeking to establish. But sadly, these standards do not often even apply in the Church – and it is these standards that should establish orthodoxy above all else.

Let’s strive to live in the Wisdom of God,

Mark 8.27-end NRSV

Mark 8.27-end

Peter’s Declaration about Jesus

27 Jesus went on with his disciples to the villages of Caesarea Philippi; and on the way he asked his disciples, ‘Who do people say that I am?’²⁸And they answered him, ‘John the Baptist; and others, Elijah; and still others, one of the prophets.’ ²⁹He asked them, ‘But who do you say that I am?’ Peter answered him, ‘You are the Messiah.’ ³⁰And he sternly ordered them not to tell anyone about him.

Jesus Foretells His Death and Resurrection

31 Then he began to teach them that the Son of Man must undergo great suffering, and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests, and the scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again. ³²He said all this quite openly. And Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. ³³But turning and looking at his disciples, he rebuked Peter and said, ‘Get behind me, Satan! For you are setting your mind not on divine things but on human things.’

34 He called the crowd with his disciples, and said to them, ‘If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. ³⁵For those who want to save their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake, and for the sake of the gospel, will save it. ³⁶For what will it profit them to gain the whole world and forfeit their life? ³⁷Indeed, what can they give in return for their life? ³⁸Those who are ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of them the Son of Man will also be ashamed when he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.’

My text for next Sunday is written in Mark 8.36:

³⁶For what will it profit them to gain the whole world and forfeit their life? 

It would appear that Mark starts a whole new section of the Gospel with this passage. Up to this point, Jesus has spent time saying and doing things; and it is all this that has caused people to ask the question: “Who is this man, who can teach as he teaches and do the things that he has done?” Jesus knows this and so puts the question to his closest disciples. Peter gets it right – and proclaims Jesus as the Messiah. One would expect Jesus to meet Peter’s answer with some enthusiasm, but we see in Mark’s account that Jesus’ response is ambiguous; he swears them to silence. It is also apparent that Jesus – at first – avoids using the word ‘Messiah’ for himself. This is probably because Jesus knew, all too well, that there were so many ideas about Messiahship going around that there was a real danger that many would have a misconceived idea of what this meant for him. There is a sense that – as most people expected the Messiah to be a military or political leader that would liberate them from earthly oppression – Jesus was not willing to accept the title and so he forbids (indeed rebukes) the disciples from using it for him. Jesus chooses instead the title ‘Son of Man’. At the time, this would have been less militaristic or political. He also makes haste to define more closely what this meant: ignominy, defeat and suffering – indeed the opposite to what popular views of the Messiah were.

This leads the disciples to rebuke Jesus in return and they try to dissuade Jesus form speaking in this way. This leads to Jesus using even stronger rebuking language because it is vital that the disciples understand. Denis Nineham writes:

“The blistering severity of Jesus reply is evidence enough that what is at stake is a matter of quite central importance …”

In the first instance, what Jesus was predicting was something that ‘must’ take place; there was no choice in the matter. To persuade Jesus to try to avoid these things was to tempt Jesus just as Satan had done in the desert after his Baptism. In short, it was to tempt Jesus to disobey the will of God.

In the second instance, it would appear that the disciples did not want Jesus to suffer because they would feel embarrassed to be seen as a follower of a Messiah who suffers. (This was a time of many different ‘Messiahs’!) It would go against the grain. Spectacular victories would seem ‘better’; suffering brings no kudos and offends the pride of natural man who would ask: “What is the point?” Nineham suggests that the reaction of the disciples reveals that “… their minds and wills are governed by the standards of this world, of the unredeemed natural man …”

They need to be taught that “God thinks otherwise …” and in ways that are often in complete reverse of the standards of the world. This truth needs to be known by everyone, and so here, there is no need for secrecy. The path to true ‘life’ comes through trusting in God and being obedient to His will. This can imply suffering in this world – even death. Our behaviour will often not make sense to those in the world. But, while this life is precious, it is nothing compared with the life to come.

Jesus being the Messiah means him being the ‘Son of man’ and this implies redemptive suffering and death. The disciples’ failure to understand was a sign of their hardened hearts and their domination by the standards of this world. The purpose of this passage is not to explain what happened when Jesus was first recognised as the Messiah, rather, to show all what is involved and demanded whenever this recognition takes place. To see Jesus as he really is and to know how to respond “… is always a gift of God in Christ …”

Jesus being the Son of man has implications for his followers as well.

We rejoice because our salvation is all of grace; unearned and undeserved, God’s gift to us. But as J C Ryle rightly suggests: “… all who accept this great salvation, must prove the reality of their faith by carrying the cross after Christ.” Part of this means upholding the faith which the world despises and a lifestyle which the world ridicules as too strict and too ‘righteous’. We need to crucify the flesh, mortify the deeds of the body, to fight daily with the devil, to come out from the world, and ‘… to lose their lives, if needful, for Christ’s sake and for the Gospel’s …’ Ryle rightly understands that these are hard sayings (he was writing in the 19^th Century, it is even more so in our world of today). Or is it?

Our ‘credit crunch’ has made people realise that the so-called easy life is not that simple, and that having an abundance of ‘things’ is not the path to fulfilment and happiness. Our Lord knew that being one of his disciples would be difficult, but he also promises to give us the strength to life the life that will bring us blessing and fulfilment, beyond measure. Because what matters is not only the body, but also the soul – what the translators of the NRSV refer to as ‘… life …’ (verse 36)

Our ‘life’ is made up of more than things; it is made up of relationships – with others but especially with God. Being in relationship with others is sometimes going to mean facing difficulties, it is certainly going to require selflessness a denial of our selves; it is also going to mean sacrifice. Being in relationships - those that bring blessing and fulfilment to ourselves and others – certainly requires sacrificial living, a sense of giving of ourselves. When we do this, we discover what real living means. Mother Teresa discovered this, as did countless others. I prefer the translation ‘life’ rather than ‘soul’ in verse 26 as the latter sometimes distracts us thinking that what matters here is our eternal lives. Even Ryle suggests that these verses should be seen in the light of going through things becoming worth it, because in the end our souls will live on in eternity. While this is all true, there is a danger of living for eternity only and not now also.  There is a sense that one might miss out on what it means to live ‘now’ – but living according to the way of Christ and not of the world.

Verse 38 also poses an interesting challenge. Many believe that they need to bring Jesus into every situation and conversation, for if they don’t it means that they are being ashamed of him. This, for me, leads to much embarrassment when this is wholly inappropriate, and in my view, brings our faith into ridicule especially when over-simplified solutions are suggested to complex problems – e.g. ‘… the Bible teaches …’

The bottom line for me is that this sort of behaviour has done so much harm, that people in Britain, i.e. those outside the faith, automatically switch off when they hear the words ‘Bible’ and ‘Jesus’ and so we need to opt for different tactics, indeed more challenging and even more costly ways. We need to live the life – walk the walk – in order to earn the right to talk the talk. Words can be easy, but I believe our Lord is calling us to carry of Cross of sacrificial living.

Words come easy, living the life is more of a challenge, but, especially in today’s world it is vital that people see how sacrificial living, the way of the cross, leads to fulfilment and real ‘life’. We need to show that we are not ashamed of Jesus’ words, by living them. As St Francis put it: “Take every opportunity to preach the Gospel, and where necessary, use words!”

It is quite possible for a person to make a massive success of their lives but in another sense to be living a life that is not worth living; the difference lies where one puts one’s values. Barclay offers the following thoughts:

(i)                 A person can sacrifice honour for profit. This can happened when people desire material things and when one is not over over-particular about how we get them. People used false scales in the ancient past, but there are a number of different ways in which the same principal applies still today. The question is: “How does life’s balance sheet look in the sight of God?

(ii)               A man my sacrifice principle for popularity. Barclay writes: “It may happen that the easy-going, agreeable, pliable man will save himself a lot of trouble.” But in the end the question we will all have to face will be: “What does God think of it? It is not the verdict of public opinion, but the verdict of God that settles destiny.”

(iii)             A person may sacrifice the lasting things for cheap things. It is always easier to have a cheap success. Authors can sacrifice writing a real masterpiece for the sake of cheap success. There are many other examples. Barclay concludes: “But life has a way of revealing the true values and condemning the false as the years pass on. A cheap thing never lasts.”

We may sacrifice eternity for the moment. We can avoid all sorts of mistakes if we always looked at things in the light of eternity.  Barclay concludes: “There is many a thing pleasant for the moment, but ruinous in the long run. The test of eternity, the test of seeking to see the thing as God sees it, is the realist test of all.” If we see things as God sees them, we will never spend our lives on the things that lose our souls. Jesus put it this way as recorded in Mark 8.36:

³⁶For what will it profit them to gain the whole world and forfeit their life?

Amen.