On feet (for Maundy Thursday)

 

 

Psalm 116

John 13:1-17, 31b-35

 

I think we should talk about feet.

They can sometimes be a bit smelly, but they seem to matter.

 

This meal in John chapter 13, closely parallels the meal in John chapter 12.

Both are in the context of the Passover and there’s talk of Jesus’ death.

Both contain a symbol action relating to Jesus and feet.

Here Jesus washes his disciples’ feet.

And in the previous chapter Mary anointed Jesus’ feet.

 

In fact, in John chapter 11, Mary had fallen at Jesus’ feet and called him “Lord”.

There is the call of the gospel:

Jesus Christ is Lord.

Will you fall at his feet?

Will you humble yourself before him, worship him, and pledge your allegiance to him, and look to him for his mercy?

 

Further, in Luke chapter 10, we find Mary sat at the Lord’s feet listening to what he said.

Sitting at Jesus’ feet, listening to his word, is the place of discipleship:

Some would have said that a woman’s place was in the kitchen, but Mary was at her Lord’s feet learning from his word.

You may remember the incident.

Mary’s sister, Martha, is distracted by all the preparations that have to be made for hosting Jesus and his disciples.

Martha is resentful.

She complains to Jesus: “Lord, don’t you care that my sister has left me to do the work by myself?

Tell her to help me!”

“Martha, Martha,” the Lord answered, “you are worried and upset about many things, but few things are needed—or indeed only one.

 Mary has chosen what is better, and it will not be taken away from her.”

 

Jesus is Lord.

He will put all his enemies under his feet and make them his footstool.

 

But what kind of Lord is he?

 

It’s worth saying that Jesus himself would of course have had smelly dirty feet.

At another meal in Luke chapter 7, a sinful woman had washed Jesus’ feet with her tears and wiped them with her hair.

Jesus pointed out that no one had given him water for his feet.

 

Jesus is the down to earth God.

He got his hands and his feet dirty.

He was truly made man, made flesh.

 

Jesus didn’t float around above the muck and the grime.

He mucked in.

 

In the Bible the earth is under God’s curse because of human sin.

The serpent has to crawl on his belly and eat the dust.

Human beings are taken from the ground and return to the ground.

“Dust you are, and to dust you shall return.”

 

And Jesus is made mortal.

Jesus too is heading for the grave and that anointing in John 12 was in preparation for his burial.

He was anointed both as king and corpse.

He comes to take on himself the curse of sin, to share in and un-do the dust of death.

 

Influenced by Satan, Judas will lift up his heal against Jesus.

But Jesus will crush Satan’s head under his foot.

 

Jesus will of course triumph over sin and Satan and death.

The LORD will deliver his soul from death, his eyes from tears, his feet from stumbling, that he may walk before the LORD in the land of the living.

 

Our chapter is one that speaks of comings and goings.

And Jesus washing his disciples’ feet is an acted parable of his incarnation, death, resurrection and ascension.

He has come from God his Father and is returning to him.

Jesus goes from his place at the table and back to it, just as he has come from heaven and will return to heaven.

And Jesus takes off his outer garment and wraps himself in a towel.

Jesus laid aside his glory and was clothed in human flesh.  

Jesus will be stripped for his crucifixion and wrapped in clothes for his burial.

He will lay down his life only to take it up again.

He has come from the Father and will return to the Father.

 

In chapter 12, you may remember, Judas objected to the expense of the anointing of Jesus’ feet.

But Jesus will pour out not expensive perfume, but himself, his own precious blood, to make his disciples clean.

 

By making his apparently pious objection to the Lord Jesus washing his feet, Peter is becoming like Judas in the previous chapter.

Judas is going to betray Jesus.

Peter is going to deny him.

Both Judas and Peter stand as warnings to us not to resist the necessity of Jesus’ death and burial.

 

For Peter, his conversation with Jesus must have recalled his conversation with Jesus at Caesarea Philippi where Jesus had said that he must suffer and die.

Peter had dared to rebuke Jesus about the cross, and had been rebuked in turn.

This rejection of the cross and of the foot washing is another “get behind me, Satan”, moment.

 

Jesus is extraordinarily strong and particular with Peter here.

Jesus absolutely insists on washing Peter’s feet and says:

“Unless I wash you, you have no part with me.”

 

So we must fall at the feet of the Lord Jesus.

We must sit at Jesus’ feet as his disciples and learn his word.

He calls us to serve him:

We must go his way.

But first we must allow him to serve us.

We must admit our need of him.

We must let him wash our feet and make us clean.

We must learn this vital lesson that the Christian faith is about what Jesus has DONE for us, before it’s what we DO for him.

Jesus must be our crucified Saviour, before he can be our risen Lord.

Jesus must cleanse us before we can serve him.

We must trust him and then obey him.  

 

Jesus’ life must be poured out for us.

His blood must make us clean.

The way of the cross is essential:

Without it there is no cleansing, no fellowship, no discipleship, no part in Jesus, no resurrection, no glory.

 

We cannot have a cost-less, cross-less, cosy, comfortable Christianity.

The Christian message is not you’re all right and I’m all right.

It insists that Jesus must wash us and make us clean.

It’s appropriate, then, that a baptismal wash is always the beginning of a Christian life.

The Christian faith is humiliating.

It says to you and me that we are dirty and we need a wash!

Jesus insists on it.

Get your feet out!

Yes, they smell, but Jesus must wash them.

There is no other way.

 

But with all that in place, Jesus does then show us what to do.

He calls us to follow in his way.

He gives us our marching orders:

“Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another’s feet.

I have set you an example that you should do as I have done.”

 

Jesus’ cross is far more than an example, but it is an example.

 

The position of Lord, Messiah and Saviour of the World is taken.

But Jesus the Lord of all and the servant of all calls on us to serve too.

The one who died for us says we must be willing to die for him.

The crucified one calls us to take up our cross.  

 

Jesus called himself the Way and he calls us to come and follow him.

The Christian faith is often described as a race or a pilgrimage.

The Bible speaks of our walk as the way we live.

And so Jesus calls on us afresh to put our feet on his way, to walk with him.

 

2 John takes up Jesus’ command that we love one another and speaks of it as walking in Jesus’ commandments:

John says to the church:

 ^“It has given me great joy to find some of your children walking in the truth, just as the Father commanded us. 

⁵ And now, dear lady, I am not writing you a new command but one we have had from the beginning. 

I ask that we love one another. 

⁶ And this is love: that we walk in obedience to his commands. 

As you have heard from the beginning, his command is that you walk in love.”

 

May we fall afresh at Jesus’ feet, which have borne the dust of the earth and the curse of sin for us.

We give thanks that Jesus has crushed the serpent’s head and that he is putting all his enemies under his feet.

But we are also thankful that he came as one who serves.

We admit our need of him.

We allow him to wash our feet and make us clean.

It is Jesus’ service of us which allows us to serve others.

Jesus’ love enables us to love.

We commit ourselves afresh today to walking with Jesus in his way, in the way of the cross which is also the way of life.

And we pray that we might stand firm with our feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace. Amen.

Holy Week and Easter Services and Events 2022

 

Holy Week and Easter Services and Events 2022

 

Maundy Thursday 14^th April 7:30pm at St John’s, Bodle Street Green – Joint Benefice Holy Communion

 

Good Friday 15^th April – An Hour at the Cross

 

10am at Bodle Street Green

 

12pm at Dallington

 

3pm at Warbleton

 

Saturday 16^th April – Easter Eggstravaganza for Children and Families – 2pm at Warbleton Church – crafts, songs, refreshments, Easter story and chocolate. Children must be accompanied by an adult

 

Easter Sunday 17^th April

 

9:30am All Age Family Service with Holy Communion at Bodle Street

 

11am All Age Family Service with Holy Communion at Dallington

 

11am All Age Family Service with Holy Communion at Warbleton

 

Easter Monday 18^th April – The Club With No Name Youth Club Ramble – Warbleton - 10am - 2 to 3 hours, followed by BBQ - Jeremy Cooke to speak. Contact us for more details.

 

All welcome

A brief sermonette on the Palm Sunday Passion Reading from Luke 23 Year C

 

Palm Sunday 2022

Luke (Year C)

Dramatized Passion Reading: Luke 23:1-49

 

Introduction

 

There’s so much we could say about the Gospel accounts of Jesus’ passion, which are at the very heart of our faith.

But as we’re going to have a long reading, we’ll have quite a short sermon.

Just before we have this dramatized reading, I’m going to suggest a couple of themes to look out for, though of course there are many others too, and it might be something else that particularly strikes you today.

 

One thing to think about is kingship.

Who is the true king here?

What’s he like?

What’s his kingdom like?

In this account, we hear about Pilate, the representative of Cesar, the ruler of one of the greatest empires there’s ever been.

And we meet King Herod, who becomes friends with Pilate.

And of course we’re shown King Jesus and we hear something about his Kingdom.

 

And then I’d suggest you also look out for a second theme of justice and righteousness.

Who does the right thing here?

Who deserves what?

Who’s guilty and who’s innocent?

 

After we’ve had our reading, I’m going to say something briefly about Jesus’ conversation with the dying thief, the details of which are given only in Luke’s Gospel, which we’re reading from this year.  

 

* * *

 

Sermon

 

Jesus is crucified, in part, because he claims to be the Christ, or the Messiah, the anointed one of God, God’s chosen king.

He’s falsely accused of opposing the payment of taxes to Caesar.

The Jewish leaders want Pilate to agree that King Jesus is a threat to King Caesar.  

Pilate cross examines Jesus about whether or not he is “the king of the Jews.”

The soldiers ridicule him by dressing him in an elegant robe, like a parody of kingly splendour.

The bystanders mock him:

They want to see him save himself if he is the Christ of God.

The written notice of the charge against Jesus, hung above the cross says, “This is the king of the Jews.”

 

So Jesus is dying as the king.

A king rejected and scorned, but a king nevertheless.

Of course, we know Jesus is the true and rightful King, the Messiah.

 

And the dying thief, amazingly, can see it.

Jesus is utterly defeated and broken.

He’s dying the most terrible death the Roman Empire could devise.

And yet the thief can see past the squalor and the pain.

He says to Jesus, “remember me when you come into your kingdom.”

The thief knows that Jesus is the king.

And amazingly he also seems to know that death won’t be the end for Jesus.

Jesus is obviously dying – but by dying he is coming in to his kingdom.

Jesus is clearly a very different sort of king with a unique kingdom.

 

Jesus is the king who dies because he will not save himself.

He dies to save others.

And he has the power to bring them into his kingdom.

 

And then to our second theme of justice and righteousness, guilt and innocence.

Pilate can find no basis for a charge against Jesus.

Neither can Herod.

It’s obvious to everyone that Jesus has done nothing deserving death.

“What crime has the committed?”, Pilate asks again in desperation.

We’re repeatedly told that there are no grounds for the death penalty.

The Jewish leaders and the crowd have lost the argument for Jesus’ guilt and they’re just reduced to shouting louder.

We could paraphrase it: “We don’t care if there’s no evidence and you’ve found him not guilty: Crucify Him Anyway!”

The Centurion in charge of the crucifixion says about Jesus: “Surely this was a righteous man”.

 

So Jesus is a king coming into his kingdom by his death.

He’s also innocent and righteous.

He is suffering unjustly.

He does not deserve death.  

 

The dying thief sees all this.

And he’s willing to admit his own guilt.

He says to the other criminal: “We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong.”

 

Jesus is the innocent one dying the death of guilty.

 

This incident with Barabbas, the insurrectionist and murderer, serves to illustrate the point.

We might say it's like a mini-parable made history. 

It’s a little drama which shows what the cross achieves.  

The innocent Jesus takes the place of the guilty Barabbas.

Here’s the gospel acted out:

The guilty Barabbas deserves punishment.

But the innocent Jesus dies, and Barabbas goes free.

There’s a reversal, a swap: the innocent for the guilty.  

There’s the Christian doctrine of the cross in this apparently incidental accident of history.

 

God has surely arranged it to show us that Jesus is dying in the place of all those guilty sinners who deserve punishment, who will put their trust in him.

Jesus is dying for us, in our place, instead of us:

The innocent one, bearing our guilt and punishment, that we might go free.

He dies, that we might live.

Did Barabbas ever realise any of that, I wonder?

 

The dying thief certainly had some idea what he ought to do.

He has the insight and courage to ask for the mercy of king Jesus.

He can make no pleas in mitigation.

He can offer no good works:

He can’t promise to turn over a new leaf and live from now on as a reformed character.

But he simply prays: “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom”.

 

And that brief prayer for mercy is enough.

The thief somehow perceives that all that is necessary is that King Jesus should remember him with kindness.

Jesus promises him: “I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise.”

 

And for any of us, whatever we’ve done, the assurance of heaven is only ever a prayer away.

That prayer of faith, looking to Jesus in simple trust, asking for the mercy of the king, is one which Jesus will always answer:

“Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.”

“I tell you the truth, you will be with me in paradise.”

 

Jesus the righteous king died to save guilty sinners like me and you.

As we marvel again at the crucified king this Easter, may God give us the insight and faith of the dying thief, that we too might throw ourselves on the mercy of Jesus. Amen.  

A Big Vision for Small Groups

 This talk for Chichester Diocesan Evangelical Fellowship Spring Conference 2022 is 50 minutes worth your time for small group leaders and members: http://www.chichesterdef.org.uk/spring-2022.html

John Webster lectures

The Kantzer Lectures 2007 Perfection & Presence: God With Us, according to the Christian Confession

Lecture 1: Introduction  | LISTEN

Lecture 2: God’s Perfect Life  |  LISTEN

Lecture 3: God Is Everywhere but Not Only Everywhere  |  LISTEN

Lecture 4: Immanuel  |  LISTEN

Lecture 5: The Presence of Christ Exalted  |  LISTEN

Lecture 6: He Will Be With Them  |  LISTEN

(A number of the other series look very interesting too)

These lectures are a bit technical at times but very worth the time and effort.

They have quite a lot to say about dogmatic methodology as well as the substance of the issue of God’s presence.

Some partial / unsystematic and possibly erring jottings on these lectures: (I could have typed out rather more, Not normally exact quotations)

Webster argues that tautology is a virtue, a necessity, in theology. God is God. He is singular, original and particular. He cannot be understood entirely by way of contrast or comparison. He must reveal himself and tell us who he is. Dogmatic work is done in his presence under his Lordship, in response to who he and what he has done and said. We do not so much seek after God as respond to God giving himself to us. God himself specifies his being before us. He must remain God.

 

Better to think of God as uncaused rather than God as self-caused.

 

God’s perfection is his particular self-existent majesty in the relations of his being as Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

 

The Mission of the Persons are temporal processions which repeat the eternal relations of origin, their eternal processions. God’s perfection is not self-enclosed. It has a term and an energy. Missions follow processions. God’s works repeat or externalise his eternal relations of being. God enacts his completeness. Neither whence nor wither can be separated off. God’s perfection includes his presence. The relations of origin turn out to be charged with economic potency.

 

Reformed Federal Theology from the late 16^th C onwards: The Covenant of Redemption / The Pact of Salvation

 

The perfect God, Father, Son and Spirit, is and is present. He has life in himself and he gives life.

 

Dogmatics give reasoned service to the gospel.

 

Dogmatics is governed by a principle of “derivation”. Dogmatics is study of God and all things in relation to God. Creaturely time is an economy formed by the Creator and the end of creation.  Giver and gift make theology possible. Theology is to teach God because it is taught by God. Recovery of beginning with God may be the sine quo non of theology.

 

Sequence. Topics must be considered in their proper order. The material sequence is God and all things in relation to him. If we seek to go from creatures to God, then we may distort both creation and God. Exposition may begin at different points, but we must relate all things to God as their beginning and end.

 

Inclusion. This does not diminish but includes the creaturely. Creatures are only properly understood in the presence of God.   

 

John Webster said that he once agreed with Colin Gunton that “life” might be the best overall way of expounding the gospel because God has life in himself and bestows life. “Life” is related to creation, redemption and eschaton.

 

John Webster argued that our theology is not that of the eternal God nor that of the blessed in glory. It is always a theology of and for pilgrims – limited, contextual. We can never give a complete and perfect picture. God’s revelation means we can make affirmations, but we also have to hedge them with negatives.

 

God’s presence - Immensity and ubiquity – omnipresence – local presence – presence on the basis of promise – free relation – purposeful presence

 

Definitive presence?

 

No bodily / spatial limitation / dimension / circumscription – not locally or by extension

 

God is simple and therefore everywhere always wholly present as himself – as Lord, creator, sustainer

 

Providence – ordered by creation and eschaton – a work of God’s love for God’s covenant purposes of fellowship with creatures – Calvin: God’s hands as well as his eyes – God conserves, accompanies and governs his creatures

 

Providence finds it consummation under the rule of Christ. God’s providence and rule cannot be separated off from his covenant purposes.

 

God’s presence in the special history of the covenant – God’s free faithful and commanding presence for God’s creatures to have fellowship with him – temporal, spatial, social, institutions, bounded, visible but also mysterious

 

God’s taking / calling / choosing create a special history by the Word of God beyond merely creaturely relations – free sovereign covenant election presence decree – unconditional ex nihilo grace, uncaused origination

 

Not merely a fiat / decree of separation and segregation but the teleological energy of a history – a temporal enactment – the steadfast love and presence of God – ongoing fellowship with God – condition, status and summons, vocation, obedience, conformity to nature

 

Sin as negation of the covenant, unbeing, absence

 

 Sinners repudiate God and their own being – sin is to choose death, unbeing

 

Our freedom is caused and given to us. It is not a freedom of spontaneity or counter-causal (against another will). God’s freedom enables our freedom. God’s causality of us and our causality are two ways of talking about the same thing which need not be played off against one another.

 

The incarnation as the great moment / test case for a theology of perfection and presence

 

What needs to be said / corrected in a particular setting? Danger of over reaction – keep in mind the overall shape of revelation and the proportion and arrangement of topics

 

Person, office and work must be held together – the metaphysics and purpose of incarnation are related    

 

The gospel requires the gospels. Christ’s presence with us flows from his presence in his incarnate ministry.

 

What does it mean to say: (1) The Word (2) Became (3) Flesh?

 

God remains God. Incarnation does not erase the difference which the perfect God is. It identifies the point at which it becomes visible in time.  

 

The perfect inner life of the Triune God must be seen not as a contradiction of the presence of God in time but as its condition. The Word became flesh. The eternal perfect divine Word of God is present. The Word is encountered in the history of Jesus as he has assumed flesh and is untied with it. The incarnation is a movement and confirmation of the Lordship and majesty of the Word. The Word becomes flesh changelessly without diminution of the deity.

 

The Word remains the free Lord of time and flesh and is not lessened by them.

 

The Word is not imprisoned within flesh. The Word remains free in the act of becoming. God is self-derived and self-determined to be incarnate. The Word is eternally to be made flesh. The Word’s stretching forth to become flesh is in keeping with the Son’s generation from the Father.

 

Word and flesh are asymmetrical. The Word exists without the flesh but the flesh does not exist without the Word. The Logos is the subject. The flesh is the predicate.

 

Jesus’ history is his mission, a function of his office. It is purposive according to the divine must.

 

Jesus’ human history is within Israel: it is the re-enactment and fulfilment of the covenant. Jesus is the faithful Son of God.

 

Jesus is baffling, oblique. He must reveal himself.

 

Jesus is prophetic. He speaks. He gives a new teaching with authority.

 

Jesus decisively brings the kingdom, unmasking his enemies, bring in his rule and Lordship.  The Kingdom of God comes and triumphs in and by Jesus.

 

Aquinas on the altar of earth which must not be ascended by steps (Exodus 20:24ff). Christ is our fleshly human altar of earth. He is divine and equal with the Father so we cannot go up to the altar by steps.

 

God’s perfection perfects.

 

The resurrection as historical apologetic is a problem if it is known not as the self-manifestation of God (his revelation) but as something to be proved by the inquirer.

 

God does not wait upon reason to establish him but God is known through God alone.

 

The historical resurrected Christ (he rose) must be related to his presence (he is risen). We need a theology of the living Christ present with us.

 

Resurrection should be related to ascension, heavenly session and eschaton. Easter Day looks ahead. Christ is contemporary and present, not just the object of probabilistic historical investigation.

 

The resurrection is the intersection of the pre-and post-presence of the Son. The resurrection points back and forward. The resurrection is related to the eternal relation of Father and Son.

 

The resurrection is natural and necessary. Of course! Not-resurrection of God the Son would be impossible.

 

The unrecognizability of the risen Christ who is then recognised shows that Christ is known only by his own act and gift. Jesus reveals himself and makes himself known. The exalted one gives himself as Lord.

 

The exalted Son turns to creatures in grace. He makes himself present to us.

 

The risen Christ is king, prophet and priest. He rules and speaks and intercedes for us.

 

Hermeneutics needs to remember that we read the Word of God in His presence. The Word is communicative, eloquent and the Truth. The canon is His Lordly address, His living voice, not just a complicated negotiation between interpreter and text. Reading the Bible is simpler and more alarming than we sometimes imagine. Christ summons and claims us by the Scriptural ambassadors.

 

More than theoretical worrying about hermeneutics, we must read. We must be attentive to one who speaks through a text.

 

We read canonically. Scripture is in one sense (a complex, historically situated) single united speech-act read traditionally. The Spirit has guided the church’s reading of this text (though not infallibly). We read with a seriousness about the 5^th Commandment.

 

We must embrace a Christological Maximalism. As Barth once said to Bultmann, Christ must stand out in gigantic proportions. He is not plastic or potential but wholly actual in his presentation to us.

 

The resurrection and exaltation of Christ has ontological, noetic and ethical implications. We are raised with Christ to know him in the Spirit for good works prepared for us to walk in.

 

Fellowship of creatures with the Creator which maintains the Creator-creature distinction.

 

For some, ecclesiology has become a kind of First Theology and has expanded into all areas of dogmatics. Communion koinonia has become a potent concept in theological and ecumenical discussion: Trinity as Communion; Communion of creatures and Creator; saving Communion in the church. The church is salvation in social form.

 

Henri de Lubac on the separation of nature and super-nature, form and inner reality etc., dualisms introduced in 12^th C – radicalised and reduced by John Milbank, On The Name of Jesus – The priority of ecclesiology over Christology and atonement – their function in bringing about a new polity of which Jesus is the founder, a New Moses. An ecclesiological deduction of Christology and the atonement. God incarnate is found in the practices of the gospel.

 

To deduce Christ from the church reverses the evangelical logic of 1 John 1. The beginning is not the church but God, the eternal life of Father and Son. Ecclesiology flows from theology proper. Testimony and proclamation flow from the manifestation of the Word resulting in fellowship. Ecclesiology has its place in this sequence and economy. It cannot be a first theology.

 

There is a we with God which answers to God with us.

 

What kind of visible polity is the church? What are its creaturely acts? What is this social history in time on the basis of the gospel realities? What is the depth of its reality as the Household of God built on the Apostles and Prophets with Christ Himself as the chief cornerstone?

 

Derivation and inclusion.

 

Theology leads to economy. God creates the life of creatures. The doctrine of God is imperfectly grasped unless all his works are included.

 

We must guard the gratuity of the church and the difference between God and the church. The shock of the existence of the people of God must not be muffled.

 

 Arguably the metaphor of the church as the body of Christ is made to do too much work in dogmatics.

 

What would an ecclesiology that started with (election or) Christ’s exaltation look like?

 

Gratuity (free, sovereign), proper externality of Christ and church as creature. The Son of God is in heaven. Christ maintains his identity. He is not mixed or confused with the church. Jesus is Lord of the church.

 

Robert Jenson Systematic Theology – embodied availability. Assembled church with her the sacraments as the way Christ is available in the world. Jenson asks where the risen one turns to find himself. But isn’t this an odd question to ask of God? The bread and the cup make Christ distinct from and available to the church.

 

Jesus is the head of the body, the firstborn from the dead, the origin who is pre-eminent. Fellowship but not confusion. The Son creates the church but he does not thereby create himself.

 

 The church is a human society which keeps us in the society of God. To participate in this fellowship is to have fellowship with the Triune God on the way to heaven. This visible human fellowship takes form in particular creaturely forms and acts, an order of signs, accessories used by God to keep the church. God’s secret power is at work by the Spirit in the church, dwelling with them as the Lord who has his own place.

 

In the sphere of the church, the Spirit acts by Scripture and sacrament.

 

The church is the creature of the Word, a hearing church which lives in the domain of the Word. The church proclaims, instructs and exhorts because it has heard and continues to hear.

 

The church is most herself as she prays for the coming of the Holy Spirit.  

And Twitter tells me I should also listen to:

The Hayward Lectures 2009  Creator, Creation, and Creature: God and God and His World

Oliver Burkeman Four Thousand Weeks

 

Oliver Burkeman Four Thousand Weeks: Time and How To Use It (Bodley Head / Penguin, 2021) 273pp

 

I have possibly saved you a little of your four thousand weeks by reading this book for you, but you might enjoy it and gain from giving it a little more time. For those in a hurry, it comes with five application questions towards the end (p220ff) and an appendix of “ten rules for embracing your finitude.”  

 

Burkeman quotes Carl Jung’s advice (in a letter of 15^th December 1933 to Frau V.) that if one wants one single, definitive way to live, one ought to join the [Roman] Catholic Church “where they will tell you what’s what.” Burkeman refers to the book of Ecclesiastes and more than once, I seem to recall, to the teaching of Jesus, but there is no doubt in my mind that this book would have benefited from more Bible and perhaps a little less Zen. Nevertheless, there is certainly wisdom here for those with ears to hear, even if the Christian would have fundamental and ultimate differences and not follow him in everything.

 

Burkeman argues that we should give up on the false illusion that we might somehow master time, gain perfect control of our lives and get everything done. Rather he suggests that if we honestly embrace our finitude (even to some extent) we might have more "bright sadness" (Richard Rohr), "stubborn gladness" (Jack Gilbert) or "sober joy" (Bruce Ballard) and focus a bit more on some stuff that really matters.

 

Some of the headings might give a flavour of the book: In the Long Run, We’re All Dead; Choosing to Choose; The Limit-Embracing Life; The Efficiency Trap; Facing Finitude; Becoming a Better Procrastinator; We Never Really Have Time; We Are Here; Rediscovering Rest; Cosmic Insignificance Therapy.

 

Work tends to expand to fill the time available. Efficient people often get given more responsibility. Every email to which we reply might generate a couple more replies.

 

There is no end to what we might do and we cannot do it all.

 

He urges a good kind of procrastination which enables us to say “no” and only pursue maybe three important on-going projects at any one time. In fact, is there actually one big thing you really want to do?

 

Probably the only way actually to get what matters to us done is to do it: today! Perhaps if we could give our first hour to what matters to us each day we would make real progress.

 

Some things, some good and attractive things, will need to be neglected. The problem is not necessarily so much that there is lots of annoying trivia in our lives we can’t eliminate (the dishwasher is always going to need emptying) but perhaps that we are spending time on our sixth or seventh priority rather than the most important stuff.

 

Probably it will not be catastrophic to neglect some things. And even if there is a cost, say to not satisfying all the expectations of your boss or your neighbours, that cost might be worth paying for some greater end. Burkeman urges that we decide in advance what to fail at and practice strategic underachievement in some areas. Pick your battles.  

 

If there is good procrastination (a level of care in choosing some things and neglecting or delaying others), a negative kind of procrastination (perfectionism or paralysis) is to be avoided. We might do well to ignore The Fear of Missing Out (FOMO) and commit to some stuff, even if we imagine there might be other better stuff out there. We do well to be present and to live life, rather than spend all our time imagining what might be. Perhaps we should just take the next step and do what seems good, right or necessary rather than fretting too much about what it is.   

 

In a way our life experience consists only of that to which we give our attention. We are often distracted (from what we think matters to us), sometimes willfully and sometimes by ourselves. It is surprisingly hard, but worthwhile, to sometimes slow down, be calm and present and do nothing. Face reality and how it feels without evasion.

 

We should not limit our ambition, holding off until some future point when we expect to be really competent and in control. Burkeman says: "I sometimes think of my journey through adulthood to date as one of incrementally discovering the truth that there is no institution, no walk of life, in which everyone isn't just winging it, all the time. Growing up, I assumed that the newspaper on the breakfast table must have been assembled by people who truly knew what they were doing; then I got a job at a newspaper." (p224f)

 

There is stuff to do which of intrinsic value. Making your family a nutritious meal is worth doing even if it wont win you a Nobel prize. We may find novelty and value even in the mundane if we can do it with some level of care, attention and dedication. Probably many of us ought to focus a bit less on work and more on our key relationships: how might they be if we gave them more focused and thoughtful engagement? Be curious. Wonder. Hope.  

 

Try embracing spontaneous generosity. If you have a positive impulse, why not follow it? Do something good or kind.

 

If a few people enjoy your novel, maybe it is worth writing even if you turn out not to be the next Tolstoy. And it may be that much of your Life’s Work may not have obvious, quick or complete results. We can only live the lives we are given and, in a sense, we are all like the medieval cathedral builders who never got to see the full fruit of their labours.

Hans Boersma, Five Things Theologians Wish Biblical Scholars Knew

 

Hans Boersma, Five Things Theologians Wish Biblical Scholars Knew (IVP Academic USA, 2021)

152pp pb

https://www.ivpress.com/five-things-theologians-wish-biblical-scholars-knew

I’ve enjoyed Hans Boersma’s book which aims to address the perceived deficits of some (especially evangelical) contemporary academic biblical scholarship. Though I think in fact some of the book is some of Boersma’s favourite themes and things he has written about before (such as the nature of Scripture and contemplation of God in Christ). If the book covers some things Boersma gas been meaning to say, I don’t think that detracts from its value. The book isn’t full of specific examples of the sort of thing he wants to correct or supplement but at times I thought he was on to something. At other times the best evangelical bible scholars would no doubt say “yes, and Amen: we know that and that’s what we try to do”. So, you will have to judge whether or not the cap fits and ought to be worn. But I thought it a stimulating and worthwhile read. The introduction and the first chapter “no Christ, no Scripture” was especially rich and compelling.

Boersma’s main thesis is that biblical scholarship can sometimes be too historical, purely naturalistic and this world-focused. He argues that we should not read the Bible just like any other book but as sacramental, a means of grace mediating of the presence of Christ. Although we want the scholar working away in her study, our reading should be neither individualistic or elitist.

Boersma is of course concerned that we try to work out what Paul meant when he wrote to the Corinthians, but he doesn’t think that is the main or ultimate goal of biblical studies. Christ is the goal and substance of Scripture. He advocates for a patristic sort of exegesis which is attentive to the literal meaning of the text but which sees great depth and usefulness in the Bible. The divine authorship of Scripture is primary and the providence of God has governed both history and text. Boersma thinks typology and allegory are important in understanding God’s revelation and purposes in and through the Bible.  

We read the Bible rightly only from and for the love of Christ. Virtue shapes and is shaped by our Bible reading. And the starting point and goal for right reading is the heavenly contemplation God in Christ. Keeping in mind the ends and goals of the Bible and of the Christian life are vital for determining how we read.   

Our metaphysical and theological presuppositions are important. We all have them and a purely neutral reading is neither possible nor desirable.

The church down the ages and around the world is the primary interpretive community. These books are read above all in the liturgy of the church.

Boersma reflects on the tag lex orandi, lex credenda ("the law of what is prayed [is] the law of what is believed"). Prayer and worship, Bible reading and doctrine interact. And the Bible is part of, arises from and shapes a particular tradition. The Bible is the supreme authority and must be able to reform the tradition of the church, but Boersma criticises simplistic or naïve sola scriptura views which pretend that everything is up for grabs. The ecumenical consensus of the church should direct our reading. The Bible grew out of prior commitments to Jesus Christ as Lord and amongst those baptised into the name of the Triune God. It is inseparable from that tradition.  

Perhaps the chapter heading that will seem most surprising is “No Plato, No Scripture”. Boersma clarifies that “Christian metaphysics is theological in character: we dare not impose the pagan philosophy of Plato (or of anyone else) on Holy Scripture. Christian metaphysics must take its starting point in the Christian confession of Christ as the incarnate Lord.” (39) Nevertheless, Boersma thinks that a kind of Christian Platonism best reflects the Biblical world view. Drawing on the work of Lloyd P. Gerson’s From Plato to Platonism (11-14), which is also taken up by Craig A. Carter in Interpreting Scripture with the Great Tradition, Boersma stresses five characteristics for Christian reading: (1) antimaterialism (2) antimechanism, that is, there is more than the stuff that is visible and the way it seems to work (3) antinominalism, there are real essences or ideas not just individual things (4) antirelativism, based on goodness as a property of being which is not merely determined by human beings (5) antiskepticism, so that real knowledge is possible. (Boersma, 43).

I feel as if I ought to spend some time with the companion volume now: Scot McKnight, Five Things Biblical Scholars Wish Theologians Knew:  https://www.ivpress.com/five-things-biblical-scholars-wish-theologians-knew

* * *

There could have been many more but here are some bits I happened to type out:

 

Boersma's claim will seem bold to some: from the first, the church has always taught that Christ is present on every page of Scripture (13)

 

Boersma argues that evangelicals have sometimes stressed formal authority (e.g., Scripture trumps tradition) and neglected material content (Christ and the Nicene Creed). Might he not be on to something? Is everything up for grabs as long as one claims Sola Scriptura?

 

Irenaeus insist that Christ "was sold with Joseph, and He guided Abraham; was bound along with Isaac, and wandered with Jacob; with Moses He was a Leader, and, respecting the people, Legislator. He preached in the prophets." (Fragments from the Lost Writings, 54; ANF 1:577). "If anyone therefore reads the Scriptures with attention, he will find in them an account of Christ, and a foreshadowing of the new calling. For Christ is the treasure that was hid in the field, that is, in this world (for "the field is the world"); but the treasure his in the Scripture is Christ, since he was pointed out by means of types and parables.... When it [the law] is read by Christians, it is a treasure hid indeed in a field, but brought to life by the cross of Christ." (Against Heresies 4.26.1; ANF 1:496) As quoted in Boersma, 5 Things, p32f

 

Boersma argues that at the most basic level typology does not move from earlier type to later antitype since Christ is the archetype. He is the Alpha and the Omega, the first principle and end, the model and goal. Chronologically he is foreshadowed and comes as the climax at the fullness of time, but ontologically and logically the Logos is the original and basis. Typology, then, is more than noticing interesting similarities: it is metaphysically, providentially and stereologically grounded from eternity and in creation all the way down and to the depths of mystery. The Son is the eternal, ever-present and eschatological Word. (Based on p33f)

 

Maybe you will say no one really wants to read the Bible like that, but if you make your exegesis simply about human authorial intent, Boersma is surely right that you have made your reading historical and not theological - and, we might add, potentially boring and useless. He would have us read instead for Christ with wisdom and savour.

Pastoral and evangelistic minimums?

 It is easy to think "oh, I wish I'd said..." We can perhaps think of great lines or questions or approaches when the moment has passed. 

We can look back on pastoral and evangelistic encounters and worry whether we spoke of Christ as clearly and compellingly as we might have done. Did the urgency and importance of the gospel come across or did we have a nice take it or leave it chat? Did I want to be liked by these people or did I have any concern for their immortal souls? Was there any hint that we stand on the brink of eternity?

At one level we need to relax and trust Christ. But maybe there are a couple of minimums we could keep in mind:

(1) JESUS. He is our USP, what we have to offer. So let us seek to speak of him. Maybe his name is never spoken in this house. Or the people here only ever use his name as a swear word. Could I speak positively with interest about Jesus? Perhaps that might be enough to encourage someone to think further about him. It is a tiny step, but it could be a first one. Name Jesus! 

(2) PRAYER. Before, during and after. We could pray daily for opportunities and wise and gentle, bold and winsome words. This might help us to be more alert and winsome. We could pray before a meeting or encounter. And we could almost always end a meeting by saying: "Would you mind if I say a prayer with you?". And later we commit all with whom we've spent time or interacted to the Lord each evening, praying that if we have planted a tiny seed, he might in his grace and power water it and give the growth.  

This isn't rocket science and much more could be said and done. But even these two things are easily forgotten and neglected. They could make a big difference because, you know, Jesus is good news and Lord and Messiah and Saviour. And our loving heavenly Father delights to hear and answer prayer. 

Bible Density

 All Scripture is God-breathed and profitable. It is all true and useful and necessary. 

But there are weightier matters of the law. Some verses are more clear than others. Some passages more important than others. Some fit our circumstances more readily than others. 

We perhaps don't remember and take into account as much as we should the variability of Bible Density.

We know the chapter and verse divisions don't always serve us well. 

But we can be rather set on half chapter length chunks. That seems to make a sensible reading for a church service or a quiet time perhaps. But a more varied diet and manner of eating might serve us better. 

The Bible contains many different genres. In some cases, a whole story really needs to be taken together and that might require reading several chapters. And books were designed to serve as a whole as part of the canon so really we always need to think of anything in relation to everything else!

So in our reading and teaching we need slow and fast reading of bigger and smaller chunks. Poems, stories, arguments, proverbs and the rest might call for different approaches and could be best handled in different numbers and at different lengths.  

 Working out what unit to concentrate on may sometimes be a matter of personal choice or teaching strategy or other constraints such as time or reading ability or availability of material. 

But we ought to think about Bible density. Even in the book of Romans, for example, we will find some parts of the argument which are pretty clear and simple. Their contribution to the larger case isn't too hard to see. But sometimes we will need to puzzle over the meaning and logical connection carefully.  And there are some key verses which are really packed with goodness which deserve more than a sermon to themselves. These would be worth slowing down over, memorising, pondering on, chewing upon until they yield all their goodness. We don't want to miss the woods for the trees but sometimes individual plank is worthy of forming your text for the day. 

Happy reading and teaching! But remember to think about Bible Density. Some passages will prove a light meal or even a snack. Some morsels are worth feasting upon.