March 22 Gospel

Fourth Sunday of Lent

John 3:14-21

"Those who do what is true come to the light, so that it may be clearly seen that thier deeds have been done in God" John 3:21 There are some very familiar words in this passage. John 3:16 is the 'gospel in a nutshell' - a succinct expression of what the coming of Jesus into the world is all about. It is this verse that is trumpeted freely - and it is one of the verses that can add weight to the criticism of the Christian message being all about life in heaven, ' pie-in-the-sky' faith. The message of John 3:17 - a message of grace - is often overlooked, but the concluding verse just seem to be ignored.

The theme of light versus darkness runs throughout John's gospel. Here we find that contrast again. Those who do evil hate the light. If they came to the light their actions would be evident to all, and they would be exposed for what they are.

There are some things that we would all rather not expose to the world - and it is right and proper that the intimate relationships of marriage are not exposed to all. But our lives should be open to others - at least to some degree. In the area of sexuality those whose proclivities are outside the acceptable norm often move away from where they are known to indulge in their depravities. Those unable to do so try to keep their activities secret by means of deception and threat.

On our journeys over recent days there have been articles about corruption in South Africa and Tanzania. In South Africa the police chief proclaimed his innocence, and appealed for his challengers to bring forth the information so he could face them in court. In Dar Es Salaam the accused did not turn up at court, and could not be found. For me there are two causes for sadness in these events. The first is that in economically underdeveloped countries some people take advantage of positions of power to steal funds that can make life so much better for their people. Even when they are well provided for themselves, they take advantage of their position for greater personal gain. It is an on-going issue that is not confined to underdeveloped countries. In Australia it was revealed that some government staff received increases in pay at the same time as he Prime Minister was calling for wage restraint in tough economic times. Maybe they earned this pay increase, maybe they deserved this reward - but it was in stark contrast to the fire fighters (some of them volunteers) who will receive verbal acclamation and public praise, but will no get any extra money for risking their lives to save the property and possessions of others. While not on the same scale as the alleged fraud in Tanzania the underlying motives are closely aligned - I deserve more for what I do, and my financial reward is more important that the 'public interest'. At least in Australia it was transparent, even if ill timed. My second sadness is that innocent people, accused unjustly, are tainted and stained by accusation alone. It is my prayer that when the light shines brightly innocence will be seen by all, and the motivation behind false accusations will be brought to light. At Lent, he challenge for disciples of Jesus is to live transparent lives, to invite the light of Christ shine not only upon our actions, but also on our motivation as well.

Year C March 7 Luke 13:1-9

Luke 13:1-9

"No, I tell you; that unless you repent, you will perish just as they did." (6)

"'Sir, let it alone for one more year, until I did around it and put manure on it." (9)


Context:
Luke's Gospel includes a significant section on judgement that comes to its conclusion in these verses. Beginning at 12:1 we find a section that includes a warning hypocrisy, exhortation to owning God before others, the parable of the rich fool and two parables about judgement on sleepy or unfaithful slaves. It is in the context of this theme that Jesus is asked about an incident that was fresh in the minds of some of the locals.

Comment:
After the disaster that befell Haiti Pat Robertson made headlines by speaking of it as God's judgement on Haiti. While his remarks may have been slightly misinterpreted the basic idea that these poor and vulnerable people were somehow the victims of God's wrath because of the sins of their forebears is reprehensible. It was with this background that a audio sermon provided good listening ("What would Jesus answer CNN?"). Luke 13:1-9 was the chosen text. While it is clear that the sins of the parents ARE visited upon the children it does not happen in the way that Pat Robertson suggested, but that is another issue.

"Shit happens!" Now this is not a 'holy expression', but it is true. Bad things happen to good people. Good people die because of random events. Good people are traumatised when things go badly wrong. Good people are caused long term suffering because 'shit happens'. Of course, whatever happens to good people also happens to bad people.

It seems that in Israel Pilate killed some Galileans around the time of a sacrifice. Why? We don't know. It certainly fits with Pilate's profile, yet there is no record of this specific event in the annals of history. Today lots of violent acts take place that don't make our newspapers or get plastered over our TV screens. We should not be surprised that things slipped past the historians of 2000 years ago.

There was also an accident that happened at Siloam. A building collapsed and eighteen people died. The Pool of Siloam was a place of healing. Among the eighteen we would not be surprised to find vulnerable people or their carers. Accidents happen and innocent people suffer.

So how are we to respond?

Jesus response pointed to ultimate judgement. Unlike Pat Robertson he did not blame the victims what happened to them, but called for all his hearers to repent before judgement comes. Whether we are saints or sinners it will come.

The parable that follows adds some perspective to the discussion. The fruitless fig tree is under judgement from the landowner. Becasue of the please of the gardener a reprieve is granted. With this parable Jesus offers no interpretation. The parable just hangs at the end of the dialogue. We are left to make our own connections.

Now the fig tree is often used in allegories to represent Israel but that does not have to be the case here. We are simply reminded that judgment is coming - and fruitfulness is required.

We do well to consider our own lives, and the good stuff that comes from them, rather than cast judgement on others. In due course, God will do that. For it is best to encourage fruitfulness in others and to work for it in our own lives.

Other readings:
Isaiah 55:1-9
Psalm 63:1-8
1 Cor 10:1-13

Year C February 28 Luke 13:31-35

2nd Sunday in Lent

"I say to you, that you shall not see me until that tie comes when you say "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord" 13:35

Context:
"And he went through the cities and villages, teaching and journeying towards Jerusalem." (13:22) This introductory phrase prefaces a series of story units as Jesus heads towards is fate in Jerusalem.

As this section begins the dialogue focuses on the narrow way, and then moves towards identifying Herod as the one seeking Jesus death. Ironically that warning comes from the mouth of some Pharisees. With Jesus' death introduced as the subject there comes a reference to the 'third day' (32) and a lament over Jerusalem and then a prediction links directly with Luke 19:38 and Jesus' entry into Jerusalem.

After the text for this day we find parables of judgment and grace as Jesus moves toward his fate. Along the way the conflict with Jewish leaders intensifies. The contract between their rule and Jesus teaching is highlighted through the use of parables and Jesus' gracious encounters with ten lepers, a rich ruler and Zaccheus.

Comment:
Being in a position of authority is never easy when hard decisions are to be faced. In this instance it was not his fate that was concerning Jesus, but the fate of Jerusalem.

In leadership choices need to be made. Many decisions impact directly on people - whether for good or for ill. Seeking to walk Jesus way means that we are concerned about the effect of our decisions on all people, and have a special interest in the vulnerable.

Jesus lament over Jerusalem was not for the metropolis as a collection of streets and structures, but for the people who lived there. It was the seat of their cultic worship. The temple was there, and all the great festivals of the Jewish nation were held in the city. It was (and is) a place of national significance.

The image of Jesus a 'mother hen' reflects a concern for the city that "kills the prophets and those who are sent to her." (34) Those of the city were unwilling to come under the protection and embrace of the "mother hen". In 19:41-43 we find another lament over the city that did not know "the things that make for [...] peace!" (v.42).

The wisdom of elders, the knowledge of scribes, and the Pharisees legalism did not combine to effect wise decisions. Self interest and shortsightedness contributed to decisions that took Jesus to the cross, and later brought the destruction of Jerusalem.

We do not have Jesus heading towards our city today. We are not faced with decisions about what to do with him. We are faced with daily decisions about our fellow human beings, those who share our streets, share our cities and share our world. Sadly all our wisdom and knowledge and law still seem unable to move us beyond self-interest. Whether at a personal or national level the over-riding issue is 'what is in it for me/us'?

While we focus on ourselves there are those among us that go without housing, homes and hope. While we focus on ourselves families are torn apart and communities are increasingly fractured. While we focus on our philosophy and way of life communities are being destroyed and countries decimated.

The best efforts of well meaning organisations and peace loving nations cannot restore peace and wholeness. Instead they are swamped with hordes of people living in comfort that they seek to protect, or an ethos they will not examine.

If only eyes were opened to the things the make for peace.


Other Readings:

Genesis 15:1-12,17-18
Ps 27
Phil 3:17-4:1

Year C February 21 Luke 4:1-13

Luke 4:1-13.
"If you are the son of God, command this stone to become a loaf of bread." (4:3)

Context:
After his baptism by John (3:21-22) Luke outlines Jesus genealogy. Following the divine voice that prcolamins Jesu as his 'beloved Son' we find the Lukan genealogy that identifies this ancestral line. The next episode in Luke's story of Jesus is the temptation of Jesus.

Comment:
Even in setting the scene there is the remind that temptations and testing comes even before ministry. For some there may be doubts about the calling, for others obstacles sem to be placed in their path, while for all of us the lure of a softer alternative is ever present.

During these past days the testing suggestion to turn a stone into bread has been at the forefront of my thinking. While the whole text and the three tests are worthy of extensive consideration it is the first that is most pertinent for me. In the opulent and sometimes corpulent western world the need to turn stones into bread is not real. SO let's take another tack and replace "bread" with whatever is your greatest need. Replace bread with something else that would change or transform your life. Replace bread with the change you need for wholeness or satisfaction. Now consider again this temptation.

Jesus had been without food for forty days. His body would be crying out for nourishment, and his mind battling to remain focussed. With the power to do what Satan challenged him to do Jesus refused. In an instant his hunger could be satisfied and his body nourished. Jesus refused to use his power in that way. His response comes from Deuteronomy 8:3 - we do not live by bread alone.

Step back to the original scenario of Deuteronomy. It was a reference to trusting God, for God had provided 'manna' for the Israelites as they wandered in the desert (Exodus 16). God told them it would be there for them, and it was. God's word was enough. They had to trust the word that came from God.

Then we come to Jesus. Faced with a raging hunger and a not-so-subtle temptation to prove his connection with God he said "No". I will trust what God says. I will rely on what God has told me. I will do what God has asked me to do.

Now we come to ourselves. I believe that God has the power to intervene and fix all that is wrong in our lives and in our world, yet still there are things wrong. Those who love and trust God have been chosen to reveal and share the kingdom of God. We have not been given the rich life as a sign of blessing, we have been given the presence of God. We have not been given the power to right all wrongs and fix all faults, we have been given access to grace and strength to endure.

So here is the temptation: "If God is truly God we should be able to ask that wrongs be righted, ills be cured, and justice prevail." Yet God says simply "Trust me. Rely on my promise to be with you always."

Turning stones into bread is not a test of my faith. Fixing all that is wrong is. I will continue to trust even though the hunger remains.

Other readings:

Deuteronomy 26:1-11; Psalm 91:1-2, 9-16; Romans 10:8b-13

Year C Ash Wednesday

Feb 17

Matthew 6:1-6, 16-21.

"When you fast do not be like the hypocrites, with a sad countenance,. For they disfigure their faces that they may appear to men to be fasting." (6:16)


Ash Wednesday is not part of the traditions of The Salvation Army. While the day has significance in many churches and denominations it is not a day that stands tall in our collective history or our liturgical year. Ironically, in Australia at least, the pre-Easter period has been taken over by our missionary 'self-denial' appeal. Instead of a spiritual exercise the Lenten period has become an exercise in mission fund-raising, with appeals to self-sacrifice that require self-discipline. I have no argument with the self-denial appeal but would welcome a greater emphasis on Lent as a spiritual time of preparation.

My Google search of Ash Wednesday revealed a little of the origins of this day, but there were many references to the fires of Ash Wednesday 1983. In the minds of many it has become a marker of a state tragedy (47 deaths in Victoria, 28 in South Australia), not the commencement of a spiritual exercise.

Ash Wednesday and the period of Lent has no scriptural foundation that points to a command or demand for observance or recognition. It is another day and the commencement of another season in the church calendar that is planned to help us focus on Christ. The origins apparently (according to Wikipedia) go back to the placing of ashes on the forehead as a sign of repentance, and the timing is 40 days before Easter. Those 40 days do not include Sundays! Why? A good question - for which I have no answer!

Forty is a number of significance in the Bible. Going back to the time of Noah (it rained for forty days and nights) it has signified a sense of completeness - so the Israelites wandered in the wilderness for forty years, Moses was on the mountain forty days and forty nights, and Jesus was tempted and fasted for forty days. Hence Lent is a period of forty days.

There is no requirement to observe Lent, which has been linked with self-denial in many traditions. In preparation for the great self-sacrifice the idea that we should "give up something" that will cost us in some way is a laudable one. It is also a worthy discipline as we follow the story of Jesus on the journey to the cross.

In this process it is notable that the texts for this day stand in opposition to the practice of placing ashed on the forehead and wearing them until they are worn off. The verses from Matthew remind us that Jesus told us to pray, to fast, and to give alms without drawing attention to ourselves. God will know what we have done.

In this day and age its OK for an individual, but for an organisation the relies on the public to support of programs of aid and transformation in the community it presents something of a challenge.

During this period we do well to engage in some form of prolonged self-discipline. We could give up something that costs us money, and direct those dollars to the poor. We could choose to eat less - miss a meal a day perhaps, or stop eating chocolate/sweets or drinking coffees. Or we could allocate some time each day to stop and pray for the needs of those around us, asking that God might touch our hearts and help us to see others as Jesus would.

However you choose to respond to Lent it is my prayer that you will understand better the mind and heart of the One who is the focus of this time.

Other readings for this day:

Joel 2:1-2, 12-17 or Isaiah 58:1-12; Psalm 51:1-17; 2 Cor 5:20b-6:10

Readings for the 1st Sunday in Lent: Feb 21

Deuteronomy 26:1-11; Psalm 91:1-2, 9-16; Romans 10:8b-13; Luke 4:1-13.

Year C The Transfiguration February 14

Luke 9:28-36

“He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Peter answered, “The Messiah of God”. Luke 9:20

Context:

It is unusual for me to include a verse that is not in the reading as my leader. On this occasion it is very helpful as we read the epiphany that we know as the “transfiguration”. The question of Jesus identity and significance is one we look at post-resurrection. For those who lived and walked with Jesus the question “Who is this man?” was a live and on-going issue. Was he really the Christ, God’s anointed, the Messiah?

The Messiah was longed for and long-awaited by the Jews. When dominated by a foreign power that longing was intensified. They needed a deliverer. It is not surprising that they held on to any that seemed to offer a glimmer of hope. The scene in Monthy Python’s “The Life of Brian” where the John Cleese character cried out “He’s really the Messiah. I should know, I’ve followed a few in my time.” May be closer to the truth than the film maker knew.

Luke follows the Marcan order of events (Mark 8:31-9:8) and makes very little adjustment to the Marcan wording. It is worth taking note of the responses of the disciples when the one they believed to be “the Christ” raised the matter of his own suffering and death. This was not the picture they had of the Messiah.

Comment:

Sandwiched between two declarations of future suffering and death is this remarkable epiphany. God broke into our world in dramatic ways. Here, up on a mountain (and hence closer to God in the thinking of the ancients), Jesus prayed. The disciples with him, Peter, James and John, were stirred from their tiredness by the luminous presence of Moses and Elijah with Jesus. Jesus stands between the great deliverer of Israel and the great prophet of Israel.

A drowsy Peter is confronted with these two heroes who stand alongside a “dazzling white” Jesus. His impulsive and blustering response is to build a tent and stay in this exalted state. Ironically the discussion topic of discussion between Jesus, Moses and Elijah is about Jesus departure and “what he was to accomplish in Jerusalem.” (31)Every time the prospect of his rejection, suffering or death was raised the disciples (for whom Peter was the mouthpiece) protested.

The idea of a difficult path for their master was not comfortable, and certainly not welcomed by the disciples. In words reminiscent of the epiphany at Jesus’ baptism the divine voice speaks "This is my Son, my Chosen; listen to him!" (35) The path chosen for Jesus and by Jesus was one of suffering. The price paid for a greater good was enormous, but it was a price Jesus was willing to pay.

Many are the times that we would say NO to suffering and pain. We would all prefer the easy road. Yet God calls us to walk in His ways. For some those paths will seem impossibly hard, and yet we must trust that ultimately the will bring about the best. For us there is a responsibility to listen for the divine voice, the voice of God. Once we have heard the challenge is to obey.

Other readings:

Exodus 34:29-35

Psalm 99

2 Corinthians 3:12–4:2

Year C February 7 Luke 5:1-11

5th Sunday after the Epiphany

Luke 5:1-11.

Simon answered, "Master, we've worked hard all night and haven't caught anything. But because you say so, I will let down the nets." (5:5)


Luke's gospel is "an orderly account" of the life of Jesus. We should not confuse 'orderly' with the idea of chronologically correct detail. Luke's gospel is not a diary, nor does it necessarily present events the order that they occurred. Look carefully at the transition words that are used as the story moves from one scene to the next.

From last weeks text (4:21-30) we note that Jesus "went down to Capernaum" (4:31) and taught in the synagogue on the Sabbath. "After leaving the synagogue" (4:38) he went to Simon's house. Then we have a sequence: "As the sun was setting" (40) and "At daybreak" (42). Luke gives no indication of the length of time between Nazareth and Capernaum, but we know that it was at least a week (v.16 cf. v.31). The events of 4:31-4:43 clearly took place in a period of about 24 hours. From there the time frame becomes hazy, and possibly irrelevant. We learn that Jesus "continued proclaiming the message in the synagogues of Judea"(44) but have no idea of the length of time involved.

The story then moves to the text for this week, Luke 5:1-11 where Simon, James and John leave everything and follow Jesus. According to Luke's orderly account Jesus has already been at Simon's house, and healed Simon's mother-in-law while he was there. Where did this take place? "beside the lake of Gennesaret" (5:1). When did this take place? "Once while Jesus was standing beside the lake…" (5:1). The geographical markers are clear, the chronological markers are not.

Does it matter? Probably not, but it certainly does not make sense for Simon to leave everything, and later have Jesus visit his house and heal his mother-in-law. For Luke this is an orderly account, for us it makes sense and is a logical sequence. Is this the sequence in which things happened? Maybe not.


A miracle, a pronouncement, and a call.

This brief encounter marks a shift in the story. Up to this point the focus was on Jesus, but now other characters are drawn into the story. A complex mix of forms is evident in this incident, and there are suggestions that Luke has drawn on a range of different sources as he reveals Jesus to us. In Simon Peter’s response to Jesus (“"Go away from me, Lord; I am a sinful man!" 5:8) we may even find echoes of Isaiah 6.

The challenge for us is to focus on the main part of this story. But what part is that?
Is it the miracle? While important in the narrative the miracle isn’t the main point of this story. Yes, Jesus is able to fill the nets of discouraged fishermen at a time when they normally would not catch fish. Yes, Jesus is able to fill their nets to breaking point. It is an amazing action (see also John 21), but that is not the point of the story.
Is it Simon Peter’s response to Jesus – the echo of Isaiah 6:5? There is additional emphasis here because it is the only time in the gospel that he is referred to a Simon Peter. It has been Simon, it will be Peter, and one reference (6:14) has “Simon, who also called Peter”. Only here is it Simon Peter. In the presence of Jesus our own sinfulness is evident. Jesus is the Holy One of God. Yet I do not think that is the main point of the story.
Is it the pronouncement of discipleship? "Don't be afraid; from now on you will catch men" (5:10). As important as this is this statement is the culmination of a significant encounter.

Simon had already been with Jesus. Jesus had been to his house, healed his mother-in-law, and received his hospitality. Simon had probably heard some of Jesus’ teaching and witnessed a few more of his miracles. And, of course, Jesus was in his boat catching fish when the fishermen could not. The point is that Simon knew about Jesus. Yet it is in this encounter that he sees Jesus afresh, and has no option but to recognize his own sinfulness in the presence of the Holy One. Here Jesus meets Simon on his own turf, and does something that reveals to Jesus much more of who he is. Simon had a personal encounter with Jesus. It was then he realized who Jesus is, and what he must do.

Some of us have been around Jesus for a while, some for a long while. We can take for granted the stuff of church, of religion, of faith. In that way we can even become good people. But God wants more than good. God seeks relationship and a commitment to follow and to learn. When we have that personal encounter things change. We enter into relationship with Jesus, and not with the church. In that encounter Jesus will invite us to follow him – and will call us to a life that may look radically different from the one we might have planned.

Other Readings:

Isaiah 6:1-8 (9-13)
Ps 138
1 Cor 15:1-11

Year C January 31

4th Sunday after the Epiphany

Luke 4:21-30.

"I tell you the truth," he continued, "no prophet is accepted in his hometown. I assure you that there were many widows in Israel in Elijah's time, when the sky was shut for three and a half years and there was a severe famine throughout the land. Yet Elijah was not sent to any of them, but to a widow in Zarephath in the region of Sidon. And there were many in Israel with leprosy in the time of Elisha the prophet, yet not one of them was cleansed--only Naaman the Syrian." All the people in the synagogue were furious when they heard this. (4:24-28)

Context:
Praise came from the lips of the crowd gathered at the synagogue. Jesus' words has been welcomed as the carpenter's son returned to his home village and opened the scriptures on the Sabbath. He was welcomed back, but as they moved past their initial impressions of his speech they considered what he said, and it did not sit comfortably with them - in fact they were greatly offended.
"Today this scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing" is a veiled Messianic claim. "No prophet is accepted in his home town" and "There were many lepers in Elijah day, but only Naaman (the Syrian) was cured" are pointing to the failure of Nazareth and Israel to recognise Jesus as prophet - and possibly as Messiah. At the beginning of his ministry in Israel Jesus is foreshadowing the 'failure' of that ministry, and his rejection.

Comment:
Jesus' return to Nazareth has parallels in Mark (6:1-6) and Matthew (13:53-58). Luke's account includes more detail, including the "mission statement" of 4:18-19 and recognition of the depth of the opposition Jesus' faced. This additional information points to another source for Luke, and the placement of the incident reflects programmatic or thematic considerations. For Luke this incident is of major significance. It is not just the rejection of Jesus in his home town, but points to the rejection of Jesus by his own people and extension of his ministry to Gentiles. Jesus has been sent or 'anointed' to bring good news, not only to the Jews, but also to those beyond its borders.
Nolland suggests that these verses indicate that "unbelief has created a situation where possibilities are not realized and benefits do not flow" (Nolland, WBC, 201) rather than emphasising Jesus rejection.

In the parallel accounts the unbelief of the people somehow limits Jesus a few deeds of power in Nazareth. If faith is a key element in miracles this is not surprising. It should not be understood that God is limited by our unbelief, for God is able to act without our consent. Yet there is an element of welcome and respect that is lacking in the people, and Jesus respects their choice. The Nazarenes are the poorer as a result.

While the unresponsiveness of the people is noted in Matthew and Mark, the account in Luke includes a much more vigorous and determined opposition. What Jesus said was seen as being 'highly provocative" and the picture presented in not Jesus being launched to his death off a high cliff but is indicative of an angry mob preparing to stone Jesus. It follows the pattern of casting the victim down from an elevated position, from which his opponents could throw or drop the stones. Just how Jesus is delivered her is not stated. Again Nolland notes that it is reflective of John's view that "his hour has not yet come".(201)

The reaction seems to be "over the top" to modern readers. It is difficult for us to comprehend. Those who have been brought up in a Christian tradition, or a democratic country value freedom of speech, and rarely become violent when alternate view or divergent opinions are expressed. In other parts of the world such a reaction is not unknown. When deeply help beliefs and views are challenged it is considered disrespectful to the elders and leaders, and is likely to result in the offender being ostracized, excluded or even persecuted.

Those who stand in the line of Christ must be prepared for their message, however graciously expressed, to be rejected and for opposition to result. Changing the world is not easy. When peoples world views are challenged and their practices are questioned we must not be surprised by their reactions. If they agree with what we say there will be acceptance or even praise, but when the message challenges or offends expect a reaction.

While we should not go out of our way to provoke a reaction, perhaps we have become accepting of the status quo and desirous of peoples praise to the detriment of the gospel.


Other Readings:

Jer 1:4-10;
Ps 71:1-6;
1 Cor 13:1-13.

Year C January 24

3rd Sunday after the Epiphany

Luke 4:14-21

“The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,because he has anointed me to bring good news to the poor.

He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind,

to let the oppressed go free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.” Lk 4:18-19a

It's kick off time!

Ironically today is the day when Salvation Army Officers are officially welcomed (installed) into their new appointments in my area of the world. It is their first official Sunday, even though they began their responsibilities during the week. Today's reading marks a 'formal' commencement of Jesus ministry in the Gospel of Luke.

Context:
Jesus has been baptised (3:21-22), tempted (4:1-13) and begun to teach in the synagogues around Galilee (4:14-15). The verses prior to our text are a summary statement. It is worth noting these in Luke's writings (especially the Acts of the Apostles). They are a reminder that the gospels are not a complete record of all that took place, and an indication of the sort of activity that was taking place. Here we see that the arena of Jesus' activity was Galilee, and his main activity was teaching. (4:15) Returning to his hometown he was invited to open the Scriptures in the synagogue.

Content:
Here we find what amounts to a 'mission statement' from Jesus (18-21), and a response from the people (22,23-29). While the text under consideration only includes 14-21, it is instructive to remember that there was a response to Jesus' words. While the initial response was positive the mood quickly turned as the message became less 'acceptable' to the hearers. The boy who grew up in Nazareth and found favour with 'God and man' (2:52) slipped out of favour very quickly!

The reputation built in his short Galilee tour no doubt led to the invitation to read the Scriptures in his home town. We see that the people were amazed at his 'gracious words' of the carpenters' son. It is difficult to understand what those gracious words were, since Luke only offers us the words that were read, and one short sentence. The 'gracious words' could refer to the text that Jesus read (Isaiah 61:1-2), and the omission of "the day of vengeance of our Lord" (2b). It could also refer to other comments he made about the text that are not recorded in the Gospel.

It is interesting to note that John Nolland (Word Biblical Commentary Vol.35A Luke 1-9:20, 196) offers a somewhat different translation of 61:1b. His translation reads "To evangelise the poor her he sent me" in contrast to "he has sent me to bring good news to the oppressed" (NRSV). While Nolland observes that the extent to which this should be spiritualized is a "vexing question" the link between the historical context of the quoted text, the quoting of the text and today points to a more holistic reading of this phrase. Evangelize in our context carries strong spiritual/other-worldly overtones. The words of Isaiah are in the context of the restoration of Israel and reflect a present experience, and immediate salvation evidenced in the day to day experience of the Jewish people. Jesus' miracles freed those oppressed by sickness, and exclusion from the community because of 'sin'. Release from political oppression was in view in Isaiah, but this is not so evident in Jesus' ministry. While it is difficult to imagine a political system operating on the basis of Jesus' teaching, such a system could not be oppressive.

The quotation of Isaiah points to a ministry that was all-encompassing, and brought physical, emotional, relational and spiritual salvation. To share in the mission of Jesus is to be concerned that people might experience the God-life in every area of their existence. To focus on the spiritual alone is a failure to embrace God's creation, and to ignore the spiritual is offering only a temporary "fix". We must strive to share the fullness of the good news that is salvation through Jesus Christ.



Other readings:

Neh 8:1-3, 5-6, 8-10;
Psalm 19;
1 Cor 12:12-31a;
Luke 4:14-21.

Year C January 17 John 2:1-11

2nd Sunday after the Epiphany

John 2:1-11

Context:

The third day. An interesting sequence appears in John 1. The next day begins three short incidents (1:29.35.43) and then we have the wedding on the "third day". Explanations include attempts to link this expression with the resurrection, but it is the third day after Jesus baptism (1:29-34).
Already Jesus has gathered a group of disciples around him. Two of them had been John's disciples (v.35)- including Andrew, the brother of Simon Peter.
This group is invited to a wedding in Cana and in this context (the only actual wedding that is recorded in the gospels) Jesus first public "miracle" is performed. This public miracle was recognised by only a few people who were 'in the know', the majority of the guests continued to enjoy the fine wine that resulted.


Comment:
It seems quite remarkable that the first miracle (sign in John's gospel) recorded in John's Gospel should be the turning of water into wine. It is not a comfortable miracle for consideration by a temperance movement - but cannot be ignored.

In this miracle we read of Mary's request that Jesus retrieve a social situation. A wedding was one of the major social occasions in the Jewish culture, as in our culture. It was important for the social standing of those concerned that everything went well - and the supply of adequate refreshments was one of the aspects that could make or break an event. To run out of wine was a disaster that would be the lasting memory of the event and damage the prestige in the village. With this in mind Mary (whose relationship to the hosts is unstated) seeks to rescue the hosts from major social embarrassment. It was not a matter of life or death nor a matter of physical quality of life. Mary would have known of the lasting effects of such embarrassment in the community, and approached Jesus. So she approached Jesus and he acted, turning water into wine that caused the steward to remark of its great quality. About 120 gallons (over 500 litres) was a large quantity to produce near the end of the wedding feast.

Why would Jesus respond to Mary's request and turn so much water into wine?

It seems to me that there are two reasons.

• His mother asked him to intervene. Honour your father and your mother is one of the commandments, and out of respect and obedience Jesus responded to her request.
• Jesus is about life. Social occasions, meals and celebrations are important dimensions of life. We are meant to enjoy life, and the complete absence of wine would have marred the wedding, hurt the social standing of the hosts, and been a cause of shame to the newlyweds that would have remained with them.

When we seek to assist others perhaps we need to do more than just give them food or shelter to help them survive. Our commitment to others should be such that we want them to thrive and enjoy the life God has given them. It is certainly something to think about as we respond to the needs of those in our communities.


Other readings:
Isaiah 62:1-5;
Ps 36:5-10;
1 Cor 12:1-11

Year C January 17 John 2:1-11

2nd Sunday after the Epiphany

John 2:1-11

Context:

The third day. An interesting sequence appears in John 1. The next day begins three short incidents (1:29.35.43) and then we have the wedding on the "third day". Explanations include attempts to link this expression with the resurrection, but it is the third day after Jesus baptism (1:29-34).
Already Jesus has gathered a group of disciples around him. Two of them had been John's disciples (v.35)- including Andrew, the brother of Simon Peter.
This group is invited to a wedding in Cana and in this context (the only actual wedding that is recorded in the gospels) Jesus first public "miracle" is performed. This public miracle was recognised by only a few people who were 'in the know', the majority of the guests continued to enjoy the fine wine that resulted.


Comment:
It seems quite remarkable that the first miracle (sign in John's gospel) recorded in John's Gospel should be the turning of water into wine. It is not a comfortable miracle for consideration by a temperance movement - but cannot be ignored.

(This is a work in process..further comment or information will be added during the week)



Other readings:
Isaiah 62:1-5;
Ps 36:5-10;
1 Cor 12:1-11

Year C January 10 Luke 3:15-17

Baptism of the Lord

Luke 3:15-17, 21-22

"I baptize you with water; but one who is more powerful than I is coming; I am not worthy to untie the thong of his sandals. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. His winnowing fork is in his hand, to clear his threshing floor and to gather the wheat into his granary; but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire."(v.16, 17 NRSV)

One of the unique aspects of The Salvation Army is the non-observance of the sacraments. Baptism and the celebration of the Eucharist are not part of the worship of the church. Against this background we must face the fact that both baptism and the Eucharist are part of the life of the church.

In this particular text we find an unusual combination of images related to baptism. John baptises with water, Jesus with the Holy Spirit and with fire, and then the chaff is to be burned "with unquenchable fire". The burning of chaff is an image of judgement which fits with the "axe lying at the root of the trees" (v.10) but in this context the baptism with water, the Holy Spirit and fire seem to represent a hierarchy of sorts.

John baptises with water - but Jesus is much greater than he is and will baptise with the Holy Spirit and with fire. This would suggest that baptism that Jesus offers is of a different nature than the baptism of John. It is also far more important that John's water baptism.

Within the various churches baptism with water is imbued with particular significance. For some it is baptism into faith. For others baptism into the faith of the church or community. In some churches infants are baptised while only adult baptism is practised in others. Despite the variants each tradition recognises various steps in the journey of faith in particular ways. Among the reasons for The Salvation Army stance was the proliferation of practices, the varied theological understandings, a reluctance to be identified as a denomination, and an attempt to avoid reliance upon symbol rather than experience. The result has been that the movement substituted its own ceremonies in place of water baptism.

What has not been replaced is baptism with the Holy Spirit and with fire. No church or organisation has been able to make this experience a ceremony or a sacrament. What God gives through Jesus is not something that can be organised, manufactured or scheduled. It comes as a work of grace through our relationship with God in Christ.

Among the criticisms of the Pharisees was the emphasis on rules and regulations rather than relationship. It is easy for us to identify how people should come to faith, and how they should grow in faith. That makes it manageable and measurable, but identification must never become regulation. The work of God cannot always be measured, and it certainly cannot be managed. No matter what the messenger of God does, what God will do in Christ is greater. Our small but significant ceremonies must not be confused with the work of God which may take place with, through, or even despite our ceremonies.

It is my prayer that we might all experience the baptism of the Holy Spirit that Jesus offers to all who enter into relationship with God through him.


Other readings:

Isaiah 43:1-7;
Psalm 29; Acts 8:14-17;
Luke 3:15-17, 21-22.

Year C January 3

Epiphany

Matt 2:1-12

"But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah,are by no means least among the rulers of Judah;for out of you will come a ruler who will be the shepherd of my people Israel." (v.6)


Over recent days I have been pondering this text, and wrestling with its implications. Is this just an interesting bit of the nativity story, or does it have a broader significance? For me the answer is both. There are some questions that need to be asked of any text if we are to take Scripture seriously. Each verse in the Bible is part of 'the inspired word of God' but some passages (or probably most) require us to do more that simply read and apply. The theological questioning must include, at the very least, the following questions:

• What did this text mean to its original hearers?
• What does this text tells us about God, Jesus, about mission, about the church?
• What does it mean for the church today?
• What does it mean for me?

The inclusion of the story of the wise men from the East, 'the three kings of Orient' that we sing about in the carols, is more than an interesting narrative diversion. These few verses point to a number of historical and theological dimensions that are not identified elsewhere.

It points to the passage of time. Depictions of the nativity scenes show these men and their gifts gathered around the manger with Mary and Joseph and the shepherds. References to the "house" (v.11) and the later account of the slaughter of innocents under two yeas old (v. 16-18) indicate an extended time between the birth of Jesus and their encounter with Jesus. We must allow at least 12 months and probably more before the magi from the east found Jesus.

It points to the universal nature of Jesus' mission. Jesus was born in Bethlehem, but these magi came from beyond the national borders. Legend depicts the journey as long and arduous. Any journey in those days was difficult, and the time frame confirms that it was a long journey. We do not know how long, but could allow a time span of around a year. Jesus' birth was noted by wise men (not kings) from afar. The Greeks also believed that the birth of a great man or king was also announced with a sign in the heavens - and here we have Matthew's gospel (with its signs of being for a Jewish audience) recognising the existence of such a portent.

It points to the failure of the Jewish leaders to see what they were awaiting. The Jews were expecting a Messiah, and awaiting his arrival to free them from the oppressor and restore Israel to greatness. Micah 5:2 points to Bethlehem as the birthplace, and the scribes and chief priests knew this, yet were informed of Jesus arrival by these foreigners. They missed it!

It points to a misunderstanding of Jesus mission. For Herod the arrival of a 'new king' was a threat to his position and power. He could only see this infant as a direct threat to his authority and sought to destroy what he did not understand. Before Pilate Jesus identified his kingdom as 'not of this world' (John 18:36) - he was a king of a different kind.

It points to God working beyond our expectations. The magi expected the new king to be born in the capital city, not a rural backwater. They expected to find Jesus in a palace, not the house of a common tradesman. The scribes expected the Messiah to be a king in the manner of David, and Herod expected a ruler who would challenge his authority and replace him as ruler of Israel. To the magi Jesus arrived in circumstances far less significant than they anticipated. In their wisdom they found him, but where they found him confounded them. At the other end of the scale the earthly rulers (Herod and later Pilate) discovered that Jesus was not what they expected, but did not see that he was far more than they expected.

So what does it mean for me today?
It reminds me that God is the God of all and Jesus was sent for all humanity - Jews and non-Jews alike. Today that translates to Christians and those who are yet to recognise Jesus as Saviour and Lord. Jesus came for us all.
It also reminds me that God works in unexpected ways. I need to be alert to the signs of his presence in the Word and in the world.

Jesus has come into our world. May we recognise his presence.


Other readings:
Isaiah 60:1-6;
Psalm 72:1-7, 10-14;
Ephesians 3:1-12

Year C December 27

First Sunday after Christmas

Luke 2:41-52

"Why were you searching for me?" he asked. "Didn't you know I had to be in my Father's house?" But they did not understand what he was saying to them." (v 50-51)


These few verses mark a transition from the infancy narratives. They are the only Biblical record we have of the years from his presentation at the Temple until the commencement of his ministry. While some non-canonical texts (e.g. the Infancy Gospel of Thomas) provide stories of childhood, these accounts do not line up with what the gospels reveal of the nature of Jesus as an adult. Some are creative, but none have been seriously considered as reflecting the childhood of Jesus.

The few verses in Luke's gospel point us to the fact that Jesus had a childhood something like those of his peers. He was a boy who grew up in the family of a Jewish tradesman. Part of tradition was the annual pilgrimage to Jerusalem, and it was expected of all adult males. While it was not necessary for Mary to be present one would expect her to accompany Joseph and care for the children when they made tahe pilgrimage.

At the time of this incident Jesus was approaching the legal age of adulthood (around 12 or 13 years of age). We learn of his presence only when his absence is noted. We should not be surprised that they did not notice his absence immediately. Unlike our nuclear families and small caring circles it is likely that there was a group of people, adults and children, who had journeyed to Jerusalem together and planned to return en masse (the relatives and friends of v.44). It would be expected that this growing young man would have been with them, without the need to check on him every moment. As we read the story is seems that the reached their overnight stop before noticing his absence, and it took another day to walk back to Jerusalem. On the third day they found him in the Temple.

Some commentators might suggest that this incident reveals Jesus as a precocious child. Some Greco-Roman biographies include this motif, but being alert and intelligent, or having maturity beyond you years, is not the same as being precocious. Many brilliant people have given evidence of great potential in their childhood years. One analyst and leadership writer (Alastair Mant) believes that leadership qualities can be detected at a very early age simply by observing children interact with others. The leader of the pack is noticeable by their actions and interactions. We should not be surprised that these qualities could be seen in Jesus.

This linking passage serves a number of purposes in Luke's story of Jesus.
It gives an indication of the passage of time, and reminds us that Jesus is no ordinary child. Here there is no supernatural or divine intervention, no angels singing to a strange and awed crowd, just a boy whose intelligence and understanding cause the learned teachers to be amazed by his answers in the cut and thrust of rabbinic dialogue.
It points us the human dimension of Jesus life on earth. He had a family, he participated in religious festivals, and he 'increased in wisdom and in years'.
Some thirty years passed before Jesus began his public ministry. Thirty years of common ordinary existence that drew no attention beyond his family and his home village. We know next to nothing of those years, but so much of the final three. Those of us engaged in ministry might just need to take a step back and reflect on this for a while. Thirty years of common ordinary existence, and three engaged in full time ministry. The one who was sent to earth did normal ordinary things for the majority of his time on earth. He did not spend all of his adult life preaching the good news of the kingdom, in fact it seems he only spent 3 of his 20 adult years in that task.

Maybe it is time for driven people to kick back and relax a little. If the Son of God and Saviour of the world had time to spend with family, to enjoy time with friends, to develop his skills as a tradesman and to hang out at the village local (wherever that was) then its OK for us to do that as well. Along the way we must remember that we, too, are about "our Father's business".

Other readings:
1 Sam 2:18-20, 26;
Psalm 148;
Colossians 3:12-17

Advent Readings Year C

Advent I Nov 29

Jeremiah 33:14-16; Psalm 25:1-10; 1 Thess 3:9-13; Luke 21:25-36.

Advent II World Aids Day Dec 6

Malachi 3:1-4; Luke 1:68-79; Philippians 1:3-11; Luke 3:1-6.

Advent III Dec 13

Zephaniah 3:14-20; Isaiah 12:2-6; Phil 4:4-7; Luke 3:7-18.

Advent IV Dec 20

Micah 5:2-5a; Luke 1:46-55 or Psalm 80:1-7; Hebrews 10:5-10; Luke 1:39-45 (46-55).

Christmas Eve/Christmas Day Dec 24/25

Isaiah 9:2-7; Psalm 96; Titus 2:11-14; Luke 2:1-14 (15-20).

1st Sunday after Christmas Dec 27

1 Sam 2:18-20, 26; Psalm 148; Colossians 3:12-17; Luke 2:41-52.

Other resources:
The Gospel of Luke

Year C December 24/25

Christmas Eve/ Christmas Day

Luke 2:1-14 (15-20).

"Today in the town of David a Saviour has been born to you; he is the Messiah, the Lord."(11)

Luke's penchant for locating events time and space has generated much discussion about the accuracy of the opening verse of this text. The Greek of the first verse is awkward, and there is no reason why it cannot be translated "Before Quirinius was governor of Syria...".
This slight alteration apparently silences all the arguments over dating, and opens the way for a census which has parallels in the history of Roman provincial government. And so it was that Jesus was born in Bethlehem.

One aspect that we overlook so often is that this is the second birth narrative in Luke's gospel, the first being the birth of John (1:57-66).

There are a number of points of parallel in these two accounts - a statement about the pregnancy reaching term (v 6, cf. 1:57), a simple birth statement (v 7, cf. 1:57), marveling onlookers (v 18, cf. 1:63), the mother taking to heart what had happened (v 19, cf. 1:66), and then the circumcision and giving of the angelically determined name on the eighth day (v 21, cf. 1:59).

There is also a major point of difference. With the birth of John Zechariah's prophecy was about promise - what John was to become. With the birth of Jesus the central verses of this narrative unit are about fulfilment.
"Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is the Messiah, the Lord."(11)
A magnificent heavenly choir adds drama and music to this announcement made to a group of smelly shepherds who were at work in the hills around Bethlehem.
The long awaited and anticipated Messiah had come. The promise had been fulfilled.

What remains for us is to accept realise the promise.
When an accountant or merchant talks about realizing an asset they mean selling that asset and receiving in monetary terms its full value. That money can then be used for other purpose.
For us realizing the promise is about claiming daily the benefits of Jesus as Messiah - the sense of peace, of purpose and of eternal and enduring worth that comes when we realise we are God's children, loved so much by God that he would send his son into the world to show us the way to live the way we were intended to live.

It is my prayer that this Christmas you might realize that promise afresh.

Other readings:

Isaiah 9:2-7;
Psalm 96;
Titus 2:11-14

Year C December 20

Luke 1:39-45 (46-55).

"Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear! But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" (42-43a)

A figure like Elijah, John drew the attention of the people by his lifestyle and his message. He was an outstanding and charismatic figure - but the gospel is not about John. It is about Jesus. John may have arrived first, but the story is about Jesus.

One wonders about the importance of this text - and the purpose it serves.
Here we learn of the visit of Mary to Elizabeth. The recent movie "The Nativity" depicts Mary's flight to the home of Zechariah and Elizabeth as a flight from the eyes of her small town neighbours, and a response to the unusual circumstances in which she was placed. The Gospel of Matthew includes Joseph's response to the pregnancy of his betrothed, and his desire to end the betrothal quietly so as not to endanger Mary's life. There we get a hint of the social disapproval of adultery which the natural mind would assume was the cause of Mary's condition. Luke avoids mentioning the stigma and the devastating social impacts upon Mary, Joseph and their families. Instead we simply read that she visits her cousin in the hill country, far from the prying eyes and wagging tongues of her home village.

Luke's specific intent may be seen if we take the time to examine the parallels and subtle differences in the birth narratives of John and Jesus.

Both births were miraculous in their own way.
John was the first born child of an elderly couple who seemed to be past child bearing age. Jesus was the immaculately conceived child of a virgin.
We read that at the approach of the pregnant Mary the unborn John leaps in response to his presence. Both are unborn, yet it is John who responds to Jesus. This may simply be the advanced stage of Elizabeth's pregnancy (indicating that John is older than Jesus) but the peculiar timing of his movement hints at something more.
Both mothers offer praise, but we observe that Elizabeth identifies Mary as blessed and lauds her. In contrast Mary praises God.

A subtle distinction has been made by Luke. John is subordinate to Jesus. He may have been a little older, but he was not the one this story is about. It was thus at the time of their birth, and was to be so throughout his ministry.

We are caused to ponder the significance of this aspect of the text. Why include such an apparently mundane encounter in his story of Jesus?
One possibility is that some of John's disciples still clung to him and his teaching, and were trying to influence others to see John as the great prophet and martyr of their time. It is possible. There are indications throughout the gospel that John had his own disciples. It is not unreasonable that some clung fast to his teaching. He was, after all, an imposing and amazing figure in his time. Such a view would reflect the audience for whom Luke wrote - his contemporaries who knew about the ministry and reputations of John and Jesus.

Another possibility is that it is there for our times. Through the history of the church there have been many charismatic leaders who have attracted their followers - people like Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Wesley, William Booth, Billy Graham to name just a few. Those who have been profoundly influenced by their ministry readily focus on their words. Sometimes those words become the lens through which we read the Scriptures. Perhaps we need to look more closely at this text. Each of those individuals have been people who proclaimed clearly and decisively the message of Jesus for their time. They have pointed people to Jesus, and encouraged them to recognize him and Lord and Saviour, and follow his teaching. Jesus has been preeminent in their lives.

It is easy for us to focus on a good thing, and miss he best. John was a great man of God, but Jesus is Son of God and Saviour.

The gospel is about Jesus. He is preeminent.
As Christians live their lives Jesus is the one to be worshipped and followed. He is to be preeminent.
As Christians share their stories Jesus is the one who must receive recognition and glory. He is number one.
Let it be so.


Other readings:

Jeremiah 33:14-16;
Psalm 25:1-10;
1 Thess. 3:9-13

Year C December 13

Year C Advent 3

Luke 3:7-18

"Bear fruits worthy of repentance. Do not say to yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our ancestor'; for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children of Abraham." (v8 NRSV)

As we consider this text world leaders are meeting in Copenhagen in an effort to decide on a global approach to climate change. While there are some who are sceptical about the cause of the increasing temperature the science is unequivocal. Temperatures are rising all around the world, and we must respond.

John appeared in the wilderness and ramped up the political and religious temperature in his part of the world. Luke reports that crowds came out to see him. Without TV and newspapers word still got around and the curious and searching came out to see and hear him.

His message was plain and confronting. He was a straight shooter and laid it on the line. Simply put it was this - don't rely on your heritage, but turn your lives around. Do the right thing to avoid the judgment to come. This was no airy-fairy idea, but a message that required a change in the way people lived, especially those in positions of power and authority, and those with goods to share.
A practical response was required.
For those who had possessions - if you have two coats, give one to someone who has none. Do the same with your food.
For those in powerful financial positions - stick to the rules and don't line your own pockets.
For those in powerful legal positions - don't use (or abuse) the might of the law to hurt the vulnerable.

The message of John was almost like a media release preparing the way for Jesus - there were sound bites that would be amplified and explained when you spent time with Jesus.

In my world context the message of John could be paraphrased something like:
"Don't rely on your developed world status to protect your from the effects of global climate change. What should you? The rich nations should give generously to help the poor and those most affected by these changes. Share your technology and resources so that they will have shelter and food in the times to come.
Those involved in business (directors, managers, and investors) should not line their own pockets just because they can - but give fair service for a fair price with the good of all in view.
And the lawmakers and law enforcers (UN and economic powerhouses) - act with compassion and justice, and do not take advantage of your global power to keep yourselves rich at the expense of the underdeveloped and struggling nations around the world.

Self-interest in these days will lead to global disaster.
Personal self-interest will only push our politicians along that track.
We need to live with the big picture in mind. In small ways we can make a difference. We must heed the message of John if we are to avoid the judgment to come. For each of us, and for our nation, that means repentance.

Other readings:

Zephaniah 3:14-20
Isaiah 12:2-6
Phil 4:4-7

Year C December 6

Year C Advent 2

Luke 3:1-6

"The voice of one crying in the wilderness:' Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight...and all flesh shall see the salvation of the God.' (v4b,6 NRSV)

The responsive reading for this day is Luke 1:68-79. It is the prayer/prophecy of Zechariah, the father of John the Baptizer.

His prophecy over his son was about the specifics of his son's life, but the scope of his life work - go before the Lord to prepare his ways, give knowledge of salvation by forgiveness of sins, give light to those in darkness and guide people in the way of peace.

As we the story of the adult Jesus begins it is located at a time (v1) and in a place (v2). And it is John who kick starts the actions. He prepares the way. It is John who walks on to the stage and grabs people attention with his introduction. It is his words and his actions that are used to disturb the status quo, to unsettle and disturb the comfortable, and to raise expectations for the present and the future.

John's lifestyle was radical enough to draw attention to his message.
John's voice was loud enough and strong enough to compel people to listen.

As I prepared for a dedication on this Sunday it was clear to me that Zechariah's prophecy for his son could well be the message of God for our generation. We are to prepare people to hear the message of the Lord, give knowledge of salvation by forgiveness of sins, give light to those in darkness and guide people in the way of peace.

And this we must do by our lifestyle and our words.

Other readings:
Malachi 3:1-4;
Luke 1:68-79;
Philippians 1:3-11

Year C and the Gospel of Luke

The beginning or Advent marks the start of a new year of Lectionary readings.

Readings for Year C find much of their focus in the Gospel of Luke. Traditionally this gospel is understood to have been written by a man trained as a doctor. It sounds good to give additional status to the author of the document, but neither the terminology of the Gospel or Acts gives great weight to this accreditation. What is clear from the two books is that Luke set out to write 'an orderly account' of the life of Jesus, and of all that happened after his crucifixion and ascension.

To write his story of Jesus Luke had at his disposal some sources. The Gospel of Mark had already been written. A close word association in some texts points to Mark as one source. When the texts of Luke and Matthew are compared there are many passages that are almost identical, and scholars identify common wording and phrasing as pointing to a common source for both these gospels. It is referred to as 'Q', an abbreviation of 'Quelle', the German word for source, because they are yet to find the particular document. Luke took this material, combined it with what he had gleaned from other sources and wrote his gospel.

Luke wrote for a purpose, and his writing is addressed to a person - Theophilus.
Theophilus was a name used in that era, and many have sought to identify this person. But Theophilus can also be more than a person. The name means God lover, or lover of God. Luke's Gospel is to be read by all who love God.

Why bother to write another gospel if the stories in circulation and someone has already written many of them down? Luke writes for his audience and for his purposes. All that he had heard and learned of Jesus was not made clear in the documents already in circulation. There were aspects that needed to be emphasised. His gospel shines light where others did not. This gospel helps us recognise dimensions in Jesus' life and teaching that received little attention from the others. It is these things we must look for if we are to understand what Luke wanted us to know about Jesus

The Gospel of Luke reveals Jesus as the Saviour for all. It is the universal gospel, for Jesus is the Saviour of men and women, saints and sinners, Jews and Gentiles. We are all welcome to sit at table with Jesus.

In this lectionary year we are invited walk with Jesus as he is revealed through the Gospel of Luke. As we do we will get a glimpse of what Luke wanted his people to see, and what God wants to reveal to us.