Delivered24 January, 2010
By Rev Dr John Evans
Nehemiah 8:1-3, 5-6, 8-10
Psalm 19
1 Corinthians 12:12-31a
Luke 4:14-21
I believe on websites there are things called spoiler alerts. Warnings that you may not wish to proceed. You may hear information about a film, or program or a book, that you yourself may wish to see or read. Tody – the warning is you may be overjoyed, or greatly offended, certainly you have heard the bible passage before.
Last Sunday I opened up the issue of what it means to be the church in our sort of world; and in our sort of denomination. I suggested, following the lead of Walter Brueggemann, that we needed to be a community that developed an alternative consciousness to that of the dominant culture that is round about us. However, following the service, one of the comments that I received, and thank you always for comments (and note that you can actually put your comments on our website), is what would that all mean for us, here at the Church of All Nations. What would it mean for you personally, and for us as a comparatively small group of followers of Jesus, in the inner city of Melbourne. What would such a community alternative consciousness be like? What should we be like?
And it is here where we perhaps will need to get upclose to who we are as a small group; even get personal. This is what my commentator was musing about. What would this actual image of being the church mean here – and not some imaginary ideal.
I want to make some suggestions, but do it in the context of examining this famous reading from 1 Corinthians about there being different gifts within the one body of Christ; and each of part of that body has a role to play.
First of all, some context. I think we forget Paul himself is writing to a comparatively small community. We are not talking about a mega church here, or a large an powerful group. In fact most of the membership was probably quite poor. Who knows the numbers – but it would not be unreasonable to think that they were about our size. In the letter, there are very personal references in which you can think of Paul remembering this congregation personally. Of the different parties Paul sees existing in this community; he names names. There are particular ethical dilemmas of individuals – a man was living with his fathers’ wife (Chap 5) or the inappropriate celebration of Holy Communion, in which poorer members of that community were excluded from the feast (Chap 11) or the final greetings in Chapter 16 – in which very specific personal instructions are given.
I guess I am saying that to use Brueggemann’s model of being a countercultural community, everyone had to have a role or part. Although there have been synagogue worship for many hundreds of years in Corinth – this was something new. Everyone had to pull their weight. There was no place to hide. However, as can happen in such a new thing, people can feel very passionate about their perspective or contribution. Disputes arise. So Paul states the obvious; and he uses this illustration – which others had used before, and many since. All have to pull together – like each part of the body. It is a great illustration; and it is a part of the DNA of who we are as Uniting Church.
“. . . the one Spirit has endowed the members of Christ’s Church with a diversity of gifts, and there is no gift without its corresponding service: all ministries have a part in the ministry of Christ.” (Par 13 – Basis of Union)
What can we add to such a fundamental statement for us?
Well I think we forget how offensive this image of the incarnation is: of the Word made flesh. This was offensive – and the church, as the body of Christ, is also offensive. As we have also seen in the gospel reading – “Today”, “today” certain passages of scripture were fulfilled. This new era of the kingdom of God had begun – in the person and work of Jesus. This was Joseph’s son – wasn’t he? and it began at a particular place, time and date in history. The divine was not meant to be so constrained. “Today” the vision of Isaiah had been fulfilled. And as Paul writes, this mission, this hope for the world lives on in the church; the very body of Christ.
The ancient church leaders, and perhaps some modern ones too, have struggled with the physical aspect; and the physical implications of the incarnation – the mother’s womb, the birth and the after birth: all of those bacteria, and hormones, and mucous and phlegm. So Tertullian, an early leader, insists God became fully human but does so with some distaste: “Beginning with the birth itself the uncleanness of the generative elements within the womb, the filthy concretion of fluid and blood – the growth of the flesh for nine months long out of that very mire – the womb”.
So when then church is the body of Christ – it, according to Paul also has some interesting parts too. This body of Christ can be messy, and challenging. Paul in this passage actually calls these, well, the less presentable parts. I assume he is talking about the genitals, breasts, upper thigh, perhaps rolls of fat, or jowly cheeks; use your own imagination of what would be better-off covered. But such bits too are part of the church, the body of Christ or the incarnation itself. You see, we usually want to sanitise all of this and just say, “this passage is about useful, occasionally challenging diversity; even God given diversity. And well, we know, a house divided will fall. So all of us, we have to pull together.” Yes, that is true, but we do have interesting bits in that one body. Bits we can find difficult. So there is the vast history of testosterone in the body of Christ; wanting to go to war, or thump the chest, or be bullies in leadership. No doubt testosterone has been present in our own 150 years of being the body of Christ, here. So couldn’t we have a limit on the awkward, and the embarrassing members of the body of Christ? Cut them off, get rid of them?
Well – no, says Paul . . . but the awkward and the less presentable need to be aware of their role, and their need of and role for, other parts of the one body. And this is where I think we Paul is not sharp enough. As we know Paul says, and we read this last week:
“To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. To one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same spirit, to another … and so on”.
At the end of that passage, and the bit about the one body – there is a unity in the Spirit, amidst all of this diversity. However, does such a passage really challenge us anymore? I think, we see all that diversity just being for other people to participate. Sometimes these people are described, as Paul does in our passage as having skills in prophecy, or ministry, or teaching or healing. And that is so obviously not me, so this passage is about the whole church, not my local congregation. I just enjoy coming along, being part of the congregation. . . . well for an hour a week anyway. All of this diverse gift talk is about other people, or the whole church.
I am sure when Paul penned this words, although he was not using names here, he really had in mind particular people in that not very large community at Corinth. Particular people had gifts, each gift was needed, no gift, no person, was better or worse than the other. He was really talking as much about individuals, and not generic spiritual gifts. Recall our passage from Nehemiah. There were two verses, which disappointingly our lectionary excluded They were the verses with all of the unpronounceable names. But I actually think they are important as the rest of that reading. So take verse 7 – this was the group who were trying to explain to the assembled nation, the meaning of the scriptures for them. Israel had returned to Jerusalem after Babylonian exile, indeed it was 80 years after their release – and still the place was a shambles. The book of the law was read and
“Jeshua, Bani, Sherebiah, Jamin, Akkud, Shabbethai, Hodiah, Maaseiah, Kelita, Azariah, Jozabad, Hanan, Pelaiah, and the Levites helped the people understand the law.”
There is one collective noun – the Levites, the priests – but apart from that – there were individuals – named, and remembered – for what they had done.
The incarnation is not about faith in the abstract – or an organisation in the abstract, or categories of gifted people out there, somewhere. If this congregation is the manifestation of the one holy catholic and apostolic church, if we who gather here Sunday are the body of Christ, each one of us a have a role.
Mac – with his gentle wisdom, and knowledge of this place
Olivia – with her concern for human rights, the environment and a better world for her children
Greta with her terrier like seizing on an issue and passionately advocating for it
Paul with his broad experience, contacts and capability
Gunawen who is new here, so young, but talented and wanting to learn so much
Barbara who believe she is new, but has so much to offer
OK, OK you say – don’t go through the whole congregation. But that is my point. The church in Corinth, in addition to its various ructions, was a fragile flower. The movement of the followers of Jesus was very fragile. There was a dynamic here which we fail to understand. There was not a strong institutional base on which this handful of people could build. Yes, there had been the synagogue, but even Judaism, with the flexing of the imperial might, was also having its own problems. All there was – was the local church, which may or may not survive.
Everyone had to pitch in; to be the one body. . . even if they might not seemingly get on, or be a likely team. Today this is the sort of mindset we need – because the institution of the church, along with other institutions in Australian society is failing, receiving a bad press. . . and we cannot assume its continued existence. In a recent book by Hugh Heclo called Thinking Institutionally he illustrates this contemporary dilemma for institutions with the story of Barry and Cal – yes its an American book.
Both Barry and Cal are athletes. Barry is all flash, self obsessed and eager to draw attention to his performance; while Cal believes that his “ultimate obligation is to the game”. For Barry the game is a setting in which his athletic prowess is exercised and his accomplishments are recorded, his individual goals are achieved. For Cal the game is that whole rich tradition of people and events that defines his appropriate performance. Where Barry sees a set of rules; Cal sees an ethos. For Barry he only loves his own accomplishments. For Cal it is loving the game itself: through his own appropriate participation in its practice and the skill required to achieve well.
Heclo suggests that to think institutionally, is to think through the roles we play for the common good. With the church, with the role of the church in Carlton, with the role of the Christian faith in Carlton – it will not just happen because there is memory, a residual memory from our 150 year presence. Carlton will only live with hope and knowledge of God’s love because of our own participation in the church’s life and practice: our being the body of Christ.
Our reading today is a call for us to have a commitment to one and other. To recognise we continue to play a part in our community because we care for one other, recognise the gifts in each other, seek to build each other up and together seek to understand more of who Jesus is for us. And Paul, is saying, amazingly, we can be the body of Christ here in Carlton.
