15 March 2015

Voices in the Night

 1 Samuel 3:1-10

Fourth Sunday in Lent/ 15th March 2015

"The word of the LORD [, that is, Yahweh,] was rare in those days; visions were not widespread” (1 Samuel 3:1).  This verse sets the stage for what unfolds in this remarkable text. 

It was rare to hear a word from Yahweh in those days.  Visions were not widespread.  Not in their day.  There was a time when people expected to hear a voice from Yahweh.  There was a time when people expected to have visions and visitations, epiphanies.  Revelation had become a thing of the past.  Samuel and Eli and others were living from, living off of earlier epiphanies, earlier visions, earlier encounters with the Living God, not from anything new.

Eli is tending to the ark of the covenant, the dwelling place of God.  The candle was lit near the ark, as it was every night; it burned all night.  Eli, the priest, was near the ark, close to it, but obviously the thought of the presence of Yahweh didn’t disturb him; it didn’t keep him up all night.  Here is the ark, the dwelling place of Yahweh.  Just think of the power of the ark. It would have been like sleeping next to a volcano. Yet, that thought didn’t seem to keep him up at night.

This is an evocative scene: Eli, the priest, a member of the religious establishment, is tending to the religious practices required of him, lighting candles, keeping watch over the ark of the covenant, preserving the rituals of the sanctuary in Shiloh, this dwelling place of God.  And he’s asleep.  Granted, he needs to sleep.  We all need to sleep.  But, here, sleep is the context for what happens; it’s the setting for the story, the occasion for what transpires.  Sleep almost becomes symbolic for something else. Does Eli represent a time when the people of God fell asleep before the presence of God?  Yawning before Yahweh.  Bored with Yahweh.  A time when the people of God served with little expectation that Yahweh would actually speak or move.  Or, perhaps, it was Yahweh who yawned, who fell asleep, bored with his people.

It’s curious that this scene occurs at night, probably close to the dawn, near the moment of first light, in that liminal, in-between place when night yields to day.  It’s while they are both asleep—sleep, when the ego relinquishes its control to the depths of the unconscious—that Yahweh chooses to speak, to speak when they least expect it, to speak when their ego defenses are down, for that’s when Yahweh is most likely to be heard. At night, in a dream state, outside conventional, ordinary, waking experience—that’s when Samuel is available for a word from the LORD.

“Samuel!  Samuel!”  Was it a shout?  A whisper?  Was it a dream? How did Samuel first hear his name? 

Of course, he didn’t know it was Yahweh.  He assumed it was Eli calling, no different from other nights, no doubt, when Eli, poor of sight, might have called out for help from Samuel. “Eli, here I am,” he said.  Samuel assumes that it could only have been Eli calling out his name. It’s striking: even though they’re before the dwelling presence of Yahweh it never dawned on them that God could be speaking, there’s no expectation that the voice was coming from God. They both assumed that God was silent.

And so Samuel runs to Eli.  “Here I am, for you called me.”  Eli says, “I didn’t call you; go back to sleep.”  So he went back to his bed. 

The Lord calls again, “Samuel!  Samuel!”  So Samuel gets up and goes to Eli and says again, “Here I am, for you called me.”  Eli says again, “I did not call, my son; lie down again.”  So Samuel went back to his bed.

We’re told here at this point in the story that even though Samuel slept in the temple, he was the ward of Eli; the text reads, “Now Samuel did not yet know the LORD, and the word of the LORD had not yet been revealed to him” (1 Samuel 3:7).  This is a remarkable piece of information in the narrative.  Samuel is unfamiliar with the voice of God; he’s unfamiliar with the presence of God.  So there was no way for Samuel to recognize the voice or the movement of God in his life because they hadn’t been formally introduced, as it were.  Recognition is not possible without cognition.  You cannot know again (re-cognize) without first knowing.  And Samuel had no prior knowledge of God in his life.  Surely, he knew about Yahweh, but that’s not the same as knowing Yahweh—there’s a world of difference between the two.

And so for a third time the voice of Yahweh speaks to Samuel.  And for a third time Samuel’s confused.  He assumes that Eli is the only one there.  He assumes that there can only be one person calling his name, only one option: Eli.  And so for a third time he goes to Eli and says, probably frustrated at this point, “Here I am, for you called me.”

It’s only then, after the third visitation that Eli begins to awake from his own spiritual slumber.  You can almost imagine him slowly beginning to realize what is happening.  Even though Yahweh had been silent for a long time, Eli knew enough about Yahweh, knew something about Yahweh’s style, knew something of Yahweh’s approach to recognize a visitation when it happens.  Eli knew it was Yahweh.

“Go,” Samuel, “lie down; and if he calls you, you shall say, ‘Speak, LORD, for your servant is listening.”  And so Samuel went and did as he was told. “So Samuel went and laid down in his place.  In time Yahweh returned and “stood there,” the text said, “calling as before, ‘Samuel!  Samuel!’”  And this time he was ready. “Speak, for your servant is listening.”  Then Yahweh began to speak to Samuel.

This is a lot for a twelve-year old to take in, isn’t it?  This is a lot for anyone to experience.  Perhaps we should be grateful that experiences such as these are not that common.  At some level any encounter with Yahweh, as we see throughout scripture, is disturbing and unsettling. Our immediate response might be something like fear, which is why the angels of the Yahweh are forever saying, “Fear not!”  After the initial feeling of fear, one thing becomes evident: once you have a religious experience like Samuel’s there’s no going back.  Normalcy is forever altered.  There are people who have never had a religious experience in their lives and hope for one, they hope for something that will confirm their faith.  I can understand that hope.  On the other hand one must be careful what one hopes for.  Once you have such an experience there’s no way to undo it.  It’s yours and then you’re responsible for it, responsible to it—to be faithful to it.

There are other folks in our day, some even in the Church, who believe that religious experiences such as Samuel’s were for an earlier age.  It was a different time, a different dispensation.  Perhaps we’re too sophisticated for epiphanies and theophanies, for spiritual experiences.  Perhaps in our age we’ve become so jaded and cynical and hurt and disappointed to the point that we, too, say, “The word of the LORD is rare in these days; visitations are not widespread.”  And so there are plenty of folks who have fallen asleep in the temple of the LORD, yawning before Yahweh, never expecting to hear a word from God or experience anything profound. Others, like Samuel, go about their religious practices and rituals, without any expectation that the Holy is about to be heard or encountered.

That wise poet T. S. Eliot (1888-1965) once said there are things “not known, because not looked for.”[1]  If you have no expectation that God still speaks, if you’re eclipsing any possibility of encountering the Living God, then don’t be surprised if you’re disappointed.  As Jesus said, “Those who seek, find” (Matthew 7:7).

So, what if we assume that God is still speaking, still seeking us, still trying to appear in many ways, how will we recognize that voice?  How will we recognize the Voice that summons us in the middle of the night?  We need an experience, a cognition, first. And we all need mentors who can help show us the way. Eli’s advice to Samuel was very wise and that truth still holds for us today.  Say, “Speak, LORD, your servant is listening.”

We are called to listen.  To listen is to be receptive to what God is trying to say to us in our lives. 

Listening requires presence.  In other words, in order to listen we need to be present, in the moment, not somewhere else.  It’s difficult to listen to someone if you’re thoughts are elsewhere.  We have to be present.

Being receptive means we have to be open, available, removing the obstacles that silence the Voice.  Being receptive means shutting up long enough to listen for what God might be trying to say.  It requires silence.  It’s difficult to listen to what someone is saying when you’re doing all the talking or when the internal chatter carries on incessantly in our heads as someone talks to us.  You know someone is speaking to you, but it sounds like the voice of the teacher in Charlie Brown; it’s almost impossible to really listen and understand what is being said.  The same can be said of our relationship with God.

And the same is true with prayer.  There’s a place for speaking in prayer, voicing our praise and petitions to God.  But there comes a time when the words must stop, when we realize there’s nothing left to say, and so we become silent and still and we open ourselves, becoming receptive to the "word" that might be coming the other way, a word from the silence, coming from God.  St. Isaac of Syria, writing from the seventh century, said, “The highest form of prayer is to stand silently in awe before God.”

It’s a terrible risk, you know, all of this.  It requires trust.  Can we trust the silence to speak?  Can we sit long enough in the silence and listen?  Can we trust what we hear? Can we trust the Voice? 

Samuel, quite innocently, even naively, opened himself up to the voice of Yahweh.  The reading for today ends at verse 10, with Samuel saying, “Speak, for your servant is listening!”  The lectionary completely skips what we find in verse 11. It completely omits what Yahweh said to Samuel and what God said was not what Samuel wanted to hear, not what he expected to here.  Samuel discovers God’s impending judgment against the house of Eli, against the blasphemies of Eli’s sons, actually.  The message Samuel receives is difficult, abrasive, and devastating.  As you can imagine, Samuel was afraid to tell Eli what he saw and heard.  But Samuel told him everything and hid nothing from him.  He had to.  That’s the risk.

And that, my friends, is how prophets are born—or called or formed.  The text says, “As Samuel grew up, the LORD was with him and let none of his words fall to the ground.”  Samuel was obedient to what he heard and saw.  Samuel knew that he was beholden to the Voice.  He had to be.  He had no choice. 

This is what is means to be a prophet within the biblical tradition.  The first task of the prophet is not to foretell the future.  The first task of the prophet is to listen to the Voice of God and then speak to the people, not what the prophet wants to say, but what the prophet has to say, is compelled to say, is called to say.  This is also a good description of how ministers are called and a good way to describe the life of a preacher and how sermons are formed.  What the prophet says is for the sake of the people because it’s for the sake of God and God is on the side of the people.  “The prophet,” Rowan Williams, former Archbishop of Canterbury, says, “is somebody whose role is always to be challenging the community to be what it is meant to be—to live out the gift that God has given to it.”[2] 

The person who perhaps best captures the image of a prophet for us is Martin Luther King, Jr. (1929-1968).  King a preacher, yes; a reformer, yes; an agitator, sure—but it was his role as prophet that really made King, King.  What he said was challenging to hear (then and now), but he was challenging this nation and the Church to be what it was meant to be, to live up to it’s own ideals and vision, to live out its calling.  That’s the role of the prophet. We can hear it in so many of King’s sermons and speeches and sayings, such as this one: “If the church does not recapture its prophetic zeal, it will become an irrelevant social club without moral or spiritual authority.”[3]

Prophets aren’t the only ones summoned to listen to God.  We’re all called to listen, called to be still and know that God is God (Psalm 46:10).  And in that stillness, in the silence, actively listening with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength (Mark 12:30), in time, you will hear something—a still small voice whispering in your ear in the middle of the night or a voice that shakes foundations—that will change your life. 

“Speak, Lord, your servant is listening.”  This, too, can be our posture in prayer.  And who knows…you just might be summoned to be a prophet.  You never know.  You might be summoned to become a preacher.  You might discover a voice you didn’t know you had, a voice the world needs to hear.

What matters most is that we awake up from our spiritual slumbers.  There is so much in our lives that wants to lull us to sleep.  But we need to wake up and then listen and then follow wherever the Voice wants to take us.






[1] T. S. Eliot, “Little Gidding,” from Four Quartets.
[2] Rowan Williams, Being Christian: Baptism, Bible, Eucharist, Prayer (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2014), 13.
[3] Martin Luther King, Jr., Strength to Love (1963).

08 March 2015

Order Matters: Kingdom, Repent, Believe.





The north shore of the Sea of Galilee.
Mark 1:9-15

Third Sunday in Lent/ 8th March 2015

I’ll cut right to the chase here this morning.  Pay attention to the order.  Look at the flow of the text.  We start at 1:9 with Jesus’ baptism by John (verses 9-11), and then we have Jesus’ temptation in the wilderness (verses 12-13), followed by Jesus’s statement about the kingdom of God (verse 14-15).  Jesus leaves Galilee for the wilderness to be baptized, then he’s led deeper into the wilderness for forty days, and then Jesus returns to Galilee.  Upon his return, right after word arrived that John the Baptist had been arrested, Jesus begins his public ministry.  Everything Jesus came to do is summed up in these two verses, verses 14 and 15 of chapter 1.  The life of a Jesus-follower is summed up in these two verses. 

Here they are again:  “Jesus came to Galilee, proclaiming the good news of God, and saying, ‘The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God has come near; repent, and believe in the good news.’”

And it’s here, in these two verses, so simple, so profound, that we need to pay close attention to the order.  Getting the order correct is crucial.

Let’s break it down and you’ll see what I mean. 
Jesus arrives in Galilee. 
What is the first task of his ministry?  
He comes proclaiming, preaching. What is he proclaiming, preaching?  The good news. 
Whose good news?  God’s.  God’s good news.  
The euaggelion tou theou.

What is this good news that’s coming from God? Here’s what Jesus says: the time is fulfilled—peplerotai ho kairos. What time is it?  Kairos time! And what is kairos time?  Kairos is time, a kind of time. It’s a moment among many moments pregnant with possibility and opportunity.  It’s not ordinary time, common time, second after second after second, tick then tock then tick then tock forever and ever.  Kairos is not that kind of time. Jesus would have described that tick-tock understanding of time as chronos.  But there are special moments within chronos so full of meaning and significance, moments that emerge and erupt the ordinary flow of tick-tock time that are singular, when something different and new occurs, and what arrives in that moment, every other moment is forever changed.  That’s kairos time.

This new thing emerging, erupting, exploding in ordinary time in Jesus’s life, this new dimension of time Jesus would have described as kairos, which is exactly how Mark describes it.  That’s what Mark wants you and me to see here.  The beginning of Jesus’ ministry is a kairotic moment and what occurred in that moment continues unabated throughout time, for all time, right down to our time, to this time.

So what erupted into time then and continues to break into our time now?  Jesus said, “The kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the kingdom.”  This is the order we need to pay close attention to. 

Kingdom. Repent. Believe.  In this order. Not: repent, believe, and then enter the kingdom of God.  Neither is it:  believe, then, repent, and then the kingdom of God will come near.  No.  Getting the order correct is crucial.  Where you begin will shape the contours of your life.  Where you begin will determine where you end up and shape how you get there.  By “there” I don’t mean heaven.  For Mark, the kingdom of God is not a synonym for “heaven.”  The kingdom or, better, the realm of God (the Greek could also accurately be translated as empire), is not “up there” or “out there” after we die.

The realm of God—God’s realm of fairness, justice and righteousness, God’s way of mercy and peace and fierce love, God’s judgment upon evil and every injustice in the world, God’s redemptive power to heal and to restore, to save and to make whole, this kingdom, this kin-dom, this realm, this empire, this sphere of benevolent influence—has come near, drawn close to us, it has erupted into the space-time continuum in the body and spirit of Jesus of Nazareth.  Our life fissures and splits open with his arrival, in this kairos time.  All that the kingdom symbolizes and means is now embodied in Jesus, in what he says, but also in what he is. God has entered into time through the Son and time is never the same again. The power of God has now been unleashed upon the world in an entirely new way in him.  This new way, as theologians say, this novum, this new thing is the good news, it is what we mean by gospel.

And because all of this is now true—the kingdom is not on the way, it’s not about to draw near, it’s here and now, right now—we need to wake up.  Wake up!  Change your life!  Change the way you think!  Change your mind, change your awareness, which is what we mean by repent; and then believe, trust in the goodness of this good news.

Kingdom. Repent. Believe. Many Christians like to switch it around by starting with repentance.  We’ve all heard countless televangelists and revivalist preachers calling for repentance as a kind of warning.  If you repent, so the message goes, change your ways, and then believe certain things about Jesus or God or the Spirit, then you’ll enter the kingdom, which often means heaven.  Many Christians think this is the order of things: Repent. Believe. Kingdom.  But that’s not what the text says.  That’s why John Calvin (1509-1564) insisted, “Repentance is not placed first…as if it were the ground of forgiveness, or as if it induced God to be begin to be gracious to us.”[1] Forgiveness is not contingent upon repentance. We can’t force God to forgive us by repenting.  Jesus arrived in the Galilee proclaiming the kingdom, because God is gracious, not because we are.

Kingdom. Repent. Believe.  Some Christians like to reverse it altogether by starting with belief.  Christians that take this approach tend to become anxious about what they believe or don’t believe, about what others believe or don’t believe, they work themselves up into a nervous state worrying about doubt creeping into their lives. They stress belief first. They say, if you first come to believe certain things about Jesus, then change your thinking and your behavior, then the kingdom will come.

The major problem with both distortions of this text, whether you start with repentance or belief, is that both of these salvation formulas are so egocentric and ego-driven.  These readings of the text make it all about us, what we can or cannot do or think or believe.  We assume that if we just perfect repentance, get our moral and theological lives in order, return to the straight and now, follow certain rules of behavior, behave like good little boys and girls, control our thoughts, then, surely, the blessing of the kingdom will fall upon us. But this is, as we all know, the royal road to continued disappointment and failure.  It doesn’t work this way.

The good news is not about you.  It’s not about what you can or cannot do to enter the kingdom.  It’s not about you and me trying to earn our salvation.  It’s not about us. We can’t usher in the kingdom of God. We can’t work toward it.  We can’t manipulate God with our “good” behavior, as if that would get God to open the doors and let us in the kingdom.   But, you might be asking, isn’t that what Jesus wants from us?  Isn’t this what God wants from us, perfection?  Isn’t that why Jesus came to die to deal with our sin, to judge our waywardness, to take our sin on a cross? Doesn’t Jesus expect a particular ethic from his followers?  Of course—which brings me back to the text.

The ethic God requires flows from understanding the kingdom.

Kingdom. Repent. Believe.  The kingdom comes first.  It’s a gift.  It’s an act of grace.  It’s given. And it has already arrived.  It’s already here, in Christ.  Right now.  What Jesus wants first from us is not our best intentions but for us to know in our hearts and minds that God is gracious, to know God’s justice, mercy, peace, and wholeness, to know that something new and beautiful and wondrous and redemptive has been born and is being reborn in us because of him. 

And when this awareness overwhelms us, when we are overcome by this grace, when we come to this consciousness, when we experience God in precisely this way, repentance, metanoia, will follow, it will happen, and we will come believe in the good news and trust in the good news because we know that it’s good. This awareness of the kingdom yields repentance, it changes our minds, and it informs what we believe, and, ultimately, it compels us to follow him, it moves our bodies and our feet and we move or march or act.  “And passing along by the Sea of Galilee, Jesus saw Simon and Andrew the brother of Simon casting a net in the sea; for they were fishermen. And Jesus said to them, ‘Follow me and I will make you fish for people.’ And immediately they left their nets and followed him.” (Mark 1:16-18).  I suspect that this is the reason why the disciples were able to respond so quickly to Jesus’ invitation to follow him.  They saw a different world before them, with new possibilities found in him.  Because they caught of a glimpse of that vision, the left everything and followed him.

Jesus offered them a vision of God’s kingdom. And he came preaching to help us to see it too.

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (1928-1968) saw it.  Had a glimpse of the kingdom.  That’s what he saw from the mountaintop.  He saw God’s vision for the world.  He saw where the kingdom would lead us. 

And all the people who marched across the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, they saw it too.  That’s why they could march and walk and suffer and even die.  It’s the kingdom vision that calls us—and it’s the vision that changes us and invites us to repent from former ways and believe in the possibilities of a different narrative.  The visions calls us to act or to walk or to march or to work or to prayer.  It calls us to come alive.  And when the vision emerges, when kairos breaks into chronos, and we attempt to move toward that vision we should expect resistance against us, we should anticipate an enormous struggle against God’s kingdom.  And when that happens we need to go back and remember the vision because, as President Barak Obama said yesterday in Selma, “We know the march is not over yet.”[2]         

I agree with Richard Rohr, the Franciscan priest and writer, when he says, “Jesus is much more concerned about shaking your foundations, giving you an utterly alternative self image, world image, and God image, and thus reframing your entire reality.”[3]  The good news—this kingdom message embodied in Jesus—is all about “regrounding, reshaping and redirecting you from your core.” And it’s not really good news unless it’s doing all of this for us and to us.  Without transformation at the core level, religion or faith is essentially ego-driven and ego-centric.  The faith becomes something we “use” for our own ends and purposes, something we “do” in order to get something out of God or the church or our neighbor.  The Christian life unfortunately becomes all about doing, “repenting,” or believing or trying to belief certain things about God or Jesus or the Spirit.  The faith experience becomes consumed with a desire to try harder, be a better Christian, a better person, a better mother or father or son or daughter or spouse or partner.  No wonder people get disappointed and frustrated.

Why do we focus on “repent” and miss the reference to the kingdom?  We hear repent as: try harder. Work harder, be kinder, be more giving, more forgiving, more peaceful, less anxious, more accepting, more loving, be a better mother, father, spouse or partner, a better son or daughter…you know the drill, you know those internal messages in your head.  You also know, for the most part, they’re not effective.  Change can occur, but deep, lasting change never really occurs this way.  And all of these aspirations are important, but the Christian life is about so much more.

Jesus’ ministry didn’t start with repent and it didn’t start with belief, it started with the kingdom message, the proclamation of the good news erupting into the world.  Think of the good news as geyser welling up from the depths and showering down upon us with grace upon grace.  We can’t cause the geyser to well up from the depths.  We’re not called to measure or “understand” the whys and the wherefores of the geyser or try to maintain its pressure or determine when and where it erupts the surface of our lives.  Instead, we are called to acknowledge its presence and force, we are called to allow it happen—because it is happening—and then allow it to wash over our lives and rain down upon us.  We need to surrender to it.  Allow it to happen.  Be grateful for it, rejoice in it, celebrate it.  You can’t cause the water to pour down upon you, you can’t make the geyser to its thing, it is done unto you. (see Luke 1:38).  This is what Richard Rohr describes as a “deep allowing.”

Allow the kingdom to wash over you.  
Receive the good news. 
Allow Jesus’ words to wash over you.  
Allow God’s love to overwhelm you. 
Allow God’s justice to convict you.  
Allow God’s grace to shake your foundations. 
Yield to it, again and again and again.  
When this occurs and every time it occurs we change, 
we are changed, metanoia happens, almost naturally.  
Think about it: 
how could we not change after an encounter with God?  Repentance flows from the transforming experience, 
and then we believe 
and trust 
and rest in the goodness of God’s kingdom.  
We give our lives over to it.  
Leaving our nets behind, we follow.




[1] John Calvin, Commentary on Matthew, Mark, Luke in Christian Classics Ethereal Library.
[2] The full text of President Obama’s speech in Selma maybe found here.
[3] Richard Rohr, “Lent Is About Transformation.” 

01 March 2015

Covenant & Cross

Genesis 17: 1-7, 15-16;
Mark 8:31-38

Second Sunday in Lent/ 1st March 2015

Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper

I’m thankful for this week’s lectionary. To be honest, I’m not always a fan of the Revised Common Lectionary.  I often follow it, but not always.  What I’m thankful for this week is the way the lectionary links a text from Genesis 17 with the pivotal verses in Mark 8, where Jesus makes unsettling statements about a cross, that a cross is required of him and of us.

It’s this link, this alignment, this juxtaposition of these two texts that is absolutely fascinating, and drew me to something I’ve never considered before or never quite saw in this light.  In Genesis 17 we have the establishment of God’s “everlasting covenant” with Abram and his descendants.  “This is my covenant with you:  You shall be the ancestor of a multitude of nations.  …I will make you exceedingly fruitful; and I will make nations of you….  I will establish my covenant between me and you, and your offspring after you throughout their generations, for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your offspring after you” (Gen. 17:3-4, 6-7).

Here God—Almighty God, El Shaddai—makes a pledge, a promise with Abram.  God rewards Abram for his faithfulness.  God makes clear what God’s intentions were from the start, when God first called out to Abram and summoned him to leave home (Genesis 12:1-3).  Here in chapter 17, God made a covenant with Abram and not just with Abram, but his children, along with his children’s children, all of his descendants, from generations to generations, multitudes.  God made a commitment to be faithful to Abram—no matter what.  God binds Godself to Abram’s destiny.  And as a sign of this arrangement, Abram becomes Abraham, meaning “ancestor of a multitude.”

There are many covenants in Hebrew Scriptures. There’s one with Noah (Gen. 8:20-9:17) and with David (2 Samuel 7).  But it’s this one, the covenant with Abram—this is the big one.  It’s this covenant that runs all the way through the story of Israel, all the way to Egypt and back again, all the way to Babylon and back again.  Throughout, God remains faithful to God’s people and never, ever gives up on them—even when they deserve as much.

Covenants are serious things.  This one in particular binds God to humanity (through Israel) and humanity to God—and nothing can tear it asunder.  Both parties, God and humanity, agree to the terms. And the terms of this covenant have shaped us ever since.

Now fast forward with me to sixteenth century Geneva, to John Calvin (1509-1564).  Calvin loved to preach and write about God’s covenant with Abraham.  Covenant and covenantal theology loom large in the history of the Reformed tradition.  I would guess that the most popular name given to Presbyterian churches in the U.S. (after numerical designations, such as First or Second, etc., or Westminster) would be Covenant.  Calvin felt very strongly—and correctly—that God’s covenant with Abraham was a sign that God is generous and good.  “Calvin interprets God’s power as God’s ability to do good for [God’s] people: Abraham discovered that the hand of God would be to him the wellspring of every good.  The very fact that God’s promises were made to Abraham’s descendants as well as to Abraham is, in Calvin’s eyes, the most remarkable testimony to the Lord’s amazing goodness.”[1]

And then Calvin does something remarkable.  Calvin links the generosity of the covenant with Abraham with the generosity of the gospel that we find in the New Testament.  Calvin wonders, Can the promise of the gospel possibly be less than the promise made to Abraham?  Of course not.  Therefore, Christians are Abraham’s posthumous children and as such we have a share in that covenant.  The gospel then becomes a clearer explication of what was made to Abraham.  The gospel doesn’t improve upon it or change it, but it extends it and expands it.  Because, in Calvin’s eyes, it was God’s infinite goodness that was poured out more liberally than ever before in the life and witness of God’s son, Jesus Christ.

In many ways, this is what the lectionary does.  And this is what struck me in a new way this week.  In other words, by linking these texts, the meaning of the cross, that is, Jesus’ statements about the cross are couched within the larger covenantal promise made to Abram.  Instead of seeing the cross as an isolated historical event it’s embedded within the larger story of God’s saving love.  The cross of Christ has a larger frame of reference.  The cross occurred within the ongoing narrative of God’s covenantal determination to not be God without humanity, to not be God without us! Or, to put it a different way, the cross is not something Jesus had to take up and endure, suffering for our sin, in order to get God to finally love us again.

In the cross, God is effectively saying to us—in big, bold, dramatic gestures—what God has always been saying to us from the beginning of time: I am forever bound to you. I will be your God. You will be my people.  And nothing —not even death—has the power to break my promise to you.  In love, God sends God’s own flesh and blood to make this point.  And the Son endures the cross and conquers death to show the extent of God’s covenantal commitment to be with us, and to love us, and forgive us, and hold us, as the old hymn put it, with a “love that wilt not let us go.”[2]  This covenantal commitment is seen in the way God remained faithful to Jesus throughout his life.  Jesus’ trust in the surety of this covenant enabled him to do whatever was needed—even death on a cross—to convey to us that God does what Jesus does, Jesus does what God does, and that Jesus is his name, Yeshua, Yahweh saves.

Writing about the nature of covenant, Calvin said this is “how [a] covenant is rightly kept: …God binds Himself to the promise given to us; so the consent of faith and of obedience is demanded from us.”[3] This covenant, then, places demands upon us. God expects us to do our part.

The covenant then frees us to take on our respective callings knowing that God is committed to us.  Confident of God’s faithfulness, Jesus invites us to pick up a similar cross, living lives of comparable faithfulness. Jesus invites us to take on and even crucify those things in our lives or in the world around us that act as if God’s faithfulness is not true, that causes you or people you know to think that God is not committed to you or them.  Jesus invites us to take on and crucify, to take on and even suffer with and for the sake of your neighbors so that your neighbors come to know or know again of God’s faithfulness, that God desires that they and their descendants “live long and proper,” that we are all children of God, and that we are held in a love that will never let us go.

Calvin wrote, “Once God has received us into [God’s] family, to treat us not merely as servants but as children, [God] undertakes to feed us, too, throughout the entire course of our life, so that [God] may fulfill the role for the best of fathers, concerned for his children.  And even that was not enough for [God]: [God] wanted to assure us of his unfailing generosity by giving us a pledge.”[4] 

Part of that pledge is this Communion table,
here in bread and wine, given to feed us. 
Here at the table we remember the cross. 
Here at this table we also remember the covenant.





[1] Brian Gerrish, Grace and Gratitude: The EucharisticTheology of John Calvin (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993), 121.
[2] The hymn “O Love That Wilt Not Let Me Go,” was written in 1882 by the Presbyterian minister George Matheson (1842-1906). Matheson went blind while he was a divinity student at the University of Glasgow, yet he was determined to enter the ministry. He had an influential career in the church.  Matheson wrote the words to this hymn on the eve of his sister’s wedding.  Reflecting back on his challenging life, remembering his fiancĂ© who left him when she learned that he was going blind, yet affirming God's faithfulness to him, the hymn came to him as a whole.  Matheson said, “I am quite sure that the whole work was completed in five minutes, and equally sure that it never received at my hands any retouching or correction. I have no natural gift of rhythm. All the other verses I have ever written are manufactured articles; this came like a dayspring from on high."  See also Ian C. Bradley, O Love That Wilt Not Let Me Go (Fount, 1990). Here is the Westminster Chorus’ moving arrangement of this piece.
[4] From Calvin's 1543 edition of the Institutes of the Christian Religion, cited in Gerrish, 124.