Preaching Notes for the Tenth Sunday After Pentecost
(August 2, 2015)
The Rev. Dr. Katherine Thomas Paisley, Guest Writer
About the writer: Katherine Thomas Paisley grew up as the daughter of the United Methodist minister in the Northern Illinois Conference, moving from small towns, to suburbs, to county-seat towns listening to a fine preacher with a passion for justice. She met her husband in one of those towns, so is disinclined to complain about the moving part. They had two children before they moved south so she could go to seminary at Vanderbilt University in Nashville. She served churches in the Tennessee Conference for 22 years, in school and out of school. She finished a Ph.D. in homiletics at Vanderbilt under the fine instruction of a great many storytellers, preachers and teachers, both in and out of the classroom. Her last child (planned, in case you wondered) was born in the middle of her exams, and she took a break from churches to do dissertation research and play with her baby. She taught the preaching class at Garrett in the Course of Study School for Local Pastors for six years, taught lay preaching and United Methodist heritage classes for district lay leaders, served a wide variety of churches across two states, and currently serves as pastor in a congregation in Chicago.
2 Samuel 11:26-12:13a
Challenges abound in this passage for both the preacher and the listeners, but there may be ample rewards in wrestling with this passage to make it worth the work.
In this text, the popular image of David as king, leader, and good man is threatened by the exposure of his sinful behavior. As we have seen in some of our own leaders in recent years, the possibilities for response to this kind of scandal are varied. David has tried a cover-up, sending for Uriah to visit home in order to cover up his responsibility for Bathsheba’s pregnancy. But that didn’t work. Uriah did not sleep with his wife, and David’s next response is to order a military initiative that leaves Uriah dead on the field. He then marries the newly widowed and pregnant Bathsheba.
This is a complicated story and problematic for the idea of David as a leader. In his actions towards Bathsheba, we have a situation of sexual assault, since Bathsheba could not havesaid “no” to the king. This isn’t just a sexual misconduct issue, however, since his self-interest leads him to disregard military responsibility and order the death of Uriah by military action. David reveals a strong streak of ruthlessness in arranging Uriah’s death to cover his own sin. The cover-up escalates the sin in a fatal way, and his betrayal of leadership in a new direction.
In the past fifty years, our nation has experienced a variety of leadership betrayals from the impeachment of former president Richard M. Nixon to the sexual sins of a great many people, including former president Bill Clinton. We have experienced some military betrayals as well, particularly with the sale to the government of faulty products that may well have contributed to deaths of military personnel. We have seen government leaders who had financial interest in the companies awarded government contracts. In several of these betrayals, the attempts to coverup the misconduct led to even worse scenarios. This story of David may help us get in touch with our feelings of betrayal, but then how do we begin to address the question of where God is in the story?
Nathan, the prophet, is the voice who confronts David in this passage. He is the Edward Snowden of the time, blowing the whistle on the corruption that he sees. It is an audacious role, to dare to be the moral oversight on a powerful leader or entity. Nathan strategically uses a fictitious story that arouses David’s wrath at the perpetrator of the injustice before he realizes that he is the one at fault. At this point, David faces another point of decision in how he will respond to the accusation. That he doesn’t order Nathan killed, as he has Uriah, may be because he honors him as a prophet. It may also be that the king’s conscience is weary. For whatever reason, David admits his wrongdoing.
How do we respond to this story? Are we in the position of David or Nathan? Heroes with feet of clay are really hard for us to deal with. But for this very reason, the text offers us opportunities to grow. King David, legendary king of Ancient Israel, may be a good opportunity for us to examine the expectations that we have of leaders and how realistic those expectations may be. David is also a character with whom we sometimes identify in the Bible, so this story may be an opportunity to look at our own sinfulness, the ways that we justify it, and then try to cover it up. This is a good example of a person who tries to do what is good and ends up falling victim to his own sin. As St. Paul explains it in Romans 7:19 (CEB), “I don’t do the good that I want to do, but I do the evil that I don’t want to do.”
Secondly, the role of Nathan in this text offers an opportunity to explore the role of prophetic leadership, even with discomfort. David’s response to Nathan’s challenge also offers an opportunity for discussion as David does not resist the judgment at all and responds with a confession of his own sin. From Nathan’s perspective, there was likely some unease at the thought of confronting the king about his sin. With this positive outcome, it might be easier to consider in what areas we may feel called to prophetic leadership today.
What might Nathan have to say to our nation or our world? Where is our sin so grievous and our protection of that sin so extreme that the question is dangerous to raise? Prophetic challenges might surround issues of racism, unequal pay and other treatment toward women, or our gluttonous consumption while a third of our own citizens live with food insecurity and around 21,000 people die of hunger or hunger-related causes every day, according to the United Nations. Would a story help us see our grievous sin?
Reflecting on my experiences in preaching, stories offer a marvelous assist in raising challenging issues. Modern parables can be constructed to help reveal truth in our congregations and cultures. Of course, this is a challenge. Or we can turn to masters of the storytelling art – Fred Craddock, Rob Bell, Michael Williams, and the like. They offer ready-made stories or examples of the craft that may inspire us to wade in. Stories, like parables, invite us into another world and then can refocus our minds in ways that we would never have imagined.
For the preacher, Nathan’s bold action leads us to consider our own preaching task. Are we challenging enough in our preaching, or do we back away from the issues that would cause our congregations to complain. Do we create an interaction with the text and context in a meaningful and relevant way? This week, we have the opportunity to draw a number of parallels with the biblical story and share the responsibility with Nathan. Go ahead; Nathan can take it.
Ephesians 4: 1-16
Ephesians is one of the books in the New Testament thought by most scholars to be attributed to Paul rather than authored by him. For most churches, this doesn’t make much difference, but it is worth noting. The author or authors of Ephesians, whoever they may be, are concerned with the quality of life existing in the church. This offers us a mine full of treasures as we seek to “dig deep” in our churches today.
The metaphor of the “body of Christ” is an important one in this epistle, as it is elsewhere in the epistles. Ephesians 4 offers some suggestions for our corporate life and health that may make this a text helpful to churches. It is worth noting that the epistolary readings for the following three weeks are also in Ephesians, making this a potential miniseries on how we are to live together as the body of Christ, perhaps entitled after 4:1, “A People Worthy of the Call,” or “Being the Church.”
Conduct, or how we comport ourselves, begins this section (humility, gentleness and patience), along with the writer’s insistence that we accept one another with love. This is an area where the church struggles, so this emphasis might be both controversial and extremely helpful. Our denominational slogan of “Open Hearts, Open Minds, Open Doors” might be a good conversational starting point. We declare it, but do we live it? (How do we and how not?) How would we describe acceptance in the church? Is it allowing people in worship? Inviting them to fellowship time? Allowing them to work on teams or committees? At what point in our acceptance of others do we allow them to influence us? Acceptance of people whose views are different, whose culture is different, or whose ethnicity is different is much more difficult and complex than we would like to admit. As our churches struggle with cultural competence (or don’t), this text from Ephesians offers a biblical starting point.
The idea of acceptance with love pushes us to a whole other level. Acceptance with love implies that we value the other person as highly as a member of our own family. Family may be a helpful model because most families include people that we love, but often disagree with or even choose not to spend much time with. Yet we love them and accept them around the family table. So who is accepted at the table at church? Does this model acceptance with love?
The following phrase, “make an effort to preserve the unity of the Spirit with the peace that ties you together,” offers a suggestion of at least the beginning of a model for how to handle our difference. “Remember that the Spirit unites us, even when we disagree, and we can live together in peace” might be one way of restating this idea. The Sanskrit or Hindi word, “Namaste” might be a helpful one to inform us in the church. It has been translated a variety of ways, but my preference is for “the light in me honors the light in you.” This translation shows an acknowledgement of the fact that the light or life of the divine exists in each person and is a reason to honor, not just accept, one another. As Christians, we might understand this as implying the Spirit allows us to claim a kind of unity with other believers, but I would also suggest that there is a unity with all people, regardless of their belief system.
On a practical level, a focus on unity in the Spirit would help us look past the perspectives, issues, or personalities that tend to divide us. We can find multiple examples in history, story, and literature of times when people moved beyond their particularities because they were focused on one uniting goal. This is a common book or movie theme as well as in life. Think of M*A*S*H* or building a bridge, survival in the wilderness, and so on. Often, our church histories provide a wealth of examples as well. There is a church in Freeport, Illinois, where the church history includes the story of a group of early settlers selling significant parts of their land to provide the money to build the first Methodist meeting house in the area. Stories of sacrifice of personal ideals for the common good abound because they are truly inspiring. How can the Spirit unify the church today? What purpose does God have for us that would lead us beyond self-interest and beyond our differences and things that divide us?
In verses 11-13, different leadership roles in the church are named and the purpose of building up the body of Christ affirmed as the reason for a variety of leadership roles. The image of infancy and maturity offers a metaphor for understanding this purpose. It also offers a way of understanding the need to grow beyond the faith of our childhoods, or to encourage our congregations to continue growing in their faith. In congregations where spiritual growth is a weakness or Bible study relegated to a very small group, this theme may be a fruitful one to explore.
John 6:24-35
We live in a reasonable culture. This is a reasonable crowd, and we can relate. They want evidence. They want to be in control of their faith. They are asking, “What can Jesus do for us?” They would fit right in to our churches today where our people are asking for hard evidence for the existence of God, wondering how we can “prove” that Jesus is God’s son or that he was resurrected from the dead, and why they should give “their” money to an organization that looks shaky on a fairly regular basis. How can we make sense of faith in a world where fact is given more credence than anything that cannot be proven?
Jesus’ statement to the crowd could very well be addressed to us, “You are looking for me not because you saw miraculous signs but because you ate all the food you wanted. Don’t work for the food that doesn’t last but for the food that endures for eternal life” (John 6. 26-27, partial verses). The questions of what we are looking for from Jesus and what matters to us are worth wrestling with. This text is a good one for helping the preacher address the question of significance or legacy in our congregations. Jesus, as God’s agent, gives us life;and as his followers, we are called to be life-givers! This might be suggestive of some stewardship questions as well. So what difference does it make for eternal purposes if we have fashionable shoes, or if those without shoes are given shoes? What difference does it make if we have dessert for dinner or if those living with food insecurity are given enough to eat? In our self-absorption and self-valuing, we tend to think more of what we want than what others need. How then can we question ourselves and consider ways in which we can be life-givers in the model of Jesus? Tying the bread of this passage with the manna in the wilderness is suggestive, as manna was given just enough for each household, and any excess that was gathered got worms.
Another avenue for exploration would be Jesus as the bread of life. The message could be a series of images or stories of ways that Jesus brings life to us. This would work well in a congregation where “gentle Jesus, meek and mild” has become the expectation. How can Jesus bring life to our congregations and communities today? Bread of life! Jesus stops between two gang territories and invites both to a cookout. Bread of life! Jesus interrupts a church meeting where we struggle with scarcity models and reminds us that generous living and giving brings life to us as well as to others. Bread of life! Jesus breaks into our grief with reminders that no one and nothing is lost from God and death is not the end of the story. Bread of life! An older congregation is interrupted in worship by the sounds of children as a new family visits. Bread of life! Neighborhood transition offers us an opportunity to embrace a new culture.
This emphasis on Jesus as the bread of life would offer a strong message of hope to our weary folks who want something, but can’t really explain what it is that they long for. Pointing them to life offered in Jesus, the bread of life might offer the food they need to be satisfied.
For a fresh look at this text, seeThe Storyteller’s Companion to the Bible, John, Volume 10,Dennis E. Smith and Michael E. Williams, editors (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996). Michael E. Williams addresses the connection with manna and retells the story in a fresh way.