| One Sabbath, when he went to dine at the house | | | | God, who is Father, Son and Spirit, where the |
| of a ruler of the Pharisees, they were watching | | | | three persons of God are equal and yet the Son |
| him carefully. And behold, there was a man | | | | is always subordinate to the Father. This then |
| before him who had dropsy. And Jesus responded | | | | gives us a model (so the argument goes) that |
| to the lawyers and Pharisees, saying, "Is it lawful | | | | maintains both a nominal equality between |
| to heal on the Sabbath, or not?" But they | | | | persons while justifying a system that always |
| remained silent. Then he took him and healed him | | | | gives the Son (or the woman) the lower place. |
| and sent him away. And he said to them, "Which | | | | The key address in the Melbourne conference, I |
| of you, having a son or an ox that has fallen into | | | | read, challenged this concept of eternal |
| a well on a Sabbath day, will not immediately pull | | | | subordination which, it said was inconsistent with |
| him out?" And they could not reply to these | | | | the Athanasian Creed, and suggested rather a |
| things. | | | | concept of 'economic subordination', wherein the |
| It's the Sabbath again and Jesus is doing what he | | | | subservience of the Son to the Father is seen as |
| does best - teaching, healing, and getting Himself | | | | taking place only for a limited time and in a |
| into trouble! | | | | particular context. |
| It's a marvelous story that contains all the | | | | Now, if you don't understand a word of what I've |
| elements that we love in the Gospel stories. Jesus | | | | just said it really doesn't matter, for my whole |
| is spreading joy and causing controversy while the | | | | point is that this type of esoteric theological |
| fumbling Pharisees scurry about in the | | | | debate is entirely absent from the Gospel |
| background, dumbfounded and exasperated. And | | | | narratives. |
| yet I hear you say, "didn't we cover all this last | | | | We take this for granted but we should not. If it |
| week?" | | | | had been any other Rabbi or religious teacher and |
| Of course I don't hear all of you say that, as | | | | not Jesus who went around doing what He did on |
| some of you weren't here last week, and some | | | | the Sabbath this would surely have been exactly |
| of you who were here last week aren't here this | | | | what we would have expected. We would have |
| week, so you'll be forgiven for wondering what | | | | expected some sort of lengthy theological |
| I'm talking about, and yet the point is well made, | | | | defense of his actions, such that He could show |
| for the Gospel story from Luke chapter 13, that | | | | how healing people on the Sabbath was in fact |
| we dealt with last week, has some very obvious | | | | consistent with the Sabbath law as written, or |
| points of similarity with this week's story from | | | | why the law as written needed to be |
| Luke chapter 14 (the next chapter). | | | | re-interpreted or discarded. |
| Both are stories of Jesus healing people and both | | | | I'm not saying that we should have expected |
| healings took place on the Sabbath. In both cases | | | | dialogues about the eternally subordinate nature of |
| the healings led to a confrontation with the | | | | any of the members of the Trinity, but we would |
| religious authorities over whether it was legitimate | | | | have expected the citing of other pieces of |
| to heal people on the Sabbath, and in both cases | | | | Scripture, illustrations of the way in which Biblical |
| the religious folk ended up with egg on their faces | | | | authorities themselves had, at certain times, |
| (so to speak). | | | | re-interpreted the Divine Law in ways that were |
| Of course the stories are not identical. Last | | | | consistent with Jesus' actions. We would have |
| week's story took place in a synagogue, and the | | | | expected some dialogue, perhaps, that took us |
| confrontation was with the ruler of the | | | | back to the creation stories in Genesis and |
| synagogue, who I assumed to be a Pharisee. This | | | | showed us how the basic concept of rest, as |
| week's story takes place in the house of a | | | | exhibited by God on the seventh day, was not |
| Pharisee, who may or may not have been the | | | | inconsistent with creative acts of healing. |
| ruler of a synagogue. | | | | We might have expected some argument about |
| In the chapter 13 story, it was a crippled woman | | | | the nature of God or the nature of rest or the |
| that Jesus healed - a woman who couldn't | | | | nature of the commandments, showing that |
| straighten up. In the chapter 14 story it is a man | | | | obedience to them should at certain points be |
| with 'dropsy', which means that his limbs were | | | | made secondary to the immediate obligation |
| swollen up. He may have looked something like | | | | placed on us by the needs of our neighbors'. We |
| the elephant man, in which case his problem may | | | | might have expected something clever and |
| have been, in one sense, the opposite of the | | | | complex and worthy of a Rabbi of Jesus' standing. |
| woman. She couldn't straighten up. The elephant | | | | Instead, all we get from Jesus is what seems |
| man, if you remember, couldn't lie down. | | | | more like an off-handed comment than any |
| Either way, Jesus heals them both. The woman is | | | | serious argument. "If your ox falls into a well on |
| straightened, the man's swollen limbs are | | | | the Sabbath, you pull it out, don't you?" (14:5) |
| somehow mysteriously deflated, and there is | | | | This was basically identical to the equally |
| much rejoicing on the part of everybody, except | | | | off-handed question He asked in the previous |
| these religious persons who just can't come to | | | | story, "you give your donkey a drink on the |
| terms with the way Jesus - a supposedly | | | | Sabbath, don't you" (13:15). In neither of these |
| righteous Rabbi and a popular teacher of religion | | | | cases is Jesus making any clever appeal to ways |
| amongst the people - could so radically flout the | | | | in which the Sabbath law can be extended to |
| law of God by disobeying on the fundamental | | | | injured or thirsty animals under special |
| divine commandments as given to Moses on the | | | | circumstances. Rather, He is simply appealing to |
| stone tablets - ie. remember the Sabbath Day | | | | His hearers' compassion. His attitude to their law |
| and keep it holy. | | | | is, in a word, dismissive! |
| As I say, there are some differences between | | | | I remember we had a visitor to our worship |
| the two stories, in chapters 13 and 14 | | | | service here once from a certain area of the |
| respectively, but the basic point of issue between | | | | United States, and he asked me how I justified |
| Jesus and his antagonists is identical in both cases. | | | | allowing woman to speak during the service. I |
| It's an issue of law. | | | | responded by pointing out that there were |
| Jesus is disobeying the law of God. That's the | | | | churches in the area where he was from where |
| charge, and it's a serious charge, and it's the sort | | | | snake-handling was a key component of their |
| of thing Jesus was charged with all the time, | | | | worship life. It wasn't a particularly gracious |
| which is extraordinary when you stand back and | | | | response but I think it was consistent with the |
| think about it for a moment! | | | | sort of response Jesus gave to so many of |
| Whatever people think of Jesus, they generally | | | | those who questioned Him. He just didn't get into |
| acknowledge him to be (at least one of) the | | | | a debate with them! |
| greatest religious figures of all time. Yet the | | | | Indeed, it is remarkable when you think about it, |
| charge laid against him throughout his earthly life | | | | how rarely we see Jesus enter into any serious |
| was that He was consistently irreligious! He was | | | | theological discussion with anyone in the New |
| labeled as a glutton and a drunkard and a friend of | | | | Testament. And when we do see this happen |
| society's low-life - exactly the sort of | | | | (such as in His dialogues with Nicodemus [John 3] |
| characteristics we associate with irreligious | | | | or the woman at the well [John 4]) we very |
| persons. And He was seen as having scant | | | | quickly see enormous misunderstandings occurring, |
| concern for the law of God! | | | | as Jesus and his partners in dialogue seem to |
| Of course Jesus would say that He came "not to | | | | speak on entirely different levels! |
| abolish God's law but to fulfill it" (Matthew 5:17) | | | | It's as if Jesus just didn't speak the same |
| and yet that very statement is a tacit | | | | language as His religious contemporaries. Perhaps |
| acknowledgement of the fact that Jesus did not | | | | we could go so far as to say that Jesus didn't |
| deal with the divine law in the way in which | | | | seem to speak a religious language at all, for |
| religious folk normally did. | | | | certainly His dialogues in these two stories in Luke |
| There was a divine law regarding what you could | | | | seem to be at an entirely secular level. Jesus' |
| and could not do on a Sabbath and Jesus seemed | | | | opponents are talking about the law of God and |
| to have very little regard for it. He seemed to be | | | | their religious obligations. Jesus is focused on the |
| happy to re-interpret the law to suit Himself, and, | | | | women and men around him, and His dialogue is |
| significantly, He seemed to show little interest in | | | | not about things mysterious and overtly religious |
| giving any theological argument in support of His | | | | but about helping needy oxen and donkeys! |
| re-interpretation! | | | | Indeed there is something secular and irreligious |
| Indeed, as I compare the two stories that lie | | | | about Jesus, just as there is something awfully |
| (more or less) side-by-side in Luke's Gospel | | | | secular and irreligious about the whole idea that |
| narrative, the thing that strikes me most in both | | | | God should choose to give Himself to us in the |
| instances is the complete lack of serious | | | | flesh and blood of this single human being! Jesus is |
| theological argument taking place between Jesus | | | | irreligious. The whole concept of the incarnation is |
| and the religious professionals! | | | | entirely irreligious! No wonder Judaism and Islam |
| This is what we religious people do: we argue | | | | can't accept it! |
| theologically. And when a religious person | | | | There remains one question from today's Gospel |
| re-interprets a divine law in some way such that | | | | that still concerns me, and it is this. Even if Jesus |
| they seem to be disregarding one of the ten | | | | did two consecutive healings on two consecutive |
| commandments, the pattern we would expect is | | | | Sabbaths where he received exactly the same |
| that they give some sort of theological | | | | response from his religious contemporaries and |
| justification for what they are doing. | | | | then made an almost identical response to each |
| I want to focus on this today as I think it is really | | | | of them, why did the Gospel writer, Luke, bother |
| important, as I think it illustrates that Jesus not | | | | to record both incidents? Would not one have |
| only had a different ideas about God from His | | | | been enough? I'm sure there were plenty of |
| religious contemporaries. He evidently thought | | | | other stories about Jesus that he could have |
| about God in an entirely different way. It wasn't | | | | included that he chose to leave out. Why include |
| just Jesus' conclusions that differentiated him | | | | both of these when the two stories are, for all |
| from his religious contemporaries. It was the way | | | | intents and purposes, identical? |
| He reached those conclusions. He not only spoke | | | | The only answer I can come up with to this |
| differently about God. He spoke an entirely | | | | question is that Luke must have figured that we |
| different language! | | | | needed to hear all this twice (and maybe a few |
| I was reading a report recently on a fascinating | | | | more times, as there are other stories of an |
| conference that took place in Melbourne recently - | | | | entirely similar nature again in Luke and throughout |
| a theological conference on the subject of "Trinity | | | | the Gospels). Why do we need to keep hearing |
| with tiers" (that indeed I think some of our | | | | about this? I think it's because we just don't get it. |
| community may have attended). | | | | We keep looking for something more spectacular, |
| The main subject under discussion was obviously | | | | more obviously transcendent, and more overtly |
| the doctrine of the Trinity, but behind the | | | | religious. What Luke seems to be trying to get |
| discussion about the nature of God and the | | | | through our heads is the fact that living the life of |
| relationship between the Father, the Son and the | | | | Jesus is not about being religious? It's about |
| Holy Spirit was a more clearly tangible debate | | | | compassion. |
| about the nature and the role of women in the | | | | For it's not obedience to the law that brings us to |
| church! | | | | God. It is Christ. And Christ's work in us is not to |
| Those in the church who argue that women | | | | bind us to any code, but to live His life through us |
| should always be placed in positions of | | | | and show his compassion through us, and so bring |
| subordination to men have been known to do so | | | | healing and wholeness to our sick and broken |
| by appealing the way in which the pattern of | | | | world. Amen. |
| eternal subordination is reflected in the nature of | | | | |