 |
|
 |
| |
|
Your seat among sinners in the Kingdom of God |
|
The Gospel according to Matthew (21.23-32):
… Truly I tell you, the tax-collectors and the prostitutes are going into the Kingdom of God ahead of you…
There is no doubt that this kind of invective deeply offended Jesus’ audience. On this occasion his listeners were the religious establishment of Jerusalem. How did they feel about being compared to the worse kind of collaborators and call-girls? What did they think hearing that they, the professional religious cast, were further from the Kingdom of God than those outcasts? When we look carefully at the biblical context of this confrontation recorded here by Matthew’s tradition, we may conclude such comments on the contemporary Jewish leaders ultimately sealed Jesus’ fate. Jesus’ words were too insulting, too harsh and too direct. They led to the ultimate conflict.
Was this conflict necessary and unavoidable? Couldn’t the two sides of the conflict, on one hand the charismatic rabbi, and on the other, the religious authorities of Jerusalem, have reached some sort of compromise and gentleman’s agreement? It looks like Jesus’ mission did not leave any room for acceptance of the religious status quo in Palestine. He had to confront his opponents who behaved as if they had the copyright on detailed knowledge about God’s will. But on the other side, Jesus’ opponents valued their unquestionable authority regarding the salvation of their people. Jesus was not interested in any form of compromise with those ‘elders’ and ‘chief priests’ as he challenged them on various occasions. To me this conflict is not a closed chapter from the earliest history of Christianity. On the contrary, it is still an open and thought-provoking clash of theologies, expectations and ideas about God, about who will be saved and who will be dammed for eternity.
In the light of this ancient quarrel and its tragic consequences let’s ask ourselves this radical question: would Jesus reach agreement with us, contemporary Christians, and with our ‘elders’ and ‘high priests’? I doubt it. Do we really have the same concerns as he had? Do we really share his passion for truth, his love of every human being, not just the members of his nation? How do we react when encountering our contemporary ‘Samaritans’, the divorced and married third or seventh time? For instance, some of us Anglicans are fixated with ongoing debate about the issue of homosexuality and ordained ministry. Are we equally concerned about people in our country who are homeless, or elderly pensioners who will soon become even poorer because of rising fuel and food prices? What about the illegal immigrants on our streets? Are these people our theological priorities? Some of us Anglicans cannot sleep because of the forthcoming possibility of ordination of the first woman as the bishop. But do we have time to engage in more serious study of history of the Church to learn why women were excluded from the sacramental ministry? We all love the moving ceremony of the washing of the feet on Maundy Thursday, but those clean feet of our polite parishioners are already washed at home and perfumed, but still we do what we do. What about a ceremony washing the feet of those who sleep in sleeping-bags or on newspapers at Victoria Station in London? Would Jesus celebrate Maundy Thursday in one of our Cathedrals? Would he guess what we are trying to commemorate as his disciples?
Within our Christian churches, we still have a problem with Jesus. We would argue with him, if necessary, try to stop him, reverse his action, interrupt his words…This Christian attitude is so well portrayed by Dostoyevsky’s novel ‘The Brothers Karamazov’, when Jesus, while coming again to this world in Seville, was arrested by the Old Inquisitor, and questioning the whole night, then as the Saviour, sent to the stake to be burned as heretic…
We Christians, we are ready to make him suffer when he does not match our noble, religious expectations and when he does not fulfil our hopes. In the Anglican context, some of us would argue that the ministry of gay clergy is against his will, others, that agrees with it. What if, Jesus does not have a view on this so-called ‘problem’, because his attention is focused on social inequality in our communities? I am inclined to believe, that Jesus has rather different views on majority of issues that currently preoccupy Christians. Therefore, we can easily miss his voice, as we are too busy shouting our slogans and making our big banners. But why does it matter? We are faithful to our religious leaders and authorities. This passage from Gospel again, challenges this comforting way of thinking.
Who are the ‘new religious leaders’ according to Jesus? Who are the examples of true Christianity? There is the paradox: he points to the tax-collectors and the prostitutes. Of course, they are named as the examples not because of their sinful professions. Jesus does not elevate prostitutes because they are prostitutes or tax-collectors because they are tax-collectors. This paradox is based on the might of God’s mercy and power of tears of those whom we exclude from God’s salvation. For us, true believers, those people are on antipodes of the Kingdom of God. They run their pitiful lives separated from God, as we understand ‘God’. But Jesus dares to suggest that that distance can be crossed if the source of salvation is correctly identified as his God. These who are so far, can become the closest to God as for Him each one of us is near, if we wish to be near and ask to be near. There is a room for each one of us in his company. Would you accept your seat?
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
| |
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
| |
| Visits today: |
5 |
| Visits yesterday: |
53 |
| Visits total: |
44459 |
|
| Totals Top 10 |  | 34 % | Poland |  | 23 % | United States |  | 20 % | Un. Kingdom |  | 4 % | China |  | 3 % | Germany |  | 2 % | Sweden |  | < 1.0 % | Unknown |  | < 1.0 % | Canada |  | < 1.0 % | Netherlands |  | < 1.0 % | France |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
)
