Pages

Thursday, October 06, 2005

Who gets to be a saint? (ii)

For Sunday October 9, 2005 - Matthew 22:1-14

No sermon I have heard about saints in the last 50 years
has failed to remind the modern Christian
that "We are all saints"
As we look at this parable (Matt.22:1-14) of the wedding feast
(read it online here)
We might ask ourselves what Jesus says
in this in answer to the question
"Who gets to be a saint?"

I do
In many ways the last line of this parable reminds us of the inescapable reality
"Many are called!"
God does not hold back on his offer of fulness of life.
So, as we ask, Who gets to be a saint?
We can at least answer:
Everyone gets the opportunity.
"Many are called!"
I am fortunate in that I can recognise
that there has never been a moment of my life
when that has not been true.
Less than a month old, I was walked across the road
to St Peter's Church, Kells
and I was baptised.
Baptism, in this sense, is a reply to the wedding invitation
that this parable is talking about.
The invitation to participate in a relationship
with the living God
which is called "eternal life"
(I sometimes think we understand that term better
if we say fulness of life or abundant life)
This gift is so abundant and free
..it is truly gracious, freely offered...
that we can and should say
Many are called...perhaps we could add
available for all
What we also need to remember and add
is that this version ends with the words
Few are chosen
This process of selection
is not a sort of
whimsical game that God plays with us
it is, as these parables demonstrate,
also a process of self-selection
They do
The invitation is extended
but some, even many,
choose to not come
Two things happen
as a consequence:
those who have heard the invitation
but who choose not to come
are excluded!
And those who we don't think are the ones
who should be chosen
actually get the chance.
In historical terms
Jesus might be addressing
his own people
Pharisees and Saducees
who hear his teaching and yet
they fail to turn back to God.
We see then he turns
to social outcasts
poor tradespeople
fishermen, and anxious young men.
More than that
there are the tax collectors, the lepers
and the prostitutes.
These people with empty, desperate lives
are the ones who hear
and receive Jesus gladly.
As we reflect on religious history
this sort of pattern has often repeated itself.
In our terms (as of old)
it is the people who have always known
the Gospel
whose parents walked them over the road
to be baptised.
They have heard
and in many cases
rejected.
This parable might remind us
that we have to live with that
as a reality.
It might also remind us that
when we try to focus our energies
at bringing people in
it is to the highways, and the byways
we should be going.
Can we honestly critique our parish life
and say
We are geared to welcoming
those who are usually rejected?
I think not

I don't
There is then
a salutary warning for those of us who are "in"
it is not a game.
It is a genuine invitation
which requires a genuine response.
If we think it will be about -game playing-
dressing up, social nicety or pretense
then we are mistaken.
We are to be clothed properly.
We are to set about our job.
It is this that we see the saints doing in their different ways.
Whether it be through faithful hours spent caring for the poor,
or a diuligent devotion to bringing up children,
it may be simply a commitment to live
a decent and honourable Christian life
as best we can.
It is not particularly about coming to church,
it is about how we live our life.
This is a serious mistake we often make
with these parables of the kingdom.
We some how seem to think
that they are about our involvement in church.
That is not the case.
It is about how we choose to live life.
Not about how oftyen we receive communion
but whether we practice forgiveness
and care for the poor.
Not about how much we give
but about our relationship with God
Will our life show that we take this invitation seriously?
Take some stock this week,
ask a telling question...
you know one of those tricky ones..
if I was on trial for being a christian
would there be enough evidence to convict me
!?
Would the jury find love, mercy, forgiveness.
Reaching out to the poor, standing alongside the weak,
caring for the sick and the lonely.
It is not a game.
Do we say yes to the invitation
to eternal life?
Do we say no, to the hypocrisy of pretence?
Nothing less will do.


5 comments:

Anonymous said...

Where does Article XVII of the Thirty Nine Articles of the Church of England figure in this disquisition - or doesn't it?

Stephan Clark said...

Thanking you for introducing me to the word "disquisition" which was the word of the day on October 14 2001! I think, however, that " n : an elaborate analytical or explanatory essay or discussion" would be something of a pretension for my humble weekly homily.
However, with regard to Article XVII...on Predestination and Election...I don't see that my thoughts essentially conflict with it.
Indeed my theme that God invites humanity to respond is better put in the opening clause of that article "Predestination to Life is the everlasting purpose of God..." beautiful stuff.
I believe that the notions of predestination and election should be seen in the context of that poowerful expression of God's intention. Too often it is seen as a damning statement about those who will fall outside God's salvation, as some clearly choose to do.
I think also my brief comment about the person found without a proper garment is quite in tune with the last paragraph of the article:
"Furthermore, we must receive God's promise in such wise, as they be generally set forth to us in Holy Scripture...(the) will of God is to be followed...".
We are not to play games with God (the chief game being "religion"), and God does not play games with us.
Thanks for your comment

Anonymous said...

I salute you Stephen.
We read in the Gospel "For many are called but few are chosen."
We read in Article XVII that "before the foundations of the world were laid" God decreed "to deliver from the curse and damnation those whom he hath chosen in Christ out of mankind." The Article refers to those not chosen as having "continually before their eyes the sentence of God's Predestination" and consequently being in desperation and wretchlessness. As I understand this, the choice here is God's. Paul appears to have the same undrstanding. He wrote to the Romans "For those who he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son .... and those who he predestined he also called, and those who he called he also justified, and those who he justified he also glorified,"
Being a heretic (in an original sense of the word), I rather agree with you on the importance you attach to OUR choice; but your exegesis appears to be founded upon a selective reading of what has been written. In truth I would prefer this to be the essence of what the Scriptures have to say; but I suspect that there are some who would (rightly) see my choice as a matter of 'religion' (in the sense that you have chosen to use the word in your response).
A 'theological' colleague of mine once made the comment to me "Anybody can rationalise anything." Would you agree - at least in principle? You might care to consider what the repected theologian E J Bicknell wrote on the Article in question. I think he too would have supported your 'religios' dissection of the issue.

Anonymous said...

Rock on Stephen!

Stephan Clark said...

We do what we can!!!