Jesus and the Samaritan Woman

 This Sunday's reading is from John 4:5-42,

So he came to a Samaritan city called Sychar, near the plot of ground that Jacob had given to his son Joseph. Jacob’s well was there, and Jesus, tired out by his journey, was sitting by the well. It was about noon.

 A Samaritan woman came to draw water, and Jesus said to her, ‘Give me a drink’. (His disciples had gone to the city to buy food.) The Samaritan woman said to him, ‘How is it that you, a Jew, ask a drink of me, a woman of Samaria?’ (Jews do not share things in common with Samaritans.) Jesus answered her, ‘If you knew the gift of God, and who it is that is saying to you, “Give me a drink”, you would have asked him, and he would have given you living water.’ The woman said to him, ‘Sir, you have no bucket, and the well is deep. Where do you get that living water? Are you greater than our ancestor Jacob, who gave us the well, and with his sons and his flocks drank from it?’ Jesus said to her, ‘Everyone who drinks of this water will be thirsty again, but those who drink of the water that I will give them will never be thirsty. The water that I will give will become in them a spring of water gushing up to eternal life.’ The woman said to him, ‘Sir, give me this water, so that I may never be thirsty or have to keep coming here to draw water.’

Jesus said to her, ‘Go, call your husband, and come back.’ The woman answered him, ‘I have no husband.’ Jesus said to her, ‘You are right in saying, “I have no husband”; for you have had five husbands, and the one you have now is not your husband. What you have said is true!’ The woman said to him, ‘Sir, I see that you are a prophet. Our ancestors worshipped on this mountain, but you* say that the place where people must worship is in Jerusalem.’ Jesus said to her, ‘Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews. But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father seeks such as these to worship him. God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.’ The woman said to him, ‘I know that Messiah is coming’ (who is called Christ). ‘When he comes, he will proclaim all things to us.’ Jesus said to her, ‘I am he, the one who is speaking to you.’

 Just then his disciples came. They were astonished that he was speaking with a woman, but no one said, ‘What do you want?’ or, ‘Why are you speaking with her?’ Then the woman left her water-jar and went back to the city. She said to the people, ‘Come and see a man who told me everything I have ever done! He cannot be the Messiah,* can he?’ They left the city and were on their way to him.

 Meanwhile the disciples were urging him, ‘Rabbi, eat something.’ But he said to them, ‘I have food to eat that you do not know about.’ So the disciples said to one another, ‘Surely no one has brought him something to eat?’ Jesus said to them, ‘My food is to do the will of him who sent me and to complete his work. Do you not say, “Four months more, then comes the harvest”? But I tell you, look around you, and see how the fields are ripe for harvesting. The reaper is already receiving wages and is gathering fruit for eternal life, so that sower and reaper may rejoice together. For here the saying holds true, “One sows and another reaps.” I sent you to reap that for which you did not labour. Others have laboured, and you have entered into their labour.’

Many Samaritans from that city believed in him because of the woman’s testimony, ‘He told me everything I have ever done.’ So when the Samaritans came to him, they asked him to stay with them; and he stayed there for two days. And many more believed because of his word. They said to the woman, ‘It is no longer because of what you said that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this is truly the Saviour of the world.’

For details on the Samaritans, who they were, what makes them different, and where they are today, see this link from the Fellowship of Israel Related Ministries.  

Legalizing an Assisted Suicide "Exception" in France

From the European Conservative,  

The introduction of euthanasia in France entered its final phase with the formal vote on the bill on Wednesday, February 25th.

This is the culmination of a long and chaotic process initiated by Emmanuel Macron himself when he was first elected president in 2017.

After multiple postponements and rewrites by both chambers, the version that was voted on reflects what is perhaps the most progressive vision ever implemented on this major issue.

All the efforts of a handful of right-wing and centrist MPs to try to put safeguards in place against this deadly rush forward have been reduced to nothing.

The latest version of the text confirms the adoption of the principle of assisted suicide as a reference, rather than ‘euthanasia’ in the strict sense: the amendment introduced by former Health Minister Frédéric Valletoux, making self-administration of the lethal substance the rule and assistance from a third party when the person is unable to do so the exception, was adopted by a large majority.

I wonder if one exception is when the lethal substance is given as an intravenous injection.  Starting the IV line would certainly require assistance. 

As a small consolation, a government amendment aimed at excluding “psychological suffering alone” from the scope of the law on assisted dying was approved by 159 votes to 130. 

An amendment creating an offence of “incitement to assisted dying” was widely adopted, but it provides for penalties that are half as severe for the offence of incitement as for the offence of obstruction.

What will constitute "incitement" or "obstruction"? 

The final vote on the bill was 299 in favor and 226 against, with an absolute majority set at 263 votes.

...The Nursing and Medical Associations, the Academy of Medicine and leaders of all religions all voiced their opposition. In vain

.When ethical and moral standards are set by politicians, who we know tend to practice questionable ethics and morality, instead of the standards of God, this is what you get. 

Cut out all that circumcision talk!

That's exactly what the Revised Common Lectionary editors did to today's reading, Romans 4:1-5,13-17. I have included the missing verses highlighted in red below.

What then are we to say was gained by Abraham, our ancestor according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the scripture say? ‘Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness.’ Now to one who works, wages are not reckoned as a gift but as something due. But to one who without works trusts him who justifies the ungodly, such faith is reckoned as righteousness.

6 So also David speaks of the blessedness of those to whom God reckons righteousness irrespective of works:

7 ‘Blessed are those whose iniquities are forgiven,

   and whose sins are covered;

8 blessed is the one against whom the Lord will not reckon sin.’

9 Is this blessedness, then, pronounced only on the circumcised, or also on the uncircumcised? We say, ‘Faith was reckoned to Abraham as righteousness.’ 10 How then was it reckoned to him? Was it before or after he had been circumcised? It was not after, but before he was circumcised. 11 He received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. The purpose was to make him the ancestor of all who believe without being circumcised and who thus have righteousness reckoned to them, 12 and likewise the ancestor of the circumcised who are not only circumcised but who also follow the example of the faith that our ancestor Abraham had before he was circumcised.

 For the promise that he would inherit the world did not come to Abraham or to his descendants through the law but through the righteousness of faith. If it is the adherents of the law who are to be the heirs, faith is null and the promise is void. For the law brings wrath; but where there is no law, neither is there violation.

 For this reason it depends on faith, in order that the promise may rest on grace and be guaranteed to all his descendants, not only to the adherents of the law but also to those who share the faith of Abraham (for he is the father of all of us, as it is written, ‘I have made you the father of many nations’)—in the presence of the God in whom he believed, who gives life to the dead and calls into existence the things that do not exist.

I guess the lectionary editors wanted to avoid any squirming in the pews during the reading of Paul's letter.  

Canadian Parliamentary committee recommends physician assisted suicide for children

Now, this is evil:

From Care, 

A committee of Canada's parliament has called for the country's assisted suicide and euthanasia programme to be extended to "mature minors".

A report by the Special Joint Committee on Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) suggests children whose deaths are "reasonably forseeable" should be eligible.

The report also recommended that parental consent is not always necessary in certain cases where a child is considered eligible for a doctor-assisted death.

No parental consent! Pure evil. 

It calls for the Government of Canada to "establish a requirement that, where appropriate, the parents or guardians of a mature minor be consulted in the course of the assessment process for MAID"

But it adds that "the will of a minor who is found to have the requisite decision-making capacity" in the eyes of the state should "ultimately take priority".

In the eyes of the State? What is that supposed to mean?  

Canadian MPs objected to the proposal to expand MAID eligibility to children, highlighting how decision-making capacities, even for mature young people, remain questionable.

Citing Dr. Maria Alisha Montes, a clinical associate professor of pediatrics, the report states: "I would argue that MAID for mature minors carries the highest amount of risk, as the consequence is death."

"We need to ask ourselves if we should be legalizing this for mature minors when biology shows us that the ability to balance risks and rewards is one of the last areas of the brain to mature", she added.

This proposal is indicative of the decline in Christian morality in Canada.

I wonder when this will spread to the U.S.A.. 

Happy Lent!

The Psalm for this Sunday is number 32, Beati quorum, and it is appropriate for the first Sunday in Lent, and it begins by wishing us a happy Lent.

1 Happy are they whose transgressions are forgiven, *

and whose sin is put away!

2 Happy are they to whom the Lord imputes no guilt, *

and in whose spirit there is no guile!

3 While I held my tongue, my bones withered away, *

because of my groaning all day long.

4 For your hand was heavy upon me day and night; *

my moisture was dried up as in the heat of summer.

5 Then I acknowledged my sin to you, *

and did not conceal my guilt.

6 I said, "I will confess my transgressions to the Lord." *

Then you forgave me the guilt of my sin

7 Therefore all the faithful will make their prayers to you in

time of trouble; *

when the great waters overflow, they shall not reach them.

8 You are my hiding-place;

you preserve me from trouble; *

you surround me with shouts of deliverance.

9 "I will instruct you and teach you in the way that you

should go; *

I will guide you with my eye.

10 Do not be like horse or mule, which have no understanding; *

who must be fitted with bit and bridle,

or else they will not stay near you."

11 Great are the tribulations of the wicked; *

but mercy embraces those who trust in the Lord.

12 Be glad, you righteous, and rejoice in the Lord; *

shout for joy, all who are true of heart.

Be glad and be happy this Lent for your sins have been forgiven and look forward to Good Friday for without the cross there is no crown.

Why the ashes brother?

After Fat Tuesday's blowout at Pewster Manor we will be headed to to church tomorrow at noon for the imposition of ashes. I did meet a few people last night who were clueless as to the reasons we do this. I wish I were as eloquent as some in explaining things, and I wish I had the following for them.    

This comes from the Rev. Matt Kennedy and is reposted in its entirety,

"Some of my reformed friends annually bemoan the imposition of ashes on Ash Wednesday, as if it were;

1. merely some Roman Catholic custom unthinkingly adopted and 

2. an outward show of piety by which Christians seek to win approval from men (contra Matthew 6, which, not accidentally, is read during the service). 

My friends, I think, miss the point. The purpose for the imposition of ashes is so that we might publicly proclaim, not our piety, but rather our worthiness for condemnation. We publicly say: I am a sinner, worthy of death. Ashes are hardly a mark of spiritual pride. If used rightly, the ashes undermine the public view of Christianity, that it is a religion of moral improvement. The ashes say 'no.' The Church is an assembly of the would-be damned who have been rescued by Christ and his work on the cross alone. The ashes say, we have no hope but the cross. 

Of course every ceremonial act even in the most liturgically low congregation can be misused and abused, but the tendency among my reformed brethren is to discard the entire rite on account of its misuse. This is folly. And, moreover, it's difficult to think of a better way to invite our unbelieving friends and neighbors to inquire about the gospel. 

What is that black smudge on your forehead...? The ash means I am a sinner. The cross reminds me that God sent his only Son to save sinners.

Reposted on Shrove Tuesday several years running now."

 

The Transfiguration

 This Sunday's reading from Matthew 17:1-9 recalls an amazing event.

Six days later, Jesus took with him Peter and James and his brother John and led them up a high mountain, by themselves. And he was transfigured before them, and his face shone like the sun, and his clothes became dazzling white. Suddenly there appeared to them Moses and Elijah, talking with him. Then Peter said to Jesus, ‘Lord, it is good for us to be here; if you wish, I will make three dwellings here, one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah.’ While he was still speaking, suddenly a bright cloud overshadowed them, and from the cloud a voice said, ‘This is my Son, the Beloved; with him I am well pleased; listen to him!’ When the disciples heard this, they fell to the ground and were overcome by fear. But Jesus came and touched them, saying, ‘Get up and do not be afraid.’ And when they looked up, they saw no one except Jesus himself alone.

As they were coming down the mountain, Jesus ordered them, ‘Tell no one about the vision until after the Son of Man has been raised from the dead.’

Why Moses and Elijah?

This from Christianity.com,

"Moses represents the law and all those who died before Christ's Incarnation. Elijah represents the prophets, and since he did not experience death, all those who are alive in Christ. Their presence shows that the law and the prophets, the living and the dead, all bear witness to Jesus as the Messiah, the fulfillment of the Old Testament."