Jesus and the Shellfish Argument

In this Sunday's highly edited Gospel selection, Mark 7:1-8,14-15,21-23 we miss a very important point because verse 19 (among others) got cut out.

This is how many will hear the story,

1 Now when the Pharisees and some of the scribes who had come from Jerusalem gathered around him, 2 they noticed that some of his disciples were eating with defiled hands, that is, without washing them. 3 For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, do not eat unless they thoroughly wash their hands,* thus observing the tradition of the elders; 4 and they do not eat anything from the market unless they wash it;* and there are also many other traditions that they observe, the washing of cups, pots, and bronze kettles.) 5 So the Pharisees and the scribes asked him, ‘Why do your disciples not live according to the tradition of the elders, but eat with defiled hands?’ 6 He said to them, ‘Isaiah prophesied rightly about you hypocrites, as it is written,“This people honours me with their lips,   but their hearts are far from me; 7 in vain do they worship me,   teaching human precepts as doctrines.” 8 You abandon the commandment of God and hold to human tradition.’

14 Then he called the crowd again and said to them, ‘Listen to me, all of you, and understand: 15  there is nothing outside a person that by going in can defile, but the things that come out are what defile.’ 

21 For it is from within, from the human heart, that evil intentions come: fornication, theft, murder, 22 adultery, avarice, wickedness, deceit, licentiousness, envy, slander, pride, folly. 23 All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.’ 

All good points, but for years the anti-Christian crowd has been using what is known as the "Shellfish Argument" to try to paint Bible believing Christians as hypocrites when it comes to following the Old Testament dietary and purity codes.  They argue from Leviticus, and it goes like this, “If you oppose same sex marriage because the Bible says it’s a sin, how come I see you eating that shrimp po-boy?”

When that happens, just understand that if they grew up in a church using the Revised Common Lectionary, they probably never heard the rest of the story. In that case or if you are with an unchurched person, mention Mark 7:17-19 and help them to understand,

17 Then he left the crowd and entered the house. His disciples asked him about this teaching. 18 “Don’t you understand?” Jesus asked. “Don’t you see? Nothing that enters a person from the outside can make them ‘unclean.’ 19 It doesn’t go into their heart. It goes into their stomach. Then it goes out of the body.” In saying this, Jesus was calling all foods “clean.”

If they need more, tell them about Peter's vision in Acts 10,

9 About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. 10 He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. 11 He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. 12 It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles and birds. 13 Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.”
14 “Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.”
15 The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”
16 This happened three times, and immediately the sheet was taken back to heaven.

After this, your opponent will try to justify same-sex marriage by claiming that the Old Testament sexual moral codes can be disregarded, but you can counter that because Jesus makes the point in verses Mark 7:21-23 that persons are still defiled by violations of those ancient commandments.

So, by omitting Mark 7:19 from the inherited wisdom of the average Sunday churchgoer, God's sheep are made less capable of answering the challenges from unbelievers outside the Church and from revisionists and progressives inside the Church. 

When the Bread From Heaven Hits the Floor

Have you ever dropped your communion wafer, or has your priest ever dropped one or a whole plate full onto the floor?

I remember the procedures we were to follow as acolytes for such accidents, and how we used to place bets on which one of us would be the one to eat a wafer off the floor... yeech.

I also remember how we poured water over the fingers of the priest after he had distributed the wafers so that any tiny particle would be washed into the chalice so that the priest could consume that too.

I am not sure that people in most Protestant denominations share the same degree of reverence for the host anymore.

This Sunday's Gospel reading, John 6:35,41-51 (note the missing verses), reminds us of exactly why we should be reverent,

35 Jesus said to them, ‘I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never be hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.  

41 Then the Jews began to complain about him because he said, ‘I am the bread that came down from heaven.’ They were saying, ‘Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he now say, “I have come down from heaven”?’ Jesus answered them, ‘Do not complain among yourselves. No one can come to me unless drawn by the Father who sent me; and I will raise that person up on the last day. It is written in the prophets, “And they shall all be taught by God.” Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me. Not that anyone has seen the Father except the one who is from God; he has seen the Father. Very truly, I tell you, whoever believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life. Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats of this bread will live for ever; and the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.’

The missing verses were 36-40

But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. Everything that the Father gives me will come to me, and anyone who comes to me I will never drive away; for I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. This is indeed the will of my Father, that all who see the Son and believe in him may have eternal life; and I will raise them up on the last day.’

Why the lectionary editors left them out is beyond me, but I suspect it is to make it simpler for the preacher in preparing his sermon, to focus on the bread from heaven bits, and for the poor dumb pewsitters who musn't be fed too much information.

It has always been a mystery to me that the lectionary editors did not pair this reading from John 6 with a reading from Exodus 16,

Exodus 16:11-21  

And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, I have heard the murmurings of the children of Israel: speak unto them, saying, At even ye shall eat flesh, and in the morning ye shall be filled with bread; and ye shall know that I am the Lord your God. And it came to pass, that at even the quails came up, and covered the camp: and in the morning the dew lay round about the host. And when the dew that lay was gone up, behold, upon the face of the wilderness there lay a small round thing, as small as the hoar frost on the ground. And when the children of Israel saw it, they said one to another, It is manna: for they wist not what it was. And Moses said unto them, This is the bread which the Lord hath given you to eat. This is the thing which the Lord hath commanded, Gather of it every man according to his eating, an omer for every man, according to the number of your persons; take ye every man for them which are in his tents. And the children of Israel did so, and gathered, some more, some less. And when they did mete it with an omer, he that gathered much had nothing over, and he that gathered little had no lack; they gathered every man according to his eating. And Moses said, Let no man leave of it till the morning. Notwithstanding they hearkened not unto Moses; but some of them left of it until the morning, and it bred worms, and stank: and Moses was wroth with them. And they gathered it every morning, every man according to his eating: and when the sun waxed hot, it melted.

My old priest was right when he insisted that any of the bread from heaven that he was passing out should be consumed immediately if it hit the floor... lest it breed worms!

We Protestants are not alone in that some concerned Roman Catholics have also noted a decrease in reverence for the host shared at the Eucharist. The following is from the Catholic Family News pages,

 In modern parishes, under the lax rubrics of the New Mass, the priest simply picks up a dropped Host and moves on, as if he dropped some loose change. Particles are left to be stepped upon and desecrated. Before and after Mass, people prattle away in church as if they are socializing in the parish hall. Many modern priests and laity disregard their duty of silence before the Blessed Sacrament. They forget the stern warning of little Jacinta of Fatima, “Our Lady does not want people to talk in church”.
Where is this reverence and care for the Blessed Sacrament in the post-Conciliar Church with the introduction of Communion in the hand and the “anyone can handle it” attitude? How will our young people gain any understanding of the Real Presence of Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament when He receives cavalier treatment from clergymen? How can reverence for the Eucharist be instilled in the Catholic faithful when they see It given in the hand as common foodstuffs, and distributed by ill-trained lay people who should not be handling the Blessed Sacrament in the first place?
It is no mystery why so many Catholics have lost faith in the Sacred Mysteries. Too many of our priests have abandoned the outward devotion necessary: 1) to give proper reverence to Christ in the Blessed Sacrament; 2) to teach the people through example that the highest reverence must be shown to Our Lord Jesus Christ truly present in the Blessed Sacrament.

 I think they have a point in that a public display of reverence by the priest toward the sacraments will send a strong message to the people and most importantly, the children, that the Bread from heaven is very, very important, and may lead some of them to some day realize that it is the most important event ever to happen to them and to the world.

The "Wrath" of God: Getting Over a Pons Asinorum

Talking about gruesome stories, in 1 Samuel we are brought face to face with some of those difficult verses we seldom hear preached on Sunday.  I have picked out the verses I believe might cause people to question the Bible.

2 Thus says the Lord of hosts, “I will punish the Amalekites for what they did in opposing the Israelites when they came up out of Egypt. 3 Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have; do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.”

7 Saul defeated the Amalekites, from Havilah as far as Shur, which is east of Egypt. 8 He took King Agag of the Amalekites alive, but utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword. 9 Saul and the people spared Agag, and the best of the sheep and of the cattle and of the fatlings, and the lambs, and all that was valuable, and would not utterly destroy them; all that was despised and worthless they utterly destroyed.

10 The word of the Lord came to Samuel: 11‘I regret that I made Saul king, for he has turned back from following me, and has not carried out my commands.’

32 Then Samuel said, ‘Bring Agag king of the Amalekites here to me.’ And Agag came to him haltingly. Agag said, ‘Surely this is the bitterness of death.' 33 But Samuel said,
‘As your sword has made women childless,
so your mother shall be childless among women.’
And Samuel hewed Agag in pieces before the Lord in Gilgal.

Modern people might question, "Did the Lord order the viscous attack on Agag and the Amalekites, or is this just the Hebrew's way of writing a justification for their war?"

And to add to the confusion for the modern mind, the victorious King Saul is disobedient to God's command because the destruction was not total and spares Agag and the animals, and as a result falls out of favor. You might hear the question, "What kind of God is this?" or the statement, "I would never worshio a God like that."

Was Agag so bad that God ordered him to be punished in such a manner?

Please read the following from C.S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain Chapter 4 Human Wickedness:

"When we merely say, that we are bad, the 'wrath' of God seems a barbarous doctrine; as soon as we perceive our badness, it appears inevitable, a mere corollary from God's goodness. To keep ever before us the insight derived from such a moment as I have been describing, to learn to detect the same real inexcusable corruption under more and more of its complex disguises, is therefore indispensable to a real understanding of the Christian faith. This is not, of course, a new doctrine. I am attempting nothing very splendid in this chapter. I am merely trying to get my reader (and, still more, myself) over a pons asinorum--to take the first step out of fool's paradise and utter illusion. But the illusion has grown, in modern times, so strong, that I add a few considerations tending to make the reality less incredible."

Would a modern person go so far as to say that God is incapable of wrath, or that He would not act in a punitive way to creatures that have sunk even lower than bad? Have we gone that far over the precipice that we can, from our fool's paradise, dictate to Him?

Truth Without Consequences: This Sunday's Lectionary Edits

In this Sunday's lectionary reading (and next week's as well) , it is the Gospel of Matthew that draws the blade of the editor's knife. After telling the parable of the sower of the seeds, the lectionary jumps (Matthew 13:1-9, 18-23) to the explanation of the parable by skipping Jesus' explanation of why he has chosen this method of teaching. Verses 10-17 contain some of the more difficult parts of this Chapter of Matthew. See what you think,

 Then the disciples came and asked him, ‘Why do you speak to them in parables?’  He answered, ‘To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given.  For to those who have, more will be given, and they will have an abundance; but from those who have nothing, even what they have will be taken away.  The reason I speak to them in parables is that “seeing they do not perceive, and hearing they do not listen, nor do they understand.”  With them indeed is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah that says:
“You will indeed listen, but never understand,
   and you will indeed look, but never perceive.
 For this people’s heart has grown dull,
   and their ears are hard of hearing,
     and they have shut their eyes;
     so that they might not look with their eyes,
   and listen with their ears,
and understand with their heart and turn—
   and I would heal them.”
But blessed are your eyes, for they see, and your ears, for they hear. Truly I tell you, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see, but did not see it, and to hear what you hear, but did not hear it.

Some of the more difficult words of our Lord for a revisionist preacher to tackle may be, "from those who have nothing, even what they have will be taken away." Never mind that it appears to me that the "dull hearted" who have "shut their eyes" and ears are "those who have nothing", and Jesus' healing is what they stand to have taken away.

The very idea that there might be anyone who will not be saved is anathema to revisionists.

It is scary to think what the consequences might be to those who shut their eyes and ears to Jesus' words of warning. It is even more frightening to think what may happen to those who keep those words from God's people.

Nathan, the Kinder, Gentler Version Presents a Kinder, Gentler God... According to the Lectionary Editors

Oh God, who from the family of your servant David raised up Joseph to be the guardian of your incarnate Son and the spouse of his virgin mother: Give us grace to imitate his uprightness of life and his obedience to your commands; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.

Today is St. Joseph's Day, and I think the story of Joseph's submission to God's will by listening to angels and dreams is something that is not currently in fashion. The assigned (Eucharistic) Old Testament reading of 2 Samuel 7:4,8-16  carries on in the tradition of silencing the voice of God's will by the means of Lectionary edits whereby a new teaching is heard by the pewsitters, most of whom will never be aware of the subliminal effects these changes are having on their theological foundations.

Study the lesson as heard today in many services,

But that same night the word of the Lord came to Nathan:  Now therefore thus you shall say to my servant David: Thus says the Lord of hosts: I took you from the pasture, from following the sheep to be prince over my people Israel;  and I have been with you wherever you went, and have cut off all your enemies from before you; and I will make for you a great name, like the name of the great ones of the earth.  And I will appoint a place for my people Israel and will plant them, so that they may live in their own place, and be disturbed no more; and evildoers shall afflict them no more, as formerly, from the time that I appointed judges over my people Israel; and I will give you rest from all your enemies. Moreover, the Lord declares to you that the Lord will make you a house. When your days are fulfilled and you lie down with your ancestors, I will raise up your offspring after you, who shall come forth from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be a father to him, and he shall be a son to me. When he commits iniquity, I will punish him with a rod such as mortals use, with blows inflicted by human beings. But I will not take my steadfast love from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away from before you. Your house and your kingdom shall be made sure for ever before me;* (before you) your throne shall be established for ever.

 David is going to be pleased to hear that, even if it means that his offspring may get smacked around a few times for being naughty.

But is that really what Nathan was instructed to tell David, and why did God send Nathan to the king in the first place?

To answer those questions, we need to fill in the missing verses (1-3 and 5-7) which I will highlight in red. Read the whole thing once again,

Now when the king was settled in his house, and the Lord had given him rest from all his enemies around him, the king said to the prophet Nathan, ‘See now, I am living in a house of cedar, but the ark of God stays in a tent.’ Nathan said to the king, ‘Go, do all that you have in mind; for the Lord is with you.’But that same night the word of the Lord came to Nathan: Go and tell my servant David: Thus says the Lord: Are you the one to build me a house to live in? I have not lived in a house since the day I brought up the people of Israel from Egypt to this day, but I have been moving about in a tent and a tabernacle. Wherever I have moved about among all the people of Israel, did I ever speak a word with any of the tribal leaders* of Israel, whom I commanded to shepherd my people Israel, saying, ‘Why have you not built me a house of cedar?’ Now therefore thus you shall say to my servant David: Thus says the Lord of hosts: I took you from the pasture, from following the sheep to be prince over my people Israel; and I have been with you wherever you went, and have cut off all your enemies from before you; and I will make for you a great name, like the name of the great ones of the earth. And I will appoint a place for my people Israel and will plant them, so that they may live in their own place, and be disturbed no more; and evildoers shall afflict them no more, as formerly, from the time that I appointed judges over my people Israel; and I will give you rest from all your enemies. Moreover, the Lord declares to you that the Lord will make you a house. When your days are fulfilled and you lie down with your ancestors, I will raise up your offspring after you, who shall come forth from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be a father to him, and he shall be a son to me. When he commits iniquity, I will punish him with a rod such as mortals use, with blows inflicted by human beings. But I will not take my steadfast love from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away from before you. Your house and your kingdom shall be made sure for ever before me;* your throne shall be established for ever.

Uh oh, the King is not going to be happy to hear that. What a difference a few verses make. Thanks to the red line verses we see that David takes it upon himself to build a permanent structure to house the ark without God's instruction, and Nathan is also erring by giving David approval to "do all that you have in mind."

Many Old Testament lessons teach us what happens to individuals and to the people when they act according to their own counsel and set themselves up as agents independent of God.

This may not be the worst mistake that David will make in his life (1 Chronicles 21), but it highlights the problem of the misuse of free will. Despite this, God loved David, and so He sternly corrects him.

The way today's reading was cut and pasted back together presents a misleadingly soft version of God's loving kindness.

The power of the Old Testament prophetic voice to deliver to a ruler a stern rebuke from God is also undermined by these edits. Yes, even the prophets need correction form time to time, but as presented today, Nathan is a flawless seer.

The subliminal message to the pewsitters, "Carry on as you are doing. You are God's chosen poeple. God only delivers "nice" messages. All will be well."

It is a dangerous path to travel when one walks without God's rod and staff as a guide.

Thank the Lord that St. Joseph listened to the voice of God and did not take his counsel from our modern day lectionary editors.  I can only imagine hearing something like this in the future... 

Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: After His mother Mary was betrothed to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Spirit. Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not wanting to make her a public example, was minded to put her away secretly. But while he thought about these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take to you Mary your wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins.”
So all this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying: “Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,” which is translated, “God with us.”
Then Joseph, being aroused from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord commanded him and took to him his wife,  Matthew 1:18, 22-23

I hope that never happens, but I suppose it is possible.

To put it simply, we should pray and listen for God's response and stop relying on ourselves so much. God has already communicated a great deal to us through Holy Scripture. What are we telling God when we decide that we can live without parts of his fabulous gift?

Therefore we must give the more earnest heed to the things we have heard, lest we drift away. For if the word spoken through angels proved steadfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just reward, how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him, God also bearing witness both with signs and wonders, with various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to His own will? Hebrews 2:1-4 NKJV

Missing Verses Weaken the Foundation: The Final Jeopardy Answer is...

From ReverendFun.com

Today's lectionary readings contained another two of those curious gaps which I have labelled as "missing verses" in various blog posts on this site.

In the first, Leviticus 19, verses 3-8 get cut from Leviticus 19:1-2,9-18.

3 You shall each revere your mother and father, and you shall keep my sabbaths: I am the Lord your God.
4 Do not turn to idols or make cast images for yourselves: I am the Lord your God.
5 When you offer a sacrifice of well-being to the Lord, offer it in such a way that it is acceptable in your behalf.
6 It shall be eaten on the same day you offer it, or on the next day; and anything left over until the third day shall be consumed in fire.
7 If it is eaten at all on the third day, it is an abomination; it will not be acceptable.
8 All who eat it shall be subject to punishment, because they have profaned what is holy to the Lord; and any such person shall be cut off from the people.

I find the deletion of verses 4-5 particularly troublesome as it seems that lack of respect for parents and the rise of idolatry are important problems in the present age. Let me be overly generous and assume that the lectionary editors desired to avoid causing pain to the many fatherless children of our time, children who have no cause to respect their fathers. I would beg them to reconsider this omission because of the importance of transmitting God's guiding word with confidence so that there would be hope for future generations to regain the wisdom of God's teaching and to put it into their child-rearing practices.

The deletion of verses 6-8 is in keeping with the typical pattern of the lectionary editors to remove references to abominations, punishment, or being cut off from the people as the consequence of acting against God's commandments, and other similar things that are too scary for the common folk to hear on Sunday morning.

The reading from 1 Corinthians 3:10-11,16-23 cuts out

12 Now if anyone builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw—
13 the work of each builder will become visible, for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each has done.
14 If what has been built on the foundation survives, the builder will receive a reward.
15 If the work is burned, the builder will suffer loss; the builder will be saved, but only as through fire.

It would appear that the lectionary committee shaved off parts of today's lessons in order to steer the minds of congregants and preachers alike to a common theme of loving the poor and all others including one's enemies, all of which should be rather simple stuff for the average preacher to communicate and for the average congregant to digest. Admittedly, 1 Corinthians 3:14-15 might be the most difficult part for the typical homilist or pewsitter  to tackle.

If we aren't going to hear it preached, at least let us take the time to try to sort it out and maybe find out what the lectionary editors found troubling enough in these verses to get them the axe. Time to pick up the old Matthew Henry (1662-1714) commentary (h/t Churchmouse Campanologist),

Re: 1 Corinthians 3:11-15

"This is building well upon a good foundation, making all of apiece, when ministers not only depend upon Christ as the great prophet of the church, and take him for their guide and infallible teacher, but receive and spread the doctrines he taught, in their purity, without any corrupt mixtures, without adding or diminishing. Others build wood, hay, and stubble, on this foundation; that is, though they adhere to the foundation, they depart from the mind of Christ in many particulars, substitute their own fancies and inventions in the room of his doctrines and institutions, and build upon the good foundation what will not abide the test when the day of trial shall come, and the fire must make it manifest, as wood, hay, and stubble, will not bear the trial by fire, but must be consumed in it..."

 "...Those who spread true and pure religion in all the branches of it, and whose work will abide in the great day, shall receive a reward. And, Lord, how great! how much exceeding their deserts! There are others  whose works shall be burnt (1 Corinthians 3:15), whose corrupt opinions and doctrines, or vain inventions and usages in the worship of God, shall be discovered, disowned, and rejected, in that day - shall be first manifested to be corrupt, and then disapproved of God and rejected..."

"...Observe, Those who hold the foundation of Christianity, though they build hay, wood, and stubble, upon it, may be saved. This may help to enlarge our charity. We should not reprobate men for their weakness: for nothing will damn men but wickedness. He shall be saved, yet so as by fire, saved out of the fire. He himself shall be snatched out of that flame which will consume his work. This intimates that it will be difficult for those that corrupt and deprave Christianity to be saved. God will have no mercy on their works, though he may pluck them as brands out of the burning." Matthew Henry's Complete Commentary on the Bible 

Henry goes on to note that the doctrine of purgatory may have come from these verses, and he proceeds to lay that doctrine on the ash heap.

Henry focuses his attention on Church leaders, and this is because Paul is directing his letter to those in Corinth who are responsible for building upon the foundation of Christ which he has preached. The problem of false doctrine is not new, and we will forever be faced with new constructs not just of straw, but of plastic, and of fanciful novelties and shiny innovations linked to the desires of modern culture.

As we take on the false Gospel and the false teachers so prevalent in today's church, we should remember that we are all in danger of the same fire, and we are all dependent of God's mercy to save us from the fire to which false doctrine condemns us, or should I say, "Final Jeopardy."

T'was the Sunday Before Christmas

T'was the Sunday before Christmas, and all through the church,
not a creature was stirred by an imprecatory verse (Ps 80:16).
The congregation sat nodding as the lessons were read.
With visions of lunch and bowl games filling their heads.
The congo in their warm coats and their outstretched toes,
Had just settled in for a nice sermon's doze.

When up from the back pew there arose such a tattler
Who claimed that the all of those missing verses really did matter.

So I opened my Bible app and anxiously read,
Romans 1:18-32 when a loud voice said,
"Heed Romans, heed Isaiah, heed Jonah and Job,
Heed Galatians, Ephesians, Titus and Jude."
Don't slash away, don't stash away,
But read away, read away, read them all.

Then down by the lectern, Bible pages started to flutter,
and verses began flying causing the congo to sputter.
The people were filled with verses so bold
They screamed and they shouted "Why weren't we all told!"

"That God might care that we should follow His call,
That He might be judge and ruler of all.
That He would chance send us His one and only son
To engage us, to enrage us,
And by the Word enlighten us
That His victory be won!"

And they sang, and they prayed, and their knees became weak
Until the church doors flew open, and they dashed to the street.

And I listened in wonder as they cried as they ran,

"Thank God for Jesus, God's gift to Man!"

UPG

Daniel is Thrown into the Lectionary Lions' Den

http://www.reverendfun.com/?date=20010510

Did anyone notice what the RCL does to All Saints' Day in Year C? Astute observers from the frozen tundra noticed and forwarded this alert to our southern clime. The O.T. reading gets chewed up and spat out as the dream of Daniel gets struck from Daniel 7:1-3,15-18 which in its edited version leaves us with the markedly shortened,

7 In the first year of King Belshazzar of Babylon, Daniel had a dream and visions of his head as he lay in bed. Then he wrote down the dream:*
2 I,* Daniel, saw in my vision by night the four winds of heaven stirring up the great sea,
3 and four great beasts came up out of the sea, different from one another.
15 As for me, Daniel, my spirit was troubled within me,* and the visions of my head terrified me.
16 I approached one of the attendants to ask him the truth concerning all this. So he said that he would disclose to me the interpretation of the matter:
17 ‘As for these four great beasts, four kings shall arise out of the earth.
18 But the holy ones of the Most High shall receive the kingdom and possess the kingdom for ever—for ever and ever.’ Daniel 7:1-3,15-18

Is it something that Daniel did or said that irked the editors of the RCL? I reflected back on the decision of the editors of the NRSV (the version used in our Episcopal church) to change the language of Daniel's dream and visions from,

“I was watching in the night visions,
And behold, One like the Son of Man,
Coming with the clouds of heaven!" (New KJV)

to the more gender neutral,

"As I watched in the night visions,
I saw one like a human being*
coming with the clouds of heaven."

The problem with the NRSV's attempt to force gender neutrality becomes apparent when the "Son of Man" turns up later in the Bible. When the NRSV does opt to retain a gender positive statement such as in Matthew 25:31–46, we lose the connection with the O. T. vision because of the attempt to be "inclusive".

The lectionary committee should have been okay with the gender neutrality, so there must have been some other reason for the edit.

It may be just as well that the NRSV version will not get heard this Friday, but it is a shame that folks will miss out on such wonderful visions as,

"As I watched,
thrones were set in place,
and an Ancient One* took his throne;
his clothing was white as snow,
and the hair of his head like pure wool;
his throne was fiery flames,
and its wheels were burning fire.
A stream of fire issued
and flowed out from his presence.
A thousand thousand served him,
and ten thousand times ten thousand stood attending him.
The court sat in judgement,"

We have already learned what the RCL does to verses that speak of God's judgment (search these pages for "Missing verses"), and maybe it was that, or maybe the references to the Ancient One as male upset someone enough to remove them from the ear of the congregation.

This is one lions' den that Daniel couldn't escape without a scratch.

With all the attacks on him, is it any wonder that modern people can't dig the God of Daniel?

Sigh...

No Mo' Woe: More Lectionary Omissions

While this Sunday's worship included the following nice anthem,



Today's Gospel reading gave another illustration of how, in an attempt to make the Bible a bit more gentle, the lectionary used in our church usually deletes references that might imply God's wrath or judgement.

The reading for July 7, Seventh Sunday after Pentecost (Proper 9): Luke 10:1-11,16-20

1 After this the Lord appointed seventy others and sent them on ahead of him in pairs to every town and place where he himself intended to go.
2 He said to them, ‘The harvest is plentiful, but the labourers are few; therefore ask the Lord of the harvest to send out labourers into his harvest.
3 Go on your way. See, I am sending you out like lambs into the midst of wolves.
4 Carry no purse, no bag, no sandals; and greet no one on the road.
5 Whatever house you enter, first say, “Peace to this house!”
6 And if anyone is there who shares in peace, your peace will rest on that person; but if not, it will return to you.
7 Remain in the same house, eating and drinking whatever they provide, for the labourer deserves to be paid. Do not move about from house to house.
8 Whenever you enter a town and its people welcome you, eat what is set before you;
9 cure the sick who are there, and say to them, “The kingdom of God has come near to you.”
10 But whenever you enter a town and they do not welcome you, go out into its streets and say,
11 “Even the dust of your town that clings to our feet, we wipe off in protest against you. Yet know this: the kingdom of God has come near.”
(Note verses 12-15 are omitted)
16 ‘Whoever listens to you listens to me, and whoever rejects you rejects me, and whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me.’
17 The seventy returned with joy, saying, ‘Lord, in your name even the demons submit to us!’
18 He said to them, ‘I watched Satan fall from heaven like a flash of lightning.
19 See, I have given you authority to tread on snakes and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy; and nothing will hurt you.
20 Nevertheless, do not rejoice at this, that the spirits submit to you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven.’

Okay, wiping the dust off your feet and saying that the Kingdom of God has come near is a mild sounding judgement, but hear what the omitted verses had to say,

12 I tell you, on that day it will be more tolerable for Sodom than for that town.
13 ‘Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the deeds of power done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago, sitting in sackcloth and ashes.
14 But at the judgement it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon than for you.
15 And you, Capernaum, will you be exalted to heaven? No, you will be brought down to Hades.

Fortunately for us we heard verse 12 today, but I suspect that many churches weren't so lucky.

I assume that the Lectionary committee thinks that the Sunday morning crowd shouldn't be exposed to talk of wrath, judgement, condemnation, and (heaven forbid) Hades! I guess they decided that such things are the things that turn people off about Christianity.

Now, there is no rule that you can't bring your own Bible into your Episcopal church and fill in the blanks for yourself every Sunday, and some Episcopal churches actually have Bibles in the pews (can you believe it?). In fact I think we should do a poll of Episcopal congregations and see how many keep Bibles in the pew racks. I believe St. John's Shandon in Columbia is one in our diocese that has them. Are there others?

An alternative, as has been suggested in comments made here after previous postings on the subject, would be to just go ahead and read the missing verses as they were meant to be heard.

Wouldn't that be a novel idea?

"If our religion is something objective, then we must never avert our eyes from those elements in it which seem puzzling or repellent; for it will be precisely the puzzling or the repellent which conceals what we do not yet know and need to know." C.S. Lewis, The Weight of Glory. 

RCL and the "Abbrevelation of John"

I posted on this 3 years ago, and this week I see that I am not alone in sensing a problem with today's suggested reading from Revelation. Dave Halt at  Benedict, Birettas, and Beets posted on the issue as he noted it during his sermon prep. This particular reading, Revelation 22:12-14, 16-17, 20-12, creates what one might call the "Abbrevelation of John" (should that be added to the Revisionist Dictionary?). When read without the imprecatory verses, the Abbrevelation of John sounds sweet and soothing, and perfect for the unsuspecting Sunday sheep. Unfortunately, most lectionary edits seem to result in this, a pasteurized scripture.

 The lectionary cycle is such that once a reading is written into the schedule, like clockwork, like a meteor shower, like a bad penny, it keeps on re-appearing. So, I will repost this from May 16, 2010.

A Warning to the Writers of the RCL

I usually blog about the Sunday sermon, but this was really bugging me today.

This Sunday's readings highlight one of my pet peeves, and that is the problem of the "missing verses." We use the Revised Common Lectionary for the assigned readings, and quite frequently this presents us pewsitters with an expurgated version of the Bible. What they did today to Revelation 22:12-14, 16-17, 20-12 sounds innocent enough,

12 ‘See, I am coming soon; my reward is with me, to repay according to everyone’s work.
13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.’
14 Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they will have the right to the tree of life and may enter the city by the gates.

16 ‘It is I, Jesus, who sent my angel to you with this testimony for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star.’
17The Spirit and the bride say, ‘Come.’
And let everyone who hears say, ‘Come.’
And let everyone who is thirsty come.
Let anyone who wishes take the water of life as a gift.

20 The one who testifies to these things says, ‘Surely I am coming soon.’
Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!
21 The grace of the Lord Jesus be with all the saints. Amen

I wonder if they just wanted to make things sound pretty by cutting the verses of warning,
v. 15

"Outside are the dogs and sorcerers and fornicators and murderers and idolaters, and everyone who loves and practises falsehood."

We sure should have heard that one the day after the consecration of Mary Glasspool in Los Angeles. I know, that verse is exclusionist (bad), and we are living in the age of theological pluralism (everybody gets in), and rationalism (there is no absolute truth so there is no absolute falsehood), but at times like this, I am beyond suspicious of the motives of the composers of the RCL.

And also left out was the part that the RCL really, really should not have tried to expurgate, vs. 18-19

"I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to that person the plagues described in this book; if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away that person’s share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book."

Uh oh...

So, if you did not hear the full text today in church, and if your preacher did not point out the omissions during their sermon, please ask them if they believe that John's Revelation is prophetic, and ask them if they believe that God wants us to hear the whole thing, and ask them why they feed God's sheep skim milk instead of whole milk.

Then, advise them to read the whole text, or else use the omission for useful instruction to the congo. 

The Greatest Villain in Newtown: The Weak Church

In my previous post, I mentioned an article that got me to thinking about the mass murder of Newtown's school children and teachers in a different light. After reading that today's Lectionary suggested that reading the Magnificat was optional (those verses framed by parentheses: Luke 1:39-45(46-56)), and fuming that this might deprive some Sunday worshippers of the opportunity to hear words such as,

For he that is mighty hath done to me great things; and holy is his name.
And his mercy is on them that fear him from generation to generation.
He hath shewed strength with his arm; he hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts.
He hath put down the mighty from their seats, and exalted them of low degree.
He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich he hath sent empty away. (KJV)

I thought people might never hear about the "God of power and might", and what might be the effect of a steady dose of similar omissions?

William Murray is the son of atheist Madalyn Murray O’Hair, and he has some interesting answers to my question and for those of us trying to make sense of the recent tragedy in Newtown (full text found here).

"If an individual is not afraid of the wrath of God, it is impossible to cause him to fear the justice of the state..."

Such a person has only himself to fear.

"But the greatest villain (in this tragedy) is a church that has accepted the world’s view that hell does not await evildoers..."

Yes, that is the message being spread in the modern revisionist parish as has been documented here on previous occasions.

"With a weak message from a weak church, there is no restraint or lessening of the violence..."

There can be no argument that the weak church (as far as judgment and damnation goes) sends out weak messages to the weak minded, but is it possible in this day and age to convince a people that scarcely believes in eternal life that there can be eternal fire?

"My mother, atheist Madalyn Murray O’Hair, fought to make the public schools the armed camps they are today by removing prayer, the recognition of the authority of God. In 1962 and 1963, I was attending an all-boys public high school in downtown Baltimore, Md. The school was a magnet school before the term even existed and was intended to prepare young men for college, majoring in science and engineering. There were 1,800 teenage boys in the school, and there was not a cop in the building – ever. The doors were unlocked and often the un-air-conditioned rooms had open windows. There were no metal detectors, no picture IDs, and students went in and out the doors on the honor system.
The authority of God was present..."

Authority was something we were taught as children to respect and to fear. I know that I never, never wanted to be hauled into the Assistant Headmaster's office, a place where all sorts of unspeakable horrors were rumored to await misbehaving schoolboys.

"In the vast majority of America’s public schools, the authority of God has been replaced with the authority of the iron fist of government. Morals? Without the authority of God, there are no morals, and none are taught in the public schools today. The ethics that are taught are situational, perhaps the same situational ethics that led to the logic that caused the tragic shootings in Newtown."

That same situational ethics might be alive and well and taught by your church too.

"A large advertising sign near my home reads, 'A church for those who don’t like church.' Translation: 'No condemnation of sin here – we have coffee latte and great music.'”

The feel good Sunday morning church of today serves up a watered down version of God's message. This is what the people, in ever decreasing numbers, lap up week after week . To what effect? Would it hurt to deliver the message with all the shock and awe contained therein?

"How about this politically incorrect sermon subject: 'An angry God condemns the carnal sin of Adam Lanza, the Newton school shooter who killed 26, and he will rot in eternal torment in hell, as do all those who turn their backs on God and his goodness and continue their wicked and sinful ways.' 

No way, no how in America today."

Read it all here.

What happens when you’re raised by America’s most famous atheist? Read William Murray’s riveting and redemptive new book, “My Life Without God”

What happens when your revisionist church includes the strong language but twists it to meet its agenda? Today at our church we got a massive dose of the Magnificat with at least four versions being read or sung, and then we had to listen to our priest's three takes on the Mag, one of which unfortunately came from a liberation theology point of view in which celibate Catholic males and early Protestant  Reformation males got bashed.  Lord have mercy!

Fortunately "his mercy is on them that fear him from generation to generation".

 

Daniel and the Translator's Den

On this Christ the King Sunday we had a chance to visit the NRSV's version of Daniel's vision.
Daniel 7:9-10,13-14

9 As I watched,
thrones were set in place,
and an Ancient One took his throne;
his clothing was white as snow,
and the hair of his head like pure wool;
his throne was fiery flames,
and its wheels were burning fire.
10 A stream of fire issued
and flowed out from his presence.
A thousand thousand served him,
and ten thousand times ten thousand stood attending him.
The court sat in judgement,
and the books were opened.

*****(Verses 11-12 were expurgated)*****

13 As I watched in the night visions,
I saw one like a human being
coming with the clouds of heaven.
And he came to the Ancient One
and was presented before him.
14 To him was given dominion
and glory and kingship,
that all peoples, nations, and languages
should serve him.
His dominion is an everlasting dominion
that shall not pass away,
and his kingship is one
that shall never be destroyed.

Besides the fact that parts of vision were not heard by the congregation, and that our preacher chose to politely castigate other Christians for focusing on the Day of Judgment, the NRSV in its attenpt to be more gender neutral chose to translate verse 13 as,

"..,I saw one like a human being
coming with the clouds of heaven."

rather than the more commonly used

"I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him."

Alas, another generation will miss the connection with the "Son of Man" phrase in the New Testament. There is an abundance of commentary on the connection available, but to be brief, I will give you the Scofield Reference Notes:

This scene is identical with that of Rev 5:6-10. There the ascription of praise of the "kings and priests" (cf. Dan 7:18, 18, ref. a) ends with the words, "and we shall reign on the earth." Rev. 6. opens the "vexing" of Ps 2:5 introductory to setting the king on Zion Ps 2:6 Rev 20:4. The vision Dan 7:9-14 reverses the order of events as they will be fulfilled. Verse 13 describes the scene in heaven (cf) Rev 5:6-10 which, in fulfilment, precedes the events which Daniel sees in vision in Dan 7:9-12. The historic order will be:

(1) The investiture of the Son of Man with the kingdom Dan 7:13,14 Rev 5:6-10

(2) the "vexing" of Psa 2.5, fully described in Mt 24:21,22 Rev 6.-18.

(3) The return of the Son of Man in glory to deliver the "smiting" blow of Dan 2:45 7:9-11 Rev 19:11-21.

(4) The judgement of the nations and the setting up of the kingdom Dan 7:10,26,27 Mt 25:31-46 Rev 20:1-6.

Okay, so the NRSV stripped Daniel's prophecy of some of its power, but what did the lectionary editors do in removing verses 11-12?

11 I watched then because of the noise of the arrogant words that the horn was speaking. And as I watched, the beast was put to death, and its body destroyed and given over to be burned with fire.
12 As for the rest of the beasts, their dominion was taken away, but their lives were prolonged for a season and a time.

Of course, they pulled out the graphic language of judgment!

We are all under the sentence of judgment, and to gloss it over, or edit it out of the readings for the unsuspecting minds of the pewsitters, is to lead them into the error of the comfortable false sense of security of a feel-good Sunday service; a steady dose of which can be just as deadly as a steady dose of sin and judgement, or fire and brimestone preaching.

People have to hear about both judgment and salvation. After all, if there is no judgement, who needs a Saviour?

We can feel good about the Day of Judgment while at the same time fearing it because of that very same Son of Man who will put the beast to death and who will give its body over to the fire.

And Daniel knew a thing or two about those beasts.

Reverend Fun - Dances with Lions

What Does He Need a Sickle For Anyway?

One recurring issue that I have been documenting here is the way the Sunday scripture readings get shortened by our lectionary. All too conveniently, it is the imprecatory verses that get cut. This does provide the congregation the short term benefit of a pleasant Sunday morning free from hearing about God's judgement or His wrath, but what are the long term effects?

In the long run, a steady diet of sweet tasting scripture leads to loss of the teeth that one needs to be able to chew on the tougher parts of the Bible.

And if you never get to work on the tough parts, your body will end up suffering from one deficiency state or another. Perhaps our denomination's deficiencies of doctrine and Theology can be traced back to an underlying problem with dentition.

Today's examples add weight to my theory that it is usually the tough parts that get trimmed by the knives of the lectionary committee.

Psalm 92 was shortened to,

 Psalm 92:1-4,12-15; (It was listed as 1-4, 11-14)

1 It is good to give thanks to the Lord,
   to sing praises to your name, O Most High;
2 to declare your steadfast love in the morning,
   and your faithfulness by night,
3 to the music of the lute and the harp,
   to the melody of the lyre.
4 For you, O Lord, have made me glad by your work;
   at the works of your hands I sing for joy.

12 The righteous flourish like the palm tree,
   and grow like a cedar in Lebanon.
13 They are planted in the house of the Lord;
   they flourish in the courts of our God.
14 In old age they still produce fruit;
   they are always green and full of sap,
15 showing that the Lord is upright;
   he is my rock, and there is no unrighteousness in him.

That is pleasant enough, but what did we miss?

5 How great are your works, O Lord!
Your thoughts are very deep!
6 The dullard cannot know,
the stupid cannot understand this:
7 though the wicked sprout like grass
and all evildoers flourish,
they are doomed to destruction for ever,
8 but you, O Lord, are on high for ever.
9 For your enemies, O Lord,
for your enemies shall perish;
all evildoers shall be scattered.

10 But you have exalted my horn like that of the wild ox;
you have poured over me fresh oil.
11 My eyes have seen the downfall of my enemies;
my ears have heard the doom of my evil assailants.

Case closed?

Next we got 2 Corinthians 5:6-10, 14-17 which reads,

6 So we are always confident; even though we know that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord— 7 for we walk by faith, not by sight. 8Yes, we do have confidence, and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord. 9So whether we are at home or away, we make it our aim to please him. 10For all of us must appear before the judgement seat of Christ, so that each may receive recompense for what has been done in the body, whether good or evil.

14For the love of Christ urges us on, because we are convinced that one has died for all; therefore all have died. 15 And he died for all, so that those who live might live no longer for themselves, but for him who died and was raised for them.

16 From now on, therefore, we regard no one from a human point of view; even though we once knew Christ from a human point of view, we know him no longer in that way. 17 So if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has passed away; see, everything has become new!

Inspiring? Yes, but reading between the lines we see what got left to be mixed in with the hot dog material.

11 Therefore, knowing the fear of the Lord, we try to persuade others; but we ourselves are well known to God, and I hope that we are also well known to your consciences. 12We are not commending ourselves to you again, but giving you an opportunity to boast about us, so that you may be able to answer those who boast in outward appearance and not in the heart. 13 For if we are beside ourselves, it is for God; if we are in our right mind, it is for you.

I can only guess that "the fear of the Lord " made someone uncomfortable. And so it should, as we were presented with this graphic image from our Lord in today's reading from Mark 4:26-34,

26 He also said, ‘The kingdom of God is as if someone would scatter seed on the ground, 27 and would sleep and rise night and day, and the seed would sprout and grow, he does not know how. 28 The earth produces of itself, first the stalk, then the head, then the full grain in the head. 29 But when the grain is ripe, at once he goes in with his sickle, because the harvest has come.’

My concern is that sans the references to God's judgement, folks in the pews just might start thinking that everything that is growing on this Earth is good for the harvest.

Anyone remember the parable of the wheat and the tares? 

Shh... More Missing Verses

It has been a while since I have featured "missing verses", or those Bible verses that mysteriously get deleted from the Sunday readings. I want to note today's expurgated verses in order to once again raise the questions of "Why?" and "What are we missing?"

Our Old Testament lesson was Genesis 17:1-7,15-16. You did not get to hear verses 8-14 which I also will leave out so that you can get a better idea of the message conveyed to the church goers.

1 When Abram was ninety-nine years old, the Lord appeared to Abram, and said to him, ‘I am God Almighty; walk before me, and be blameless.
2 And I will make my covenant between me and you, and will make you exceedingly numerous.’
3 Then Abram fell on his face; and God said to him,
4 ‘As for me, this is my covenant with you: You shall be the ancestor of a multitude of nations.
5 No longer shall your name be Abram, but your name shall be Abraham; for I have made you the ancestor of a multitude of nations.
6 I will make you exceedingly fruitful; and I will make nations of you, and kings shall come from you.
7 I will establish my covenant between me and you, and your offspring after you throughout their generations, for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your offspring after you.

15 God said to Abraham, ‘As for Sarai your wife, you shall not call her Sarai, but Sarah shall be her name.
16 I will bless her, and moreover I will give you a son by her. I will bless her, and she shall give rise to nations; kings of peoples shall come from her.’

We got the message that a covenant was made by God with Abram, and that a "multitude of nations" will be the result. He and Sarai are also given new names and will become fruitful.

So what got left out today? Here are verses 8-14.

8 And I will give to you, and to your offspring after you, the land where you are now an alien, all the land of Canaan, for a perpetual holding; and I will be their God.’
9 God said to Abraham, ‘As for you, you shall keep my covenant, you and your offspring after you throughout their generations.
10 This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your offspring after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised.
11 You shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and you.
12 Throughout your generations every male among you shall be circumcised when he is eight days old, including the slave born in your house and the one bought with your money from any foreigner who is not of your offspring.
13 Both the slave born in your house and the one bought with your money must be circumcised. So shall my covenant be in your flesh an everlasting covenant.
14 Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.’

I have a suspicion that verse 8 is politically incorrect in this day and age. Doesn't it sound much nicer to present a pluralistic, multi-national, covenant than an exclusivist, "this land is yours" vision for Israel.  This certainly is in keeping with the Episcopal church's view. TEc has campaigned against a Israel by supporting the "two state solution." To quote Episcopal Pravda,

"The Episcopal Church has long advocated and legislated in support of a two-state solution in which a secure and universally recognized state of Israel lives alongside a secure, independent and viable Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as the shared capital of both states...
...Executive Council said at its June meeting that it voiced the church's 'unequivocal opposition to any action by either party that undermines progress toward negotiations' and urged all Episcopalians 'to pray for the peace of the Holy Land and advocate to their own governments for maximum international support for a negotiated two-state solution.'"

I cannot come up with a better explanation for the deletion of verse 8 other than a need for political correctness.

Note to God: Would you please follow our lead on these earthly matters. This covenant business needs to be more of a two way street.

And what about the circumcision stuff? Why did it get cut? Is it too hard to understand, or is it just too hard to explain?

If you leave out the part of the covenant that involves circumcision, then you will have a difficult time understanding what all the fuss was about in the early Christian church as the Gospel
spread to the Gentiles.

Time to cut this post short...

The Absence of Fear in Lectionary Readings

In studying the lectionary edits, this lowly pewster has noticed a tendency for the editors to cut verses from the psalms that teach us about God's judgement, wrath, or anger, and instead teach us about God's love for his people. I have concluded that a steady diet of this is not healthy for the average pewsitter whose only exposure to the Psalms is what he/she hears a couple of Sundays a month.

 Today's readings contain a perfect example of the kind of verse that gets left on the cutting room floor. 

Today's Psalm was Psalm 85:1-2,8-13. Read it and consider its effect as edited.

1 Lord, you were favourable to your land; you restored the fortunes of Jacob.
2 You forgave the iniquity of your people;
you pardoned all their sin. Selah

8 Let me hear what God the Lord will speak,
for he will speak peace to his people,
to his faithful, to those who turn to him in their hearts.
9 Surely his salvation is at hand for those who fear him,
that his glory may dwell in our land.

10 Steadfast love and faithfulness will meet;
righteousness and peace will kiss each other.
11 Faithfulness will spring up from the ground,
and righteousness will look down from the sky.

12 The Lord will give what is good,
and our land will yield its increase.
13 Righteousness will go before him,
and will make a path for his steps.

I am left with a warm and fuzzy feeling except for the problematic verse 9,

"Surely his salvation is at hand for those who fear him,".

Why should I fear Him? Certainly nothing in the selected verses would give me any cause to fear God. The psalmist knew better; read the full text of Psalm 85 (I have highlighted the missing verses).

1 Lord, you were favourable to your land;
you restored the fortunes of Jacob.
2 You forgave the iniquity of your people;
you pardoned all their sin. Selah

3 You withdrew all your wrath;
you turned from your hot anger.
4 Restore us again, O God of our salvation,
and put away your indignation towards us.

5 Will you be angry with us for ever?
Will you prolong your anger to all generations?
6 Will you not revive us again,
so that your people may rejoice in you?
7 Show us your steadfast love, O Lord,
and grant us your salvation.


8 Let me hear what God the Lord will speak,
for he will speak peace to his people,
to his faithful, to those who turn to him in their hearts.
9 Surely his salvation is at hand for those who fear him,
that his glory may dwell in our land.

10 Steadfast love and faithfulness will meet;
righteousness and peace will kiss each other.
11 Faithfulness will spring up from the ground,
and righteousness will look down from the sky.

12 The Lord will give what is good,
and our land will yield its increase.
13 Righteousness will go before him,
and will make a path for his steps.

I wonder if the subliminal message being conveyed to the typical Sunday morning pewsitter, "We have no need to fear the Lord," is contributing to the decline of churches that use these Lectionary selections? After all, what is the beginning of wisdom?

Stumped? Try,

Psalm 111:10 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: a good understanding have all they that do his commandments: his praise endureth for ever.

Proverbs 1:7 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.

Proverbs 9:10 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding.

Proverbs 15:33 The fear of the LORD is the instruction of wisdom; and before honour is humility.

(h/t Topical-Bible-Studies.org)

Funny how, on a Sunday where we hear about John the Baptist's cry for repentance, we are left to wonder why we should repent in the first place.

Pride and The Lectionary Editor

Today's supply priest gave a very good sermon on the subject of "Pride" based on Matthew 23:1-12.

I was thinking about how our pride shapes how we read the Bible. We tend to ignore the parts that we don't like and focus on the parts that please us.

Many times the lectionary does this for us by presenting us with the expurgated Bible as has been pointed out on this blog as well as over at the Churchmouse blog.

Today's lectionary provided another cleaned up Psalm for the Sunday masses. This time, Psalm 107 felt the chopping block. The result was a "psalmette" that left me feeling warm and fuzzy, and I don't do warm and fuzzy. This is what we read:

1 O give thanks to the Lord, for he is good;
for his steadfast love endures for ever.
2 Let the redeemed of the Lord say so,
those he redeemed from trouble
3 and gathered in from the lands,
from the east and from the west, from the north and from the south.
4 Some wandered in desert wastes,
finding no way to an inhabited town;
5 hungry and thirsty,
their soul fainted within them.
6 Then they cried to the Lord in their trouble,
and he delivered them from their distress;
7 he led them by a straight way,
until they reached an inhabited town.
33 He turns rivers into a desert,
springs of water into thirsty ground,
34 a fruitful land into a salty waste,
because of the wickedness of its inhabitants.
35 He turns a desert into pools of water,
a parched land into springs of water.
36 And there he lets the hungry live,
and they establish a town to live in;
37 they sow fields, and plant vineyards,
and get a fruitful yield.

Lots of good vibes in that one, but I was left wondering about verses 8-32 and why they got left out. After all, they contained the following,

8 Let them thank the Lord for his steadfast love,
for his wonderful works to humankind.

9 For he satisfies the thirsty,
and the hungry he fills with good things.
10 Some sat in darkness and in gloom,
prisoners in misery and in irons,
11 for they had rebelled against the words of God,
and spurned the counsel of the Most High.
12 Their hearts were bowed down with hard labour;
they fell down, with no one to help.
13 Then they cried to the Lord in their trouble,
and he saved them from their distress;
14 he brought them out of darkness and gloom,
and broke their bonds asunder.
15 Let them thank the Lord for his steadfast love,
for his wonderful works to humankind.
16 For he shatters the doors of bronze,
and cuts in two the bars of iron.

17 Some were sick through their sinful ways,
and because of their iniquities endured affliction;
18 they loathed any kind of food,
and they drew near to the gates of death.
19 Then they cried to the Lord in their trouble,
and he saved them from their distress;
20 he sent out his word and healed them,
and delivered them from destruction.

21 Let them thank the Lord for his steadfast love,
for his wonderful works to humankind.
22 And let them offer thanksgiving sacrifices,
and tell of his deeds with songs of joy.
23 Some went down to the sea in ships,
doing business on the mighty waters;
24 they saw the deeds of the Lord,
his wondrous works in the deep.

25 For he commanded and raised the stormy wind,
which lifted up the waves of the sea.
26 They mounted up to heaven, they went down to the depths;
their courage melted away in their calamity;
27 they reeled and staggered like drunkards,
and were at their wits’ end.
28 Then they cried to the Lord in their trouble,
and he brought them out from their distress;
29 he made the storm be still,
and the waves of the sea were hushed.
30 Then they were glad because they had quiet,
and he brought them to their desired haven.

31 Let them thank the Lord for his steadfast love,
for his wonderful works to humankind.
32 Let them extol him in the congregation of the people,
and praise him in the assembly of the elders.

Granted, Psalm 107 might seem a tad bit too long for a Sunday morning service, but it looks like the part that was cut is the part containing lots more great reasons why we should be so thankful to the Lord.

Verses 9-16 give us a recitation of the reasons for the distress of the people: Thirst, hunger, imprisonment, hard labour. Bless the Lord who relieves all who so suffer.

Verses 17-20 describe the sickness the people suffer as a result of sin. This would be an obvious choice for the lectionary committee to cut because it is not at all in keeping with the modern world view. I like it, and think we are sick with sin, and therefore I see no problem with presenting this subject to the Sunday morning crowd.

Verses 23-30 give us a wonderful premonition of Jesus calming the stormy sea. I really think that should have been heard.

Verses 31-32 conclude that because of God's great deeds of saving grace we are to shout about it in the congregation, not cut it out and leave it to some lowly blogger to dredge up in a half forgotten part of the web.

To be fair, Psalm 107 goes on for five more verses at the end, but the only objectional lines are the "negative" things God does to princes and wickedness.

38 By his blessing they multiply greatly,
and he does not let their cattle decrease.
39 When they are diminished and brought low
through oppression, trouble, and sorrow,
40 he pours contempt on princes
and makes them wander in trackless wastes;
41 but he raises up the needy out of distress,
and makes their families like flocks.
42 The upright see it and are glad;
and all wickedness stops its mouth.
43 Let those who are wise give heed to these things,
and consider the steadfast love of the Lord.

At the risk of repeating myself, when we cut and paste the scripture to either make worship more pleasurable or in order to direct the message rather than let the message direct us, we are guilty of the cardinal sin of pride, and we are giving people a watered down version of Christianity which does them no favors.

Lectionary Psalter Slasher Strikes Again

Most folks I talk to are glad that the readings from the Psalter that we are given each Sunday are shortened. I, on the other hand, am a fan of the Psalms and hate to see them changed in any way. The lectionary frequently edits the psalms in addition to the other readings, and I have often questioned the rationale behind such edits. Today, I would rather focus on the effect on the casual churchgoer of what might initially seem to be meaningless changes to Psalm 78 (today's chosen psalm). 

First, read and digest the appointed verses:

1 Give ear, O my people, to my teaching; incline your ears to the words of my mouth
2 I will open my mouth in a parable; I will utter dark sayings from of old,
3 things that we have heard and known, that our ancestors have told us.
4 We will not hide them from their children; we will tell to the coming generation the glorious deeds of the  Lord, and his might, and the wonders that he has done. 

(You may have noted that verses 5-11 were missing from today's psalm.)

12 In the sight of their ancestors he worked marvels in the land of Egypt, in the fields of Zoan.
13 He divided the sea and let them pass through it, and made the waters stand like a heap.
14 In the daytime he led them with a cloud, and all night long with a fiery light.
15 He split rocks open in the wilderness, and gave them drink abundantly as from the deep.
16 He made streams come out of the rock, and caused waters to flow down like rivers. 

Taken on its own, this psalm fragment points to a glorious God, who worked wonders, delivered and provided for the Israelites in the time of Exodus. God is great. People are...well, there ain't a whole lot about people in that version. Maybe they left that part out. Now, where might they have put it? Maybe in those missing verses?

5 He established a decree in Jacob, and appointed a law in Israel, which he commanded our ancestors to teach to their children;
6 that the next generation might know them, the children yet unborn, and rise up and tell them to their children,
7 so that they should set their hope in God, and not forget the works of God, but keep his commandments;
8 and that they should not be like their ancestors, a stubborn and rebellious generation, a generation whose heart was not steadfast, whose spirit was not faithful to God. 

 9 The Ephraimites, armed with the bow, turned back on the day of battle.
10 They did not keep God’s covenant, but refused to walk according to his law. 
11 They forgot what he had done, and the miracles that he had shown them. 

 As far as lectionary edits go, this one might seem rather minor, and it does leave us with a nice uplifting message, but think about the cumulative effect of hearing only the positives. If one does not hear about how we still resist and offend such a wondrous God, won't we get to feeling a bit too good about ourselves. Doesn't anybody think that there could be lasting harm in this?

I hesitate to speculate again that the goal of the lectionary editors might be to make people feel good about themselves so that folks not leave church feeling guilty, but that does seem to me to be an recurring theme.

The church that tries to teach only positive things will inevitably find itself face to face with people doing negative things. What is such a church to do? How can it turn to scriptures for help if those scriptures have had the wonderful examples of our ancestors' negative behaviors expunged?

And what were they thinking when they make this cut right after verses 2-4 in which we heard that we will not hide these things from future generations?

The net effect is a quiet ruling, "We need to hide that from the coming generation!"

I am afraid that the leaders who guide us with Sunday worship resources are in danger of acting "like those forgotten ancestors, a stubborn and rebellious generation, a generation whose heart was not steadfast, whose spirit was not faithful to God. "

The Purpose of the Parables Kinda Got Left Out

Today's lectionary reading from Matthew 13:1-9, 18-23 contained, or should I say did not contain, yet another one of those curious lectionary edits that left me scratching my head. I include the omitted verses in the bold text below.

That same day Jesus went out of the house and sat beside the lake. Such great crowds gathered around him that he got into a boat and sat there, while the whole crowd stood on the beach. And he told them many things in parables, saying: ‘Listen! A sower went out to sow. And as he sowed, some seeds fell on the path, and the birds came and ate them up. Other seeds fell on rocky ground, where they did not have much soil, and they sprang up quickly, since they had no depth of soil. But when the sun rose, they were scorched; and since they had no root, they withered away. Other seeds fell among thorns, and the thorns grew up and choked them. Other seeds fell on good soil and brought forth grain, some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty. Let anyone with ears listen!’

Then the disciples came and asked him, ‘Why do you speak to them in parables?’ He answered, ‘To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given. For to those who have, more will be given, and they will have an abundance; but from those who have nothing, even what they have will be taken away. The reason I speak to them in parables is that “seeing they do not perceive, and hearing they do not listen, nor do they understand.” With them indeed is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah that says:
“You will indeed listen, but never understand,
and you will indeed look, but never perceive.
For this people’s heart has grown dull,
and their ears are hard of hearing,
and they have shut their eyes;
so that they might not look with their eyes,
and listen with their ears,
and understand with their heart and turn—
and I would heal them.”
But blessed are your eyes, for they see, and your ears, for they hear. Truly I tell you, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see, but did not see it, and to hear what you hear, but did not hear it.

‘Hear then the parable of the sower. When anyone hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what is sown in the heart; this is what was sown on the path. As for what was sown on rocky ground, this is the one who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy; yet such a person has no root, but endures only for a while, and when trouble or persecution arises on account of the word, that person immediately falls away. As for what was sown among thorns, this is the one who hears the word, but the cares of the world and the lure of wealth choke the word, and it yields nothing. But as for what was sown on good soil, this is the one who hears the word and understands it, who indeed bears fruit and yields, in one case a hundredfold, in another sixty, and in another thirty.’

Could it be that Jesus' words, "For to those who have, more will be given, and they will have an abundance; but from those who have nothing, even what they have will be taken away" might be considered too exclusivist to the modern pluralist leaning Episcopalian?

Or is it just a coincidence that for two weeks in a row we get a softer, gentler Jesus presented to the Sunday morning crowd than what the full text might suggest, and that crowd never gets to see the sterner reality facing those who reject Him?

O Lectionary, Lectionary, Thou that carves up the words of the prophets and the words of the Lord.

Today's readings from using the Lectionary raise some interesting questions about the rationale behind the lectionary edits that we have noted on numerous occasions on these pages.
Genesis 24:34-38,42-49,58-67 I won't focus on the O.T. edits today, but be sure to read Chapter 24 of Genesis as a whole.
Psalm 45:10-17
Romans 7:15-25
Matthew 11:16-19,25-30 is what our Deacon chose as the focus of his sermon today.

‘But to what will I compare this generation? It is like children sitting in the market-places and calling to one another,
“We played the flute for you, and you did not dance;
we wailed, and you did not mourn.”
For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, “He has a demon”; the Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, “Look, a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax-collectors and sinners!” Yet wisdom is vindicated by her deeds.’

(Deleteted verses went here)

At that time Jesus said, ‘I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and the intelligent and have revealed them to infants; yes, Father, for such was your gracious will. All things have been handed over to me by my Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.
‘Come to me, all you that are weary and are carrying heavy burdens, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.’

You have to give our Deacon credit for mentioning the missing verses, but I have a different take on how they are an integral part of the Gospel.

So, read the Gospel selection again, but this time I have inserted the missing verses,

‘But to what will I compare this generation? It is like children sitting in the market-places and calling to one another,
“We played the flute for you, and you did not dance;
we wailed, and you did not mourn.”
For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, “He has a demon”; the Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, “Look, a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax-collectors and sinners!” Yet wisdom is vindicated by her deeds.’

Then he began to reproach the cities in which most of his deeds of power had been done, because they did not repent. ‘Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the deeds of power done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I tell you, on the day of judgement it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon than for you. And you, Capernaum,
will you be exalted to heaven?
No, you will be brought down to Hades.
For if the deeds of power done in you had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day. But I tell you that on the day of judgement it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom than for you.’

At that time Jesus said, ‘I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and the intelligent and have revealed them to infants; yes, Father, for such was your gracious will. All things have been handed over to me by my Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.
‘Come to me, all you that are weary and are carrying heavy burdens, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.’

Our Deacon pointed out that a judgement worse than that delivered onto Sodom awaits those who reject the yoke of Christ.

Does anyone else see the importance of the Jesus' suggestion in the course of his reproach that repentance is needed from those who accept Him? I have heard it said that there are several points that should be made in the course of preaching, and the need for repentance is one. Without these verses, the Sunday morning crowd at church gets another pass. Oh yeah, the yoke is easy when you don't have to repent.

I also see the missing section as a key to why Jesus is thankful in the next part for this revelation. If there is no judgement, who needs to be thankful?

Time after time, we have seen similar edits. I suggest to you that the Lectionary is contributing to the delinquency of Sunday pewsitters. It is a clear pattern, and you have to wonder why the people who wrote the lectionary chose to present a watered down version of the Scriptures to the congregations (who do not read the Bible regularly and whose only exposure to the text is likely to be on Sunday morning). My theory has been that the editors do not want to scare people with all that judgement and wrath business (as if they might not come back next week for more). I am beginning to think that there are deeper theological implications of the lectionary edits. How does the revision affect our thinking about things such as repentance, salvation, atonement, sin, judgement, and the might and power of the Lord?

The long term effects of listening to an expurgated Bible every Sunday cannot be healthy.

Maybe that has something to do with the decline of the church.