Beware of hypocrisy

 

Reflection Sunday 7th November 2021

The focus of the passage we’ve heard today from Mark’s Gospel is usually the bit about the Widow. It is often used to remind people about their need to give generously and selflessly. But I’m not thinking about that today. Rather I’m thinking of the first part dealing with the scribes.

You may have heard last week an earlier passage in Mark 12: 28 - 34 where another scribe came to Jesus and asked which commandment was the most important. Jesus was satisfied with that scribe’s attitude when the scribe said it was most important to love God and to love our neighbour. The scribe went on to say that to do these things was “more important than all the burnt offerings and sacrifices.” Mark 12:33

But now a short time later Jesus is concerned about the teachers of the law, the scribes in other words,  who like to be seen in the right places, wearing the right clothes and have the most important seats in the synagogue. Men who “devour widows houses and for a show make lengthy prayers.” Mark 12:40

So, who were the “scribes”? They were originally people trained in writing skills and were used to record events and decisions. During the exile in Babylon educated scribes became the experts in God’s written word, copying, preserving, and teaching it. By the time of the New Testament, they had become a profession in their own right. They were akin to what we would think of as lawyers. They interpreted the law, taught it to followers, and were experts in cases where people were accused in breaking the law of Moses. They were mainly Pharisees (the Pharisees being like a political party.) They weren’t necessarily priests as such but were closely associated with the high priests in the Temple.

Jesus’ charge that “They devour widows’ houses” probably means several things. The scribes were part of the process of setting the rules for the Temple. Rules that required people to make sacrifices and gifts to the Temple in order to ensure that people were right with God. It’s possible that some scribes profited directly by this but it is more likely that the harsh rules meant that some widows sacrificed everything in order to comply with the Temple rules.

Others think that this phrase “They devour widows’ houses”, might be a reference to the practice of some scribes expecting and receiving lavish hospitality from widows in an attempt by the scribes to support their own wealth and power. Which widows couldn’t really afford.

These practices made Jesus angry. And consequently, when he sent the disciples out to preach, Jesus prohibited the disciples from accumulating wealth or from exploiting households that offered the disciples hospitality. He also warned the disciples against seeking honour rather than serving others.

The obvious question for us then is “Who are today’s scribes?” Who are the hypocrites in our world? Who are the ones who don’t practice what they preach?

I’m sure you can produce your own list without any help from me!

But let’s bring our attention closer to home. Jesus insisted that his disciples should not adopt the standards of power and influence that society might have expected from followers of the Messiah. And Jesus’ expectations apply to his disciples today.

Sadly, we know all too well how over the centuries people who claim to be followers of Jesus have come to expect power, influence, and wealth because of their positions. It’s been a charge levelled at parts of the Roman Catholic Church for instance for many years. But before we Protestants get all self-righteous, parts of the Protestant Church today are just as guilty.

A colleague told me of his experience with the South Korean Methodist Church when he visited a few years ago. Ministers there are incentivised to grow their congregations. The more members the bigger the car supplied by the church, the bigger the house the bigger the salary. It didn’t sit well with my colleague. It doesn’t sit well with me. I feel it wouldn’t sit right with Jesus either.

As a minister, I think I’m always aware that I live in a glass house, and so I’d better not throw stones! And as someone once said when we point a finger at someone, we’d better remember there are three fingers pointing back at us!

Nonetheless it is important to be what is called “a critical friend”. To say  to someone in a kindly way that maybe they’ve stepped out of line. Or have they thought about what they are doing. Sometimes it is right that we call out practises which are damaging to others, unjust or even illegal. It is right that we do speak out against those who seek to exploit their position for their own gain. I’m not just thinking of Church. It is true in all contexts.

A young minister was pleased that a particular woman in his congregation always asked for copies of his sermons. One day his pride got the better of him and he asked her about it. "Oh," she responded brightly, "they're just the perfect size for the bottom of my budgie’s bird cage!"

This little story serves as a useful reminder to ministers of keeping our feet on the ground. Of not getting above ourselves. A few years ago, I had such a moment. I’d been preaching at a church in another part of the service. After the service, an old gentleman came up to me and shook my hand. The conversation went something like this:

“Brother! What a word you brought us today! I watch the God channel all the time. And it was worthy of being on there.”

As you can imagine I was quietly pleased. I’ve long realised that sometimes when I preach a sermon it can be received in ways I’d not thought of. But this was praise indeed. He was obviously a very discerning old chap.

A few days later, we had our staff meeting. And my colleague who was the minister for the church asked how I’d got on. I told her my experience. “Oh. That was Bob. Yes, he’s a lovely man. He says something similar to every preacher!” Oh well

It was a good reminder to keep thing in perspective. To not get above ourselves. To have those “critical friends” who keep our feet on the ground.

The American poet Edgar Guest wrote these wise words:

I'd rather see a sermon than hear one, any day;

I'd rather one would walk with me than merely tell me the way;

The eye's a better pupil and more willing than the ear.

Fine counsel is confusing, but example's always clear,

And the best of all the preachers are the men who live their creeds,

For to see good put in action is what everybody needs.

Ruth - a tale of a refugee

 

Sunday 31^st October 2021

 

The story of Ruth is an interesting one. Ruth is an important figure in the Old Testament. She is King David’s great grandmother, and she is given as one of Jesus’ ancestors. And yet she was not Jewish. She was a Moabite woman who was married to a Jew. Given how some prophets – Ezra and Nehemiah – called for an expulsion of “foreign” wives after the Jews had returned from exile in Babylon, with the suggestion that Jewish society was being polluted by the presence of foreigners, Ruth’s place in history shows how special she was.

The story starts with “a certain man of Bethlehem” along with his wife and sons leaving Bethlehem for the country of Moab as there is a famine. Elimelech, Naomi, Mahlon and Chilion settled in Moab. The sons took local women as wives – Orpah and Ruth. But in due course Elimelech, Mahlon and Chilion died. As a widow Naomi decides to return to Bethlehem as she had heard that “the Lord had considered his people and given them food.” Ruth 1:6

This is then where the story gets interesting. Naomi tells her daughters - in - law, Orpah and Ruth, to stay in Moab which Orpah says she will do. But then in these beautiful words Ruth says:

 ‘Don’t urge me to leave you or to turn back from you. Where you go, I will go, and where you stay, I will stay. Your people will be my people and your God my God. ¹⁷ Where you die, I will die, and there I will be buried. 

In a world that’s suspicious of immigrants – whether legal or illegal – this is a story about forced immigration. Naomi and her family don’t cross into Moab because they are religious radicals. They head to Moab because there is no bread in Bethlehem. (Ironically, Bethlehem means “house of bread” in Hebrew.) This is a desperate thing to do. For Jewish people Moab was a place to avoid. And yet Naomi and family settle there, and the sons marry and start to settle. Even if it is perceived to be hostile territory.

With the death of Elimelech, Mahlon and Chilion as we’ve heard, Naomi sets off for Bethlehem once more. And Ruth goes with her. But think for a moment. If Jewish people feel that nothing good can come from Moab, what will they think of Ruth? And yet Ruth agrees to accompany Naomi to confront all the prejudice and hatred that such an action will entail.

It is debatable why Naomi told Ruth to return

¹⁵ ‘Look,’ said Naomi, ‘your sister-in-law is going back to her people and her gods. Go back with her.’ Ruth 1:15

Is Naomi just glad of an excuse to get rid of her foreign daughters in law? Did Naomi fear what people would say when she arrived back in Bethlehem with a Moabite woman in tow? The fact that Ruth decides to stay with Naomi suggests these aren’t the case. It seems more likely that Naomi felt she’d be unable to provide for her daughters - in - law (Jewish custom would have meant Naomi’s own family or more likely Elimelech’s family would have provided for Naomi but no one else. Certainly not a Moabite woman.) Or perhaps Naomi feared the abuse her daughters - in - law would face.

Orpah decides to stay. But Ruth has what the Hebrew calls “hesed,” steadfast love for Naomi and refuses to leave her side. Hesed is a love that will not be restricted by ethnic or religious boundaries.

This steadfast love causes Ruth to “cling” to her mother-in-law Naomi. This steadfast love, this hesed, is more powerful than ties to a nationality or country or even s birth family. Hesed comes above all things and is more powerful than all things.

I said at the start that Ruth is an ancestor of Jesus. In the Genealogy of the Messiah given at the start of Matthew’s gospel we are told that “Salmon was the father of Boaz, whose mother was Rahab, Boaz the father of Obed whose mother was Ruth” 1:3

What Ruth does to Naomi is what Jesus told his disciples to do -  “Cling” on to him and let go of things that “cling” on to them. Things like their assumption that only Jewish people could be associated with the Messiah. Ruth’s actions in being prepared to associate with someone outside her own culture, faith and nationality, are a forerunner of what her descendent Jesus would say centuries later.

This is a challenge to us, or at least a reminder to us not to cling on to things that hold us back. Not to cling on to our prejudices perhaps or the “we’ve always done it this way” mindset that we can fall in to from time to time. Ruth’s actions show the importance of being prepared to take a great risk. Of leaving something behind and clinging on to something new and better.

For a Moabite woman like Ruth, especially one who has been part of a mixed marriage with a Hebrew man, to leave her homeland and set foot in Bethlehem would have been a massive risk. A risk of alienation from her own people and a risk of not being accepted in her new home. Ruth might have been facing a language barrier, a food barrier, a social etiquette barrier, and a religious practice barrier. She would also have been facing the constant reminder that she was “not one of us.”

It’s worth remembering that for those people who risk coming here in flimsy boats across the English Channel, they are giving up everything they have known. They, like Ruth, are facing language barriers, food barriers, and social etiquette barrier. They face hostility. They may have the freedom here to worship as they wish but to do so can often put them at risk. And some may say “Well that’s their choice. No one’s making them come here.”

True. But to those people I’d say for a moment try and put yourselves in the shoes of some of these refugees. If you saw the BBC news from Afghanistan last week, you’d have seen people starving, as the food aid from other countries they’d relied on, has been stopped by the Taliban. You’d have seen one mother who had agreed to sell her baby daughter to a man so that this baby can in due course become a wife for one of the man’s sons.

And as the COP26 conference happens in Glasgow, it’s worth remembering that as climate change has its impact on increasing numbers of people, whether through rising sea levels or increased drought, it is likely that more and more people will be forced to flee their homelands.

It is for reasons like these and many more that some people risk everything to come to a place they’ve heard is safe and welcoming.

It’s easy to romanticise the story of Ruth and Naomi as the faithful daughter in law clinging to this older woman out of a sense of Hesed – steadfast love.  But the story of Ruth and Naomi isn’t romantic. It is in fact a story of how people can be constricted by some social, ethnic, racial, or religious boundaries. Yet it is a story of how God can work across these boundaries and can break them down to bring new life and new hope.