Beyond all understanding

 Christ leaves his disciples his peace (Jn 14.23-29) a peace that we say 'is past all understanding'.  This sort of peace is also found in the images of Revelation and the New Jerusalem that St John describes (Rev. 21.22-).  In the world around us we often fail to realise this sort of peace and more often then not we have situations that are the direct opposite of this Peace that Christ leaves for us and his disciples.

A prominent politician made the point that a lot of the increasingly divided geo-politics of the Middle east is a result of the imposition of a form of government on people who were not looking for it.  There is perhaps some truth here or rather a discussion that we need to engage in to determine our own views and determine our actions from a Christian faith point of view.  Let us take a long view of Christian history and development to show that this point is essentially correct.  In doing this we need to go back to not only the beginning of the spread of the Christian message but can go back even further to see essentially the same or similar scenario developing within the human experience.  Put simply we can say that whenever a viewpoint has been forced upon another then there is a rise in conflict and distress within populations.  Let us look at the Jerusalem Synod with the discussions centred on circumcision or the later Trinitarian discussions.  Perhaps we can look at our early interactions with the Muslim faith and the Crusades, or perhaps the Inquisition.  Of course we can discern a somewhat similar pattern in the America's let alone the colonisation of countries and cultures.  Do we need to go on?

This is the continual to and fro between dualistic opposites that is reflective of our understanding of the world around us.  What then should the Christian and indeed what should be humanities outlook given this tendency to look at everything in a dualistic frame  that comes from a Greek philosophical and Western viewpoint?  We always say that there are two sides to every problem without really understanding that although there may be two sides to the problem it takes a third to form the solution.  Instead of advocating for this side or that side, which is what the majority of us do, we need to be saying what could be done if it was this and that rather than this or that.  By imposing 'this' view on 'that', which produces a discord, as we have missed the opportunity presented to us that would bring harmony.  Look at the current situation in the Ukraine or the Middle East, a peace process which is centred on bringing the various sides together is falling apart as each side is failing to accept a new way of looking at the whole.

Only by accepting some of the other in our selves do we come into harmony and peace.

Christ knew that any change within a society or a group will cause dissension and discord as the many views grate on each other.  Just look at some of the other phrases in this section of the Gospel that relate to persecution and disharmony whilst Christ prays for harmony.  The peace that Christ brings is the perspective of unity and harmony within our lives.  For us to attain this type of understanding we have to be rebellious and chuck out the main style of thinking that we have inherited, not just from the enlightenment period, but going back to Greek philosophy,  This is the challenge that the Christian community faces in the modern world.  So much of our thinking is based on opposing and polar opposites that we are unable to conceive of the alternative.

All good negotiations, whether in business or in politics or in the Church, must be prepared to find a win-win situation.  That is we must enable ourselves to give here in order to gain there so that the outcome, which may not be what we would like, is at least something that all can live with in harmony.  Looking at the once again growing crises in the Ukraine and the Middle East all I see is posturing and negative, divisive stances from both sides. Even I dare say it from those who are protesting.  The attitudes held are with regards to their own point of view, which may be extremely laudable, however what is needed here is the way to Christ's peace in the world.  A  way that leads to harmonious living that honours the other while not debasing our own view.

Having said all this the question arises: How do we manage this?  Dare I say it! We must be radical in our thinking and rid ourselves of the drive we have inherited to think in terms of opposites; man vs woman, lion vs lamb. black vs white.  The peace of Christ which passes all understanding comes from within ourselves as we seek to harmonise our thinking and feelings with those who are different from us in belief, colour, viewpoint, etc.  Christ accepted all and if we follow within the Christian tradition as Christ followers not as dogmaticians, institutionalists, Churchers, but as CHRISTians.  That means swallowing our own instincts and moving in to a world view that encompasses all of creation and all of the diversity inherent in humanity as God's image.  Only by using both this and  that thinking as opposed to the accepted either this or that thinking will we achieve Christ's peace.  The place Christ's peace is to be found is in the empty space between this or that, a place that is beyond all understanding as we never go there.

What is love?

 Christ's call to love is a call that is placed upon us at baptism. As his disciples we are charged with the commandment to love one another (Jn 13.34). In this commandment lies all our personal interactions within and without the community in which we live. It is the basis upon which we as Christians and Christ's followers must (this imperative is essential) produce a stability to the increasingly diverse community of the modern age. It is not something that we can neglect and it is why we empower Godparents and parents to bring up their children in an extraordinary manner. We encourage and indeed command those who take these vows on for children to live to a standard that is far beyond what is common practice in today's world.

This extraordinary means of living is demonstrated within the story of Peter in the Acts of the apostles (Acts 11.1-18). Despite the requirements of Jewish law around dietary matters God's vision is a turning point in how Peter sees the community in which he lives. For us it must also be a turning point in how we live our lives and is an instruction to those who look to guide young people in their formative years. By accepting that which we automatically shun as a result of our own inner convictions with an act of love is the true beginning of living as Christ's servant and disciple. Those who follow Christ are asked and are asking their compatriots to put aside their own deep prejudices and open their hearts to the community in which they live. To often we see this as nothing but an excuse to create havens that are conforming to our own ideals and our own believes. No leadership and no form of politics, if it is to be truly Christian, can abandon people to live without care and love. This applies to, at a familial level as much as to an international level.

Only when we come together do we expose love

We cannot abandon the least of our families, communities or other groupings for the sake of our prejudices and incoherent beliefs. The commandment that we obey is the one that is inclusive of all not just for some. This is something that we need to ultimately understand for ourselves as Christians especially within the present climate of expediency and denial that affects our everyday lives. Only when we have plumbed the depths of despair do we find the hope of the risen Christ in the love that is shared with our neighbours, in humility and hospitality. Peter destroyed everything that he knew as being part and parcel of his faith to show the ultimate love of God for those we despise. It is only when we throw away our iconoclastic views and embrace the flow of love that comes from God through Christ can we manifest the remarkable changes that God's grace brings into our lives. In the Church, we are too often divided by our dogmas and belief systems in a way that destroys the concept of God's love. We draw lines and defend our point of view such that we no longer understand the concept of love but rather create the conclaves that eventually destroy that love.

We can change the world, we may not have the will to change governmental policies that create an increasing divide within countries and between countries, but we can change the world by ensuring that the Christian message of love is carried into the future in the hearts and minds of the youngest members of society. We have been poor at undertaking the charge that Christ gives throughout the history of the Church establishment but as individuals it is up to us to ensure that the basis of our own lives within the community, not only of the Church, but also of the seculam in which we live. In doing this one thing we establish within our families and our communities the true understanding of God's love for us as we manifest God's love in our own communities. In encouraging that love in our youngest through the encouragement of godparents and parents perhaps we will strive towards a better and more loving society.

Is the shepherd heard?

 We could say that today is Shepherd Sunday as this is one of the Sundays, if not the Sunday of the year, when we discuss the proposition of the Shepherd as a model for Christ or God or Jesus.  In seeing this description we immediately think of leadership but we also need to think in terms of those who are being led.  First of all why use the model in the first place?  A bit archaic given modern farming practices and the imagery which surrounds Jesus the Good Shepherd.  Think of all those stain glass windows and book illustrations of a clean fresh faced Jesus and some clean looking sheep.

The reality in the context of the era and the Middle East is a much less romantic figure.  The shepherd, like David, was often the youngest in the family (no other occupation suits).  A loner who was often unmarried. Smelly and unwashed, sheep are not the most cleanly of animals and certainly have their own aroma. Uncouth to say the least.  Often not the owners of the sheep, normally hired hands or as previously mentioned the youngest in the family (No inheritance here).  Often apart from community and not participants in the normal everyday workings of community. This is the figure that is used in Scripture as the embodiment of leadership and of God! Why?

Well let us look at what the shepherd does.  If we picture a Middle Eastern scene where a shepherd would normally be the vision of Psalm 23 although beautiful is not exactly the true picture.  Rather it is a desolate hilly country with little to commend it self in terms of grazing.  Yet the shepherd will lead his flock through this barren landscape to areas where he knows that there is fodder and forage available to the flock.  During the trek some sheep may play up but unless they get into extreme difficulty they are often likely to re-join the flock as they know they will be looked after in the group.  The shepherd does not use force with his sheep but rather is self effacing doing what is required for the good of the whole rather than that of the individual.

The harsh landscape of Jordan with the shepherd leading his sheep (www.pinterest.com)

Despite looking as if they are amenable sheep can be ornery and recalcitrant, especially when left to fend for themselves.  So it is quite to their benefit to be known by the shepherd and follow where he leads, so they have a role to play in the flock and shepherd scene.  If they were to play follow the leader they would in all probability be like army ants, who, if having lost their nest, will follow the ant in front.  If that ant is lost or walking in a circle then they have no guarantee that they will survive.  Indeed the ant in front may find another ant in front as it circles (the tail end of its own followers).  They forever go around in circles until the majority die!! Is this what has become of the Church?

So if we are sheep who is the shepherd? and who is the under shepherd to whom authority has been given to lead the flock to the abundant pastures which are indicated in Psalm 23?  These questions have implications for us today in this Parish as we move towards our synod, for the Australian Church as it moves towards the election of a new Primate and also within Australia with the elections just past.  They are not simple questions with simple answers (God, Jesus, the Christ, etc) but they impinge on our daily lives not just our faith journey.  Working with people within the reality of our context is not the same as working with our faith journey although the two should be overlapping. What should we be looking for in our leaders when we look at the Shepherd model that scripture gives us.

Our leaders should be looking to lead the whole not just their own personal coterie (party, personal accounts, etc).  Scripture is specific about leadership being for the whole (flock) not just for the individual.  Our leaders should be those who listen to the needs of others and to the call of God our ultimate shepherd.  Our leader(s) should have the vision that leads the people (flock) to those pastures where we obtain sustenance but not as thought from the front.  Leaders know the way and call to those who are at the forefront to direct them along the way. The path should be discerned through prayer and consultation by speaking to others to smooth the way and direct us down the path.  Our leaders should not resort to violence or coercion except as a very last resort.  Leadership should be looking for solutions in conflict that are beneficial to both sides and all of God's creation.

As sheep we are also required to listen to our leaders, be persuaded to assist not forced or conscripted against our will, be able to speak against wrong doing and be heard. We should not be persuaded by popularity but by experience and results.  We must also remember that we ourselves are leaders as we too love our neighbours and so will speak out for the disenfranchised to obtain justice and lead people to the love of God through the expression of God's love in our hearts and lives.

Will we listen to God in the coming months as we discern where leadership in Australia and the diocese aims or will we succumb to the populist views and propaganda? Are we able to show the true leadership which is part of who we are as Christians and discern God's will and path in our lives?  No matter what we do, it is our responsibility and decisions that determines the leadership in the Church, in Society and in our lives.

Understanding love in a cycle of violence

 Christ's words to Peter in the last few paragraphs of John's gospel can be quite difficult to understand as the English translation in all of Christ's utterances are 'love'. However, there is a nuance in the final question which seems to upset Peter as the word in Greek is different in both order and depth, yet still translated for us as the word 'love'. We perhaps think Peter gets upset as a result of the repetitiveness of the question but what if it is around word usage as opposed to repetitiveness. There are up to eight variants of the word love in Greek but the more important ones for the present are storge, philia, eros and agape. Each of these word convey a different form of love which we miss in English unless we are aware of context, which is not required when using the Greek forms.

One of the things that the Anglican Church in Australia has been prominent in and, dare I say it, is a leader in is moving on Domestic Violence. Some years ago the Church organised an investigation and report into Domestic Violence in the Anglican Church in Australia which resulted in a task force and the Seven Commitments. Each Diocese and its parishes were asked to take up the commitments and work towards at least one of these in their daily lives and ministry. However, if we think about domestic violence, its perpetrators and its consequences we can probably, in a naïve manner, see that in many cases there is a failure of love within the familial setting. This may in part be how we as English speakers see love, i.e. as a single concept 'love', without realising that there are a multitude of interpretive ways in which we can see love acting within the family and the community. To understand the failure to love within a setting of domestic violence as stated earlier seems rather naïve but becomes much clearer if we understand love as a multiplicity rather than as a singularity. It is also perhaps something that we can teach rather than just talk about not only to children but also to those embarking on a family.

What love defines your relationships?

When we form relationships we tend to form them through a series of ever deepening processes which may or may not follow the order of the Greek words but often tend to. In other words we often begin any relationship with an empathetic bond. A bond that is formed out of empathy for the other, their situation and their context in relation to ourselves. This is what the Greeks call storge. A relationship may stop at this point and we are forever empathetic with and to our acquaintance without moving into any deeper relationship. We often take this feeling of empathy to a deeper level especially if we continue with our friendship on a regular basis such that we gather together often for social or other entertainments. we now start in towards the Greek concept of philia which is love in the bond of a continuing friendship. This is the word that Christ uses in the last statement to Peter, this is also the bond that David and Jonathon have. It is a bond that we do not often talk about but is a bond often formed in war and during times of trouble. It is closest, perhaps, to what Australians know as 'mateship'. Friendship such as this may turn into a sexual attraction which of course will culminate in the intimacy of sexual love or eros. This is of course dependent on the sexual proclivities of the individuals concerned but may often be a precursor to permanent relationships. The combination of these three deepens in a relationship that becomes more permanent that leads to the culmination of agape love or love that is self sacrificing, which is the love in the first two questions of Christ to Peter and is demonstrated on the cross.

The sequence above is one of many possibilities and more often than not the last, agape, is not common within our modern understanding of relationships as the three more ephemeral loves tend to rule our hearts and as they breakdown then we open the door to domination and power. Once we let these into such relationships we will tend to move towards a situation where domestic violence and abuse becomes more prone. Whilst the above schema is perhaps idealistic in this day and age it does assist us to understand better our own relationships and perhaps how to assist those who are in the bleak throes of an unhealthy and abusive relationship. God's relationship with us is none of the first three but is based on agape and it is this that we should be bringing into the world through our own relationship with the risen Lord. Perhaps we do not consider our side of the relationship as being agape but philia or sorge should we not therefore recognise our deficit and learn the art of agape before God?