July 25, 2010
From Hollow to Hallowed
Hosea 1:2-2:1
Luke 15:11-24
I Peter :1-12

          “ When the Lord first spoke to Israel through Hosea, he said to Hosea, “Go and get married; your wife will be unfaithful .  .  .  ”.   For the past several week-ends and here at St. Paul ’s just a week ago Saturday, the following scene has unfolded in many local churches.   The minister accompanied by 3 or 4 young men, looking somewhat uncomfortable in their dress of Tuxes or suits, move to the front of the sanctuary and stand with somewhat bated breath and nervous smiles.  Then the organ breaks into a stirring rendition of Pachelbel’s Canon and the people in the pews turn expectantly.  First one beaming body of beauty then another move with grace down the aisle.  A flourish from the pipes and a burst of volume brings everyone to their feet and flashes of light pop like a Canada Day fireworks display as the bride makes her way to the front.

          As the groom extends his arm and guides her to face the minister, the couple stand jubilantly side by side and the service continues.  With solemn joy the minister inquires of the Groom, ‘Will you Hosea take Gomer to be your wife, will you love her, comfort her, honour and keep her and forsaking all others faithfully keep yourself to her alone, as long as you both shall live?’.  The smiles are immediate throughout the sanctuary as the Groom promises ‘I will.’

          Then the minister addresses the Bride.  ‘ Do you Gomer, take Hosea to be your husband to be unfaithful to him as long as you both shall live?’ ‘I do’.  ‘I now pronounce you husband and wife.’  Can you imagine such an exchange of vows?  Can you conceive of a minister officiating at such a ceremony?  Or providing that kind of pre-marital counselling?  No, it’s unimaginable isn’t it!

          Even in Hollywood , in which marital faithfulness is about as common as a blue moon or maybe the Maple Leafs winning the Stanley Cup, even there, no one declares openly his or her intent to be unfaithful, promiscuously wanton.  And yet in the second verse of the book of Hosea that is the very scene we encounter, the very counsel we hear.  And it is God speaking, God setting the scene, penning the plot.  What’s happening?

          The technical term is an enacted parable.  Hosea’s life is to be the story of the relationship between God and God’s people.  The marriage of Gomer and Hosea will mirror the spiritual life of the people of Israel .  Like the groom in the story God is faithful, reliable, dependable, passionate with love.  God’s people are like the bride - heartless and hedonistic. 

          Hedonistic.  The word means focused on pleasure and common synonyms are words like self-indulgent, riotous, wild and self-gratifying.   As you read the story of Gomer in the succeeding chapters that is what you find - a wanton, unbridled, live for the moment and the thrill, egocentric woman.   If it doesn’t pleasurably stroke one of her senses, Gomer isn’t interested.   Her life is prodigal in the degenerate understanding of that word - immoral and unrestrained. 

          Heartless.  Once one uses egocentric as a description of a person then heartless is really redundant.  As only the thoroughly wanton and self-focussed can be, Gomer has no regard toward others, even those for whom a woman’s natural instincts are thought to incline her heart - her children and spouse.  Gomer leaves Hosea and abandons her children.  She has a heart of stone.

          Set aside for the moment the abandonment of her children.   Consider the spousal relationship she rejects.  Hosea is the husband of every wise woman’s imagination.  He is caring, generous, willing to die for her - with the exception of the men here today, a rare man indeed!  But Gomer willingly throws this relationship away for hollow glitter and fleeting thrills.  Is Headless too strong a word to describe such irrationality, foolishly leaving the solid ground of devoted love for the quicksand of superficial stimulation?

          Yet is there any description more consistent with the ways of western  society than headless.  Scores and multitudes of plays, novels and movies all revolve around this theme -one spouse rejecting the other, even though the one who is spurned offers deep and passionate devotion.  And the reasons for this rejection?  A stranger passing through who stimulates fantasies, a sense of boredom with stability, an attempt to recapture one’s fading youth, the lie that ‘the grass is greener on the other side of the fence’, confusing the feelings of passion for the substance of love.  Rarely do such stories have happy endings, for the author writes with integrity.  Such motivations are like the morning mist, they quickly evaporate in the heat of reality.

Heartless, hedonistic, headless and in the end hopeless.  For when the mist of the momentary pursuit of pleasure fades, the spouse who has spurned all that is of substantial and lasting value lies outcast in the gutter, a hollow shell empty of self-worth, friendless and often destitute - haunted with remorse, bitterness and self-loathing.   Such is the fate of Gomer as this sad tale unfolds.  The names of her children describe her state -  Lo-Ruhamah and Lo-Ammi, Unloved and Forsaken.  Hopeless.

Not!  For in the gospel story there are two understandings of prodigality at work.  There is the degenerate angle well represented by Gomer and the younger son.  There is also the gracious use of prodigal, typified by the father in the parable and Hosea, both of whom represent God in the story.  It is that prodigal grace that offers an alternative and joyful ending. 

Peter picks up that second possible conclusion in the tenth verse of chapter 2. “Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.”  Or to reflect more closely the Hebrew of Hosea, ‘Once you were Lo- Ammi - rejected, now you are embraced; once you were Lo -Ruhamah - unloved, now you are cherished.’   Peter continues to frame this alternate ending in the most incredible of terms.  These ones who were destitute like Gomer and the younger son are now described in the most glorious of expressions.  “. . . you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to

God, . . .”.  

This far happier second ending, if we ponder it, raises two issues of difficulty.  One is the prodigal-ness of God’s grace.  It’s just too incredible!   Who among us would be able to repeatedly forgive and embrace a spouse as wantonly unfaithful as Gomer?  Like the old Peter, we might be able to stretch our imaginations and say we’d take such a person back seven times.  But 70 times 7 - and each time delighted to be reunited with the one who has shredded your heart and maimed your children’s souls.  It’s too much!   Yet there is no other way to view the Father’s welcome other than as unrestrained joy.

          As we shared a few weeks ago, this full blown grace, characteristic of God, causes great offence to the natural sense of justice that lies near the root of our being.  We may be able to move beyond the fairness of ‘an eye for an eye’, but forgiveness without any obvious repercussion or penalty tends to grate uncomfortably our psyches.   Grace as seen in the heart of the gospel I believe will always be troublesome.  We agree it is amazing but when poured out without limit from the throne of heaven, it overwhelms our limited human understanding.

          That noted, we can usually come to some uneasy peace with this part of the divine character.  It is the second piece that is far more troublesome for most of us.  It’s Peter’s audience.  Peter isn’t writing to the obviously debauched like Gomer and the younger son, ones for whom descriptions like rejected and unloved seem well earned, folk for whom Newton ’s word ‘wretch’ seems very suitable.  No!  Peter is writing to more or less ordinary people, more run of the mill sinners, your average congregational members and he’s equating them to Gomer - that wanton hussy.  That I believe most of us find much more disturbing than the prodigal-ness of God’s grace.  In our heads, we know God does not grade sin as off-white, gray and pitch black - they are all pitch black.  And in our heads, we know God does not differentiate levels of individual rebellious pride - inconvenient, troublesome or diabolical - they are all diabolical.  But in our hearts, we often apply the Bell curve, comparing ourselves to others rather than to the person God created us to be; and when we find that divine standard grouping us in with the Gomers of this world, we are not happy. 

          Yet the gospel is unfazed by such dismay.  Indeed the gospel is adamant.  Until you and I can sing without reservation ‘that saved a wretch like me’; we will never be able to sing in full measure ‘Amazing grace, how sweet the sound’.   I believe that realization of his utter lack of status before a Holy God is the blindness from which Newton celebrates deliverance and healing. 

          I found C.S. Lewis writing in Mere Christianity helpful here.  Lewis asserts that the gospel isn’t about nasty and nice.  Jesus didn’t die to make us all nice.  For some of us are already pretty nice.  Jesus died to make us new, whether we are more or less virtuous or full of vice.  The newness can only begin when we acknowledge that God doesn’t grade on the Bell curve, that “there is none righteous, no not one”.

The good news, that is the gospel, is that once we are embraced by that grace, once we empty ourselves of all pretence of self-sufficiency, then we really do start live as “a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God”; who by word and deed are able “to proclaim the wonderful acts of God”.

For now we give and seek full access to the Spirit of God to shape us more and more fully into the likeness of Jesus.  Some of that happens through the intentional acts of the will as we “rid [y]ourselves of all malice and all deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and slander of every kind.” and “live such good lives among the pagans that .  .  .   they may see [y]our good deeds and glorify God”.   We truly make becoming nicer, that is reflecting the fruit of the Spirit - kindness, goodness, gentleness and so on, the focus of our decisions.  And some of it happens as it were intravenously as we fill our beings with the truth of God’s word, practise praying for those who have hurt us, invite God to reframe our heart’s passion to conform more and more to the heart of Jesus and take delight in opportunities to serve generously and with contentment.  This growth into the full stature of Jesus is the new life for which we were both created and redeemed.  And it is absolutely the happiest ending, both imaginable and beyond imagination.

Amen

July 18, 2010
Not Just Another Pretty Face  
Amos 8:1-14 
Luke 10:38-42
Revelation 2:1-7

          Many of you are aware our family has a cottage on the Georgian Bay in Muskoka.  A number of years ago we possessed a small wooden sailboat - a main sail and jib and room for maybe three persons -if you were friendly and not overly large.  Going out on the boat was a fun way to spend a quiet hour or two.  When there was a breeze and we were tacking, the sight was pleasant.  But in spite of appearances and even functionality and although repairs and upkeep had been attempted -all was not well.  Dry rot had set in.  It all came to a head [no there were no facilities on board], it came to an end one glorious afternoon, when as he was executing a slick come around, the captain’s foot went through the hull and the air space began quickly to be displaced by water.  Linda can relate the rest of the story if you corner her sometime. 

          That in part is the essence of Amos’ vision.  A basket of fruit looks great whether it is in a hospital room or on the kitchen counter or on my office desk!  But its shelf life is short.  Left uneaten, decay will soon set in and the basket will become a smelly, unsightly mess.   So was the situation for the people to whom Amos prophesied.

          Like that little boat tacking in the breeze and sunshine all appeared attractive.  As God’s people, they seemed to be doing all the right things, appeared to have the right stuff.  They observed religiously the festivals and holy days. They kept the Sabbath.  To the casual observer faithful living was a core part of their existence.

          Alas it was but a surface appearance, a superficial commitment.  Inside there was no driving compassion for others, no passion for morality.  Listen again to Amos’ indictment, “⁴ Hear this, you who trample the needy and do away with the poor of the land, ⁵ .  .  .         skimping the measure, boosting the price and cheating with dishonest scales,  ⁶ buying the poor with silver and the needy for a pair of sandals, selling even the sweepings with the wheat.”  The dry rot of greed, avarice, dishonesty, injustice and lust was eating away at their souls and spirits.  Like that former family sailboat, they were only one small calamity from going down to the bottom.  And the prophet warns that calamity is fast approaching.

          Sometimes I wonder if those images don’t describe Canada .  To almost the entire world we are known as a great place - magnificent in our natural beauty, rich in our natural resources, highly developed in our educational system and social safety net.  We always score in the highest echelons when nations are rated.  And we can rise to the occasion - the most recent example was the generous outpouring of aid in support of Haiti . 

          Yet if you peel back the layers of our psyche, is that who we are at the core?  When we go to the ballot box are those most noble and worthy characteristics, the motivations that direct our choices?  What values are being championed over discussions in our local coffee shops or even when we are sipping lemonade in the lobby?  Do we find compassion for the least, the lowest, the little and the last at the heart of political campaigns, in the fabric of municipal policy, in the hopes and dreams being promoted by our leaders? 

          Or are we more apt to find practices of expediency and/or self-promotion in ascendant or dominant positions in the mainstream of the Canadian mind-set?  In the speeches of Premiers and Prime Minister, in the political gamesmanship carried on in the media, in the policies designed to attract voters’ support?   From time to time these days, I wonder if some of the motivations that have shaped Canada into being one of the best places in the world might not be at risk.  Are we still looking good but is there erosion setting in?

          Martha too looks good doesn’t she?  And there is no evidence of internal rot here?  At least I think her complaint is just a bit of pique and not an explosion of deep-seated bitterness and repressed anger, as in ‘Mom always liked you best!’.  No, Martha looks pretty good.  She’s a worker.  A hard worker.  She wants the best for her guests.  And it doesn’t seem to arise from inner hubris, a lusting to hear everyone in the marketplace exult, ‘Boy, nobody does it better than Martha!!! That woman can put on a spread fit for royalty!’.   No Martha’s commitment to being the best hostess seems entirely genuine.  It is who she is.   And to everyone else that day, she is looking pretty good; everyone except Jesus that is.

          I wonder if Jesus was planning to take Martha aside later and counsel her privately?  His affection for her is deep.  I suspect a quiet word was his plan, a few moments of one friend correcting another.  But it was not to be.  Instead good old Martha received her enlightenment in public, right in the hurly burly of one course being cleared and another served.  And something as potentially destructive as the dry rot Amos spoke about is brought into the light.   Martha is majoring on minors.  She is allowing the good to keep her from the best. 

          There is a place for Martha’s concern, a legitimacy to her busyness; but not as a substitute for time in the presence of Jesus, lingering and listening with rapt devotion at his feet.  Sometimes both are possible, remember what Martha is focussed on is good, it just doesn’t give life in abundance.   And if one isn’t serving out of inner abundance then a little pique can become deep-seated bitterness and broken relationships and a sense of God being either distant or unfair. 

          Once the focus becomes me and my service, instead of God and his word; then the journey down the slippery slope to the kind of self-seeking greed, dishonesty and injustice evidenced by the people of Amos’ day has begun.  It may not get there but the turn has happened. 

          This also forms the core of the rebuke given to the church in Ephesus .  They had been like Mary.  Their prime attention, their heart’s passion was the love of God and the service of God’s people flowing from that love.   But somehow the two movements had become separated and the first one had faded.  They still looked good.  They are commended for a multitude of good works.  They have resisted all kinds of pressure to compromise or recant their faith.  But they have “lost their first love”.  The passion of Mary has been superseded by the works of Martha.  The good has supplanted the best.  

                We at St. Paul ’s need to realize that our psychological and spiritual D.N.A. make us susceptible to the dangers of looking good.  Most of us are not that far from the boat - not that old family sailboat I talked about earlier, but the boat that brought our ancestors to Canada .  Life is never easy for an immigrant.  For the first and usually the second generation it is the life of Martha not Riley that describes life in the new land.  And hard work gets woven into our soul and spirit as a virtue equal to or maybe even greater than godliness in character.  We are almost genetically predisposed to energetic effort.

          And as Presbyterians we are heirs of a faith that puts high value on understanding.  We grew from roots that inculcated the catechism into the brain with the same regularity as porridge was infused into the stomach.  It’s a great heritage. Regrettably though, sometimes the heart dimensions of belief were under-emphasized and the passion needed to implement these well learned faith principles into daily life was not sufficiently strong to keep the practice from becoming more rote duty than burning desire.

          And Canada in the 21^st century bombards us with beckonings to busyness.  We are cajoled and tempted to do, do, do and rarely find time nor motivation to be, be, be.  Think about it.  How many of us have set aside any extra time this summer for devotional reading or prayer?  Or a week or a week-end at a church sponsored conference ground?  Or even just quiet walks on the Lynn Valley trail?  But I suspect it is easier to name trips to this activity or that attraction.  Doubtless all good things but our world pressures us so that doing trumps being, Martha dominates Mary.

          We here at St. Paul ’s, for these and other reasons, may be very susceptible to the pitfalls being set forth in this morning’s scripture lessons.  But the fact that we are here is a very constructive way to avoid becoming entrapped.   We live in a strange society.  On the one hand-the more physical side of life, we are encouraged to practice regular habits of healthy living - low fat diet, exercise, avoidance of unnecessary drugs, caring for the environment.  On the other hand - the more spiritual dimension of life, our culture advocates lack of boundaries and elevates entrepreneurial individualism - no discipline, no structure, no rules.

          So talk of spiritual discipline, holy habits, God ordained rules for living can sometimes cut against the grain.  Yet the practice of activities like participating in weekly worship, daily personal devotions, journaling one’s faith life, praying for each other, inviting one’s elder for a conversation about spiritual matters and other such practices, help us not to get our priorities inverted so we invest ourselves almost entirely in the good, with the result that there is nothing left for the pursuit of the best.   The priority Mary is exhibiting is also infused in our D.N.A..   It just seems to be the recessive gene, the one that needs assistance to emerge and flourish.  Let me end with one practical way we can strengthen that part our heritage.

          I happen to know that in the last month or so, a number of us have had one of those moments of divine insight.  Maybe not hearing our name spoken by Jesus, “Martha, Martha …”, but something a bit along those lines.  Let me encourage you first to stay for refreshments and in the midst of sharing about summer adventures ask if there has been any special ‘God moments’ this month.  Sharing and hearing will benefit every person in the conversation. 

          We here at St. Paul’s have the history and the ability to not only look and be good, we can exhibit the best of kingdom living.  Thinking of Amos’ image of the fruit basket, you might say that as we pursue the best while still maintaining the good, we can have our fruit and eat it too!

Amen

July 4, 2010
Naaman +1; Gehazi -1; Maiden Priceless 
2 Kings 5:1-27 Luke 4:16-28

          If you were to goggle the old expression ‘Quit while you’re ahead’, over 66,000 sites would be noted.  Guess what sites pop up on the first page?  Ones related to poker.  Of course the first rule of poker etiquette dictates that it is the highest level of rudeness to cash out when you are ahead.  If you do, you might be richer in dollars; but you’ll be poorer in acquaintances and impoverished in reputation.  Poker or gambling in general aside, we all have experienced the wisdom that is woven in the old expression ‘quit while you’re ahead’. 

          A case could certainly seem to be made for applying that to Jesus’ return to the synagogue at Nazareth .   He got off to a glorious start.   As they say in some churches he was invited to bring a ‘word from the Lord’.  He focuses on the powerful and hopeful words of Isaiah 61 and declares the promise to be fulfilled.  And the response from the congregation was very positive, “They were all well impressed with him and marvelled at the eloquent words that he spoke.”   Just go to the back Jesus and shake hands.  Bask in the moment.  But he didn’t.  Then some busybodies stirred an old wound - either the scandal associated with his conception or aspersions about his lack of economic status. The comment “Isn’t he the son of Joseph” could be interpreted either way.  And no more Mr. Nice Guy.  The snobbery, the sanctimonious self-righteousness, the superficial obedience, the religious and racial bigotry that kept these worshippers from knowing the fullness and freedom of God’s loving presence were sharply exposed.  And the mood shifted from placid contentment to violent commotion.

          Note that the final salvo in Jesus’ reproval uses the story of Elisha and Naaman from this morning’s Old Testament reading.  For a few minutes then let’s explore this story for the light it can shed on Jesus’ understanding of his mission and the way life in God’s kingdom is to be experienced.

          Let’s start with the scandalous parts or at least what scandalized Jesus’ hometown congregation.   In a nutshell it is the undiscriminating lavishness of God’s grace.   A few days ago a number of us met to discuss Wm. Young’s book The Shack.  It’s a provoking and evocative story.  It shreds many traditions around the Trinity.  It also emphasizes God’s prodigal attitude toward humanity.  In the book God loves the drunken, abusive father and the murderer of small children as much as the heart broken, faith seeking individual and the caring and patient follower of Jesus.  God’s redemptive love is limited in benefit and experience only by a person’s stubborn and prideful rebellion.

          From the perspective of The Shack, from the vantage point of the Naaman story, one could almost imagine God arguing that Parliament shouldn’t be trying to prevent a Karla Homolka from being pardoned.  Doesn’t such a thought scandalize you, at least a little?   Actually it’s worse.  In effect Jesus was even saying not only is God prodigal in the distribution of grace, if God does discriminate there is a preference for the Karla Homolkas not their victims!  That is certainly the Naaman story isn’t it?

          The victims in 2 Kings in general are the people of God and in particular the anonymous maiden.   The Syrians under Naaman’s skilled leadership have been killing and plundering with impunity the people of Israel .  This is like terrorism.  There is no formal war, no pitched battles; just regular border intrusions and a legacy of destruction.  If you want to know how the Israelis felt about Syria and Naaman, think Al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden and how he’s viewed by the police and fire departments of New York City.  

          I want to get to the traditional good parts of the story, the parts we learn in Sunday School; but sisters and brothers we are not in Sunday School.  This story and Jesus’ use of it in Nazareth , remind us there is far more to God and the gospel than what a child can grasp.  And some of those other parts are scary and scandalous and may leave us distressed; maybe not violently angry like the Nazareth crowd but unsettled. 

          So here is Naaman.  Maybe not a war criminal but very skilled at killing others, unfazed by stealing, content to snatch a young girl from her family and make her a slave and as arrogant as they come.  He is not interested in spiritual things and has the primitive sense of God as some localized deity.  There isn’t an Israelite alive who probably doesn’t thank God every night for the leprosy that afflicts Naaman.  For them it is a sign of God’s judgement on their enemy. 

          Oh, let me correct that.  Perhaps two, one for sure, Israelis don’t give God thanks for Naaman’s affliction.  Probably Elisha doesn’t, though a plea for God’s judgement on the enemies of his people is likely a regular prayer of Elisha’s.  The young slave girl doesn’t however thank God for her Master’s disease.  And that is one of the good parts of the story.  So let’s ponder it a bit.

          We moderns have a phrase that some may wish to apply to the young girl, Stockholm Syndrome.  It’s Patti Hearst adopting the manifesto of her captors, The Symbionese Liberation Army.  However the little girl’s behaviour indicates otherwise.  In fact she is the one in the story who best represents the heart of God.  And that reminds me, that while what we learn in Sunday School isn’t the whole picture, it is the essential core of the gospel.  This girl demonstrates prodigal love, amazing grace.

          Ponder for a moment what she has experienced.  She has been brutally separated from her family.  Did she see her parents slaughtered?  Hear the cries of the other victims as the sword sliced through them? The text indicates she is young, so perhaps she was spared the usual degradation inflicted on captive women; but she may have witnessed others being viciously violated.  Then she is paraded in the marketplace and sold like a piece of livestock and lives the precarious life of a slave in a culture foreign to all she has known.  Can you imagine the scarring of her soul?  The marring of her mind?  In this story is she not, the suffering servant as described by Isaiah, the Christ figure?

          She certainly is the one who displays the heart of God, isn’t she? The God whose mercy is “from everlasting to everlasting”.   The God who puts the seal of his protection on the murderer Cain.  The God who prays from the cross “Father forgive them for they know not what they do”.  The God who moans about his rebellious children through the prophet Hosea, “How can I give you up, Israel ? How can I abandon you?  .  .  .  My heart will not let me do it!  My love for you is too strong.”   In spite of all that has befallen her, she remains confident in God’s power and wanting the best for others, even her enemies.  Without this nameless, powerless servant girl we have no story and Naaman remains unaware of God’s power and love and Jesus has no example to quote.

          Before we return to Nazareth let’s look at the contrasting character in the story, Gehazi.  He is the servant of God’s prophet.  The anonymous girl is the  servant of the enemy of God’s people.  He is older.  He has witnessed first hand God’s power, the maiden has likely only heard rumours of such glory.  He has seen his master, Elisha demonstrate the difference between the ways and mind of God and the ways and mind of earthly rulers.  Which one should be expected to reflect the heart of God? 

          Alas, Gehazi has been hanging around the periphery of God’s presence, but has not allowed the wonder of God’s love and power to transform either his lust for things or his sense of the immensity of God’s mercy.   Hear again his motivation, “My master has let Naaman get away without paying a thing.”  This wretch has got off too easily.   No repentance!  No grovelling!  He doesn’t even say he’ll release the slave girl.  He’s getting away scot free!  Where’s the justice in that?  He’s done terrible things. 

It’s always a bit of a chicken and egg thing.  Whether Gehazi’s immature view of God’s character and grace make him susceptible to the lure of riches or whether Gehazi’s craving for the delights of the flesh, limits his ability to grasp the immensity of divine mercy that lies at the heart of God’s character.   Regardless he is the one whose judgement is pronounced. 

And that my friends are some of the reasons Jesus’ reference to this story caused such an uproar in Nazareth .  As I noted it started out well.  Those messianic images of release and healing and God’s salvation - well who can’t get excited about that!   Those are the parts of God’s plans and purpose that have universal appeal.  That’s our first image of abundant life - personal peace and prosperity.   It is only partial however, the outer layers.  The innermost parts, the parts that enable such experiences of abundant living are rooted in the transformation of hearts and attitudes and expectations to resemble the character of God, which most clearly is described by grace.  Grace as we see it worked out in the life of Naaman. 

And grace can be difficult to embrace.  First for oneself.  Isn’t our initial inclination to make a trade, to reflect Gehazi’s attitude that Naaman needed to exchange something for the gift of wholeness.  So we become dealmakers or minimizers.  As dealmakers we want to barter or bargain with God.  I’ll give you this in return for forgiveness.  The ‘this’ may be an effort to be better, a certain amount of time, serving on a task force, a percentage of income.  As minimizers we try to scale down our pride and rebellion and up our goodness.  ‘Well God I do sometimes mess up a little but I’m nothing like that wretch Naaman - a murdering marauder, an egotistical prima donna.  I may need a little touching up but not a complete do over like Naaman.’   The line that ‘nothing in my hand I bring, simply to thy cross I cling’ is more than we want to acknowledge.

And grace is often difficult to embrace in the life of others, especially for the Naamans of this world.  Like Gehazi, it can leave us upset.  He got off too easily!  Seven dips and Bingo! Bango! He’s good to go!  “Remember me when you come into your kingdom”  “Today you’ll be with me in paradise”.  Where’s the justice in that?  Of course the justice is, that the One giving the grace is dying unjustly.  “By his stripes we are healed”.  Grace is free, it’s just not cheap! 

This God of Grace as Eldredge writes is ‘Wild at Heart’.  God cannot be tamed or managed but God can be trusted.  And somehow the maiden grasped all that.  In the midst of misery, she both still trusted God and still loved others unconditionally.  That is the sight Jesus came to bring to the blind, the freedom he came to give to the prisoner, the release he came to give to those held captive by pride and rebellion.   And the maiden set in motion a remarkable chain of events in which Naaman was healed and God was glorified.  She was just a nameless, virtual nobody.  Think of what those somebodies at Nazareth could have initiated, if they had embraced such grace.  Think of what we can set in motion as we embrace such grace!  It’ll be amazing.

Amen

HOME