Sermon 19th September 2010
Today, Adrian Parkhouse, one of our Lay Readers, preaches based on the passage from Acts 14:8-28
“Paul in Lystra”
1. Have you been following the coverage of the Pope’s State visit. It didn’t get off to a great start did it: but if you looked behind the “Third World” comment of Cardinal Kasper, you find that the Cardinal was emphasising that Britain was, in his view, a “secular and pluralist” country in which there was a “distance from God”, where (he says) Christians suffer discrimination, “above all by an aggressive new atheism”. The Pope himself hinted that he might share this view of our society, when speaking in Glasgow on Thursday: “The evangelisation of culture is all the more important in our times, when a 'dictatorship of relativism' threatens to obscure the unchanging truth about man's nature, his destiny and his ultimate good.” Hold those comments on British society – comments which are more easily made by an outside observer?
2. Next a riddle: God willing, on what obligation, with Biblical significance, am I likely to be engaged at the end of March next year? A clue: this will the third time I have undertaken the obligation; but is the sixth in which I have been involved; and is likely to be my last.
Answer: the 2011 Census in England & Wales (and also – but separately - in Scotland and in NI): Sunday 27 March is Census night for which someone in each of the c.25 million households of this country will be required to complete a series of questions – for themselves and those staying in the house that night. The “biblical significance” was a reference of course to the “proclamation made by Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered”, in Luke 2, the census that brought Joseph to Bethlehem. And I reckon I will have been reflected in 6 censuses and responsible for two so far: and according to a recent statement by Cabinet Office Minister Francis Maude, the 2011 census is likely to be the last: scrapped as being expensive and inaccurate.
There are arguments for and against this last view: but even as an amateur observer, I will miss the continual seep of off-the-wall but apparently authoritative statistics which the Census produces. One of the more interesting set of stats from the 2001 Census was the set that arose out of a new (or more properly “revived”) question which asked “What is your religion?”. You may recall that the inclusion of this question caused a degree of opposition – and indeed led to a campaign encouraging people to tick “Other” and then declare themselves as “followers of the Jedi-faith”! But it was a question endorsed by leaders of most of the major faiths: they wanted, amongst other things to dispel the fog of rumour and to establish the true facts about “multi-faith” Britain. And as I say, the statistics which emerged are very interesting. For example, out of 57M people recorded in the 2001 Census, are you surprised that the Jewish community numbers only 276K (barely ½%), that Sikhs are only slightly more numerous (there were more Jedi than either of these religions!); and that even the Muslim community was only 1.5M; that religions other than Christianity amounted to less than 5.5% of the total population?
But most surprising to me, given that those responding had the option not to answer the question at all or of replying by ticking the box “None”, was that 41M of the 57M recorded themselves as “Christian”. This was in 2001. Over 70% of the population at the start of the 21st-century positively opted for describing themselves as “Christian”. 7 out of 10 people you meet in the street are Christians! I find that flabbergasting. But perhaps that is your experience?
Who is right? Do you recognise more the society painted by the statistics from the 2001 Census – a predominantly Christian society; or the picture painted by the early coverage of the Papal visit – of Christians at the margins – driven there not only, you might feel, by reason of aggressive new atheism but also the growth of other beliefs?
3. In a sense your perception is as important as the statistics – either of them right or wrong. But it is important in all that read or feel we leave ourselves open to the influence of the Holy Spirit. It good then, that our reading this morning faces us squarely with an instance of Christians in the minority, facing, in this case, the challenge of another faith. Minority-hood was after all the lot of the first disciples and the Early Church – to be the minority, to spread the seed and pray it grew, to be the yeast through which the kingdom of God would grow. At first they were the minority among people of who were their own people, their own faith – a sect speaking to Jews. I find it amusing that the scene today in Lystra opens with the sight of a seated man, crippled in his feet, lame from birth; “amusing”! “why?” Because, its déjà-vu – this ministry to the Gentiles in Lystra begins with almost a carbon-copy of the event which had marked the start of the initial ministry to the Jews in Jerusalem – turn up Acts 3 and see there the man lame from birth, sitting at the Beautiful Gate to the Temple, healed by Peter passing by. An event which was to lead to questions, explanations and the first arrests.
4. In Lystra things took a different course – there was no time for questions or explanations – the marvel of the miracle caught the crowd’s imagination, was interpreted according to their own understanding, given the spiritual significance which was appropriate given their histories and Paul and Barnabas were hailed as gods! Religious fervour took over. It may seem over-reaction (but then how would you react to such a miracle?) but Lystra took no chances – they had folk stories which led them to fear a visit from Zeus. For Paul and Barnabas of course, the issue was more than an issue of confusion and mistake: to have colluded in the proposed sacrifices, to have accepted the people’s worship of them was akin to idolatry. Whether the tearing of their clothes was the natural Jewish reaction to blasphemy or an effort to demonstrate that they were absolutely 100% only human, we don’t know. But clearly there was a point beyond which, even as a small minority, their conscience, their belief would not go.
5. But within that boundary, when the crowd had settled slightly, it is of interest to listen and hear Paul’s words: he is at the same time firm (in his statement that he is the bearer of good news, of a living God who is to be contrasted with worthless things); and accessible. He looks to find his hearers where they are in the hope he can take them on. He meets these folk at the point of God the creator and the sustainer of the world. This (what the theologians call “common grace”) they can understand: this is exactly the sort of provision which they understand Zeus to provide. Not Zeus says Paul: God the Father. Not in human form either. And he had met the lame man at a point he could understand – his need; and as Peter in Acts 3 talking to the Jews, met them where they had understanding, in the words of scripture; and examples of such practical evangelism, finding common ground from which to build, keep on coming in the adventures of Acts.
6. Oh yes: and then they almost got executed and were thrown out of the city. Being a minority has its risks. So can being a majority or an influential minority: there may be a temptation to abuse the position – like these Jews from Antioch who were not content to have moved Paul out of their region but were determined to keep him on the move.
7. It fell to others in history to cope with the shift whereby Christianity moved from a persecuted minority to the ruling class. We have inherited and must own their efforts – both good and bad. Whatever our view of today’s UK society – Papal or the National Office of Statistics - ultimately we are left to listen to the Holy Spirit in our own place: to deal with extreme positions (9/11, burning Korans) and the everyday (including how to express the love of God to those of other faiths and no faiths). It is difficult stuff: What are the boundaries? What do we accept before “tear our clothes”? How and when do we find the “common ground” from which to begin to explain God’s love?
I have no easy answers – I do not even pretend that the principles to be applied today are easily distilled from the examples of Scripture such as today. I suggest only this: that these issues arise – and as I suspect, where we live, we see society as being somewhere between the extremes of the Papal view and the Census statistics – they arise regularly and will arise more often (even without Press hyperbole); and quite apart from the events of the weekend, the passage gives an opportunity to acknowledge this, to commit to seeking the Holy Spirit’s influence in our hearts and finally to share our experience and seek advice.
“Paul in Lystra”
1. Have you been following the coverage of the Pope’s State visit. It didn’t get off to a great start did it: but if you looked behind the “Third World” comment of Cardinal Kasper, you find that the Cardinal was emphasising that Britain was, in his view, a “secular and pluralist” country in which there was a “distance from God”, where (he says) Christians suffer discrimination, “above all by an aggressive new atheism”. The Pope himself hinted that he might share this view of our society, when speaking in Glasgow on Thursday: “The evangelisation of culture is all the more important in our times, when a 'dictatorship of relativism' threatens to obscure the unchanging truth about man's nature, his destiny and his ultimate good.” Hold those comments on British society – comments which are more easily made by an outside observer?
2. Next a riddle: God willing, on what obligation, with Biblical significance, am I likely to be engaged at the end of March next year? A clue: this will the third time I have undertaken the obligation; but is the sixth in which I have been involved; and is likely to be my last.
Answer: the 2011 Census in England & Wales (and also – but separately - in Scotland and in NI): Sunday 27 March is Census night for which someone in each of the c.25 million households of this country will be required to complete a series of questions – for themselves and those staying in the house that night. The “biblical significance” was a reference of course to the “proclamation made by Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered”, in Luke 2, the census that brought Joseph to Bethlehem. And I reckon I will have been reflected in 6 censuses and responsible for two so far: and according to a recent statement by Cabinet Office Minister Francis Maude, the 2011 census is likely to be the last: scrapped as being expensive and inaccurate.
There are arguments for and against this last view: but even as an amateur observer, I will miss the continual seep of off-the-wall but apparently authoritative statistics which the Census produces. One of the more interesting set of stats from the 2001 Census was the set that arose out of a new (or more properly “revived”) question which asked “What is your religion?”. You may recall that the inclusion of this question caused a degree of opposition – and indeed led to a campaign encouraging people to tick “Other” and then declare themselves as “followers of the Jedi-faith”! But it was a question endorsed by leaders of most of the major faiths: they wanted, amongst other things to dispel the fog of rumour and to establish the true facts about “multi-faith” Britain. And as I say, the statistics which emerged are very interesting. For example, out of 57M people recorded in the 2001 Census, are you surprised that the Jewish community numbers only 276K (barely ½%), that Sikhs are only slightly more numerous (there were more Jedi than either of these religions!); and that even the Muslim community was only 1.5M; that religions other than Christianity amounted to less than 5.5% of the total population?
But most surprising to me, given that those responding had the option not to answer the question at all or of replying by ticking the box “None”, was that 41M of the 57M recorded themselves as “Christian”. This was in 2001. Over 70% of the population at the start of the 21st-century positively opted for describing themselves as “Christian”. 7 out of 10 people you meet in the street are Christians! I find that flabbergasting. But perhaps that is your experience?
Who is right? Do you recognise more the society painted by the statistics from the 2001 Census – a predominantly Christian society; or the picture painted by the early coverage of the Papal visit – of Christians at the margins – driven there not only, you might feel, by reason of aggressive new atheism but also the growth of other beliefs?
3. In a sense your perception is as important as the statistics – either of them right or wrong. But it is important in all that read or feel we leave ourselves open to the influence of the Holy Spirit. It good then, that our reading this morning faces us squarely with an instance of Christians in the minority, facing, in this case, the challenge of another faith. Minority-hood was after all the lot of the first disciples and the Early Church – to be the minority, to spread the seed and pray it grew, to be the yeast through which the kingdom of God would grow. At first they were the minority among people of who were their own people, their own faith – a sect speaking to Jews. I find it amusing that the scene today in Lystra opens with the sight of a seated man, crippled in his feet, lame from birth; “amusing”! “why?” Because, its déjà-vu – this ministry to the Gentiles in Lystra begins with almost a carbon-copy of the event which had marked the start of the initial ministry to the Jews in Jerusalem – turn up Acts 3 and see there the man lame from birth, sitting at the Beautiful Gate to the Temple, healed by Peter passing by. An event which was to lead to questions, explanations and the first arrests.
4. In Lystra things took a different course – there was no time for questions or explanations – the marvel of the miracle caught the crowd’s imagination, was interpreted according to their own understanding, given the spiritual significance which was appropriate given their histories and Paul and Barnabas were hailed as gods! Religious fervour took over. It may seem over-reaction (but then how would you react to such a miracle?) but Lystra took no chances – they had folk stories which led them to fear a visit from Zeus. For Paul and Barnabas of course, the issue was more than an issue of confusion and mistake: to have colluded in the proposed sacrifices, to have accepted the people’s worship of them was akin to idolatry. Whether the tearing of their clothes was the natural Jewish reaction to blasphemy or an effort to demonstrate that they were absolutely 100% only human, we don’t know. But clearly there was a point beyond which, even as a small minority, their conscience, their belief would not go.
5. But within that boundary, when the crowd had settled slightly, it is of interest to listen and hear Paul’s words: he is at the same time firm (in his statement that he is the bearer of good news, of a living God who is to be contrasted with worthless things); and accessible. He looks to find his hearers where they are in the hope he can take them on. He meets these folk at the point of God the creator and the sustainer of the world. This (what the theologians call “common grace”) they can understand: this is exactly the sort of provision which they understand Zeus to provide. Not Zeus says Paul: God the Father. Not in human form either. And he had met the lame man at a point he could understand – his need; and as Peter in Acts 3 talking to the Jews, met them where they had understanding, in the words of scripture; and examples of such practical evangelism, finding common ground from which to build, keep on coming in the adventures of Acts.
6. Oh yes: and then they almost got executed and were thrown out of the city. Being a minority has its risks. So can being a majority or an influential minority: there may be a temptation to abuse the position – like these Jews from Antioch who were not content to have moved Paul out of their region but were determined to keep him on the move.
7. It fell to others in history to cope with the shift whereby Christianity moved from a persecuted minority to the ruling class. We have inherited and must own their efforts – both good and bad. Whatever our view of today’s UK society – Papal or the National Office of Statistics - ultimately we are left to listen to the Holy Spirit in our own place: to deal with extreme positions (9/11, burning Korans) and the everyday (including how to express the love of God to those of other faiths and no faiths). It is difficult stuff: What are the boundaries? What do we accept before “tear our clothes”? How and when do we find the “common ground” from which to begin to explain God’s love?
I have no easy answers – I do not even pretend that the principles to be applied today are easily distilled from the examples of Scripture such as today. I suggest only this: that these issues arise – and as I suspect, where we live, we see society as being somewhere between the extremes of the Papal view and the Census statistics – they arise regularly and will arise more often (even without Press hyperbole); and quite apart from the events of the weekend, the passage gives an opportunity to acknowledge this, to commit to seeking the Holy Spirit’s influence in our hearts and finally to share our experience and seek advice.