Reformation Day - Year B
“Let every person be subject to the governing authorities;” Paul says, “for there is no authority except from God, and those authorities that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists authority resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgement. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Do you wish to have no fear of the authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive its approval; for it is God’s servant for your good.”
On what planet was Paul living on when he wrote that? “Rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad.,” he says.
Really? Is that so?
Paul should know better. After all, as a Roman citizen he knew what the Roman government was capable of. He was eye-witness to brutal executions. The empire-building on the backs of slaves. He watched as people were forced to worship Caesar. No matter what religion they were.
In Jerusalem, he knew all about Herod's slaughter of 1000s of innocent children. The corrupt, puppet governments. The two-faced, double-dealing leaders.
This passage makes no sense when you think of where Paul came from. Or where any of us come from.
And this passage defies logic when placed along side of the rest of Paul's message. In his first letter to the Corinthians, Paul rails against the “rulers of this age.” Earlier in Romans, Paul demands that Christians confront the “principalities and powers” of this world. Not to submit to them.
This passage seems shoe-horned into this letter. As if it's not meant to be here. It feels out of place. Like someone put words in Paul's mouth.
In fact, a small group of scholars say that's exactly what happened. They say that since this passage doesn't make sense in either Paul's historic context or with the rest of his message, that it must have been put in this letter by another hand. Someone with a political axe to grind. Because this passage definitely DOESN'T sound like Paul by any estimation.
Other bible scholars twist themselves into knots trying to justify Paul's blessing of Caesar's authority. They say that the only authority that can ever exist can only come from God, because God is the source of all authority, and gives it out to whomever God wants. And since Caesar had authority, that authority must come from God. Pretty much what Paul was saying.
And they can quote Jesus standing before Pilate, the symbol of Caesar's power: "You would have no power over me unless it had been given you from above” (John 19:11).
But Jesus didn't submit to Pilate. Not in the way Paul is saying we should. And Jesus definitely didn't call Pilate “good.”
And if Paul were to follow his own advice he would never have found himself in jail so often.
It turns out folks who defend this passage are often defending their own authority over others. Defending the social and political status quo over those who are asking for change. And so this reading of this passage is a recipe for tyranny.
Others suggest that Paul was trying to level the political playing field. They point out that Paul says “EVERYONE” should submit to the governing authorities. No one gets a free pass. No one gets special treatment. Everyone is equal under the law. And since everyone is equal, everyone can participate. Every voice is heard. No one is powerless.
If this interpretation is correct, then this is subversive stuff. Rome liked their hierarchy. They luxuriated in knowing their place in society. And the game was to move up in their world.
And here, some say, Paul is turning this upside down and flattening it. For Paul, hierarchies are destroyed and everyone has a say. Paul is advocating a democratic society where all people have a chance to participate.
This sounds good! Especially when Paul's the guy who said that “there is no jew or greek, slave or free, male or female. All are one in Christ Jesus” (Gal 3:28). Radical social equality was a big part of Paul's message. Paul was all about tearing down walls between people, opening doors, to let the fresh wind of freedom blow through.
So, maybe this passage is hammering this message home even further.
But this interpretation ignores the problem of tyranny and corruption. How is the Christian to respond if the divinely appointed governing authorities steam-roll over the people they're supposed to govern? Paul creates no mechanism for holding leaders accountable for their behaviour or decisions.
Paul simply says, “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities; for there is no authority except from God, and those authorities that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists authority resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgement.”
Again, this passage makes no theological or practical sense. It's hopeless naïve. Dangerously unrealistic.
But then I came across someone who said that Paul was making a joke. He was being ironic. Even sarcastic. He had his tongue firmly planted in his cheek. It's the only explanation that makes sense to me.
“Let every person be subject to the governing authorities;” Paul says, “for there is no authority except from God, and those authorities that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists authority resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgement. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Do you wish to have no fear of the authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive its approval; for it is God’s servant for your good.”
It has to be a joke. Try this:
“Let every person be subject to their bank and credit card provider. Don't bother checking your statement each week, because banks and credit card providers come from God. After all, God is the God of all our resources, and banks and credit card providers are faithful stewards of God's abundance. If you question your bank, your are questioning God, and you will incur judgment.”
Or...
“Let every person be subject to the used car salesmen. They have your best interest in mind. God has appointed them to make sure that you are able to get from place to place without hassle. They will give you the best car for the best deal. They are only worried about you; your mobility and your safety. To question or resist the divinely appointed used car salesmen, you are are questioning or resisting God, and you will incur judgment.”
You hear what I'm saying? That's what the Roman Christians heard when Paul talked about blindly obeying the government.
Martin Luther often did the same thing. Often he preached such outrageous sermons that people couldn't take them seriously.
Although Luther, in his commentary on this passage, took it at face value, he didn't practice it with Church authorities. He said this passage applied to secular authority, not to church authority. Which, of course, makes no sense. Authority is authority. And you could make a stronger case for church authority coming from God more than secular authority.
So, how then should WE read this passage? What do we do with it? What was Paul REALLY trying to say?
To be honest, I don't know. None of us fully obey this passage at face value. And rightly so. Both Paul and Luther didn't do so – they failed righteously in following this bit of scripture. And the world is better for it.
So what does this say about the bible?
Within our denonimation there is a huge fight taking place. Some say it's about interpretation of the bible. Some say it's about the authority of the bible itself.
Some are advocating what is called a “plain sense” reading of the bible, which means that “the bible says what it says that's the end of the story. No interpretation required. And our job is to obey what it says.”
And while that sounds good, we've seen from today's reading that it's not as simple as it looks. There is no such thing as a “plain sense” reading of the bible. We all bring our backgrounds, our histories, our ways of looking at the world into how we read the bible.
Words – even bible words - don't exist in a vacuum. Just like if a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, it DOESN'T make a noise because there is no ear present to process the sound waves, so too, words don't exist unless there is someone to read them. A closed book makes little impact on people.
Words are given life when they are spoken, heard, or read. Words are made flesh when people struggle to live by them, when communities of faith are shaped by them, when churches fight over their meaning, when they rip holes in our minds and blast their way through our souls.
It's been said that the Church is at the doorstep of a new Reformation. That the Church is changing from being the dominant religious force in society to having to prove its relevance.
But what I think is happening is that God, by the power of the Spirit, is asking churches to think deeply about how we use the bible, how we read it, what Jesus' message of life and salvation means for us today.
Too often, we Lutherans are still fighting the battles of the 16th century; exposing heresies, fighting the Roman Catholic Church as if it's still the boss of us, and worried that people are still fraught with fear over their salvation.
Our theology and liturgies still focus on the sin-forgiveness transaction that soothed anxious 16th century souls and launched the Protestant church.
But God is opening our eyes to the needs of today and tomorrow. God is calling us out of a medieval mindset to proclaim the good news that needs to be heard today – at this moment. Not 500 years ago.
We are being called into the 21st century to bind up 21st century wounds, to dry 21st century tears, to preach good news to the 21st century poor, to set 21st century captives free. That's our mission. That's our call.
Ecclesia semper reformanda est. The church is always reforming. That's what they said in the 16th century. And that's still true now.
God is always moving within and among us, changing, transforming, destroying and rebuilding. We have a God who brings dead things to life. A God who calls us from the future to live those future promises now – today. Where we are.
That is OUR Reformation.
And may this be so among us. Amen.
On what planet was Paul living on when he wrote that? “Rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad.,” he says.
Really? Is that so?
Paul should know better. After all, as a Roman citizen he knew what the Roman government was capable of. He was eye-witness to brutal executions. The empire-building on the backs of slaves. He watched as people were forced to worship Caesar. No matter what religion they were.
In Jerusalem, he knew all about Herod's slaughter of 1000s of innocent children. The corrupt, puppet governments. The two-faced, double-dealing leaders.
This passage makes no sense when you think of where Paul came from. Or where any of us come from.
And this passage defies logic when placed along side of the rest of Paul's message. In his first letter to the Corinthians, Paul rails against the “rulers of this age.” Earlier in Romans, Paul demands that Christians confront the “principalities and powers” of this world. Not to submit to them.
This passage seems shoe-horned into this letter. As if it's not meant to be here. It feels out of place. Like someone put words in Paul's mouth.
In fact, a small group of scholars say that's exactly what happened. They say that since this passage doesn't make sense in either Paul's historic context or with the rest of his message, that it must have been put in this letter by another hand. Someone with a political axe to grind. Because this passage definitely DOESN'T sound like Paul by any estimation.
Other bible scholars twist themselves into knots trying to justify Paul's blessing of Caesar's authority. They say that the only authority that can ever exist can only come from God, because God is the source of all authority, and gives it out to whomever God wants. And since Caesar had authority, that authority must come from God. Pretty much what Paul was saying.
And they can quote Jesus standing before Pilate, the symbol of Caesar's power: "You would have no power over me unless it had been given you from above” (John 19:11).
But Jesus didn't submit to Pilate. Not in the way Paul is saying we should. And Jesus definitely didn't call Pilate “good.”
And if Paul were to follow his own advice he would never have found himself in jail so often.
It turns out folks who defend this passage are often defending their own authority over others. Defending the social and political status quo over those who are asking for change. And so this reading of this passage is a recipe for tyranny.
Others suggest that Paul was trying to level the political playing field. They point out that Paul says “EVERYONE” should submit to the governing authorities. No one gets a free pass. No one gets special treatment. Everyone is equal under the law. And since everyone is equal, everyone can participate. Every voice is heard. No one is powerless.
If this interpretation is correct, then this is subversive stuff. Rome liked their hierarchy. They luxuriated in knowing their place in society. And the game was to move up in their world.
And here, some say, Paul is turning this upside down and flattening it. For Paul, hierarchies are destroyed and everyone has a say. Paul is advocating a democratic society where all people have a chance to participate.
This sounds good! Especially when Paul's the guy who said that “there is no jew or greek, slave or free, male or female. All are one in Christ Jesus” (Gal 3:28). Radical social equality was a big part of Paul's message. Paul was all about tearing down walls between people, opening doors, to let the fresh wind of freedom blow through.
So, maybe this passage is hammering this message home even further.
But this interpretation ignores the problem of tyranny and corruption. How is the Christian to respond if the divinely appointed governing authorities steam-roll over the people they're supposed to govern? Paul creates no mechanism for holding leaders accountable for their behaviour or decisions.
Paul simply says, “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities; for there is no authority except from God, and those authorities that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists authority resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgement.”
Again, this passage makes no theological or practical sense. It's hopeless naïve. Dangerously unrealistic.
But then I came across someone who said that Paul was making a joke. He was being ironic. Even sarcastic. He had his tongue firmly planted in his cheek. It's the only explanation that makes sense to me.
“Let every person be subject to the governing authorities;” Paul says, “for there is no authority except from God, and those authorities that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists authority resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgement. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Do you wish to have no fear of the authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive its approval; for it is God’s servant for your good.”
It has to be a joke. Try this:
“Let every person be subject to their bank and credit card provider. Don't bother checking your statement each week, because banks and credit card providers come from God. After all, God is the God of all our resources, and banks and credit card providers are faithful stewards of God's abundance. If you question your bank, your are questioning God, and you will incur judgment.”
Or...
“Let every person be subject to the used car salesmen. They have your best interest in mind. God has appointed them to make sure that you are able to get from place to place without hassle. They will give you the best car for the best deal. They are only worried about you; your mobility and your safety. To question or resist the divinely appointed used car salesmen, you are are questioning or resisting God, and you will incur judgment.”
You hear what I'm saying? That's what the Roman Christians heard when Paul talked about blindly obeying the government.
Martin Luther often did the same thing. Often he preached such outrageous sermons that people couldn't take them seriously.
Although Luther, in his commentary on this passage, took it at face value, he didn't practice it with Church authorities. He said this passage applied to secular authority, not to church authority. Which, of course, makes no sense. Authority is authority. And you could make a stronger case for church authority coming from God more than secular authority.
So, how then should WE read this passage? What do we do with it? What was Paul REALLY trying to say?
To be honest, I don't know. None of us fully obey this passage at face value. And rightly so. Both Paul and Luther didn't do so – they failed righteously in following this bit of scripture. And the world is better for it.
So what does this say about the bible?
Within our denonimation there is a huge fight taking place. Some say it's about interpretation of the bible. Some say it's about the authority of the bible itself.
Some are advocating what is called a “plain sense” reading of the bible, which means that “the bible says what it says that's the end of the story. No interpretation required. And our job is to obey what it says.”
And while that sounds good, we've seen from today's reading that it's not as simple as it looks. There is no such thing as a “plain sense” reading of the bible. We all bring our backgrounds, our histories, our ways of looking at the world into how we read the bible.
Words – even bible words - don't exist in a vacuum. Just like if a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, it DOESN'T make a noise because there is no ear present to process the sound waves, so too, words don't exist unless there is someone to read them. A closed book makes little impact on people.
Words are given life when they are spoken, heard, or read. Words are made flesh when people struggle to live by them, when communities of faith are shaped by them, when churches fight over their meaning, when they rip holes in our minds and blast their way through our souls.
It's been said that the Church is at the doorstep of a new Reformation. That the Church is changing from being the dominant religious force in society to having to prove its relevance.
But what I think is happening is that God, by the power of the Spirit, is asking churches to think deeply about how we use the bible, how we read it, what Jesus' message of life and salvation means for us today.
Too often, we Lutherans are still fighting the battles of the 16th century; exposing heresies, fighting the Roman Catholic Church as if it's still the boss of us, and worried that people are still fraught with fear over their salvation.
Our theology and liturgies still focus on the sin-forgiveness transaction that soothed anxious 16th century souls and launched the Protestant church.
But God is opening our eyes to the needs of today and tomorrow. God is calling us out of a medieval mindset to proclaim the good news that needs to be heard today – at this moment. Not 500 years ago.
We are being called into the 21st century to bind up 21st century wounds, to dry 21st century tears, to preach good news to the 21st century poor, to set 21st century captives free. That's our mission. That's our call.
Ecclesia semper reformanda est. The church is always reforming. That's what they said in the 16th century. And that's still true now.
God is always moving within and among us, changing, transforming, destroying and rebuilding. We have a God who brings dead things to life. A God who calls us from the future to live those future promises now – today. Where we are.
That is OUR Reformation.
And may this be so among us. Amen.
posted by Unknown at 4:37 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home