“To Touch the Hem of His Garment”  (Mark 5:21-43, Psalm 130)

Our Psalm this morning shows us a person crying out for something that is needed, so deeply longed for, but is not yet there.  The Psalmist is waiting, watching, hoping for something, reaching for something, we’re not just sure what has put the writer “in the depths” of despair, but something is NOT right and the person is reaching out from their depths to God asking for help.   With the Psalm, we don’t know what happens next, but we do hear the hope that is there in the heart of the Psalmist.  He is watching for God’s steadfast love with the power to redeem.  “More than those who watch for the morning, more than those who watch for the morning.” 

Our New Testament passage shows us two people who were also call out from the depths of their despair, seeking something that money could not buy.  Mark shows us two people whose lives felt broken, and were touched and changed by Jesus. 

In our reading we meet Jairus, the leader of a local synagogue, and a woman– who had been suffering with bleeding for twelve years.  These two lived in the same area, but they certainly would not have run in the same circles, and surely they could not have been more different from one another.  What they do have in common is that they are in some way “not whole” and are in need of the healing touch of Jesus.  I’d like to consider these two, their approach to Jesus, and how Jesus meets each of them.

The leader of the synagogue, Jairus, would have been a man of influence within his town.  His position in the temple would make him a pillar of the community.  He had a lot riding on the status quo in society, he enjoyed a great number of privileges that came from his role as chief priest.  The priestly role was passed down in families, so his name would have been one of honor.  His family would be one of prestige and wealth.  Priests had a great deal of education.  He has everything, and yet it seems he is powerless to do anything for his precious daughter.

And the woman is not even named in our story.  We do know that she had spent all that she had on physicians, and with her condition of bleeding she would bear many shames of being “unclean” and an outcast in the culture.  She would be confined to her house and even from physical contact with her family.  Anyone who touches her also becomes unclean for a time.  Her problem is chronic, things look pretty desperate, in many ways she may feel that she has nothing to lose, for she has nothing.

Jairus he is part of the ruling class, those with prestige and authority, the very ones who have been harassing Jesus and belittling him for disobeying religious law.  But now, the leader is like the common folk.  He is a man in need, a father whose little girl is dying … a finite human being who grasps for divine power to heal and make his daughter whole.  He approached Jesus very directly and boldly.  He went right up to him on the street, stopped him and begged for assistance.  He risks his status, his way of life, his reputation by reaching out to Jesus and begging for help.  Such was the depth of his loss.  My little daughter is everything to me please help!  It would seem fitting and appropriate to those with Jesus that he would stop and respond to this leader.  He is the highest local religious authority, so it would be proper for the Christ to respond.  Jesus did not react to him because of his position, it was his faith and willingness to risk, that made the difference.

And the woman risks her very life by challenging the rules as she goes out in to the crowds and makes contact with Jesus.  The woman who has been hemorrhaging for twelve years is, in this story, a symbol of all the outcasts, all the marginal people who are outside the social and economic power structure of the day.  She is not even named in our story As a bleeding woman, she is-by Hebrew law-untouchable, and any man who touches her is himself rendered unclean.  She would be confined to her house and even from physical contact with her family.  But Jesus stops, receives her touch, healing her and restoring her to wholeness-both as an individual, and in relationship with those around her.

This woman risks her very life by challenging the rules as she goes out in to the crowds and makes contact with Jesus.  Notice how she approaches Jesus by coming up in the crowd, from behind and only desiring the chance to touch his garment, not talk to him, not even look him in the face, but simply touch his clothing.  That would be enough.  How many of us have suffered silently longing for a cure of the body or of the spirit, longing only to touch the garment of Jesus? 

I’d invite you to pick up the piece of fabric in the pews in front of you and simply hold it.  Feel the textures and notice theintricate weave.  Think about the complex threads of our own lives and the frayed edges, the places that feel like they are coming apart, as well as the places that are tightly holding together.  What areas of our lives long to be touched by the garment of Christ?  What do we wish could be cured?

The Greek word for cure means “the repair of a fractured soul.” In what ways are our souls fractured?  In order for there to be healing we must first recognize and acknowledge what’s not right.  Without the recognition of need, without knowing what takes us into the depths, there is no place for Grace.  As we become aware of our own areas of need, we then are open to the presence of God’s Grace, and can sing with the psalmist “rejoice in theLord, Praise the Lord, sing a new song!”

From this brief sketch, we see how these two were each different, but they do share in common, a real sense of loss.  Neither of them are confined by what is, to keep them from hoping for what may yet be.  They have open minds, and eyes of faith that, in the right moment, can see in Jesus possibilities that are radically new.  And they are willing to risk everything for the healing touch.  Without hesitation, Jesus responds, tending to the outcast, and the socially powerful with exactly the same healing and unconditional love.  This is the kind of response Jesus that gives to each one of us, no matter how “important’ or “unimportant” we might feel.  This is the kind of response Jesus gives to us, if we are able to name and own our need, if we are able to admit that we are dependent upon the grace of God.

For all of us, Jesus enters our world.  Our Savior finds a way to reach out and encounter us today, and we can reach out to God.  We are to take therisk of that encounter, to extend our selves toward Christ and to respond when we experience God’s presence and call in our lives.  Jesus shows us that the sufferings of others are not to be disregarded.  We are not insulated and isolated from the lives of others.  The temptation to turn away from other’s suffering is strong, the tendency to deny the reality of pain comes quickly.

While we can not bear the cross for others we can help them carry it.  When we spend time comforting someone with a broken heart, we are doing the work of Jesus.  We are part of the garment.  We may not have had the experience of pain we see in another but we can feel a part of the loss of others.  We help those in need by offering a sense of being connected to something larger than themselves and maintaining a sense of community. 

We offer healing when we hold a hand, wipe a tear, or share a hug.  We are part of the healing garment.  And others can be part of the garment for us.  May we have the strength to ask for help when we need it, give comfort when we are able, and trust that the steadfast love of God will make us all whole.   Amen.

It is very easy to accept the story in our first Samuel reading as a proof text that tells us that God will deliver faithful people from impossible or dangerous situations. 

The story of David and Goliath is not only a story from the Bible it is one of the classic stories of our culture.  It is a story that has encouraged insignificant individuals and marginalised communities to not only tackle but overcome a whole range of oppressive giants. 

Maurice Andrew quotes David Lange’s involvement in New Zealand’s confrontation with the United States over nuclear weapons.  We might also think about Gandhi’s confrontation with the British Empire over Indian independence.  The classic that I grew up with was the Kiwi beekeeper that climbed Mt Everest.  That inspired Tom Scott to make a film about the expedition.  Scott also relates in his autobiography, Drawn Out how failing ‘School Certificate English’ meant that he would not be able to write film scripts or newspaper columns.  Scott was a master of the verbal slingshot and when one newly elected prime minister noted he read his article in the Listener and added the barb that he didn’t know Scott could write.  Scott slung it back saying, ‘I didn’t know you could read.

As far as quick verbal slingshots go part of our folk law is David Lange’s quip in the Oxford Union Debate.’  ‘And I’m going to give it to you if you hold your breath just for a moment.  ‘I can smell the uranium on it as you lean towards me!’

Recently Willy Jackson paraphrased that famous line as he became the first M?ori to take part in that same debate.  Jackson negated the motion that the British Museum was not very British by maintaining that, because it was full of artifacts from around the world, it was extremely British because the British were renowned for arriving in other people’s land and claiming everything for themselves.   He then added. ‘I can smell the colonialism on your breath from here’.

Willy Jackson cunningly drew on Lange’s past ‘David and Goliath’ struggle, and brought the case for the return of M?ori artifacts to the very heart of British academia.

The David of our First Samuel reading likewise shifted the conflict from a situation in which he would be overwhelmed to one where he was in control.

David lived in a totally different world to us, but it had similarities.  In a previous episode we were informed he was the youngest in a large family.  So, like many younger members of the British Aristocracy, who were driven lack of inheritance to emigrate to colonial Aotearoa, he was unlikely to inherit any of the family’s assets. 

Yet his early life as a shepherd gave him the skills and the faith that equipped him for his confrontation with Goliath.  I remember from Bible in Schools the suggestion that he became skilful with the slingshot

Furthermore, as a reward for defeating Goliath David married into the royal family and began a distinguished militarily career.  That lead to him to becoming the most powerful leader in his world. 

Goliath was described as a giant and with his sword and armour he must have been a formidable opponent.  Much like a lion or wolf intent on dining on mutton Goliath would quickly dispatch the diminutive David in a face-to-face confrontation.

We can however assume that David have learned how to defend his sheep from large predators had no intention of fighting the giant on Goliath’s terms.  David never intended to get close enough to Goliath for the giant to use his superior size and strength.  David was a skilled practitioner in the use of an alternative technology and exploited a situation where Goliath’s size and bulky armour was the source of his greatest weakness.

We think of a slingshot as a toy that delinquent boys once used to break shop windows. Now of course they use other people’s cars.

However, some years ago I saw a documentary about an area in South America where the indigenous people used slings to hunt flamingos.  They rode at speed on horseback at the flocks of birds and were able to send stones at the feeding birds with incredible accuracy. 

Furthermore, in the ancient world the sling was also a respected and very dangerous weapon that was widely used in warfare.  It was used in Europe and the Near East from the Bronze Age until about the 17th century.   Apparently, the impact of a missile from a sling could have a similar affect to a small handgun. 

One historian noted that ‘Goliath had as much chance against David as any Bronze Age warrior with a sword would have had against an opponent armed with an automatic pistol.[1]

But not only did David attack Goliath on his terms rather that the giant’s, David also had faith in his God and the rightness of his cause.   Lange, Gandhi, Scott and Jackson also had the skills of their profession but were likewise motivated by what they believed was the rightness of their mission.  

The righteousness of the cause is also a feature of the story of Jesus which was very much a David and Goliath mission.  The Gospels are an account of an unknown Jew, convinced of the rightness of his cause and an unfailing faith in his God.  A man who takes on both the ruling class of his own people and the might of the Roman Empire. 

As we cross from our reading in first Samuel to Mark’s Gospel it is also worth noting that today’s episode is one of Mark’s ‘crossing over’ episodes. 

It is a literary crossing from one subject to another, but it also reminds me of another crossing episodes.  In that story a young would-be chaplain is terrified by an Atlantic storm that breaks the ships mast.  As he trembles in fear his personal faith is challenged by the Moravian missionaries who stand in the storm by the broken mast and sing hymns. 

After the failure of his own ministry, he is recalled to England and on a whim goes to listen to a Moravian missionary at a meeting in Aldersgate Street.  There, his heart is famously strangely warmed.  John Wesley crosses over to begin preaching in the open to the dispossessed of the industrial revolution.  A mission of faith and social action with the enthusiasm expressed in his brother’s hymn.  ‘Forth in Your Name, O Lord, I go’.

Our Gospel cross over however is a literary construction that moves the reader from a selection of parables to a quite spectacular exorcism.  In so doing Mark uses the power of the narrative, and allusion to other scripture and folklore, to introduce the disciples’ question ‘who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey him?’ (Mark 4:41) 

The answer to that question is unfortunately given by the Gerasene demonic in the next week’s exciting episode. 

So, spoiler alert.  The demon possessed man calls out ‘What have you to do with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God?’(Mark 5:7) 

In the meantime, we the reader, have not only been drawn to ask the same question but have been given several hints about Jesus.  Through allusion to previous scripture, we are informed of his link with the creator and the forming of a new people of God by control over the wind and the sea. 

When Moses led the slaves out of Egypt, he was the agent of God who opened the water in a new act of creation, so the people could begin their journey as the people of God. 

The question for us therefore is not ‘who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey him?’ But ‘who are this new people of God?’ 

The answer Mark is suggesting is that we are those people.  Mark, in his Gospel, is calling us to the David and Goliath struggle where the Christ in us confronts the massive giant of a disbelieving, violent and self-seeking world.  

As we live in such a world of noisy, hostile, wealth  grabbing giants we are challenged to live as if the kingdom of God is well and truly at hand. 

That belief, Mark is telling us, is the agility and superior weapon that will well and truly slay the giant demoniacs of our time and place.

So, trusting in God, grounded in the scripture and traditions of our faith, we are not only assured of the rightness of our cause…. 

We are convinced that we are indeed Christ’s new people of God.

We are the people who can transform our lives and so transform our world.

---

[1]http://www.today.com/popculture/david-goliath-understanding-dynamics-power-struggle-8C11338370

 “Saying Thanks”  (Luke 17:11-19)

Intro:  Our New Testament lesson comes from Luke and it is a story about a call for healing and a response of grace.  It is about how nine people, and one person, then respond to that gift of grace.  In our reading, Jesus encounters ten lepers, who ask for mercy.

“Call and response” is a concept that I have loved ever since someone first showed me on a piano how musical phrases can talk to each other.  I know this is elementary for many musicians, but the idea is that one set of notes can ask a question and another set of notes can answer that question.     Jazz music is predicated on this idea, there is something asked, for a moment things feel unfinished, and then an answer comes and it comes and goes back and forth and hopefully by the end everybody is tapping their toes and delighting in the music. 

Musically, the phrase “call and response” originally referred to work songs sung by slaves.  A leader would sing or call out the first line and others respond in unison.  It made their dreadful work into a song, into a prayer that was offered up to God.  And somehow hope was kept alive and grace was present as these songs were sung.  In almost all of the Psalms, there is the common characteristic of pain being stated up front, pain that is met with God’s response of grace.  “Help me”, and help comes.  “We’re hurting” and healing follows.  Again and again, pain is met by grace.  Pain.  Grace.  Call and response. 

One of my favorite preaching professors explained how African American preaching has that same kind of rhythm and feel to it, in church the phrase “call and response” is used to describe when a preacher set out a phrase “it may feel like Friday” (and he would stop preaching he would wait) and the people of the congregation respond “But Sunday is coming”, there is a give and take, and back and forth and the preaching becomes something the congregation participates in, not by silent listening, but by responding.  Everybody feels like they were an integral part of the sermon that way.  Presbyterians don’t do that so much.  While we don’t often verbally respond to the word preached, we do believe that we are to respond to God’s living word – with our lives.  Out faith is not a Sunday only kind of thing.  We are to live as though the word we hear is asking something of us, calling to us to respond, and that we answer with what we do and how we live with one another.  I love the signs that hand in some churches that say as you exit, our worship is over, now our service begins.   

I see call and response in our text this morning.  This is an extraordinary story.  There is a real humanness to it.  Jesus was on his way from Galilee to Jerusalem and on the road he encountered ten people, each of whom suffered from leprosy. That is to say they were physically sick and socially rejected. No one wanted to have anything to do with them, probably not even their families. The ten were a company of the miserable. “Jesus, master, have mercy on us,” they called to him and he responds with mercy. “Go, show yourselves to the priests,” travel the road to the ones who could certify that leprosy was gone and these people were once again fit for normal human relationships. 

In essence, Jesus said go and claim your full place in society, start walking the road ahead as if you are healed and you will be healed.  On their way to the priests for verification, suddenly they were made clean.  When that transformation took place, when they went from hurting to healing, nine kept on walking to show the priest.  They took this miracle, this good fortune this as entitlement to walk right back to their lives they had been left behind by leprosy.  That was the response of the majority.  The nine had the attitude that they just were keeping what they deserved.  But in that God given transformational moment, there was one who stopped in his tracks, ran back to find Jesus, fell on his face at Jesus’ feet, and thanked him.  Jesus asks about the other nine, where are they?  Were they not also healed?  Then he says a very interesting thing to the grateful man at his feet: “Get up and go on your way: your faith has made you well.”

Now notice that we don’t know anything about this man’s religion. He is a Samaritan, but we don’t know what his theology is. We don’t know a thing about his moral values, whether he is for or against this or that. We don’t know how he voted or how he spends his Sabbath. All we know is that he recognized a gift when he saw it, returned to say thank you, and Jesus said to him, “Your faith has made you well,” which surely is to say that by Jesus’ definition, faith and gratitude are very closely related, that faith without gratitude is maybe not faith at all, and that there is something life-giving about gratitude.

Notice also that the man’s wellness is more than being rid of his dreaded disease. Wellness, wholeness, ­some scholars translate the word wellness as “salvation”: “Your faith has saved you,” in which case being grateful and saying thank you are absolutely at the heart of God’s plan for the human race and God’s intent for each of us.

The basic Christian experience is not obligation or guilt, but gratitude, gratitude for the gift of life. Gratitude for the world. Gratitude for dear people who grace and enrich our lives.  Gratitude marks the difference between the person who believes that life is theirs  only, to do with as he or she wishes, and the one who understands that life is God’s gift, to live out in joyful thanks and praise. Gratitude marks the difference between the person who comes to worship periodically out of duty, and the one knows she will be here Sunday after Sunday, joining her voice in the crescendo of hallelujahs, because, in so doing, everything that has unfolded in the week behind her is now enfolded in the grace and mercy of God. Gratitude marks the difference between the one who looks at a healing as the result of having the wisdom and substance to choose the best medical care, and the one who recognizes her healing as God’s act of love in her life

Gratitude marks the difference between those who are measured and cautious in their giving, because they look upon their resources as possessions that must be hoarded against some future scarcity, and those who give generously and thankfully, viewing their resources as gifts from God and one more way in which they can joyfully serve God.   This stewardship season at Church, we have been grateful for the music, the people, community concerts, the mission outreach- each a vital part of our community.  And we are thankful for the ways this congregation makes a difference in our community and our lives.  We know how lives are changed and challenged by an awareness of God’s gracious presence.  The question is how will we respond, how will we say more than a passing thanks?  

A response of gratitude comes when you and I recognize that God’s grace and mercy have touched our lives, surrounds our lives, sustains our lives and gives our lives meaning and purpose.  Gratitude is the central characteristic of authentic faith, it is the clearest sign of our true spiritual condition­ it is a measure of our soul­.  Gratitude has the power to save us, to make us whole.  It is at the very heart of our faith it is the basic human response to the goodness and mercy of God and to grace, God’s undeserved and unconditional love for us.

At the heart of Christian experience and teaching is not guilt, as we have sometimes been taught; not obligation, as we occasionally conclude and teach; but gratitude, pure and simple­ for God’s grace, gratitude because all of life, all of it, is a gift we did not earn but were given. 

The leper who returned to give thanks to his God, knew where he had been.  He had been an outcast, when his healing took place, he knew he had to go back to his God to give thanks.  Before enjoying his new place in the world, he responded to God’s grace by expressing his gratitude.  So he travels the road back to the source of his healing to say thanks face to face.  Nine others made a different choice.  Face down in the dirt giving thanks to his God, that was his response to the call and claim on him by Jesus.  We’re lepers.  We are still struggling to be whole, to recognize the full humanity of our selves and our sisters and brothers.  We have a ways to go, we are people who are traveling toward redemption.  As we hear Jesus ask were not all ten healed?  We know the source of all our gifts is our God.  So the call for us is the question, ———–  how will we respond?   How will we express our gratitude?   Amen

Here’s our Zoom link –

Topic: St Martin’s Sunday Worship. To Join Zoom Meeting:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/81508696154?pwd=cnErZFM5VG5OQVhsZkxYc0dxOHdvUT09

Meeting ID: 815 0869 6154
Passcode: 712158

NOTICES:

A very warm welcome to all who worship with us this morning. Many thanks to Rev Dan Yeazel for leading our service today. Next Sunday Chris Elliot will be with us.

Wednesday Walkers 5^th June: Meet 9.30am at the Bus Exchange for a wander north of the Square and check progress at Otakaro Orchard wet or fine. Coffee at Joe’s Garage opposite the Bus Exchange. All welcome.

Men’s Group: Kate Russel from Hagar will speak at the next men’s group meeting starting at 6 pm on Thursday 13th June in the church lounge.

We will have a pot luck tea followed by Kate’s talk at about 6.40 pm.

All men welcome. Rob C 384 4320.

Can you help? Waltham Cottage is in desperate need of tinned soups & stews to replenish their shelves.

Otautahi Christchurch Eco Church Gathering Tuesday 11 June 7-9pm at Enviro Hub in Botanic Gardens. All are welcome to come along and learn how we can continue to integrate sustainability and creation care into our church communities. For details or to RSVP contact James at james.beck@arocha.org

Wanted – drivers to help with picking up and delivering home again several members of our congregation who either live alone and have no means of transport – and/or folk who are now residing in rest homes and rely on a friend or family member to collect them and bring them to church. Irene would love to chat with you.

Check out the All Heart Store run by Spreydon Baptist Community Ministries Trust, 122 Burke Street, Sydenham.

Hours: 9am-4pm Tuesday – Friday and Saturday 9am-1pm.

They sell ‘everything’ from coffee through toilet paper to office chairs.

THIS WEEK AT ST MARTINS                 

Tuesday 10am              South Elder Care (lounge) Jeannette 332 9869

Tuesday 7.15pm           Meditation Group (lounge) Dugald 021 161 7007

Wednesday 9.30am      Walking Group: City

Wednesday 9.30am      Port Hills U3A (whole complex) Joy 337 2393

Wednesday 7-9pm       Cantabile Choir (lounge) Rose 027 254 0586

Thursday 10am             Crafty Crafters (lounge) Sally 332 4730

Thursday 1.30pm          Sit & Be Fit (church) Anneke 021 077 4065

Friday 9.30am               Sing & Sign (lounge) Becky 022 086 2211

Bill Wallace asks a very important question in the opening lines of the Hymn we have just sung.

What image shall I use

to give a face to God?

There are plenty of Christians who find very little relevance in the doctrine of the trinity and are quite happy to worship a divine mystery they refer to as God.

However, there are some significant differences in the god worshiped by those who see themselves as patriotic Christian Nationalists and those, like Robin Meyers[1], who believe that Christians should concentrate on following Jesus rather than worshiping Jesus.  

Furthermore, just as our religious tradition tells us that we are created in God’s image, humanity has both the capacity and inclination to return the compliment and create a god in our image.  A divinity with our own worldview, ambitions, prejudice. A deity that completely agrees with us and offers us no challenge whatsoever.

So, what image shall we use?

Interestingly the answer, which became a fundamental and defining doctrine of the Christian Faith, came from Christian Nationalism, or more precisely Christian Imperialism. 

The Roman world was a pagan world where generals, kings and emperors went to astrologers and fortune-tellers before a battle seeking guidance on the outcome of the battle.  It would of course be a foolish general that went into battle knowing they were going to lose so what they really wanted to know was which god they should sacrifice to before the battle to ensure victory.

Before the Battle of Milvian Bridge, Constantine no doubt inspired by some sage or fortune teller, had a vision which convinced him that if he put the Christian symbol on his soldiers’ shields, he would be victorious.  Through victory at that battle in 312CE Constantine was able to claim the emperorship.  By that time Christianity had become the most widely spread religion in Roman World so vision or no vision it made sense to declare that Christians were not to be persecuted and Christianity became one of the official religions of Rome. 

But Constantine was a cunning politician, so he remained a pagan and offered sacrifices to all the various gods to keep favour with their supporters.  He was finally baptized shortly before his death, and it was his successors who made Christianity the only official religion of Rome.

It appears to have been important to Constantine’s reforms, in the pagan world of multiple gods and hierarchy of gods, that Christianity was seen as the religion that worshiped the only one true God.

The trouble was that Christian language spoke of Father, Son and Spirit, which sounded very like three divinities. 

Therefore, it was easy to conclude that Christianity wasn’t any different to all the other beliefs.  Especially the Greco-Roman Religions where the top-level gods had affairs with humans resulting in lesser deities with specific portfolios for various virtues and evils along with the mechanics of the natural world.

So, Constantine gathered the leaders of the church together at the council at Nicaea and wouldn’t let them go home until they produced Christendom’s most important white paper, the short form loyalty oath, we call the Nicene Creed.[2] 

That gave the framework of Trinitarian Theology, but the debate continued because, once the bishops got home, they wrote minority reports and had press conferences.  But neither Constantine or the church fathers should get all the blame.  The early church leaders had been searching for a loyalty statement for some time.  The understanding of God in Christ and Christ as God along with the Spirit was a long debate that bothered Christians both before and after Nicaea.

Furthermore, it was not just a debate among the church leaders.  A quotation from Gregory of Nyssa illustrates just how important a Trinitarian understanding was to ordinary people of the time. 

If you ask someone to give you change, he philosophises about the Begotten and the Unbegotten; if you inquire about the price of a loaf, you are told by way of reply, that the Father is greater and the Son inferior; if you ask, “Is my bath ready?’ the attendant answers that the Son was made out of nothing.’

Certainly, the Emperor had total authority but then as now, everyone had an opinion.

Gregory, along with his older brother Basil bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, and their common friend Gregory of Nazianzuz, are known as the three ‘Cappadocian Fathers.  They are credited with putting the finishing touches to Trinitarian theology.  Basil and Gregory also had an older sister called Macrina who Basil refers to as the teacher.  We can therefore presume she also influenced the debate but in a male focused society, got none of the credit. 

As already mentioned, this framing of language that created an understanding that people could affirm in a creed was just the finishing touches in a long debate.  But like all theological understanding Trinitarian understanding needed to be grounded in biblical text.

Fortunately, although Trinitarian theology is not spelled out anywhere in the Bible, the seeds of it certainly are.  So, the church fathers and mothers trawled the Bible for proof texts to answer the perplexing question for the Greco-Roman mind. 

It is also a question for us as we wonder, as we should, ‘what image shall I use to give a face to God?’

‘If there is only one God how can Jesus also be God and how can God and Christ be experienced as Spirit?’  As the latest and most spiritual and theological Gospel John provides the most proof texts. Therefore, so it is extremely likely that Trinitarian theology was beginning to evolve by the time John’s gospel was written, probably in Ephesus.

Church History can explain why it was important to the church in the third century.   But why should such highly enlightened Christians of the third millennium, such as us, give a toss about the doctrine of the trinity? 

For example, Robin Myers, is quite scathing of doctrine as he argues for Christian’s to act upon what they believe about Jesus rather than define that belief as if it was a certainty. 

However, one of the great virtues of theologians is they don’t agree with each other.  So, although Meyers has some very important things to say he is as capable of any of us to miss the point from time to time. 

Commenting on today’s reading Bill Loader’s concluding sentences in his commentary are very helpful in unravelling the sermon to Nicodemus we read this morning.  It is also helpful in understanding why Trinitarian theology is relevant to us. 

John, therefore, sets us on the way towards the doctrine of the trinity by insisting on the fact that relating to the person of the Son is relating to the Father, without equating the two, and that living in that relationship is living by the Spirit. By earthing faith and spirituality in a relationship and a person, rather than in momentous events or experiences, in places here or hereafter, John invites us to develop a spirituality which sees God in all of life’.^[3]

As a cooperative species humanity is drawn to relationships with other humans.  By imaging the divine mystery with what we can learn about a first century person we are able to form an imagined relationship.  But, with only an imagined relationship with Jesus we are still able to project our own prejudices and hopes into our vision of Jesus.  Fortunately, the Gospels challenge such projections with the sayings and stories of Jesus.

But we need to also acknowledge the other ways we image the divine because together they all contribute to protecting us from building a god in our own image.  As Christians we admit to worshiping Jesus as God, but we place conditions on that understanding by also admitting he was a fully human person.  Therefore, Jesus he grew and learned in relationship with other people and the other characteristics of God. 

Like Jesus, we too are inspired and informed by the Spirit. But our relationship with our image of Jesus mediates that inspiration and saves us from redefining what it is to be Christian in ways that give us power over others.  We are also gripped with awe and wonder at the vastness of creation, yet we are drawn back from fear of the creative power by recognising the parent sibling relationship between Creator and Christ.  A relationship that reminds us that we, and all humanity, are part of the divine family.  The creator image can be a fearful image of earthquake wind and fire.  But as loving parent of the infant Jesus and the suffering Christ, the merciless evolution of natural selection is held in tension with the image of loving relationship.

What is most significant, and most forgotten, is the truth that, the Trinitarian formula holds these three images of the divine in relationship.  Divine revelation does not come in a list of rules and God does not appoint some megalomaniac to rule on behalf of the divine mystery.

As Jesus stressed that relationship as he preached to Nicodemus; ‘God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life’ (John 3:16)

Our relationship with the divine mystery is grounded in the image of the Jesus of the Gospels and inspired and interpreted, for each of us, by the Spirit. 

What Image shall we use, A triune image, that recognises our inadequacies and the failings of the human condition, yet still calls to all humanity,

‘Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?’  (Isaiah 6:8) 

Inspired by creation, in relationship with Christ and guided by the Spirit we can be confident to respond.

Here am I; send me!

---

[1] Robin Meyers The Underground Church and Saving Jesus From The Church

[2] Robin Meyers The Underground Church: Reclaiming the subversive way of Jesus  (London: SPCK, 2012 ), p.64.

[3] http://wwwstaff.murdoch.edu.au/~loader/MkTrinity.htm