Last week during my annual leave, I started watching ‘Vicar of Dibley’ on the recommendation of my colleagues. When the villagers were waiting for a new vicar at Dibley, to their utter surprise it was a woman Geraldine, who introduces herself as the new vicar of Dibley. Who did they think the vicar would be? Since it has always been men who were vicars, the villagers at Dibley expected a gentleman to be their vicar, based on their theological and historical evidences. Against their expectations, when it was a woman vicar, it took time for them to accept her, and eventually Rev. Geraldine makes a huge difference in the community through her ministry. It was fun watching these episodes, specially Dawn French’s performance of Rev. Geraldine, as a female priest in the tiny village of Dibley is exceptional to watch.
In the reading from Matthew 16: 13-20, Jesus asks his disciples about his identity, asking them, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” Like the villagers in Dibley, the people in the district of Caesarea Philippi had their own known theological and historical expectations of Jesus, the Son of Man. For the disciples reported, “Some say John the Baptist, but others Elijah, and still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets” (14v). Jesus was neither content with their reply nor consented to their reply. Now that John the Baptist was dead, Jesus did not claim that he was the risen John the Baptist. Since Elijah was the greatest prophet of Jewish religion who did not see death, Jesus did not claim that he was Elijah reborn. Jeremiah was a known prophet of yester years, for he was lamenting against exilic powers then, and there was every reason for Jesus to claim that he was Jeremiah born again to lament against the colonial powers of his time. Even though Jesus’ mission coincides with the mission engagements of John the Baptist, Elijah, Jeremiah and other prophets, Jesus was not content on taking the identity of others for himself. Jesus has his own unique identity, which he wanted his disciples to explore and recognise based on his work and mission engagements. If we read the question that Jesus posed to his disciples, Jesus was enquiring, ‘who do people say that the Son of Man is?’ and not as ‘who do people say that the Son of Man was?’ Jesus was looking for an answer in present tense. Jesus was not content with an answer based on some historical knowledge about himself, he was looking for an answer in present tense.
When his identity was not fully expressed in the answers of the people, Jesus further probed his disciples and asked them, “who do you say I am?” (15v) Jesus would have said to his disciples, let’s leave what the people say about me, for they have not seen or known me as much as you have seen and known me, and therefore asked his disciples to say who he was as they have known him. It was a question to all the disciples to answer who Jesus was to them. Simon Peter picked Jesus question and replied, “you are the Messiah, the Son of the living God” (16v). On a closer encounter with Jesus, Peter recognised the Messiah in Jesus, who the Jews have been eagerly awaiting to come and restore their land, and also recognised that Jesus is the Son of the living God. For the Jewish audience of the first century to whom Matthew was writing his gospel, they wouldn’t mind calling Jesus as John the Baptist, or Elijah or Jeremiah or another prophet, they would have thought Jesus was continuing their mission. But for Jews then, Peter’s declaration of Jesus as a Messiah and the Son of the living God was heretical and profane. For according to their belief, Messiah was a political figure who will come to restore their land, and how can Jesus, a son of a carpenter from Nazareth do that? According to their Jewish faith, how can living God have a son, for God is beyond any human comprehension for God cannot be compared in human terms of a son. Peter’s declaration of Jesus’ identity was not only counter-cultural, but was also blasphemous.
Jesus on the contrary, not only appreciates Simon Peter for his bold declaration about Jesus, but also reveals that such a declaration did not come to him from flesh and blood, but has come from his Father in heaven (17v). In a way Jesus accepted that yes, he was the Messiah, who has come to restore people to God and also is the Son of the living God, the Father in heaven. Peter’s declaration about Jesus was a recognition of who Jesus is, in its present tense. Peter’s declaration about Jesus was contextual, contemporary, creative, and counter-cultural, for they were based on his experiences and encounters with Jesus. Jesus then said to Simon Peter, that on such a rock called Peter he would build his church, and the gates of the hades will not prevail against it (18v).
As we read this text today, two sets of questions come to the fore for our faith journey today. Firstly, who do we say Jesus is for us today? Secondly, what do we say about our church today? We have recognised earlier that Jesus was not content with some historical answers about him, but was seeking a creative, contextual and counter-cultural recognition about Jesus.
Allow me to answer it from my own perspective who do I say Jesus is for me? Jesus for me is God becoming human, who identifies with us, laughs with us, walks with us, weeps with us, like a friend, for he transcends all the barriers among people and builds a just and inclusive communion with God and with one another in this his creation. Jesus for me is the lens to know who God is, and a lens to know how human beings should be. Jesus for me is collaborating with each of us in the creation of God in striving towards a new-creation. Jesus for me is the one who stands for justice and sides with those that are oppressed, offering hope and liberation to them. By making such a declaration about Jesus, the call for us is to live like Jesus and work with Jesus in transforming our world to a just world.
What do we say about church today? Like Peter, the church is built on people who make counter-cultural affirmations about Jesus, offering hope, love, and peace to all in the community with Jesus, for the gates of hades will not prevail against it. Church for me should not be known by its membership, but should be known by its missional engagements for justice. Church for me should not be known by its minister, but should be known by its ministry in the community. Church for me should not be a private place for the saints, but a public place of comfort and care to the wounded and the broken people. Church for me should not be about prosperity and wealth, but should be about sharing good news to the poor, feeding the hungry, healing the wounded, visiting the sick, realising the captives and engaging in transforming this world to become a new creation. For no gates of hades will prevail against such a church, for Jesus is the lead to it, working with people for a new heaven and new earth.
As we return back to our church buildings for worship, let us keep reflecting on the need and relevance of our churches today. I have written previously, what has the community missed with the closing down of church buildings? And now what will the community around our church gain by the opening of our church building for worship? We need to prayerfully wait on God and ask God to help us envision a counter-cultural church, where we can make a difference in our community. Let us not to be content with the rich historical legacy we have had, let us not always keep singing about the past glory of our churches, rather we are called in humility to recognise that we as a church are called to share and offer hope in Jesus Christ to our communities around us. It calls courage to be counter-cultural as a church, but allowing the Spirit of God to lead us will help us in our movement forward, in fact outward as a church. The gates of the hades will not prevail against the church built on a rock, who are willing to be courageous, counter-cultural and creative in their declarations of faith and engagements of mission today. As a church if we aren’t counter-cultural, the gates of contemporary hades will prevail on us.
Let’s keep asking this question in our quest for re-imagining the church today, who is Jesus for us today? And what is church for us today? May God lead us and guide us so that we can be bold to be counter-cultural in our declarations of our faith and also in our missional engagements. By the way the Rev. Geraldine, the vicar of Dibley was counter-cultural in many ways and continued her mission engagements.
Rev. Dr. Raj Bharat Patta,
21st August 2020
Pic credit: https://sermons.com/powerpoint/who-do-you-say-i-am/1456748
2 comments:
Amen!
I would even go further. With the pandemic we may have seen a greater focus upon the need to provide a worship experience, at some great cost to this ministers. Was this focus entirely necessary and proportionate given those within our community who may not have attended church in the (recent) past but now might seek to understand some relevance to their lives today.
Jesus declares to build a church upon the rock in Caesarea Philippi, a place famed for its pagan worship - what more counter-cultural could there be?
Interestingly there's no mention of hell. Hades is a very different concept than hell. I wonder whether this passage might focus our thoughts on the kingdom of heaven, allowing those not in the church to see God's love, rather then the alternative death and damnation perspective all to familiar from the past.
Thank you for such a highlight from this short passage.
Thank you Bob for your comment. Yes, it is interesting to note that Jesus speaks about church at Caesarea Philippi, a place which had a large carving of rock facing the city for pagan worship. Jesus' words of building a church on the rock called Peter, which was counter-cultural to the then context. How important it is for us as a church to be a space of counter-cultural presence in our localities today. We need to keep the conversation going.
Post a Comment