Sunday, February 17, 2013

The 1st Sunday of Lent - The Antagonist Slanders


         Today our gospel reading presents Jesus as a character in a brief story told by Luke as an ominscient narrator.  Jesus is the protagonist and the devil is the antagonist.  The conflict centers on Jesus, made weak and vulnerable by fasting, being tempted to short-circuit his mission as God's revelation of God's self.  To defeat the devil Jesus quotes God's revelation of God's self in the written words of  the Hebrew scriptures.  The denouement tells us the devil departed in apparent temporary defeat, but will return at an opportune time.  Game, set, match!  Jesus is tested; Jesus overcomes.  Seems simple, doesn't it?  Like a morality tale?  A story with a moral for us—resist when the devil tempts you and you will be fine.

         On the other hand, thoughtful Christians have struggled to interpret this story in greater depth.  On Ash Wednesday about 11:10 I went down to the room where the AA folks were just about cleaned up after their meeting to let them know at 11:30 the church would be in silence for the next hour and a half for prayer and the imposition of ashes.  A young woman still sitting in her chair asked me what Lent was all about.  As I begin to explain, I mentioned that the forty days of Lent were based on the 40 days Jesus spent in the desert fasting and being tempted by the devil.  She asked what the temptations were and how they relate to us today.  She wondered about what giving something up for Lent was all about.

         On the General Ordination Exams these sorts of questions are posed in a section seminarians call “coffee hour” questions.  You must answer briefly with clarity.  Your answers must reflect biblical and theological accuracy as well.  I hope the answers I gave that young woman met those standards!

         In any event, today I have the advantage of time to prepare to explain the meaning of Jesus' temptations in the wilderness.  The explanation I treasure most is by Henri Nouwen, the Roman Catholic theologian who left academia to live and work in the L'Arche community with cognitively challenged adults.  He describes the temptations as the dangers all Christians who have a leadership roles face (and in a small church almost everyone is a leader in some way):  the temptation to be relevant – turn those stones into bread so people do not need to go hungry any more; the temptation to be powerful – how much good you could do in the world if you possessed lots of power; and the temptation to be spectacular – let everyone one see how God miraculously takes care of God's holy ones.  These temptations place us at the center of things: our intentions rightly applied to the problems of life will make all the difference, so what is good will prevail.  If we succumb to the belief that our holiness and our good deeds will make the difference in bringing in God's reign, we will have yielded to the devil's challenges and lost our need to keep connected with God.

         For some reason as I prepared for today, I questioned what Greek word Luke used to identify the devil and if that could offer some depth in interpreting this account of Jesus' temptations as well.  Often we are too much influenced by pop cultural depictions of the devil from the red guy with horns, a tail and a pitch fork to the one who presides over the burning sulfur in some region below the earth.  Luke's word, translated as devil, is diabolou and means “slanderer” and is the root of the English word, “diabolical.”  Who is the antagonist slandering in this story?  God, of course.  This diabolical one, this slanderer sought to depict an easy way to achieve what we call “the age to come,” a time of abundance, a well-ordered, just society and victory over death—if only Jesus would agree to take the easy way.

         This easy way would involve the tyranny of imposing the “good” and taking back the gift of freedom God gave God's creation.  It is slander to say that God rules by anything but the power of love. From the chesed of God in the Hebrew scripturestranslated as God's “loving kindness”—to the declaration in the Gospel of John that “God so loved the world . . .” we see that tyranny will never be God's way.  And tyranny, even tyranny in the cause of what we believe is good should never be our way.  God offers us love in Jesus and hopes for our love in return.  God offers us love in Jesus and yearns for us to freely offer ourselves to God in love with humble obedience as Jesus did.  To love as Jesus loved means to love God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength and our neighbor as ourself.

         Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the German theologian killed by the Nazis, wrote about the need to be grateful when God shatters the “wish-dream” of a perfect Christian community, because that forces us to relate to each other—despite our inadequacies and our sins—through Jesus Christ, to center our community in Christ.  In our freedom we have all fallen short in one way or another, but in our freedom we can look to Jesus' compassion and  relate to each other through his compassion.  That's the freedom that will allow us to accept God's love and forgiveness and share God's love and forgiveness with others.

         So what I believe Luke's account of Jesus' temptation teaches us is to reject the slander that there is an easy way to establish God's reign if God in Jesus would only “step up.”  Love can never be the easy way, because there are costs, particularly the risk of rejection. But God chose love from the beginning of creation.  God chose love in sending God's self to become human in Jesus.  And Jesus chose love, not tyranny, which led in the end to the sacrifice of his life at the hands of human sin and evil.  Yes, God in Jesus chose love to overcome death and lead us to into salvation and eternal life. To say that God should have chosen an easier way and fixed it all through power—that is indeed slander.  Luke's portrait of a vulnerable, yet steadfast, Jesus, choosing God's way of love should be our guide.

No comments:

Post a Comment