Moving On with Mark

Dear Students of Saint Mark:
As we take time off for vacation, I encourage you to continue to study Saint Mark’s Gospel by reading and re-reading it. My prayer for you is that the Holy Spirit will guide you as you spend time with the gospel.

We will continue our study of Mark in September (Chapter 7 see below with questions) I am a true conservative when it comes to Scripture. I wish to conserve for every single person the opportunity to be challenged by their reading of the Gospel.

All of the things that we are taught by our families, our culture, and even the church are challenged by the Gospel message. So, as we continue our study together, we need to allow the Word of God that is revealed in the Gospel of Mark to speak to us through the Holy Spirit. Here are is the text for chapter 7 and some questions to stimulate your study.

God’s Peace in the Word Made Flesh,Bob+

(Mark 7) Now when the Pharisees and some of the scribes who had come from Jerusalem gathered around him, 2 they noticed that some of his disciples were eating with defiled hands, that is, without washing them. 3 (For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, do not eat unless they thoroughly wash their hands, thus observing the tradition of the elders; 4 and they do not eat anything from the market unless they wash it; and there are also many other traditions that they observe, the washing of cups, pots, and bronze kettles.) 5 So the Pharisees and the scribes asked him, "Why do your disciples not live according to the tradition of the elders, but eat with defiled hands?"

This story throws light back on the first six chapters of Mark. It reminds us of the controversies that swirled around Jesus prior to this one. I invite you to read these first few verses of Chapter 7 and then go back over the first six chapters of Mark and identify the stated reasons for conflict.

Mark 7:1-5 ends with a question addressed to Jesus. Read over these verses carefully several times. Try to imagine yourself standing in the crowd that surrounded Jesus, his questioners, and the disciples.

Can you see the disciples picking up food without first washing their hands?
Try to imagine Jesus’ questioners watching this violation of tradition.

Have you ever seen a workman sit down for lunch without first washing his dirty hands?

What goes through your head when you see people eating without washing their hands first?

Try to write down the assumptions you make about such a person.

Is this controversy really about dirty hands or about the authority of tradition and those who enforce it?

Our new Presiding Bishop when asked about the conflict within the Anglican Communion over her election, said that the question was about authority in the church.
What do you think she meant by that statement?

Who holds the authority in our world; nation; church; and communities today?
What is the source of such authority?

Why do you think this tradition was so important to those who questioned him?

6 He said to them, "Isaiah prophesied rightly about you hypocrites, as it is written, 'This people honors me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me; 7 in vain do they worship me, teaching human precepts as doctrines.' 8 You abandon the commandment of God and hold to human tradition."

Jesus seems to be saying that these folks “talked the talk, but did not walk the walk.”

Why are religious folks so prone to such hypocrisy?

Jesus says that the religious leadership teach “human precepts as doctrines.”
What are the human precepts to which Jesus is referring?

Jesus also says that religious leaders “abandon the commandment of God and hold to human tradition.”

Based upon what you have observed of Jesus’ life as it is told in Mark’s Gospel so far, what is “the commandment of God” to which he is referring?

Do you think the religious leaders would agree with his assessment? Why? Why not?

9 Then he said to them, "You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition! 10 For Moses said, 'Honor your father and your mother'; and, 'Whoever speaks evil of father or mother must surely die.' 11 But you say that if anyone tells father or mother, 'Whatever support you might have had from me is Corban' (that is, an offering to God)-- 12 then you no longer permit doing anything for a father or mother, 13 thus making void the word of God through your tradition that you have handed on. And you do many things like this."

Jesus gives examples of how the commandment of God is being rejected in order to keep human traditions.

What do you think of the examples he offers?

Do you think abandonment of parents was a big problem or do you think that Jesus was uncovering an unspoken tradition that allowed children to ignore the needs of their parents?

What traditions do we follow within our culture which allow us to ignore the needs of others?

What other traditions do we follow which seem to be clearly prohibited in the commandments?

Which commandments are the defining commandments for Jesus?

14 Then he called the crowd again and said to them, "Listen to me, all of you, and understand: 15 there is nothing outside a person that by going in can defile, but the things that come out are what defile." 16 17 When he had left the crowd and entered the house, his disciples asked him about the parable. 18 He said to them, "Then do you also fail to understand? Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile, 19 since it enters, not the heart but the stomach, and goes out into the sewer?" (Thus he declared all foods clean.) 20 And he said, "It is what comes out of a person that defiles. 21 For it is from within, from the human heart, that evil intentions come: fornication, theft, murder, 22 adultery, avarice, wickedness, deceit, licentiousness, envy, slander, pride, folly. 23 All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person."

Is this Jesus’ way of changing the purity codes found in Scripture (Thus he declared all foods clean) and as a way of softening the requirements for membership in the church (i.e. Gentiles)?

If you look at all of the behaviors that Jesus says defile us and that flow out of the human heart (remember that the heart represents the power of desiring), what do you notice as a common thread that runs through them all?

If Jesus says that the Great Commandments are to love God and our neighbor as our selves, how does that help us understand the list of defiling intentions and behaviors that flow from the human heart?

If you look through the news today, what seems to be the greatest examples of such evil?

Is all evil corporate and relational?

What does the Episcopal Church seek to do in response to such evil?

What did Jesus do in response to such evil?

24 From there he set out and went away to the region of Tyre. He entered a house and did not want anyone to know he was there.

Why do you think Jesus was trying to avoid being known?

Do you think it had anything to do with the fact that he was in Gentile territory?

Yet he could not escape notice,

This is an interesting phrase. Despite his efforts to remain anonymous, Jesus could not avoid being discovered even by the Gentiles.

What does this say about Jesus?

What does this say about those who “noticed” him?

25 but a woman whose little daughter had an unclean spirit immediately heard about him, and she came and bowed down at his feet. 26 Now the woman was a Gentile, of Syrophoenician origin. She begged him to cast the demon out of her daughter. 27 He said to her, "Let the children be fed first, for it is not fair to take the children's food and throw it to the dogs." 28 But she answered him, "Sir, even the dogs under the table eat the children's crumbs." 29 Then he said to her, "For saying that, you may go--the demon has left your daughter." 30 So she went home, found the child lying on the bed, and the demon gone.

What is the significance of a Gentile woman coming up to Jesus and bowing at his feet?

The woman’s request was that Jesus cast out the demon from the little girl.
Do you remember our discussion in which we said that the demons are communal projections of evil that imputed to someone or group within a community?

Is this woman’s daughter the one who is bearing the demon of her village?

There is a universal tradition within the human culture to scapegoat others for what dwells in our own hearts that we will not confess. The woman is asking Jesus to save her daughter from the consequences of the demon.

Does Jesus seem sympathetic to this woman at first? Why or Why not?

Do you think the woman is being flip or disrespectful to Jesus when she responds to his apparent lack of sympathy?

What does the woman say that changes Jesus’ mind about how he will respond to her request?

What is in the woman’s response that says she has a faith that connects with the heart of God?Where did the demon go?

31 Then he returned from the region of Tyre, and went by way of Sidon towards the Sea of Galilee, in the region of the Decapolis. 32 They brought to him a deaf man who had an impediment in his speech; and they begged him to lay his hand on him. 33 He took him aside in private, away from the crowd, and put his fingers into his ears, and he spat and touched his tongue. 34 Then looking up to heaven, he sighed and said to him, "Ephphatha," that is, "Be opened." 35 And immediately his ears were opened, his tongue was released, and he spoke plainly. 36 Then Jesus ordered them to tell no one; but the more he ordered them, the more zealously they proclaimed it. 37 They were astounded beyond measure, saying, "He has done everything well; he even makes the deaf to hear and the mute to speak."

Jesus is moving back towards a more mixed crowd of Jews and Gentiles. We do not know who brought this deaf man with a speech impediment to Jesus to be healed, but we do get an idea of the sort of people they are.

Can you describe the people who brought this man to Jesus?

How are they like the woman in the previous verses?

Jesus heals the man in a more private setting and tells those who brought him to Jesus not to tell anyone about what he had done. It seems that the more Jesus tells them to not share the news with others, the more zealously they share it.
Do you find it interesting that the healing allowed this man to hear and speak and that Jesus’ is asking those who brought him to act as if they had not heard what happened nor speak about it? Why or Why not?

I look forward to seeing you all in September. Have a wonderful August and don’t forget to continue to read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest the feast that Saint
Mark has set before us.Bob+

What is Your Theological World View

Have you ever taken a quiz to see where your theological views might place you in the big picture of Christian theology. I just recently went to this web site and took such a quiz. Here is the site.

http://quizfarm.com/test.php?q_id=43870


What did my quiz reveal?

It says that I have the theological worldview of a Roman Catholic. Hmmm... If you read the reasons for why I scored this way, you will see that what is true of me is the high value I place on Church tradition and ecclesial authority.

In the Episcopal Church, Tradition is one of the three sources of authority that helps us define the life of our church. We refer to Tradition, but are not dominated by it. It is important, but it must be balanced by Scripture and Reason. So, while I value Tradition, I do not worship it or turn it into something of greater value than God. It is simply one of the three ways I have come to understand God.

Neo-orthodox is my next highest score on this quiz. This score shows my very strong Protestant beliefs and demonstrates the balance with the Episcopal Church between Catholicism and Protestantism. If you read about this post World War I theological movement whose advocates included many German theologicians (Barth and Tillich are two of my favorites), you will probably recognize why I have a passion for Scripture. Note that my lowest score was as a Fundamentalist. It is possible to be a lover of Scripture; someone who believes that God reveals who we are (anthropology) and who he is (theology) through Scripture without being a Fundamentalist.

Jesus is the cornerstone in my reading of the entire Bible. When I read the Gospel, I focus on the fact of Jesus' life and his death. The rest of Scripture, for me, can only be understood as it either reveals what Jesus revealed or fails to reveal what Jesus revealed. I believe the Word of God is contained in Scripture, but is most completely revealed in Jesus' life, death, and Resurrection. I believe that left to our own best thinking, without Jesus, we continue to repeat blindly the old relgious ways of scapegoating, exclusion, and violence. As we hear in Eucharistic prayer B, Jesus, brings us "out of error into truth..."

My third highest score was as Post Modern/Emergent. My sense is that I am what is called a "liminal," in the language of Alan J. Roxburg, The Sky is Falling: A Proposal for Leadership Communities To Take New Risks for the Reign of God.

A liminal is someone who is tied into the traditional church and who would like to limit the impact and stress of the increasing changes that are happening in our daily lives. As liminal implies, we have reached a limit, a boundary, and we see the future that is quickly coming towards us as risky and changing. Roxburg reminds me that we can not stop the changes, but we can decide how we will respond to these changes. He suggests that many of the gifts of the mainline churches need to be offered to the emerging churches that sometimes seek to remove everything that is part of the past. I value both positions and know that each expresses the needs of the other.

So, I am a man born in the previous century (1946)who seeks to find creative ways of sharing the Good News of God with those whose experiences growing up have been very different than my own. My youngest years of life did not include computers, televisions, IPods, cell phones, digital photography, increasing life spans, new forms of international terror,increasing fears and ignorance of pending global environmental disasters, and a globalized job market that is less and less dependable and ever shifting. What is the Good News that God wants to share with this generation? What treasures from our tradition will be considered gifts for the times of immense change?

Here is the summary of my test results:

You are Roman Catholic. Church tradition and ecclesial authority are hugely important, and the most important part of worship for you is mass. As the Mother of God, Mary is important in your theology, and as the communion of saints includes the living and the dead, you can also ask the saints to intercede for you.

Roman Catholic 68%
Neo orthodox 68%
Emergent/Postmodern 61%
Evangelical Holiness/Wesleyan 57%
Reformed Evangelical 39%
Modern Liberal 39%
Charismatic/Pentecostal 32%
Classical Liberal 18%
Fundamentalist 7%

Charlotte Allen's Editorial and Bishop Bruno's Response

On July 9, 2006, Charlotte Allen published a highly critical evaluation of the Episcopal Church. Bishop Jon Bruno and Father Bryan Jones have responded to this editorial with a remarkably charitable and comprehensive style. As part of our work together in the study of Mark, I would like for you to read the material below and begin to formulate your own response to Ms. Allen's editorial and to our bishop's words about who we are as Episcopalians.


Liberal Christianity is paying for its sins
Out-of-the-mainstream beliefs about gay marriage and supposedly sexist doctrines are gutting old-line faiths.

By Charlotte Allen

CHARLOTTE ALLEN is Catholicism editor for Beliefnet and the author of "The Human Christ: The Search for the Historical Jesus."

July 9, 2006

The accelerating fragmentation of the strife-torn Episcopal Church USA, in which several parishes and even a few dioceses are opting out of the church, isn't simply about gay bishops, the blessing of same-sex unions or the election of a woman as presiding bishop. It also is about the meltdown of liberal Christianity.

Embraced by the leadership of all the mainline Protestant denominations, as well as large segments of American Catholicism, liberal Christianity has been hailed by its boosters for 40 years as the future of the Christian church.

Instead, as all but a few die-hards now admit, all the mainline churches and movements within churches that have blurred doctrine and softened moral precepts are demographically declining and, in the case of the Episcopal Church, disintegrating.

It is not entirely coincidental that at about the same time that Episcopalians, at their general convention in Columbus, Ohio, were thumbing their noses at a directive from the worldwide Anglican Communion that they "repent" of confirming the openly gay Bishop V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire three years ago, the Presbyterian Church USA, at its general assembly in Birmingham, Ala., was turning itself into the laughingstock of the blogosphere by tacitly approving alternative designations for the supposedly sexist Christian Trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Among the suggested names were "Mother, Child and Womb" and "Rock, Redeemer and Friend." Moved by the spirit of the Presbyterian revisionists, Beliefnet blogger Rod Dreher held a "Name That Trinity" contest. Entries included "Rock, Scissors and Paper" and "Larry, Curly and Moe."

Following the Episcopalian lead, the Presbyterians also voted to give local congregations the freedom to ordain openly cohabiting gay and lesbian ministers and endorsed the legalization of medical marijuana. (The latter may be a good idea, but it is hard to see how it falls under the theological purview of a Christian denomination.)

The Presbyterian Church USA is famous for its 1993 conference, cosponsored with the United Methodist Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and other mainline churches, in which participants "reimagined" God as "Our Maker Sophia" and held a feminist-inspired "milk and honey" ritual designed to replace traditional bread-and-wine Communion.

As if to one-up the Presbyterians in jettisoning age-old elements of Christian belief, the Episcopalians at Columbus overwhelmingly refused even to consider a resolution affirming that Jesus Christ is Lord. When a Christian church cannot bring itself to endorse a bedrock Christian theological statement repeatedly found in the New Testament, it is not a serious Christian church. It's a Church of What's Happening Now, conferring a feel-good imprimatur on whatever the liberal elements of secular society deem permissible or politically correct.

You want to have gay sex? Be a female bishop? Change God's name to Sophia? Go ahead. The just-elected Episcopal presiding bishop, Katharine Jefferts Schori, is a one-woman combination of all these things, having voted for Robinson, blessed same-sex couples in her Nevada diocese, prayed to a female Jesus at the Columbus convention and invited former Newark, N.J., bishop John Shelby Spong, famous for denying Christ's divinity, to address her priests.

When a church doesn't take itself seriously, neither do its members. It is hard to believe that as recently as 1960, members of mainline churches — Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Methodists, Lutherans and the like — accounted for 40% of all American Protestants. Today, it's more like 12% (17 million out of 135 million). Some of the precipitous decline is due to lower birthrates among the generally blue-state mainliners, but it also is clear that millions of mainline adherents (and especially their children) have simply walked out of the pews never to return. According to the Hartford Institute for Religious Research, in 1965, there were 3.4 million Episcopalians; now, there are 2.3 million. The number of Presbyterians fell from 4.3 million in 1965 to 2.5 million today. Compare that with 16 million members reported by the Southern Baptists.

When your religion says "whatever" on doctrinal matters, regards Jesus as just another wise teacher, refuses on principle to evangelize and lets you do pretty much what you want, it's a short step to deciding that one of the things you don't want to do is get up on Sunday morning and go to church.

It doesn't help matters that the mainline churches were pioneers in ordaining women to the clergy, to the point that 25% of all Episcopal priests these days are female, as are 29% of all Presbyterian pastors, according to the two churches. A causal connection between a critical mass of female clergy and a mass exodus from the churches, especially among men, would be difficult to establish, but is it entirely a coincidence? Sociologist Rodney Stark ("The Rise of Christianity") and historian Philip Jenkins ("The Next Christendom") contend that the more demands, ethical and doctrinal, that a faith places upon its adherents, the deeper the adherents' commitment to that faith. Evangelical and Pentecostal churches, which preach biblical morality, have no trouble saying that Jesus is Lord, and they generally eschew women's ordination. The churches are growing robustly, both in the United States and around the world.

Despite the fact that median Sunday attendance at Episcopal churches is 80 worshipers, the Episcopal Church, as a whole, is financially equipped to carry on for some time, thanks to its inventory of vintage real estate and huge endowments left over from the days (no more!) when it was the Republican Party at prayer. Furthermore, it has offset some of its demographic losses by attracting disaffected liberal Catholics and gays and lesbians. The less endowed Presbyterian Church USA is in deeper trouble. Just before its general assembly in Birmingham, it announced that it would eliminate 75 jobs to meet a $9.15-million budget cut at its headquarters, the third such round of job cuts in four years.

The Episcopalians have smells, bells, needlework cushions and colorfully garbed, Catholic-looking bishops as draws, but who, under the present circumstances, wants to become a Presbyterian?

Still, it must be galling to Episcopal liberals that many of the parishes and dioceses (including that of San Joaquin, Calif.) that want to pull out of the Episcopal Church USA are growing instead of shrinking, have live people in the pews who pay for the upkeep of their churches and don't have to rely on dead rich people. The 21-year-old Christ Church Episcopal in Plano, Texas, for example, is one of the largest Episcopal churches in the country. Its 2,200 worshipers on any given Sunday are about equal to the number of active Episcopalians in Jefferts Schori's entire Nevada diocese.

It's no surprise that Christ Church, like the other dissident parishes, preaches a very conservative theology. Its break from the national church came after Rowan Williams, archbishop of Canterbury and head of the Anglican Communion, proposed a two-tier membership in which the Episcopal Church USA and other churches that decline to adhere to traditional biblical standards would have "associate" status in the communion. The dissidents hope to retain full communication with Canterbury by establishing oversight by non-U.S. Anglican bishops.

As for the rest of the Episcopalians, the phrase "deck chairs on the Titanic" comes to mind. A number of liberal Episcopal websites are devoted these days to dissing Peter Akinola, outspoken primate of the Anglican diocese of Nigeria, who, like the vast majority of the world's 77 million Anglicans reported by the Anglican Communion, believes that "homosexual practice" is "incompatible with Scripture" (those words are from the communion's 1998 resolution at the Lambeth conference of bishops). Akinola might have the numbers on his side, but he is now the Voldemort — no, make that the Karl Rove — of the U.S. Episcopal world. Other liberals fume over a feeble last-minute resolution in Columbus calling for "restraint" in consecrating bishops whose lifestyle might offend "the wider church" — a resolution immediately ignored when a second openly cohabitating gay man was nominated for bishop of Newark.

So this is the liberal Christianity that was supposed to be the Christianity of the future: disarray, schism, rapidly falling numbers of adherents, a collapse of Christology and national meetings that rival those of the Modern Language Assn. for their potential for cheap laughs. And they keep telling the Catholic Church that it had better get with the liberal program — ordain women, bless gay unions and so forth — or die. Sure.


Open Hearted, Open Minded Christianity

by The Right Reverend J. Jon Bruno and The Reverend Bryan Jones

In recent years the Episcopal Church has acted from a firm foundation of biblical, historic faith, not on “whatever the liberal elements of secular society deem permissible or politically correct” as contended by Charlotte Allen in her diatribe against the Episcopal and Presbyterian churches, “Liberal Christianity is paying for its sins” (Los Angeles Times, Sunday, July 9, 2006).

Episcopalians seek to follow Jesus’ own understanding of scripture when he identified two commandments from the Torah (Deuteronomy 6:5, Leviticus 19:18): “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength” and “You shall love your neighbor as yourself” as greater than any other portions of Scripture (Matthew 22:36-40). We believe that the central biblical mandates are clear: to love, welcome, and include all people into an egalitarian Christian fellowship, in which “There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female, for all of you are one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28, Colossians 3:11). It is in these overarching commandments and central mandates from the Bible as a whole that we find the authority of Scripture. We do not look for that authority in any handful of scattered, isolated passages selectively gathered to rationalize intolerance, cruelty or unfairness.

This basic call of God in Christ leads Christians in each age to new awareness of still unresolved divisions and unaddressed exclusions in the Church and in society. In our own times, this dynamic has led the Episcopal Church and many other American churches into conflicts over injustice and oppression against people of color, the poor, and immigrants, as well as over the equality of women and the full humanity of gay and lesbian people.

Our current conflicts are real but should not be overblown. Out of more than 7,000 congregations nationwide fewer than 150 have sought to leave the Episcopal Church. Out of 111 dioceses, seven are seeking ecclesiastical oversight from someone other than our newly elected Presiding Bishop, Katharine Jefferts Schori, while making it clear that they do not wish to leave the Episcopal Church.

The Episcopal Church is open to all people regardless of race, gender or sexual orientation. Within the broad parameters of essential Christian conviction and practice, it celebrates a diversity of opinions and positions on many issues. We are bound together by common prayer and shared worship, so we have no need to impose uniformity in thought and doctrine. At our best we are open-hearted and open-minded followers of Christ. We democratically elect our bishops, priests, and lay leaders at all levels of the church. We respect each person’s right to conscience. We know our understanding is limited and often mistaken but we strive together to hear God’s voice in Scripture, in the tradition of the Church and in our God-given capacities to think and feel, to reflect and to learn.

In her article, Charlotte Allen paints a picture of the Episcopal Church in particular and the American religious landscape in general that is simplistic and inaccurate. In her view churches can be neatly divided into denominations which are declining because of their liberalism and denominations which are growing because they are conservative. Reality, as usual, is a bit more complex. The Episcopal Church was never simply “the Republican Party at prayer.” It always has been and still is home to people who are both theologically and politically conservative, moderate and liberal. It is the church of Gerald Ford and George H.W. Bush, but also of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, a life long active Episcopalian whose social conscience was formed by the Episcopal schools of his youth. Even the Southern Baptists are more diverse than their commonly assigned caricature. The last three Baptist Presidents were named Truman, Carter and Clinton.

Declining Church membership and attendance is a broader phenomenon as well. The Southern Baptist Convention now publicly worries that its plateaued membership numbers and declining baptism rates augur future decline. Some recent studies reveal that attendance has started to decline in evangelical congregations and conservative mega churches as well. It is true that the overall membership of the Episcopal Church has declined since the 1960’s. But it also true that a majority of its dioceses experienced increases in their active members (communicants) between 1993 and 2003. For example here in California the “liberal” diocese of Los Angeles and the “conservative” diocese of San Joaquin grew at nearly equal rates. (13.9% with 1,018 new communicants for San Joaquin and 12% with 5,869 new communicants for Los Angeles.)

Christianity in North America is moving through a great historic transition which may have first expressed itself among mainline denominations, but is not stopping there. We have moved into an era where, regardless of nominal identifications, only a minority of Americans are active, church-going Christians of any stripe. The rivers of societal sanctions and cultural norms no longer flow through church doors depositing people in the pews. Today the majority of Americans no longer fear either social ostracism or eternal damnation when they choose not to go church. The palpable tone of hostile resentment in so many public voices of American Christianity today arises out of grief at the passing of that socially conventional church. But we are convinced that its passing is all to the good. Too often the motivation of religious fear bore the bitter fruit of anxious lives and judgmental communities, hardly the joyous fruits of the Spirit which the poetry of St. Paul sings praises to (Galatians 5:22-23). Far better for churches of any size to be filled with people who have consciously chosen to sing praises faithfully and gratefully towards the loving God they find there.

And while we are at it, let’s sing a few praises for Katherine Jefferts Schori, newly elected as the first woman Presiding Bishop in the Episcopal Church. Her ministry continues to embody what Christian churches in the 21st century should be about. Her vision for the Church calls us beyond the current disputes to Christ’s call to comfort the mourning, feed the hungry, and preach good news to the poor.
Every week in tens of thousands of churches, including Episcopal congregations, people are quietly living into that vision by caring for their neighbors. A recent study from the University of Chicago revealed that presently 50% of Americans report they have fewer than three people in their lives they can confide in. Twenty-five percent report they have no one to confide in at all. In such unprecedented social isolation, loneliness may be the hunger and poverty that is shared most often by people at all levels of our society. Although we make no claims that it is the only place where a life different from this can be found, we know the local Episcopal congregation offers a blessed alternative. There you will find a faith community where people know and care for each other; respect differences, and share the presence of God, whose love passes all our understanding.

J. Jon Bruno is the Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles. Bryan Jones is Rector of St. Thomas of Canterbury Episcopal Church in Long Beach.

Office of Communications & Public Affairs
Diocese of Los Angeles
840 Echo Park Avenue
Los Angeles, California 90026
Website: http://www.ladiocese.org

When Your Smiling, When Your Smiling....

Why is Desmond Tutu so happy? Visit the Trinity Wall Street website for the answer and hear the archbishop's views on the particular gift of the Anglican Communion. Go to http://www.trinitywallstreet.org/resources/article.php?id=745

A Little Help on the Parables

The Parables of Jesus
by Don Schwager(revised and updated July, 2001)

"He began to teach them many things in parables." (Mark 4:2)

Communicating with images and stories
Like the rabbis of his time, Jesus used simple word-pictures, called parables, to help people understand who God is and what his kingdom or reign is like. Jesus used images and characters taken from everyday life to create a miniature play or drama to illustrate his message. This was Jesus most common way of teaching. His stories appealed to the young and old, poor and rich, and to the learned and unlearned as well. Over a third of the Gospels by Matthew, Mark, and Luke contain parables told by Jesus. Jesus loved to use illustrations to reach the heart of his listeners through their imagination. These word-pictures challenged the mind to discover anew what God is like and moved the heart to make a response to God's love and truth. Like a skillful artist, Jesus painted evocative pictures with short and simple words. A good picture can speak more loudly and clearly than many words. Jesus used the ordinary everyday to point to another order of reality -- hidden, yet visible to those who had "eyes to see" and "ears to hear". Jesus communicated with pictures and stories, vivid illustrations which captured the imaginations of his audience more powerfully than an abstract presentation could. His parables are like buried treasure waiting to be discovered (Matt. 13:44).

How can ordinary everyday images and stories, such as hidden treasure, a tiny mustard seed, a determined woman looking for her lost coin, a barren fig tree, the pearl of great price, the uninvited wedding guests, portray timeless and extraordinary truths? Jesus taught by use of comparisons. To what shall we compare the kingdom of God, or what parable can we use for it? It is like a mustard seed... (Mark 4:30-31). God's kingdom or reign is like what happens in Jesus' stories. The comparisons have to do with a whole process, and not simply with an object or person alone. While his parables are rooted in a specific time and place, they nonetheless speak of timeless realities to people of every time and place. They underline the fact that God works in every age and he meets us in the ordinary everyday situations of life.

What is a parable?
A parable is a word-picture which uses an image or story to illustrate a truth or lesson. It creates a mini-drama in picture language that describes the reality being illustrated. It shows a likeness between the image of an illustration and the object being portrayed. It defines the unknown by using the known. It helps the listener to discover the deeper meaning and underlying truth of the reality being portrayed. It can be a figure of speech or comparison, such as "the kingdom of God ..is like a mustard seed ..or like yeast" (Luke 13:19, 21). More commonly it is a short story told to bring out a lesson or moral. Jesus used simple stories or images to convey important truths about God and his kingdom, and lessons pertaining to the way of life and happiness which God has for us. They commonly feature examples or illustrations from daily life in ancient Palestine, such as mustard seeds and fig trees, wineskins and oil lamps, money and treasure, stewards, workers, judges, and homemakers, wedding parties and children's games. Jesus' audience would be very familiar with these illustrations of everyday life. Today we have to do some "homework" to understand the social customs described.

Jesus' parables have a double meaning. First, there is the literal meaning, apparent to anyone who has experience with the subject matter. But beyond the literal meaning lies a deeper meaning -- a beneath-the-surface lesson about God's truth and his kingdom. For example, the parable of the leaven (see Matthew 13:33) describes the simple transformation of dough into bread by the inclusion of the yeast. In like manner, we are transformed by God's kingdom when we allow his word and Spirit to take root in our hearts. And in turn we are called to be leaven that transforms the society in which we live and work.

Jerome, an early church father and biblical scholar remarked: "The marrow of a parable is different from the promise of its surface, and like as gold is sought for in the earth, the kernel in a nut and the hidden fruit in the prickly covering of chestnuts, so in parables we must search more deeply after the divine meaning."

Jesus' parables often involve an element of surprise or an unexpected twist. We are taken off guard by the progression of the story. The parable moves from the very familiar and understandable aspects of experience to a sudden turn of events or a remarkable comparison which challenges the hearer and invites further reflection. For example, why should a shepherd go through a lot of bother and even risk his life to find one lost sheep when ninety-nine are in his safe keeping? The shepherd's concern for one lost sheep and his willingness to risk his own life for it tells us a lot about God's concern for his children.

How to read the parables
Jesus told his disciples that not everyone would understand his parables. To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of God; but for others they are in parables, so that seeing they may not see, and hearing they may not hear (Luke 8:10). Did Jesus mean to say that he was deliberately confusing his listeners? Very likely not. Jesus was speaking from experience. He was aware that some who heard his parables refused to understand them. It was not that they could not intellectually understand them, but rather, their hearts were closed to what Jesus was saying. They had already made up their minds to not believe. God can only reveal the secrets of his kingdom to the humble and trusting person who acknowledges the need for God and for his truth. The parables of Jesus will enlighten us if we approach them with an open mind and heart, ready to let them challenge us. If we approach them with the conviction that we already know the answer, then we, too, may look but not see, listen but not hear or understand.

When reading the parables it is important to not get bogged down in the details of the story. The main point is what counts. Very often the details are clear enough, but some are obscure (for example, why would a rich man allow his dishonest steward to take care of his inventory; see Luke 16:1-8). A storyteller doesn't have to make every detail fit perfectly. Each parable will typically present a single point. Look for the main point and don't get bogged down in the details. In addition, Jesus often throws in a surprise or unexpected twist. These challenge the hearer and invite us to reflect. Jesus meant for his parables to provoke a response. If we listen with faith and humility then each will understand as he or she is able to receive what Jesus wishes to speak to each of our hearts.

Recommended reading for further study:
The Parables: Jewish Tradition and Christian Interpretation, by Brad H. Young, (c) 1998,
Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., Peabody, Massachusetts. The Gospel Parables, by Edward A. Armstrong, (c) 1967, Hodder and Stoughton, Ltd., London, Great Britain

Violence and Religious Zeal

Dear Friends: I discovered this news story this morning and felt that it offered us an opportunity to learn more about the nature of "sarx" and the ways we humans devise to "set things right" through threat, violence, and the words we use to defame one another. Is blasphemy in the defacement of the church; the language used; the intentions of those who did the deed; and/or the targeting of Gays and people of color?

Read the story below in relationship to what we have been studying and see if you find any connections or insights that you would like to offer.

Homophobic graffiti deface St. Mark's

By SAM SKOLNIK
P-I REPORTER

A vandal armed with a big black marker recently defaced St. Mark's Episcopal Cathedral with homophobic and racist messages, causing concern among church leaders and police.

The Very Rev. Robert Taylor, the openly gay dean of the Capitol Hill cathedral, said the graffiti attack was the second in two months. The first incident occurred in mid-May, he said, after the visit of South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu.

Taylor and police said that the more recent hate-filled messages were discovered on the morning of June 13 on the cathedral's front pillars and on two separate church buildings.

"It was pretty harsh, racist and homophobic language," Taylor said. "Pretty violent."

Taylor said he didn't know whether he had been specifically targeted by the graffiti artist, though he acknowledged it was a possibility. "I sincerely hope not," he said.

Taylor, 48, is from South Africa and is a protege of Tutu. He arrived at St. Mark's in 1999, and leads about 2,400 members.

Taylor, who has a longtime romantic partner, Jerry Smith, is one of the highest-ranking openly gay deans in the national Episcopal Church. Last month he lost an election to become the new bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of California.

Most of the insults written on the church were targeted against gays, said Taylor; at least one was also aimed at racial minorities.

Seattle police spokesman Rich Pruitt said the messages -- written on the church buildings either the evening of June 12 or early the following morning -- were "directed at the church's stances, at the church, and maybe at (Taylor)."

"We treat this like a malicious harassment," Pruitt said.

Pruitt said no suspects had been identified, but neighborhood patrols are keeping an extra eye out.

The words have been cleaned up, Taylor said. But the personal damage will last longer.

"This was envisioned as a 'Victory Cathedral' " after World War I, he said, "a place of reconciliation. The violent nature of the graffiti goes against everything we're about.

"It's a stark reminder of the work that still needs to be done."
More headlines and info from Capitol Hill.

P-I reporter Sam Skolnik can be reached at 206-448-8334 or samskolnik@seattlepi.com.

Blasphemy

What do you think Jesus meant by blasphemy in the following passage?

Mark 3:22-29

And the scribes who came down from Jerusalem said, "He has Beelzebul, and by the ruler of the demons he casts out demons." 23 And he called them to him, and spoke to them in parables, "How can Satan cast out Satan? 24 If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. 25 And if a house is divided against itself, that house will not be able to stand. 26 And if Satan has risen up against himself and is divided, he cannot stand, but his end has come. 27 But no one can enter a strong man's house and plunder his property without first tying up the strong man; then indeed the house can be plundered. 28 "Truly I tell you, people will be forgiven for their sins and whatever blasphemies they utter; 29 but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit can never have forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin"