GE2017 - Some initial thoughts on how to approach the election

First up...

Should ministers of religion get involved in politics?

Some people think that ministers shouldn't be political. I think that's entirely wrong - Jesus responded to the politics of his age and we are called to follow him. I think what we shouldn't do is be partisan; what we shouldn't do is be party to the personal attacks and character assassinations; what we shouldn't do is shackle ourselves to one party for life, regardless of the flaws of our chosen party.

However, I think we should get involved with the conversation, talk about the issues and the policies, the morality and the ethics. We should challenge and debate and dig under the surface of the popular reactions. We should perhaps offer some wisdom that goes beyond national boundaries and things that look good to me and mine in the here and now, towards those things that are for the good of humanity, the good of all creation in the long run. We should challenge people to look under the surface of the sound bites and the quick slogans to the complex interconnectedness of people, ideas and resources around the globe. When a party's policies or tactics offend us we should say so - and when a party offers a better choice we should feel free to say so too, even though that party will no doubt have other points with which we disagree. That's me, but what about you? ...

Advice for Voters

There's likely to be a lot of toing and froing about who the contenders are for this election and what Theresa May's motives were for calling it now. For now I want to concentrate on the notion that we put too much blame on the quality of our politicians - and not enough on the quality of our own voting or our engagement in the process before the day. The electorate are both the strength and the weakness of democratic systems. I'm not going to say who I think you should vote for at this point. Partly because political landscape of the election is, as of yet, far from fully established, but more importantly because it needs to be your choice. That is the intended nature of democracy. What I would like to do is suggest some ways in which I would like to see people approaching this election.

1. Don't just leap to the defence of the people you like - or attack those you don't. Hear what they are really saying and respond to real policies.

2. Don't just vote on the basis of how it affects you, remember that if a policy hurts someone else, even if you don't have an innate moral sense of responsibility to all, ultimately one day that someone else might be you - and even if it's never you, the world that you live in will be populated by people you decided were less important than you when you voted. And they may not thank you for that.

3. Question everything, get the other side of each report and hear the voices of those whom the policies effect. Question the 'facts' as well as the motives - and get independent confirmation of each story.

4. Understand that economies are never static. It's right when somebody says 'we will invest in...' to ask where the money will come from - but whenever somebody says 'we will save money by...' - ask yourself what the flipside is. What is the long term effect of not investing in this or that; what is the cost of not spending? (Think education, health, small businesses, infrastructure etc.)

5. Avoid the politics of character assassinations, but do look for leaders who have personal qualities that go beyond the policies. Ultimately policies will need to be adjusted to fit the reality of the situation. Those with a strength of character, with compassion and an understanding of the real needs of real people will adjust those policies in a direction that serves all the people - not just the ones that hold the power.

6. Understand that while we might hope for a level playing field for the opportunities of all people - and whilst for many in Britain, prospects are more equal than they might be in other parts of the world, no such level playing field exists yet. Don't judge the decisions of people whose lives you have not lived and whose experiences you haven't experienced. And be deeply suspicious of any politician or policy that does try to make such judgements. Any policy that considers someone as other, not our problem, or unworthy because of poor life choices is stepping beyond the bounds of what good politics are meant to be. Government should be for the benefit of all, not just those that the current government deems worthy. I think this understanding should be true for all people, it certainly ought to be true for any of us who would claim to be Christian.

Voices in the Crowd: Part II

A couple of years ago I posted a bit of raw biblical analysis and a hymn, relating to Palm Sunday. The following is the sermon that went with those two items...

I think that we often miss the point with Palm Sunday, we think of it as a story for the children, we think of it as a simple story, a story of celebration, a story with humility, a happy story before the tough times leading up to the crucifixion. It is a moment of affirmation before the trouble starts, but it is perhaps not quite the story we think it is.

There is politics and complexity in the mix of this story.

There are four versions of this story in the four Gospels, but more than 4 voices being heard within those stories. The four gospel versions aren't simply four different people's accounts of the events. There are places where the versions cross over, places where they are identical and places where they are completely different. And in these variations perhaps we may be hearing echoes of the voices from the crowd who were there on that day.

These days we get used to the idea that even if you weren't at a particular event you will hear about it. It will be on the television, in the news paper, it will be posted on the internet, and someone will have taken photographs. If it was a big enough event, then there will be a record of the event somewhere, there will have been live coverage so you can probably buy the DVD. But back in the days of Jesus the only people who experienced that event, were the ones who were there. So the versions of the story that we have are very interesting. And they are interesting as much for how they differ as how they are similar.

 

Luke and John start their versions with a little introduction, but unlike all the others, John starts with the crowd and not with the disciples. John is interested in the public viewpoint.

Matthew, Mark and Luke spend a fair amount of time talking about Jesus sending the disciples off to find the donkey, they seem particularly interested in the fact that Jesus knew where to find the donkey, this is one of several slides that would have covered that aspect of the story had I included them all.

John doesn't talk about how the disciples are involved in this elaborate plot of finding the donkey, he is more interested in the quote from Zechariah 9:9, which is also quoted slightly differently by Matthew, who for some reason that I don't know about is set on there being both a donkey and a colt, but Matthew always wants to root his account in Jewish history and the inclusion of the prophetic words make sense in that light. I suspect that John was less interested in the idea that Jesus knew where the donkey was, and more interested in the thought that he would have known that quote before he chose to enter the city in this way, and the crowd would have known that too - and the temple priests would definitely have known that quote and the implications of these actions. This may have been a humble entry to the city, but it wasn't a naïve one. It was a calculated and dangerous move by Jesus, the eventual outcome was inevitable.


As for the bit about the palms, the reason why we call this Palm Sunday, the strange thing is that with four accounts we only have one mention of the palm branches. Matthew mark and Luke give us the spreading of cloaks on the road, Matthew and Mark also give us the branches, but only John mentions palm trees. None of that is particularly significant in itself, but this section in particular shows us the diversity of voices that seem to have contributed to this story and what that tells us about what draws those voices together.
 

It is Luke alone concentrates on the disciples praising God for the miracles, which is interesting because it is Luke who later picks up the political thread and runs with it.

 

And so we then turn to psalm 118 that we heard earlier. Matthew, Mark and John quote the Hosanna from verse 25, which translates as 'save us' or 'save please' and it is the only place in the Old Testament that the word is spoken. It is a cry for help but it is followed by the words blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord, and so over the years between the writing of the psalm and its being quoted in the accounts of Jesus' entry into Jerusalem, the meaning has shifted from 'save please' to something more like - 'salvation has come'.

Matthew of course wants to put Jesus into the context of the Old Testament narrative, so we have the hosanna to the son of David, whereas Luke interestingly offers no hosannas at all, perhaps because its meaning would have been obscure to his non Jewish readers.

 

They all follow with the next line of psalm 118 Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord. John's opening line about the crowd suggests that they were at least partly aware of the political impact that this arrival might have. When we realise that the crowd is quoting Psalm 118 we cannot avoid the probability that all four writers are believe the crowd was all too aware of the political overtones to this event, and Luke further emphasises that here by putting 'the King' in the place of the 'he' from the psalm.

Mark keeps the politics slightly more ambiguous by talking about the Kingdom of our father, David, whereas John sticks to the 'he', but then hits that nail with a sledgehammer and follows up with 'blessed is the king of Israel'.


Matthew and Mark give us more hosannas, this time 'hosannas in the highest heaven', but Luke replaces the hosanna with peace and glory, emphasising again his mission to gentiles who would have been unfamiliar with much of the meaning of the psalm.

 

 

Interestingly - each gospel arrives at a different conclusion.

Matthew is interested in the effect this event has had on the crowd, and the idea that they want to know who he is.

Mark - is not interested in reflection, he's onto the next thing. As if to say, you can reflect in your own time - I've got a story to tell.

Luke draws our attention to the inevitable friction that is now building up between the religious leaders and the crowd - at this moment, it looks as if a political revolution might be in the air. But John has moved his attention from the crowd, to the disciples and the fact that they didn't understand what was going on until after the resurrection.

John highlights the fact that the disciples didn't get what was happening, even though the crowd seems to get it, and the Pharisees, from a very different angle, also seem to get it. Matthew Mark and Luke concentrate on the inside story of the disciples and they get caught up in the tale of the finding of the donkey. Luke hones in on the political unrest but it's only John who begins with the crowd and it's only John who realises how much the disciples have missed the point.

This story is full of complexity, politics and it paints a picture of a potentially really dangerous situation. And what we see in this moment is Jesus laying his cards on the table. He is saying I am not here to be subordinate to the system, I'm not ignoring the system nor am I throwing it out, I am taking heed of the scripture, the tradition and the power structures, but I'm also declaring myself as leader, as bringer of salvation - humble, yes, but in charge.

Yet the thing he does next is to allow himself to be arrested. He doesn't take on that leadership, not in the way that our earthly political structures would expect him to do. There is no revolution, there is no political uprising - what comes next is something for us to reflect upon in holy week, but for now I want us to reflect on the way that the disciples eyes were fixed inwards on the activities within their group. They lacked the understanding of the politics, the way that the scriptures interacted with the political powder keg of 1st Century Jerusalem. They didn't get the way that the tensions between the Roman Empire, the Jewish religious leaders and the crowds in Jerusalem were likely to explode at any moment. They didn't see that the world was changing around them and the at Jesus was giving them salvation not just for eternity but also for now, not just salvation for the next world but also a plan of how God's people ought to move through the complex changes that were happening around them.

I wonder how much that might be our problem today, are we so focussed in on our churches and the way we do things, that we are unable to see what God is teaching us through what is happening out there in the world. Are we concentrating on how we get the donkey and missing why the donkey was there in the first place. Do we come and celebrate our God but fail to see what our God is doing? Do we see the miraculous wonders that God has done for us, but miss how those things fit into the bigger more volatile and complex picture of the world around us?

This is God's world, and we are God's people. We should perhaps from time to time, just like John did, look first to the crowd outside in the streets, to listen to the voices in the crowd, to find out what it is that God is doing and plans to do with us.