Luke 12:49-56
Proper 15 (20) - Year C
“I came to bring fire to the earth. . . .” brings a direct line to the current number 1 best seller in hardback non-fiction — Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth by Reza Aslan.
Here are two paragraphs from page 120:
The Kingdom of God is a call to revolution, plain and simple. And what revolution, especially one fought against an empire whose armies had ravaged the land set aside by God for his chosen people, could be free of violence and bloodshed? If the Kingdom of God is not an ethereal fantasy, how else could it be established upon a land occupied by a massive imperial presence except through the use of force? The prophets, bandits, zealots, and messiahs of Jesus’s time all knew this, which is why they did not hesitate to employ violence in trying to establish God’s rule on earth. The question is, did Jesus feel the same? Did he agree with his fellow messiahs Hezekiah the bandit chief, Judas the Galilean, Menahem, Simon son of Giora, Simon son of Kochba, and the rest, that violence was necessary to bring about the rule of God on earth? Did he follow the zealot doctrine that the land had to be forcibly cleansed of all foreign elements just as God had demanded in the scriptures?
There may be no more important question than this for those trying to pry the historical Jesus away from the Christian Christ. The common depiction of Jesus as an inveterate peacemaker who “loved his enemies” and “turned the other cheek” has been built mostly on his portrayal as an apolitical preacher with no interest in or, for that matter, knowledge of the politically turbulent world in which he lived. That picture of Jesus has already been shown to be a complete fabrication. The Jesus of history had a far more complex attitude toward violence. There is no evidence that Jesus himself openly advocated violent actions. But he was certainly no pacifist. “Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth. I have not come to bring peace, but the sword” (Matthew 10:34 | Luke 12:51).
This passage certainly is a passionate, zealous one. How are you reading it today? How are you interpreting this passage and Jesus in light of it?
I recommend the book to you. There is not any new material here, but Aslan does put together a very readable and persuadable argument that is worth looking at in yet another day of zealotry, imperialism, and generalized terror in and by a security state.
http://kcmlection.blogspot.com/2013/08/luke-1249-56.html
In times that are settled or constrained by one heirarchy or another, Jesus comes with wild language about setting fire to the world and being a sword that divides, that causes choice to be unavoidable.
In times that are in turmoil Jesus comes with a calming word of peace, preemptive peace that binds all wounds and brings us to be one.
It is difficult to say both of these at the same time. In this political season in the US of A, and probably everywhere (for when and where is it not political season?) we are in need of the both in their appropriate settings.
Again we are at a significant point of choice. The divisions among us need to be clarified before they can be healed. This clarity will lead us deeper than the surface issues of the day that make the sound-bite news. We will get to the real crux of the matter that is neither the economy nor some set of values. Both of these are details upon the larger question of whether we are in this together or individually. The signs we rely on will let us know which is which.
In the midst of this choice we are also at an equally important point of respect, honor, and kindness for every "other" we encounter or can imagine encountering.
The word of division leads us to inappropriate atonement images of suffering and last chances. The word of peace leads us to ways of relating that are only on the verge of being noticed. Between these words we encounter the scripture and our own lives.
Let us interpret well where we are and whether we need to focus on the campaigning to make one choice over another or to focus on a choice not to go negative even if that means going to a cross instead of a swearing in ceremony.
http://www.kairoscomotion.org/lectionary/2004/august2004.html
While there are many different attempts at controlling the weather, as varied as the societies of people, none seem to be effective over the long haul. Periodic confluences of a particular weather with a desired weather keeps those attempts alive and well. Weather is something we all talk about, but, so far, we don't do much about it.
In like manner, divisions between people, whether between family and friends or a congregation or some other form of community, seems to come around whether desired or not. We have all manner of platitudes about how to keep divisions at bay, but none of them work over the long haul.
As with undesirable weather, with people we are left with issues of managing the realities of all too disputatious people. Regardless of what we think, plan or desire - this is our reality - differences. In ordinary times these differences aren't paid much attention. In edgy times they take on all the difference in the world.
To face up to this reality of needing to manage differences and it being easier to do that early than late, we need to be reminded in the good times of how we can interpret the minor bits and pieces of life to bring our attention to managing them at that level. When we fail the interpretation of easy times we soon enough arrive at trying to manage hurricane like chaos.
Our experience is that even the best attempts at early management seem to quite regularly fail. We were baptized into cross and chaos and death. Let's recognize it and be about the business of living in the midst of pain, confusion, and endings of dreams. Enough of weather control, enough of avoiding division, face the stresses of life and live anyway.
http://www.kairoscomotion.org/lectionary/2004/august2004.html
Being the literalist that he was [grin], Jesus knew there was no getting around flooding folks out again. A rainbow is a rainbow is a rainbow. The natural alternative for the rule bound is to flip things 180 degrees. No water! - its opposite is Fire! That's the ticket, Fire!
So the slaves sang, "God gave Noah the rainbow sign, No more water, the fire next time!"
Who among us hasn't envisioned ourselves as the spark to get a conflagration going that would refine all the dross of our lives (particularly particular other people). Rage, rage, against the dying of the light of justice. Of course there is going to be separation of people, we are all at different levels of maturity and peace.
This is not new news. This is our condition as long as our condition has been reported. The only surprise is the lack of progress we have made in recognizing our condition.
- - -
division is so embarrassing
it always means someone
is getting chosen last
division is so normal
it is the water in which we swim
unrecognizable
division is so tempting
we're going to settle this
once and for all
division following Zeno
means we will never
get to a better place
division is a giving up
on the paradoxes of life
and the processes of G*D
http://kcmlection.blogspot.com/2007_08_01_archive.html
Division and separation are creation-long experiences. Formless void and darkness are separated from light, a garrulous and day-long absent G*D is separated from said image of same and they from their garden chatting place, languages are separated one from another, unclean shellfish are separated from clean sheep, Samaritans are separated from Jews and Gentiles, and the list of separations can continue and continue to today's religious-right identity politics of separationing gay from straight.
Yes, Jesus continues, and even provokes, division and separation. His attempts at clarifying meaning seem to automatically provoke. With Jesus as forerunner of our faith, it is little surprise that we continue to provoke one another to the point of division after division and separation after separation - how many Christian sects are there - as many as the stars in the sky or sand in the ocean (a promise to Abram and Sarai fulfilled?).
Instead of presuming there is no way around some of our disputes (even though the best that might be done is to manage them, not to dispel them) there is here room for us to ask some clarifying questions. What are our divisions? Are you sure? Is there somewhere greater to which our current separating smallnesses might be led? If we are just disputing to dispute because what we are disputing about doesn't really amount to a hill of beans in a larger reality around us, the refining fire of this recognition will exacerbate our stress immensely.
Can we look at ourselves with the same clarity we apply to clouds? Who among us is a nimbostratus? a cumulus? a nacreous? What clarity will resolve long-standing divisions and which will finally bring a needed separation? These are questions for whole religious traditions, as well as a congregation/parish, and an individual.
I expect that dealing with an issue of clarity will also have its dark side as it expands a yearning to have simple resolutions to complex issues. Clarity can also energize precipitous action in the expectation of dealing with ongoing polarities, once and for all.
Said anew, "You hypocrites! You know how to interpret the appearance of earth and sky, but why do you not know how to clarify your present time and your present life?"
This issue of clarity is the issue, not the fire next time or instituting our own current personal or cultural bias.
http://kcmlection.blogspot.com/2010/08/luke-1249-56.html