A Faith Story

In the chaos following the events of Easter morning
            we find the continuation of a story from earlier in Matthew’s gospel.
We pick up on a story from the end of chapter 27.
            The Pharisees requested that guards be placed at the entrance of the tomb,
                        for fear that someone might steal away Christ’s body
                        and claim that he had been resurrected.

So the Pharisees were given soldiers to guard the tomb,
            and these are the men who were scared and appeared as though dead
                        when the angel rolled the stone away.

Now these guards return to the Pharisees reporting everything that had happened.
            The Pharisees create a story based upon their initial fears
                      that the disciples of Jesus came in the night and stole the body of Christ.
            This plays into the plot they had from the beginning.

The interesting thing about this story concocted by the Pharisees,
            is that Scripture gives us no proof that their version of the story is incorrect.
                        Scripture gives us no proof that their story is a false one.

One who reads all of Scripture would certainly say that the story is untrue,
            based on the story of Jesus,
            and the account by the disciples.
But not one of the gospel accounts describes the entire event.
            None of the gospels describes the actual resurrection
                        the exact moment when Christ was raised from the dead.
            They tell of the earthquake, the stone rolled aside,
                        the fear and joy of those who were there,
            They tell the story of the empty tomb.
The gospels tell about the results of the resurrection.

And this leaves the story open to attack.
Because that moment is ambiguous,
            Because there are unanswered questions,
                        the story is open to attack by those who are threatened by it.
                        the Christian story is vulnerable to contradicting stories,
                                    like the one paid for by the Pharisees.

The Pharisees take advantage of the situation
            to create their own interpretation of the empty tomb,
                        one that does not reconfigure the world.
One that makes sense in the system that already exists.

And using just the evidence – the empty tomb – there is no way to say
            definitively and based on the facts...  
You are wrong.

In 1543, Prussian astronomer and Renaissance man Copernicus died,
            and his works were finally made public.
Copernicus argued that the Earth and other planets go around the sun
            This was in contradiction to the commonly held understanding
            that the Sun and other planets revolved around the Earth.

After his findings were published,
            it took another century of research
                        from people like Kepler, Galileo, and Newton,
            before Copernicus’ ideas became widely accepted.

Throughout this time frame,
       some scientists – many of whom were Christian – argued against this new theory.
            They tried to refute Copernicus’ claims and ideas.
They even incorporated some of the observable facts that he documented
            into the heliocentric, or earth-centered, view that they already held.
            Faced with evidence they could not explain,
                        they struggled to maintain the view that they had about the world
            by sticking to their understanding of how the world worked.
                        By aligning these new observations with the system they understood.

Those who held beliefs about an Earth-centered universe
            felt they had much to lose with these changes.
                        The transition of everything that they understood
                        to that which they did not understand was overwhelming.

This was a similar fear faced by the Pharisees
            who manufactured their own empty-tomb story.
They took the evidence placed before them – the story of the empty tomb,
            and fit it into the world-view which they understood.
            they created an explanation for something unknown
                        that conformed with something known.

This is something that we are prone to do.
            It is something we do on a fairly regular basis.
            We take the things that we observe in the world
and the things that we understand about the world
            and place them in the same framework.

There’s good reason for us to do this.
            With the way the world works
                        and the way we work,
            it makes sense that we would try to conform
                        our observations to our understandings.
            And it’s not necessarily a bad thing.
But it may not always be the way things work,
            especially not when we look at the resurrection story
            or when we bring a troubling word into the conversation: faith.

I was talking to someone recently about a TV show
            called Biblical Mysteries Explained.
            The premise of the show is that scientists look at mysteries from the Bible
            and they attempt to describe the science behind how these things might have happened, like the great flood, or the parting of the Red Sea.
I think the idea of the show is fascinating
            I love that people are so drawn to these stories
                        that they are willing to invest time and energy in exploring them,
                        I love the idea that God created us with such curious minds.
                        I love the idea of a world where miracles could be observed logically.

Part of the reason I think this appeals to me so much
            is that I am drawn to the idea of a world in which science and religion
                        do not conflict with each other
                        but in which they complement, inform, and support one another.
For the most part, I believe this is the kind of world in which we live.
I believe this is the world that God created
            and the world in which people like Copernicus explored and discovered.

I think that Christians are perfectly able to be scientists,
            and vice versa.

The story of Christ's resurrection affords us
            the perfect opportunity to explore this convergence.
Most modern scientists might observe that people do not rise
            out of their graves (except in zombie movies).
                        Scientists would say that it is something that is not
                                    scientifically possible.

Christians reading and speaking about the resurrection of Jesus would not disagree.
            Christians don't believe that people resurrect in body all the time.
            We do not say that is a scientifically observable fact
                        something that happened to people regularly,
                        and that Jesus happened to be one of them.
Christians recognize that the resurrection of Jesus was something that was entirely unique.
            And this is where the story of Christ's resurrection becomes a faith story.

In the eleventh chapter of the letter to the Hebrews
       the first verse says
       "Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen."

When we take this meaning of faith, that which is unobservable,
         we realize that the story we read of Christ's resurrection is definitely a faith story.
Even as the gospels tells it.
            The supernatural part, the part where Jesus is raised, is not described.
            It is not something that is seen,
                        it is not something that is observed.
            It exists in the realm of faith.

So when the Pharisees were faced with this story,
            and it was faith in Christ which was required for belief,
            There response was to incorporate the story
                        into their existing system of understanding.
                   To explain this phenomenon using the rules about the world that they had.

But when God conquered death,
            and raised Jesus from the dead,
            it was a new thing that was happening.
Something that defied all of the rules that people thought they understood.
            Something that made people reorient their understanding of God.

For some people, this was not something they could accept.
            they refused to accept that something could happen,
                        that didn't fit into their understanding of the world
            that didn't maintain their status quo.
But for the early Christians,
            Christ's resurrection from the dead didn't have to fit into their understanding
                        of the world
            It meant a new understanding of a changed world.

When we look at the world around us,
            when we think of the things that make sense,
            the things that are observable
We realize that faith is not something that is observable.
            The faith story is not one that fits into a system that makes sense,
                        that is why it's a faith story.

This doesn't mean that the world shouldn't make sense.
            This doesn't mean that science and religion are at odds,
It means that God,
            who created all things,
                        is able to do anything.

Yes the story is ambiguous.
            Yes there are unanswered questions.
            Yes the story is open to doubt by empirical observation.
This is because the one who performed the most important action in the story,
            the one who raised Christ from the dead
                        is God.
And it is pointless to try to force God into our understanding of how the world works

If we trust only in the ways of the world,
            we see around us a world in chaos,
                        world which seems to spin out of control.
But when we place our trust in faith,
            when we place our trust in a Lord that we can't observe,
                        but who brings us out of our own tombs of despair,
                        who raises us from the ways of death
                                    into the hope of life,
            we live in faith, we trust in faith.

Placing our faith in the story of Christ's resurrection
            means being assured of that for which we hope,
                        and believing in that which cannot be seen.

This is the essence of the faith story.
            This is the hope to which God calls us. Amen.

Who sinned?

As Jesus walked along, he saw a man blind from birth.  His disciples asked him, 

"Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” 

Jesus answered, “Neither this man nor his parents sinned; he was born blind so that God’s works might be revealed in him.  We must work the works of him who sent me while it is day; night is coming when no one can work.  As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.”

When he had said this, he spat on the ground and made mud with the saliva
and spread the mud on the man’s eyes, saying to him, “Go, wash in the pool of Siloam” (which means Sent).

Then he went and washed and came back able to see.  The neighbors and those who had seen him before as a beggar began to ask, “Is this not the man who used to sit and beg?” 

Some were saying, “It is he.” 

Others were saying, “No, but it is someone like him.”
He kept saying, “I am the man.” 

But they kept asking him, “Then how were your eyes opened?” 

He answered, “The man called Jesus made mud, spread it on my eyes, and said to me, ‘Go to Siloam and wash.’  Then I went and washed and received my sight.” 

The story you have just heard is a story about a miracle, or - as John's Gospel calls it - a sign.  The first eleven verses of this story do two things.  First they tell the reader about one of the identities of Jesus.  He is God's healer.  He is able to heal in a way no one has before: he is able to heal an affliction present from birth.  The implication is that Jesus is able to do that which only God is capable of doing.  This is the kind of relationship Jesus has with God.

The second thing these first 11 verses do is begin a theological conversation.  The subject of this conversation is sin, one of the things we focus on during Lent.

These verses, this story deserve the opportunity to speak for themselves.  So I am going to read you most of the rest of the story, but I am going to read this story as it can be found in the Message, an interpretation of scripture by Eugene Peterson.
We continue the story where we left off, as the man born blind is about to be led to the Pharisees.

They marched the man to the Pharisees.  This day when Jesus made the mud and healed his blindness was the Sabbath.  The Pharisees grilled him again on how he had come to see.
He said, “He put a clay mud on my eyes, and I washed, and now I see.”

Some of the Pharisees said, 

“Obviously, this man can’t be from God. He doesn’t keep the Sabbath.”

Others countered, “How can a bad man do miraculous, God-revealing things like this?” There was a split in their ranks.

They came back at the blind man,
“You’re the expert. He opened your eyes. What do you say about him?”

He said, “He is a prophet.”

The Jews didn’t believe it, didn’t believe the man was blind to begin with.  So they called the parents of the man.
They asked them, “Is this your son, the one you say was born blind?  So how is it that he now sees?”

His parents said, “We know he is our son, and we know he was born blind.  But we don’t know how he came to see—haven’t a clue about who opened his eyes.  Why don’t you ask him? He’s a grown man and can speak for himself.”

They called the man back a second time—the man who had been blind—and told him, “Give credit to God. We know this Jesus is an impostor.”

He replied, “I know nothing about that one way or the other.  But I know one thing for sure: I was blind . . . I now see.”

They said, “What did he do to you? How did he open your eyes?”

“I’ve told you over and over and you haven’t listened.  Why do you want to hear it again?  Are you so eager to become his disciples?”

With that they jumped all over him.  “You might be a disciple of that man, but we’re disciples of Moses. We know for sure that God spoke to Moses, but we have no idea where this man even comes from.”

The man replied, “This is amazing!  You claim to know nothing about him, but the fact is, he opened my eyes!  It’s well known that God isn’t at the beck and call of sinners,
but listens carefully to anyone who lives in reverence and does his will.
That someone opened the eyes of a man born blind has never been heard of—ever.
If this man didn’t come from God, he wouldn’t be able to do anything.”

They said, “You’re nothing but dirt!  How dare you take that tone with us!”  Then they threw him out in the street.

On January 12, 2010 a massive 7.0 magnitude earthquake struck Haiti approximately 16 miles west of the capital city Port-au-Prince.  There were an estimated 3 million people affected by the earthquake, and the death toll ended up somewhere between 100,000 and 300,000 people.  Haitians struggled to remove themselves from the wreckage of their homes and to repair the wreckage of their lives.  They struggled to find water, food, and family.

Many people rushed to aid the devastated population.  Yet some people had questions about the meaning of this earthquake.  One Christian leader in particular had a unique observation about Haitians.  His observation was that these people were suffering the consequences of a pact their ancestors made with the devil.  He claimed that Haitians in the early 1800's made a deal with the devil to free them from their colonial masters.  This religious leader believed that Haitians were being punished for this sin.  He made a moral evaluation of their actions, and connected them through a cause-and-effect relationship to the earthquake.

There were outcries and condemnations of this theory from many directions but the questions could not be ignored: Did this happen because of sin?  What is sin?

To explore these questions we need only listen in to the debate as it happens in our story.  At the beginning of the story, the disciples present the common view of sin.  They ask Jesus, "Whose sin is responsible for this man's blindness?"

The Pharisees - the religious leaders - do essentially the same thing.  The first thing they say is, "Obviously this Jesus can't be from God he worked on the Sabbath and that is a sin."  Their default is to attach a specific action to this concept of sinner.
                         

Yet from the beginning of the story, Jesus redirects the conversation.  He says, "You are focusing on the wrong question here.  You are looking for someone to blame when you should be searching for an opportunity to find God at work.
                         

Our instinct in the world is to always look for the cause and effect.  Where the rain falls we look for the clouds.  After the car is wrecked we look for failed brakes or a distracted driver.  After an earthquake we look for the pact with the devil.  Where the gun is fired we look for a violent video game, or some mental incapacity.

           

You can't really blame us, this is how we experience the world.  It is our instinct to point to a cause for all effects. It is our desire to know and understand all things.

So it's not really a surprise that this carries over into our experience of evil.  We don't really understand evil.  So we seek to define and categorize it.  We end up placing sin and evil as cause and effect.

But sin and evil are not things that fit into a simple system of cause and effect.  Sin cannot be simply judged and identified through an evaluation of actions.  This is what the Pharisees and the disciples wanted.

If we take this story seriously, and listen to what the characters say, we see that sin is something that exists in the lack of relationship.  One does not uncover sin by evaluating actions on a scale of morality, but rather by exploring one's relationship with God.

Though we are not in a place to judge another person, we ask ourselves the questions anyway, "How do we detect sin?  How do we detect righteousness - or lack of sin?"

To answer this, Jesus points to those around us.  We know that the first commandment is to love the Lord your God, and the commandment that follows on its heels is to love your neighbor as yourself.  Our righteousness - or lack of sin - is rooted in our relationship with God, and our relationship with God is grounded through our relationships with others.

  

Our experience of evil in the world is too complicated.  We have too many examples of bad things happening to good people.  Evil defies logic too much to fit into any system of logic.  It is too complicated to put into a flow chart.
             

Christ calls us to set aside our cause and effect.  He calls us to stop using God's name to justify the cause for this earthquake, or that hurricane, or this death, or that shooting.  He calls us to use God's name to justify caring for all people: families, friends, strangers, enemies.

He calls us to set aside this belief that we know what it means to be sinful or righteous.  That we have a corner on the market for goodness, that we are the ones that can judge.  He calls us to start paying close attention to our relationship with God, and with God's children.  

This is the only connection that can be made with our actions, for it is when we pay close attention to our relationships that they are no longer casual.  It is when we place our deep faith in God, when we understand that call as the call to reorient ourselves toward the well being of others, that our actions are those of righteousness.  That our actions truly reflect our faith.  That our actions make an impact in the world for good.

This is how the blind are healed.

This is how God's light is spread. Amen.