December 4, 2016

Susan Adams

Second Sunday of Advent     Isaiah 11:1-10     Matthew 3:1-12

Video available on YouTube, Facebook

So how are you feeling about it this year? Christmas I am talking about! Ready? Not ready?

Fed up with the hype and the shopping and the loaded expectations and the planning?

There are only 21 more days to the big day that it seems so much of the year hangs on whether you are a Christian or not.

It is a bit like the little boy says at the end of the Warehouse as he is climbing into bed "It feels like I've been waiting all year!"

I am always ambivalent about this time of the year.

My ambivalence seems to swirl around conflicting attitudes:

Did Christmas really belong to the Church and has it go away on us?

Does Christmas really belong in the list of secular holidays and are we trying to take it over?

Should I approach a minimalist approach to the festivities ... ?

Should I go all out and really make a celebration for family and friends: special food and decorations ... ?

Should the festivities and celebration be focussed on the 'Christ child' story?

Should they be focussed on celebrating the year past, the family and the summer holiday?

Should they be focussed on the church's liturgies and music and pageants, and out-reach dinners?

It seems many people I wonder the same things at some time or other. Some have resolved them one way and some another, and some are still experimenting. There seems to be no one way to manage Christmas.

It is a time of year that brings with it many complex feelings and emotions.

Whether we are Christian or not, Christmas figures – largely – in our annual calendar. Why is that? What is it about the Christmas season that we can't ignore? (Apart from the incessant advertising!)

Today is the second Sunday of Advent, there are two more before Christmas Eve and Christmas Day and we are right in the middle of the time of preparation – in our households and liturgically.

Last year I also preached on this second Sunday and I asked the question "Preparing for what?".

That is still a question in my mind and after church this morning John and I will be opening an exploration around Christmas. The first of two sessions. We will try to look at the origins and traditions that enmesh Christmas and to prise open space for our contemporary responses. This sermon is by way of an introduction to all that. A bit of a lecture I'm afraid!

It is very difficult for us to scrape away the accretions that have attached themselves to this season in the liturgical calendar. We tend to put the 'Christ Child' as we say, centre stage, as if that is who and what the season is all about – the birth of baby Jesus, the family, the gifts. There are centuries of magnificent art and, I dare say, thousands of pieces of music and songs about this nativity – but the question remains, is this season about a baby?

Historians have shown us that there was not much interest in the nativity aspect of the season prior to late in the 3rd century CE at the earliest.( It was certainly not celebrated prior to this.) The early church, as it emerged, was concerned with shaping identity, telling a story about its origins and positioning itself as different from the surrounding religious framework that celebrated Saturnalia and the return of the sun in this mid-winter season, or the birth of the emperor, son of the god Apollo. The focus on the baby Jesus was not of concern until well into the 4th Century.

The Council of Nicea in 325 did not recognise 'Christmas'. The term had not been invented. There was some recognition however that it would be good to celebrate Jesus birthday but the date had not been settled. The first documented evidence of the Western church celebrating 'Christmas' was not until 354 CE. The Eastern Church, some time later, also agreed the church needed to celebrate Jesus' birthday – but it insisted that 6 January was the correct date to do this. That is still the case in Coptic orthodox Christianity today.

When Matthew and Luke were writing their gospels about 50 or 60 years after Jesus death, and Luke perhaps even as late as 70-80 years after his death, the 'baby' and any suggestion of 'Christmas' as we know it, was not the issue. The emphasis was all about establishing authenticity for the movement, and an identity for Jesus that could be recognised as significant; about shaping a story and images that could capture imagination and raise up a following; it was about separating this cult (for that is what it was at this time) from Roman ideas and locating it in a distinctive position in relation to the Empire of Rome and the promises, behaviours and 'divinity' of the emperor. Matthew and Luke were offering an alternative to the empire and its power; they were continuing the work of the prophets, of John the Baptist and of Jesus; they were mobilising opposition to the oppressive regime. Remember, the Temple in Jerusalem had been sacked by the time Luke sets down his gospel and the Jewish people were being brutalised and dispersed.

Matthew and Luke set about telling their stories about Jesus nativity very differently, they differ on many details and emphases, but today we can say while these stories are not historical or factual, they are filled with truths and they certainly point us toward the power of their gospel message.

Matthew's emphasis is on linking Jesus with the stories of the First Testament in order to establish his credentials and appeal to the Jewish people who were now gathering around the Jesus story with its theology – so different from the dominant Roman imperial theology. Matthew uses the First Testament device of dreams to announce key moments and issues into the story; and he was free in his reinterpreting and reassigning of the names and titles and images identified at the time with the Emperor. Titles such as son of righteousness, light of the world, saviour of the world, king and lord. And Matthew has a focus on the men in the story and on how power is used. His telling of Jesus nativity is dark and foreboding figuring death and displacement.

Luke on the other hand puts the women in the story centre stage along with others who are powerless – the shepherds. The energy and activity of the holy spirit is core for him. His a joyful telling full of light and hope for all people, Jews and gentiles alike.

Biblical scholars suggest that, for those of us reading these origin stories today, it is helpful to see these two nativity stories as overtures to their respective gospels – summaries of what will be developed. We will talk more about all of this in the sessions after church today and next week.

But, the question remains why, in the face of all we know now days of history and science does this season with its story of a baby figure so strongly in both our secular and liturgical calendar?

The best way I have of approaching that question is to understand that the stories carry both a personal and a political message. Both dimensions were important at the time of their initial telling, and both have remained powerful through the centuries since whether we are aware of these dimensions or not. The stories touch us in the place of our deepest human longing – for love, acceptance, goodwill, justice and kindness. And they challenge us in our imagination and in our desire to create a better world where everyone has enough, lions and lambs lie together, where there is equity and justice. The images of babies, and mangers, light and the gifts, trees and feasts – indeed all the traditions that have accumulated around Christmas including the excesses and disruptions are all symbols of the deep political truths and dreams of a transformed world that the initial story tellers (Matthew and Luke) were pointing us toward.

So welcome to the complexities of Christmas. I pray, that like all good sacraments, whether we are aware of it or not, we will be expressing once again our dream of heaven come on earth, and our desire to overturn all that diminishes and constrains the fullness of life.