February 24, 2019

Wilf Holt

Ordinary 7     Luke 6:27-38

Video available on YouTube, Facebook

I’d like to remind you of the last words of last week’s sermon.

“But that is next week’s preacher’s problem!” Thankyou Hellen.

In preparing this sermon I quickly came to realise (as did numerous commentators) that there were at least three sermons worth of material in today’s reading. Don’t panic you won’t be listening to me for some 24 minutes!

First things first. Love as in ‘love your enemies’.

There are at least 6 kinds of love encountered in our Bible.

In the First Testament there are 2 main Hebrew words that are translated into English as "love."

The first, 'ahab, (AAHUB )is used in a variety of contexts, very much like our English word: sexual attraction, affectionate feelings between spouses / lovers, parental love for children and children for parents, love of places and special food, friendship, and finally God's love for us and human's love for God.

Ahab is the "love" of the great commandment, Love the Lord with all your heart and all your soul and with all your strength and the “Love your neighbour as yourself” found in Leviticus.

The second, hesed, (HEESD) is more difficult to translate because embedded in its meaning is the unbreakable covenant bond that God initiates with Abraham and Sarah and their descendants:

Hesed has the feelings of love, kindness, mercy, and affection but is defined primarily by the unconditional steadfast, loyal, faithfulness, trustworthiness of God for that covenant bond.

In the New Testament there are 4 Greek words that are translated into English as "love."

Phileo, is now commonly associated with "brotherly love," but in the Bible it is also used almost interchangeably with agape.

Charitas, is often translated as "charity," and has the sense of a generous, freely given, gift or action; grace.

Eros, is associated with sexual desire, romance and Valentine's Day.

Agape, which is closely associated with the meanings of the first Testament hesed. (HEESD) That is, with God's unconditional, unbreakable bond of love, kindness, and mercy. When Jesus quotes the Great Commandment from Deuteronomy and Leviticus above, it is agape that is used for "love."

And Agape is the word used in our text today. In this context it means a whole-hearted, unreserved, unconditional desire for the well-being of the other – the antagonist.

Nothing is held back. There is no hesitation. No calculation of costs and benefits. No expectation of receiving anything in return. Only a total desiring for the well-being of the other.

This may well mean that you might not like the other. Might oppose some of their behaviours. Might speak against some of what they stand for.

If you agape your enemies, (enemy may be better understood as hate) the way you express your dislike and opposition will also always express your total desire for their well-being.

When someone does something to us or says something to us that is disrespectful or abusive our responses are often delivered in similar vein. So often we retaliate and escalate. Instead of such a response Jesus teaches that we should somehow pause and come up with a response that doesn’t return the violence.

We need to prevent our all too common reptilian response of fight or run. We need to pause things, take a deep breath as it were and seek an inventive nonviolent response, one that seeks to maintain the mana, the dignity of the antagonist. We may well disagree with their action or words – that doesn’t matter. What matters is the manner in which we respond. It’s not easy.

There are many books available on confronting personal violence, de-escalating and managing anger. We have at our disposal many little techniques and micro skills that can assist in defusing an anger situation. They are useful and with practice can make a huge difference.

If we are not careful however, the use of these skills and techniques can become mere devices to ‘preserve the peace’ or protect ourselves – all worthy goals in and of themselves but the underlying principle of Agape is the unreserved desire for the well-being of the other and a quick fix does not honour that requirement.

So if someone hates you, curses you, or abuses you – employ the pause, seek a non-violent creative response, a response that will keep you safe from extracting an eye for an eye.

Now we come to that most difficult passage. “If anyone strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also”.

We need to step back into history and place ourselves in the culture of Luke. The action Jesus describes – striking the cheek was not something "anyone" could do. This was the kind of thing only a privileged few could do. Something that those who were listening to Jesus would have witnessed and possibly experienced.

This was done by masters to their servants and slaves. It was always done by hitting with the back of the right hand across the right cheek. The blow was about asserting status and power over the other. This is not about random violence or fighting among friends or enemies. It is about rank, privilege and power.

And to preserve one's honour – one's public standing – it is crucial everything must be done according to the socially accepted protocols. The slave must obediently stand facing you without external coercion. You must strike only the right cheek; and only with the back of the right hand. Any variation on this would demonstrate that you were not in control; would be a public loss of face.

Now imagine your overlord has just slapped you on your right cheek, and without saying a word you silently turn your head to expose your left cheek. It appears that you are becoming doubly subservient; doubly accepting your master's authority over you. But you are actually rendering your master powerless!

Turning your head hides your right cheek and presents your left cheek. But the angle of your head will be such that the master can see but cannot strike your left cheek with the back of his right hand.

Lets try it.

Doing this would publicly expose the master to shame and ridicule. You would appear to be meek and servile; obediently waiting for a second blow. But the Master would be totally helpless. His only options would be to hit you with the palm of his right hand, or use his left hand, or walk away. All three would cause him to lose face.
 

An excellent example of a creative nonviolent response don’t you think.

The same creative response comes in giving up your shirt when your oppressor asks for your coat. There were two likely scenarios in which your coat could have been taken away. Someone demands your coat in repayment of a debt. You owe your oppressor something and since you have no land and very little money, your oppressor seeks your coat.

Now there were very clear restrictions regarding the repayment of debts. You could not leave a debtor naked at sundown no matter what he or she owed. It simply was not to be done. It was against the law.

So Jesus sets up another creative strategy. If they ask for your coat, give them your shirt too he says. The shirt in this context is the equivalent of our underwear. To give up your shirt was to be made naked. The oppressor will now be forced to deal with this new reality. No, no!" they say, "I don't want your shirt. Put it back on!" They might be so disarmed that they'll return your coat as well.

The other possibility would involve a soldier who just took whatever he wanted. The roman soldier was often brutal and regarded all non-romans as fare game. When your coat was demanded, and you also removed and offered your shirt you might well be embarrassed, but you would have publicly exposed the injustice – the injustice of having your coat taken in the first place.

Whilst it would be difficult to imagine this happening on Queen Street today (and I don’t recommend it) the case is again made for a different response. Both examples demonstrate how to agape those who hate us. Both are powerful non-violent, creative ways to expose injustice and hate.

It is this creative nonviolent inventiveness that that led Martin Luther King, Jr., to kneel down with many brothers and sisters before water hoses and snarling police dogs. Many people thought he was crazy. "Only violence can fight violence," they told him. But the authorities and the oppressors didn't know what to do with this kind of resistance. They knew the power of violence; they knew the powerlessness of victims who knew their place, but this was something they hadn't seen before: victims who refused to be victims, victims who refused to fight back with violence, victims who paused and found a creative response.

Many in the past – and present for that matter – have often viewed these passages as examples of Christion passivity. Passivity means doing nothing. Offering the other cheek, offering your underwear is doing something and something provocative. It risks greater harm in order to make a (nonverbal) statement, which requires the aggressor to take a second and more careful look at the one who is being victimized, with the possibility of a change in relationship. Perhaps another way of stating this is that we will not let the other person determine our actions – instead of reacting we respond.

In the middle third of our reading today we find Jesus starting to turn the screws – starting to drill down deeper into a more complete understanding of the ramifications of agape. If you love those who love you – so what. Even sinners love those who love them, even sinners do good and lend to those that lend to them.

The text makes it clear that in the culture of the day the sinners respond by following the rule of reciprocity – love those who love you, lend to those who lend to you. Jesus says that won’t do anymore. Give, not because you will receive the same kind of response when in need but rather give without expecting something in return. There is perhaps a higher reciprocity at work here. I give without regard to reward in kind in the knowledge that Gods Agape for all humans will suffice.

As with many of our passages today "Do not judge" is also a much-misunderstood teaching.

Jesus is NOT saying anything goes. We shouldn’t read this as meaning the church should not speak out on matters that need to be spoken about. We are clearly called to judge and to choose and act to combat injustice and oppression. We have a legitimate and moral duty to call out – especially when others are to frightened or uncaring to do so.

This is a teaching against the kind of stereotyping that is typically part of the gossipy way we pigeon-hole and stigmatize people-who-are-different-than-us. This kind of judging labels others; removes their humanity; and relieves us of the moral obligation to treat them as we would any friend or family member.

The answer? Don’t be quick to hate but try to find a way of reconciliation. Don’t be quick to punish someone who steals from you but discover why they were stealing and how people can solve that problem. Don’t be quick to judge people who beg. Why are these people begging and what can be done about it?

Jesus wants to change the way we deal with those whom would oppress us or would seek to do us harm.

If Jesus were to deliver his sermon today I wonder what inventive scenarios he might plan.

Possibly the lone man in front of a tank in Tiananmen Square.

Possibly a Gandhi.

And if he did visit us I hope he would speak to his disciples from the Pai Pai at Pari haka.

Amen.