On the Circumcision of Jesus

 Sermon. 01/01/2023. The Naming and Circumcision of Jesus.

 

Numbers 6:22-27

Luke 2:15-21

 

I sometimes wonder how disappointed a person would be, if they listened to the Church. Let me clarify: I sometimes wonder how disappointed a person would be if they listened to the Church in one regard. I mean if they really followed the Church and its pronouncements on Advent.

 

You know the claim, the contrast, I think.

While the world starts celebrating and feasting and otherwise keeping Christmas from mid-November,

in the Church, Christmas does not begin until the evening of Christmas Eve, and Advent is a season in its own right, one marked by self-reflection, silence, and going without.

So imagine you stuck to that. Not a mince pie, not a slice of stollen, not even a shepherd or an angel, before the evening of 24 December. And then?

 

And then you come to the main service on Christmas Day, and even here (if your church is being obedient) you don’t hear of angels or shepherds, but rather what may seem to be rather abstract stuff about (GOD), and the Word, and flesh, and so on – the Prologue to John.

And then?

And then already on the second day of Christmas you are thrown straight into the story of death. The Feast of Stephen, the first Christian martyr.

A few days later, the most horrific story in the New Testament, the story of the slaughter of the innocents. The slaughter. Of innocents.

This is hard.

You may well think that you should have enjoyed all the mince pies and slices of stollen you were offered in November and December.

 

Surely, at the beginning of the second week of Christmastide, then we can return to a story which fits a season of feasting and celebration?

Well, let us see.

 

The first thing to say is that the Church Catholic keeps different feasts on 1 January.

For most Orthodox, it is the Feast of St Basil (who by the way often wears red and goes from house to house distributing presents, but that’s for another time).

For modern Roman Catholics, it is the Solemnity of Mary the Mother of (GOD).

For Anglicans (being Anglicans), we have a choice.

But all Christian calendars carry an awareness that the eighth day of Christ’s life was/is/is/was the day of the Naming and Circumcision of Jesus.

 

So here your preacher can play safe, and speak about the naming and the name of Jesus, Yeshua, meaning (GOD) saves, or (GOD) is salvation, and let the feasting commence!

Or your preacher can play not-safe, and actually mention the less-discussed, the undiscussed, act of the circumcision of Jesus, an act which brings us back (we may as well say it) to the theme of blood.

You will have guessed that your preacher is going to play not-safe.

Let us mark the circumcision of Jesus.

 

There are a number of reasons for doing this. The first is that the circumcision of Jesus is one of those things even sceptics can be reasonably sure really happened. Now, if you get your information from social media ((GOD) help you), you will have a sense that it is controversial to say that Jesus even existed. But within proper historical studies, there is no real argument. Jesus (whoever he was) really existed. Someone called Yeshua was born, had a role as teacher and healer which impacted upon some, and was crucified by the Romans. And his followers were somehow energised after his death. These things are historical facts. And I say that another fact we can set alongside these is that Jesus was circumcised on the eighth day, in accordance with Jewish custom. (If there were any sense that Jesus might not have been circumcised, we can be sure that his opponents would have brought this up at every occasion.)

 

This brings us to the second reason to mark the circumcision. It is one obvious way of bringing to the centre of the stage something we may forget. Jesus was a Jew. And he wasn’t only a Jew “ethnically” (whatever that means). He was a Jew “religiously”. He was a Jew religiously, and, brothers and sisters, we have to face it: he was not a Jew who became a Christian (think about it)!

 

The story of the circumcision of Jesus occurs only in Luke. Luke has much more to say about the baby-and-child, Jesus, than the other gospels. And, in the stories Luke brings,

his parents are presented as devout Jews,

Jews really at home in the religion of Judaism,

Jews who relished Jewish ways of connecting with (GOD).

And I dare to say this applies to Jesus too.

This is something we Christians might usefully treasure and ponder in our hearts, like the Jewish mother, Mary.

 

I’m really not sparing you, am I? Well, I say again: if the Church brings so many martyrs into the calendar so soon after Christmas Day, then it must be telling us - against all the assumptions - that Christmastide is for adults. But of course I know that as adults (precisely as adults) we may have all kinds of moral or ethical objections to the circumcision of baby boys (who cannot consent). And, for sure, there are discussions to be had. If I say there are modern questions, that is not to dismiss or minimise them. But it is to say that ethical concerns were almost certainly not around for the Jews of Jesus’ day, for Jesus’ own family.

 

So what, then, was circumcision, in the day? What was it about? What was it for? Bluntly, we are not told. Nowhere in the Bible are we told. Back in Genesis, (GOD) commands Abraham to circumcise himself and his menfolk, and Abraham obeys. And it becomes a mark of the covenant with (GOD) from then on. It becomes a mark of (GOD)’s call. Is there any reason for this? Well, later Jewish tradition is clear that not all (GOD)’s commands have to be grounded in reason. They don’t all have to show how they do us good. (GOD) is (GOD) and (GOD) can call us to pattern our lives as (GOD) chooses (save for real harm alone). However, speculative rationales for circumcision abound:

it is about involving human beings in the process of creation, by giving them a final little tidying-up task to perform;

it is about moderating male sexual desire;

it is about having an enfleshed reminder of (GOD) every time a married couple has intercourse.

And so on.

 

But I want to make another connection. The fact that circumcision goes all the way back to Abraham means that it is essentially and intimately linked to… to blessing. Remember (GOD)’s promise to Abraham at the very start of his story [Gen 12.2f]:

 

“I will make you into a great nation,
    and I will bless you;
I will make your name great,
    and you will be a blessing.
I will bless those who bless you,
    and whoever curses you I will curse;
and all peoples on earth
    will be blessed through you

[or will bless themselves in you].”

 

The later blessing of Aaron – “the LORD bless you and keep you. The LORD make his face to shine upon you…” – this blessing is something of an echo of this core blessing, this root blessing, the blessing of faith, the blessing in Sarah and Abraham. (Whether that was actually why it was chosen by the compilers of our lectionary for today, I cannot tell you. But I suggest that the resonances are just plain there.)

 

Perhaps you are not used to think of blessing as the central meaning of the Old Testament, from Abraham on. It would be surprising if you were. After all, here is the more normal Christian summary of the biblical story:

Creation – Fall – Redemption – Consummation.

The Old Testament, in this account, is overwhelmingly about the Fall.

So in the Old Testament Christians look for flickers of light in a dark night, and little else.

 

Well, brothers and sisters, I offer you another reading.

You can think of it as a parallel rather than an alternative reading, if you like.

Think of the story of Bible as one of

blessing upon blessing, of grace upon grace.

What happens if we think of the biblical story as

-         the blessing of creation (“very good”)

-         enriched by the blessing in Sarah and Abraham

(by circumcision and all the marks of all the covenants)

-         enriched in turn by the blessing of Jesus

embodiment of the covenants.

Whenever you have an Old Testament reading, ask yourself:

How is the core blessing in Abraham reflected here?

How is the new blessing of Jesus anticipated here?

 

So we have reasons to celebrate today.

We have the naming of Jesus - (GOD) saves!

And we have his circumcision too,

his circumcision into the blessing of Abraham.

So Christmastide, yes. Feast, yes. Celebration, yes.

In which spirit, you will find after the service a mince pie, and a piece of stollen!

 

Amen.

 

INTERCESSIONS

 

(GOD), who comes to us as child,

bless your Church.

that it may find again the delight of a child,

in its worship of you, and its service of its neighbours.

 

(GOD) in your mercy, hear our prayer.

 

(GOD), who comes to us as child,

bless your world,

that people of power and influence

will find again the fierce sense of justice of a child.

 

(GOD), in your mercy, hear our prayer.

 

(GOD), who comes to us as child,

bless this place,

that it be a source even of rest and gentleness,

such as every child needs.

 

(GOD), in your mercy, hear our prayer.

 

(GOD), who comes to us as child,

bless all who are unwell,

or in need of any kind 

(among them those we name now in our own hearts)

May we cry out for them with a child’s urgency.

 

(GOD), in your mercy, hear our prayer.

 

(GOD), who comes to us as child,

bless all who will die today,

and those who have shaped us and died,

and those who mourn,

and give us a child-like trust that you will remember them and us into life.

 

(GOD), in your mercy, hear our prayer.

 

(GOD), who comes to us as child,

come anew to each one of us in this new year,

to show us the new next step you want us to take.

 

(GOD), in your mercy, hear our prayer.

Amen.

 

Sermon: Paul Takes on the Foolish Galatians

Sermon. St Vedast-alias-Foster. 29 May 2016.

First Sunday after Trinity (Year C)

Galatians 1.1-12

Luke 7.1b-10

• Have you ever received a letter where every letter was cut out of a newspaper? Gd forbid!
• Have you ever been given a letter written in green ink? I hope not.
• Have you ever had a letter telling you everything you believe is nonsense (or worse) and putting you right by giving you the pure truth? Perhaps you have (if, for example, you have ever had a letter published in the Church Times, which, for some reason, prints your full address - I know whereof I speak).
• Have you ever been on the receiving end of abuse on social media? I think @StVedast may have been spared that aspect of the twittersphere. But if you are especially active in social media, chances are you will have been unceremoniously insulted.

Why do I ask these questions? Well, I want to suggest that St Paul's letter to the Galatians has some (I emphasise: some) of the qualities of a letter written in green ink. He is being blunt to the point of rudeness. But we may miss this if we don't know the conventions of letter-writing which Paul is breaking.

Today's Second Reading is the opening of the epistle. Paul introduces himself, according to convention. (You sign in rather than sign off.) He then gives his characteristic greeting 'grace to you and peace'. Grace is charis in Greek which may be taken as a homophonic adaptation of the secular opening, 'chairein', or 'Greetings'. 'Peace' (eirene in Greek) resonates with the well-known Hebrew greeting, 'shalom'. So it it likely that Paul is here implicitly insisting that Christianity is a blending of the best of Greek and Hebrew/Jewish traditions.

Crucially, though, what his readers would then have been expecting from him would be a hymn of praise to Gd mentioning them, thanking Gd for their existence, and for their gifts and virtues. For example, this is from the opening of Paul's letter to the Philippians:

I thank my God every time I remember you, constantly praying with joy in every one of my prayers for all of you, because of your sharing in the gospel from the first day until now. I am confident of this, that the one who began a good work among you will bring it to completion by the day of Jesus Christ. [Phil 1.3-6]

If you had grounds to expect something as affirming as that, just imagine how shocked you would be when, instead, you hear this:

I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel... there are some who are confusing you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ.

Perhaps you see now why I say Paul is being blunt to the point of rudeness. St Paul is not a cruel writer (though I realise I may have to convince some of you of that over coffee). So what is so exercising him? It is not hard to discover.

Some in the community in Galatia were urging male gentile participants to be circumcised. And this meant much more than a moment's ritual - and rather more moments of pain. No, it meant that the one circumcised, and his female companions, were committing to keep the whole of Torah, all the 613 commandments which Jews believe originated in the meeting with Gd on Sinai.

St Paul thought that was wrong. Very wrong. Dangerous. Undermining. So he is strong in his opposition. Later, he calls the Law/Torah a curse [3.10-14]. And later still he even says: 'I wish those who advise these things would castrate themselves' [5.12]. Or mutilate themselves. He seems to be saying: let those who seek the circumcision of male gentiles rather endure an extra circumcision themselves! Brutal stuff.

And it gets worse. For it is in no small part because of this letter that later Christians saw an unbridgeable chasm between

• on the one hand, Moses and Sinai and Torah and Law (bad),
• and on the other hand Christ and the Cross and freedom and grace (good).
  Judaism and all its ways – many have understood Paul as saying – is passing away, its purposes fulfilled in Christ. As no one needs a guardian or satchel-bearer or nanny as an adult, so now all those specifically Jewish commandments – which no one ever kept fully any way – serve no purpose. Bluntly (on this reading), Judaism and Christianity are against each other.

It is worth pausing here to take full cognizance of the radically different message from today's gospel, from Luke. Here we have what we must surely call interfaith harmony. And note that the harmony actually precedes the arrival of Jesus on the scene. Already the centurion, although from the occupying power, has got to know both Jews and Judaism, and is evidently profoundly sympathetic, to the point of building a synagogue. The centurion and the Jews around him show mutual respect, understanding and empathy. Indeed, the text itself speaks of love. Thus the centurion already has the insight he needs to see in Jesus an impressive figure from the faith he loves, who can heal. Yet he apparently has seen no need to convert to Judaism, and was apparently under no pressure from Jews to do so. So indeed: interfaith relations at their richest and most hopeful.

Back to St Paul. And the good and hopeful news is that the oppositional reading of Galatians I've just presented – that Judaism and Christianity are opposed to one another – has been severely criticised over several decades now, and has been undermined.

Scholars have noticed that nowhere – not in Galatians, nor elsewhere – does Paul suggest that Jewish boys should avoid circumcision. Indeed, twice in Galatians Paul says that neither cirumcision nor uncircumcision count for anything. But that cuts both ways (no pun intended). It means there's no special virtue attached to being uncircumcised either. It follows that Paul's argument must be that Jews - but only Jews – should circumcise their sons. And the whole question is entirely irrelevant when it comes to the matter of salvation. You don't need to be Jewish to be saved.

Scholars have also noted that this understanding – that you don't have to be Jewish to be saved – is actually itself very Jewish. It's part of rabbinic Judaism – that's much later than Paul but probably with very early roots. Let me remind you of the Tosefta (Sanhedrin 105a), which insists (and I quote): 'The righteous of all the nations have a share in the world to come'.

Further, even the idea that Torah is something like a curse, an all-but-unbearable heavy burden, is something rabbinic Jews might themselves say – when engaging a potential convert. Within a Jewish circle, Torah is hard work, but also a huge privilege, offering real intimacy with Gd. But when discussing it with someone who says they want to convert, in order to be sure that their motivation is pure, you present the Jewish way at its most negative. Let me, again, refresh your memory of the process of accepting a convert set out in the Talmud (Yevamot, 47 a & b). The Jew says: 'Do you not know that Israel is now afflicted, persecuted, humbled, distracted and suffering chastisements?' and goes on to make clear all the penalties for disobeying laws the gentile currently does not have to keep. (By the way, the successful convert says in reply only: 'I know, and am not worthy'.)

It is certainly possible that Paul is standing near the beginning of this rabbinic Jewish tradition of presenting Torah as negatively as possible to those who are drawn to it. So his argument is not at all that Judaism is done-away-with. Rather, it is that the Church must be an internally diverse community. I'd say the Church is necessarily a multinational body, but I don't want to be heard as commenting on any imminent referendums.

What I must say is this: for Paul, the Church is a community we join as we are. No one need 'cross the floor'. No one need pretend to be something they are not. The one thing that is absolute according to Paul is Christ's welcome. It is for all. It is for you.

'Just as I am without one plea

save that thy blood was shed for me'

Charlotte Elliott's Edwardian sentiment actually echoes down through the centuries right back to Paul and the Galatians. Paul's rudeness – ruder than we should ever dare to be in our church discourse, even with recalcitrant bishops or archdeacons, I hope – is because he felt in his bones that this universal acceptance was being obscured. Indeed, lost.

As we now enter into the great period of Ordinary Time, green after green, perhaps we can forgive Paul his metaphorical green pen, and with him, with Charlotte Elliott, with the centurion, make Christ's welcome, and Christ's healing, our own. Just as we are, without one plea. 

Amen.