Before he came to the cross, Jesus came to a
crossroad: a decisive moment, a tipping point, a choice.
Before Jesus hung from a tree, the future of God’s
kingdom hung in the balance in a garden of olive trees.
Before he suffered and died at Calvary, Jesus
suffered as he prayed in Gethsemane.
Luke’s Gospel tells us that “in his anguish he
prayed more earnestly, and his sweat became like great drops of blood falling
down on the ground” (Luke 22:44).
The bloody crucifixion may seem the hardest test
Jesus faced. But maybe what happened in Gethsemane was harder. Certainly it was not Jesus’ first test. Remember
his ministry began with Satan’s testing in the wilderness. Don’t forget the relentless
testing by scribes and Pharisees wanting to trap him into saying words that would
warrant arrest. But Jesus’ final test was in a prayer garden. After that, he was
out of options. Jesus was mainly silent
during his trial. He endured
torture. He met his death. But in Gethsemane he was still playing out
possibilities before making a decision, a choice. He prayed, he discerned, he
sought God’s will. And that process was agonizing.
We don’t know all the options Jesus agonized over
once he realized his arrest was imminent. One option would have been to rouse the
crowds for bloody insurrection. But his previous choices had prepared him to
choose the path of peace at this critical juncture.
Now some scientists and philosophers may question if
humans have real choice, so “programmed” are we by genetic codes and cultural
conditioning and environmental influences. They think we may THINK we’re choosing
when we in fact are responding predictably to other influences. But evolution requires the role of chance. This dance between chance and choice, predictable
laws and randomness, may mean our lives follow some kind of trajectory, but we’re
not confined to a script.
Have you seen the movie The Adjustment Bureau? Matt Damon plays a budding politician who
falls in love with a beautiful woman through a chance encounter on a city bus.
But their meeting was not meant to happen.
Because the “Bureau” that secretly determines all major human decisions
on our planet and has been positioning Matt Damon’s character to gain political
power-- hadn’t mapped out the possibility of love for him. The “Bureau” fears
the young woman will distract the aspiring politician from achieving his
political potential. So they make course corrections on the young politician’s
map which prevent him from seeing her again. “The Bureau” of men in business
suits and hats has that kind of power. They literally pull out maps to chart
the lives of human beings—mainly with the benign intention of exerting some
control over our tendency to blow up the planet. Maybe the “Adjustment Bureau” represents God
in a fedora, or fate, or simply the succession of choices that seem like
choices but really aren’t. The film
calls into question how much choice we really have. But it also suggests that
love is always a possibility.
If our choices are more limited than we like to
think, it may be because our previous choices have narrowed our current
options. As Robert Frost said, “way leads on to way.” We can think of our lives
as the sum of our many choices which test our convictions and shape our souls
and prepare us for the bigger tests in life.
You responded today—to someone else’s comment or to the lure of some habit
or to an opportunity to act with kindness—because of earlier responses to
life’s tests. You’ll act tomorrow because of some choice you made today. Surgeons
and airline pilots and soldiers and astronauts are trained to make life-and-death
decisions instantaneously.
You and I make seemingly minor decisions—not the big
Gethsemane choices—every day. In doing
so, we are wiring our minds and hearts for future actions. Each choice—for steamed broccoli instead of French
fries, for kindness rather than criticism—each choice paves the way for the
next. And thus a life is made.
Now some tell the Jesus Story as if there were no choices. As if God’s inexorable plan of salvation was
to implant in a human child a suicide directive. They believe Jesus’s purpose was to be
executed—as if Jesus were an ancient version of the Manchurian Candidate, groomed
for leadership and programmed to “self-destruct” in the service of a bigger
cause.
I do not believe God mapped out Jesus’s life so that
it ended on a cross. As I’ve said, I believe that Jesus, his culture, the authorities,
and the crowd made all sorts of choices that resulted in his crucifixion. I do not believe that violence was God’s choice
or plan. We may justify our hate or make a tragedy comprehensible by ascribing
such events to the will of God. But a god of love does not cause suffering.
As we enter Holy Week again, I repeat from this
pulpit a statement contrary to what some of us were taught: God’s “plan of
salvation” did not require violence. You may believe otherwise. That’s okay. We
don’t require theological uniformity among us.
But I stress this point because harm can come from the idea that Father
God sent his son into the world to die as a sacrifice so that God could finally
forgive the sins of the other children. This theology reinforces the pernicious
falsehood that violence can end violence. It makes God either cruel or stupid. Did
we not hear Jesus shout, “No more of this” to the disciple who pulled his sword
in the garden? Have we not known God
best through Jesus who died rather than harm another? How could God, creator of the universe’s
laws, build into that universe an equation that one man must suffer before forgiveness
can be offered to the others? The cross is
a consequence of a violent humanity, not the intention of a loving God. If we worship
a violent God, then we will justify our own violence. Jesus risked the possibility of his own
violent death in order to live fully into the way of nonviolence.
As we enter Holy Week, I imagine Christ continuing
to experience agony when we trust in violence rather than love. I imagine that
we perpetuate Jesus’ suffering on the cross by worshiping a God who requires a sacrificial
death in order to forgive her beloved children.
When Jesus learned Judas had betrayed him, he could
have fled or gathered revolutionaries. One of his followers chose the Empire’s
way and drew his sword in the garden of prayer.
And the sword drew blood. And you
can imagine what normally would have happened next. Instead of arresting and executing one man,
the temple police would have drawn their swords, and soon the garden where
Jesus went to pray would have been a battlefield.
Instead, Jesus practiced what he’d preached. He refused to be drawn into violence. In fact, he did the opposite. He reflexively healed the man his disciple
wounded.
If he’d been a fanatical martyr, Jesus would likely have
rushed headlong into that death with some ferocity of resolve, some exultation
about his mission, some shout of triumph in the name of his God.
Instead, Jesus sounded more like Martin Luther King,
Jr., (who sounded a bit like Jesus, of course) both of whom recognized what their
witness to God’s love might cost. He/they might have hoped that, if death came,
it would serve to illustrate God’s love more powerfully than their sermons
about peace ever had. But Jesus truly had a choice. Over and over he had chosen
how to live and love, how to seek God’s way rather than the Empire’s way--long before
his cruel death exposed the vileness of the Empire in the most decisive
contrast between God’s way of love and the Empire’s way of domination.
I have given up the God who requires violence and
suffering. But I’ve also given up the God who removes suffering. Because it’s plain to see that suffering
still exists. I’ve forsaken the God who
uses the suffering of one poor soul for the salvation of another—and the God
who intervenes to make sure I won’t ever suffer. I turn instead to the God who suffers with
us. Who stands by us if we suffer. As
Jesus taught in the Sermon on the Mount, there are some creative ways to return
good for evil that do NOT require our very lives. But when all the creative nonviolent options were
gone, Jesus’s choice to die rather than to kill, to feel hurt rather than to wound,
is a hopeful choice. To choose to suffer
rather than to perpetuate the cycle of violence is a choice that NO ONE HAS TO
MAKE---if we ALL make that choice. Hear that paradox again: If we ALL choose to suffer from violence
rather than commit violence, then NO ONE ever has to suffer from violence again.
Next Sunday we’ll return to another garden setting. Our Hebrew Bible reading will take us to Eden,
brimming with first life. Our Gospel
reading will take us to the garden where Jesus was raised to new life.
But
this evening we have read of a Garden that could have become a battlefield, that
did become a testing place, a dark place, but an oddly victorious place where
Jesus, despite death threats and darkness, lived into the way of light. Shouting
to his followers, he cried, “No more of this violence!” Shouting to those
arresting him, he accused: “This is YOUR hour, and the power of darkness!” He exposed the injustice. He named the darkness. He named it.
He did not deepen the darkness by adopting their tactics. He diverted
from their script.
Jesus had been tested long before the cross. By the time of his arrest, he was clear eyed
and focused. He knew who he was and what he must do. His reflex was healing. He would not fight. He would not flee. As the
temple police pressed forward, Jesus had to trust the God whose power is
love. Without knowing if or how someone
might tell the end of his story, he walked to the cross ready to commend his
spirit to a loving God.
Before Jesus came to the cross, he came to a
crossroad. We will make a thousand
choices tomorrow, most of them seemingly insignificant. This is not a call to overthink, to be
anxious about minor decisions, to feel overly responsible. This is a call to appreciate that all of life
is bound up together—and that love is the direction Jesus always took—to the cross
and beyond.
PRAYER: Loving One, in our darkness, call us to the Light. In our quandaries, lead us to peace. In our hurting, stay beside us until Easter
dawns.
This may sound odd, but I think of the sacrifice of Jesus for our sins somewhat along the lines of what Agent Sadusky said to Ben Gates in the National Treasure movie "someone has to go to jail Ben". When it came to forgiving the original sin and thus all sins that came after someone had to die. Blood had to be shed, it wasn't about violence even though the crucifixion was indeed a violent act. God said the wages of sin is DEATH, thus to meet that debt Jesus had to die for our sins and only the blood of God could cover all of man's sins.
ReplyDelete