I’ve a real soft-spot for John the Baptist. Not the personal hygiene, the diet or the dress sense, obviously, but I like the fact that he told it as he saw it. I admire the fact that he took on the powerful and the vested interests of his day and pointed an accusing finger at the corruption and religious hypocrisy that was rife. And that’s a part of the story that tends to be overshadowed by the more familiar part of his story: we tend to see John, “the voice crying in the wilderness”, primarily in terms of his preparing the way for Jesus. What we might be less familiar with is the whole backstory of his getting up the noses of the religious and political authorities.
If you’ve switched off after hearing today's Gospel text I
don’t blame you. This is a terrible story. It's hard to say "Praise to
you, O Christ!" after such a story. Perhaps we should skip this story and
read the next one instead. It's a much more uplifting story about Jesus feeding
the 5000. Mark is a very careful writer. Herod's distasteful banquet segues
into the story where Jesus makes sure that everyone is fed. Mark wanted these
stories back to back because of the contrast between Herod’s banquet of death
and Jesus’ banquet of life. But I won’t steal next week’s preacher’s thunder.
So, hard as it is to listen, let's go back to Herod's story.
This feast was a very public state event – the King’s birthday celebration:
there may not have been a large crowd, but there was a select guest list of
important officials. Herod's wife, Herodias, was there, even though she
shouldn't have been because he’d stolen her from his brother: an unlawful
liaison that John had condemned and, as
a consequence, had ended up in prison.
Though Herod was a Jew, the power that the Roman Empire had
given him - even as puppet king - had replaced his sense of religious
commitment. But why did he give in to
this terrible request for John’s head on a plate? Wasn't it enough that John
was in prison? I should imagine alcohol may have played a part, combined with a
bit of self-indulgent self-promotion playing to the gallery, “Look at me. I’m
the King. I can do whatever I please. I have it within my power to grant
whatever you may wish.” Except that in reality he didn’t: maybe this Big-I-Am
routine was a way of covering the fact that as a Roman-appointed king his power
was actually very limited indeed, so where he could exercise power he was going
to make a show of it. And perhaps this is why he made this promise to his
step-daughter rather than someone who might actually call his bluff and ask for
something he couldn’t deliver. The silly slip of a girl was bound to ask for
something trivial after all, like a necklace. Well, Herod didn’t bank on
Herodias’s bitter desire for vengeance against the man who had held her up to
public ridicule. John’s death was Horodias’s idea, not her daughter’s.
Herod had liked to listen to John, which was odd indeed for
John preached repentance wherever he went. Was there something inside Herod
that remembered God's word, some spark of God that drew him to John's teaching?
Herod was upset by her request because he feared the crowd
beyond his palace gates, because they revered John as a prophet. He was also upset
because he was still drawn to what John said. But his guests had heard his
oath. How could he back down without losing face? Who knows what the guests
might tell someone higher up? So Herod gave the command, and soon the head of
John the Baptist was brought out on a platter, as thought it was the last
course of the meal. This was a very different banquet to the abundance of
Jesus' feast. Not twelve baskets of food left over, but a horrifying leftover:
John the Baptist's head served on a platter.
So, there’s our context. What are we to make of this?
John is often regarded as the last of the Old Testament
Prophets because he stands in that long line of men of faith who spoke the word
of God to their own generations. When we talk about “Prophets” let’s be clear
what we mean: this isn’t about foretelling the future. The Prophets of the
Bible were the outspoken critics of their day, speaking out against all sorts
of abuses meted out by the rich and powerful, deliberately or by omission,
against the poor and the marginalised. If there was any element of foretelling
the future it was only in as much as they predicted the anger of God and the inevitability
of the downfall of the wicked as a consequence of their corrupt behaviour and
lack of compassion.
We look back on them now as some sort of Robin Hood type folk
heroes, but they can’t have been easy people to have been around.
Isaiah typically delivered a message few people wanted to
hear: “Come back to the ways of God you apostates.” Although, in fairness, he
also talked about the hope of forgiveness. Jeremiah was a relentless doom-and-gloom
merchant, challenging Judah’s moral decline – and he was persecuted for his
pains. Ezeikel, was another prophet who warned the People of Israel of the
consequences of turning their backs on God. How about Malachi? Let the wicked
be warned by the certainty of judgement. Amos: God is just and must judge
wrongdoing. Obadiah: retribution must overtake merciless pride. Nahum: doom is
to descend on the wicked.
So, there’s a theme: get it right with God and get it right
with your neighbour. Micah’s question, “What does the Lord require of you? To
act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.” is echoed later
by Jesus, “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul
and with all your strength and with all your mind and love your neighbour as
yourself."
It costs to be a prophet: John wasn’t the only one who died
an unpleasant death as a consequence of speaking out and yet we are all called
to be prophets …. in some sense, and it’s a hard ministry to pull off: I think
of those high profile American and South African Christians who spoke out
against desegregation of the races. Well, they were on the wrong side of both
history and morality. Going further back, both in America and here, there was a
powerful Christian lobby against the abolition of slavery. The wrong side of
history and morality again.
Scripture has something to say about false prophets. Matthew
warns, “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but
inwardly are ravenous wolves.” In Romans we read, “For such persons do not
serve our Lord Jesus, but their own agendas, and by smooth talk and flattery
they deceive the hearts of the naive.”
So, how do we discern a position on the moral and religious
issues of our day where we should feel compelled as Christians to speak out?
Well, the direction of scripture points to justice, inclusion, compassion and
equality. I’ve no doubt you’ve all heard the mantra WWJD? (What would Jesus
do?) It isn’t a bad mantra for a Christian to live their life by. We know of
Jesus’ compassion for the poor, the weak, the downtrodden, the powerless and
the marginalised. What would Jesus do/say/think about the suffering of
civilians in Iraq and Syria? And the West’s response to the humanitarian
crisis? What would Jesus do/say/think about welfare cuts to the most vulnerable
in society in the name of austerity? – And I mention that last one acutely
conscious that the prophets of the Old Testament were often not at all popular
when they spoke out. The Church of England published a critique of the Thatcher
government called Faith in the City. “Pure Marxism.” said Norman Tebbit. David
Jenkins, the former Bishop of Durham spoke out during the miner’s strike. He
was vilified by sections of the press who mounted a smear campaign against him.
“Make him look a fool and no one will take any notice.” Our own Archbishop,
Justin Welby has spoken out against the banks and against corporate greed. That
same press has been on his case ever since. “Lefty clergy.” Pope Frances has
spoken on environmental issues. He has done so with full papal authority and
his influence will go far beyond the Catholic faithful. America’s Fox News has
described him as the most dangerous man in the world and suggested that he
should stay out of politics and concentrate on religion. After all, what does
he know about science? (Apart from his doctorate in Chemistry from Argentina’s
premier university. Let's not let factual accuracy get in the way of a good rant, after all!) Being a prophet doesn’t make you popular with the vested
interests of your day.
If all that sounds like a party political broadcast on behalf of the Hard Left, it isn't meant to. We come from all colours of the political spectrum, I'm sure. My argument is about each of us speaking to our own peer groups and holding to account those who promote policies and strategies which clearly do not bring the Kingdom of God closer. It come as something of a personal revelation, but others ARE accountable to us in all of the spheres we inhabit daily. Sometimes people need to be reined in and told, not in my name.
If all that sounds like a party political broadcast on behalf of the Hard Left, it isn't meant to. We come from all colours of the political spectrum, I'm sure. My argument is about each of us speaking to our own peer groups and holding to account those who promote policies and strategies which clearly do not bring the Kingdom of God closer. It come as something of a personal revelation, but others ARE accountable to us in all of the spheres we inhabit daily. Sometimes people need to be reined in and told, not in my name.
Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the German Lutheran Pastor invoved in
the plot to assassinate Hitler and undoubtedly a prophet of his time: executed.
Martin Luther-King, a tireless campaigner against racial injustice and
undoubtedly a prophet of his time: assassinated. Archbishop Oscar Romero of El
Salvador, a tireless campaigner against political corruption and the crushing
of opposition parties in his own country and undoubtedly a prophet of his time:
assassinated – in his own cathedral, during the Eucharist.
Being a prophet’s a bit of a risky business.
So, where does that leave us?
If we accept that the arc of scripture bends towards justice;
if we take seriously the mantra WWJD; if we believe that the Holy Spirit works
in our lives to bring the Kingdom of God closer in small and incremental ways
perhaps we could consider to what extent we might need to “man-up” a bit. If
you are anything like me you’ve probably kept quiet when you should have spoken
out: spoken out against the casual racism, sexism, Islamophobia and homophobia
we encounter daily; kept quiet when politicians of all colours have said and
done things which clearly have not brought the Kingdom of God closer and when
we’ve known in our hearts that such-and-such a policy is clearly not
Christlike. Did we try to make anyone accountable? Should we have done? One of
the things about Christianity – and the thing that frightens the powerful like
Herod and Herodious – is that followers of Jesus are called to activism. How
else will the Kingdom of God come closer?
Me? Speak out? I’m not called to be a prophet! Well, let’s be
clear, none of us here are likely to be a John the Baptist, a Martin Luther
King, a Dietrich Bonhoeffer or an Oscar Romero, but the English Philosopher,
Edmund Burke is quoted as saying, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of
evil is that good men do nothing.” WWJD?
Maybe that would be a good thought on which to end.
Amen
No comments:
Post a Comment