Sermon — Good Friday, March 29, 2024

Michael Fenn

Lectionary Readings

There is an uncomfortable question that Good Friday brings up for me. Maybe you have thought this at one point or another. It feels almost blasphemous to really ask. For me, a question I have come back to from time to time is: Why exactly did Jesus have to die?. What I mean, is that, in theory, could the whole story of Christianity have been:

-Jesus, Son of God, comes down and tells everyone to behave, be kind, and love one
another
-Jesus tells us all we are saved
-Jesus goes back up into heaven on a chariot of fire

Instead, Jesus dies a terrifying and horrific death where a good many people are implicated–Judas, Pontius Pilate, the Roman Empire writ large, and even the crowds of people who welcomed him into Jerusalem just five days before. It is a strange thing to grapple with, a strange horror we as Christians revisit year after year. 

It is difficult to know what to do with this sense of horror, how to find a spot for it in our souls. It is tempting to use it to immediately point to its conclusion: the resurrection. It is tempting to not really take it personally. It is tempting to acknowledge the scariness, let it be uncomfortable, and then to let it just pass. I am going to challenge us who have physcially come to church today, or are listening to this sermon online, to let Good Friday really sink in, to take Good Friday personally, and to allow it its due time.

In the spirit of that, I will recite for you all a poem I feel is pretty apt at capturing the tone of Good Friday. It is “In the Desert” by Stephen Crane. I will read it for you two times, because you don’t have the text in front of you. 

In the desert
I saw a creature, naked, bestial,
Who, squatting upon the ground,
Held his heart in his hands,
And ate of it.

I said, “Is it good, friend?”
“It is bitter—bitter,” he answered;
“But I like it
“Because it is bitter,
“And because it is my heart.”

I read this because to me, it captures the essence of what makes Good Friday so discomforting to us as people. In the poem, we see a beast with no redeeming qualities, completely occupied with one thing, and devoid of anything else. This beast, which was once likely a man, is utterly and completely devoted to one singular act. Devouring his own bitter heart, and relishing in that action. 

In Good Friday, we as people face our darkest moment as Christians, when Jesus is crucified. When the crowds that yelled “hosanna” five days ago on Palm Sunday now scream for the violent, gory death of Jesus as they scream “crucify him”. Here is where Good Friday gets so disconcerting. We are seen in the crowd that betrays Jesus, and we are seen in the beast that eats its own bitter heart. The dark discomfort of Good Friday becomes personal to us, if we let it sink in. We are culpable in the violence and death that take place. 

This returns me to my original question, Why did Jesus have to die?

Many theologians, pastors, and church fathers have wrestled with and addressed this question. The answer that you land on depends heavily on the time period, the denomination, and the person you ask. However, the general consensus is that Jesus had to die for our sins. But the actual meaning of that is still unclear. And, if you think about it, paints a picture of God the Father who demands death and destruction. And sort of goes against the idea of a loving God that Jesus and the scriptures tell us about. What gives. One thing I have learned in seminary is that a way of understanding a belief in God is to understand that by believing in God, we are making a statement that God is an inherently trustworthy person. A bloodthirsty God demanding the suffering and death of Jesus does not seem like a God I can trust. 

Rather than a bloodthirsty God who accepts Jesus’ suffering as a substitute for our own. Who accepts Jesus’s death as a payment for our sins–which treats sin and redemption as almost an economic action. There is another way of looking at it that does not contrast the loving God of the scriptures. One where the perspective is one of trust and belief, rather than fear and deferred punishment. I will invite us to skew our perspective in this way. I will invite us into the perspective of the crowd that called for his crucifixion. The crowd that represents us on Good Friday. 

In this perspective, we can understand that instead of Jesus’ death as a payment. We understand that in going to the cross, Jesus takes our sins to the cross with him. In the words of Archbishop Rowan Williams–the cross is the negation of negation, the killing of our desire to kill. We have shown our deep human bitterness and that is what is destroyed on the cross. In the crucifixion we attempted to kill love and thus our hatred was killed. In this thinking, to return my my original question, Jesus had to die becuase we had to kill him. It was the extremity of our hatred, bitterness, and violence that led to the crucifixion. And almost paradoxically, it is the crucifixion that defeats all of this violence. 

To return to the poem I read to you all. The crucifixion takes us out of our own bitter self-absorption, and destroys that which makes us bitter, destroys that which makes us evil. We get a chance to repent of what makes us so bitter, so self absorbed, so hurtful by the saving action of Jesus. God sees that darkness, destroys it, and gives us another chance again and again–particularly in the darkness of Good Friday.

Good Friday at its core, tells us that no matter how extreme our violence, how deep our hatred goes, how hot our anger, how shameful our pride, God does not abandon us, God is still working with us. It is an uncomfortable truth to hold and to face, that we as good Christians have many parts of ourselves that are angry, violent, fearful, and dark; and God sees that, and these desolate aspects of our human condition are what is nailed to the cross.

This is the good news of this dark day, that as we acknowledge the darkness of the day, God accepts that for what it is, accepts us for who we are. Our deep horrors are transfixed to the cross. I do not wish in preaching this to skip over the darkness of this day. It is necessary to experience this darkness. Witness our own darkness. Witness the terror of this day. The ressurrection after all, cannot exist without it. However, as we wait for the resurrection, which will come in its due time, we can know that, God is here with us in this darkness. In the name of the one who loved us first. 

Sermon — March 24, 2024 (Palm Sunday)

The Rev. Greg Johnston

Lectionary Readings

I spent a summer in college studying abroad in England, and while I was there, I chose to balance two parts of my brain: with one, I took a one-on-one tutorial in the history of economic thought from the Renaissance to the mid-20^th century—with the other, a creative writing seminar. The intellectual history was enlightening and engaging and became part of my senior thesis—but the creative writing seminar was where I really learned something, and it was this: the golden rule of narrative writing is “Show, don’t tell.”

For example: if you want the reader to know that little Billy is afraid of the dark, don’t write, “little Billy was afraid of the dark.” Write, ““Good night, little Billy,’ still echoed in his ears as the shadows of the willow branches swirled like ghoul-fingers on the walls.” And so on.

Holy Week is the Church’s great season of “show, don’t tell.” We don’t just say, “Hosanna,” standing primly in place. We march around the room. We don’t just hold our hymnals as we sing. We wave our palms. I don’t just read the story of the Passion to you from the center of the church: we act it out with a whole cast. And all throughout this week, we’ll do the same: in our Holy Week services, we’ll taste and touch and see reminders of the last week of Jesus’ life, and not just be told about them.

But the true expert in “show don’t tell” is not my writing teacher, and it’s not the committee who created our Book of Common Prayer. It’s Jesus, planning the ambiguous events of that first Palm Sunday.

I say “ambiguous” because, at least in the story of Palm Sunday we read this morning from the Gospel of mark, it’s not exactly clear what Jesus means.

Jesus seems to be prepared for a parade. He knows that the colt will be ready to ride. But he won’t explain what he’s doing. He tells the disciples that if anyone asks them why they’re taking the colt, they’re simply to say, “The Lord needs it.” (Mark 11:3) And nothing more. Those in the crowd who know the prophets well might recognize an allusion to the words of Zechariah, who says, “Lo, your king is coming to you, humble, and mounted on a donkey” (Zech. 9:9). The Gospel of Matthew helps the reader understand by quoting the text. But here, we just get Jesus, riding a small horse. He doesn’t quote Zechariah. He doesn’t quite tell you he’s the king. He just goes out and does a royal thing.

The same is true with the palms. Or the not-quite-palms, which the people don’t quite wave. Palm branches are a part of the Jewish festival of Sukkot, and they’d become a patriotic symbol of redemption in the first century, such that the coins minted by the Jewish rebels against Rome a few decades later were stamped, among other symbols, with palms. To march around with palms would be the equivalent of a Fourth-of-July parade, a rebellion in the face of the occupying authorities: but simply to cut leafy branches from generic trees and lay them under his feet, as the crowd does in the Gospel of Mark: Well, is that really the same thing?

The same goes for the carefully-worded chants. “Hosanna!” the people shout. “Save us, please!” A prayer addressed to God, or a celebration of Jesus? “Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord!” they say, which is a quotation from one of the psalms of ascent, sung by pilgrims as they processed toward the Temple. Are they saying that Jesus himself is the Messiah, the one who comes in the name of the Lord, or are they just singing a psalm? And they go on, “Blessed is the coming kingdom of our ancestor David,” and you’ll notice they don’t say, as our prayer book had me say when the service began, “Blessed is the King.” They’re careful to keep things abstract. The chants are as ambiguous as the palms are as ambiguous as the colt: Jesus shows those who are wise enough to recognize the signs that he is the Messiah, that this day is the long-awaited return of the King. But he doesn’t tell anyone anything.

He won’t even tell the Roman governor Pontius Pilate what’s really going on. He would seemingly rather die for a crime he’ll neither confirm nor deny than proclaim the truth of the charges to the world, and so when Pilate asks him, “Are you the King of the Jews,” Jesus answers him, with infuriating ambiguity, “You say so.” And he makes no further reply. (Mark 15:2–3)

This whole series of events sets us up for Easter morning itself, when Mary and Mary and Salome go to Jesus’ tomb. As Mark tells the story, they don’t see that Christ is risen, but they see that he is gone. A young man, sitting by the tomb, shows them that it is empty, and he tells them that Jesus has been raised. And they run away in fear, and tell no one anything.

A few days ago I was in a meeting, totally unrelated to this, where a group of people were trying to parse out the meaning of a somewhat convoluted policy. If the policy meant A we’d want to do thing #1, and if the policy meant B, we’d want to do thing #2 instead. And we struggled to figure out whether we should do thing #1 or thing #2, because it seemed the creators of the policy could choose whichever interpretation worked out best for them, even if it left us holding the bag.

After a few minutes’ discussion, one of the wiser members of the group said: “Ambiguity can be a tool.” And isn’t that the case? Ambiguity gives the interpreter flexibility; the real issue in our group was that we didn’t trust the people who’d be enforcing the rule.

But it’s exactly this flexibility that makes ambiguity such a powerful spiritual tool. It’s why Jesus teaches in parables. It’s why he keeps his identity a secret, why he only alludes to messianic prophecies, and leaves later interpreters to connect the dots. Because it’s one thing to be told the truth; it’s another to be shown everything you need, and then forced to work it out yourself.

If Palm Sunday were filled with unambiguous signs, then the story wouldn’t work. The failure would be too clear. If Jesus rode in on a donkey, quoting from Zechariah, and the people waved palm branches in the air, and said, “Blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord!” then this procession would be unambiguously a coup. And imagine the disappointment they would feel when the parade reached the city, and went straight to the Temple, and instead of proclaiming that the King was finally here, and gathering an army, and throwing the Romans out, Jesus just looked around, and then went home. Jesus would still be put to death, and on the same charges of sedition. But it would look as if he’d simply got cold feet.

Instead, the ambiguity forces us to think. What is Jesus doing here? Why is he not getting ready to fight? What do the symbols in this procession really mean? And if he’s mysterious enough, it might take us long enough to figure it out that there’s time for the full picture to become clear. Because the Palm Sunday story doesn’t end with the Passion, today, with a failed attempt at revolution.   

Because Jesus isn’t quite that kind of king. His ultimate battle is not with Rome, it’s with death itself. And so he doesn’t tell the people that he’s the Messiah, and call to mind their assumptions and ideas. He shows them what the Messiah does. He shows them what true kingship means. He lays down his life, to spare them from death, and up until the last minute, they’re still trying to figure him out. And in the end, only the centurion, the commander of the soldiers who have just killed him, realizes the truth: “Truly, this man was God’s son!” (Mark 15:39)

 Palm Sunday is Jesus’ final parable, the final ambiguous story in which he shows the world what the kingdom of God is like. He doesn’t answer every question for us. He doesn’t tell us what it all means. And it’s not because he’s a bad teacher: it’s because he’s so good, and he knows that what matters for us is not a concise theological truth, but the struggle through which we try to make meaning of the text.

So make meaning of the text. Carry home your palms, and ask yourself what it means to say “Hosanna,” “Save us!” today. Think about this gentle, loving Christ, and wonder what it means to act as if he’s King. And if you don’t have any answers right away, remember that the slow work of figuring it out is the point, after all. So sing this morning, and pray, but ask yourself what it means for you, today, to join your voices with that ancient crowd, and say, “Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord! Blessed is the coming kingdom of our ancestor David! Hosanna in the highest heaven!”

Sermon — March 17, 2024

Michael Fenn

Lectionary Readings

In the Gospel today, there is a small rhetorical device used that carries a lot of weight. I don’t know if it is easy to miss, because I am such an avid fan of plants and ecology that it jumped out at me immediately. Jesus says that “unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains just a single grain; but if it dies, it bears much fruit”. I think naturally many of us intuitively know that this is how plants work, seeds in general must fall and be put into soil and die in order to grow again. But there is a beauty and majesty to the fact that one seed from an apple can grow into a tree that then produces thousands of apples, one ear of corn can seed a field of corn, one kernel of wheat grows an entire stalk of wheat, or even how a caterpillar can metamorphosize into the splendor of a butterfly. 

However, I am skipping ahead within the rhetorical device. Before we get to the new apples, the rolling field of corn, the strong stalk of wheat, or the butterfly. We must go somewhere darker–we must fall to the ground. In a very classic kindergarten project, kids will get caterpillars, watch them as they turn into cocoons, and then patiently wait until what were once caterpillars emerge as butterflies. However, what is not talked about nearly as much is that all holometabolous insects–including all butterflies and moths–dissolve and digest the vast majority of their own body in the darkness of the cocoon; leaving only the essential plans of butterfly-ness and making everything else into a kind of bug-slime. Similarly, essentially any seed of any kind of plant will experience its dark moment; for many seeds inside fruits this occurs by being actually physically eaten, humans and animals eat countless seeds that then germinate in our byproducts. Or if not that, then many seeds will experience the fruit that once housed them rotting around them as it decomposes. And like Jesus says, many other seeds will fall to the ground into the darkness of the soil and “die”. If this has been a bit gross for you, my apologies, the biologist that lives inside me got the better of me when writing this sermon, but I hope I have invigorated the notion of the darkness attending to this metaphor. There is a moment of true darkness when the seed falls away, when the seed is planted, as it waits to germinate and grow into something beautiful again. The moment of the seed “dying”. 

Importantly, Jesus seems to use this rhetorical device to qualify the surrounding statements in the Gospel reading today. Just before this metaphor he talks about how the time has come for he himself to be glorified, just after he gives the direction to the disciples that they must “lose their life”, and in the next chunk he tells the disciples how his soul is troubled even as he is going to be glorified. 

Jesus uses this metaphor to anticipate both the crucifixion and the resurrection and to help understand what is going to happen. He is indeed greatly troubled by the idea of the crucifixion, but the troubled nature passes through the understanding of the kernel of wheat metaphor. Which helps us to understand that the crucifixion is in some way necessary, but that it is also not a permanent state. It is scary, but one moment on the path to something truly greater. Like the kernel of wheat that falls, the crucifixion is one moment on the journey, not the final destination. The resurrection is anticipated in this metaphor, the kernel of wheat will naturally grow into a stalk that produces many kernels of wheat, and that is its final point on its particular journey. 

It also points Jesus into a direction of relationship and trust. Jesus even asks rhetorically if he ought to ask God to spare him this endeavor, this fear, the hardship he must endure. Ultimately, though, Jesus says that he cannot do that, and will not do that. First because it is necessary–a kernel of wheat cannot grow into a stalk if it remains on the stalk. Second, because there is trust. There is a trust in Jesus’s relationship to God that God will glorify Jesus again. Jesus trusts in the fact that in his moment of falling to the ground that God will indeed lift him up again. When Jesus finds himself heading into the fearful darkness of the soil, he does not flinch away from it, does not ask God to spare him from the moment of trial, instead he moves deeper into a relationship of trust with God. 

Returning back to our gospel story, Jesus, ever the teacher, gives his followers some direction after he says something scary and ominous. Right after he gives the metaphor of the kernel of wheat, he tells his followers that those who love their life will lose it, and those who hate their life will keep it forever. It does feel like a “heads I win, tails you lose” kind of scenario. With either option, I either lose the life I love or keep the life I hate forever. So personally, I think understanding the confusion of this statement requires the understanding we get from the kernel of wheat metaphor. 

To love our life in the sense of this story would mean to cling onto the stalk of wheat, to demand that God give us the easiest straight path to follow, to always do what is easy instead of what is right, to do what is efficient over what is just, to do what is profitable instead of what is loving. In this sense, to love our life as it is is not a natural thing, it would be unnatural for the kernel of wheat to remain stuck forever onto the stalk–even though that is the most secure and safe place for it to be. To love our life means to be unwilling to undergo transformation, unwilling to leave the stalk, to be unwilling to do what is just, right, and necessary. To lose our life would mean to lose ourselves to pursue love in all its forms: justice, joy, community building, mercy, and so on. 

To lose our life means to embrace the fact that there will be times where our pursuit of this love will take us off of the stalk of wheat and into the dark soil on the ground, buried and waiting for what will come next. It will almost certainly get difficult, and strange, and inconvenient, and unpleasant. It may be the wisdom behind the pessimistic adage that “no good deed goes unpunished”–following Jesus, doing good, is hard. Unlike the adage though, we have the promise that when we inevitably find ourselves in the darkness of the soil, after falling off the stalk of wheat, we have a trust in God that we will not remain there in the soil forever.

I will say with almost certainty that everyone in this church has already experienced what I am talking about. The pursuit of love is, for example, what led all of us to isolate ourselves in our houses for months on end during the various stages of COVID, an anxious and dark time where love meant separation and boredom. 

However, it is also maybe not always that large and looming. Most of the time, we live quite ordinary lives with quite mundane problems. What of the dark soil then? I also think the pursuit of this love, and the subsequent darkness of soil, manifests in smaller ways throughout our lives. Maybe not in grand gestures of dark times, but in the small inconveniences we take upon ourselves to make our community better. I see this kind of thing acutely in my life when college students give up their entire summer to get paid a few hundred bucks to sleep in cabins and care for people’s kids——when they could easily make ten times that doing almost anything else; I see it when people regularly take hours out of their week to attend building committee meetings, vestry meetings, and such things——when they could easily say “no thanks”; I see it when tiny little churches devote days and dollars to welcome dozens of people into their parish house for a free weekly meals——when simply surviving another year as a church would be considered a success. 

As we move through Lent this time around, I am reminded through the darkness that Lent entails, that we understand that a Christian life, in its pursuit of love, is not always easy. Whether it is an everyday darkness in soil–losing your life bit by bit; or a more profound darkness in the soil, and losing your life feels much bigger. BREAK As we approach Easter, I am reminded that a Christian life, through the action of Jesus, also promises a profound and powerful resurrection in return. And like Jesus did, we can place our full trust in God for this resurrection. In the name of the one who loved us first.