Rev Andy Braunston

Introduction

Over the Sundays in Lent we have been considering Jesus as both a radical preacher and counter-cultural teacher.  We’ve heard him say the most surprising things like:

    * “Love your enemies”,
    * “Blessed are the poor”
    * “Turn the other cheek”

We have heard him criticise, quite vehemently, the dominant religious and social traditions of his day.  If we were to just know these things about Jesus’ teaching we’d soon come to see what a radical, and dangerous, preacher he was.  As we get nearer to Holy Week we can see that things are coming to a head; the authorities aren’t going to let this radical preacher continue unchallenged.

The Background

What we haven’t considered so far in our sermons is the background to all this.  We need to remember the political and social situation at the time of Jesus’ ministry.  

The Jewish people were a conquered people.  The Romans were in charge and there was a Roman Governor of Palestine – Pilate.  The Romans liked to have local rulers who would administer Roman law and give a veneer of independence so there were “local” kings like Herod and his brothers who ruled the various parts of the once proud Kingdom of Israel as Tetrachs.  The Romans, however, were the real power; the kings were puppets who tried to ape Roman culture.  

The real leaders of the people were the religious authorities.  They were more representative of the people than the various kings and they were devout and put great emphasis on upholding the traditions of the ancestors.  They were various groupings amongst the religious leaders but Jesus seems to have directed most of his criticism to the Pharisees who were a deeply conservative sect within Judaism and who grew into the modern day Rabbis who lead the Jewish people spiritually.  Jesus was probably close to the religious positions of these people and so reacted badly to what he saw as their hypocrisy.  From this party were chosen the High Priests of the Temple who were the religious leaders of the Jewish people.  

The religious and political leaders of the people had a difficult task.  They had to:

    * ensure that the taxes were paid to the Romans – which would guarantee their continued semi-independent existence
    * convince the Romans not to interfere with the Temple – some emperors wanted to put Roman insignia or even statues of themselves within the Temple
    * and to stop the people from rebelling.

 If they managed to do this they would, they believed, secure the future of the Jewish people for a different age.  

The leaders, therefore, had a difficult balancing act to perform. Like all leaders they weren’t popular but they didn’t have to contend with general elections!  They had to keep the Romans at arms’ length to allow their religious and cultural life to continue but, in order to do this, they had to keep the Romans happy by ensuring the tax was paid and the people didn’t rebel.  

Rebellion was the BIG fear.  The might of Rome could not be defeated by a small people on the edge of the Empire.  The Romans were ruthless in suppressing dissent.  If the people had rebelled then the fear was that Jewish life as it was known would end.  In fact when the people did rebel in the year 66 the Temple was destroyed and the State of Israel ceased to exist not to be seen again until the middle of the twentieth century.  The leaders of the people were very keen to keep the people docile.

Then into this tinderbox of competing priorities and dreams comes Jesus and his radical message.

The Pressure from Jesus

The selection of passages today which made up our reading all come from chapters 20 and 21 of St Luke’s Gospel and contain direct challenges to the religious leaders.  He criticises the scribes (another religious grouping) who look pious but who are greedy but praises the poor widow who gives all she has to the work of God.   He says that the richly adorned Temple – of which the Jews were rightly proud – would pass away but his words would never pass away; such an extraordinary claim would have outraged the leaders of the people.  

St Luke says that "every day he was teaching in the temple... and all the people would get up early in the morning to listen to him..."  To the establishment figures at the time this must have seemed like a relentless onslaught against them; and it was being delivered in the very heart of their cultural and religious identity - the Temple.  No self respecting priest, scribe or Pharisee could wander through the Temple without risking the sharper end of Jesus’ tongue as he told the crowd of God’s generosity and contrasted it with the meanness and of the leaders.  

If best brains amongst the leadership challenged him then Jesus always seemed to wrong-foot them and ran rings around them using all the examples of moral decay that he could find in the society of the time.

The numbers of Jesus' followers are not exactly quoted, but the gospels regularly suggest shortage of space for all those who wished to hear him when he gave his speeches.   We may need to appreciate what that weight of numbers looked like to those in positions of power who were regularly on the receiving end of his criticisms.  What was the degree of risk which his popular movement represented to the powerful and privileged?  Remember the great fear was rebellion and here was a leader who criticized the trimming and compromising of the leaders and who was trusted by the people.  A revolt would have brought terrible retribution from Rome and the possible end of Jewish life as they knew it.

If he had been allowed to continue, could Jesus have actually brought his community to a tipping point where the privileged leaders and the corrupt institutions were to be washed away and a more just and equal society put in their place?  Or was that too much social change for the Roman occupying authorities to tolerate?  Were Caiaphas and his crew a case of 'better the devil you know' for the Governors and Procurators who regarded the Palestinian posting as a backwater?  Or were the Romans a safer bet for the leaders than a popular movement led by Jesus?

All this taxed their minds as the festival of Passover approached.  Passover is one of the major Jewish festivals and is a commemoration of the Exodus from Egypt.  It’s about freedom from oppression and is a key reminder of the religious and social identity of the Jewish people.  Each year it is repeated “once we were slaves in Egypt….but the Eternal One with outstretched arm brought us forth”.  Passover was, and is, political, Jesus was drawing huge crowds each day in the Temple, he was deft, dangerous and popular; the festival was approaching.  The risk was huge for the leaders so they were determined to remove him; Judas, for his own reasons we can only guess at, was their pawn.    As we shall see next week Jesus’ triumphal march into Jerusalem was very confrontational.

Power

One of the things we will be asked to consider over the coming weeks is who we think will exercise power most effectively and fairly in the United Kingdom.  For weeks the different political parties have been giving us their pitch, asking us to trust them and allow them to lead us.  We’re told we need change, and we’re told that we need stability, that we can’t spend our way out of a recession, and that if we cut spending too soon we will end up back in a recession.  We’re asked to trust people we’ve never met, and trust that the policies presented to us will be followed through and effective.  In essence, however, we’re being asked to say who we think will be best at exercising power.  

In the ancient world the use of power was more brutal.  Power was seized not elected, but once seized those who exercised it had to keep it and create a degree of trust amongst the people whom they governed.  

As the Passover approached statuses, and the status quo, were being threatened; vested interests were being challenged.  Pilate ultimately caved in to the blood lust of the crowd because he feared a riot, which his forces could probably have quelled; but such an incident would have reflected badly on his professional reputation and career prospects in Rome and so, as the weak ruler, he chooses to keep the status quo rather than allow a revolution to start.  This shouldn’t surprise us as all leaders have to make calculations about how to keep the trust and obedience of those they govern.  

The contrast is with Jesus in all this.  The leaders of the people misjudged his intentions.  He clearly had a huge following and he clearly was critical of the religious leaders of the people and seemed to have utter contempt for Herod whom he ignores compared to Pilate whom he actually engages.  But Jesus’  desire to use power wasn’t for personal gain, it wasn’t even really for political independence and for the passing concerns for the Jewish people in first century Palestine.  

Instead, Jesus shows that power can be used responsibly, that the call for a fairer world, for a just society, for the freedom celebrated in the Passover involves politics but is somehow beyond them as politics will always betray us and let us down.  This is what he meant when he told Pilate that “my kingdom is not of this world”.

Conclusion

Instead of launching a revolution Jesus points to values which are political but which are eternal – fairness, justice, integrity, compassion.  These are the tools we used as we seek to change our society, as we seek to build a world which is diverse, fair and just.  

But as Passover approaches a series of events is now to unfold because of the power struggles, private ambitions, and political intrigues at work in the corridors of power in Roman-occupied Jerusalem.  Fear will be the dominant emotion and the prime motivator for many of the characters involved in the drama.  That fear will destroy the inner courage of many of Jesus' followers; it will generate an oppressive atmosphere of blame and guilt; it will appear, initially, to wipe out any hope of a future for the community of followers who had supported Jesus with their gifts, their hospitality, and their loyalty.

The days that follow will not be the time for the disciples to be counter-cultural - that's the effect that raw fear has on people.  And the gospels seem to indicate that much of what Jesus taught his followers about the essential truths of God's kingdom will be driven from their minds as the terror unfolds.  Fear will continue to grip them as they gather together on the night of Jesus' arrest and will haunt them throughout the days of grieving until the day of resurrection dawns.  Only then will they begin to remember some of what their teacher told them.  Only then will the deep truths behind his stories, and the revolutionary ideas within his teaching begin to take shape in their understandings and start to be shown in how they approach the future.

Living by those ideas, and pursuing an understanding of Jesus' teachings, are the hallmarks of the Christian disciple.  Sometimes we are called to be counter-cultural ourselves, particularly when the core principles of our Teacher are undermined.  Sometimes we are called to challenge the seats of power and demonstrate the hollowness of their values.  Yet, most frequently, we are called simply to choose love instead of hate, to see God in all people, and to pursue the abundance of life for ourselves and our neighbours which Jesus said he came to bring.

Amen.