Romans 12:12ff; Luke 4
I have a pretty awful memory for sermons, but one that sticks in my mind was by Jeffrey John. He was preaching on the feeding of the 5,000, and described two of his Sunday School teachers.
Miss Jones read all of Jesus’ miracles in spiritual and moral terms. The feeding of the 5,000 becomes a moral teaching about how when we share everyone gets what they need.
Mr Matthews to a rather more literal view of the Bible. The feeding of the 5,000 was a demonstration of God’s mighty power to provide bread and fish and that’s all there is to it. Take the story as it’s written and nothing more.
Both of these approaches have their merits, but neither are particularly satisfactory on their own.
How do we approach Jesus’ extraordinary pronouncement at Nazareth? In this season of Epiphany and revelation how do we make sense of Jesus’ claim that Isaiah’s prophecy is fulfilled in the hearing of the people.
That Jesus inhabits these words: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to bring good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to set free those who are oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favour.”
Do we take the Mr Matthews approach? Jesus is here to bring good news to the poor. That he’s here to release prisoners? To give sight to the blind? To set free the oppressed?
Will the ministry of Jesus of Nazareth be a literal fulfilment of these things? Today we leave it to the Home Secretary to proclaim release of the captives when the prisons are too full. What is Jesus here to do?
Perhaps we take the Miss Jones approach. The good news for the poor is less that they won’t be ground down by their material disadvantage, than that the spiritually poor will be blessed.
The proclamation of freedom to the captives is the freedom from those held captive by addiction or anxiety. It’s sight for the inly blind. It’s the setting free of spirits oppressed by pleasure, wealth and care.
I wonder which approach you naturally warm to.
It’s an interesting question, but I hope it’s clear that these things are not mutually exclusive.
It’s manifestly clear in the gospels that Jesus has come both to give sight to the blind, and also allow the inly blind to see afresh. Emma will tell you that she may not be able to see physically, but Jesus has nonetheless given her gifts of sight that most do not possess.
Jesus comes to release both the economically and physically oppressed, as well as the mentally and spiritually oppressed.
If Jesus’ ministry is just a political project at leaves us in our sin then we may as well go home.
But is Jesus’ ministry is just about healing our inward wounds with nothing material changing then we have a rather impoverished view of the good news that Jesus comes to proclaim.
This is something that Jesus started and that we, the church, the Body of Christ, are called to continue.
The wonderful thing about the image of the body is that it is so broad. The whole point of the metaphor is that it is made of diverse parts working together for a common goal.
Some Christians are called to works of healing. That could be through the practice of medicine, or through the pastoral and prophetic gifts of healing that the Spirit gives. Both are necessary and good.
Some Christians are called to set the oppressed free. That could be through political and moral campaign. It could be through the compassionate and courageous practice of the law. It could be through prayerful pastoral ministry. All are necessary and good.
We may be called to release captives through education, or counselling, or loving service. All are necessary and good.
Jesus says in John’s Gospel that he has come to bring life in all its fullness. He embodies this life and, by his Spirit he seeks to bring it to fruition in the world which he loves.
He calls his church, his body, to engage with him in this mission to fulness of life that was revealed at the beginning of Luke’s gospel, was paid for on the cross, and he its first fruits of new creation at the resurrection.
We saw a brave example of this as the Gospel was preached in Washington after President Trump’s inauguration. Whether you agreed with her or not, Bishop Budde was surely seeking to challenge perceived oppression.
Each of us are called to participate in this work of God in some way. What is your calling? What is our particular charism as a particular, local manifestation of the church?
We are called to proclaim the season of the Lord’s favour. It is here and growing in our midst.
It has been fulfilled in the life, death and resurrection of Christ and now it spreads and grows through the body to the glory of God!
MB