“THE PASSIONS OF THE CHRIST”
A Sermon by the Rev. Bruce Clear
Easter Sunday,
All
There are, I think, two distinct ways that Christians view Jesus. One is to see him as the object of religious belief and faith, claiming that as his most important role. The other is to see him as showing us a religious path to follow in belief and behavior, claiming that following his teachings is of supreme importance. In the reading, Marcus Borg identified these two paths, explaining that both are legitimate and have strong following.
These two very different paths seem to become most obvious with the Easter story. In some ways, those who view belief about Jesus as most important are most drawn to the resurrected Jesus after the crucifixion, that is, after Easter. Those who view belief in Jesus’ teachings as central are drawn to Jesus, the wise rabbi, and his message before Easter. The former are drawn to the passion story. The latter are drawn to the passions that epitomized Jesus’ ministry.
As I said in the newsletter, don’t read my sermon title too carelessly. My thoughts today do not address the same concerns as Mel Gibson’s famous movie from a few years ago.
In fact, I’ve
always had some uneasiness about the tradition of what has come to be called “Passion
Plays” – stories of the crucifixion and resurrection (though mostly the
crucifixion) of Jesus. Part of my
uneasiness has been the sorry record of anti-Semitism that these plays seem to
have inspired over the years. In the
case of the most famous of passion plays, Oberomergau in
Part of my uneasiness about “Passion Plays” has been that they are, well, a fairly morbid topic. Yes, they portray an important interpretation of an historical event, but they seem almost to glory in the gory part of the story. At the very least, if we think young children should be shielded from depictions of extreme violence, then they should not be allowed at such plays.
But most of my uneasiness with passion plays is that they seem to suggest that the way Jesus died is the most important part of his legacy; that the somehow we can discover the crux of who Jesus was by looking at his death and resurrection more than at his life and his teachings. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with passion plays, but as far as I can tell, they have nothing to do with the religion Jesus taught. Passion plays, as a rule, ignore entirely who Jesus was in life in order to focus on who he was in death.
So instead of the “Passion of the Christ” which speaks of his death, I am more interested this morning in the “Passions of the Christ” which speaks of his life and teachings. I want to ask, “what was Jesus passionate about” in his ministry?” I want to know about the pre-Easter Jesus, and discover what he cared about.
In his book on Jesus, biblical scholar Marcus Borg speaks of passion as “a major indicator of character.” It is “our dedicated devotion, our consuming interest, our concentrated commitment.”
“What was Jesus passionate about?” It turns out that is not a difficult question at all. A cursory reading of the Gospels reveals pretty much the same, I think, as what a deeper reading reveals about his passions. And when we look at those passions we discover that his message was a fundamentally radical one – radical in our own day as it was in his. His message, if taken seriously, would threaten today’s ruling powers not only in nations but in Christendom. I want, for the rest of my sermon, to review what I see as the passions of Jesus. It is only fair to say that much of my views expressed are drawn from Marcus Borg’s book I used for the readings (Jesus) and another recent book called What Jesus Meant by perhaps my favorite non-fiction writer about history, politics, and the classics, Garry Wills.
One thing that Jesus’ religion was clearly passionate about was compassion, standing in support of those who are in some way disadvantaged or suffering: those who are poor, sick, oppressed, outcast, alienated from, or scorned by, society. When he was asked how people can serve him, he replied that to serve those society considered “the least” important – the least of these – is to serve him. He was on the side of “the least of these, and taught his followers to be so as well.
Jesus spoke more about helping the poor than almost any other topic. He instructed his followers to sell everything they own and give to the poor. When I consider this, I can’t help but think of what I consider to be the “prosperity ministries” on television, and there are many of them, that promote the Christian religion as a formula to amass personal wealth. In fact, Jesus taught almost the opposite. When a man asked Jesus about protecting his property, Jesus replied,
“Take care to protect yourself against every desire for having more, for life does not lie in the abundance of things one owns.” (Luke 12:15).
Jesus’ passion about the poor also directs me to consider how we set policy priorities in this country in terms of helping the poor, providing medical care, and promoting diversity. We are far behind most Western nations in terms of helping those in need, yet our political leadership, whether Republican or Democrat, invokes the name of Jesus to endorse their policies.
It is ironic that many people of wealth attach themselves to Jesus, because his ministry was no friend of the wealthy. For example, Jesus wrote,
“Happy are they who are poor; for the reign of heaven is yours. . . . But dire your plight, you who are rich, for your time of comfort is over.” (Luke 6:20,24.)
Or again:
“No servant can obey two lords. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or pamper the one and scant the other. You cannot serve both God and Mammon (or Greed).” (Luke 16:13)
When a young
and wealthy man who was sympathetic to Jesus, asked what he must do to enter the
Jesus was particularly suspicious of power – both political and religious – and urged his followers in no uncertain terms to avoid the pursuit of power.
“Whoever would be first must become the last of all and the servant of all.” (Matthew 9:35).”
When his
disciples asked which of them will be more respected in the
“Whoever becomes as lowly as this child here will be the greatest person in the heavens’ reign; and whoever welcomes any child like this in my name, that person is welcoming me.”
Jesus had particular contempt for the religious leadership of his day, seeing in them the soul of hypocrisy.
“The Scribes and the Pharisees,” he said, “sit in the chair of Moses. You should do as they tell you, and do it scrupulously. But do not do what they themselves do. For they do not do as they say. . . . All their deeds are performed for show in men’s eyes.” (Matthew 23:1-7).
He said
directly to the chief priests of the
Jesus had a strong passion for equality of inherent worth and dignity. He befriended the outcasts of society, claiming that he was there to give love to all, especially those who are shunned by society. He associated with all whom society rejected. He saw in them the personal inherent worth, and taught others to honor that as well. Jesus preached the equality of all, saying, “the servant is not greater than his master, nor the emissary greater than the one who dispatched him.”
One example of that egalitarianism was his extraordinary welcoming of women into his close circle. Garry Wills comments on it this way:
“The equality of men and women was a thing so shocking in the patriarchal society of Jesus’ time that his own male followers could not understand it. (The book of John, at chapter four verse seven, recounts that) ‘at this point his followers arrived, and were thunderstruck that he was speaking to a woman’ – and a Samaritan woman at that.
It
was a source of scandal for women to travel openly with a rabbi; but ‘many’
women followed Jesus through
Jesus was also passionately anti-violence. His message was an extraordinary one that, if taken literally, or even taken seriously, should shock quite a few people.
“Love your enemies and pray for those who afflict you.” (Matthew 5:44) Praise those who hate you, praise those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you. To one who punches your cheek, offer the other cheek. To one seizing your cloak, do not refuse the tunic under it. . . . For if you love those who love you back, what mark of virtue have you. Sinners themselves love those who love back. . . . Be not a judge, then, and you will not be judged. Be no executioner, and you will not be executed.”
Jesus also taught separation of church and state, stating explicitly to “render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and unto God that which is God’s.” Jesus was appalled whenever the power of the state and the power of religion would mingle together.
Jesus was passionate about the fact that religion is something personal, not something to wear on your sleeve. Religion was located in the heart, and it is a blasphemy of true religion when it is paraded ostentatiously. He opposed formalisms of worship, pietistic allegiance to the Sabbath, and codes of personal behavior. He questioned the authority of the priest.
Any public display of religious piety he opposed. When I hear debate about prayer in school or prayer in the state legislature, I can’t help but think of Jesus’ prescription for prayer. It went like this:
“When you pray, be not like pretenders, who prefer to pray in the synagogues and in public squares, in the sight of others. In truth I tell you, that is all the profit they will have. But you, when you pray, go into your inner chamber and, locking the door; pray there in hiding, and your Father who sees you in hiding will reward you.” (Matthew 6:5-8).
For Jesus, religion is an inner commitment and passion, not an outward set of rules or structures or piousness. Religion is a relationship with the sacred, with the divine, not commands of behavior from Scribes and Pharisees.
These are some
of the passions of Jesus, known as “the Christ.” But the most important passion was treating
everyone with inherent dignity, and I’ll return to that in summary. When his disciples asked about how to enter
the
“When the Son of Man comes in his splendor. . . he will say to you, ‘Approach, you blessed of my Father, take possession of the reign prepared for you from the cosmic origins. For I hungered and you gave me food. I thirsted and you gave me drink. I was an alien [i.e., immigrant] and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was ill, and you tended me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ Then the vindicated responded to him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and we fed you, or thirsty and we gave you drink? When did we see you ailing and we tended you, or in prison and we went to you?’ And the Ruler will reply, saying, ‘In truth I tell you, whenever you did these things to the lowest of my brothers, you were doing it to me.’
This passage may in fact be the very heart of Jesus’ passion – about caring for those who are less fortunate. Here is how Garry Wills comments on these verses:
“What exactly does it mean, ‘Whenever you did these things to the lowest of my brothers, you were doing it to me.”? It means that priests who sexually molest boys are molesting Jesus. Televangelists who cheat old women of their savings are cheating Jesus. Those killing members of other religions because of their religion are killing Jesus. Those who despise the poor are despising Jesus. Those neglecting the homeless are neglecting Jesus. Those persecuting gays are persecuting Jesus. And that judgment of his is being delivered now, at the moment when he is scorned, ignored, left hungry. He is outcast, and we welcome him not. He needs us, and we do not take up his cross with him, love with him, die with him. That is the awesome test of love that Jesus brings to bear in our lives. Admittedly, Jesus was a radical, but can any but radicals justly claim his name?”
On this day of Easter celebration, we turn not to the passion story of Jesus, but to the passions that Jesus’ himself felt during his ministry on earth. These were extraordinarily challenging concerns that should awaken in us an understanding of how we relate to others, especially those less fortunate than us.
Some students
of the Bible blend Jesus’ passions into one overarching label: the
“God’s passion is justice. God’s character and God’s passion go together, for the simple reason that justice is the social form of compassion.”
It seems to me this is the time to invoke the teachings of Jesus. Easter is the time to look to his passions. This is the time to bring the passionate teachings of Jesus, not just the passion of Jesus, back to the center.
In Borg’s book on Jesus, he used almost as a synonym for “resurrection” the word “vindication.” Jesus was executed by the secular rulers of his world, but his life was vindicated by divine power.
Resurrection may mean many things, but at the minimum it means that Jesus’ passions did not die when his body was laid in the tomb. The passions of Jesus are reborn with every generation that turns to him for guidance.
The popular Easter hymn declares that “Jesus Christ is Risen Today. Alleluia!” Those words mean different things, but one crucial meaning is that his passions are reborn in those who follow him.
Reading from Marcus Borg in
“Jesus: Uncovering the Life, Teachings and Relevance
of a Religious Revolutionary”
Marcus Borg is the leader of the “Jesus Seminar,” a group of biblical scholars who gather to discuss and find consensus on what Biblical sayings of Jesus are authentic. Borg was asked in a television interview to answer the question, “What was Jesus Like” in a minute and fifteen seconds. Here is what he said.
“Jesus was from the peasant class. Clearly, he was brilliant. His use of language was remarkable and poetic, filled with images and stories. He had a metaphoric mind. He was not an ascetic, but world-affirming, with a zest for life. There was a sociopolitical passion to him – like a Gandhi or a Martin Luther King, he challenged the domination system of his day. He was a religious ecstatic, a Jewish mystic, for whom god was an experiential reality. As such, Jesus was also a healer. And there seems to have been a spiritual presence around him, like that reported of St. Francis or the Dalai Lama. And as a figure of history, Jesus was an ambiguous figure – you could experience him and conclude he was insane, as his family did, or that he was simply eccentric or that he was a dangerous threat – or you could conclude that he was filled with the Spirit of God.”
Reading from Marcus Borg in
“Jesus: Uncovering the Life, Teachings and Relevance
of a Religious Revolutionary”
In a section called “Two Paradigms for Seeing Jesus,” Borg claims that there is a “’major conflict in American Christianity today” between these two paradigms:
We are experiencing conflict between two very different paradigms for seeing the “data” of Christianity. The Bible (including the gospels), Jesus, postbiblical teachings and doctrines (including the creeds), the nature of Christian language, and ultimately the nature of the Christian life. Both are Christian paradigms – millions of Christians affirm each. So it is not that one of them is Christian and the other is not. And it is not that one of them is “traditional” Christianity and the other is an abandonment of much of the Christian tradition. Rather, both are ways of seeing the Christian tradition and what it says about the Bible, God, Jesus, and what it means to follow him.
There is as yet no commonly agreed-upon terminology for naming these two paradigms. To use a chronological way of naming them, the first is an earlier paradigm, the second an emerging paradigm. To use more substantive ways of naming them, the first is belief-centered; it emphasizes the importance of holding Christian beliefs about Jesus, God, and the Bible. The second is way-centered; it emphasizes that Christianity is about following Jesus on a path, a path of transformation. The first emphasizes the literal meaning of Christian language, including the Bible; the second emphasizes the more-than-literal meaning of Christian language, what I call the metaphorical meaning of the Christian language. . . .
Here I provide only a preview of the foundation of the “way-centered” view of Jesus:
Ø The gospels are the result of a historical process. Written in the last third of the first century, they tell us what Jesus had become in the lives of the communities in which the traditions reported in them developed.
Ø As such, the gospels combine memory and testimony. Some of what they report is Jesus remembered; some of what the report is the fuller understanding that had developed in the decades between his death and the writing of the gospels.
Ø The gospels also combine memory and metaphor, historical memory and metaphorical narrative.
Ø There is a crucial distinction between the pre-Easter Jesus and the post-Easter Jesus. The former is Jesus before his death; the latter is what Jesus became after his death. There are important differences between the two.
These are the foundations of a historical-metaphorical way of telling the story of Jesus. . . . They lead us to a way of telling the story of Jesus quite different from the most familiar way of telling the story. They result in a sketch of Jesus that is persuasive, compelling inviting – and challenging.