4/7InkzHVUEQeEdU9vpc1tikzEhChrKmPfvXI-FSDBrBQ

martin luther king jr

Adult Object Lesson: Jesus’ View of Jerusalem (Luke 13:31-35)

Joseph of Arimathea carrying the body of Christ.

Savoldo, Giovanni Girolamo (c. 1480 – 1548)
Christ with Joseph of Arimathea

The people of Jerusalem:

Remembering Their Names

Today’s story is about the actions of a city. Jerusalem as a body of people is center stage.

Today’s “object” is the old children’s ditty that is meant to teach the meaning of “church.”

NOTE: The message can be taught to both children and adults, but they are likely to require different emphases. Adults need to ponder with maturity their actions within a group, while children are still learning the skills to act independently.

Here’s the children’s finger game:

Fold your hands with the fingers interlocking and bending over the back of your hand—the most traditional way.

Here’s the church.

Point your two index fingers skyward to make the church spire.

Here’s the steeple.

Spread your thumbs outward.

Open the doors. Where are the people?

There will be no people!

Now fold your hands with your fingers interlocking and bent inside the fold—toward the palms.

Repeat the poem.

Here’s the church. Here’s the steeple. Open the doors.

Now when you spread your thumbs outward. You can see the fingers.

Here are the people.

Today’s Gospel is leading us to think about the people of God as a group. Our actions, as a group, take on personality and power. We think of this as a good thing. It certainly is rooted in the Bible and God’s view of His creation. He names a Chosen People. They carry a lot of weight as such.

Jesus refers to his longing that the people of Jerusalem be gathered together under his protection, but they are unwilling.

When we think of God’s people today, we think of people who do good things and trust and obey God. We think of correct behavior as being found within the safety of numbers—no matter how often history proves this isn’t true.

Jesus starts out condemning Jerusalem, the City of Peace, from the start. They have a reputation, those Jerusalem folks. It is the city that turns on the prophets.

Jesus will ride into this city to the cheers of the people.

Jesus will walk out of the city to their collective scorn.

The path to this drama is foreshadowed in today’s text. We are privileged in reading it to know what is coming.

The people are given one opportunity after another to make things right—at every level of power—but collectively they just can’t muster the courage.

There is no guaranteed safety in numbers — even within the church. Collectively we can still do the wrong thing. In these moments, individuals in the church can shine. It is not easy and often the Church discourages it. They may succeed. Often, they do not.

That’s why saints are called by name.

They act as individuals within groups that are ethically or morally challenged. The problem may be isolated. The group generally may be good. But something about them, at one moment, just isn’t right.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer, for example, stood alone against the Nazis. Martin Luther King, Jr. raised his voice to a nation that wasn’t ready to hear him. Both were killed—one by an authorized group, the other by a lone gunmen who felt empowered by the sentiments of others.

Jesus will have just one person who steps from the crowd on the way to Calvary. Joseph of Arimathea will stand alone before Pilate as the people of Jerusalem assemble on the hill. He alone will not follow that crowd. He will be the one person in a large city to speak up—unafraid or afraid.  He wasn’t part of the inner circle as far as we know—the properly vetted spokesman for Christ. He was one man acting without support of any organization. Many others know that what is going on is wrong. One will act.

We remember his name.

Church Decline and the Inability to Say “No”

At the core of democracy is the freedom to say “no.” This freedom is also at the core of Christianity, without which democracy the way we know it today would not exist.

Jesus taught His followers to sort out the demands of the various authorities in everyday ancient Mediterranean life—and they were many—local, religious, tribal, class, Roman. Jesus gave his followers license to say “no.” Yes, it got some of them in trouble. Saying “no” calls for some bravery, some chance-taking.

Every now and then, the Church forgets that “no” is an option, even in Church life. The Church is then taking itself more seriously than its mission.

There is always a temptation to worship the leaders whom we can see and hear rather than the nebulous God they serve but come to represent in people’s minds. The temptation of leaders is to first accept the attention and then to expect the attention. Obedience to man is substituted for obedience to God.

Things can go badly for many for a very long time until one or a few brave souls put their tongues to the roof of their mouths and say “NO.”

Many of these are remembered today as saints. Others are featured in history books. Two of them have similar names — Martin Luther and Martin Luther King, Jr.

Still we easily forget the power of the simplest and most necessary word in almost any language. Wrong will prevail without the ability to say “no.”

We are in one of these unfortunate eras. We have church leaders who look at any controversy in the Church and say. “I’d better not comment.” No response appears to be safe, a ticket to popularity (and reelection and a continuing paycheck).

No response is a devil’s playground.

We have clergy who protect their status in the Church by saying nothing to abuses of power.

We have church members who follow suit and attempt to create an easy-going congregational life where everyone just gets along and never considers taking a stand on anything that might disrupt the good life.

Shun the naysayer.

Substituting for the simple word “no” are laborious Social Statements that committees slave over until everyone can agree  . . . and that collect cyberdust on the national bodies’ websites.

The Church then stands for nothing and people of conviction rightly conclude that passions are of more value outside the Church.

The Church, without the word “no” in its vocabulary, will continue to decline.

Do something about this? It’s our choice: Yes or No.