• Can you preach about the Road to Emmaus?

    This sermon was preached on 19 April 2015 in St Mary’s Cathedral, Glasgow using ideas that were also explored in the sermon preached for Fr Chucks Iwuagwu in Haslemere, Surrey.

    Sermon preached by Kelvin Holdsworth on 19 April 2015 from St Mary's Cathedral, Glasgow on Vimeo.

    There are a number of texts in the bible about which it is almost impossible to preach. If I were to ask you which texts were there which preachers really shouldn’t attempt to tackle then I fancy that you might come up with some of the genealogies – the lists of who begat whom. Or maybe some of the more obscure purity laws in Leviticus which have little to do with our lives in a modern world.

    And it is true – some of those texts are next to useless for anyone trying to preach the gospel.

    But there are also a small number of texts about which sermons are pretty tricky for the opposite reason. If I’m honest, I’ve never heard (or preached) a sermon on the good Samaritan which actually improved on the story itself. It is the same with the Love Chapter – that glorious paean to love which St Paul sent to the fractious church in Corinth. No matter how badly it is read at so many weddings the ultimate truth shines out.

    Love is patient, love is kind. (And that just can’t be improved upon.

    And the same might be said of Psalm 23 – when did you ever hear a sermon on it that improved on the poetry or the pathos of the human condition so precisely observed.

    And so it is with the gospel reading this morning.

    The road to Emmaus is the Easter reading par excellence – it is familiar and comforting and disturbing all at once because it contains within it the surprise of recognising the Lord himself who appears, as is our experience with the breaking of bread and the fellowship that results from the breaking down of barriers between people.

    But who can improve on the story?

    What preacher ever beat Luke at his own game?

    The answer, if there is one is to presume that we’ve never heard Luke telling of the story at all.

    The answer is to put ourselves into the shoes – or probably the dusty sandals of the two who made their way to this place called Emmaus.

    And the thing to remember is that they’ve not heard the story. They’ve no idea what’s about to happen to them much less any idea that we might still be talking about them these centuries later.

    As they walk along, can we walk with them and overhear their conversation.

    Before the stranger catches up with them, what are they saying?

    Luke just tells us that they were talking about what had happened. Jesus had been put to death and Jesus had been buried. He was gone. No doubt there was a lot to talk about.

    If we read this as pious Christians who know how the story turns out then we might presume that they were having prayerful discussions about how Jesus’s death fitted in with the prophecies of the Hebrew scriptures. If we read the story as empathetic fellow travellers on a spiritual tradition we can probably see into their grief and share it.

    But what makes us so sure that is what they were talking about.

    What makes us so sure that they were not angry with Jesus for provoking just about everyone and finally going that one step too far and getting himself killed off long before his time.

    They may not have been experiencing pious thoughts at all. They may have been really rather cross.

    And surely they must have been wondering what was coming next.

    They’d been part of a great movement. And they’d lost their Messiah – what comes next? Who will replace him?

    How do you replace a Messiah anyway?

    Well, it’s obvious, isn’t it? You just put an advert in the Church Times for a new one. Maybe that’s what they were talking about as they made their way along the road.

    How to write the advert for a new Messiah.

    I’ve got this week’s edition of the Church Times here. This is how those adverts usually sound.

    • City based church seeks Messiah. Our priorities are missional leadership, imaginative outreach and children and young people. We seek a Messiah who has a personal relationship with God. (These adverts are all written in code).

    • Here’s another one – Honorary Assistant Messiah needed for 8 rural parishes in Norfolk. House provided but no stipend. Must be self-motivated.

    • Messiah required to be rector of beautiful rural parish in the Garden of England. Good schools, lovely people, well-appointed Rectory. Resolutions A, B and C have been passed. (That’s code for – no female Messiah’s need apply).

    It is funny the things they put in these adverts.

    If I’m ever tempted to read these out in the office on a Friday morning when the Church Times comes I have to make sure that there are no coffee pots near to the Vice Provost. He has been known to get over excited and break crockery in his fury at what they say.

    You would think sometimes that the Christian Gospel had been spread for 2000 years by mission development plans, people able to accomplish goal based ministry and those who have a passion for “innovative work with families and children”.

    Fortunately, I think that I worked out some time ago that this simply isn’t true.

    The Christian Gospel is spread by kindness, good humour, by people who bear the marks of Christ in their souls to enable them to reach out to a world that needs to know more about God’s love. It is spread by the enthusiastic witness of those who know the love of God to be true and to be the most wonderful thing in the whole world. But somehow the adverts don’t usually mention those things.

    The stranger reached over the table and picked up the bread and gave thanks and broke it and their eyes were opened.

    Opened I suspect to the good company that he had been on the road. The good humour he had exhibited that made them invite him in. The kindness he had shown them at a difficult time. Familiar factors. Familiar signs. Familiar symbols.

    And all of a sudden their eyes are opened. And all of a sudden he doesn’t seem to be there.

    Or is he?

    All of a sudden they have a burning desire to rush back to Jerusalem. All of a sudden they have a burning desire to tell their friends that all it not lost. Love has not died. Kindness has not gone. The one who broke bread with them before has broken into their world again.

    They don’t need a new Messiah.

    It is worth remembering sometimes that the church doesn’t need any new Messiahs. One was always enough and he’s still around.

    Still around and still turning up where bread is broken, stories shared and God’s people with humour and kindness celebrate the greatest news in the world – that God is love.

    Turned up there in Emmaus. And turns up here.

    For if Christ were not risen, we would not be gathered here in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

    Amen.

10 responses to “The end of the World”

  1. agatha Avatar
    agatha

    Mildly serious question that has never occurred to me before. Why does she still get called the Virgin Mary when Jesus had brothers she presumably had in the normal way?

    1. kelvin Avatar

      Well, there are those who try to make the case that she remained “ever” Virgin and that the reference to Jesus’s brothers is an oblique and more general reference to the men of the extended family – cousins, uncles and so on. I think that’s rather silly myself.

      The Blessed Virgin Mary is simply one of the titles afforded her because of the persistent story of Christ’s birth. For myself, I think there is more interesting theological ground to be ploughed by thinking of her as exemplifying a virgin world waiting in longing and expectation for God to come. That kind of thing seems to me to be considerably more potent than birth-story tittle-tattle.

  2. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
    Rosemary Hannah

    When I was young I was sure the birth story was ‘just a myth’ – but then as I got deeper into history I got more experienced at evaluating stories. Not, you understand, ‘form-critical’ experienced, but historical experienced. What now strikes me with force is that two very different writers tell very different stories about the birth of Jesus with very different genealogies. However, despite the two birth stories coming from markedly different traditions, both bill Mary as a virgin. In any other context, I would find that more than convincing. So here, too, I let myself be convinced. As a sober historian, and cynic, I find it the most probably explanation. Not the only historically possible one, just the most generally convincing.

    Generally, I find historical thought more satisfying than the more circular arguments of form criticism. I am fairly sure I could use form criticism to disprove the fact that David Cameron is currently the PM.

  3. agatha Avatar
    agatha

    Thanks – I have no problem with the virgin birth, its been humanly possible for decades now so I reckon God could have arranged it easily enough a couple of thousand years ago.

  4. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
    Rosemary Hannah

    Well, actually it is NOT humanly possible – even with IVF. You cannot get a boy baby, humanly speaking, without a father. But then, humanly speaking, bodies do not resurrect, and walk and talk and eat…

  5. agatha Avatar
    agatha

    Rosemary, I think you are being a bit technical. Where I come from a virgin is someone who hasn’t had sex.

  6. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
    Rosemary Hannah

    The problem is that it is not the ‘having sex’ but the chromosomes in the baby. Or to put it another way – how did Jesus get his X? It is easy enough to get pregnant without ‘having sex’ but harder without ‘having sperm’. Despite that, the evidence is that two unrelated stories believe it was done. And two unrelated stories believe the babe was born in Bethlehem. Very interesting.

  7. Agatha Avatar
    Agatha

    From God?

  8. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
    Rosemary Hannah

    Sperm from God? Not I think, stories ‘from God’ except in the general sense that all understanding is divine. No. Stories from history. And the biology? Truly beyond current understanding. But, here you have it – if one understands it ceases to be amazing and people say : ‘Now we understand, that is not a miracle and Jesus is not form God.’ And if we do not understand, people say: ‘We do not understand and so it cannot have happened, and Jesus is not from God.’

  9. Agatha Avatar
    Agatha

    If I didn’t believe God could knock out a few sperm as and when required I would have Sunday mornings free.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • The Flu

    The last couple of days, I’ve been down with a nasty dose of the flu and it seems it is not over yet. My doctor assures me that it is the flu and not consumption, however, I do feel that it is worthy of an opera plot. It seems that if you think you might…

  • Baptism!

    Kudos to Gordon Smith for the pics.

  • Changing the mobile

    I’ve just changed my mobile. (That’s a cell-phone for US readers). The trouble is, I think that the mobile phone economy is a place of complete madness. I don’t understand all the options. I find the whole thing tricky to navigate. I didn’t really text much until about 2 years ago and indeed, there was…

  • Archbishop promotes Bisexual’s Bible

    Oh, do forgive me for the attention seeking title. I just couldn’t resist. Its just that I find myself gently raising a curious eyebrow at the current love-in being manufactured for the anniversary of the King James Version of the Bible. When I heard that the Archbishop of Canterbury had based his New Year message…