OrthoAnalyika Shownotes: 6 September 2009
Note: be sure to subscribe to the podcast.
1 Corinthians 16: 13-24; St. Matthew 21: 33-42
[Then Jesus spoke this parable]: There was a certain landowner who planted a vineyard and set a hedge around it, dug a winepress in it and built a tower. And he leased it to vinedressers and went into a far country. Now when vintage-time drew near, he sent his servants to the vinedressers, that they might receive its fruit. And the vinedressers took his servants, beat one, killed one, and stoned another. Again he sent other servants, more than the first, and they did likewise to them. Then last of all he sent his son to them, saying, ‘They will respect my son.’ But when the vinedressers saw the son, they said among themselves, ‘This is the heir. Come, let us kill him and seize his inheritance.’ So they took him and cast him out of the vineyard and killed him. “Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those vinedressers?” They said to Him, “He will destroy those wicked men miserably, and lease his vineyard to other vinedressers who will render to him the fruits in their seasons.” Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures: ‘The stone which the builders rejected has become the chief cornerstone. This was the LORD’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes’?
Malicious Ignorance: Christ is coming: look busy!
In today’s Gospel, Christ is trying to help His listeners understand who He was, who sent Him, and why it was that the religious leaders rejected Him. As Christians, we grow up understanding that Christ is “God the Son”, the second person of the Holy Trinity; that God the Father, the first person of the Holy Trinity, sent His Son to return the world to righteousness; and that the Jewish leaders rejected His Son because He did not fit into their plans. We know this to be true, and it is true. But our acceptance of these facts is facilitated by a Christian worldview that makes them seem natural; they simply fit into place. But the Jews did not have such a worldview; rather, they had developed one over time that made rejection of the Christ seem to be good and natural.
Psychologically, it is much easier for us to ignore or reject data that challenges our expectations than it is to adjust our expectations around it [sic]. Even the Jews that loved Jesus and His message were struggling with wrapping their minds around the Truth and the implications of His coming.
So Christ gave them parables like the one we heard today. Because stories are not expected to be real, people disengage their ideological filters a bit when hearing or reading them. So when people hear of the landowner, they naturally sympathize with his attempts to regain control of his property; when they hear of the actions of the vinedressers/husbandmen, they are naturally revolted by their wickedness; and their sympathy and revulsion will naturally peak when they hear about the mission, rejection, and murder of the landowner’s son. This parable [and other] created a space in their minds and gave them concepts that would eventually allow them to more fully understand everything about The Christ. [the prophecies also served this function, but their (mis)use by the religious leaders meant that not everyone would be able to see them correctly]. And once they saw Him in Truth, they had to decide what to do next: kill Him or render to Him his due.
So what does this story do for all of us who already know Christ to be the Messiah, the Son of God? Well, I have given you a rule of thumb for interpreting Scripture that I want you to use today: when the Scriptures criticize the Jews, they are really criticizing us. A bigot might use today’s reading to reinforce his self-righteousness and anti-Semitism; but the Christian uses it to learn greater humility and repentance.
Instead of the Jews, imagine us as the folks running the winepress. This should not be hard to do: we have more control over the patch of dirt that God has leased to us than any people anywhere or anytime. What would we do if the landowner sent emissaries to collect the fruit of His land from us? This may be uncomfortable, but it isn’t hard: what would we do if God asked for what should naturally go to Him as His due? Or to phrase it in a way that is easier for us to understand: what would we do if God were to ask more from us than we wanted to give? What would we do if He made demands of us that did not fit our view of what God should demand?
I can tell you what we would do because we do it every day. We ignore Him. Even when He sends His Son among us to show that He is serious: we ignore Him. Some of us do it on purpose, but most don’t even recognize Him or His authority. We don’t have room in our lives for the real God, so we ignore Him and worship a false imitation of Him that demands nothing from us and is not worthy of true adoration and sacrifice.
“Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those vinedressers [who ignored his prophets and His Son]?…
We cannot ignore Him forever. When you see Him in Truth, you will have to decide. Why wait? The Truth is here. Christ is here. Make your choice: murder… or repentance, humility, and worship?
The stone which the builders rejected has become the chief cornerstone. This was the Lord’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes.”
———-
[and what do we do to those people who recognize Him for what He really is and who try to order their lives in such a way? why do you think we have so few priests and monks? The god that we have created has no need for such things; nor does he really deserve them]
Mail:
A few of you wrote and asked very similar questions. To summarize them: “You said that you watch movies that deal with the paranormal, take martial arts, and read books based on heretical theology; how do you protect yourself from corruption? What kind of discernment should we use in determining what kinds of entertainments are useful and which ones are harmful?”
You have mentioned a few podcasts: which ones do you listen to regularly? Which ones would you recommend? [review the podcasts that I listen to]
Isn’t the evil eye an example of a curse that hurts someone? If the physical and spiritual world are both ontological, then why should we be surprised that spiritual events (e.g. curses) can hurt an innocent person both spiritually and physically? Perhaps. This is not something I know anything about; so I just bounce it off the one thing I do know; and while I am willing to accept this possibility, my point was trying to make was about salvation, not about causing harm. But this is a difficult thing to study because it is both dangerous and so tangled by mythology. The main thing is that Orthodox Christians are taught the healthy ways to deal with evil, harm, and sinfulness.
===================
This is material I did not get to:
Movie Review:
GI Joe. Simple entertainment: nanoacid. Bad guys, good guys (secret NATO program). Two guys enter a secret world. Plot twists. One really neat theological question point: brainwashed. Then love brought back her “real” self. I like that. It resonates with the Truth. Also, corollary question: is she culpable for the damage she did while she was brainwashed?
Rewatching an old series: Sharpes Rifles. Sean Bean. Romantic fiction. A bit too much on the romantic side, but heroic, tactical depiction of Napoleonic Wars. I think I have liked all of Sean Bean’s movies (Ronin, Bravo Two Zero, National Treasure, Lord of the Rings, Troy, and surely: Percy Jackson!!!)
News:
Local news – getting things ready for the festival. spiderman. sick calls keep things in perspective – thankful for the opportunity to do something to help. Mass at Mount. Continuing to like the treadmill and new diet; no real drop in weight, but that should come. Feeling healthier. Also really enjoying the food: I’m not just feeding my face. I’m even helping with the cooking: theory is throw good ingredients into a crock pot or skillet, and the result is sure to be good!
This coming week: 9/11 (Beheading of St. John the Baptist), UOL/Jr UOL executive board meetings here, baptism Saturday, Archbishop Antony in Boston this weekend, ordaining Sbdcn Borislav; festival; heading to VA thereafter (get back and Pani heads to a Pani convention). [note: next show may be delayed!]. Pray for us!
Other news:
Insightful article in WSJ: Making God More accessible. Very true (minus the hyperdemocratic tone). Unfortunate that builders did not have foresight. Really need help, but sometimes there is no feasible solution set. Answer? Improve situation with soft changes until hard ones can be made. Visitations. Missions. Outreach. The article points out that churches were largely exempt from ADA: framed in this way, and assuming the “government as hammer” problem, it seems obvious to require sanctuaries to improve access. But this is why framing (and hammer hegemony) is so important and must be contested! There are many churches teetering on the brink. Many have closed. Most have trimmed spending to the bone: very efficient. Such well-intentioned efforts push them over (fire codes).
Afghanistan in the news: gas trucks, stolen elections, and a lost moment (and I’m not alone: George Will agrees!). Good articles in Small Wars journal and Foreign Relations; debate in Washington Post. Sunk costs temptation. Unintended consequences. Benefits of risk aversion for big and expensive movements.
One last piece of news: started putting show notes up at www.orthoanalytika.org.
Andy Rooney Moment: over-reacting to things
President to speak at school: this is outrage! President looking to reform healthcare: this is outrage! President trying to restore economy: this is outrage! Political discussion is necessary, and political decisions do matter. Just within the active memories of our communities, we have seen the disasters that well intentioned programs can cause. It is our right – and even our responsibility – as citizens in this democracy to be informed, to comment on, and to influence governmental decisions. This is not the problem.
I fear the damage that we are doing to our souls. The individual and collective vitrol is sinful. By this, I mean that it is inflicting spiritual damage on our society. Hate may or may not do damage to its object, but it can destroy the person who is doing it. There are segments of society, both on the “left” and the “right” whose main hammer is not the government, or free enterprise, but antipathy for their adversaries. Among conservatives, there is no other rational explanation for the strength of the opposition to the president’s plan to speak to students in public schools. The text of the opposition is reasonable, if overstated, but the emotion behind it is so far overblow as to indicate a serious problem. Obviously, it’s not about speaking to children anymore than the threats of fascism (and hysterical accusations of murder boards – as if people didn’t make actuarial decisions every day about risk and reward/cost and benefit) and the like were really about health care.
I oppose big government, but I have tried to model a mode of opposition that is charitable, rational, and Christian. Sharing love, compassion, and charity are so much more important to the health of our nation than any policy battle. In fact, if you are Christian, you know that there is no rationality without these virtues: there is not logic without the Logos; there is not logic without love.
