A fellow I know has been sober in AA for nearly 30 years. He told me a while ago a newcomer to their fellowship went out drinking after a couple of months of sobriety. Fortunately he got back into their program and is reportedly doing well.
My friend asked him, “Why didn’t you call me before you went out drinking?” The newcomer replied, “I know I should have. I didn’t because I knew if I talked to you I wouldn’t have gone out drinking.”
We can laugh at this man being rather, shall we say, disingenuous with himself. But as we laugh we may want to look at our own openheartedness or resistance to Jesus in our own life.
In the United Church creed we say “In Life, In death, in life beyond death God is with us. We are not alone.” In our hymn books this is followed by Thanks be to God. Is the same Thanks be to God being echoed in our own hearts.
Through our faith in Jesus Christ we know God loves us and wants the very best for us. We know that in Jesus we are shown the way to live fully: to become as the early church father Ireneaus said “the glory of God: humanity fully alive.”
The questions today’s gospel passage puts before us are: “Do we consistently resist the teaching and call of Jesus? If so, what form does this resistance take? What can we do about it?
Because, if there is one theme that is clear in today’s gospel it’s the consistent resistance encountered to the teaching and call of Jesus.
The people of Samaria want little to do with him when they hear he's headed for Jerusalem. Remember the one great theological sticking point between Jews and Samaritans was that the Samaritans worshipped at Mount Sinai and the Jews in Jerusalem.
His own disciples seem to have ignored his teaching about how to treat enemies (with prayer, love and respect!) and ask instead about calling down fire on them.
One person seems eager to follow Jesus, but apparently backs away when Jesus indicates there's no place one can call home in his ministry.
Jesus calls another, but he wants to wait until his father is dead before he joins Jesus.
A third wants to go home for a while to say his farewells first, but Jesus concludes sternly: "No one is fit for the kingdom who puts hand to the plow and then turns back." You're in, or you're not. There's no "in between."
Jesus "keeps plowing" and keeps leading those who will follow him.
I know I can be like the Samaritans and sometimes screen movements of the Spirit out because they don’t seem to fit what I think is the true faith. What about you? For example are their worship expressions that you just don’t think are right? Even though people are being led to full hearted and full headed commitment to the Lord through them? Are we sometimes so set in our ways that our way gets in the way-resists the way Jesus is calling us to follow him?
Or like his disciples, I can be as judgmental as the next guy? I might not call fire down upon those who believe differently then me about the Christian faith, but I sure can have not so nice thoughts. What about you? Do our prejudices get in the way-resist the call and teaching of our saviour and Lord?
And yes, when Jesus has called me to leave everything behind without promise of home or support I have balked. I would like to go and minister there, but there is no certainty of funding…. Yes, that sounds like a good project but where will the money come from? Does holding on to what we believe is safe and secure and comfortable and non threatening get in the way of following Jesus.
I remember a good Christian member of a congregation I ministered to as a student intern at a mission in Cameroon, West Africa. For him to have become a Christian, he had to leave the traditional religion of his village. He was disowned by his father when he became baptized. I don’t know if I could have overcome such resistance to following the call of Jesus as my friend did. Do you know if you could?
And like the man who wanted to say his farewells, sometimes we have to act in the name of Jesus in the here and now. Whether our friends like it or reject it. I find such situations very tough and have sometimes balked. Have you?
If we are honest, I believe at times as individuals and as a church community we sometimes find ourselves wanting to tell Jesus to go away, or where we want to ignore his ethic of loving enemies, or when we want to tell him to wait.
Just like our friend with the drinking problem, we don’t want to pick up the phone because we know what the answer will be.
Jesus is clear that his call is not negotiable and he will call others if we don’t respond. Our resistance doesn't stop him. Neither should it stop us when we call others into discipleship to Jesus with us and they offer their excuses.
The good news in this hard news, if you will, is if we acknowledge where we resist him it tells us much about what we actually consider more important than our relationship with the Lord. It identifies our allegiances. And it gives us a basis to confess, repent, and learn to grow, if we will.
The gospel story urges us to accept Jesus into our lives and into our home; to check our motives and be willing to follow him as a first priority.
But I would not be doing my job as a preacher if I left you with the impression that being a follower of Jesus is nothing but grim faced huffing and puffing and hanging in for the long haul. It is that, but along the way we walk with each other and share our experience strength and hope. We walk with the Spirit of the Risen Lord not only calling us into the unknown and sometimes scary future, but with that Spirit with us, comforting us, giving us those aha moments that may come with some comforting realization from a hymn or a prayer or a few words from a preacher, or the cry of your new born or a glorious sunrise that brings you hope in a dark time.
Those moments give us the assurance and the strength to go forward in faith, hope and love. For God is with us. We are not alone. Thanks be to God. Amen.
Sunday, June 27, 2010
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Web articles on viable farms on urban edge
I have included below a number of web articles that provide a snapshot of some of the projects going on in Ontario regarding farming on the urban edge, some good discussion papers on the promises and prospects for revitalizing such farming, and the last site has quite a visionary article on what a truly sustainable city would look like.
Give them a good read and provide us your feedback. Also if you know any other pertinent articles in this regard please post them.
Thank you.
Rev Jim
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Comments on Draft Official Plan
Before we discuss the OP draft released recently, ask ourselves the following questions:
- Have we read what we are commenting on?
- Have we participated in the process?
- Is our opinion being formed by the facts or by group think?
With respect to urban boundary expansion which is the focus of much of the attention presently, here are my thoughts which I presented as a deputation this past Monday:
I have read through the Hemson Report which provides the study which leads to the proposed expanded urban boundary and do have questions regarding the 9,600 unit deficit number. Regularization of secondary suites and allowing for additional modest infilling of say 2,000 units, may reduce significantly this number, would it not?
I also have concerns what the impact of the expansion will have on the preservation of wetlands in and around the proposed expansion area.
These are complex issues and over 18 months ago myself and a colleague approached the city with the blessings of the provincial Places to Grow Secretariat asking that a series of stakeholder roundtable discussions with developers, government officials, ratepayer groups etc. be held to go over the rules of the places to grow legislation and their implications.
That proposal went nowhere. Given the passions around this issue which will be ongoing whatever plan comes forth from this process I request that the new offical plan provide for such a roundtable to be held annually so we can begin to work together on this rather than pick sides and throw stones at one another.
I speak tonight, however, in main to urge you to include in the legislation the commitment and methodology to preserve the agricultural land outside the urban boundary you decide upon.
John Sewell once said, “Every piece of undeveloped land in the GTA is only one political party fundraiser away from becoming developed. Certainly simply zoning farmland for agriculture and then hoping that the free market will take care of the rest has proven to be an ineffective municipal strategy.
Unless the agricultural lands are profitable, why wouldn’t you try and convert their use if you owned them?
If we are serious about making Vaughan a sustainable community key is to make the remaining farmland profitable and productive in today’s economy. To do so will require the full support of all levels of government.
What I am proposing is that the revised official plan declares the extant agricultural land in Vaughan an Agricultural Economic Zone.
This would mean that incentives and legislation be put on stream to create agricultural easements to protect this land which specify that the land will not be used for urban or industrial development.
Second, current standard land-use policy which does not allow existing farms to be subdivided into parcels smaller than 40 hectares must change. This amount of land may be suitable for commodity-oriented farms, but it hinders small-scale farming. Market-gardening operations should be able to rent “agricultural condominiums” or small parcels of land. They should also be offered long-term leases, which encourage these market gardeners to steward the land.
Third, the City and Region can provide direct support to farm markets and adopt zoning policies that allow on-farm processing and sales. They can introduce measures that control traffic on rural roads, support farmers using seasonal workers and enforce public health rules for farm visitors. Cluster development zoning which allow for small on-farm enterprises (another contribution to farm viability) can be put in place. Support can be given to wholesale and retail farmers’ markets, actively promoting local food marketing and design a number of supportive programs (such as signage and wider road shoulders that enable safer travel by farm equipment).
I am not naïve. Much of the remaining agricultural land is already owned by speculators. If you implement the agricultural economic zone I propose you are in for a real donnybrook. That is why all levels of government have to pony up on this one if they are really serious about sustainability. All our citizens have to move beyond nimbyism and take the issue of creating a vital and viable wealth and health producing agricultural industry in Vaughan. There are municipal elections this year and a provincial election next year. Now is the time for us to extract our pound of flesh for having to bear impact of the places to grow legislation.
Otherwise, in my opinion, whatever urban boundary you choose it will all be swallowed up by market pressures and become just more housing units. And that would be an awful pity.
The Beginning
The Heart of the Matter is a blog spot for meaningful discussion on Vaughan politics. It is about policies and actions. Discussions of individuals will be around the efficacy of their actions and the quality of the policies for which they develop and/or advocate.
It is moderated site and anonymous comments will not be accepted. The intent is to create of community of folks who are interested in discussing the hurts and hopes of this City's citizens and how those hopes and hurts are being addressed through the political process.
Personal attacks of individuals will not be posted. Nor will comments containing inappropriate language or potentially libelous remarks.
May the spirit be with us as we begin this enterprise.
Rev. Jim Keenan
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)