becoming

過去讀血漏婦人的故事（可5.25-34），常以為「觸摸衣裳」是這婦人自創的獨門療法。

誰不知自己看漏了同書的3.10「他治好了許多人，所以凡有災病的，都擠進來要摸他」一句。原來這並非婦人自創，而是當時流行於群眾間的傳說。並且，從血漏婦人一例而言，這是一個「可行」（work）的療法。

話雖如此，我們還有幾個值得留心的問題：

1. 在「可行」（work）裡，耶穌有多少自主權？若耶穌「頓時心裡覺得有能力從自己身上出去」，是否意味祂隨時可以選擇「能力從自己身上出去」與否？
2. 「觸摸耶穌」在福音書內的醫治個案中屬descriptive（敘述性）還是prescriptive（處方性=要跟著行）？更多的經文是指到耶穌作為醫治的主動（若然（1）釋放能力的主動權在耶穌，則兩者實為同一）。
3. 從血漏婦人的故事看，「出來」乃是故事的重點。「在眾人前府伏」和「從後頭來摸他」展現強烈的對比。可見「面對/認識祂」比「觸摸/利用祂」更為耶穌所看重的。

一個週中的早上，一位穿得不太光鮮的男子，在教會的門外按鈴。

「你找誰？」教會的幹事問。
「你們的牧者在嗎？」

幹事不認識對方，於是便叫了牧者來。

「有甚麼是我們可以幫助你？」
「我要怎樣才可以在教會做傳道？」那男子衝口就問。

牧者覺得奇怪，於是說；「你信了耶穌沒有呢？」
「…」

牧者略略說到信耶穌、參加教會、讀神學，實習、得教會認同等等的事情。說了大半天，牧者才問那位男仕：
「你為何希望在教會做傳道？」
「我覺得這樣的工作很安定…」

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

很安定、唔駛憂、唔駛做、唔會炒
其實對不少人來說，又可止這樣？

傳道人冇嘢做，行行企企。最多一個星期出來一次，走上台，講幾句，就收人工，幾爽？！

這確是很多人的心態。

曾經有親戚的未信主家人問我：「你一至五的正職是甚麼？」

即是說：牧者，又怎可能是份正職？

我不知怎樣回答。因為他們早已認定了：做牧師的，是業餘的時間，正職的收入。若這也可以是正職，那將會是對他們每天勞心勞力地工作的一種侮辱。

「我要怎樣才可以在教會做傳道？」

可以是羨慕，也可以是一種變相的抗議。

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

或者，你以為我在「剷人」；想為同行抱不平。
或者是，或者不是。

但我更想說的是，
這確是很多人的心態。

這確是
教會外，
教會內，
甚至身為牧者傳道的

心態。

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

同工們，要自圓其說自己怎樣忠心事奉、怎樣「不是我選的」，不難。
要用打卡、寫time sheet來確定你的牧者未敢偷懶，不難。
要知道「怎樣才可以在教會做傳道」的答案，甚至做到有人聘請你，也不難。

今天的牧者，尤如在這樣的時勢，去當一個Ford的推銷員。

我只盼望，
明日的同道，
少一份「我要」，
少一份「多數人的心態」，

就好了。

VIIV

This is too cool not to post. Watch out for the twist in the end.

Yes, I know it is basically a promotion from Philips; and that it is heavily influenced by the Dark Knight. But still, it prompts you to think what it means when a storyline is not developed based on time (the whole story can be seen as one infinite loop which happened on the same second), but space.

Really bad.

And Michael Gorman is telling us why.

And while he is at it, he also offers an alternative set of principles – a cruciform hermeneutic– for reading Revelation:

1. Recognize that the central and centering image of Revelation is the lamb that was slaughtered.
   
2. Remember that Revelation was first of all written by a first-century Christian for first-century Christians using first-century literary devices and images.
   
3. Abandon so-called literal, linear approaches to the book as if it were history written in advance, and use an interpretive strategy of analogy rather than correlation.
   
4. Focus on the book’s call to discipleship.
   
5. Place the images of death and destruction in Revelation within the larger framework of hope.

Read his post here as he expounds each point in more details.

[link: cross talk via euangelion]

Rowan Williams’ Easter sermon reminds us that we (i.e. our lives) are the living proof of the reality of resurrection:

…And the only way of saying that, of course is for it to be lived out. It’s no use talking endlessly – preaching endlessly – about reconciliation and forgiveness and liberation. No argument can persuade anyone about this, only the lived reality. It’s worth remembering that Paul of Tarsus joined the Christian community not as a well-meaning religious enquirer but as someone who had been the equivalent of a terrorist gunman, someone who had supervised the activities of a private militia devoted to abducting and imprisoning members of the Christian sect.

On the other hand, Larry Hurtado’s Why Was Jesus Crucified? A historical perspective is a flip-side warning to the Church when she forgets her subversive nature and mission:

In fact, Jesus’ crucifixion posed a whole clutch of potential problems for early Christians. It meant that at the origin and heart of their faith was a state execution and that their revered savior had been tried and found guilty by the representative of Roman imperial authority. This likely made a good many people wonder if the Christians weren’t some seriously subversive movement. It was, at least, not the sort of group that readily appealed to those who cared about their social standing.

Jesus’ crucifixion represented a collision between Jesus and Roman governmental authority, an obvious liability to early Christian efforts to promote their faith. Yet, remarkably, they somehow succeeded. Centuries of subsequent Christian tradition have made the image of the crucified Jesus so familiar that the offensiveness of the event that it portrays has been almost completely lost.

And Mark Roberts encourages us to celebrate the Resurrection with his Easter Postscript:

…Because of the resurrection, we reverence the cross.
Because of the resurrection, the symbol of the cross is one of the best known in the world.
Because of the resurrection, what was once the sign of horrific death is now a sign of life and hope.
Because of the resurrection, the death of Jesus is remembered, cherished, even celebrated.
Because of the resurrection, the Stations of the Cross lead, not to death, but to live.
Because of the resurrection, we are reborn into a living hope.
Because of the resurrection, we know that we too will live anew.
Because of the resurrection, everything is different.
Because of the resurrection, new life has begun.
Christ is risen!
He is risen, indeed!

While our good bishop at Durham commissioned us:

…to be agents of new creation we must ourselves become, and live as, people of new creation. And that means holiness, which means rediscovering what a full and genuine human life was always meant to be like. Our world has lived on so many lies and half-truths about what it means to be human, whether it’s the celeb culture, the drug culture, the idolisation of sport, the obsession with sex, or just the slow deterioration of human relationships and community. The challenge to personal holiness always comes as a shock, like someone waking you up at midnight and insisting that you’ve got to come running to see the new dawn. We are called to be Easter people, resurrection people, leaving behind in the grave all that spoils and downgrades our human calling.

校園《編疆》的阿詳，在這節期中，貼上一連三篇思考復活真諦的文章，很值得向大家推介：

1. 復活全體驗──復活三部曲之一
2. 復活的力量──復活三部曲之二
3. 復活的靈修學──復活三部曲之三

他整理了Eugene Petersen，Henri Nouwen 和 Rowan Williams 等人論復活的作品。尤其在討論Williams 的 Resurrection一書，寫得相當精彩：

…耶穌被釘十字架並不是結局。耶穌因著愛、因著勇氣，承受了世人的怒氣，甘願在「譴責與被譴責」、「壓迫與被壓迫」的暴力循環中，選擇成為那個被譴責的人， 成為一個受壓迫者。祂打不還手、罵不還口，悲慘地走上了十字架上，承擔一切的暴力與怒氣。可是，祂復活了。祂從死裡復活，祂也從無止盡的暴力循環中復活。

Rowan Williams認為，因著耶穌的復活，人類的暴力循環、譴責與被譴責的邏輯便被切開、斬斷。耶穌的復活大聲地訴說著一件事情：這世界上曾經有一個人，承受了世人的譴責、怒氣、壓迫，祂沒有把這樣的譴責、怒氣、壓迫傳給其他的人，反而把這樣的暴力吸收，死在十字架上。但是上帝卻讓祂復活了，並且將所有承接的譴責、憤怒與暴力，轉化成一個新的生命！換言之，遭受迫害、暴力與譴責的最終結局，再也不是死亡，而是復活、而是更寬廣的生命！這，就是復活的真諦！

在眾多的受難、復活詩歌，經文和信息中，我們竭力的，是說明「復活」？證明「復活」？

還是活出「復活」？

[link: 編疆]

Jocelyn says:

Hi everyone! Ta-da, I am 4 years old now!!! And guess what, it is also time for my favorite sushi! And look at those cup cakes which Lan Yi & Gu Ma got me! By the way, I don’t even know that you can write on a small cup cake like this! Maybe they can write my chinese name next time…

Thanks everyone! Enjoy the photos!!