Bible Talks - Sunday Night Church
Church Service
Sunday, 23 January 2005
Audio
Listen Now (32:04)
Feedback:
Share using:
Facebook · 
Delicious · 
Google · 
Twitter · 
Email
(suggest another share link)
Morally bankrupt
Have you ever noticed what a morally bankrupt place the world of business is? Think back over the last few years... to the testimony from the HIH inquiry. How the proceeds from this company went to buy that house. Or remember OneTel? Where Mark Silbermann "changed the numbers" on the cashflow records. The figures come in from the accountant. Mark Silbermann doesn't like them. Easy. Change them. To something he does like. How about Rene Rivken? Not denying that he used insider trading information to make a motzer on some Qantas shares, but not understanding the fuss everyone was making.
Most would say ‘that's business’. And you have to do business that way to keep your advantage. To the point where Gordon Moyes, from Wesley Mission in Sydney made an interesting observation a while back. He said, the problem we're seeing in the business world runs deep. He said, it all boils down to an underlying issue. We used to live by the Christian ground rules… do unto others as you want them to do to you. Now, he said, it's this. Now, it's a matter of do others in before they do you.
He said, we're caught up in a self serving ideology. With no interest in serving others. No interest in doing what's best for them. Just looking out for number 1. Gorge yourself and run. And I think he's right. And I think it's a problem that runs all the way from Wall Street to church on Sunday’s. The thinking that says what's in this for me? The consumer mentality that says, this is about my needs, and my preferences. And my rights. And my wants. And I'm going to assert myself, to get what I like.
I want to suggest that's exactly the attitude here in 1 Corinthians 11. A passage with two distinct sections. Which at first seem to touch on two distinct issues. And yet underneath, I want to suggest that there's one attitude behind both issues.
They are two issues that give a snapshot of the Corinthians in church. Praying and prophesying from v2 to 16. And sharing the Lords Supper in v17 to 34. And there are problems in both areas that come back to exactly the same point: The Corinthians are in it for number 1.
The Corinthians are forgetting what it means to follow the example of the Apostle Paul, who follows the example of Jesus Christ. Forgetting the words at the very end of chapter 10:33. Where he says, “For I'm not seeking my own good… but the good of many… so that they may be saved. Follow my example… as I follow the example of Christ.”
Serving in Prayer
So what's it going to mean, in practice, in church?
I mean, who would have thought there'd be potential for problems with praying of all things? I mean, what can go wrong with a bunch of people getting together praying? Paul’s talking about prophecy as well - which raises some other questions we'll come back to in chapter 14 - but prayer… sounds pretty safe, doesn't it?
Apparently not!
But, this section is full of potentially contentious cultural references, and it kicks in with v3. Now, the biggest problem with a verse like this one is the ways it's been handled in the past, or rather abused by generations of men who absolutely miss the point.
It's a verse about headship. Which to a lot of men sounds quite appealing. And brings to mind visions of the subservient little woman, who you push around. Who doesn't have access to the bank account… who doesn't have a say. Because you're the man. And you're the head. And she'll do what she's told.
Now, I expect, hope and pray that no one here actually does told extreme views like that... But I wouldn’t be surprised if some guys here had thinking that leaned in that direction, and if that is the case, you need to look more closely - and repent of that thinking...
Let's take a look.
”But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.”
The first and most important thing we need to notice here is how the headship Paul’s talking about is modelled on Christ. That somehow the way that man relates to the woman is to be like Christ in his headship.
And I guess that makes it the sort of headship that started in a stable. And ended on a cross.
The sort of headship that knelt down and washed feet. The sort of headship that said, “whoever wants to be first… has got to be slave of all.” (Mark 10:44), The sort of headship that said, “I didn't come to be served, but to serve. And give my life. As a ransom for many.” (Mark 10:45
And so in the Christian order of relationships, that's what headship is going to looks like.
Now, to be honest, most Christian men I know struggle with that. And we need to be encouraged in it, and reminded of what Christian Headship looks like. And Christian women are called to respect that sort of headship. And express their respect for it in appropriate ways...
It's counter-cultural, isn't it? It’s actually radical thinking!
It's counter-cultural now. And it was counter-cultural back then as well. Which is perhaps one reason why they've missed the point in Corinth...
Now I've got to say as we read a chapter like this there are all sorts of customs you're going to find tough to make sense of. Head covering customs. Veils when you pray. Length of hair; of shameful women with shaved heads. And that can be a little distracting – it’s easy for us to wipe all that off and say ‘that doesn’t apply to us’... but we should be careful...
It's not so long since we've had customs like that as well. My Dad stills lifts his hat to a lady. Why? Who knows. You just did in his day. Not so long ago, if you were a lady, you kept your hat on when you go indoors; if you were a man, you didn't.
We still have expectations and norms when it comes to things like hair – When the singer Sinead O’Conner first appeared on the scene, it was with a totally shaved head!
When Demi Moore starred in ‘GI Jane’ a few years back and had her head shaved, it actually made front page news!
Now in one way, you'll see echoes of that sort of stuff back in Corinth 2000 years ago. But in another way, it's very different. And so in a way whatever connections we do want to make, be careful, because there's probably more to it than you think. Corinth was a mixture of Greek and Jewish culture; the temple of Diana up the road with the high priestess and her flowing braided hair. The customs of the Jews had lots to say about hair.
But the point is, you don't have to understand the details to get the point. And that is, there are women in the church in Corinth who are making a stand. There are women in Corinth who are rocking the boat. There are women in Corinth who are using the opportunity to pray and to speak in the church as a point scoring exercise.
And they're doing it by uncovering their heads.
To which Paul at considerable length says, they shouldn't. That when they pray or prophecy, it's no time for a declaration of rights, and a claim for independence. He says, maintain the difference. v4. There's a symbolism they need to respect. He says, women and men are different. “Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonours his head, but every wife who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonours her head—it is the same as if her head were shaven.”
We mightn't quite understand the symbolism. but they did. And it's a declaration of independence. At the wrong time. In the wrong place. In the wrong way.
And men and women both need to hear this – v11.
A declaration of independence is the wrong way to go. You won't do it these days by taking off your headscarf, but there are other ways, aren't there?
We've got symbols of our own. And they say something within our culture. Your wedding ring. You slip it off on your way to a party. What's it saying? A very strong declaration of independence. Or what about the way you dress, especially young women? That can certainly be a powerful statement of independence and identity...
Maybe they don’t seem important thing in and of themselves, but I would suggest that they can cut right against the goal of a church family where each member isn't seeking their own good, but the good of others.
And so v11. “Nevertheless, in the Lord [ie: for us Christians] woman is not independent of man nor man of woman; for as woman was made from man, so man is now born of woman...”
Which means that as we gather to encourage one another, as we gather to pray, as we gather to hear God's word, it's no place to be self serving. It's not the place for a feminist meeting. It's not the place to declare independence. But it is the time and place to express a mutual dependence, in appropriate ways.
The Lord's Supper
There's another thing Christians do when we get together. And that's to share in what we call the Lord's Supper. We Sydney Anglicans have reduced it to a little ritualistic token ‘meal’. But in Corinth, the Lord's Supper was a real meal. And by the sound of it, a pretty good meal!
The Lord's Supper is a meal that's meant to be about remembering Jesus. It's a meal that's meant to bring to mind… the heart of our message.
Let's pick up, first of all, what it's meant to be. And then see what's gone wrong. V23. gives us a description of what the Lord's Supper's all about. And Paul takes us right back to the start. The night before the crucifixion, and a Passover meal in an upstairs room.
”For I received from the Lord,” he says, “what I also passed on to you. The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread. And when he'd given thanks, he broke it and said, "This is my body, which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me." And then with the cup, after supper.” Verse 25. “This cup is the new covenant. [The new contract. The new deal.] In my blood. Do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.”
Whenever you share a meal as Christian brothers and sisters, he says… Jesus said, do it in remembrance... of my broken body on the cross. For you. Remember my blood. That as it drips into the dust, is actually paying your death penalty, as rebels against God.
You know, sometimes remembering is meant to be a very practical thing. I mean, there's the stuff you do in maths at school like quadratic equations and you say "why do I have to remember this"? Because for most of us, it's no use.
But some things are different. Our Sam, has recently got his Learner's Permit. He had to learn the road rules before he could get it. Which as the guy who had to sit beside him the first time he ever went on the road, I'm kind of glad about!
I mean, I want him to know that stuff. And I want him to know it inside out. I want him to know that you don't turn in front of the car coming straight at you and expect it to give way. In fact as I'm sitting there beside him, I don't just want him to remember the road rules. I want him to do them.
Now can I suggest you don't need a theology degree to figure out that remembering Jesus who's been crucified as your substitute… remembering the Lord's death in the place of undeserving sinners… it might dawn on you that there's meant to be some sort of practical model there for the way you treat other people. But have a look at v20, and see how badly they've gone wrong. It's a real irony.
When you come together, says Paul, you might think it's the Lords Supper your sharing. But it's not. He says, When you come together, it's not the lords supper you eat. For as you eat, each of you goes ahead without waiting for anyone else; One remains hungry, another gets drunk.
This is every man for himself! This is, let's get the good stuff first. This is, make sure you get a good go at the wine before anyone else gets a turn.
This is the church sausage sizzle where you have four sausage sandwiches and someone else has none. Or supper after church. When you're first in the queue. And you fill up your plate with all the good stuff, and who cares about anyone else?
But it's actually worse than that. Because apparently in the church there in Corinth, there are the rich and the poor. And apparently the theory of what they were practising is to have a church meal so that that the rich provide, so the poor members can enjoy a good meal.
Except it's not working. V22; Paul says, “What! Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing.” The ones who come hungry are being left out in the cold until the upper crust members have eaten all the good stuff. And leave them the crumbs under the table.
And they’ve still got the gall to call it the Lord's Supper. Paul says, the Lord who gave up his body and blood for you would want nothing to do with it. Naming rights are revoked!
Back at v17; he says, your meetings, they do more harm than good. There are divisions, there are squabbles; it's like a branch meeting of the ALP - It's every man for himself. Do others in… before they do you.
So stop and think, he says… so you don't sin against the body and blood of the one who bought you. Stop and think… before you eat judgement on yourself.
Look around… and recognise the body of Christ… your church family… and start putting other people first. Even in practical ways like eating a meal. V33-34… “So then, my brothers, when you come together to eat, wait for one another—if anyone is hungry, let him eat at home—so that when you come together it will not be for judgment.”
I guess when it comes to the Lords Supper, we Anglican have fixed it, haven't we? No way you'll get drunk on a little cup of grape juice. Or full on a centimetre cube of bread. But in a way, turning it into a little ritual doesn't really address the issue – that there's meant to be a fellowship shared around the table. The Corinthians were totally missing that. Missing that it was an opportunity to be like Jesus in putting others first…
This is something of a timely passage for us.
We’ve been downplaying the Lord’s Supper at SNC, not so much because of the major issues that the Corinthians face, but because of some practical issues, and the changing nature of this congregation. Some of us have wondered if we should go back to how most 1st century churches actually practised the Lord’s Supper, and have a fair dinkum meal together giving ourselves the opportunity to practise doing what Paul encourages us to do here... Worth a think about and mentioning to David or myself...
But in the end, the important thing is not the physical way that we share the Lord’s Supper, but the practical way we practise what it reminds us of...
So back to the Corinthians...
They'd turned prayer time into a party political statement of feminist rights.
And they'd turned the Lord's Supper into a food fight.
At every instance, it was every man for himself. And every woman for HERself.
Which means it wasn't church… at all.
Because we come together to practice not seeking our own good but the good of one another. We come together to encourage one another in following the example of Christ. Week by week as we meet it's meant to be about serving one another. In whatever ways we can.
Can I ask you this evening, why are you here? Because if you're not here to honour the Lord Jesus by the way you serve one another, if you're not here to spur one another on in growing to be more Christlike, you're missing the point.
Whether it's in the way you pray, whether it's in the way you sing, whether it's how far back you put yourself in the queue for supper; whether it's making the effort to welcome a newcomer; or where you choose to sit – whether it's where you park your car. There are a million ways decisions to make each Sunday. A million ways of serving. And I guess a million tempting ways not to. So which is it going to be for you?
