THE KINGDOM OF TRUTH

           

Sermon delivered on the Sunday Next Before Advent, the 22^nd November 2009 by Fr Nicholas J.G. Sykes in the congregation of St. Alban's Church of England in the Cayman Islands.

Scriptures: Daniel 7: 9-10, 13-14                      Revelation 1: 4b-8                  S.  John 18: 33-37

 

John 18: 37.  Jesus says to Pilate: “You say that I am a king. For this I was born, and for this I have come into the world, to bear witness to the truth. Every one who is of the truth hears my voice.”

 

When several years ago I saw a Prep School production of the musical Oliver, it was clear that the producer had an ironic turn of mind, in that forming part of the backdrop to the initial orphanage scene was a large banner with the words “God is Love”. In the Christian ethic, all will agree on the importance of love: indeed it is something that even modern and traditional Christians can agree about. However, part of that agreement may be because the idea of love is very elastic or malleable, and can mean different things to different people. The St. John who in his first epistle used the expression “God is Love” gives us today in the Gospel the remarkable conversation between Jesus and Pilate on the truth-nature of the kingdom claimed for Jesus Christ. The “King of love” that we sing of in our hymns is not just a Diana-like king of hearts. His voice, he says, is heard by every one who is of the truth.

 

One of the principles that is minuted as agreed to by  the ministers of the Cayman Ministers’ Association is that the truth is absolute and non-negotiable. In other words we agree to grow in the truth, but we reject the idea that there can be a fundamental conflict between what is true for you, and what is true for me. We can all of us be said to have blinkers on of various shapes and sizes, but if two or more are looking at the same object or action, the variety of interpretation that they put on what they see does not alter the fact that it is the same object or action they are looking at. The notion that “One man’s truth is another man’s falsehood” can at best only be a subjective impression - it can seem to those involved to be the case. But it can never be objectively true. Christ’s words today show us that we who are baptised into Christ are called to be those of the truth and called to be truth-tellers. Just as we are called to grow in the new nature of Christ and put off the old Adam, so we are called to grow in the truth and in His rule, which is one of truth, while at the same time never losing sight of the fact that it is also one of love.

 

Challenging truths may seem to be unloving ever to express. The physician, I am sure, has this dilemma too at times. So the doctor has to develop the proverbial bedside manner, and the Christian has to develop pastoral style, so that people will accept better any unwelcome truth they are called to speak. In the sphere of Christian ethics there are many unwelcome truths that need to be spoken to those who are attracted to or engaged in those popular but unchristian lifestyles that are widely hailed, and not out of any lack of love but from the reverse, out of concern for a true healing.

 

For instance if  I give marriage counselling to a couple that is contemplating living together before marriage, I should talk with them amongst other things about what fairly recent statistics have said: that 70% of couples who have lived together for five years or more  and then marry, break up after 10 years, compared with 31% for others.

 

Or similarly perhaps this research finding: "Cohabiting couples are less satisfied than married spouses with their partnerships, are not as close to their parents, are less committed to each other, and, if they eventually marry, have higher chances of divorce".

 

Being aware of such results of research, is it really “loving” to duck these issues, for the sake of being kind and untroublesome?

 

Or, to take what must in our day be construed as a more controversial issue still, I will make two quotations from homosexual rights strategisers, made I think some 20 years ago or more: “In any campaign to win over the public, gays must be cast as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to assume the role of protector... Our campaign should not demand direct support for homosexual practices, but should instead take anti-discrimination as its theme. … The public should not be shocked and repelled by premature exposure to homosexual behaviour itself.” This strategy of taking anti-discrimination as the main theme was followed and has been almost completely effective, even now to the extent of suppressing free speech in arenas of moral discourse. But it is the truth about the actual behaviour that shows clearly the nature of what is being advocated, especially for vulnerable youngsters, behaviour that the very strategisers themselves admit to be shocking and repelling.

 

And if I am to speak anywhere about domestic abuse, would it be either loving or truthful of me to duck this research finding; that men who attend church once a week or more are significantly less likely to physically abuse their wives. "The odds of committing partner violence are lower by more than half among men who attend services regularly ‑‑ at least once a week ‑‑ than among those who attend once a year or less". The research basically tells us that if anybody does not find himself in active church life he is far more likely to be a social problem than those who are in active church life. Also the research suggests that the two-parent married ideal that Christ taught and that has always been the Church's model for active sexuality is indeed the one system that is designed for making sure that children's needs are met. The research further points to the absolute folly of churches who desert what the Church is mandated to teach. The truth is that the church that sets out not only to survive but to be obedient to God and the teaching of His Son Jesus can find statistics to show its wholesome influence in all kinds of social areas of concern.

 

The Sunday Next Before Advent is the last Sunday of the Christian Year, and in the Common Worship calendar we celebrate the Kingship of Christ and call this day the Feast of Christ the King. For the Church to function well, the Church needs the active and experiential living out of the divine kingship. We need Christ the King in His role as our Head. We cannot be what we ought to be if we do not know Him in His kingly role and authority over us and providing for us. In our 1st Lesson from Daniel He is shown being given dominion by God, the Ancient of Days. In the 2nd Lesson from Revelation He is shown, having loved us and loosed us from our sins by His own Blood, as making us a kingdom, thus giving us the calling to be no less than priests to His God and Father. The research I have outlined show effects of living out or not living out that kingship and that priesthood.

 

 

CHRIST'S KINGDOM IS THE RULE OF TRUTH

Our Gospel shows Jesus, already betrayed and ill-treated by His own, explaining before Pontius Pilate His Kingship as a Kingdom of truth. That is still the nature of the Kingdom of Christ, and in today's world of meaning-construction, we must on no account slip away from that. We are to be the truth-tellers. If we are not of the truth, we have deserted Christ's Kingdom, which is the Kingdom of God who truly is love. That is why at the end of the day, those who pierced Him will be wailing, according to Revelation. Most scholars think that the wailing is a reaction to judgment instead of the kind of grief that leads to salvation. May we always hold on to His kingship and live the truth, so as to rejoice in His presence rather than wail on his account, in the Last Day.