Hunger and Thirst No More

Rev. 7:9-17

May 2, 2004

 

I was talking last week with Sharon Core, pastor over at Arlington Pres, and she asked me about the sign on our wall over the parking lot. She wanted to know what we meant by ìprogressive, inclusive and diverse.î A couple of days later, Father Creedon, from St. Charles, asked me the same questions: what does progressive mean, and does everybody in the church agree on the meaning?

Hm, good questions. So, now that itís way too late, now that Iíve committed myself to being pastor of a church that calls itself progressive, inclusive and diverse, now that we are in this together ñ what does it mean? For reasons of grammar and time, Iím going to focus on just that first word this morning. While all three words are usually adjectives describing something ñ in this case, a congregation of Christians who are also described as Presbyterian and thus from the Reformed tradition, progressive is used often as a noun in ways that inclusive and diverse are not. Its meaning is broader, and thus a bit more encompassing in describing who we are.

The dictionary tells us that progressive is related to progress, from the Latin progressus ìto advance,î from progredi which combines pro ñ forward ñ and gradi ñ to go. To go forward, then, tells us a little bit about ourselves: we face the future, open to change.

But there is so much else packed into this little word, especially when it is used, as we use it here, as a description of a Christian congregation ñ and especially when it comes up in a sermon that intends to comment upon words from the Book of Revelation.

Indeed, Revelation is one of those texts that many self-identified progressives read with considerable discomfort, and one that self-identified conservative evangelicals embrace with an enthusiasm that, by itself, makes progressive even more uncomfortable. We can so easily imagine a tent revival scene with a passionate, earnest and sweat-soaked evangelist waving a floppy Bible, and almost begging his listeners to come forward, kneel and be saved from the coming ravages of the apocalypse.

Revelation, with its dramatic end-time images, its 144,000 sealed with the mark of servants of God on their foreheads, its sign of the beast, its golden lampstands and angelic messengers to the seven churches ñ this is not comfortable terrain for us progressives. When it comes to seven seals, most progressives are far more comfortable sitting through a three-hour, sub-titled Bergman film than sitting through a three-minute reading from Revelation.

What is the word of the Lord for us, here, in a progressive, inclusive and diverse Christian congregation from such a strange and forbidding text?

Listen ñ for a word from God from the apocalypse of John:

Revelation 7:9-17

9After this I looked, and there was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, robed in white, with palm branches in their hands. 10They cried out in a loud voice, saying, ëSalvation belongs to our God who is seated on the throne, and to the Lamb!í 11And all the angels stood around the throne and around the elders and the four living creatures, and they fell on their faces before the throne and worshiped God, 12singing, ëAmen! Blessing and glory and wisdom and thanksgiving and honor and power and might be to our God forever and ever! Amen.í

13 Then one of the elders addressed me, saying, ëWho are these, robed in white, and where have they come from?í 14I said to him, ëSir, you are the one that knows.í Then he said to me, ëThese are they who have come out of the great ordeal; they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. 15For this reason they are before the throne of God, and worship him day and night within his temple, and the one who is seated on the throne will shelter them. 16They will hunger no more, and thirst no more; the sun will not strike them, nor any scorching heat; 17for the Lamb at the center of the throne will be their shepherd, and he will guide them to springs of the water of life, and God will wipe away every tear from their eyes.í

 

Multitudes, angels, thrones, ordeals, robes, the blood of the Lamb, salvation ñ this is certainly a text full of vivid images. ìWashed in the blood of the Lambî is one of those phrases the falls easily and often from the lips of conservative evangelicals. Such cleansing is part and parcel of the ìborn againî experience and is central to the personal relationship with Jesus Christ understood to be the essential requirement for eternal salvation.

This text, and so many others like it from Revelation, have become proof texts among those who live in anticipation of the rapture. And while that ìend timesî perspective is not universally held among conservative evangelicals, it certainly colors much thinking among conservative Christians as evidenced by the incredible popularity of the Left Behind series.

If I were a conservative evangelical, Iíd lick my lips at the opportunity to preach on a passage such as the one that the lectionary puts before us this morning. But as one who is trying to work out and live out a progressive faith, the temptation to turn to the other passages is great.

For example, the gospel reading today comes from John, and it features Jesus walking in the portico of Solomon in the temple (John 10:22-30). It, too, is rich with images of sheep and typically mystical Johannine explorations of the identity of Jesus and his sonship ñ not terribly difficult, but not exactly the favorite terrain of progressives. The passage from Acts (9:36-43) has Peter raising the disciple Tabitha from the dead. The central role of a prominent woman disciple is always funs for progressives to reflect upon, as is the wonderfully rich role of the apostle whoís own wrestling with faith and doubt, with trust and denial is the foundation of our tradition, but it seemed almost too easy this morning. The psalm of the day is the 23rd Psalm. While it has some nice pastoral images, itís not exactly a proof text for liberation theology.

So I figured if Iím going to challenge us to wrestle with a difficult text why not go all out and dive into Revelation!

Of course, the whole issue of approaching texts is central to what it means to be a progressive Christian. How we approach scripture is not the be-all and end-all of progressive Christianity ñ and next week I intend to extend the notion of progressive Christianity in a more typical way toward a specific social issue, and the following week John Green is going to lead us toward a deeper understanding of progressive Christian worship. Still, how we understand and intend to live out of scripture as progressives is crucial because it shapes and informs both the inward journey of worship and spirituality, and the outward journey of mission and social justice. On top of that, how we interpret scripture is so clearly an area of great tension not only between progressives and conservatives but also, I have seen, as a tension inherent in progressive faith regardless of the attitudes of conservatives.

That tension exists within our movement because, as the dictionary reminds us, progressives look forward in hope, but, at the same time, progressive Christians are deeply rooted in an ancient tradition that calls us to look back as well. As Presbyterians, we are rooted in a particular stream of that broader tradition, and our branch claims as its watch words the phrase ìthe church reformed and always reformingî ñ in other words, part of a particular reformed tradition, but always open to being reformed anew. So, while our vision is for the future, it is also cast back to a foundational past, and we are rooted and grounded in texts that are thousands of years old.

These texts developed in cultural and historical settings that are incredibly foreign to us, in languages that we do not speak, by writers about whom precious little is known.

I ran across an amusing updating of our lectionary psalm for this morning recently. Itís called a 21st Century 23rd Psalm. It begins like this:

ìThe Lord and I are in a shepherd ñ sheep situation, and I am in a position of negative need. He prostrates me in a green belt grazing area, and conducts me directionally parallel to a non-torrential aqueous liquid.î It goes on to describe the table set in the presence of enemies like this: ìYou design and produce a nutrient bearing furniture type structure in the context of non-cooperative elements, and my beverage utensil experiences a volume crisis.î It concludes, ìAnd I will possess tenant rights in the housing unit of the Lord on a permanently open ended time basis.î[1]

Personally, I think I prefer the King James Version. But this humorous recasting of ancient words does underscore the challenge of approaching ancient texts in good faith.

We 21st century North Americans really donít know much at all about ancient Middle Eastern cultures. We donít know much about sheep and shepherds, about temples and blood sacrifices, about kings and kingdoms.

But one thing we progressives ñ at least we Presbyterian progressives who place such a high value on education ñ one thing weíre good at is understanding texts. There is a lot that we donít get, but text criticism is not one of those things.

So, as we listen for a word from God, letís look at the textual package the word comes wrapped in. Our passage from Revelation is not so strange as it seems at first blush. Actually, itís a fairly common setting ñ a throne room scene in which the throne and its attendants are carefully described, and an approaching crisis is revealed. Think of Joseph in the Pharaohís court. Typically in such stories, the seer or visionary interprets a message from heaven and is thus elevated to a higher status. Think again of Joseph interpreting dreams sent from God. The focus in such stories is usually on the visionary ñ thatís why the musical is called Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat and not How Godís Grace Saves Joseph.

But in our text the tables are turned. When the elder asks ìwho are these, robbed in white, and where have they come from?î the visionary, first-person narrator shifts the focus away from himself. Those robbed in white are the faithful ones who have been brought through a time of great trial by a faithful and grace-filled God.

The story is ultimately about the faithful actions of God, not about a special and specific number of the saved and what we must do to be in that number. If we donít understand the framing of this story, itís easy to miss the forest for the trees. Itís like the running gag in the wonderful childrenís film, Finding Nemo. Thereís this clown fish, and every time he meets another fish they expect him to be funny, because heís a clown fish. They insist he tell a joke, but heís really not funny because he tries to explain everything in the joke as he tells it. Itís as if I said to you, ìknock-knockî ñ OK, we can actually do this, and itíll be Biblically based, too:

Knock, knock ñ

Whoís there?

Amos.

Amos who?

Amosquito bit me.

And, rather than groan and roll your eyes, you asked, ìso, who was this Amos?

If you donít understand the form, you cannot understand the message. This is important for all of scripture. It is utterly determinative for the Book of Revelation.

A central part of practicing a progressive faith is understanding the form of the text; for it is only by understanding such textual information that we can lift these ancient words out of the distant past, bring them forward to our time, and use them to help us faithfully anticipate and work toward a future of Godís envisioning.

Why does any of this matter? Why not just ignore the parts of scripture that offend or confuse? Indeed, why not just jettison the whole endeavor altogether?

Two reasons:

First, because we are people of the Book. Scripture remains for us the authoritative revelation of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. Jesus remains for us the one through whom the fullness of God is revealed decisively. Through scripture, God speaks to us ñ even now. This is not, we progressives fundamentally assert, the only way in which God speaks, but it remains, we progressive adamantly affirm, the central way in which God speaks to the community of faith throughout the ages.

Second, we hold on to these texts because if we do not embrace them, study them, and understand them, I am convinced that they will be used against us by those who hold a different vision of the world, of the life of faith, of scripture and of God.

As I was in the process of being forced out of my pastorate in a church in Pittsburgh ñ a process brought to a head when I spoke out from the pulpit in favor of the blessing of same-sex holy unions ñ I was accused of ìtrashing the Bible.î One woman asked me, ìwhy do we need to do all of this interpreting? Why canít we just accept what the words say?î

ìWell,î I said at the time, ìwe cannot come to any text ñ holy scripture or the Sunday New York Times ñ without interpreting.î

As Walter Brueggemann put is, reminding us that interpretation is nothing new under the sun, ìThe Bible, our mothers and fathers have always known, is not self-evident and self-interpreting, and the Reformers did not mean that at all when they escaped the churchís magisterium. Rather, the Bible requires and insists upon human interpretation that is inescapably subjective, necessarily provisional, and, as you are living witnesses, inevitably disputatious.î[2]

The question is not whether we interpret, but how? The challenge for progressives is to lift up and hold onto a faithful interpretive framework.

Let me conclude by suggesting a few principles:

In brief, we interpret the whole of scripture with an eye toward the future, with humility and a prophetic imagination, guided always by the rule of love. Let me unpack that by suggesting five quick principles that seem to me to grow naturally in the soil of this church:

First, that we interpret these ancient words with an eye toward the future that God is calling us into. That is the essence of progressive interpretation. In the text before us this morning, that principle insists that we hear God calling us toward a future of wholeness and healing and shalom that includes the multitudes ìfrom every nation, from all the tribes and peoples and languages.î In other words, this principle insists that we hear in this text a call for the inbreaking of Godís kingdom, and that such salvation is meant to be radically inclusive.

Second, that we interpret this often profoundly difficult text with a deep humility. The hymn in our text today reminds us that ìsalvation belongs to our God.î There is much that we are not given to know, much that belongs to God, much that remains forever shrouded in mysteries. In the face of this, it is much more to our credit to sing to Godís glory and confess our limited understanding of that glory than it will be to hatefully scorn those who disagree with us.

At the same time, as a third principle, we should interpret these texts with prophetic imagination, hearing in them Godís call to do justice, to love filled with mercy and compassion, and to walk, again humbly, with God. Interpreting thus, we hear in a text like this one both a description of Godís promises of shalom ñ ìhe will guide them to the springs of the water of life, and God will wipe away every tear from their eyesî ñ and a call to work in the world for the incarnation of this promise for all Godís people.

Such reading is easier when we adhere to a fourth principle ñ one that is long-standing in the tradition and comes straight out of John Calvin: that we interpret scripture in light of scripture. In other words, we do not latch onto isolated proof-texts and use them to bash our opponents over the head with ñ no matter how tempting that may be from time to time! For we find ourselves not beaten down but embraced when we discover ourselves in such texts as this song of victory in Revelation with its promises that ìwe will hunger no more, and thirst no more; the sun will not strike us nor any scorching heat.î In the light of these promises, we who too often find ourselves on the receiving end of judgments based on a handful of disputed passages, can claim our rightful place at the table of the beloved.

Finally, again as Calvin charged us, we progressives interpret scripture according to the rule of love ñ the rule of the radically inclusive, barrier-breaking, abundant and overflowing love of God made known to us in Jesus Christ. By this rule we know that even though this text is profoundly realistic about the suffering that is part of the lives of faithful people ñ ìthese are they who have come out of the great ordealî the text tells us in a scene set just before the opening of seventh seal when all hell breaks loose ñ although the text does not shy away from the reality of suffering, it insists ñ over and over and over again against that provisional reality ñ that the love of God will triumph, that nothing in all of creation can separate us from the love of God ñ known to us Christians in the life, death and resurrection of Christ Jesus.

This is the good news of the gospel for all people in all times and all places. The challenge to us, to the church at Clarendon, is to be now and to become ever more so the progressive expression of that promise. Let is be so. Amen.

 

Rev. Dr. David E. Ensign



[1] Posted by wft@ukonline.co.uk on www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/98/Aug/psalm23.html

[2] Walter Brueggemann, William C. Placher and Brian K. Blount, Struggling with Scripture (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 2002), 13.