Presentation of Christ: 3rd Feb 2008

 

Preacher: Christopher Green

 

Readings:

Malachi 3, 1-5

Hebrews 2, 14-18

Luke 2, 22-40

 

 ‘Candlemas’… I don't know about you but I have always loved candles. Perhaps it is to do with the soft light they shed, leaving mysterious shadows all around. Strange that when we have brighter and more constant lights available at the flick of a switch, we still want to go back to them for special occasions, whether it is dinner parties, birthdays, or church festivals such as today’s.

Candlemas of course is yet another case of Christians hijacking Pagan Festivals- like Christmas and Easter. The 2nd Feb is the mid-point between the winter solstice and the spring equinox. Pope Sergius I invented a festival that would be full of fire, warmth and light, which was just how the pagans were celebrating. It was originally dedicated to the Virgin Mary- in Jewish Law, a woman who had given birth to a male child must wait for forty days before presenting herself in the Temple, with a sacrifice to atone for her ritual impurity.

Various old traditions attach to Candlemas- you may have heard the rhyme-

If Candlemas day be fair and bright, winter will have another fight;
If Candlesmas day bring cloud and rain, winter will not come again.

So let us be glad we are celebrating it today rather than yesterday!

'Light' and 'dark' are potent spiritual symbols, for Jews and Christians as much as for pagans. God’s first word in Genesis is ‘Let there be light’, and light is often identified with God in the Old Testament. Thus the psalmist “You, O LORD, keep my lamp burning; my God turns my darkness into light” (Ps 18); and Isaiah “the people walking in darkness have seen a great light” (Isa 9). We are not just talking about intellectual understanding here, but something moral and spiritual- ‘enlightenment’ in the widest sense.

This continues in Christian writing when Christ is called “the light of the world”. And our gospel today recounts how two prophetic Israelites recognise the dawning of this light - so let us turn now to this story.

First we meet Simeon. We are told little about him, except that he was 'righteous and devout, looking for the consolation of Israel'- and by 'consolation' we should understand the Jewish idea of the Messiah.

Next we are told that he takes the baby Jesus in his arms, before uttering his hymn 'Now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word' (to use the translation I was brought up with). The words he uses could have been inspired by several passages from the prophet Isaiah, such as

"I will place salvation in Zion for Israel my glory." (47 v13)

and "The Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising." (60 v3).

So Simeon is saying- "here is the Messiah that I and the people of Israel have longed to see- and who will be the salvation for the Gentiles too- now I can die in peace".


But he has not done yet. He adds:

"Behold, this child is set for the falling and rising of many in Israel", and to his mother " a sword will pierce your own heart also". So the hope of Israel is also to be divisive- and we know these are prophetic words, for the nation of Israel will turn on this Messiah and kill him, and break his mother's heart.

Simeon's message is reinforced by the prophetess Anna, who is also cast as a faithful Israelite, waiting for the salvation of Israel.

There has been much speculation on the identity of Simeon and Anna, who have this single walk-on part in this one Gospel. For Luke I think it does not matter- their role is representative. They stand for the old Israel, waiting in hope for God’s light to shine in their dark times- and they recognise in Jesus the fulfilment of this hope. They take their place with Zechariah and Elizabeth, John the Baptist’s parents, who we meet earlier in the gospel. They, too, are an aged and priestly pair of Israelites, who prophesy concerning the Messiah[1]. Perhaps through them Luke is saying- the last mission of the ancient Mosaic faith is to point to the one who was to come- and then its job is done, and it can depart in peace.

We are now at the end of the infancy narratives; soon we meet Jesus starting on his ministry, which will end so fatefully (and of course this year, Lent starts in three days from now). So we might pause to ask- why did the Messiah fulfil the hopes of some, but not others? As the fourth Gospel puts it, "In him was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it." What was so unacceptable, so incomprehensible, about this Messiah?

I don't think the answer is hard to find, if we put ourselves into the first century Jewish mind. Jesus was the wrong Messiah! Much of Israel was waiting for a strong leader who would galvanise the people and end Roman occupation- so perhaps it is not surprising that they were slow to catch on. What irony it is to have that passage from Malachi today. Malachi says "Suddenly the Lord will return to his temple. But who can endure the day of his coming?" And after four hundred years of waiting, the Messiah returns to his temple as a baby of a humble family, passing unnoticed except by two otherwise unimportant Israelites.

And this seems to be the problem with the illumination provided by God. His ways are not our ways; unlike the sun, we cannot predict his rising and setting, and unlike the electric light, we cannot switch him on and off. The Jewish establishment of Jesus’ day thought they had God all worked out- all they had to do was follow the dictates of Mosaic Law in order to win eternal life. But as so often in their history, God appeared to intervene to throw over their assumptions. Jesus may have been the light of the world, but many proved blind. Rejection of the way of Jesus, the way of peace, arguably led to destruction and disaster for the Jewish people, in the Jewish rebellion of AD 67.

Bringing this down to earth for us, we are currently seeking illumination on our way forward in these parishes- Rodney Stoke, Draycott and Cheddar.  We are being asked to participate in the selection of our new minister, who will lead a united benefice- something we have not had before. Ahead of us is uncertainty- obscurity. What do we want? Someone who will keep things going just as they have been, as far as possible? Perhaps a leader who get us working in a more co-ordinated, or event united, way?

Maybe this Candlemas we can find a useful image for ministry in the candles themselves. When we pass our flame from one person to another, lighting one candle from another, isn’t this a wonderful image for the Holy Spirit- we are sharing something that is capable of living in each one of us.  It is not one great power-source like the sun, but a collective of individual flames. Of course this may be an alarming image for anyone who wants to control the process- once started, it takes on a life of its own.

I think that Stanley has shown us how much can be done by devolving things to lay ministry in the parishes- the preaching team is one example (and I hope you think it is a positive one). Our new minister will have less time to get around his patch than we are used to, and I suspect that if we are not to reduce the presence of our local churches, we shall need more local leadership. So perhaps the minister we need is one who will give us greater local autonomy, and encourage local initiative and ministry- and this is what we should be telling our representatives who are charged with choosing him- or her.

So there are many things to hope for this Candlemas. We look forward to the spring, we look to a new vicar and new fellowship with our fellow parishes, and we look for the mutual illumination and sustenance we are able to give to each other.

I wish you all a reflective and holy Lent.

 



[1] Elizabeth's song- the Magnificat- is generally attributed to Mary, but it is much more probable that it was uttered by Elizabeth, as indicated by a few MSs