From the context, this sermon was preached in Christ Church URC Church on the last Sunday in Advent. I'm sorry - I don't know which year.
Faith and Works
Our Lord Jesus Christ said, 'Whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.
'And every one that heareth these sayings of mine and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand; And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall thereof'.
This parable, to be found at the end of Chapter 7 of St. Matthew's Gospel, of the house built upon shifting sands and the one built upon rock has provided a popular text for many a stirring sermon.
I recall listening to many such in my childhood and youth as a choirboy and later as a server at an Anglican church in Ipswich. Always, as I recall, the preacher insisted that the rock upon which the secure house was built was the rock of faith. It was only upon a secure foundation of faith in the church's teachings that we could hope to build our lives.
Faith was equated with 'belief'. Even at a very young age, this struck a false chord with me. I couldn't force myself to believe something that I was by no means certain was true – and I didn't suppose that anyone else could. We could try to believe. We could, if we were prepared to deceive others, pretend to believe – but that was surely not the kind of faith on which we were being urged to build our lives.
I have since come to realize that the faith that is required of us equates more closely to 'trust' than to 'belief' and I am brought once again to that wise dictum of George Bernard Shaw that I have quoted before from this pulpit, that our faith does not consist of the things that we think we believe but of the assumptions on which we habitually act.
Furthermore
a closer look at the parable of the two houses reveals that the 'rock' on which the wise builder erected his home was not that of faith alone but of faith-in-action. Our Lord likened the foolish builder to those who hear his words only, and the wise one to those who hear his words and act upon them!
Archbishop William Temple once insisted that the Christian Faith was the most materialistic of all the world's religions. It didn't simply require that our creator and heavenly father should receive prayer and homage and sacrifice. He required us to do his will.
Jesus Christ, the Word of God, who was 'made flesh and dwelt among us' some two thousand years ago, said that 'not all who call unto me "Lord!, Lord!" shall enter into my kingdom, but those who do the will of my Father which is in Heaven'.
It is by heeding the words of Jesus and – we Quakers believe – by following the inward light of Christ's spirit, which illuminates our consciences and will, if we allow it, guide our actions, that we know what is the will of our Father in Heaven.
The ten commandments, originally intended for a primitive nomadic tribe in the Middle East many millennia ago, are for the most part still relevant today. They used to be read, with an appropriate prayer response to each commandment, at every Anglican service of Holy Communion. Nowadays they are, more often than not, replaced by what Jesus described as the two great commandments – to love God with all our heart and soul and mind and strength, and to love our neighbour as ourselves.
Some may think of these as easy options (there are, after all, only two of them!) but are they? To love God with all our heart and soul and mind and strength we must be continually conscious of his presence. How many of us, in the world of the 21
st
Century, can really claim that that is so?
Jesus told us that 'neighbour' includes everyone with whom we come into contact – including our enemies. I suspect that those who claim that loving their enemies is easy have never really had any!
It also means refugees staying in hotels in our town, the possibly alcoholic or drug addicted beggars whom we may encounter in the streets, and – of course – the people who live in the same neighbourhood as ourselves, including those who actually live next door.
My wife and I have always been very fortunate with our immediate neighbours. My years as a public health inspector and as Clacton's housing manager have taught me that not everyone is so fortunate. Some have distinctly unlovable neighbours with incessantly barking dogs, recurring smoky garden bonfires, noisy televisions and radios, and late-night parties.
Sometimes it is easier to entertain feelings of love for the poverty-stricken slum-dwellers of Latin America, the constantly flood-threatened peasants of Bangladesh, or the street children of Moscow, than for those who live near at hand.
There is a couplet in a satirical poem by G.K. Chesterton that goes:
'How I love humanity, with love so pure and pringlish –
And how I hate the horrid French, who never will be English!'
How do we even attempt to love someone whom we instinctively
dislike? The late C.S.Lewis, children's author, Christian publicist, and the subject of the play 'Shadowlands', to be presented by Clacton's Arts and Literary Society early next year, suggested that, when faced with the unlovable we should try behaving towards them as though we loved them.
God loves them – as he loves us all. And St Teresa pointed out in the 16
th
century that God has no hands but ours with which to do his bidding; no feet but ours to run his errands. It may be that by doing God's work, however reluctantly, there will be a transformation - perhaps of our neighbour; perhaps of our own nature.
In our second reading this morning we heard St. James, whom many believe to have been a brother of our Lord, ask 'If a brother or sister be naked and destitute of daily food, and one of you say unto them, 'Depart in peace. Be ye warmed and fed'; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?' What indeed?
Martin Luther, is said to have denigrated this epistle as 'an epistle of straw'. In repudiation of the corrupt practices of the church of his day he believed fervently in 'justification through faith alone'. He had some pretty powerful friends among the German princes and may also have been unhappy about the denunciations of the rich and powerful in the same epistle.
Great as Luther undoubtedly was, I hope that I may be excused for regarding St. James as an even greater authority on Christ's Gospel.
The world of the New Testament was very different from the one that we know today. It was harsher and more cruel in many ways – but both acts of cruelty and of kindness were the responsibility of individuals.
Conquering armies would sack towns and carry off the inhabitants into slavery – but, unlike us, they hadn't perfected the art of dealing out death and mutilation impersonally and from a distance; from an aircraft miles above its victims perhaps, or from warships sailing a distant ocean. On the other hand, there was no health service, no economic 'safety net' to alleviate destitution, no human rights legislation.
Life and death, happiness or misery, depended upon the whim of a ruler, on the personal wealth of individuals and their families, and on the alms-giving of strangers. It seems to us that the difference between 'right' and 'wrong' must have been very much clearer in those days than it is today and that much biblical wisdom is hardly relevant to the 21
st
Century.
This certainly cannot be said with regard to either of the scriptural readings that we have had this morning. Those who seek a brief exposition of the Christian ethic can do no better than to read again Jesus' words 'I was hungred, and ye gave me meat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink, naked and ye clothed me: I was sick and ye visited me: I was in prison and ye came unto me'. And when those to whom he was speaking asked, in puzzlement, when they had done those things, he replied, 'Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
Jesus thus clearly identified himself with the sick, the disabled, the hungry and the homeless everywhere. To me, as a Quaker, it means rather more than that. I believe that every man, woman and child in the world is endowed with 'that of God' – a spark of that same Divine Light of which Jesus of Nazareth was the incarnation. Thus, whatever good – or bad – we do to our fellow men or women we are doing to the Holy Spirit of Christ.
This conviction is the firm foundation of all our Quaker testimonies – most of which, of course, we share with followers of other Christian traditions. It is the rock upon which we have built our faith and practice. There is our peace testimony, for which we are perhaps best known, our testimonies to political and economic justice, our concern for education, and our interest in penal reform from the time of Elizabeth Fry to the present day.
Jesus' 'Inasmuch as…….' is as relevant today as it was two thousand years ago. There are still sick, homeless, ill-clad, and starving people in the world. There are untold numbers of prisoners, victims of oppression, and victims of war and violence. What we do for them, good or evil, we are doing to Jesus Christ. Our indifference to their plight is indifference to the suffering of Our Lord.
Among the victims of oppression, war and violence are countless little children. Let us never forget that Jesus, though the gentlest of men, said of those who harm little children that it would be better for them if a millstone were tied round their necks and they were cast into the sea.
What should it mean to us, here in Clacton today? For many of us – the frail and the elderly – there may be little that we can do but pray and support the work that others are doing on our behalf. Other, younger and fitter folk will perhaps feel called upon to play a more positive role.
National and international charitable organisations that are undoubtedly doing God's work include Christian Aid, Oxfam, The International Red Cross (for whom I have always had a warm regard since they undoubtedly saved my life during my time as a prisoner of war) and Save the Children, as well as denominational organisations like the Salvation Army, Cafod and Quaker Aid.
They, and many others, deserve all the support that we can give them. In our multifaith society it may be considered politically incorrect to suggest that one religious faith could be better than any other – but can you think of any other world religion with an organisation like Christian Aid which, world-wide, supports those in need, whatever their race, colour or creed?
While it is right that we should support the sick, oppressed and disadvantaged world-wide, we should not ignore the plight of those in need in our own locality and our own community. In Our Lord's parable of the wealthy man, traditionally called Midas, and Lazarus, the beggar at his gate, we know very little about either of them.
The wealthy man may well have been a model citizen, honest and upright, a supporter of worthy causes. He was condemned for no other reason than that he chose to ignore the plight of the beggar on his own doorstep.
We should remember too, the words of the eighteenth century poet and visionary William Blake, perhaps best known as the author of the hymn 'Jerusalem'. He wrote that, 'He who would do good to another must do it in minute particulars'. No matter how old or frail we may be we can all manage the minute particulars of a friendly smile of welcome, a word of praise, of encouragement or of thanks.
Above all, I think, we should attempt to dedicate everything we do 'to the greater glory of God'. As the hymn declares 'Who sweeps a room as for thy laws, makes that, and the action fine'. I can't help comparing the permanence of the great cathedrals, erected to God's glory in the early centuries of the last millennium with the strictly temporary Greenwich Dome, hastily erected in the closing months of that millennium to the greater glory of contemporary humanity and our false god Mammon. It is, I believe, this change of purpose that has produced what seems, to my admittedly elderly senses, a modern cult of ugliness in art, in music and dance, in architecture, and in literature.
This Sunday is the last before Advent; the season during which Christians traditionally prepared themselves both for the anniversary of Christ's birth and for his second coming which, for many centuries, was believed to be imminent.
When I was a boy it was often known as 'stir-up' Sunday because of the opening words of the collect, or short prayer appointed for the day, in the Anglican Book of Common Prayer. My mother, who had been a cook in an Edwardian household, had no doubt that one of its purposes was to remind housewives that it was time to stir up the Christmas pudding mixture and make the pudding.
I think it likely that Thomas Cranmer, the sixteenth century author of the prayer book, did have the approaching Christmas celebrations in mind when he wrote that collect, but its real purpose is to serve as a rallying call, urging all faithful Christians to serve their Lord in deed as well as in word, in both faith and practice. Perhaps I may use it to close this address:
Stir up, we beseech thee, O Lord, the wills of thy faithful people; that they, plenteously bringing forth the fruit of good works, may of thee be plenteously rewarded; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
………………………….