St. Aidan’s Sermons
Winnipeg, Manitoba
The Rev. Canon Dr. Brett Cane, June 13, 2010
3rd Sunday after Pentecost: 8:30 a.m. & 10:00 a.m. Holy Communion
Elijah #2: “Taking a Stand”
1 Kings 18:1-40
Opening Prayer:
Heavenly Father, you called your servants Elijah and Obadiah to take a stand for you in their different contexts; help us now, by your Holy Spirit, to hear and take action upon your call to us to take a stand for you in our situation, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
Introduction
Today, as we continue with our mini-series on Elijah the prophet, I want to do two things. First, I want us to hear God speaking to us today through the dramatic and exciting passage about Elijah that we heard read earlier from 1 Kings 18. Then I want to move into the present and report back to you on how God has worked these past two weeks at General Synod in Halifax and the implications to us of the amazing things that happened there.
The Story of Elijah
- Setting the Scene: as you may have heard last week, Elijah was a prophet who ministered in the 9th century BC. After King Solomon’s death, the great empire he and his father David had ruled over split into two kingdoms, Israel in the north and Judah in the South. The northern kingdom of Israel, ruled by various rebel kings, was larger and more prosperous than the southern one, ruled by kings from David’s line. Israel still claimed to follow the Lord God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, Yahweh, but by virtue of its location and inclinations began to absorb the spirituality of the nations around them in order to “fit in” and “cover all the bases.” The religion of the day was “Baalism” a crude fertility cult whose primary god, Baal, was a god of rain, thunder and agriculture and called the “Lord of heaven.” This more popular and culturally-accepted faith with its orgies and dramatic worship appeared much more exciting and relevant than the old “no nonsense” and “no fun” religion of Yahweh, the true God.
The relentless drive to merge the worship of Baal with the true God of heaven was led by the kings of Israel of whom Ahab was one of the worst. “Ahab son of Omri did more evil in the eyes of the LORD than any of those before him. He not only considered it trivial to commit the sins of Jeroboam son of Nebat, but he also married Jezebel daughter of Ethbaal king of the Sidonians, and began to serve Baal and worship him. He set up an altar for Baal in the temple of Baal that he built in Samaria. Ahab also made an Asherah pole (fertility symbol) and did more to arouse the anger of the LORD, the God of Israel, than did all the kings of Israel before him” (I Kings 16:30-33). However, despite supporting the cult of Baal, Ahab tried to make a semblance of worshipping Yahweh – he still consulted the Lord’s prophets and named his sons Ahaziah (“Yahweh holds”) and Jehoram (“Yahweh is high”).
It is into this setting that God sent Elijah – the most significant of the many prophets the Lord sent to Israel to call them back to him. Unlike the later prophets, we have no record of the teaching of Elijah, just stories of his dramatic actions such as the miraculous provision of food, raising the dead, ascending into heaven in a chariot, and the amazing confrontation with the prophets of Baal on Mount Carmel that we heard read earlier.[1] The way the Old Testament depicts Elijah is as almost a second Moses – and in the New Testament Elijah and Moses appear together at the Transfiguration of Jesus (Luke 9:28-36). John the Baptist is seen as a second Elijah, “He will go on before the Lord, in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the parents to their children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the righteous” (Luke 1:17), and there are other references to Elijah throughout the Scriptures.[2]
Today’s story opens with God’s word coming to Elijah in the third year of terrible drought that Elijah had prophesied in the previous chapter (1 Kings 17) as a punishment to bring Israel back to him. “After a long time, in the third year, the word of the LORD came to Elijah: ‘Go and present yourself to Ahab, and I will send rain on the land.’” (1 Kings 18:1). We then read of Ahab and his Prime Minister, Obadiah, trying to find food for his livestock (there is no mention of Ahab trying to alleviate the pain of his people) and the encounter of Obadiah, “a devout believer in the Lord” (verse 3) with Elijah, a subsequent tense meeting between Ahab and Elijah and the ensuing drama of the confrontation with the prophets of Baal on Mount Carmel.
Unfortunately we don’t have time to go into the details of the contest, but the main point of it is aptly summarized by a commentator as follows: “What four hundred and fifty Baal priests could not get Baal to do by dancing and slashing all day, Yahweh did in a last brief moment before sunset and he did this in response to the simple but powerful supplication of his true servant. While Baal was away on a journey or on business or sound asleep (and one version reads, ‘or he is relieving himself’[3]) Yahweh was alert and attentive.”[4] The Lord and Elijah carry the day and the people’s response is “The Lord—he is God! The Lord—he is God!” (verse 39).
- 2. Lessons learned: Here are four things we can note from this passage about the stand taken by Elijah and how they apply in our own lives:
i. It cost Elijah to take a stand: it can not have been easy for Elijah to see the pain of his people caused by the drought and famine his prophetic word foretold. He had already experienced this first-hand as we see in the story of the widow of Zarephath you heard about last week and here we read that the wicked Queen Jezebel has been “killing off the Lord’s prophets” (verse 4), probably in retaliation for Elijah’s ministry. Many would have been his friends in the struggle and this would have brought him great anguish – maybe also frustration with and anger at God for allowing such a thing to happen. Often, when we take a stand, it will have fall-out and consequences that affect others. For example, there has been a backlash because the Network folk have left the Anglican Church of Canada and some have felt a need to “distance themselves” or move “underground” in order that they not be misunderstood. Remnants left behind after the bulk of a parish have left have suffered intense discouragement and abandonment as we have seen in Brandon diocese.
In addition to being in anguish over others, Elijah was also probably afraid for his own life – as he certainly was later which we shall see next time when we look at chapter 19. Here, Obadiah expresses his fear of being Ahab’s next victim, “What have I done wrong…that you are handing your servant over to Ahab to be put to death?” (verse 9). In our struggles today, many of us have been called homophobic and obscurantist and looked at with suspicion. Taking a stand involves a cost, not only to yourself, but to others, and this latter can make it even worse for yourself.
ii. Elijah is blamed by Ahab: when Ahab and Elijah finally meet, Ahab blames him for all the sorrow and heartbreak: “When Ahab saw Elijah, he said to him, ‘Is that you, you troubler of Israel?’” (verse 17). We have seen his in the current disputes – those who have taken a stand in response to those who have broken with biblical truth and orthodox doctrine and the pleading of the rest of the Church are accused of committing the greater sin. There is no logic in this and t stems from either a blindness or unwillingness to see the first error. To this accusation, Elijah replies, “I have not made trouble for Israel…But you and your father’s family have. You have abandoned the Lord’s commands and have followed the Baals” (verses 17-18). We likewise must take a stand and call a spade a spade as we did during this past General Synod. Taking a stand involves being falsely accused.
iii. Elijah cuts to the heart of the problem: when Elijah confronts the people on Mount Carmel he issues them a challenge: “Elijah went before the people and said, ‘How long will you waver between two opinions? If the Lord is God, follow him; but if Baal is God, follow him.’ But the people said nothing” (verse 21). The heart of the problem was ungodly compromise of the truth. This is at the root of all sin – most of us want to do what is right, to go God’s way – but the pain that this might bring about is too much for us. We want to have the so-called benefits of sin and the Lord’s blessing as well. We can not. Sin is deceptive and brings no benefits and we need to be absolutely clear in that – with ourselves first and then with others. In our current debate over sexuality and the Bible – right belief and right action – we are taking a stand that is uncompromising with regard to sin. Perhaps we did not do this enough at General Synod but perhaps this was also not the right time. As I will share in a moment, if we love those with whom we disagree, we will want to win them over and that may mean working to create an appropriate opportunity to be heard. Take a stand by going to the heart of the problem – the ungodly compromise with sin.
iv. Elijah took his stand one way and Obadiah another: Elijah took his stand by heading off to the wilderness, separating himself from the wickedness of court and city life. Obadiah, on the other hand, stayed right inn the middle of the situation and took his stand for God there. The text is unambiguous about Obadiah’s faith: “Obadiah was a devout believer in the Lord” (verse 3). What follows is not a qualifying statement beginning with “But…” to show that in some way he was compromising. Instead, we hear how he used his position at court, went to great expense and risked his own life to save others: “While Jezebel was killing off the Lord’s prophets, Obadiah had taken a hundred prophets and hidden them in two caves, fifty in each, and had supplied them with food and water” (verse 4). It is amazing that in the time of famine he was able to do this. He showed his faith by his actions. However, some would criticize him for compromising and not separating himself like Elijah. I found this to be the case in an older commentary by a trusted author which I read in preparation for this sermon.[5] I spoke earlier about “ungodly” compromise. There is a form of “godly” compromise – perhaps it is better described as being “as wise as serpents and harmless as doves” (Matthew 10:16). Obadiah was able to take his stand within the system just as Elijah took his stand without.
Taking a stand costs; it may incur blame; it needs to cut to the heart of the problem; it can be taken in different ways. These are the lessons we learn from Elijah and the stories in 1 Kings 18. We now look at how taking a stand worked out at General Synod.
The Story of General Synod
Well, what did happen at General Synod? Representatives from dioceses of the Anglican Church of Canada along with some spouses, guests, staff and displayers – including lobby groups, such as ourselves, the Anglican Communion Alliance (ACA) – met at St. Mary’s University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, from June 3 to 11 in our triennial gathering – we were about 500 people in all. We assembled to do God’s work – the business of the church – and there were many challenges before us. I am going to highlight the sexuality issue but there were many other deeply important matters that were addressed such as the affirming of the indigenous church in our midst and the receiving of the Anglican Covenant for discussion and future recommendation. Before I begin, I want to say that your prayers 24/7 going up from our congregation were much needed and powerfully answered!
First, I want to describe briefly what the ACA did. I was in charge of the organization and Murray Henderson, our former rector, was responsible for the strategy and motions group which helped the conservative delegates with talking points and an opportunity to discuss together how to proceed. This latter ministry was most appreciated by the two dozen or so who were directly involved plus others who received the information. Eight others from across the country, including our own Ellen Spencer and Linda Stokes, served as volunteers along with a dozen local folk from Halifax, most of whom were from Trinity Church under the leadership of their rector Steve Ashton. We rented a beautiful auditorium in the University which was located in the old chapel just across from the gym where the synod sessions were held. In here was a hospitality lounge and internet café, an auditorium where we heard our own speakers before synod began and during supper hour for five nights, a dining area for our meals together, a prayer chapel area, an office area and meeting space for the strategy group. It was a great facility – but hard to find once you were in the building!
We also had a display table along with three-dozen other groups right next to the gym where the plenary sessions were being held. Our table was next to the coffee table so that was helpful but we also had significant ministry with other displayers. As things were getting set up, Linda Stokes and another volunteer, Mary Robinson, went around all the other exhibits offering to pray for folk and were warmly welcomed and their offer was only declined once!
One of the ways I knew God was with us in power was how I kept meeting the people I needed to at just the night time. On the early morning before synod begin, the first person I met in the elevator was one of our own Rupert’s Land delegates whom I invited to come and hear Professor Ephraim Radner speak on the covenant in our facilities that morning. The next two people I met on the path were also Rupert’s Land delegates and I invited them. They all turned up with others from our diocese so we were the largest single group there! This “chance meeting” with people I needed to see characterized my experience throughout synod – including an opportunity to meet the presiding bishop of the US and express to her that, while we stood on opposite sides of many issues, I appreciated her address to us that morning – which was very irenic and didn’t press any of the buttons she could have!
There is so much I could share but I will focus on the issue of same-sex blessings. Six sessions were devoted to it, including an opening introduction and closing decision-time with two small-group times and two report-back sessions. What stunned me was the atmosphere of conciliation and fairness. For the first time in fifteen years I heard the conservative position being expressed on an equal footing with others. Though some conservatives initially felt overwhelmed in the small groups, the reporting back was fair. For example, one point was that directional language such as “moving forward” or “going ahead” was to be avoided as extremely unhelpful. Theological groups and committees that had been working on the issue before Synod shared how they realized that though a consensus was not possible they had come to respect one another in a new way. The strong recommendation was that a legislative decision not be made as such weighty matters should not be decided by simple voting majorities. A much more profound approach of listening to Scripture and one another needs to take place.
The end result of all this was a statement summarising the discussions which was more descriptive than prescriptive. The key recommendation was not to make any legislative decision. When the statement was presented for approval there was overwhelming acceptance on all sides. After that, movers of resolutions which had been prepared on the issue from both sides, led by a key conservative, met together and agreed to withdraw them as it would have moved us away from the spirit of conciliation that had been reached. There are things in the statement, however, which can be seen as ambiguous, so the ACA has issued our response to it which is written below:
++++
A RESPONSE TO THE STATEMENT ON SEXUALITY
OF THE GENERAL SYNOD OF THE ANGLICAN CHURCH OF CANADA
BY THE ANGLICAN COMMUNION ALLIANCE (ACA)
Halifax, N.S. June 11, 2010
“Surely God is good to Israel, to those who are pure in heart.” Psalm 73:1
Dear friends,
We give thanks to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. The General Synod of the Anglican Church of Canada (ACoC) in its acceptance of Resolution 137, “Sexuality Discernment”, made the decision to continue to “walk together” despite deep disagreement on the issue of the blessing of same sex unions. Rather than force a solution that would further divide the church, people on all sides of the issue of same sex blessing chose to live with their respective pain and to continue to dialogue. We’re grateful to our Primate Fred Hiltz for his leadership at Synod and indeed over the years in dealing with this issue in a spirit of conciliation.
Almost no one in the church believes this is a final solution. The Statement remains problematic for Anglican Communion Alliance members. Yet by the grace of God, in a quite miraculous way, we are able to rejoice in the following:
-
The Statement is a Pastoral Response rather than a legislated Resolution of church doctrine: “we are not prepared to make a legislative decision (para.4).”
- The official teaching of the church remains that which is summed up in Lambeth 1998, 1.10:
“in view of the teaching of Scripture [the Lambeth Conference] upholds faithfulness in marriage between a man and a woman in lifelong union, and believes that abstinence is right for those who are not called to marriage…”
- The admittedly ambiguous language in several places in fact gives no grounds for dioceses to pursue the “local option”. The ACoC has given no formal permission for same sex blessings to take place.
d. The Statement insists that “despite all our differences, we are passionately committed to walking together, protecting our common life.” Clearly that common life will be jeopardized by any attempt to see the Statement as a license to authorize same sex blessings.
- Finally, our aboriginal delegates said that, for the first time, they genuinely felt listened to at General Synod. They were able to express their concern that the same sex blessing issue is low in their priorities. Many “liberal” Christians at General Synod realized that our aboriginal people might be alienated if this issue were forced upon them.
We were disappointed that Synod made no official re-affirmation of the moratorium on same sex blessings. We will be encouraging the House of Bishops to address this vital issue. While at Synod our spirits were lifted when we heard that the Archbishop of Canterbury has exercised church discipline in the case of those provinces of the church which may be breaching the moratoria. We rejoice that the world-wide Anglican Communion is beginning to express its interest in our situation.
The Anglican Communion Alliance eagerly accepts the challenge ahead of us. Our aim is to be a center of biblical and spiritual renewal within the Anglican Church of Canada, and we intend to give ourselves to the on-going theological discussion and study of human sexuality that this General Synod has called for and that is so needed in our church.
+++++
The story is not ended, obviously, but the Lord is with us as we walk into the future. This was demonstrated by a difficult but productive episode which happened just after the major resolution was passed. A motion was put forward to encourage further study and an attempt was made to amend it to include, along with “gay and lesbian voices,” “ex-gay voices.” This was voted down and an unfortunate remark made: “so-called ex-gay.” This was devastating to those present who have come out of the gay lifestyle but we then realized that half of the bishops had voted for it to be included. This has shown us that the half of our leaders have publicly declared that they want to hear the “ex-gay voice” in their dioceses and so we shall be following that up to enable that to happen! Along with everything else that was accomplished, I believe your prayers also enabled that seeming defeat to be turned into a victory!
Conclusion
Our commitment is to carry on within the Anglican Church Canada to ensure these voices are heard and that people who are seeking to be set free from sinful habits and lifestyles can be shown the way. I am energized to continue to be a witness for orthodox life and belief within the Anglican Church of Canada as the place where God has called me to take my stand at this time and I encourage you to do likewise.
One final postscript – on the last evening, as we were having our ACA supper presentation on an exciting congregational development in New Brunswick, Ellen Spencer felt led to go out into our reception lounge. There she met a young man who had just “drifted in” (which was very difficult to do as he was not a student and we were very hard to find!). He was originally an Anglican and had seen our sign. He was destitute and in deep need. He also shared he was in the gay lifestyle and wanted out. We immediately got Daryle Duke from the Zacchaeus Fellowship over and they talked for a long time. He left with practical assistance and links to get help. I see this encounter as God’s confirmation of all that we had done and stood for at General Synod. Our taking a stand has made a difference and will continue to do so that others may find freedom in Christ in every way.
[1] The Elijah stories are found in 1 Kings 17, 18, 19, 21, and 2 Kings 1, 2.
[2] E.g. Malachi 3:19, Mark 15:35-36, Luke 4:24-27, Romans 11:1-6, James 5:16-18
[3] New Living Translation.
[4] S. J. De Vries (Word Bible commentary, 1993) as quoted by Ronald S. Wallace, Readings in 1 Kings. (Grand Rapids, Mi: Eerdmans, 1995), pg. 124.
[5] F.B. Meyer, Elijah. (New York, NY: Fleming H. Revell), pgs. 74-83.
