March 17, 2019

Cate Thorn

Lent 2     Genesis 15:1-12, 17-18     Luke 13:31-35

Video available on YouTube, Facebook

Less is more of words this day, heavy of heart, bereft and full of tears perhaps unshed, we gather, it is good for us to be together. 

The unspeakable has happened, yet we must speak of it.

The unbearable has taken place in our place, yet we must bear it, together.

Like the death of a close loved one, is how it feels, I keep hoping to wake up and it not be true, the world to not have shifted so fundamentally. Yet it has and before this dread puzzlement I am stilled, numbed, I’m not sure what I can do to live with this being the way things are now, how to navigate.

Steadily each day turns, though and we must tread each one, even in our bewilderment, for it cannot prevent the flow of life that continues. So we continue to honour our Lenten commitment to consider the care of creation. Remember on Friday, before overshadowed by the shocking events of the afternoon our children were taking unprecedented strike action to confront us, our leaders, with the lack of action to address climate change. This Lent we consider how to care for creation learning from the wisdom of the creation narratives of different religions and practice. Today we have with us Jules Gaddie from the Auckland Hebrew Congregation. It may be our conversation moves and shifts a little given how we have been moved and shifted.

What we do know is we share the stories of creation found in Genesis with our Jewish and Muslim communities. We’re aware of two creation stories and even maybe that these texts aren’t the earliest writings but have been placed at the beginning as if they were. From the outset the human enterprise is complicated and we’d prefer it were not so. Jewish author Gabby Barzilai writes “Bible critics have sought to view these differences as evidence of two separate Creation stories, transferred to the Torah from two different sources. In their opinion, the "redactor (editor) of Genesis" included both stories because both found favour in [their] eyes and [they] did not want to choose between them.

Jewish Bible scholars wished to discount the idea the two stories entered the Bible by chance and have tried to find real reasons why both accounts were included and to show how they reflected different aspects of existence.

Rabbi J.B. Soloveitchik writes, in Chapter 1 the Torah describes man as a creative being who asks, "How is the world constructed?" "How does nature operate?" Out of his desire to imitate nature, to improve and control it. In contrast, man as described in Chapter 2 is a philosophical being who asks questions of cause and effect: Why was the world created? To what purpose was man created? Who is the Creator, who is the Ruler of the Universe? His main point is that beyond the messages found in each narrative individually, an important message can be found by considering them in conjunction. [Hu]Man[ity] is not one-sided, solely a creative or a philosophic being; rather, humanity has the characteristics of a thinker and of a creator at one and the same time. The two stories present different aspects of human beings, since humans are complex, not to be encompassed in a single story.” [1]

Humans are complex, from the outset not one story can tell and this is before even considering the other dynamic in the creation narratives, humanity’s conceiving of the intimate divine partner in creation’s coming into being.

Complex, with freedom to choose and repercussions that are to be lived with. What happened in Christchurch is shocking, beyond our imagining in this country where we’ve an assumed etiquette of civility we expect to be honoured. However, whether we’re comfortable with the notion or not, the acts of this man and those aligned with him, people with such capacity for inhumanity are among us. We’d rather it not be so, but it is. What’s more such capacityfor inhumanity isn’t just over there, it’s in us. We’d rather this not be true. As disbelief and numbness dissipate there will be anger, desire for retribution and blame, for we humans like to feel we can do something, reassert meaningful control when it’s been stolen from us.

We humans are complicated and messy and we’ve capacity to choose how we enact our complexity, how we live, which stories we listen to and bring to life. Many years ago I heard this Native American tale, The Wolves Within it may be one you know:

An old Grandfather, whose grandson came to him with anger at a friend who had done him an injustice, said, "Let me tell you a story. I too, at times, have felt a great hate for those that have taken so much, with no sorrow for what they do. But hate wears you down, and does not hurt your enemy. It is like taking poison and wishing your enemy would die. I have struggled with these feelings many times."

He continued, "It is as if there are two wolves inside me; one is good and does no harm. He lives in harmony with all around him and does not take offense when no offense was intended. He will only fight when it is right to do so, and in the right way."

"But the other wolf, ah! He is full of anger. The littlest thing will set him into a fit of temper. He fights everyone, all the time, for no reason. He cannot think because his anger and hate are so great. It is hard to live with these two wolves inside me, for both of them try to dominate my spirit."

The boy looked intently into his Grandfather's eyes and asked, "Which one wins, Grandfather?"

The Grandfather solemnly said, "The one I feed." [2]

NZ’s darkest day, a defining moment in NZ’s history, these words have been spoken. Yet how will it define us, or how will we choose to be defined by it? Which wolf will we feed?

Will the violence of this moment define and determine how we as a nation choose to react, choose to be. Or will we define who we are by choosing for one another? Respond to such targeted violence by deciding, actively, to make the “they are us,” Jacinda Ardern spoke of real, to actively create space, offer welcome hospitality to NZ that is home for those who choose NZ as their place.

Will we choose to follow the lead of our young people who defied the authority of their schools, resisted the scorn of media, the derision of politicians and public opinion, (who seemed determined to talk about every issue but the one our young people were for) young people and act differently or there will be no future.

What is our choice? It is in our hands, each moment.

[1] https://www.biu.ac.il/JH/Parasha/eng/bereshit/bar.html

[2] http://www.naute.com/stories/wolves.phtml