MPC
8th June 2008.June 8 - 1 Corinthians 11 - "This is My Body"
MPC
8th June 2008.
Phil Campbell
It's funny how times change, isn't it? To the point where a little thing like a hat can cause such a lot of contention in one context, and almost none in another. That a little thing like a hat will mean one thing to one generation, and something else entirely to another.
So that for instance if I were to wear a hat into church at the 9am service there'd be a completely different reaction to if I wore it to Latechurch at night.
Because for an older generation for a man to wear a hat into church is a sign of disrespect. And for a younger generation there's no sense of disrespect at all. Just be laughing at my poor fashion sense.
And for a previous generation there'd equally be shock and horror if a woman didn't wear a hat into church. Or on a formal occasion. Whereas now it's really only ever the Queen you see wearing a hat, or women going to the races.
And the point is, in certain cultures in certain times, conventions like that really do mean something. I mean, in my dad's day for a man to doff his hat was a very genuine mark of honour. And to not do that, to keep his hat on in the presence of a lady was a very marked sign of disrespect.
And of course in the Islamic world, there are all kinds of regulations about the veiling of women, the wearing of the hijab; this week in what they've called the biggest court decision in modern Turkey, the High Court overturned a previous ruling that allowed girls to wear the hijab in secular schools. Because it raised fears of the Islamisation of the Turkish state. Which could have meant their exclusion from the European Union.
A nation's place in the EU in jeopardy. All over a little thing like a veil. For some strange reason, customs about whether or not you cover your head, when and where you cover your head, how and why you cover your head... have always been contentious.
Which brings us of course to our passage. Which at first reading seems to be all about head coverings. Men who do when they shouldn't. Women who don't when they should.
It's a glimpse into the culture of ancient Corinth. Which in many ways is remote. But I want to suggest to you this morning that when we catch a glimpse of the attitudes underlying their ancient Corinthian customs, the issues Paul's addressing here are very real. And very relevant.
In 1 Corinthians 11, we're invited to a public meeting of the Corinthian church. There are people praying. There are people prophesying. There are people sharing in the Lord's Supper together. Or they think they are. And all of it... they're doing wrong. Because in all of it, they're serving themselves. Instead of serving one another. This is the ultimate me church. About my preferences. And my rights. And my wants. And my appetite. And I'm going to assert myself. To get what I like.
It's a chapter with two distinct sections. Which at first seem to touch on two distinct issues. And yet underneath, I want to suggest this morning that's the one attitude behind both issues.
If you take a look at the shape of the chapter, you'll see it's about Praying and Prophesying from verse 2 to 16. And sharing the Lord's Supper. In verses 17 to 34. And in both cases, the Corinthians... are in it for number one. In both cases, the Corinthians are forgetting what it means to follow the example of the Apostle Paul who follows the example of Jesus Christ. Forgetting the words at the end of chapter 10. Verse 33. Where he says,
For I'm not seeking my own good... but the good of many... so that they may be saved. Follow my example... as I follow the example of Christ.
So what's it going to mean? In practice? In church? I mean, who would have thought there'd be potential for problems with praying? Of all things? I mean, what can go wrong with a bunch of people getting together praying? He's talking about prophecy as well. Which raises some other questions we'll come back to in chapter 14. But prayer... sounds pretty safe, doesn't it?
Apparently not.
Now as we step into verse 3, you'll realise it's part of a passage that can be contentious. And the biggest problem with a verse like this one is the ways it's been abused. By generations of husbands who absolutely miss the point.
It's a verse about headship. Which maybe brings to mind visions of the slippers by the fire. The little woman. Who you push around. Who doesn't have access to the bank account... who doesn't have a say. Because you're the man. And you're the head. And she'll do what she's told.
Can I ask you if you're thinking verse 3 is about that, look more closely. And repent. Let's take a look.
"Now I want you to realise," says Paul... "Now I want you to realise that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is man. And the head of Christ is God."
Now as a first step, will you take note before we go any further, the headship he's talking about is modelled on Christ. That somehow the man to the wife is to be like Christ. In his headship.
It's the same idea in Ephesians 5. This is a headship that started in a stable and ended on a cross. This is a headship that kneels down and washes feet. This is a headship that says, "whoever wants to be first... has got to be slave of all." That says, I didn't come to be served, but to serve. And give my life. As a ransom for many.
And so the Christian order of relationships, that's what headship is going to looks like. The man is the head of his wife in the same way as Christ is head.
And most Christian husbands I know struggle with that. And we need to be encouraged in it. And reminded of what Christian Headship looks like. And Christian wives are called to respect that sort of headship. And express their respect for it in appropriate ways.
Except in Corinth, there's a cultural revolution going on. Now I've got to say as we read a chapter like this there are all sorts of Head covering customs it's tough to make sense of. Of veils when you pray. Of the length of hair; of shameful women with shaved heads. But the point of it all is this: the Corinthian Christian women have started ditching the customs that showed they respected their husbands.
I've uploaded a section of Bruce Winter's book to the MPC website if you want to get more details. But what it boils down to is very simple. There was a cultural way of a wife showing public respect for her husband. And at the church in Corinth, the women were very purposefully throwing it away.
Now as I said before, it's not that long ago since we had customs like that ourselves. A time perhaps where if the bride didn't wear a white veil on her wedding day there'd be absolute horror because of what it signified. And when it comes to hair as well. We've got expressions... like you let your hair down. Which means you're ready to party. A few years back when Demi Moore starred in GI Jane and had her head shaved it made front page news. The ultimate feminist statement.
Now in one way, you'll see echoes of that sort of stuff back in Corinth 2000 years ago. But in another way, it's very different. And so in a way whatever connections we do want to make, be careful. Because there's probably more to it than you think. And again, Bruce Winter's article that you can find online will fill out the details. What we're going to look at though is the impact. And the intentions.
Because you don't have to understand the details to see exactly what's happening. And that is, there are women in the church in Corinth who are making a point. There are women in Corinth who are rocking the boat. There are women in Corinth who are using the opportunity to pray and to speak in the church... as a point scoring exercise.
And they're doing it by uncovering their heads.
To which Paul at considerable length says, they shouldn't. That when they pray or prophecy, it's no time for a declaration of rights. And a claim for independence. He says, maintain the difference. Verse 4. There's a symbolism they need to respect. He says, women and men are different.
Every man who prays or prophecies with his head covered dishonours his head. And every woman who prays or prophecies with her head uncovered dishonours her head.
We mightn't quite understand the symbolism. But they did. And it's a declaration of independence. At the wrong time. In the wrong place. In the wrong way.
Verse 11. And men and women both need to hear this. And in the context of church of all places, a declaration of wifely independence is the wrong way to go. You won't do it these days by taking off your headscarf. But there are other ways, aren't there. We've got symbols of our own. And they say something. Your wedding ring. You slip it off on your way to a party. What's it saying? A very strong declaration of independence. Or word symbols. Like Mrs. Which if you're politically correct you'll replace with Mizz. To express your independence.
Which cuts right against the goal of a church family where each member isn't seeking their own good. But the good of others.
And so verse 11. "In the Lord, however," for us Christians, "woman is not independent of man; nor man independent of woman. For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman."
Which means that as we gather to encourage one another, as we gather to pray, as we gather to hear God's word, it's no place to be self serving. It's not the place for a feminist meeting. It's not the place to declare independence. But to express a mutual dependence. In appropriate ways.
There were wives in the church in Corinth who when they got up in the church to lead in prayer ... took off their headcovering. Took off the symbol of interdependence with their husbands. As a public assertion of their rights. And Paul says in verse 16 they are clearly being contentious. And forgetting what it means to follow the Christ who put aside his rights. When he's just said follow my example... as I follow the example of Christ.
There's another thing Christians do when they get together. And that's to share in the Lord's Supper as we did last week. Although we Presbyterians have of course reduced it to a little ritual with a tiny piece of bread and a thimble full of grape juice. Partly, I suspect, because of the way things went wrong back in Corinth. In Corinth, the Lord's supper was a real meal. And by the sound of it, a pretty good meal. At least for some.
The Lord's Supper is a meal that's meant to be about remembering Jesus. It's a meal that's meant to bring to mind... the heart of our message.
Let's pick up first of all what it's meant to be. And then see what's gone wrong. Verse 23. A description of what the Lord's Supper's all about. And Paul takes us right back to the start. The night before the crucifixion. A Passover meal in an upstairs room.
"For I received from the Lord," he says, "what I also passed on to you. The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread. And when he'd given thanks, he broke it and said, 'This is my body, which is for you. Do this in rememberance of me.'"
And then with the cup, after supper. Verse 25. "This cup is the new covenant..." The new contract. The new deal. "...in my blood. Do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me."
My body. My blood. There's nothing more he's got to give. And he's about to give it all... on the cross. So whenever you pop the cork, says Jesus... whenever you share a meal as brothers and sisters; Jesus said, do it in remembrance... of my broken body on the cross. For you. Remember my blood. That as it drips into the dust, is actually paying your death penalty. As rebels against God.
You know, sometimes remembering is meant to be a very practical thing. I mean, there's the stuff you do in maths at school like quadratic equations and you say "why do I have to remember this"? Because for most of us, it's no use.
But some things are different. As our kids learned to drive, they had to learn the road rules before they could even get their "L" plates. Which is a good thing, isn't it? I mean, as a dad, I was always kind of glad they had to know the road rules. But the thing is, I don't want them to just remember them. I want them to do them. And keep on doing them. Even now. You don't turn in front of oncoming traffic. You do stop at a stop sign. No point saying you remember that stuff if you're not going to do it.
Now remembering the Jesus who's been crucified as your substitute... remembering the Lord who gave up his body to death instead of you... who poured out his very blood for the rest of us... does it dawn on you there's meant to be some sort of practical model there? A model for how you treat other people? Have a look. Verse 20. And see how badly the Corinthians have gone wrong. And it's a real irony.
Now there were a number of different types of public banquets that people were used to in Corinth. Which I guess are still around today in one form or another. Like the bring and share dinner. Or the bring your own dinner. Corinth was a city big on public dinners. And now the Lord's supper was another one on the list.
Now see if you can guess the right answer for this one. See if you can figure it out. You're holding a dinner to honour the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus. You've got rich people in the church who eat well. You've got poor people in the church family who hardly eat at all. What kind of dinner will you make it? Bring your own, and every man for himself? Or share what you've got with the rest of your church family? Use it as a chance to divide the haves from the have nots? Or use it as an opportunity to serve?
Well, you can see which way they've gone, can't you?
It's a bring your own and tuck in... enjoy your caviar sandwiches and sip on your Grange Hermitage. Look after number one. While the poor members look on.
Verse 20: When you come together, says Paul in verse 20, you might think it's the Lords Supper your sharing. But it's not. He says, "When you come together, it's not the Lord's Supper you eat. For as you eat, each of you," literally, takes for himself, "without waiting on anyone else; one remains hungry, another gets drunk."
I mean, this is every man for himself. This is, I've got the good stuff for myself. When instead of that they should be waiting on one another. Serving on another.
So even in the small things... like sharing a meal. They're getting it wrong. I mean, you can do that with any system can't you? You can do it at church morning tea. When you're first in the queue. And you fill up your plate with cakes and slices. And who cares about anyone else. Or the church sausage sizzle where you have four sausage sandwiches and someone else has none.
In Corinth, it's more than that. It's a humiliation of the poor. Verse 22; Paul says, haven't you got somewhere else you can eat? "Or do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing." The ones who come hungry. Left out in the cold while the upper crust members eat all the good stuff.
And they've still got the gall to call it the Lord's Supper. Paul says, the Lord who gave up his body and blood for you would want nothing to do with it. Naming rights are revoked! Back at verse 17; he says, your meetings, they do more harm than good. There are divisions, there are squabbles; it's like a meeting of the Queensland Liberals. It's every man for himself. Instead of do unto others as you'd have them do unto you, it's do others in... before they do you.
So stop and think, he says... so you don't sin against the body and blood of the one who bought you. Stop and think... before you eat judgement on yourself. Look around... and recognise the body of Christ... your church family... and start putting other people first. Even in practical ways like eating a meal. Verse 33... when you come together to eat... wait for each other. If you're hungry, eat at home... so that when you meet together, it won't end up in judgement.
I guess as I said when it comes to the Lord's Supper, we Presbyterians have fixed it, haven't we? No way you'll get drunk on a little cup of grape juice. Or full on a centimetre cube of bread. But in a way, turning it into a little ritual doesn't really address the issue - that there's meant to be a fellowship shared around the table. That the Corinthians were totally missing. That it was an opportunity to be like Jesus in putting others first... that the Corinthians had totally reversed.
They'd turned prayer time into a party political statement of feminist rights.
They'd turned the Lord's Supper into a food fight.
Because at every instance, it was every man for himself. And every woman for herself. Which means it wasn't really church... at all. It was me-church.
Because a real church we come together not seeking our own good... but the good of one another. We come together to encourage one another in following the example of Christ. Week by week as we meet it's meant to be about serving one another. In whatever ways we can.
Can I ask you this morning, why are you here? Because if you're not here to honour the Lord Jesus by the way you serve one another, if you're not here to spur one another on in growing to be more Christlike, if you're not here saying to other people, this is now my body given for you, you're not imitating Jesus at all. And you're missing the point. Whether it's in the way you pray, whether it's in the way you sing, whether it's how far back you put yourself in the queue for morning tea; whether it's making the effort to welcome a newcomer; or where you choose to sit - whether it's where you park your car. There are a million ways decisions to make each Sunday morning. A million ways of serving. And I guess a million tempting ways not to. So which is it going to be... for you?