Skip to main content

Being the covenant people

Deuteronomy 29.10-15
Romans 12.1-2
John 15.1-10

Deuteronomy chapter 29 is a reconstruction of what might have been. The writers of Deuteronomy want us to think that it is real history, that Moses actually stood in front of the people of Israel and made this speech, but actually that is most unlikely.

The Book of Deuteronomy, or its first draft at any rate, was miraculously discovered in the Temple in the reign of King Josiah. The credulous were persuaded that it had been mislaid there in the reign of King Solomon, and then forgotten by his worthless successors. Supposedly it had been brought to the new Temple by priests who had handed it down, from generation to generation, since the time of Moses himself. But, in fact, it was almost certainly a construct of a group of reformers active during Josiah’s own reign. Among other things, they wanted to reinforce the idea that Israel was a covenant people.

Interestingly, they had a very inclusive approach. In many religions men have a privileged place, and even today that’s true of orthodox Jewish religion, although not of more liberal interpretations of the faith. However, the writers of Deuteronomy make clear that the covenant is not just for the leaders, officers and elders, nor even for the men of Israel, it includes women, children and even foreigners who live in the land of Israel.

Nor does the covenant make any distinctions of class - the humblest slaves, who are forced to draw water and cut wood - can be part of the covenant too. To be a member of the covenant people is a privilege, but it’s not for the privileged few. It’s open ended - a circle which draws everyone in rather than shutting some people out.

Later, Judaism was to turn its back on this inclusive approach and become much more inward-looking, much more defensive. But the Deuteronomists are on a mission to build a new nation of believers and, for the time being, anyone can join.

Most strikingly of all, the covenant reaches out to embrace those who are not even born when Moses makes his speech. The Deuteronomists no doubt have in mind the people of their own day who were hearing these ideas for the very first time and learning that their previous understanding of the covenant had been incomplete. However, by implication, the passage also broadens out the reach of God’s covenant to include anyone since that time who has been willing to embrace the faith. For Christians, of course, it means that we are bold enough to include ourselves in the covenant people - not by virtue of our descent from Jewish ancestry, nor because we deserve it, but because Jesus has invited us into the circle.

People have often worried about making the covenant promise and many Methodists refuse to attend the covenant service at all. It’s intriguing then to read the Deuteronomists’ claim that even those members of the community who are absent when the promise is made are somehow, mysteriously, bound up in its claim over us.

What does it mean, then, to be part of the covenant people? Paul spells it out very succinctly in the opening verses of Romans chapter 12. It means offering ourselves as a living sacrifice to God by dedicating ourselves - body, mind and soul - to him. And it means separating ourselves from the prevailing culture in so far as it would hinder us from knowing and doing what which is good, acceptable to God and perfect.

It’s pretty challenging stuff, and the words of the covenant promise in the Methodist Service help to spell out its full implications. Interestingly, though, the covenant is not just about putting our faith in God or trusting our emotions to him. Somewhat uncharacteristically, Paul emphasises that entering into a covenant relationship with God is a rational thing for people to do. It’s not like joining a cult, where we’re asked to leave our common sense or our critical faculties behind. It’s about becoming more truly ourselves by renewing our minds as well as our feelings.

If Deuteronomy emphasises the open endedness of God’s covenant promise, John’s Gospel turns back to the idea of its exclusiveness. John is more inclined than the other Gospel writers to draw a circle with shuts some people out. This is because he was struggling to lead a church which was deeply divided between people who insisted on the importance of knowing the right things and people, like John himself, who had a lot to say themselves about knowledge but who understood that love is more important still. Claiming to know Jesus isn’t evidence of being in a covenant relationship with him, unless it changes the kind of person we are and puts us more in touch with God’s loving kindness.

So, in John’s community, bad disciples had to be cut out of the vine and got rid of and good disciples had to be pruned to make them even better and stronger. And the definition of whether or not a branch can stay, or needs to be cut out, is - of course - whether it is bearing fruit. The good disciple heeds Jesus’ commands and dwells in his love. The bad disciple does not.

This passage finds its way into the covenant service because of its promise that we can draw sustenance from Jesus himself. Entering the covenant may be a rational choice, as Paul described, but it’s not just about believing the right things and then trying to put them into practice. It’s also about being in a living relationship with Jesus - being grafted onto him like a vine stem being grafted onto a different root stock to make it grow stronger. Unless we allow ourselves to be united to Jesus, and to dwell in him, we shall not be able to bear the fruit of loving kindness that John sees is so essential to the spiritual life.

Tonight’s service is a reminder that, like the crowd of men, women and children, foreigners and slaves who gathered in the Temple to hear the Deteronomists unpack Moses’ ideas - supposedly uncovered for the first time in centuries - we too can become heirs of God’s covenant. And, by a rational decision to abide in Jesus we can also find the strength and the resources that we will need to live up to the challenge.


Popular posts from this blog

I don't believe in an interventionist God

Matthew 28.1-10, 1 Corinthians 15.1-11 I like Nick Cave’s song because of its audacious first line: ‘I don’t believe in an interventionist God’. What an unlikely way to begin a love song! He once explained that he wrote the song while sitting at the back of an Anglican church where he had gone with his wife Susie, who presumably does believe in an interventionist God - at least that’s what the song says. Actually Cave has always been very interested in religion. Sometimes he calls himself a Christian, sometimes he doesn’t, depending on how the mood takes him. He once said, ‘I believe in God in spite of religion, not because of it.’ But his lyrics often include religious themes and he has also said that any true love song is a song for God. So maybe it’s no coincidence that he began this song in such an unlikely way, although he says the inspiration came to him during the sermon. The vicar was droning on about something when the first line of the song just popped into his head. I suspect …

Why are good people tempted to do wrong?

Deuteronomy 30.15-20, Psalm 119.1-8, 1 Corinthians 3.1-4, Matthew 5.21-37 Why are good people tempted to do wrong? Sometimes we just fall from the straight and narrow and do mean, selfish or spiteful things. But sometimes we convince ourselves that we’re still good people even though we’re doing something wrong. We tell ourselves that there are some people whose motives are totally wicked or self-regarding: criminals, liars, cheats, two-timers, fraudsters, and so on, but we are not that kind of person. We’re basically good people who just indulge in an occasional misdemeanour. So, for example, there’s Noble Cause Corruption, a phrase first coined apparently in 1992 to explain why police officers, judges, politicians, managers, teachers, social workers and so on sometimes get sucked into justifying actions which are really totally wrong, but on the grounds that they are doing them for a very good reason. A famous instance of noble cause corruption is the statement, by the late Lord Denni…

Giotto’s Nativity and Adoration of the Shepherds

John 1.10-18
In the week before Christmas the BBC broadcast a modern version of The Nativity which attempted to retell the story with as much psychological realism as possible. So, for instance, viewers saw how Mary, and Joseph especially, struggled with their feelings.

But telling the story of Jesus with psychological realism is not a new idea. It has a long tradition going back seven hundred years to the time of the Italian artist Giotto di Bondone. This nativity scene was painted in a church in Padua in about 1305. Much imitated it is one of the first attempts at psychological realism in Christian art. And what a wonderful first attempt it is - a work of genius, in fact!

Whereas previously Mary and the Baby Jesus had been depicted facing outwards, or looking at their visitors, with beatific expressions fixed on their faces, Giotto dares to show them staring intently into one another’s eyes, bonding like any mother and newborn baby. Joseph, in contrast, is not looking on with quiet app…