The focus of my sermon today is the interpretations we must make to live as Christians. Because of these interpretations, disagreements among Christians are inevitable.

1. First question, then, is why we must make interpretations. The answer arises from the ministry of Jesus. There were any times when he criticized particular laws of the "old covenant" such as Sabbath observance. And there were many situations when Jesus did not follow the law. In some places, Jesus called for a higher standard than the law - not only "do not murder" but also "do not hate". This meant the apparent replacement of the law by the Great Commandment: to love God, and to love one's neighbor as oneself.

   Conclusion: Torah / Old Covenant is replaced by new covenant

   Objection: Jesus also said - not a jot or tittle will pass from law until all is accomplished (Matt 5:18)

   Historical Record: Some early Christians in Jerusalem under the leadership of James did expect to keep both covenants.
   Questions arouse due to baptism of Gentiles - did they have to convert to Judaism to become Christians?
   Answer was no - by end of 1st Century, the Christian community was no longer following the Torah - our "law" is summary given by Jesus, "Great Commandment".

2. Second question is, what exactly, does it mean to love God and to love one's neighbor as oneself?

   This point is where interpretation comes in: each Christian individual, each Christian family, each Christian community must decide in their particular circumstances, what it means.

   Our belief is, that the Holy Spirit will guide us in making these interpretations and decisions.

   The Holy Spirit's guidance comes through prayer, meditation, through reading the scriptures, and through discussion within our Christian community. We do our best to discern, through these means, what actions to take, what changes to make, what traditions to defend.

   In our Anglican heritage, we talk about that famous 3-legged stool - Scripture, tradition and reason - as the sources of authority.

3. Whether we are making decisions about worship, or the budget, or outreach to the needy, we use Scripture, tradition and reason to reach a decision. So each church and each person is called to interpret, in our own circumstances, what it means to love our neighbor.

   Let me illustrate this point starting with our lessons, and then moving on to 3 examples, two from news reports from the last 10 days.

   • In the lessons about the healing power of Elisha and of Jesus, we have two men of God - prophet and Messiah - whose actions illustrate the commandment to love one's neighbor as oneself.
   • 2nd Kings: Shunamite woman does a favor for Elisha - building him a guest room. He returned the favor by granting the gift of conception, and later by reviving boy from death.
   • In the Gospel, Jesus cured Peter's mother-in-law, and later cured many who were sick and cast out daemons

   In both cases, Elisha's and Jesus', there was no benefit to the healer - actions were prompted by love of neighbor, by compassion.

4. Therefore we, reading about the many times when love of the neighbor motivated Jesus to help people who were strangers, and wanting to follow him, try in our day and time to help strangers, whom we believe are our neighbors
   1. 20 years ago, the Rector and Senior Warden (Harold Anderson) of St Thomas led the people of this parish through a process of discernment, to the decision that we are called to feed the hungry.
   2. Most of you know that the first meal was offered at Thanksgiving in 1982, to 11 people who were "hanging around in Washington Park"
   3. Between that day and early March of 1983, plans were made to serve a hot cooked meal 3 days a week to whoever was hungry in Sunnyvale.
   4. The early expectation, I believe, was that such a program would be temporary, that pretty soon there would be no more hungry people in Sunnyvale. And that they would never need the cookbook entitled, "Cooking for 50".
   5. Today, as we approach the 20th anniversary of Our Daily Bread, we are averaging 270 meals each day we serve. Hunger has not gone away and we have moved far beyond those early recipes for 50 servings.
   6. I am not aware that we have any disagreement within St Thomas over this program, but there are other Christians who believe we should be addressing the causes of hunger. Feeding the hungry doesn't make the on-going problem of poverty in our society go away. So Christians look at the problem of hunger differently.

5. My second example moves from the local to the national.

   2 weeks ago, President Bush gave his State of the Union address.

   • Many were surprised by his proposal to give $15 billion to fight AIDS in Africa and the Caribbean.
   • His decision itself is a clear example of compassion for suffering of a neighbor - even those neighbors far away.
   • What caught my attention was a NY Times article on Jan 30th, titled "What influenced the President to do this?"
   • Answer: Key People influenced President to do this.
     • New Senate majority leader, Bill Frist
     • Bush administration officials traveled in Africa
     • Jess Helms came out in favor of AIDS assistance
     • Frank Griswold, Presiding Bishop of Episcopal Church met with Secretary of Defense.

   What did Bishop Griswold say to Donald Rumsfeld?

   • That AIDS was de-stabilizing armies in Africa
   • That AIDS was leaving millions of orphans in Africa, who will be easily recruited by terrorists

   Our Presiding Bishop, who has also traveled in Africa, discerned both the need for help, and also discerned how to make an effective approach to the Bush administration. He did what we are all called to do, that is to interpret how we can love our neighbors, in the particular circumstances we each find ourselves in.

6. I have saved the most controversial example for the last -

   On Tuesday, the New York Times reported that the Episcopal Diocese of New York raised money to rebuild a mosque, in Afghanistan.

   • This mosque had been heavily damaged by American military in fall of 2001 after the events of Sept 11.
   • Bishop Mark Sisk heard about it on radio and thought that since Americans destroyed it, we ought to help rebuild it.
   • Diocesan Committee for Episcopal - Muslim relations was formed, and raised $20,000. A local NY Mosque raised $8,000, and some people in California raised $3,000.
   • The mosque is north of Kabul in Rarhabagh - it will be dedicated on Feb 12th, 2003
   • The Bishop's motivation was the belief that all people are children of God and we are called to love unconditionally
   • Some Episcopalians within the diocese were opposed, and a conservative Bishop from another diocese argued that this action "discards the uniqueness of the Christian faith.

   I would argue that Bishop Sisk, and the Diocese of New York were responding to the need of neighbors through the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Within the Episcopal Church, there is freedom to disagree, and still to be in love and fellowship with one another.

   Several months ago, when the House of Bishops was struggling with disagreements among themselves they asked is it possible to be of one heart, when we are not of one mind? In my opinion, the answer is clearly Yes, as long as we all recognize our own limitations and choose to respect the good will and integrity of those who make different interpretations than we do.

I close with a quote from Eleanor Roosevelt. She is describing a mature person - I hear this as a description of a mature Christian:

"A mature person is one who does not think only in absolutes, who is able to be objective even when deeply stirred emotionally, who has learned that there is both good and bad in all people, and who walks humbly and deals charitably with the circumstances of life, knowing that in this world, no one is all-knowing, and therefore all of us need both love and charity."

Amen