Today we have heard a reading from one of only 2 books in the Bible named after a woman. And, this is the first time you have ever heard any reading from the Book of Esther in worship, because Esther was not included in the Prayerbook lectionary. Esther was one of the last books in the Hebrew scriptures to be written: about 100 to 200 years before the birth of Christ. The story takes place in Persia, which is today called Iran, and concerns the Jewish people who were taken in exile to Babylon, which was later conquered by Persia. The central figure in the story is a young Jewish woman named Hadassah. When a person belongs to a persecuted ethnic minority, they often have two names: one which comes from their ethnic heritage, Hadassah in this case, and another which allows them to blend in. The name Esther, is a variation of the name Ishtar, the Babylonian goddess, and using that name allowed this young woman to conceal her identity as a Jew. So the story of Esther fits two storytelling patterns that are still in use today: the concealed identity, and the whistle-blower.

Esther is the adopted daughter of her cousin Mordecai. When the reigning Queen Vashti is disgraced and divorced, a call goes out for all the young women in the land to be brought to the King. When Esther's turn comes, she is chosen as the new Queen. Apparently she did not observe the Jewish law, and accepted the food and customs of the court. Shortly after she became queen, Mordecai discovered a plot by the king's eunuchs to assassinate him, and reported it through Esther, earning the king's gratitude. Meanwhile, Haman the Amalekite was promoted to Prime Minister. Haman disliked Mordecai, both because he was a Jew and also because he had done a favor for the king. So Haman, from his position of power, persuaded the king to have all the Jews killed, on a day that was chosen by casting lots. And to seal the matter, Haman offered to give the king 10,000 talents of silver.

The decree written by Haman went out to all the provinces in the name of the king, and the Jewish community was in despair. When Esther found out about this decree, she didn't think there was anything she could do about it. She could only speak to the king when he called her into his presence. The most significant verses of the book are in Chapter 4, in my opinion, where Mordecai says to Esther: "if you keep silence at such a time as this, . . .you and your family will perish. Who knows? Perhaps you have come to royal dignity for just such a time as this?" (4:14) Esther decided to accept the risk of initiating converstion with the king, saying, "I will go to the king, even though it is against the law, and if I perish, I perish" (4:16) The king received her and accepted her invitation to two feasts. At the second feast, she revealed her identity as a Jew, and pleaded for her life and the lives of her people, to be spared. Esther then pointed at Haman as the originator of the plan. The king ordered Haman to be executed, and sent out a new decree, giving the Jews permission to assemble and to defend themselves. The day after the Jews defended themselves was the 14th day of Adar, when a great celebration was held. This became the feast of Purim, so called because the day was chosen by lot, "Pur" in Persian. It was a day of feasting, of sending gifts of food to friends, and of giving to the poor.

The big message of this story is salvation. Once again, the Jews were rescued from destruction in a foreign land, and could begin a new life without fear of persecution. The creation of a new feast-day marked the event as an important one to be remembered through the generations, and it is still celebrated today, usually in March, with joy and humor, with lots of food and wine, and with special cookies called hamantschen. I have learned two things from reflecting on this event. First, it underlines how strongly people feel about remembering anniversaries, whether they are positive or negative events. Our country has recently observed the 5th anniversary of the Sept 11th attacks, with many special events and ceremonies. We have also observed the first anniversary of Hurricane Katrina. In both cases, these are sad remembrances, grieving over those who died, and recognizing that the causes and effects of these disasters have not been fully addressed. Our preference, of course, is to remember the positive events, which can really be celebrated. In November, we will remember that this sanctuary was built and dedicated 40 years ago. Some of those involved are still with us to celebrate!

Anniversaries are important because they mark changes in our lives, sometimes really big changes. The motto of the college I attended, was Incipit Vita Nova: here begins a new life. As for every 18 year old who goes away to college, leaving the family home to live in a dormitory was indeed a new life. Getting married used to be such a big change, although today many brides and grooms have lived together and bought a home before they marry. Having a child, either by birth or by adoption, certainly begins a new life (for the parents as well as the child!). In a novel by Anne Tyler (Digging to America), two families who adopt Korean babies create a new celebration, called Arrival Day, every year. We also remember anniversaries of the death of the person we love, because we are forced to begin a new life without them.

It is just at this point my second learning from Esther fits in. The Jews of later generations who are celebrating Purim, may have a similar experience, but it is not the same as the experience of the Jews in Persia. And the Christians of later generations do not have the same experience as the disciples who followed Jesus, or as the earliest Christians. So each generation, and each individual, has to reflect on these events, and then decide whether we consider ourselves to be part of that story. This is the reason we read so much of the Bible in our worship--we are constantly remembering those past events, remembering what they have meant in the past, and THEN interpreting them for ourselves, and for the world we live in.

So let me try to say how I consider myself to be part of Esther's story, and then, how I consider myself to be connected to those difficult sayings of Jesus. What I like about Esther is that she accepted the challenge posed to her by Mordecai: that she may have become queen just for that opportunity to save her people. She was willing to speak truth to power, and accept the consequences. We need to recognize that our commitment as Christians to speak the truth, also includes a commitment not to mislead others by our silence. This is spelled out in the Outline of the Faith at the end of the Prayerbook (page 848), and it is especially important as we evaluate candidates and ballot propositions. It is also important in family life, and in friendships.

But what about those difficult saying of Jesus? It is very tempting to say, "No, I don't want to be part of THAT story!" Just because my hand or my foot leads me in committing sin, does not mean I should cut them off!! Why is Jesus being so harsh? What happened to forgiveness? In answer to my own questions, I want to emphasize the problem Jesus seems to have with the disciples. They haven't grasped his message, nor are they able to apply the message to a new situation. Last week we heard they were arguing over which disciple is greatest. This week, they have discovered someone using the name of Jesus to cast out demons, and they want to stop him because he was not part of their group. In other words, they were possessive of their own position with Jesus, and wanted to draw a clear boundary between themselves, the true disciples of Jesus, and those outsiders, who must be false disciples. They were still competing for status and positions of authority. But Jesus would have nothing to do with that attitude. ÒWhoever is not against is, is for usÓ he said.

That dialogue is the context for the difficult sayings. Jesus chose the extreme metaphor of cutting off a part of one's body, in order to reject this whole attitude of insider versus outsider, good guys versus bad guys. The stumbling block Jesus was talking about, is both the desire to compete, and also the judgment that someone else is doing it wrong (whatever "it" is). So if you SEE someone who threatens your position by their different theology, or by their political opinions, the problem is not with the eyes that see, but with the heart that judges and condemns. Likewise if you walk into a church and discover people are worshipping differently than you do, or using a different practice of healing, the problem is not with your feet, but with your heart.

What Jesus was saying to the disciples, is directly applicable to the present situation in the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion. Each group is engaged in saying "we are the ones who are the true Episcopalians, and you others are false Episcopalians. We reject your theology and practice, and intend to treat you as an outsider." These words of Jesus also apply to our attitudes about other Christian denominations. We may not agree with the positions taken by the evangelicals, or the with the doctrines of the Roman Catholics; but we are wrong to judge them false disciples. Today, in the Gospel, we hear Jesus saying, STOP. There are different ways to follow me, and it is not important for all disciples to be the same.

In this passage, Jesus talked about how we might cause the little ones (the ordinary folks) to stumble by our attitudes. Behind that verb to stumble, is the idea of causing scandal, which could diminish a person's faith. Perhaps we should think seriously about not causing scandal to people of other faiths as well. The insistence that we have the one truth, or the only way to follow Jesus, which makes all other ways wrong, does indeed injure other people. Jesus says to us, cut that attitude off, and give up the game of insiders versus outsiders. "Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace with one another" (Mark 9:49)