Author: John Drymon

+In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

Those who attended our adult Sunday School series on the Book of Revelation may remember that we talked about the fraught nature of water, and particularly large bodies of water (seas and oceans), in the ancient world. While water is necessary for life, while forty years in a desert is less than ideal, water was reckoned the realm of chaos and the demonic.

Naturally, this found a prominent place in the imagery of the Apocalypse, considering it was written at a time when the great anti-Christian power, Rome, expressed its violent might on the Mediterranean, which they called mare nostrum—“our sea.” It’s why that book leaves aquatic life out of its vision of the totality of life represented by the four living creatures and why the New Jerusalem is not surrounded by raging waters but by a sea of glass.

This aquaphobia is not by any means unique to apocalyptic literature in the Jewish and Christian traditions, though. The realm of Leviathan is separated by the firmament at creation, and the immense power of the Creator would have struck ancient people profoundly when they learned that his voice moved over the waters, a place where even the angels would fear to tread. In short, best to stick to dry land, because for an ancient person, the seas were not only a place of natural peril; they were literally a realm given over to the demons.

As a child, I was fascinated by something that happened every year on Epiphany in our city. The local Greek Orthodox church had a service at the port at which the priest sprinkled holy water into the river to bless it. I thought this was strange; of course I found a lot about Orthodoxy a little strange, unlike what we completely normal Episcopalians did. (It didn’t occur to me then that to the hordes of Southern Baptists in town, what we “normal” Episcopalians did was probably just as strange, if not outright degenerate.) What, I thought, did this guy think he was accomplishing by sprinkling a few drops into so large a body of water?

Well, he was blessing it—I have no doubt now, effectively—in the same way that Christ blessed all water when the baptist helped him fulfill all righteousness so long ago at the Jordan. He has subdued the realm of chaos; no longer must a firmament separate it from us. He has cleansed the waters that they may cleanse us in baptism. And in that holy sacrament we are submerged into a death like his that we might be lifted out to breathe new life, in this world and the next.

In his commentary on Matthew, St. Hilary of Poitiers wrote the following:

In Jesus Christ we behold a complete man. Thus in obedience to the Holy Spirit the body he assumed fulfilled in him every sacrament of our salvation. He came therefore to John, born of a woman, bound to the law and made flesh through the Word. Therefore there was no need for him to be baptized, because it was said of him: “He committed no sin.” And where there is no sin, the remission of it is superfluous. It was not because Christ had a need that he took a body and a name from our creation. He had no need of baptism. Rather, through him the cleansing act was sanctified to become the waters of our immersion.

You see, in the Incarnation we have a two-way street, as it were, an equal and opposite reaction. In condescending to the material world, God has lifted nature up to the spiritual realm. This he does with water. This he does with bread and wine. This he does with flesh and blood and hearts and minds, enlightening us with wisdom from on high and the very righteousness of God.

I’ve been asked before if I go to church when I’m on vacation, and I say “of course.” But why? Sometimes I say, “well it’s just nice to sit in the pews with my wife” or “I like to sing hymns” or “I’m up anyway” or something like that. But that’s not the reason. I hope you’ll forgive me if this sounds “arch” or something, but I mean it 100%. What I want to say, what I rarely screw up the nerve to say but probably should, is this: If you knew a miracle was going to happen somewhere at 10 o’clock on a Sunday morning, wouldn’t you show up for it? I believe that’s what happens here, so I’m not gonna miss it. Christ giving himself for us in bread and wine, lifting the common elements of material existence up to a heavenly table and sharing his own substance with us? Gee whiz, I wanna see that! Christ taking a fallen creature and, with the application of a bit of water and the triune name creating something new and beautiful and luminous? Count me in!

On this Sunday we have the option in our prayer book to replace the Nicene Creed with the renewal of baptismal vows, and the pious practice of asperging the faithful with Holy Water at the conclusion of that renewal has become more-or-less assumed. (I’m not sure if that is strictly rubrical, but the bishop always does it, so I think I won’t get in trouble). After the reaffirmation of what we believe as summarized by the Apostle’s Creed, and the renewal of those promises which rehearse what we ought to be doing about it, that sprinkling highlights something even more important. Yes it’s terribly important that we believe the right things, and it’s also pretty important that we try to live in such a way that those things affect ourselves and others for the good. But even more important, I think, is what we have been made through no effort of our own, simply as a free gift of God’s grace, effected by a little water and the name of the Holy Trinity. We have been made something new, we have been raised to the divine life, we have been called beloved children with whom the Father is well-pleased, and I, for one, am here for that.

+In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

+In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

Perhaps the most difficult thing for many of us to do is to “take flight” when the situation calls for it. It’s not always been so. Though we are wonderfully created in the image of God—though we are indeed moral creatures unlike anything else under the sun—human beings are still in a sense “animals”, and anyone who’s studied animal behaviour will have heard of the “fight or flight” mechanism. Certainly, earlier in the history of the human race, we were, like any other animal, largely controlled by reflexes which would determine if a fight (perhaps with a mastodon or a person from another tribe) was winnable and, if not, our reflexes would set us into flight.

Over the millennia, with the development of civilization, this natural response came to be suppressed and to be cast as cowardice. “Run Away” is not a very inspiring battle cry, unless, of course, you’re Monty Python’s version of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table. Retreat is seen as a negative thing, an embarrassment when necessary and to be avoided at all costs for the sake of honor- or something like that.

Thus, we might find the response of the Holy Family in this morning’s Gospel to be initially less than inspiring. The machismo of our modern sensibilities might not align with Mary and Joseph’s response to the threat of Herod. Joseph didn’t organize a militia of sympathetic Bethlehemites; he didn’t sit on the porch swing, shotgun in hand, daring Herod’s soldiers to step onto his property. The Holy Family ran away.

It’s too bad that we might have a hard time seeing how brave Joseph and Our Lady were to pick up the Christ Child and retreat to an unfamiliar place, and to sojourn there, without knowing who would help them or how they’d survive, but only knowing that it was God’s will that they go.

In truth, sometimes the bravest action, the action God desires for us, is flight. Despite the Monty Python joke, sometimes “run away” is the most valiant battle cry. Too often we hear on the news or even from personal acquaintances, stories of battered women, who are frightened to run away, the tyranny of whose Herod-like husbands has instilled a degree of fear which immobilizes. In those sorts of situations, the choice to flee is both courageous and unimaginably difficult.

My oldest friend, whom I’ve known since kindergarten, would not be around unless his father had made a courageous decision to run away. He was among the hundreds of thousands of Indo-Chinese who got his family on a rickety boat, taking his chances with storms and pirates, so that they might escape an untenable, deadly dangerous situation. That doesn’t sound like cowardice to me; it sounds like courage.

Examples of courageous decisions to flee could be multiplied. However, most of us, though I suspect not all, have been fortunate enough to be spared extraordinary situations like abusive families and oppressive governments. Even so, most of us find ourselves in situations where a brief retreat of our own, a brief sojourn in Egypt as it were, is necessary.

Perhaps the most common case I’ve seen among my friends and acquaintances, is the need for spiritual retreat. So many of us these days are stressed to the brink all the time. In some ways “workaholism” is the disease of the American middle class today. I’m not suggesting that one ought not do one’s job and do it well, that one ought simply to run away when things get tough, but sometimes we permit our physical, emotional and spiritual health to suffer because we cannot but be busy all the time. In these situations, perhaps the best thing is to retreat to a place of calm and of prayer. There’s certainly a balance to be maintained in this regard, and we cannot engage in avoidance or laziness, but the overworked, overstressed person today must permit himself or herself periods of quiet and calm and reflection in the midst of his or her busy life in order to maintain a good and gracious disposition at work and in the home and in all of the other places in which we live and move and have our being.

I like to take retreats at monasteries, but some people are more inclined to go out into the woods or stay at home. The important thing is that we give ourselves a little time to flee from the terrible nonstop rush of things in order to spend quality time with God on God’s terms.

And just like the Holy Family on their retreat, our retreat may present itself as the context for a certain kind of peril. Perhaps it won’t be the peril of not knowing how we are to survive, but rather the danger that when we do quiet down and listen to God for a while, He might demand something new and different from us. He might make it clear that His will for us is a radically different course in life. Too often we subconsciously avoid listening to God because of this very real possibility. But like the Holy Family, and like all those who flee awful situations for the good, we must approach our own flight, our own retreat, with courage and with faith that God’s will is to the good.

And we can take heart in the fact that however treacherous the path may seem, God makes it safe for His people. God said to the prophet Jeremiah “I will let them walk by brooks of water, in a straight path in which they shall not stumble.” God will do the same for us if we only let Him, if we only trust Him to make the path smooth, if we only determine to flee to Him when He calls us.

+In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

+In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

On this fourth day of Christmas we are confronted by a reality which is anything but “holly jolly.” We may get away with romanticizing other less-than-cheerful elements of the story of the birth of Christ without losing the point—the stable is a rather unhygienic place for childbirth, but it remains a sweet scene; the flight to Egypt is harrowing, but it still has the elements of a homely, family feeling. The massacre of the Innocents, though, is bleak.

Infanticide strikes us as just about the most wicked thing a person could do, as well it should, but I think this is a case of Christianity winning the battle of ideas in the West a millennium and more ago. To the cultured despisers of religion in your life who claim to have freed themselves from all the baggage of the Judeo-Christian worldview, I’d encourage you to ask the following question: “How do you feel about killing babies?” Unless your interlocutor is psychopathic, he will probably say that this would be a bad thing to do. In this way he has unwittingly yielded some ground to the idea that religion is at least not all bad. You see, from an ancient perspective, unless you were a Jew or a Christian, infanticide wasn’t reckoned that big a deal, at least from a moral standpoint. If it happened to your child (assuming you weren’t the one who did it) you would of course be distraught, but there was not a societal taboo against it among ancient pagans. If your baby is deformed or if you’ve already got enough kids and the new one’s a girl, you could kill the child without any legal or social consequence.

We cannot confirm the accuracy of the Fifth Century historian Macrobius, because it dates so long after the event, but he wrote that Herod’s own son was inadvertently killed in the massacre. To this, the Emperor Augustus purportedly mused “it is better to be Herod’s pig than his son.” If anything, this account may be suspect due to giving the emperor and the king too much credit for having sympathetic feeling regarding children!

That Christ was born in a stable, that his family became refugees, that the Gospel presents the fate of the Holy Innocents as a tragedy, that our Lord is shown over and over again associating with the outcasts of society, that he died as a criminal—all these facts point to a critical element of our faith: namely, that the Kingdom of Heaven is populated by the weakest and most vulnerable. Blessed are you if life has dealt you a terrible hand.

Most of you have heard me say that one reason I avoid getting into hot button political in sermons is because, this congregation not being filled with high-powered politicians and titans of industry and the like, it would only serve to make one feel good about having the right opinions and not result in any change in policy or effect a significant improvement in social problems. Two particular issues occurred to me first in relation to the Holy Innocents, and I thought about putting my oar in because one would mark me as a liberal, the other would mark me as a conservative, and then you’d all be equally angry with me afterward. I think, what I said previously about our ability as individuals to effect national policy change, I won’t go there, and that’s my Christmas gift to myself. We can talk about those issues not in a sermon if you want, but you’re probably happier not getting into it, too.

Where I think we can find ourselves moved by the tragedy of the Holy Innocents and the moral imperative of the Gospel, though, is significant, and it’s a lot more challenging than just holding the “correct” view on some political issue. We can identify who in our lives and in our communities are the most vulnerable and show them as much love as we can. That sounds easy, right? Like I’m saying “just be nice”, which isn’t a very inspiring takeaway from a sermon. It sounds easy until you sit with somebody who hasn’t showered in a month or who is experiencing psychosis or drug withdrawal or who doesn’t know how to behave in polite society or whom you just find off-putting in some unidentifiable way. Then it becomes hard, and you’ve got to stay “prayed up” to treat them as a brother or sister. That person is just as much but no more a sinner than you or I or the Holy Innocents for whom the stain of Original Sin was washed off by the baptism of blood at their martyrdom, when it mingled with the blood of Christ which would be shed for them. Christ took on flesh for all of them, too, just as he lives forever for them and for us. Today the Innocents are in everlasting felicity with their Lord, and so too may we come to live forever with them and with all God’s children.

+In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.