What Shall We Do?

by Robert Hamerton-Kelly

"As for what was sown on good soil, this is he who hears the word and understands it; he indeed bears good fruit, and yields a hundredfold, or sixtyfold, or thirtyfold."

-- Matthew 13:23

Last Sunday we spoke about the “seed of Abraham,” today we speak of the seeds that the parabolic sower scattered. The scholarship I read holds that the interpretation of the parable in verses 18-23 comes not from Jesus but from the early church, because it is an allegory while Jesus told only parables. Parable must be taken as a whole and it makes only one point, while allegory wishes to be taken detail by detail to make several points. In this case the parable Jesus told in verses 1-9 teaches that while three quarters of the seed may be lost the one successful quarter bears abundant fruit. This could mean several things, depending on the circumstances of the hearer. When Jesus spoke it the immediate meaning was probably that we should not be discouraged, despite the fact that so much of what we do to realize the Kingdom fails, because the little bit of effort that succeeds, succeeds so magnificently; or, thinking of the individual, it could also mean that even though we effectively devote only one quarter of our lives to the Kingdom, that quarter is very powerful in its effect. 

Imagine now an early congregation that has experienced what all congregations experience, the disappearance of once enthusiastic members, the disappointing fact that only about a quarter of those who join the church actually bear fruit for the Kingdom, and the fact that to many the word of the gospel means nothing at all. Imagine a teacher saying, “Don’t be surprised or discouraged, our Lord understood our situation and addressed it.” “Where and when,” they ask. “In the parable of the sower,” he replies. “The seeds that fall on the path are those people for whom the word of the Kingdom has no meaning at all; the seeds on thin soil are those whose enthusiasm flares up and quickly fades; the seeds among thorns are people whose worldly cares and ambitions make the power of the Kingdom in them weak and often ineffectual; and those on good soil are those rare Christians who put their love of Christ before everything else in their lives, are not choked by worldly cares or the need for approval in this world, who have depth of soul and strength of commitment, who are not afraid to bear the cost of  discipleship, and so bear abundant fruit for God. I think that allegory is a good interpretation, and the fact that the historical Jesus himself did not give it does not mean that it is not from God. The Holy Spirit continued the revelation of Jesus after his Ascension and the full significance of his person and teaching unfolded in time.

So today I want to ask you to help me understand what the Spirit might be saying to us as we seek to interpret this parable for our time, and specifically what it takes today to bear abundant fruit for the Kingdom of God. I assume that the essential prerequisite is clear, that we must be committed, dedicated and in love with Jesus Christ one hundred percent, because if twenty-five percent can bear so much fruit how much more will a hundred? That of course means that we shall examine our own lives to see how we might bring them more into line with his goodness and love. Taking that as a baseline requirement what more shall we do today?

It seems to me that God is calling us urgently in these times to take a public stand for truth. There is such a thing as truth, despite the fog of politics and public relations, dishonesty and intimidation, lies and threats. And the truth that claims my conscience now is that the Israeli Jews are pursuing a policy of ethnic cleansing against both their Arab citizens and their Palestinian prisoners of war. They have no intention of allowing a Palestinian state to be formed or allowing their Arab citizens to integrate into Israel as equals. I was born and raised in Apartheid South Africa and I followed the story of that race-based theory of ethnic separation and ethnic cleansing closely. If it waddles like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck the chances are that it is a duck. Jewish Israel as represented by the present government is an Apartheid state and Zionism as represented by them is racism.  In this judgment I follow Archbishop Tutu, who knows this kind of duck better than anyone.

Here is a small sample of the evidence that support the judgment that the Jewish state is determined not to allow a Palestinian state but rather wants the Palestinians to relocate elsewhere that is over the border in Jordan or Syria or Iraq: 1) Destruction of governmental capacities: The Israeli Defense Forces have methodically destroyed the data on which the Palestinian Authority depends for administration – computers and data disks destroyed, government offices destroyed, communications destroyed, etc, all the technological vestiges of an emerging state have been destroyed. 2) Elimination of moderates: Last week Israel arrested Sari Nusseibeh, representative of the PLO in Jerusalem and closed his office. He has been a moderate voice for reconciliation, and the reason why he has been silenced is because elements in the present government do not want a moderate voice from Palestine. Uzi Landau the security minister responsible for the arrest, a longstanding opponent of the Oslo process, said that Nusseibeh’s role in Jerusalem was part of a PLO effort to “undermine Israeli sovereignty in Jerusalem” (NYT 7/13/02, pA25). Nusseibeh, an Oxford educated philosopher and a Muslim said to David Remnick of the New Yorker, “The Palestinians have to resurrect the spirit of Christ to absorb the sense of pain and insult they feel and control it, and not let it determine the way they act toward Israel. They have to realize that an act of violence does not serve their interest. This is a gigantic undertaking (NYT ibid.).” Minister Landau knows that Palestinian acts of violence serve not their interest but his own, to prevent a Palestinian state and to keep pressure on the Palestinians until they flee, to Jordan and Iraq, where the US is shortly to prepare a place for them by invading to install a puppet government, and so Landau removes Nusseibeh, a voice of restraint and patience. (Nusseibeh’s family is ancient in Jerusalem; they are the keepers of the keys of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, because the Christian factions do not trust any one of themselves to keep the keys. So for a thousand years the Muslim family Nusseibeh has protected the Holy Sepulcher of Christ against the mutual hostility of the Christians. The more you know about Christian history the harder it is to keep the faith). 3) Establishment of settlements and intimidation of Palestinians: Settlements are being established at a record rate (44 in the year since Sharon took office) actively promoted by the Israeli government, inhabited by 200,000, many of whom are fanatics with weapons, and many of which ring Palestinian lands and villages from surrounding hilltops. From these vantage points the fanatics intimidate Palestinian farmers by random shooting into the fields. This is all part of a plan to make life so miserable for the Arabs that they emigrate. The Sharon government seems to be guided by the old Ben-Gurion principle, that Israel will only be secure when the Arabs are totally humiliated and subdued. This principle was established by Israel’s first prime minister and is still alive and well.

These are brief snippets from a much larger body of evidence that I find convincing. It is a Christian duty to be informed about atrocities funded by our government and so I hope these snippets have whetted your appetite for true information, above and beyond the sanitized reports of our mainstream media.

The Bush Administration has given the Sharon government carte blanche to deal with the Palestinians, for two reasons in my opinion: First, because the Christian Right in this country, a solid Bush constituency, supports Israel solidly and second, because the Republicans want to win the American Jews away from their traditional allegiance to the Democrats.

The support of the Christian right is based on fundamentalist readings of the Bible. They are our Taliban, our fanatic settler-types, and we Christians should be ashamed of them. Consider, groups of “born again” Christians are sponsoring an” adopt a settlement” program in which they send material and moral support to the Jewish fanatics in the hills, and they are also paying the costs of migration to Israel for certain Jews (S.F.Chron. 7/10/02, p. A1). One of their leaders recently called the prophet Muhammad a “demon-possessed pederast.” These Christian fanatics are an important part of Bush’s political constituency, and Bush himself is “born again.’ Nusseibeh pointedly says that the Palestinians need to resurrect the truth of Jesus. Why resurrect? Could it be because it has died again in the hands of his followers? I think so. Therefore, we can be thankful that a group of Protestant evangelical leaders, from essentially the same neck of the spiritual woods as these fanatics late last week sent a letter to Bush asking for just and equitable treatment of the Palestinians. They stood up to be counted, and among them is the president of Fuller Seminary, where Zondra studied.  I hope that you will agree with me that we too should stand up for the truth of Christ.

We would be standing first against our own fellow Christians whom I believe have lost their moral way, and then against our government whom I believe, like our business community, has lost its moral way, and seems to be prepared to cultivate the Jewish vote with the blood of Palestinian children. We would also stand against the frighteningly powerful Jewish lobby and propaganda machine in this country, and from them we must expect real reprisals, unless they deem us too insignificant to notice.

What do I mean by taking a stand? That’s where I need your help. I have shared with you some of the evidence, and my interpretation of it, which disturb my conscience and challenge my faith. There is of course much more to be said, but we know enough already to ask, “What should we as congregation of Christ’s church do?” I ask you to think that over and to come to a congregational meeting in three weeks to discuss this further and see if we can agree on a course of action.