Archives: Sermons

Bible Text: Matthew 2: 1-12 | Preacher: Rev. Jenn Geddes

Bible Text: Luke 3:1-6 | Preacher: Rev. Jenn Geddes

Bible Text: Jeremiah 33:14-16 and Luke 21:25-36 | Preacher: Rev. Jenn Geddes

Bible Text: Daniel 12:1-3 and Matthew 5:13-16 | Preacher: Rev. Jenn Geddes

Bible Text: Job 2:1-10 and Mark 10:13-16 | Preacher: Rev. Jenn Geddes | I recently saw on a friend’s Facebook page an important exercise in gratitude. It read, “I am thankful for laundry because it means that my family has clothes to wear. I am thankful for dishes because it means that my family has food to eat. I am thankful for bills because it means we have financial provisions. I am thankful for making beds because it means we have warm, soft places to rest at night. I am thankful for dusting because it means we have furniture to enjoy. I am thankful for vacuuming because it means we have a home to look after.” Seeing this list of things to be thankful for has made me think about other areas in which I could improve on my gratitude. For example, I am thankful for a cluttered desk because it means that I am busy at work. Or perhaps, I am thankful for the rain because it means there will be enough water for the salmon to come up stream. Or, I am thankful for the quirky characters of this congregation because it means that we are a true family.

It seems appropriate to spend some time discussing what we are thankful for on such a Sunday as this, but at first read, the Scripture passages do little to help us articulate this gratitude. I can remember struggling through Job in seminary, especially as one who studied Hebrew rather than Greek, and trying to decipher what it all means. As mentioned in the introduction this is not an easy book to interpret. In fact, it is even a difficult book to translate because the Hebrew in the original text is so archaic that we don’t know what some of the words mean. Yet, I am thankful for passages in the Bible that are challenging because it means that God wants us to engage with the Word.

I am also thankful for scholars like the Rev. Dr. Karl Jacobson, because it means I can use his words to help us explain some of this complicated text. For example Dr. Jacobson helps us wrap our heads around the introduction of “Satan”. Now most of us assume that Satan was the one who tricked Eve into eating the fruit off the tree of knowledge, but remember- nowhere in Genesis does it say that Satan or even the devil was even there. The first time Satan is introduced is in 1 Chronicles where Satan provokes David to count the soldiers of Israel which angers God because God already knows how many soldiers Israel has. In a similar way, when Satan is introduced in Job it is not meant to signify one particular person, like say, the devil; in fact, we should probably try to dispel the idea that Satan and the devil mean the same thing. Rather Satan is a Hebrew word for an adversary. In Hebrew the verb “to oppose” or “thwart” is saTan.  As Dr. Jacobson says, “the satan in Job works in much the same way as the angel of the Lord who appears to Balaam’s donkey (that story takes place in Numbers 22:22 and in that story the Lord is in fact called saTan in the Hebrew), blocking Balaam’s donkey’s way “as his adversary”. The Satan is one, usually an angel, who serves as an adversary or “prosecuting attorney” on God’s behalf.   What is often overlooked, but cannot be ignored, is that Satan functions as an adversary on God’s behalf.”

In the book of Job Satan is not a name but rather an office. And in case that isn’t confusing enough, Satan does not show up for the rest of the book of Job! I know, this is a very odd passage to deconstruct and attempt to interpret on Thanksgiving Sunday, to say nothing of the fact that we have communion. But it is also an intriguing passage. God sends Satan to demonstrate that Job, despite all struggles, ailments, deaths, pain, will not curse God. This section of Job is setting the stage for the rest of the book. We would do well to remember that Job always argues, believes and even complains that his life and breath, even in his awful circumstances, are in God’s hands. Note, God’s hands not Satan’s.

But here is where we can tie this book into our annual thanksgiving holiday. When Job’s wife asks him, “Do you still persist in your integrity? Curse God, and die.” Job reminds his wife, “Shall we receive the good at the hand of God, and not receive the bad?” I think we tend to forget to be thankful each day yet we have no trouble complaining, or even cursing, every day. I am absolutely in this same boat. For a while there was a phrase that was rather popular in hipster vernacular, in which one would state that we have “First World problems.” It highlighted that all those complaints we have, all those beefs, all those pity parties, usually have more to do with our amazing privilege than they do with real problems. What a privilege it is to be able to complain about so many “problems” in our personal lives. I will absolutely admit that my biggest problem is with complainers. I, ironically, complain about complainers nearly every day, so I likely have a bit of an agenda in this sermon. Imagine turning those complaints into thanks. I will be thankful for the housework that needs to be done because it means I have a house.

Now we tend to think that what makes Job a man of integrity is that he never complained- but the truth is, he complained a lot! He was in pain, he was heartbroken, he was depressed, he was angry but what gave him integrity is that he never cursed God. Job argues against the often simplistic view that only good things come when people are good. Job speaks against what is often referred to as the “prosperity gospel.” Job speaks against the idea that financial wealth and physical wellbeing are directly linked to the will of God. Or more importantly Job speaks against the idea that those who are facing challenges are facing them because it is a sign of being out of synch with God’s will.

And here is where I think we can tie it into the true understanding of thanksgiving. It was Governor General Vincent Massey who issued a proclamation in 1957 that stated we should have a day of “general thanksgiving to almighty God for the bountiful harvest with which Canada has been blessed.” We absolutely should give thanks for all that is good in our lives but we cannot receive the good at the hand of God and not receive the bad. When Job asks this rhetorical question Job is not being fatalistic.  Instead it is an instruction. It acknowledges that true gratitude and faith also involve struggle, and these struggles are not usually because of a deal with the devil; rather they are a reality of a life of immense blessing.

I am thankful that Jesus says “Let the children come to me; for it is to such as these that the kingdom of God belongs.” Because it means that one must have faith like a child. It means that being confused by scripture is normal. It also means that no matter where we are in understanding our relationship to God, or no matter what struggles we are facing, or how we react to those struggles, that we are welcomed to this table. Let us all be thankful for the welcome that we receive at Christ’s table. But we would do well to also be thankful that God is with us in our good days- days in which we are truly thankful for all the good that is in our lives, and God is with us in our bad days- those days that cause us to stumble and struggle. Today I will be thankful for the challenges because it means I have much to be thankful for. Amen

Bible Text: Esther 7:1-6, 9-10, 9:20-22 and Mark 9:42-50 | Preacher: Rev. Jenn Geddes

I am not one to enjoy or watch or really pay attention to beauty pageants. In part this is because I make certain assumptions about the contestants, judges and culture around such events. So when I heard about the Canadian representative to the Miss Universe competition in 2018 I was pleasantly surprised and reminded that I shouldn’t make assumptions. Marta Stepien was raised in Windsor, Ontario but was born in Warsaw, Poland. What fascinated me about her is that she is in her final year of biomedical engineering, and is currently working on a program at Harvard Medical School in genetics and immunology in her spare time. She actually claims that her pageant experience is what taught her to overcome barriers and focus on education. In reading Marta’s story I realized some of my prejudices, and I will be rooting (although probably still not watching) for her at the Miss Universe competition in December. There has always been this unfortunate juxtaposition between beauty and brains and the very unrealistic stereotype that one is either one or the other but never both. You would think that by now I would have learned that people, especially women, can have it all.

The book of Esther always reminds me that pageantry is not a new construct.  And while our lectionary reading only focuses on the last portion of the story, I want to spend time unpacking the whole book. It really is an incredible story that includes violence and humour, humility and bravery, beauty and brains, and it essentially all begins because of a beauty pageant. Well, if I am honest with you, it begins when Queen Vashti refused to be objectified by the King following his 7 days of binge drinking with his army buddies, but Esther’s story begins when she wins the king’s favour after 6 months of strict beauty routines ordered by the King. You see it really is a really fascinating book. And as I mentioned in the introduction it is unique to Scripture because it never once mentions God. Neither does it mention anything about prayer or worship. Yet the main focus of this book is how one can be faithful in their identity and practice and (most importantly) belief when they are thrown into a foreign environment.

The book takes place in 5th century BCE Persia. The Israelites are living in Persia in exile. They have been living in exile for a generation now, which means that they are struggling to maintain their identity and practice. Most were attempting to cut themselves off from mainstream society, creating cloisters of religious practitioners so that they were not affected by the Persian culture and religion. Yet, the Book of Esther gives a different response. Instead of cutting oneself off of mainstream culture she becomes an active participant in it. But let’s return to unpacking this story for a moment.

Esther is now queen- but it is important to note that she has not told her king and now husband of her genealogy. She likely would not have even been able to compete for his affection had they known that she was an Israelite.  At the same time the King promotes Haman to the highest-ranking official in the government following an assassination attempt on the king. Due to his status in the Kingdom, when Haman passes by, everyone is expected to bow or kneel before him, but Mordecai, Esther’s uncle and adoptive father, refuses. Now because Mordecai wants to keep an eye on Esther he has stationed himself at the King’s Gates, which means that pretty much every day Haman notices that Mordecai is disobeying the law. Haman loses patience and when he confronts Mordecai, Mordecai explains he will not bow because he is a Jew. Haman’s pride and arrogance is hurt and so Haman explains to the King that the Jews should be destroyed because they are disregarding the king’s law. The King, influenced by Haman’s willingness to pay for these killings himself, agrees. While this does not sound like a story with much humour in it, there certainly are verses that cause us to think “Who wrote this”? For example, after the decree goes out readying the people for this massacre, the following verse states, “The King and Haman sat down to drink; but the city of Susa was thrown into confusion.” These two guys are sitting back and having a drink while the city reels from this news and the author felt that this was an important detail to include.  Haman decides to build a special gallows specifically for Mordecai. Haman’s wife convinces him to build a gallows 50 cubits high, that’s nearly 23 meters or 75 feet.  And we all know how well that goes for Haman thanks to this morning’s readings. You see the story of Esther is almost a farce, at the very least a commentary on how ridiculous some people in power can be. Haman is so mad at one man’s behaviour that he influences the king to kill an entire people! Haman is so bothered by Mordecai’s independence that he builds a special gallows.   It is as ridiculous as building- say, a wall, in an attempt to keep one culture out when all a wall does is imprison both parties.

The humour and farcical nature of this story are even part of the annual festival that commemorates the story of Esther. At the festival of Purim people are encouraged to dress up, put on plays, and generally party it up for a few days. When the scriptures are read and the name Haman comes up the people drown it out by booing and when the name Esther or Mordecai is read they cheer. There is even a passage in the Talmud (the book that essentially decodes Jewish

Law and is as valuable to the Jewish people as the Torah) that says, “Celebrants at Purim should drink until they are unable to differentiate between the phrases ‘bless Mordecai” and “curse Haman.”” But all of this humour also leads to some very serious outcomes.

One of the most beautiful passages in the Hebrew Bible comes from Mordecai. Mordecai sends a message to Esther to stop this massacre and Esther responds that she cannot approach the king unless summoned. Mordecai then replies, “Do not think that in the king’s palace you will escape any more than all the other Jews….Who knows? Perhaps you have come to royal dignity for just such a time as this.” God may not be explicitly mentioned in the book but Mordecai implies that it is God who has placed Esther in this role at just the right time.

So, how do we use the book of Esther in our modern lives? First, it is still a revelation to me that neither God nor worship are actually mentioned in the book. However, God’s presence is riddled throughout the text. Throughout Scripture we are so used to God acting in burning bushes, clouds of smoke, and of course through Christ, that we forget that most of the time God does not speak or act in that way. Most of the time God is, well, not explicit, rather God is subtly present. I recently heard an old saying adapted by Jon Levenson, a Hebrew Bible scholar. He said, “a coincidence is a miracle in which God prefers to remain anonymous.” That is not to say that God is absent but rather the purpose of God’s anonymity is to allow the presence to be felt is ways more familiar to us than burning bushes. God may not be mentioned in the book of Esther, but through the humour and violence, through the humility and bravery, through the beauty and brains, God is there! Imagine all of us being placed in our moment in history for such a time as this.

Esther’s story also reminds me that we are all facing challenges as a church in which we are not mainstream culture. This is essentially the argument behind the Missional church. We are no longer living in a Christendom state but rather in a time in which the church is counter-cultural. At this juncture, thankfully our lives are not being threatened, but we do have to defend our faith in a multitude of ways. We could choose to cloister ourselves and become more and more insular in our behaviour, seeking a model of church in which we only look after ourselves, or we can be like Esther and be out in the world, recognizing what is good about it and using it to our advantage- using it as a way to be missional, to show others by the very nature of who we are, that God is present. And right now people make a lot of assumptions about us, much like I have made assumptions about beauty pageant contestants. Thanks to the loud voices of a few, people think that Christians are ignorant, narrow minded, unscientific, intolerant… and the list goes on…when we know that in our heart of hearts that, that is not who we are. How do we change those assumptions? We certainly don’t do it by being silent or secluded.

Perhaps this is why Jesus’ words are so drastic. He has spent much of his recent conversations with his disciples trying to get them to turn their thoughts from human thoughts to God’s thoughts. And there are enough stumbling blocks when it comes to faith that we don’t need to add to that list. Jesus’ invitation to discipleship in the passage is about getting out there because we have been chosen to be here for such a time as this.      Amen

Bible Text: Mark 7:24-37 | Preacher: Rev. Jenn Geddes

In 2006, a year before he announced his intention to run for president, Barak Obama published a book entitled, “The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream.” Now, full disclosure, I have not read the book, but the title and the story behind the book really intrigued me. Oprah Winfrey not only endorsed this book but also endorsed his run for president based on the principles in this book. These principles later became part of his campaign.  But the title actually comes from a sermon which was delivered by Obama’s pastor, Jeremiah Wright in the 1990s. Wright was inspired to preach on hope based on a  lecture he attended based on a G.F. Watts painting entitled, “Hope” (SHOW PICTURE). Wright described the painting and then stated, “with her clothes in rags, her body scarred and bruised and bleeding, her harp all but destroyed and with only one string left, she had the audacity to make music and praise God” He later encouraged us to “take the one string you have left and to have the audacity to hope.” Obama modified and adapted this sermon into a speech when he was keynote speaker in 2004 at the Democratic National Convention where he stated, “Hope in the face of difficulty, hope in the face of uncertainty, the audacity of hope: In the end, that is God’s greatest gift to us…a belief in things not seen, a belief that there are better days ahead.” It was this speech that propelled him into a celebrity and likely why his second book had the same title. While the dictionary can define audacity as being “rude or disrespectful” it can also be defined as “the willingness to take bold risks” or “to be courageous”. So, the audacity to hope is seen as being bold or courageous in hope. Audacious behaviour characterizes the first part of our gospel reading, both in the rude and disrespectful behaviour of Jesus and the bold and courageous behaviour of the Syrophoenician woman. In many ways, this woman personifies what it is to have the audacity to hope.

The passage begins with Jesus on a journey. While it does not explicitly say so, we get the sense that Jesus is tired, particularly because he enters a house and does not want anyone to know he is there. Jesus wants some downtime. Jesus is on his way to Tyre when a gentile, or more accurately a Greek woman of Syrophoenician descent approaches him.  The author of Mark is not known for his descriptive words. This Gospel is the shortest, most grammatically curt and often omits descriptions. So, when Mark introduces this woman and not only says she is Greek but also Syrophoenician, it means it was worth it to Mark to share this piece of information. But why? In Matthew’s version of the story she is a Canaanite. It is quite possible, that she was all three. A woman of Canaanite descent, which was now part of the region of Syria; a native of the Phoenician seaboard who was Greek in religion and likely speech. To say nothing of the fact that she was a woman, there were essentially three or four more knocks against her within the eyes of the Jewish people.  I have a theory that the reason she is described in such a way is to make very clear, three times clear, that this woman had nothing to do with who Jesus was or what he stood for. There is literally no reason for her to trust that Jesus can do anything for her. Yet, she has the audacity to approach him as he enters a home for some privacy.

This woman calls out to Jesus asking him to cast out a demon from her daughter. Note that this daughter is not with her- the daughter is at home- meaning that this woman’s hope in Jesus is such that she feels he can heal her daughter without even seeing her. She has the audacity to have deep faith and trust. Jesus’ response, however, is not the kind, gentle, or courteous Jesus we have come to know. Jesus has the audacity to call her a dog. Now, to call any woman a dog is rather unkind, and you should know that the Greek word that Jesus uses is an informal term that is in the diminutive, meaning, he uses a similar term to what people would use to describe a female dog. Jesus dismisses and completely insults this woman. But here’s the incredible thing to this story the woman owns this title, she does not say, “I am not a dog” instead she says, “yes but even the dogs eat the crumbs.” This woman turns his words around and uses the dog metaphor to her advantage. She has the audacity to debate the Son of God!

This passage is a very complicated story within the gospels but I have to admit that I admire that this story is included in the Cannon at all, in both Mark and Matthew. You know, in some ways, it tells me that we can challenge God or we can turn to God in anger and desperation and debate. Jesus recognizes this woman’s ability to go head to head with him and he dismisses the demon from her daughter. What’s curious is that in most of Jesus’ healing stories he says that it is their faith that has made them well or changed the situation. Clearly this woman has faith in Jesus’ ability- but I wonder- does she go back to her Greek gods after all this? The text doesn’t say. In Matthew’s version Jesus does indeed say that it is her faith that has made her daughter well but not in Mark. This passage certainly does teach me of a mother’s deep love- she will do anything for her child, even risk being called names.

This woman acts with boldness and dares to confront Jesus which brings about change. Perhaps it is this story that paved the way for the early church to begin preaching to the gentiles. In a Church of Scotland resource on Creation Time it describes hope as being  something that “encourages us not to give up when the temptation is to be overwhelmed by the enormity [of the problem]…Hope is an agent of transformation which calls us to be daring and bold and even impudent at times. Passing on the gift of hope happens between people of every generation. The hopes of older and younger generations can enthuse and inspire each other if we take time to listen; to allow our encounters to speak to our hearts and live the change we experience.”

Audacity and tenacity are part of the other healing story that we hear as well. A man who cannot hear or speak is brought by friends to Jesus. It is his friends who speak on his behalf, not unlike the woman who speaks on her daughter’s behalf. Sometimes we need to have the audacity to hope for people other than ourselves. Like the man’s friends- who are we going to give voice to? We not only go to Jesus for ourselves; we also go to Jesus for others. We need to be the voice for those who cannot speak.  The people are also rather audacious in their response to Jesus’ healing ministry. Jesus keeps telling them to keep these experiences to themselves, but the more he tells them to keep quiet, the louder they become.

The prophet Isaiah also had the audacity to hope that God was still present within the people despite their experiences in exile. But note that hoping is not a static response. To hope means also to act- we speak up for others as well as our selves. We approach God with pleas. We go straight to God and say, “Hey- we need help here!” and we continue to say that until there is transformation. And we are part of that transformation; we do what we can to restore hope by being witnesses to God’s love around us.  So, for example, if we are hoping that more people will come to church or see our faith community as having value, are we going to have the audacity to act?

Amen

Bible Text: Joshua 24:14-18 and John 6: 60-69 | Preacher: Rev. Jenn Geddes

Joseph Priestley was a chemist, political theorist and inventor in the mid-18th century. Like many modern people of faith and science today, he felt that his science was integral to his theology. As an interesting side note, he is the one who invented Soda water. Priestley also had close friends in high places, which came in handy when he had to flee London and find refuge in the United States following the burning of his home and church after he spoke in support of the French Revolution. One of his friends was Benjamin Franklin. On Sept. 19th, 1772 Benjamin Franklin responded to a letter from Joseph. While we do not have the preceding letter, it is clear from Franklin’s response that Priestley was asking him about a difficult decision. Franklin’s response did not include his thoughts on what exactly Priestley should do but it did give him some advice on how to make such a decision. Franklin wrote,

“When these difficult Cases occur, they are difficult chiefly because while we have them        under Consideration all the Reasons pro and con are not present to the Mind at the same        time… To get over this, my Way is, to divide half a Sheet of Paper by a Line into two       Columns, writing over the one Pro, and over the other Con. Then during three or four Days      Consideration I put down under the different Heads short Hints of the different Motives            that at different Times occur to me for or against the Measure. When I have thus got them    all together in one View, I endeavour to estimate their respective Weights;”

Thus Franklin is credited with being the first to suggest writing a pros and cons list when faced with a difficult decision. When I struggle to make a decision, which by the way is not all that often, I tend to be very decisive, but when I struggle usually it happens when there is more of a grey area rather than clear pros and cons. Or sometimes the right answer seems very clear despite the fact that I may want to do the opposite. Clarity of choice and making the right decision are on top of mind for the Israelites and disciples this morning but sometimes a good old fashioned pros and cons list is in order.

At the beginning of chapter 24 Joshua gathers the elders, heads, judges and officers of Israel so that they may present themselves to God. This sets the stage to remind these important leaders of God’s interventions throughout their history. Joshua starts by naming all the pros. While it is not part of our assigned lectionary reading, it is good to remind ourselves of what God has done for the people thus far. God took Abram out of the land where he served other gods and led him to the land of Canaan. Abram becomes Abraham and it is his grandson Jacob that takes the people to Egypt to escape the famine. Then there is Moses who brings the people out of slavery in Egypt back to the land where Abraham had settled. But the story doesn’t end there because the people, under Joshua’s leadership, have had to fight a few battles, many of which where they were outnumbered. And now they stand in the city called Shechem, where Abraham had placed the very first altar to God, and they are being asked to renew this relationship – make a covenant with God. But this covenant is unique because it appears that God, through Joshua, gives them a choice.

The choices are , serve this one God, Adonai (meaning Lord in Hebrew) who has done all these things for you OR serve the gods of their ancestors pre-Abraham OR serve the gods of the Amorites where they are about to live. Notice how they are given three choices, they can choose their pre-history, their present or an unknown future. The confidence in their response makes it seem like there is no question. They will serve the God who has been with them on this long, tedious and sometimes dangerous journey. Remember these people who stand before Joshua are not the ones who experienced slavery in Egypt; that generation has died. But they have witnessed God’s protection in many other miraculous forms.

One thing of note is the use of the term “to serve”. The people use it in their response “We will serve the Lord, for he is our God.” In Hebrew the verb is ‘abad and it is used six times in three verses in the Hebrew version of this passage. ‘abad means “to serve” but also “to work” and “to worship” and even “to be a slave”. This may not rub us the right way but as theologian Anathea Portier-Young puts it, “[The Israelites] can and will give their whole selves to one kind of relationship only. Worship of false gods is slavery to human artifice and self-interest. Joshua calls Israel out of bondage into the freedom of life in covenant with God.” We may not have former gods of our ancestors to worry about- most of our ancestors are the reason why we still come to church- but we certainly have idols that enslave us. There are pros and cons to choosing those idols- as we tend to do in our daily lives. It’s important to mention that after the people state that they choose God, Joshua reminds them that this decision will not always be followed properly and this God will become angry with them time and time again. History will repeat itself. And yet, God continues to respond in grace, through the kings, prophets, apostles and most importantly through Christ. Our choice to follow God may not be as easy as it sounds, but I often wonder how hard it must be for God to consistently choose us.

We have to remember that while Jesus’ words “I am the bread of life” are very familiar, perhaps even comforting, to us, it would have been a completely bizarre thing to hear when Jesus first said it. This is also one of Jesus’ longest discourses in the Gospel of John. It has taken us three weeks to get through it! Perhaps you remember that the crowd was initially very excited to hear Jesus compare himself to Moses- this is someone they can get behind and understand! But thirty verses later even Jesus’ own disciples declare that his teachings are too hard. So Jesus gives them a choice. “If this offends you, you might be better off following someone else, because things are about the get a whole lot more complicated and confusing and difficult”. Jesus tells them that the only way to make heads or tails of all this confusion is to choose to rely on God- but that is a tough choice. Abiding in Jesus is difficult. Notice that when Jesus compares himself to Moses the people are enthusiastic but when they learn that Jesus is not offering an easy way out they lose interest. Discipleship does not mean sitting in a comfortable pew!

We are surrounded by tough choices, and in many ways I think it becomes increasingly tough in a post-Christendom world. We can choose to bow down to the lesser gods of money, greed, hatred, intolerance, selfishness, comfort, routine- and in many ways I know I do, sometimes intentionally and sometimes unintentionally. But thankfully God does not close the doors to mercy with that choice. We are then offered a deep relationship; do we follow the road to discipleship and take our time learning from and forming and reforming our understanding of Jesus, or do we walk away? Things can get hard- we’re already faced with changes whether we like it or not- so the decision is: what are we going to do about it? I’m not going to write a pros and cons list because we all know what the right answer is, but ask yourself: do I really choose discipleship? Do I really abide with Jesus and stick with him even though his teachings are difficult? Do I trust God even though changes make me uncomfortable? Roman Catholic theologian Adele Stiles Resmer points out, “It’s a radical posture that Jesus takes, giving himself for others, many of whom will turn away from him before he is finished speaking. Yet this is the heart of who we have been told Jesus is over the last several weeks: one who gives himself as food and drink for all who are hungry and thirsty… How do we respond to an invitation to follow such a risky path?” We need to ask ourselves every day: what choices do I have and who do I choose? In all honesty the cons might outweigh the pros on discipleship, but then, who else can offer eternal life? That’s one heavy pro. Amen