The Story of Two Brothers



Graves of Vincent and Theo van Gogh at the cemetery of Auvers-sur-Oise

Matthew 21:28-32

“But what do you think? A man had two sons, and he came to the first and said, ‘Son, go, work today in my vineyard.’ He answered and said, ‘I will not,’ but afterward he regretted it and went. Then he came to the second and said likewise. And he answered and said, ‘I go, sir,’ but he did not go. Which of the two did the will of his father?”
They said to Him, “The first.”
Jesus said to them, “Assuredly, I say to you that tax collectors and harlots enter the kingdom of God before you. For John came to you in the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him; but tax collectors and harlots believed him; and when you saw it, you did not afterward repent and believe him."

If you are a repeat reader of this blog then you have probably gathered that I write in the traditional five paragraph essay format (which is the same as a three point sermon structure). Even when I have more than five paragraphs, I still have five "sections." I start with an introductory paragraph, followed by three body paragraphs that illustrate different "points" and then I finish with a concluding paragraph. This week's post will be different. I will still use the five paragraph format but I will begin with the conclusion. By "conclusion" I not only mean the denouement of my argument about the biblical text, but also the conclusion that we all must come to in our lives: The grave. Actually there are two graves that I will discuss... and two lives. It should be noted that tombstones and grave markers are a type of art.  Rightfully so, since they are illustrations for a story. Tombstones picture the lives of those that lay six feet below them. They give us a glimpse into the deceased's biography, the legend that the community constructed around them or maybe even the fantasy that the departed would like you to believe. With only a shape, a name, a date and a sentence, the corpse communicates with you from beyond the grave. It strives to share its story. Maybe it's a cross shaped grave marker that reads "Shirley Grant, 1967-1996, Here lies a soldier, wife and mother of two." Or maybe it's like the graves pictured above, with only a "ici repose" (meaning "here lies"), followed by the deceased's name and lifespan. Since there is no is no story listed on these two graves, I will share it. They were the two brothers of the House of Van Gogh. One was named Vincent and the other was named Theo. One of these brothers is world famous. The other brother is only known because of his relationship to his famous brother. One of these brothers is known to history as a madman. The other one was a mild mannered businessman. One of these brothers was known to have a tumultuous relationship with a prostitute as his live-in girlfriend. The other brother was a married family man. These two brothers lived divergent lives yet both ended up in this same burial plot within six months of each other. There were also two brothers in the house of Jesus' parable. They also had stark differences between them. One brother was repentant. The other brother was self-righteous. Yet the underlying and unstated truth of Jesus' parable is that just like the Van Gogh brothers in the end they share a commonality. If you consider Jesus' parable in the overall context of Matthew 21 then you will find that the house of the two brothers in Jesus' parable is really about the House of Israel. It is a stinging indictment of the current state of God's House in first century Palestine. There were two brothers in the House of Israel. One brother was a symbol for the tax collectors and harlots. The second brother was a representation of the chief priests and the elders of the people. The commonality that these two brothers shared was that they were both sinners. Jesus shares how two people with the same problem (disobeying the Father) create divergent paths by dealing with it in starkly different ways.



Self-Portrait, Vincent van Gogh

 The First Brother

"Son, go, work today in my vineyard.’ He answered and said, ‘I will not,’ but afterward he regretted it and went. Then he came to the second and said likewise."

I have written about Vincent Van Gogh before on this blog. Vincent was many things in his life. He was a preacher and a missionary long before he was a painter. He was a bit too extreme in his ministry methods and was ushered out of that vocation. At this point he entered into the profession of painting as a second career and a spiritual vocation. However, I am not sure if we can fully call his painting a profession. He never was financially successful at it. All of these parts of his life were punctuated with erratic episodes brought on by his mental instability.  Van Gogh is as famous for his mental struggles as he is for his painting. Vincent Van Gogh's "constant" in life was inconsistency. Or was this his strength? Vincent van Gogh was given to change. The reason that we value his paintings was that he helped birth the post-impressionist era of expressionistic painting. He changed painting. Vincent was able to learn from historic European art, contemporary European art and fuse its painterly expression with the vibrant flat tonality of the East Asian prints that had come into fashion in his time. Vincent van Gogh was given to change and development and in doing so he changed Western Art. There is a value to those who are given to change. The Old Testament is full of stories of God choosing the inconsistent, wild and undeserving ones. God chose Jacob the liar over his brother Esau. He chose Joseph the dreamer over his other brothers. God also chose David the humble shepherd over his warrior brothers. In the New Testament Jesus continues this tradition by choosing the tax collectors, harlots and various other ragtag scalawags to be his followers. Why does God do this? Not because they were sinless. On the contrary, Jesus literally chose professional sinners. God chose this assortment of characters because their inconsistency showed that they were given to change. They changed from following their sin to following the Savior. If you are willing to allow God to change you, your past of sin does not matter.


Portrait of Theo van Gogh

The Second Brother

"Then he came to the second and said likewise. And he answered and said, ‘I go, sir,’ but he did not go." 

While Vincent Van Gogh was painting and starving in Arles, his brother Theo was running a successful business as an art dealer in Paris. Before this post he had previously worked in Brussels and London. All of this was accomplished before the age of thirty three. Theo excelled at business and family, while exercising prudent decision making at a young age. These are usually three factors that we praise an individual for. They are the criteria used to judge one as consistent. Yet, we don't celebrate Theo Van Gogh, do we? We celebrate the passion and ingenuity of his brother even though that greatness came with many a demon to wrestle with. It is very peculiar that the more stable brother is not the one that society champions. It is almost as if we punish him post-mortem because he was not given to change. Interestingly enough that is the same way that Jesus treats the second brother in the parable. The second brother showed no change... or as John the Baptist called it "repentance." The concept of repentance is simple as that: change. It is turning 180 degrees from sin and returning to God. The most important part of that last sentence was the "returning to God" part. God knows that we wrestle with sin...we are born into it. When one attempts to deal with sin outside of acknowledging their need for God they miss the big picture. Sin exists because we are absent from God's presence. The solution is to return to Him by following His Messiah that guides us back to Him. This missing element is the faith that the tax collectors and harlots possessed but the chief priests and the elders of the people lacked. The religious leadership of this time focused keenly on turning away from what they perceived as sin and uncleanness but failed to return to the God of mercy. Their turn was not 180 degrees but rather 360 degrees...which placed them right back at facing sin. Their greatest sin was a lack of mercy. Therefore they could not understand Jesus' ministry and message of mercy. Like the second brother, the chief priests and the elders of the people gave lip service to the Father (God) but did not do what he required. Entering the kingdom of heaven requires repentance. If you are not willing to allow God to change you, your past record of sacrifice and following the rules does not matter.


   Letter from Vincent van Gogh to his brother Theo, Etten, mid-September 1881

The Father's Will

"Which of the two did the will of his father?”

Heretofore I have left out a critical detail of the story of Vincent and Theo Van Gogh: their relationship was a good one. Theo Van Gogh was a loving brother to Vincent. He actually financially supported Vincent during his lean years. We have several letters of correspondence between the two, where Theo emotionally supports Vincent and encourages him in his painting. There are also other letters where Vincent takes opportunity to uplift Theo at points of loss and share his creative process. Some even say that Theo died so soon after the death of his older brother Vincent due to his grieving (that and the syphilis). These brothers were far from adversaries, rather they stood beside each other in life just as they lay next to each other in death. We know of their relationship because of their supportive communication to one another. We know of Theo's existence because of his love. There is no comparable support seen between the two brothers in Jesus' parable because the chief priests and the elders of the people gave no comparable support to the tax collectors and harlots. I am not sure if Theo served as Vincent's caretaker due to his father's request but I am certain that God the Father called the chief priests and the elders to be the spiritual caretakers of His people. Christ said that people will know his followers (God's children) by their love. The type of love that we see in the life of Theo van Gogh. The chief priests and the elders were supposed to care for the tax collectors and harlots and call them out of sin through acts of love. They were God's children too and therefore the chief priests and the elders' brothers and sisters. What was the will of the father in the parable? The will that He calls both brothers to? It was to work in his vineyard. It was to care for his creation. It was to tend to his flock. It was to love his people. The religious leadership of Jesus' day was called to be the caretakers of all of God's people, but Jesus' shows that their leadership is lacking. The chief priests and the elders would not repent for their lack of love as John the Baptist had demanded. Therefore they only gave lip service to the Father's commands. You cannot fulfill God's commands or abstain from sin if you do not practice love. The fullness of God's commandments is that we love one another.


Red Vineyards near Arles, Vincent van Gogh

Working the Vineyard Together

"For John came to you in the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him; but tax collectors and harlots believed him; and when you saw it, you did not afterward repent and believe him"

It is said that Red Vineyards near Arles was the only painting that Vincent van Gogh sold during his lifetime. The only financial success that this great painter met was while painting workers doing the same activity that the Father in Jesus' parable calls his sons to do. The Father has a vision of the beauty of cooperative labor for his sons. It is a beauty that the master Dutch painter captures and crystalizes two millennia later. The Father in this story (who happens to be our heavenly Father) has two sons that are both sinners. The difference between them is that one of them is honest and repentant and the other is self-righteous and repugnant. Only one of the brothers cooperated with the Father. The brothers' kinship in being sinners also reveals a common salvation to be had in Jesus and a common belief that they are called to possess in the preaching of John the Baptist. John the Baptist and Jesus Christ both shared a central theme to their message: the kingdom of God. John foretold of the coming kingdom of God and it's Messiah. Jesus is the Messiah and established the kingdom of God on earth. This coordination between their messages is not a coincidence but a precept of the kingdom of God. It is the call to cooperation. It is the call that the chief priests and the elders failed to exercise in their relationship with the tax collectors and harlots. They could not fulfill the call because there was no relationship between them. Herein lies the scandal that Jesus was to the religious leaders of his time: he ate and shared friendship with publicans and sinners. Jesus partnered with these sinners to change them. In the end that is what repentance is. We turn from sin and turn to God and form a partnership with Him. We cooperate with God for the changing of our lives and the changing of other lives. God calls us to create beauty with Him. It is a picture of Vincent Van Gogh and Theo Van Gogh. One brother was an artist. The other brother was an art dealer. They worked together to support each other. A partnership to create and distribute the art that changed the Western Art history forever. These two brothers created beauty. This beauty occurred because of the cooperation between change and love. That is the cooperation that God calls us to make with others. That is the partnership that God is making with Mankind. That is the story that God is telling. It is not a story chiseled on a tombstone but the story that creates everlasting life.

The Lord of Labor

Pan American Unity, at the City College of San Fransisco, Diego Rivera

Matthew 20:1-16

“For the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard. 

The most underrated nation (in terms of its rich, historic contribution to world art history) is Mexico. This country that shares the combined visual legacy of the Mayan, Aztec and Olmec civilizations is at least artistically equal to anything Italy, China or Egypt ever created. And those three mammoths of visual art are just from the Pre-Columbian periods. When the indigenous Native cultures combined with the anthropological exports of Spain (itself a hybrid of European Christendom and Moorish Islamic aesthetic influences) to form a new Mestizo identity, the world would soon be graced with priceless imagery. This imagery would illustrate the next few hundred years of a vibrant and intricate historical narrative. It is a narrative that is often overlooked and under appreciated, yet, it is a narrative that is testified to in detail in the murals of Diego Rivera. Besides his own artwork, Diego Rivera is also known for his associations. Rivera was known as one of the big three” painters of Mexican Muralism along with José Clemente Orozco and David Alfaro Siqueiros. He is also known for being the husband of the artist and feminist icon Frida Kahlo. Diego Rivera was also a prominent Communist and he and Frida were known to be friends with Leon Trotsky. His political leanings lead him to illustrate the story of the laborer. However, his depictions were not like other Socialist Realism, European communist depictions of the struggle between the Bourgeoisie and Proletariat as seen in the plight if the urban factory worker. In his appropriation of a German/Russian exported political philosophy he found ways to apply it to the Mexican people's story. Rivera painted the brotherhood of all laborers, be they urban factory workers or rural field hands. In documenting the seemingly ignoble labors of these workers he weaved in the story of their ancestral nobility. Diego Rivera told the grand narrative of Mexican history and in doing so glorified the humble. Within the veins of the lowly migrant laborer that society looked down upon flowed the blood of kings, astronomers, architects and warriors. The sombrero concealed brows that sweat under the scorching sun in agricultural effort enshroud the ancient mind that calculated complex calendars by that very same sun. The brown hands that burrow out fields of crops are the same that chiseled the Mesoamerican pyramids. This was the forgotten narrative of an undervalued people that the master muralist remembered. Now let me tell you about another story from a master storyteller. When Jesus shared the parable of Matthew 20:1-16 he also telling a story about rural laborers. And like Diego Rivera, Jesus' workers were part of a greater, undervalued narrative. It to is a historic tale involving kings, astronomers, architects and warriors... yet all of these varied professionals were migrants (pilgrims, if you will) that shared one blood. And they all shared the task of agricultural labor. The lowly profession of the vineyard laborers of Jesus' was also the vocation that Adam was called to in the Creation: to keep the Lord's garden. Indeed when Christ, the "new Adam", was first seen by his follower Mary Magdalene after the Resurrection he was mistaken for the gardener. The last chapter of the story begins with the description of a garden where we are reunited to community with God. Since the beginning, the call, to everyone that has been called, has been to work in the Lord's garden. It is a narrative that is often overlooked and under appreciated, yet, it is a narrative that is testified to in detail in the parables of Jesus Christ. God is the landowner that employs us to tend to His creation.



Sugarcane, Diego Rivera

The Covenant

Now when he had agreed with the laborers for a denarius a day, he sent them into his vineyard. 

The plot of Jesus' parable is held together by the idea of an agreement. The landowner and the laborers both agree on the terms of employment contract. The idea of the binding agreement between two parties looms big in Scripture. It is usually referred to as a covenant and the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) is full of them. All of the Old Testament (and Judaism in general) can be seen as the story of the covenant between God and Israel. It is the story of God and His covenant with Abraham where Israel is a future family. It is also the story of God and His covenant with Moses where Israel is an oppressed nation. It is the story of God and His covenant with King David where Israel is a monarchy. It is the story of a few more covenants (even before these three) that all are parallel to our concept of an employment contract. In effect they say, "Be my workers and I will pay you." The Reformed Covenant theology is based around the task of understanding the structure of God's relationship to mankind. The first covenant described in covenant theology is the "covenant of works." It is described by Wikipedia this way:

"The covenant of works (Latin: foedus operum), also called the covenant of life, was made in the Garden of Eden between God and Adam who represented all mankind as a federal head. (Romans 5:12-21) It promised life for perfect and perpetual obedience and death for disobedience. Adam, and all mankind in Adam, broke the covenant, thus standing condemned.^[2] The covenant of works continues to function after the fall as the moral law.
The term foedus operum was first used by Dudley Fenner in 1585, though Zacharias Ursinus had mentioned a covenant of creation in 1562. The covenant of works became common in Reformed theology by 1590, though it was not adopted by all, and some members of the Westminster Assembly in the 1640s opposed it. While John Calvin had spoken of a probationary period for Adam, a promise of life for obedience, and the federal headship of Adam, he does not speak of a covenant of works.^[3]
Though it is not explicitly called a covenant in the opening chapters of Genesis, the comparison of the representative headship of Christ and Adam,^[4] as well as passages like Hosea 6:7 have been interpreted to support the idea. It has also been noted that Jeremiah 33:20-26 (cf. 31:35-36) compares the covenant with David to God's covenant with the day and the night and the statutes of heaven and earth which God laid down at creation. This has led some to understand all of creation as covenantal: the decree establishing the natural laws governing heaven and earth. The covenant of works might then be seen as the moral law component of the broader creational covenant. Thus the covenant of works has also been called the covenant of creation, indicating that it is not added but constitutive of the human race; the covenant of nature in recognition of its consonance with the natural law in the human heart; and the covenant of life in regard to the promised reward."              

Pay of the laborers was based on the federal headship of the workers in the first agreement. The pay was life. Punishment was also agreed to by this same party. The punishment was the termination of employment: being evicted from the garden and the presence of the landowner. In the contract the punishment is often described as death. Now these terms of life and death can become murky at points. It appears that God is describing both in a nuanced and expanded way. Indeed Jesus spends much of his ministry explaining the true meanings of life, death and eternal life. But maybe we should be asking an additional question of this text. One that is also a bit unclear. What is this labor that the landowner has called us to? What is the nature of this vineyard/garden?   

Coit Tower Mural Detail, Diego Rivera

The Call to Labor

And he went out about the third hour and saw others standing idle in the marketplace,  and said to them, ‘You also go into the vineyard, and whatever is right I will give you.’ So they went.  Again he went out about the sixth and the ninth hour, and did likewise. And about the eleventh hour he went out and found others standing idle, and said to them, ‘Why have you been standing here idle all day?’ They said to him, ‘Because no one hired us.’ He said to them, ‘You also go into the vineyard, and whatever is right you will receive.’

After the landowner calls the first labor crew, he encounters other groups of the unemployed and hires them. He does this over and over again. You may have noticed God didn't stop calling people after Adam. You may have also noticed that at some point in history the focus of God's call went far beyond the borders of Israel and the bloodline of Abraham. Maybe even you feel God's call on your life. Even Jesus' own disciples learned that he was calling other sheep of a different flock to follow him. God's human resources department is always hiring because the evangelistic call continues. The story of Salvation History starts with the fall of a family (Adam and Eve) but then the eventual salvation of another family (Abraham and Sarah) that becomes a people (Israel), that becomes a nation, that births a Messiah who came to save the nations of the world. The Covenant gets continually extended because God continually calls laborers. So what is the nature of this labor that continually needs new hands? Is it a massive building campaign? Notice how Jesus initially compares the landowner to "the kingdom of heaven" and not specifically to God himself. Now of course the "kingdom of heaven" is God's domain. So in effect it is the extension of God's decisions, but I think that solving this riddle lies in understanding Jesus' choice of words. The kingdom of heaven is God's government. So this ongoing labor is a government project. It is like the old Works Progress Administration from the Great Depression Era. Like the WPA the point of God's building campaign is two fold: it is to build up the kingdom but also to provide employment for the workers. God's kingdom mission has always been to build up, strengthen and perfect his laborers. It is because we are part of His Creation that Adam was called to tend in the garden and we are now God's temple, the place where the Holy Spirit encounters Mankind. So in this ongoing labor recruitment the landowner encounters the spiritually unemployed and asks them, "Why are you idle?" To which the response is "Because no one hired us."-God has called the rejected of this rejected world. Jesus always sought out the lonely, forgotten and needy. Those whom nobody wanted to employ. It is these humble souls who understand their need for God. It is these that he calls to be laborers to recruit and build up laborers... and in doing so they build up His temple and kingdom.


The Flower Carrier, Diego Rivera

Grace & Works

“So when evening had come, the owner of the vineyard said to his steward, ‘Call the laborers and give them their wages, beginning with the last to the first.’ And when those came who were hired about the eleventh hour, they each received a denarius. But when the first came, they supposed that they would receive more; and they likewise received each a denarius. And when they had received it, they complained against the landowner, saying, ‘These last men have worked only one hour, and you made them equal to us who have borne the burden and the heat of the day.’ But he answered one of them and said, ‘Friend, I am doing you no wrong. Did you not agree with me for a denarius? Take what is yours and go your way. I wish to give to this last man the same as to you. Is it not lawful for me to do what I wish with my own things? Or is your eye evil because I am good?’ 

At the end of the workday when all labor has been accomplished in the vineyard, the landowner assembles his laborers to pay them. Despite the amount of hours worked he pays them the rate that was agreed upon with the first crew of laborers (remember that they had federal headship in the bargaining process). The latter workers that were recruited did not even know the terms of the agreement. They just trusted the landowners promise to pay them "whatever is right." That trust in the landowner is faith. They had no evidence of the landowner would pay them outside of their perceived goodness of his character. You are obviously picking up that I am making a parallel to religious faith. It is that simple. Whenever anyone (before or after Christ) had faith in God, they were trusting in His goodness. They were trusting that He would find a way to save, justify and/or forgive them, even if they were unaware of the means by which he would accomplish their saving. He did it through the sacrifice of His Son Jesus. This is a covenant that God makes that is a little different than the earlier contract. It is not based on "do this and I will pay you life." It is a contract that is purely based on faith in God's goodness. Covenant theology describes it as the covenant of grace. Wikipedia defines it as:

"The covenant of grace promises eternal life for all people who have faith in Christ. He also promises the Holy Spirit to the elect to give them willingness and ability to believe.^[5] Christ is the substitutionary covenantal representative fulfilling the covenant of works on their behalf, in both the positive requirements of righteousness and its negative penal consequences (commonly described as his active and passive obedience). It is the historical expression of the eternal covenant of redemption. Genesis 3:15, with the promise of a "seed" of the woman who would crush the serpent's head, is usually identified as the historical inauguration for the covenant of grace.
The covenant of grace runs through the Old and New Testaments, and is the same in substance under both the law and gospel, though there is some difference in the administration. Under the law, the sacrifices, prophesies, and other types and ordinances of the Jews signified Christ, and men were justified by their faith in him just as they would be under the gospel. These were done away with the coming of Christ, and replaced with the much simpler sacraments of baptism and the Lord's Supper.^[6]
Reformed orthodox theologians taught that the covenant was primarily unilateral or monopleuric (Latin: foedus monopleuron) on the part of God, but also entailed conditions on the part of men. The conditions of the covenant of grace were spoken of as assumptive and confirmatory rather than duties required in order to receive the covenant. The covenant was therefore also bilateral or dipleuric (Latin: foedus dipleuron). Scholars have challenged the notion in contemporary scholarship that Genevan Reformers taught a unilateral and unconditional covenant relationship whilst the Rhineland Reformers taught a bilateral contractual relationship. Mark Jones, Richard Muller, J. Mark Beach, and John Von Rohr have argued that Leonard Trinterud’s identification of the apparent polarisation between Calvin, Olevianus on the one hand and Luther, Bullinger, and the Puritans on the other hand is a faulty reading of history.^[7]
The covenant of grace became the basis for all future covenants that God made with mankind such as with Noah (Genesis 6, 9), with Abraham (Genesis 12, 15, 17), with Moses (Exodus 19-24), with David (2 Samuel 7), and finally in the New Covenant founded and fulfilled in Christ. These individual covenants are called the biblical covenants because they are explicitly described in the Bible. Under the covenantal overview of the Bible, submission to God's rule and living in accordance with his moral law (expressed concisely in the Ten Commandments) is a response to grace - never something which can earn God's acceptance (legalism). Even in his giving of the Ten Commandments, God introduces his law by reminding the Israelites that he is the one who brought them out of slavery in Egypt (grace)."

This trust in God's goodness is not based on anything that we do. Rather the latter laborers worked for the landowner just because they had faith in how good he was. They didn't labor for a specific reward because their being chosen by him was reward enough. So the grace that they receive at he end is even more of a grace. It is an unmerited gift that neither they nor the first crew of laborers could ever earn. They did not protest like the first labor crew on payday because they remembered a time (not far off) when they were idle and no one found them fit to hire. Being hired by the landowner gave them an identity and purpose. That is not only their story but our story as well. When God saves us, He saves us from idleness, He saves us to meaningfulness and He saves us to Himself.   

Still Life and Blossoming Almond Trees, Diego Rivera

Equality in Grace

So the last will be first, and the first last. For many are called, but few chosen.”

I am no Communist but I understand the allure that Communism presented to Diego Rivera. It is the same  allure that it held to the poor, people of color and victims of colonialism and the disenfranchised the world over. The allure was the promise of equality. In the United States the renowned African American actor and singer Paul Robeson had also been attracted to the communist promise of a classless, race-less post-nationalistic brotherhood of equals. In both Mexico and the United States, like in Russia, this ideology found converts due to the weaknesses of their current governmental system. Whether it was a Orthodox Church backed monarchical empire (like in Russia) or a democratic republic riddled with the hypocrisy of segregation (like the United States), governments around the globe were lacking in their provision of equality. And just maybe they weren't interested in it at all. Their is an innate need in Mankind that yearns for equality. It is a hunger that was imbued in the creation from the Creator. That need for equality is the theme of the parable of Matthew 20:1-16. The story of the landowner ends with the riddle "So the last will be first, and the first last." The only way for the first and the last to occupy the same space is if they are equal. He also finishes a teaching centered around the complications of entering the kingdom of heaven with great wealth with a similar quote. He says "But many who are first will be last, and the last first." It is as if to say that preferential treatment in this world does not promise preferential treatment in the next. Both stories get to the point that all are equal under Grace. One cannot buy their way into heaven and one cannot work one's way into heaven. On the contrary, it is the kingdom of heaven (the landowner) that calls gifts us with employment in God's labor. Or to put it another way "For many are called, but few chosen.” Adam was called for this labor and so was Abraham, Moses and Jesus' disciples. Along with these great heroes God called Rahab the harlot, Mary Magdalene (another prostitute), the theif who died on the cross and Saul of Tarsus who persecuted Christians (before being converted to the Apostle Paul). Despite their point in history, sinfulness or piety, God saved all of them into the same Grace and the same calling to labor in the overall same covenant. The covenant in which they share in the same blood: that of Jesus the Christ. This is what the kingdom of heaven is like. It is a unity in the call to be what God originally called us to be: workers in His vineyard, farmers in His garden, caretakers of His Creation.

El Vendedor de Alcatraces, Diego Rivera

The Power of an Image

 

The Serpentine Cross/The Brazen Serpent sculpture on Mount Nebo, by Giovanni Fantoni

John 3:13-17

No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven. And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up...

So this was one of those weeks where I didn't do any of my Old Testament/New Testament Word & Image posts because they all happen to tie I perfectly with the Gospel reading. This week's readings in the liturgical cycle started out with the story of Moses and the bronze (or brazen) serpent. If you do a Google image search for bronze serpent, brazen serpent or Noah's snake sculpture, one image repeatedly comes up. It is a curious sculpture by the Italian artist Giovanni Fantoni on Mount Nebo in Jordan. The sculpture is entitled the "Serpentine Cross" and in an homage to truth in advertising the sculpture is indeed comprised of snakes that make a cruciform. Due to the cross structure the sculpture may not be widely accepted as appropriate Jewish art. Due to the creepy use of snakes it may not be universally palatable to all Christians as representing their faith either. Yet the first century Jewish rabbi that we call Christ would totally cosign on this image. Jesus would agree with this image because in effect created it. No, he didn't twist the metal that constructed the sculpture, but he created the mental and literary image that Giovanni Fantoni's sculpture illustrates. Jesus created this image in John 3:13-17 by unpacking the idea of Moses' original serpent sculpture in Numbers 21:4-9. Jesus not only claims that there is a parallel between Moses' story and his own story but rather that the bronze serpent of Moses' metalworking and the wooden cross of Christ's carpentry have the same source and effect. Jesus, Moses and Giovanni Fantoni all developed the same image. It was the image of one that was lifted up to the heavens so that many would receive Heaven's healing. It was a loaded image, one with a cultural history and power. Using loaded imagery is a powerful tool. They are pictures that already possess widely understood meaning and significance. Jesus' Jewish listeners (like the Pharisee Nicodemus) would have understood the story and symbolism behind the image of the bronze serpent as much as a Christians would understand the image of the cross and an American would understand the logo of McDonald's golden arches. When one uses a loaded image, he takes upon the historical meaning of that image and uses it to support his further conclusions. Jesus was using this powerful means to a powerful end. What was the end of the use of this means? Maybe a little more background story will help.

The Serpentine Cross/The Brazen Serpent sculpture, by Giovanni Fantoni

Lifting Up

Numbers 21:4-9
Then they journeyed from Mount Hor by the Way of the Red Sea, to go around the land of Edom; and the soul of the people became very discouraged on the way. And the people spoke against God and against Moses: “Why have you brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? For there is no food and no water, and our soul loathes this worthless bread.” So the Lord sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and many of the people of Israel died.
Therefore the people came to Moses, and said, “We have sinned, for we have spoken against the Lord and against you; pray to the Lord that He take away the serpents from us.” So Moses prayed for the people.
Then the Lord said to Moses, “Make a fiery serpent, and set it on a pole; and it shall be that everyone who is bitten, when he looks at it, shall live.” So Moses made a bronze serpent, and put it on a pole; and so it was, if a serpent had bitten anyone, when he looked at the bronze serpent, he lived.

The story of Moses' bronze serpent sculpture is a peculiar one. It induces all types of theological quandaries. The greatest of these is: when Moses created the bronze serpent, wasn't he (the great lawgiver) breaking the 2nd Commandment? If it was breaking the second commandment, then why did God ask him to do it? Since different denominations measure the enumeration of the 10 Commandments differently I should clarify what I mean by 2nd Commandment:

“You shall not make for yourself a carved image—any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; 5 you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me." 

-Exodus 20:4-5

Lutherans and Roman Catholics consider an extension of the first commandment, that told the Israelites "You shall have no other gods before Me.." I believe that all sides in this debate can agree that all of the Commandments work together, so their proper enumeration is only a nominal issue. The point of the commandments surrounding idolatry was not to outlaw sculpture but rather prohibit the worship of sculpture as a god, or as the God of Israel. After all, God opens the discussion up by stating "I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before Me." As if to say, that He is God and He is not a statue. To prove this point God would later use a statue, not as a representation but as a tool. The fiery serpents that bit the Israelites were a judgment and when they cried out in repentance He had Moses sculpt a bronze serpent statue as the agent of their healing. The fiery serpents were God's tools of judgment and the bronze serpent was God's tools for restoration/healing. The point of this story was that judgment and mercy both came from the hand of God. Moses' bronze serpent was a means to the end, not the end. The end was God. The bronze serpent was not to be worshipped but rather lead the Israelites to repentance and worship of the true and invisible God. The lifting up of the brass serpent was the means by which God would send His Mercy and save the repentant from death


The Brazen Serpent sculpture, Giovanni Fantoni

Breaking Down

2 Kings 18:1-6
Now it came to pass in the third year of Hoshea the son of Elah, king of Israel, that Hezekiah the son of Ahaz, king of Judah, began to reign. He was twenty-five years old when he became king, and he reigned twenty-nine years in Jerusalem. His mother’s name was Abi the daughter of Zechariah. And he did what was right in the sight of the Lord, according to all that his father David had done.
He removed the high places and broke the sacred pillars, cut down the wooden image and broke in pieces the bronze serpent that Moses had made; for until those days the children of Israel burned incense to it, and called it Nehushtan. He trusted in the Lord God of Israel, so that after him was none like him among all the kings of Judah, nor who were before him. For he held fast to the Lord; he did not depart from following Him, but kept His commandments, which the Lord had commanded Moses.

So here's the curveball: the story of the bronze serpent in the Old Testament does not end here. It appears that the Children of Israel kept the statue through the ages. Nothing wrong with that, as long as it served as a reminder of God's historic acts of grace. The problem lies in the fact that it became more than this to some Israelites. By the time of the Kings, the Israelites had not only housed the bronze serpent in God's temple.(lacking a good self storage facility) but they had given it a name, "Nehushtan." By all intents and purposes they seem to have started to worship this statue. as an idol god. When King Hezekiah came to power he embarked on a campaign to root out all forms of idolatry that had crept into Israelite worship. This included ones, like the bronze serpent, that had started as honest attempts to exercise legitimate faith (as seen in the Torah). So he destroyed the bronze serpent statue to eradicate Nehushtan centered idolatry. King Hezekiah can be seen as an i
conoclast. Iconoclasm is the destruction and advocacy of destruction of religious imagery in religious worship. Most religions have a period or faction of iconoclasm. Certain factions of the Protestant Reformation were famous for educing violent fervors of iconoclastic revolts.You may have observed that the older Christian denominations, such as the Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox churches, utilize imagery in their worship. However long before the Protestant Reformation and even before the schism of the Eastern and Western churches, Christianity had to come to terms with its understanding of the prohibition against idolatrous images and sculpture. The Eastern church (the predecessor of the Orthodox Church) became increasingly uncomfortable with what it perceived as the misuse of images in worship. Even today the Orthodox churches abstain from the use of sculptural imagery in worship (to avoid the carved/graven image prohibition). It uses two dimensional icons extensively in worship, but it does so with a certain understanding. In the ancient churches (Catholic and Orthodox) when one venerates an icon (as opposed to worship), one is not looking to the image, but rather through the image, to what the image represents. The power and significance of the image is the power of God that it (should) testify to. As I mentioned earlier, many of the Protestant Reformers (like John Calvin) objected to this, and even some Catholics and Orthodox can be wary that some Christians don't appreciate the subtle difference between honoring/remembering the agents that God used for his purposes and worshiping them. But I'd hate to miss the bigger picture here. I'd hate for any of us to feel like we are better than our Hindu or Buddhist neighbors because we do not worship a statue. There are many things that are not carved from wood or stone that we can treat as an idol. Often times they can be good things that God has used to bless us but we take them out of their proper context and focus our lives around them. These idols can be our jobs, our possessions, our relationships our nationalistic or racial identity... to steal a phrase from St. Paul, we "worship and serve the creature rather than the Creator." Just like with Moses' brazen serpent, the image can become the end, not a means to the end. So we are called to be like Hezekiah and destroy all of our idols. We are called to be like the Orthodox and not look to the image, but rather through the image, to what the image represents. The power and significance of the image is the power of God that it reminds us of.

The Brazen Serpent/ Serpentine Cross, Giovanni Fantoni

Ascending

John 3:13-17
...that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.

That is the background that Jesus builds upon in John 3:13-17. He takes the visual image of the story of Moses' bronze serpent being lifted up and combines it with the visual image of himself being lifted up upon the cross. When he compares the two images of "lifting up" he does so to back up their contrast: both were lifted up for the healing of the judged but only he ascended to Heaven. Likewise he, the one who ascended, came down from Heaven. This is where Jesus introduces another type of image. This image is not as much of a visual image (like Moses' bronze serpent) as much as a literary image. Jesus inserts a poetic device. Lately I've been noticing that Jesus may have been inserting poetry into his sermons. Hebrew poetry, like the Psalms, are constructed with various techniques. They don't necessarily rhymes (just like haikus don't). Sometimes the Psalms use alliteration and acrostic poetry, but most often they use couplets and rhyming ideas and images. You can see a clear "AB" structure used to compare and contrast. Also repetition is used fairly often to construct what we recognize as a chorus (or "hook" as the kids say). Couplets, rhyming images and repetition seems to be the type of poetry that Jesus used. You can see it the most in the repetition of the Beatitudes. However Jesus appears to have a similar yet less obvious structure in John 3:13-17. Jesus repeatedly refers to himself as the Son and then tells about his relation to those who follow him in a call and response sing-songy structure.

The "AB" structure in John 3:13-17 goes a little like this

A) Something was done to the Son
B) so that many might live

Here's how it is put into action in the verses:

A) even so must the Son of Man be lifted up
B) that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.

A) For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son
B) that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life

A) For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world
B) but that the world through Him might be saved.

So Jesus gives us three poetic verses explaining how he, the Son, was crucified (lifted up), offered as propitiation (gave) and incarnated (send) so that those who believe in him (whoever believes in Him) might fully live and live forever (have eternal life/have everlasting life) and that creation in general (the world) would be redeemed back to God (be saved). You may have noticed that Jesus pictures things in their reverse chronological order. You may also have noticed that he is also listing them in their level of cosmic significance. Jesus is unraveling the bigger picture for us here. The significance of what Jesus is and does is greater than we are the disciples can appreciate. Jesus didn't just come to die to save you from sin, though his dying does save you from sin. Jesus came to Earth long before he died. In coming (which includes his eventual atoning death) Jesus saves everything. The Incarnation makes way for the Atonement... or to put it another way, Christmas leads to Easter. Jesus death saves mankind from Sin and saves everything that God created (dogs, rabbits, rainbows, rocks) back to God. Images are used as a means to an end. Jesus used this literary image as a means to an end. The cross was Jesus' means to an end. Jesus' birth, life, ministry, miracles, mercy, death, resurrection, ascension and present intercession with God the Father on our behalf is a means to an end. The end is God being glorified in communion with all of His creation. Let's start preaching the whole story of Jesus.

The Brazen Serpent, Giovanni Fantoni

Descending

Philippians 2:6-11
who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross. Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

So what can we therefore conclude? That is the question that the Epistles of the New Testament ask. The Torah of the Old Testament introduces us to the Creator God, explains the Fall of Mankind and disunion of Creation, all before introducing us to the holiness of God's Law and judgment. The historical books of the Old Testament show the complications of Mankind's sinful state in spite of the grace of the Law, and foreshadows the need for the fullness of Grace in the Messiah. The Gospels testify of the Messiah's ministry of redemption. The Acts of the Apostles walks us through the beginning of the restoration of all things to God through the Holy Spirit's life in the Church. Then we are left with the Epistles that meet us in our point in history. It greets us as students of Salvation History and tutors us in the significance of all the things that we have learned thus far in Scripture. The Epistles instruct us on what Christ's sacrifice means for us in the here and now. In the Epistle to the Philippians, St. Paul concludes that the compelling image of Jesus on the cross wasn't just that he was lifted up like the bronze serpent for our spiritual healing. It wasn't just that he was the only one who has ascended to the Father. It was that though he was equal with God the Father he chose to descend to us. Even more so, the power of his descending was not just that he came down as a Man but rather that he took the form of a humble man. Greater than all of that is that he became the least of all,. He became a humble servant, a slave of God, that was sacrificed in a despicable manner so that we may no longer live in dishonor. Yet his shame became his glory. In his sacrifice God has redeemed the humble and saved the lost. Jesus came down from Heaven and descended to earth so that we might rise to new life. Jesus' descent was a means to God's own ends. So what was the end that justified the means? God is lifted up, or worshiped and glorified, when we worship the Son of Man who was lifted up, crucified. God is glorified by all of Creation when we mimic the humble self sacrificial love of Christ in our everyday, yet eternal, lives.

The Serpentine Cross sculpture (the Brazen Serpent Monument), Giovanni Fantoni

Christ and Christo



Over the River (Project for Arkansas River, State of Colorado) Christo

Matthew 18:15-20

“Moreover if your brother sins against you..."

When I first heard of the environmental artist Christo, some years back, I was offended. I assumed that his name was an attempt at self-aggrandizement or sacrilegious humor by appropriating a name similar to the messianic title of Jesus. It turns out that its really just the guy's real birth name. He was born Hristo Vladimirov Yavachev (Христо Явашев) and "Hristo" (or it's English spelling "Christo") is just a popular Bulgarian shortening for "Christopher." That being the case, it turns out that I am an idiot. #Hooray!!! I took a perceived offense and used it as an opportunity to exercise judgment. It was judgment that was based on suspicions and not on facts. It was religious judgment but not specifically biblical judgment. It came from my personal cultural-religious reservation to bearing the name of Christ... in spite of being surrounded by people named Jesús, Christopher, Christie, Christian, Kristen and so on.

Christo, the artist, is used to controversies and being judged based on perceived offenses. For the past 22 years he has been embroiled in a controversy surrounding one of his works over the Colorado river. Let me clarify this a little further, this isn't a controversial artwork that he created 22 years ago and is still feeling the backlash of... this is a piece that he wants to create. For the past 22 years he has been proposing a grand work of art over the Colorado river to the communities surrounding the Colorado river. Like most of Christo's works it is an environmental piece that involves wrapping and covering to highlight some natural or preexisting beauty. He wants to drape six miles of the river in a translucent fabric in a work that he has entitled "Over the River." After this long suffering process Christo is not discouraged. In fact he describes the trials and protest as "invigorating." In a 2013 article he told the Denver Post:   

"We are enjoying that. We are not masochists, but we are enjoying the communication with so many variety of people. Usually the art world is a small club of professionals. Here we are exposed to an enormous relation of meeting so many variety of people"

The worshipers of Christ have much to learn from the words and works of Christo. In Matthew 18:15-20 Jesus Christ discusses offenses, judgment, misunderstanding and community in the religious environment of his followers. Or to phrase it in a more contemporary theological way, dealing with Sin in the Church. Interestingly Jesus doesn't refer to it this way. He was familiar with and used words like "church" to congregation of believers but he describes this group in more intimate terms in this scenario. Christ does not say "if a fellow church member sins against you" or even "if another one of my disciples sins against you." Jesus says "if your brother sins against you." Christ sees those who follow him as a family, the most intimate form of community. Therefore church discipline of sin must take the form of restoring the family and encouraging its health. Dealing with offenses and sins amongst believers must be something that is life giving. It must be a communal beautification effort. In the words of the artist Christo, it must be "invigorating."


Over The River shop signed print, Christo

Art by Committee

“...go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have gained your brother. But if he will not hear, take with you one or two more, that ‘by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.’ And if he refuses to hear them, tell it to the church. But if he refuses even to hear the church, let him be to you like a heathen and a tax collector..."

Along this 22 year attempt to construct the "Over the River" project, Christo has meet his accusers several times over. These meetings are not just held between artist and those who are offended by the project. On the contrary, Christo invites out the whole community to these forums. This pushes the idea of art created by a committee to art created by an entire community. Everyone participates in the planning process of what is or is not to be created. And why shouldn't they? This work is going to be more of their possession than Christo's, once he is finished creating it. So when Christo comes to these forums he comes with plans and sketches in tow. The naysayers may think that they are condemning his plans to a shelf but Christo treats their criticism as critique that will fine tune the work that will eventually be created. Twenty years of discussion have proven that he is in this for the long haul, because he can foresee the beauty that all will behold in the end. The beauty of community creation is what Jesus is describing in his how-to-manual for dealing with sins and offenses. First Jesus advises that the offense be discussed on a person to person basis. If a problem continues past this stage then Jesus sketches out the rounds of community involvement to pursue in remedying the problem. We are left with plan that on paper looks like an ever widening set of concentric circles with a single offense between two believers at the center. It may initially look like these encircling groups are condemning the sinful brother but a further reflection reveal that they are actually helping him create his life into a masterpiece. Christ's circles of Church discipline and Christo's planning forums do the same thing: they take a problem and seize upon the opportunity that it reveals. One brothers offense against another does not just reveal his personal sin (we can assume that we all have those) but it also illustrates the support network that surrounds him. If he wants to view it as judgment then it is judgment... but if he has a heart open to repentance and a mind willing to understand opportunity. then this group is a family here to nurture his growth. In forgiving him and aiding in his development the Church grows as well into the facilitator of good works that it is called to be. Church discipline can be church development if we can foresee the beauty at the end of the struggle.

Wrapped Reichstag, Christo

The Governing Assembly

“...Assuredly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven..."

The Over the River project is not Christo's first go-round with controversy. One of his more famous works at the Reichstag building was seething with latent controversy prior to its revealing. But that is ironic, isn't it? Since Christo works are not revealed but rather a wrapping, framing, covering or concealing of an existing thing. The argument was not Christo's wrapping per se, but rather the thing that he chose to wrap. The Reichstag was the seat of German government based in Berlin. In the latter twentieth century government still carried a lot of historic baggage in the German context. But the Reichstag building did not represent the shameful days of the Nazi's Third Reich or the East/west German division of the Cold War. The Reichstag represented a unified Germany. According to Wikipedia:

"Reichstag is a German word which in political terms means Parliament but directly translated is Diet of the Realm or National Diet or Imperial Diet."

So in effect the building houses the governing assembly of the German people. Construction of this building began after the unification of all of the independent German states into one federal republic. It was completed in 1894 and the assembly governed there until 1933 when it burned down under suspicious circumstances under the Nazis. During the post-World War II era of a divided Germany, Michael Cullen, a Berlin historian, approached Christo with a dream project. He asked Christo to wrap the symbol of Berlin's unified, glory days as a beacon of hope for the people. The idea was a dream because its realization was nearly impossible in a divided Germany. Yet the situation on the ground was much different 24 years later. Germany was now unified and the literal wall of separation between its people was torn down. The unified government approved Christo's wrapping of the Reichstag. There it stood, a symbol of the efforts of all of the German people to unify and grow past the sins of the past. It was wrapped, almost as a present to future generations of Germans. When the art exhibition was over, Christo would loose the wrapping that bound the building and symbolically release it from the sins of the German past. Jesus Christ has an art project that he wants to perform on earth. Like Christo, Christ's creation deals with a wrapped object of consideration. Yet Jesus reveals in our Scripture reading that it isn't the wrapping that he is interested in. The object has already been bound in the sins of its past. Jesus Christ is interested in the loosing part where the bound objects are unbound and loosened from the sins and offenses that have wrapped them. Like Christo, Christ is an artist that does not work alone but rather works with a community of laborers. By now you may have realized that the object that Christ is unbinding is the object of his affection: you...and me...and the lost of this world. Christ has designed this great work and it has been approved by the government of Heaven, and you may be thinking that "he did it all on the cross." You would be right to think that. He did everything on the cross, saving the part that he called his followers to do. After Peter proclaimed Jesus to be the Christ, Jesus professed that he and the other disciples had the power and authority to forgive sins. Now this is not a controversial statement to those of you readers who come from Christian traditions that teach Apostolic Succession. You believe that the Disciples/Apostles passed down the power to forgive sins to the bishops over the ages who pass it on to priests. But to those readers, like myself, who come from groups that do not teach Apostolic Succession, you may be thinking "Why does this Man speak blasphemies like this? Who can forgive sins but God alone?” Ironically, this is what some said of Jesus when he proclaimed sins forgiven. Now, I know what you are thinking. Yes, Jesus is different because he was God and anything he says counts as God speaking. Then what about his commissioning of his disciples to forgive sins? Is not that God's call to his children? I suspect that our problem is not with what the Scriptures say as much as it is with the dangers of Church government. I understand. Like the German government, Church government has been guilty of some fairly shameful sins over the millennia. Yet Christ says here that the sins that the Church forgives will be forgiven by Heaven. God's government in heaven and God's government on earth seem to support each other. So one must ask, why did Christ legitimize the Christians' "Reichstag"? He legitimized it because it is the assembly of his unified kingdom. God does not legitimize individual leaders per se but he legitimizes the mission of the church. The church is his "ekklēsia", his assembly of called out ones that governs the distribution of mercy. love and forgiveness. Christ did not just call Church leadership to forgiveness but rather all of his Church. When the Church and its leaders fail to do this, then they are no longer the Church. The Church is not called to be wrapped in it's own sin but rather to loosen the burdens of sinners. We labor with Christ to reveal the beauty hat has been wrapped up for to long.    

Christo and Jean Claude

The Art of Relationships

“...Again I say to you that if two of you agree on earth concerning anything that they ask, it will be done for them by My Father in heaven..." 

I have been misleading you somewhat up to this point. Christo never makes his artwork alone. And no, I am not referring to the overall community that he consults I its conception. Before her recent death, Christo created every project with the artist Jean Claude. She happens to also be his wife. These two conceive an art project together, work out their creative differences and agree upon the great work that they will bless the world with. There is a simple yet powerful  beauty to cooperation. Av life of cooperation, peacemaking and community is more beautiful than one can describe. There is something about relationships that mirrors the Divine's work in creation. In the previous section I discussed Christ giving the Church the power to forgive because it is just part of the bigger picture. God works in relationships. God uses the illustration of an intimate relationship, a marriage, to illustrate this point. In the Old Testament/Hebrew Scriptures it was the story of the marriage between God and Israel. The New Testament centers around Christ and his bride the Church. But maybe you don't like romantic relationships. God also used other intimate relationships to describe His work o Earth. He describes Himself as a "Father" and Jesus as God the "Son" because the Son proceeds from the Father like our salvation proceeds from the Creator. He describes us as his "children." And when it comes to strangers, Jesus describes them as our "neighbors." And when opening Matthew 18:15-20, Jesus describes our enemies as our "brother." God wants to do something amazing here on Earth. But it involves you and others...and those others are your enemies. If you and your enemies can move past your distance and enmity into a relationship and intimacy, there is a miracle to be wrought. When you agree to forgive, to love and to move from strangers and enemies to neighbors and brothers the God of Heaven will grant you that forgiveness. Your sins are forgiven by the blood of Jesus but the repercussion of your sins are forgiven by the ones that you have sinned against. When you make piece with your brother you create a work of unmatched beauty. The sins that bound you are loosened and the picture of God's work with Mankind is paralleled. 

Christo by Annie Leibovitz

The Revealing

"...For where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them.”

Christo and Jean Claude wrapped islands, valleys, trees, motorcycles, couches, buildings and yes, even people. Even though this may seem like the least controversial, because the only one who needs to approve it is the artist and the person that is wrapped, it may be the most dangerous. Wrapping bodies is what we do to dead people. Mummies were wrapped. Wrapping bodies of the living is dangerous because the living need to breath, move and not be bound. Who would surrender to be wrapped by the artist? The artist himself would! The image posted above is a photograph by Annie Leibovitz of Christo himself. It is a self portrait on two levels: it shows who the artist is and it shows what he does. This portrait simultaneously tells us about the creator and his creation. Jesus Christ found himself in this very same situation. The post-crucifixion body of Jesus was wrapped. And at that moment Scripture reveals a portrait that tells us about the Creator and his Creation. It tells us that the Creator identified with the predicament of Creation. The Son of God took upon the sins of the world and surrendered to death in solidarity with creation. The tow, the Creator and Creation were unified in the saving act of this God-Man, Jesus Christ. Peace was achieved between these two warring parties because Jesus lay in the midst of them, wrapped in the shame of the cross and the grave. Yet he rose to new life and ascended to the right hand of the Father, but still mysteriously remains with us in a sense. He dwells with us in his Holy Spirit. His Holy Spirit dwells in us when we abide in his name. We abide in his name when we practice the acts of forgiveness, mercy and love. We abide in God's grace when we abide with two or three others that were once our enemies and God's enemies and break the bread of friendship. When we dwell in Christ, Christ dwells in us. The Holy Spirit dwells in us corporately. So the challenge is for us to reveal what is wrapped up in us. If we are no longer bound by sin then we are bound together in the love of Christ. We as the body of Christ must unwrap this love and lose it on the world. When we see sin-sick souls around us that are wrapped in bandages from their spiritual scars then we are called to nurse them into spiritual health. The church is a hospital for sinners. It is a place where we give life and energy to each other and allow God's power to make us become more active and lively. in the words of Christo, the Church of Jesus Christ is "invigorating."