Matthew 4.1-11
1Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. 2He fasted for forty days and forty nights, and afterwards he was famished. 3The tempter came and said to him, ‘If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread.’ 4But he answered, ‘It is written, “One does not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.”’ 5Then the devil took him to the holy city and placed him on the pinnacle of the temple, 6saying to him, ‘If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down; for it is written, “He will command his angels concerning you”, and “On their hands they will bear you up, so that you will not dash your foot against a stone.”’ 7Jesus said to him, ‘Again it is written, “Do not put the Lord your God to the test.”’ 8Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendour; 9and he said to him, ‘All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me.’ 10Jesus said to him, ‘Away with you, Satan! for it is written, “Worship the Lord your God, and serve only him.”’ 11Then the devil left him, and suddenly angels came and waited on him.
“Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material. Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard.” Yes, the Round the Bible in 40 Days Challenge has reached Leviticus 19, and every word that proceeds from the mouth of God is indeed starting to get a bit challenging. But it’s great to have found that so good a company of people – perhaps a thousand or so – are joining in with me in one way or another in taking on the task of reading the Bible cover to cover before Easter. All too often we behave like the great heretic Marcion and just read the bits that suit us or our lectionaries, even if we don’t go as far as he did and actually cut the rest out. There’s something to be said for just taking the Scriptures neat, letting them come at us and to us, instead of taming them and cutting them down to size. And as literature too, there is something of the Grand Story that you only sense if you sit through the whole show, instead of rushing out at the first interval to file your review.
So I’d like to encourage you this Lent to respond to the reminder that we do not live by bread alone not just by cutting down on the bread, but by sizing up on the scriptures. It’s not too late to join in the round the Bible adventure.
I’m using the “not live by bread alone” verse because it was of course in today’s Gospel, the account of the temptation of Christ in the wilderness, as told by Matthew. It’s a fascinating piece of Scripture, and one aspect of that fascination is that unless the whole thing was just made up, then we have to assume that at least to some extent what the Gospels tell us goes back to Jesus’ own recounting of the incident to his disciples. There simply wasn’t anyone else there, the devil and angels apart, to take notes.
Fascinating too is the way in which both Christ and Devil both use Scripture to clinch their arguments. In terms of the culture of the time, they go to it like a pair of rabbis, firing off texts at each other. I rather like that approach. Leaving Scripture on the shelf either because we find it irrelevant on the one hand, or because it is too sacred to engage with on the other, doesn’t appeal to me; and I don’t think this is just a matter of taste.
I think there is a problem with these approaches because there is a problem if we treat God in the same way. At the heart of our faith is the belief that he is irrevocably in relationship with us, walking through history with us as the Old Testament so graphically records; walking our history in our very shoes as the New Testament so movingly tells us; and now always with us, to the end of the age. Most of us are quick to seek out a friend or family member to talk to when something is up, and find value and help in talking things through, arguing them out. How much more so with God.
400 years ago the people who worshipped in this place would have been full of anticipation and perhaps anxiety as the publication date drew near for a new version of the Bible in English which tried to square the circle of being officially authorised on the one hand but open for everyone to use on the other. Some of them will have sat in the translation committees, wrestling their way through their allotted books. All of them knew that these words were potentially a matter of life and death. Man shall not live by bread alone. This Lent, let’s share their hunger.
I could stop there, but the sort of life that God gives us is not meant to be an alternative existence, but a serious transformation of the kingdoms of this world into the kingdom of God. Jesus said no to the temptations to just be a miracle worker on the one hand or a worldly ruler on the other. The two must collide. And if I stopped the sermon right here we’d be left in a far too churchy place; read the Bible and everything will be all right, in heaven if not on earth. Indeed – but God did not send his Son into the world to save us from it, but to save us in it, to save the world he loves. So however awkward it is, part of the arguing things out is letting the word and the world go into overlap now, and seeing what they have to say to each other today.
The temptation story, like so many Bible passages, can take us in many directions. The one I want to go in now is to do with fine words and parsnips. Let’s go back to the way in which Jesus and the Devil fire proof texts at each other. There is an underlying issue of how such texts should be used. Be a devil and take the text out of context and if you’re not careful you are just left with a con. Or promise things that you can’t actually deliver, and you’ll leave your victim in free fall, even from the finest cathedral. Fine words, but no parsnips buttered.
Now it doesn’t take long to see that this is leading us straight towards what has to be the big question in many of our minds at the moment, which is of course to do with the so-called Big Society. Are we really at the exciting if challenging beginning of a new sort of way of doing society, something that might even be part of the kingdom of God; or is it just a Big Smokescreen, all words and no substance. Should we be shouting about it from our steeples; or watching in case we are lured off them?
The choice is not, of course, as stark as that; and I am as allergic to unthinking support or unthinking antagonism here as I was for the scriptures. We need to engage, argue it out, work out what is really the best for us all. I am exploring, for instance, the idea of getting a group of movers and shakers together to convene something we might call the “Cambridge Conversations” later this year or early next, when speakers, an audience and a smaller group over supper afterwards can really chew over – on the record but without simple sniping – just what has been gained and what perhaps lost.
For now, we mostly have questions not answers, and many of those are in the area of the potentially dangerous gap between the fine words and the parsnips. Honesty, transparency and fairness are the value-words of the moment, and I suggest that while we have to accept that the current economic situation does indeed require some economy, and that we elected a government on that basis, we must share with government the task of sifting out the gaps between rhetoric and reality that are always likely to open up, and making sure that we really can work together to do things differently where we need to.
So for example, and to finish, the quick examples of the sort of things people have raised with me:
- There is a shortage of posts for midwives and the Prime Minister says we will recruit 3000 more. The Nursing Standard reports that 6 out of 10 Strategic Health Authorities are cutting midwifery training places, and midwives graduating now face an uncertain future. A Big Society needs big joined up thinking, and government has responsibility to help it happen.
- Faiths are named as a positive force in society; but inter-faith organisations have lost both regional and national budget support and many of the intermediate bodies on which they had seats seem to be disappearing. The Big Society needs these other estates of the realm to be empowered not handicapped.
- Rebuilding local community is very important to the Big Society project; but rural bodies are worried about loss of public transport, and a model that seems better suited to more urban and more prosperous place. The Big Society needs to cover all our not so big country.
- Cuts we are told will fall primarily on those most able to afford them. The mobility component of Disability Living Allowance was withdrawn. DLA were unconvinced that this was reform not reduction and felt vulnerable. In a Big Society that is also a Good Society, the neediest are protected.
I suspect that I am telling you what you already know, and there is much here that I do not know in any detail myself. How can we in a church community like ours not retreat from it into our ecclesiastical towers, seeing it as either irrelevant to faith or too awkward to engage in, but use the position we have to foster a healthy debate, and a healthy society too – perhaps even, the kingdom of God.
Filed under: Sermons and Talks, Uncategorized

As far as we know, Jesus never served a curacy in the Church of England, though I am waiting for Dan Brown’s next novel with bated breath just in case new evidence has emerged. Jesus did, however, have a public ministry like you, and that ministry had a public beginning, just as yours has. The Spirit of God was seen to descend on him at his baptism, and then that same Spirit drove him into what I suppose we can call his ordination retreat. (A feature of the Spirit in the New Testament is that he helps all the right things to happen, but not necessarily in what we might think is the right order: this is the Morecombe-Wise doctrine of pneumatology with which I am sure you are familiar by now.)
Micah 6.6-8

