This blog provides a meditation on the Episcopal daily readings along with a headline from world news:

MARKETS FAIL; CAPITALISM DOOMED!

1st Corinthians 7:1-9

1. Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: ‘It is well for a man not to touch a woman.’ 2But because of cases of sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. 3The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. 5Do not deprive one another except perhaps by agreement for a set time, to devote yourselves to prayer, and then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 6This I say by way of concession, not of command. 7I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has a particular gift from God, one having one kind and another a different kind.

8 To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain unmarried as I am. 9But if they are not practising self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion.

his own wife....her own husband

For much of the history of Christianity it was assumed that the words about not touching a woman were Paul’s. As the editors of this translation indicate by their use of speech marks, it seems more likely to be a quotation from his Corinthian correspondents. If we guess that the trouble at Corinth was being caused by people who elevated knowledge over faith and spirit over body, denigration of sexuality is as much to be expected as permissiveness. If bodily things are of secondary importance one may either impose abstinence or permit license.

In any case, it’s clear that Paul is against abstinence at least as a rule for all Christians. He sees nothing wrong with the body or with sexual pleasure. Married partners have each willingly given their body to the other and should not deny each other sexually. He doesn’t exactly rhapsodise about the married state but seems to regard it as right and normal. For the sake (doubtless) of the church’s mission, or because he expects the imminent return of the Messiah, he would like more people to be unmarried, like him. (I guess he was a widower as he’s unlikely to have been a top Pharisee if he was single.)

Certainly nothing in the text justifies the Roman Catholic elevation of virginity over sexual experience, or indeed the imposition of celibacy on all priests. As results show, they should have heeded Paul’s down-to-earth wisdom: “because of cases of sexual immorality each man should have his own wife..”

Paul’s sobriety about sex makes a useful contrast with the explosion of sexual hysteria in contemporary UK society.

Matthew 13:44-52

44 ‘The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field, which someone found and hid; then in his joy he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field.

45 ‘Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant in search of fine pearls; 46on finding one pearl of great value, he went and sold all that he had and bought it.

47 ‘Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was thrown into the sea and caught fish of every kind; 48when it was full, they drew it ashore, sat down, and put the good into baskets but threw out the bad. 49So it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come out and separate the evil from the righteous 50and throw them into the furnace of fire, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

51 ‘Have you understood all this?’ They answered, ‘Yes.’ 52And he said to them, ‘Therefore every scribe who has been trained for the kingdom of heaven is like the master of a household who brings out of his treasure what is new and what is old.’ 

Matthew’s Jesus sums up his sermon on the mount with three parables. The first two are more or less identical. The rule of God, which Jesus has expounded in the sermon as a “better righteousness” and as an imitation of the very character of God, is so precious that whoever “finds” it will give up all his wealth to keep it. The “finding” sounds simple but it actually stands for the understanding faith of true disciples: “if God is like this and I can be like God, that’s better than anything in the world!” There’s the implication that if you don’t feel you want the kingdom more than all else, you haven’t found it yet.

The third parable is different. The rule of God is not concerned with exclusivity: it may attract all sorts of people and it’s nobody’s business to assess them till they’re finally “brought ashore.” Those who Jesus has asked to be “fishers of people” should not be over- concerned with the quality of their catch.

Matthew places these parables in this position because he wants his readers to know that the rule of God is unexpected and unearned treasure as well as the culmination of a lifetime’s seeking and is therefore seized with joy; but only some of those who seize it are prepared to pay the cost of keeping it.

Commercial wisdom says that it seems too good to be true, it probably is. Matthew speaks of the kingdom as beyond our best dreams but it costs, in T.S. Eliot’s phrase, not less than everything.