Where Everybody's Crazy

I'm trying to write a sermon on Luke 5:1-11 - Jesus calling Peter - for next Sunday. See, I was supposed to be having a weekend off in Tokyo next week, but, well, you know how it goes - Saturday afternoon will be spent at a conference in Yokohama, and then on Sunday I'll be preaching at Shonandai church. Shonandai is pastored by the Kawamuras, who were missionaries in Oxford and looked after me like parents while I was there in 2003-2005, before their mission retired them. When they asked me to preach, I could hardly say no. But then I'm preaching the week after at Nagahama anyway, so I'll use the same sermon...

Anyway, I was really surprised by Peter's reaction to Jesus' miracle. Most of the time the disciples, or anyone else, witness a miracle, they ask who Jesus is; when Peter witnesses a miracle, he asks who he is. And he declares that he is a sinful man. Suddenly, this big fisherman starts talking in religious jargon. "Sinful" is not a word that is a normal part of a fisherman's vocabulary. This is a theological word. Jesus starts talking about fish; Peter ends up talking about theology. As I said previously, if you want to talk to the fisherman about religion, you've first got to talk to him about fish. This is still, I think, a lesson for all missionaries.

But now Peter has got religion, what does he say? He says he is a "sinful" man. Sinfulness is an admission of guilt. This is a man with literally a serious guilty conscience. There is no connection between a miraculous catch of fish and Peter's sinfulness. The usual explanation is that Peter is in awe of Jesus' holiness. But I'm not convinced about that. Because you can't see holiness. Peter didn't see holiness. He saw fish. If you want to talk to the fisherman about religion, you've first got to talk to him about fish.

This wasn't the first miracle that Peter witnessed, either. Peter's mother-in-law got healed. (Lk 4; now that raises questions about Peter's wife during the rest of the Gospel, but let's not go there this time.) Why the confession of sin? Why now? I wonder what he's done. I wonder why Peter has a guilty conscience. Fishermen are pretty feisty characters. They work hard, they play hard. They probably drink hard, and generally live hard. My ancestors were fishermen. Sometimes it shows.

But anyway, what this got me thinking is that Jesus knew exactly what was needed to get Peter talking in theological terms. Jesus doesn't talk theology; Peter ends up talking theology. This was obviously Jesus' plan all along. First he prophesies over Peter when Andrew brings him for an interview; (Jn 1) then he heals Peter's mother-in-law; and now he is ordering Peter around on matters of fishing. He knows exactly what is needed to get Peter to recognise his own sin.

And this is really what caught my attention. Because there is a distinction between dealing with "felt needs" and giving "personalised attention", and we often mash the two together. There's a lot of emphasis on "felt needs" in evangelism these days. And I understand it. I'm fairly sympathetic to it. There's a great article in this edition of "Japan Harvest" about the felt needs of the Japanese. I know that Jesus can fulfill these. And I used to enjoy the sermons of Archbishop Kallistos of Diokleia, and one of his catchphrases was "if salvation is to be salvation, it must reach the point of human need". And he's right. If it doesn't satisfy us, it isn't salvation.

But that must be weighed against another quote, from William Sloane Coffin:

I don't see how you can attract folk to Jesus by appealing to their basic selfishness - "Jesus can fix everything that's wrong with you" - and end up offering anything like the self-less, self-denying faith of Jesus.

Jesus did not deal with felt needs. His concern was with getting Peter to acknowledge his sinfulness. Jesus did demonstrate personalised attention. He clearly had Peter in mind and knew how to bring him to a point of confession. But it seems like his sensitivity was not towards Peter's felt needs, but to Peter himself. Peter knew he was a sinful man, but that wasn't a problem. Jesus personalised his attention towards Peter and made it a problem.

The danger of the "felt needs" gospel is that we can alter the gospel to be whatever the individual needs. Jesus doesn't do this. His personalised attention is focussed on getting people to need whatever the gospel is.