Next Wednesday I am speaking to a ladies' meeting in Manchester!  They have even altered their date to fit my availability, so I'd better be good.  I am speaking on Mary and Martha - Luke 10 and John 11.  Two very different tales that give us some different takes on these sisters.

Martha - you know her, careworn red hands, face lined from frowning, always busy cooking and cleaning.  Mary, beautiful, attentive, deeply spiritual... well that's the kind of images I grew up with anyway.  So which one is it who recognises Jesus as who he is...?  Why do Luke and John give us these seemingly contrasting portaits?  Are they, in fact, contrasting?  Or is it just that somewhere I have sold out to an unfair image of Martha (even if she's the one I feel more like, busy, practical and, when all's said and done, is making sure Jesus plus 12 hungry blokes and countless hangers on get the best dinner she can cook - yes, I know, that's Sunday School eisegesis or worse, but you get my drift).

Somewhere in what I share I want to affirm both Mary and Martha, and to recongise the times when it is right to be either or both of them, that actually they both live within each of us.  To note that sitting at Jesus' feet (the good child who knows all the answers in Sunday school) does not automatically lead to recognising him as Lord; to suggest that the busy, practical woman who at times puts family or community before church is not automatically less spiritual than the one who is there every week looking both gorgeous and suitably pious!

There's nothing radical or new here, and I owe a debt of gratitude to Stuart J for his amazing Mary and Martha sermon of a few years back, but I hope that my thoughts will say something to these 21st century women who meet for worship on a Wednesday afternoon and then scurry home to cook tea for husbands and families...

This Sunday's sermon will be based on the Emmaus Road story.  Given the length of the journey - some scholars say 3.5 miles, others 7 (depends on if it was a round trip distance that was recorded apparently) - what we get told by Luke is a very minimalist precis.  So here is where Sunday's sermon will go...

First of all, Jesus met Cleopas and friend where they were - on a journey, feeling lost, confused, bewildered, perplexed, stuck in their own little world.

Then, he let them tell their story.  He did not interrupt (so far as we are told) just let them tell it as it was for them.

Then, 'foolish and slow' comment not withstanding, he reminded them of ancient promises - we don't know what exactly, no one tells us.  The Moses story - the one they have just had a festival to commemorate - speaks of God's faithfulness of hope despite the oppression of slavery in Egypt.  The obvious prophecy Luke's gospel has Jesus quoting to refer to himself is one of hope and action (Luke 4: 18-19/Isaiah 61: 1 - 2).  Jesus doesn't ask them to 'Turn Take, Trust, Thank' or 'Admit, Believe, Confess' or put crowns rather than self on a chair, he offers them wonderful promises of a trustworthy God and a vision of a different world.

Then HE accepts THEIR invitation to share food - something utterly ordinary and accepting of them as they were.  In a very earthy and practical way, he is invited to be with them.  "Come and be part of our everyday life, we have something to offer you"

Only then, as they are doing something as ordinary as sharing a meal, do they realise who he is and race back to Jerusalem to tell the news to others.

It seems to me that this passage offers us lots of things...

• promises for when we find ourselves in Cleopas' place
• a reminder that we don't take Jesus with us into the world, Jesus turns up whenever and wherever he wants to, recognised or not
• a model for pastoral support - listening and offering hope (not advice or solutions!)
• a Jesus approach to evangelism - walking with people, earning their trust, entering their places, receiving from them what they can offer us, and being surprised by joy in the process as it is they, not us, who recongise Christ and take the news to others.

In many ways on Easter Sunday nothing changed - the Romans still occupied the land, people still got crucified, the Temple still functioned as before, violence and injustice continued - and yet everything changed for Cleopas and friend as they discovered a new way of seeing, a new way of walking into a future shaped by promises of hope and a love that was stronger than death.

Reflecting on the story has been helpful for me - challenging tempations to too much eisegesis (reading in) and interpretation and allowing myself to stand in the places of Cleopas and (dare I say it) Jesus as they walked together as Easter people in a Good Friday world.

It has been an odd Easter, and I have resisted the temptations (a) to dwell on what has miffed me (b) to criticise what I've experienced in services and (c) to post anything until my last commitment was complete.  There is a lot I could say - a lot that found its way into my paper (and now rarely used) journal but I want to post on one train of thought only.

On Friday evening I was channel hopping in search of something worth seeing and happened across the start of the repeat showing of the Manchester Passion.  I had loved it last year and thought it was worth seeing again; I was not disappointed.  Granted, I knew the ending and remembered much of the broadcast, but it was no less powerful.

I have always had a soft spot for Judas, and as he sang 'Heaven Knows I'm Miserable Now' the poignancy of his predicament touched something very deep within.  I don't do crying very often (like about once in ten years) but I found tears rolling down my cheeks as he sang.  Poor Judas, torn apart, feeling isolated, let down, bewildered, having agreed to something he already regretted... not a typical 'bad guy.'

Maybe some of what he was singing/expressing connected with some of the vulnerability and scariness of being an HMF minister in a church that is always precarious; maybe the emptiness echoed some of what I felt about this Easter - who knows.  Whatever it was, it got me thinking.

There are two key characters in the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus and Judas, and each of them acts in some way  vicariously for every person who ever lived.  This is not the place for deep discussions on atonement theology, but if in some way Jesus' death was vicarious, then so was Judas' betrayal.  If Jesus somehow stands in the place of 'fallen humanity' than so does Judas.  We have no right to judge him, for we are him.

Whether Judas hanged himself or whether his guts spontaneously spewed forth (both Biblical) I have no idea.  I feel for Judas, I really do.  Some how or other life became impossible after his betrayal of Jesus.  Tradition has it that he went to hell, scripture calls him a 'son of perdition' but when I think about him, recall how much Jesus loved him, I wonder.  I find that I want either (a) to be a universalist or (b) to embrace unreservedly the expression of the theology of the 'harrowing of hell' that sees the whole purpose of descent as to redeem those who were there.  I can't get to (a) otherwise I'm not sure what the point of the church is, and I have never studied (b) enough to fully appreciate its nuances.  Theology aside, I long, and have done for as many years as I can recall, one day to discover that in the end Judas was reconciled to Jesus, to God.  After all, there but for the grace of God go I.

Late on Saturday night I got an email from someone I'll call Jonathan.  He is a member of my church but has been working away at a Christian centre for almost two years.  Jonathan is gay.  Jonathan had (has) a hardline theology of gayness and has spent as long as I've known him trying to make himself straight.  Last night's email was not such a surprise, but it made me sad - after a long struggle it has become too much and faced with the choice 'God or Gay' he's decided to explore gay.  He is lonely, angry, sexually frustrated, deadly earnest, and horribly, horribly confused.  I am sad not because of the choice he's made (though I struggle with aspects of it) but because he feels he had to choose.

What should I do?  It's an issue where I have no neat answers and struggle to find a 'standpoint.' It's an issue where I accept the BU rules for ministers.  But I am Jonathan's pastor, not his judge, and, being female and straight aside, there but for the grace of God also go I.  I have tried to encourage him not to see it as 'either/or,' reminded him of evangelical networks that affirm a range of standpoints on human sexuality issues (he is terrified of liberalism), and assured him of my support whatever he decides.

Are Jonathan and Judas so very different?  Am I?  Are you?  Where does the balance between inclusiveness and anything goes lie? 

The last contact between Jesus and Judas was a kiss - how ironic that a first century greeting would be seen as 'gay' in our culture and age.  How ironic that love and intimacy should become so perverted, not by issues of sexuality but by intent.  How ironic that when I want to save Judas, I am called to stand beside Jonathan.

Not the Easter I anticipated.  Not a story of resurrection joy, but one of being in a potter's field trying to talk Judas down from the tree, of praying that the Good Shepherd will go right to the bottom of the ravine (Paul Fiddes at his best) to rescue the weak, shivering lamb.

The Easter story never ceases to amaze me; just when I think I have a clue, the pieces shift and the view changes - I have no more 'got it' than the first disciples who found crazy women telling them impossible things.  I still feel a little cheated that I didn't get to preach this year, but somehow, God has preached a sermon I needed to hear and then to share.

Please pray for Jonathan, and all the sad, bewildered, angry, frustrated, lost, alone, whatever-they-are Judas-like characters you know.  And may the peace of Christ dwell richly in your hearts and minds this Eastertide and forever more.

I often wonder about this, though I do take advantage of them, even today at the Fairtrade shop where the question seemed especially pointed.  "Buy one get one free on all Fairtrade Easter eggs" said the sign.  I would have bought two anyway, but I was left in a bit of a quandry about the 'rightness' of it.  Someone, somewhere, has to lose out in all this. 

The shop in Leicester is staffed mainly by volunteers, and I assume it is the shop, not the suppliers, who take the hit on the reduced income.  But is even that right?

A few years back I was preaching on Fairtrade Sunday and picked up this very theme - we all love bargains but is that fair for the shop floor retail staff, most of whom are on little over minimum wage, or the suppliers, who can, even in this country, make a loss on this kind of product (my erstwhile church secretary here works as production manager in a meat factory supplying Tescos, not withstanding some naivety and incompetence on their part, they regularly sell things for less than the cost price, made worse when these offers necessitate larger quantities).  We hear regularly the effect of supermarket pressure on local suppliers and small businesses, less often about the shelf stackers and till operators on just over £5 an hour.  The two for ones and three for twos have to be paid for somehow.

I don't have any answers to this, I'm too much of a coward to insist on paying for both of my Easter eggs, and there aren't any simple answers to any of it.  I guess that for Fairtrade outlets, the pressure to conform to western, consumerist mindsets is enormous - but it is concerning that such pressures might undermine the good it does if we are not watchful.

Still, the good thing is that I have now 'booked' a big box of sale or return Fairtrade goodies for the Dibley Pentecost Party taking place on 26th May from the very helpful people at Just (if only the Christian bookshops were as helpful...)

Well, according to Radio 2 at 6:20-ish this morning an unnamed supermarket had to have three versions of a press release before it was anywhere near ....

Version 1 - Easter is a celebration of Jesus birth

Version 2 - Easter is a celebration of Jesus' rebirth (to be fair you find this on lots of websites)

Version 3 - Easter is a celebration of Jesus' resurrection

It's a tad worrying if the PR companies employed by our supermarkets are really so clueless - but no more so than the countless churchgoers who complain about the secularisation of a pagan festival that the church took over (you, kind reader, of course know that Easter and oestrogen share the same root, that Oestere was a pagan fertility Godess whose festival conveniently occurred around the right time of year for marking Christ's Passion (Pasch)).

Now, must go and buy some theologically sound cold pastry-topped teacakes...