Brief synopsis of the readings: Our first reading consists of a dialogue between Amaziah, the priest of Bethel, and Amos. Amaziah commands Amos to leave Bethel and return to his home in Judah and orders him to never prophecy again in Bethel. Amos protests that he is not a prophet or a prophet’s son but a herdsman and dresser of sycamore trees and that the Lord commanded him to prophesy to the people of Israel. Mark’s Gospel follows directly the Gospel from last week. Here Jesus sends out his disciples in pairs. He gave them authority over unclean spirits. He ordered them to take no food or money but only a walking staff, sandals, and one tunic. When they enter a place, stay until leaving. If a place does not welcome them, they are to shake the dust from their feet as testimony against them. They cast out demons and cured many who were sick.

In many ways these readings continue the discussion from last week. In the Old Testament a prophet is sent by God with a difficult message and in the Gospel, Jesus and his disciples proclaim the Kingdom of God.

But there are significant differences: Amos brings a different message than Ezekiel and Jesus’ disciples were much more successful than was Jesus.

Amos brings a different flavor to his writings. All prophets comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable, but Amos is full throated in telling the leaders in Israel that unless they start treating the poor better, they will be destroyed. In Chapter 5 God proclaims hatred of religious festivals and assemblies. Because of their unacceptable treatment of poor God will refuse burnt offerings and not listen to the music of their harps. Finally, Amos writes the phrase that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. took up: “Rather let justice surge like waters, and righteousness like an unfailing stream.”

God’s anger flows from how the wealthy oppress the poor; they tax from the poor’s need and use the money to make their lives more luxurious. They keep the poor in debt and use that as a way to enslave them.

In this reading the priest of Bethel (a religious figure of great importance) tries to smack down Amos. He doesn’t challenge Amos’ status as a prophet but claims that Amos has conspired against Israel by his words. In other words, Amos is committing treason.

But here’s where it gets interesting to me: while Amaziah doesn’t dispute Amos’ role as a prophet, Amos does. He tells Amaziah that he was no prophet. In other words “I didn’t ask for this job.” He goes on to say he never laid claim to be an intellectual or a leader. His jobs (herder and sycamore dresser) were the jobs of the common laborer.

This is a point that cannot be emphasized enough: the choice of who becomes a prophet is God’s alone. If you were blessed with a good intellect and came from a wealthy family, you had several advantages, and becoming a “learned man” (apologies to the intelligent, wealthy women at the time, but there was no way you were going to be listened to) was one of the fruits of those blessings. Amaziah was likely one of those men: born with all the advantages. I read a funny commentary that said Amaziah had blue blood and Amos had a blue collar.

But prophets are not chosen by resume or experience, or by family connections or intellectual prowess. Prophets are chosen by God and God alone, and we ignore their words at our own peril. Why did God chose people like Amos? We can speculate all we want, but in the final word, it’s none of our business. God has never found a need to explain.

It’s easy, perhaps too easy, to discount someone because they aren’t someone we would have chosen. We saw this last week when Jesus was ridiculed because he was one of the neighborhood kids and we see this with Amos who (ironically enough) was someone they didn’t know. Clearly God chooses by strengths we cannot see instead of resumes we can see.

But I find it fascinating that the Twelve in Mark’s Gospel were so successful. Any reading of the Gospels will tell you that Jesus’ first followers were not the apostles any of us would have chosen. They were stubborn, selfish, ambitious, and missed the mark more often than they hit it. And yet, for reasons I can’t figure out, they were the ones Jesus chose. He gave them the power to exorcise demons, a staff, a tunic, and each other. And it worked. They were successful beyond any predictable measure. This Gospel clearly foreshadows the success of the early church they would build after Jesus’ resurrection.

And so what do we learn from this today? Clearly we should pay attention to the those who preach the truth, even if they aren’t the ones we expect. As a matter of fact, if we can learn anything from these readings it’s this: Don’t listen to those who have money or power or influence and want you to believe that the future is best lived when they stay comfortable.

OK, I’ll admit that much as I’ve tried, I cannot preach about these readings apart from the 2016 Presidential elections. As we begin the process of choosing our next leaders we aren’t necessarily looking at the most experienced or who “deserves” to be elected, and that’s a good thing. But I fear we are giving unnecessary weight to those who are the wealthiest or those who attract the attention of the wealthiest.

Wealth is always going to be concerned with preserving those institutions that made or kept their wealth. And while the ability to acquire and preserve wealth does demand a skill set, it doesn’t necessarily translate into the role of servant leadership that our faith calls us to.

We are blessed to live in a democracy where our voice is heard. That gives us an advantage of large swaths of the world population and large eras of our history. We have a choice of who to listen to, and I hope we listen to the voices of the Amos’ and the apostles in these readings, and not to those who wish to preserve their wealth and power.