10/26/2014 ~ Twentieth Sunday after Pentecost ~ Thirtieth Sunday in Ordinary Time ~ (Proper 25) ~ Deuteronomy 34:1-12; Psalm 90:1-6, 13-17; Leviticus 19:1-2, 15-18; Psalm 1; 1 Thessalonians 2:1-8; Matthew 22:34-46.
Justice
“Do not be corrupt in administering justice; do not render an unjust judgment; do not show partiality to the poor or defer to the great; do not give honor to the great. Judge your neighbor with justice. Judge your neighbor with fairness.” — Leviticus 19:15
As has been true for the three years running, on Thursday last I offered an invocation and a benediction at the Annual Breakfast of the Chenango County Retired and Senior Volunteer Program. I should note that in the course of a year people gave more than 43,000 volunteer hours to many organizations such as the Classic Car Museum, Opportunities for Chenango, various food pantries and the Chenango County Historical Society.
These hours were registered with the RSVP program. That donated work was worth nearly one million dollars in terms of contributions.
At least five of our parishioners were in the breakfast crowd with more listed in the program. These folks might have noticed something a little different about me, something not too many church members have seen. For this occasion, I was wearing a Roman collar. I looked more like an Episcopal Priest than a Congregational Pastor.
And yes, I do own a Roman collar. I don’t often wear it. Generally, I use it only specific for public functions, for instance officiating at a funeral home memorial service.
More specifically, I use it when I think it’s appropriate to indicate I hold an office, probably a good idea when I am interacting with a group who do not know me well. Since I knew the people gathered at this breakfast would be very diverse, I felt wearing a Roman collar immediately identifies the pastoral office. (Slight pause.)
The Rev. Tamara Lebak is a pastor at very large church, All Souls Unitarian Church, in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Now, I just said some things which might shock we Easterners, sheltered as we are. That’s because we probably carry some preconceived notions about folks out west.
Of course, that there is a large church in Tulsa, Oklahoma might not surprise us. But that there is a large Unitarian Church probably does. That a woman is one of the pastors in Tulsa might also be a surprise. But that’s just Eastern prejudice.
Tamara decided to set a challenge for herself this year. The challenge was to spend a full year wearing a Roman collar whenever she is “on duty.” Needless to say, part of the challenge is just to be disciplined enough to wear the collar.
And also needless to say, since she is a woman who is a pastor in Tulsa, Oklahoma, her very appearance does gets some quizzical looks, which is the kind of reaction that feeds our Eastern prejudice. I should also note she has, through the course of this year, has written a blog about her experiences— Under the Collar in Oklahoma. [1]
I found her blog entry this week quite interesting. It’s not a comment about her experiences wearing a collar. It was a comment about the lectionary reading. (And yes, Unitarians— at least some of them— do pay attention to the lectionary.)
In noting one of the assigned readings for this week was Leviticus, Tamara admitted her relationship with this work has taken some hits over time. People determined to use passages from the book as cudgels have employed the various “Thou shalt not’s” found therein to bludgeon her.
She, however, realizes these “Thou shalt not’s” should never be taken literally. If anyone does take them literally, they then also need to realize Leviticus insists a crime which carries a extraordinarily severe punishment is eating shrimp wrapped in bacon.
In her blog Tamara said this passage we heard today has become one of her favorites. It’s clear both this passage and Leviticus in its entirety calls us to holiness.
She goes on to explain that, as a pastor, she works with people and shows them the so called Golden Rule often has good intentions but a poor impact. She does this by introducing people to the Platinum rule. The Platinum rule: do unto others as they would have you do unto them. You have that? As they would have you do unto them.
This Platinum rule makes a very large requirement on everyone, all parties. It requires knowing what others would like done unto them.
It, hence, also requires we teach others how to respect us. In other words, we all need to be curious about and seek to discover how others would like to be respected. And we should not start with an assumption that we know how others would like to be respected. (Slight pause.)
We find these words in the work Torah in the section known as Leviticus: “Do not be corrupt in administering justice; do not render an unjust judgment; do not show partiality to the poor or defer to the great; do not give honor to the great. Judge your neighbor with justice. Judge your neighbor with fairness.” (Slight pause.)
This passage begs many questions but prime among them is this: “what is justice?” More to the point and more specifically, the deeper question is not “what is human justice?” but “what is the justice of God?” How would God see justice and how would God have us see justice? (Slight pause.)
Part of what makes the issue of justice problematic is, largely, we only consider human justice. Human vision sees justice solely in terms of winners and losers.
Human vision, hence, sees justice only in terms of a game, something to be won or lost. Further, most people just don’t seem to comprehend that when (quote) “justice” is demanded, the goal of human justice is the same as the ultimate answer to any game: who wins; who loses. Put the other way around, human vision turns justice into a game— human vision turns justice into a game.
I would posit that God does not see justice in terms of a game— winners and losers. You see, with the justice God seeks, with perfect justice, winning and losing are immaterial.
The goal of the justice God seeks— the goal of the justice God seeks— is truth, not my vision of truth or not your vision of truth, but God’s vision of truth. When real truth, God’s truth, God’s justice is sought, picking a winner or picking a looser stops being a goal.
I would be the first to admit this is a very hard concept for most of us to grasp— that when real justice is sought determining a winner or a loser is not a goal. After all, isn’t life about who wins and who losses?
If you think that’s true, let me ask you this: does not everyone think God is on their side? But does God choose sides? Clearly that is not the claim we hear in Leviticus (quote): “...do not show partiality to the poor or defer to the great...” (Slight pause.)
In her blog the Rev. Lebak says this: “In lifting up both neighbor and stranger, what Leviticus seems to be lifting up is that you cannot simply stop the conversation with those like you. And you cannot simply stop the conversation with those you like.”
“So our call is to learn how to make mistakes and still stay connected to a person beyond any sense of respect or disrespect.” Connection is the goal.
To do that we must get our hands dirty. To do that we must tap into a sense of humility that says we, ourselves, were at one point strangers in a strange land and we were unaware of when we offended others even though our hearts were in a good place.
Lebak then says she wants to shout the good news of Leviticus from the rooftops because this is what we are being told: stay in relationship; speak from the heart. And is that not the holiest of places? Stay in relationship; speak from the heart: a holy place.
The church the Rev. Lebak serves has an interesting covenant. (Quote:) “Love is the spirit of this church; service is its law. This is our great covenant: to dwell together in peace, to seek the truth in love, to help one another.” [2] (Slight pause.)
I want to note whether it’s Tamara wearing a collar or me wearing a collar, some might say it’s a challenging exercise. You see, the collar makes you stand out, makes you a mark. It also makes a claim about what you strive to do, who you aspire to be.
So, perhaps the real question for us, for you and for me, is simple. Can we be recognized by those around us because we observe a covenant of holiness, a covenant of love to which God calls us without being set apart by an item of clothing which designates an office?
Indeed, I think we are called to not just a covenant of holiness and love. We are called to the responsibilities of an office of holiness and love. What is that office? This is the office sometimes referred to as the priesthood of all believers. And it is our calling. Amen.
ENDPIECE— It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Congregational Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “I want to leave you with two quotes today. The first is Frederick Buechner (quote:) ‘Justice is the grammar of things; mercy is the poetry.’ The second is from Thomas Aquinas (quote:) ‘The work of divine justice always presupposes the work of mercy, and is based on it.’ Why is the reading about covenant and holiness? Justice presupposes mercy.”
BENEDICTION: God sends us into the world ready and equipped. God is with us each day and every day. We can trust God Whose love is steadfast and sure. Let us commit to doing God’s will and God’s work. And may God’s presence be with us this day and forevermore. Amen.
[1] http://underthecollarinoklahoma.blogspot.com/
[2] http://www.allsoulschurch.org/
Monday, October 27, 2014
SERMON ~ 10/19/2014 ~ “Examples”
10/19/2014 ~ Nineteenth Sunday after Pentecost ~ Twenty-ninth Sunday in Ordinary Time ~ (Proper 24) Exodus 33:12-23; Psalm 99; Isaiah 45:1-7; Psalm 96:1-9, (10-13); 1 Thessalonians 1:1-10; Matthew 22:15-22 ~ Mr. Al Fedak on the Organ.
Examples
“...you, in your turn, became imitators of us, followed the example set by us and by Jesus— receiving the Word in spite of great trials and persecution with the joy which comes from the Holy Spirit. In this way you became an example, a model, to all the believers in Macedonia and in Achaia.” — 1 Thessalonians 1:6-7.
Most of you know Bonnie and I had a long distance relationship when we were courting. She lived in Maine. I lived in New York City. She was a photographer on a newspaper. I did back office work in Wall Street firms.
When we decided to get hitched Bonnie was not real keen on living in the Big Apple, so I took the leap. I moved to Maine. That move made sense given the surface appearances of our job situations.
Wall Street had just gone through a serious downturn— the more things change... so Bonnie actually had a more stable employment situation. I never regretted the move, but perhaps we should have also seen a job at a newspaper as less than stable.
Bonnie was laid off in a ten percent cut back at the paper three years after we were married. Newspapers were not stable then. Newspapers are really not stable now.
I was reminded of that industry instability because I recently read an article from the Brookings Institute. It told a story about a vice president of The Washington Post who paid a visit to the garage workshop of Sergey Brin and Larry Page, two young Silicon Valley entrepreneurs looking for backers.
The purpose of the visit was to determine if the paper should invest in the new company these two had. The Post never put a dime in it. A couple of months later that company adopted a new name... Google.
The issue tackled by the article was simple. People living through a time of revolutionary change usually fail to grasp what’s going on around them.
The Washington Post and a lot of other newspapers would be in better shape had they invested in online ventures early. But big, slow-moving organizations steeped in traditional ways have a hard time accurately foreseeing next stages.
So, what really happens in the newspaper business? How does it work? Rumor to the contrary, newspapers are not in the business of delivering news. They make money with advertising. They are in the advertising business. Advertising is now done online.
In fact, CBS has announced you will be able to buy a subscription to all network programs to be delivered, watched, absorbed online. The cost is six dollars a month.
Why? Rumor to the contrary, CBS is not in the business of delivering entertainment. CBS is in the business of delivering advertising. And advertising is now done online.
So, how long has it taken any broadcast network to establish video online? CBS is the first. (Slight pause.) To reiterate, people living through a time of revolutionary change usually fail to grasp what’s going on around them. (Slight pause.)
We find these words in the work known as the Letter to the Church in Thessalonika, commonly called First Thessalonians. “...you, in turn, became imitators of us, followed the example set by us and by Jesus— receiving the Word in spite of great trials and persecution with the joy which comes from the Holy Spirit. In this way you became an example, a model, to all the believers in Macedonia and in Achaia.” (Slight pause.)
Scholars are in agreement about this. First Thessalonians is the earliest work of Paul. Paul is the earliest writer recorded in the New Testament.
Hence, I want to draw your attention to the first words in this passage, the first words of the earliest work in the New Testament. (Quote:) “From Paul, Silvanus and Timothy, to the people of the church in Thessalonika...” (Slight pause.)
When this passage was introduced, this was said. “Paul depicts an evangelism different from the conventional image of a unilateral action by an evangelist on a receptive yet passive audience. Here evangelism involves the interaction of Paul and co-workers with the Thessalonians, an interaction that leaves both sides changed.”
Let me unpack that a little for you. When we hear the word evangelism today many of us immediately picture someone asking, “Are you saved?” While that’s a caricature, a comic exaggeration, in terms of depicting our culture it’s also fairly accurate.
And, of course, there’s a logical problem with the question, “Are you saved.” The question is about the person asking it.
You see, if you’re the one asking that question, not the one of whom the question is being asked, you are simply projecting your doubt that “yes” could be the answer, should be the answer. Put another way, if you’re the one asking that question, your question illustrates that you— in a tacit way— doubt God might be alive, be real, be loving.
Let me put that another way yet again. “Are you saved?” is an individualistic question, a self-centered question, a question which has no relationship to the possibility that there is a cooperative community of faith to which God calls humanity. It is a question about you, as an individual, and thereby the question excludes community. (Slight pause.)
Paul is quite clear in the opening words of this letter. The Apostle is not acting alone. Paul is working with others— in this case Paul names Silvanus and Timothy. Later Paul insists the people, the whole church in Thessalonika are an example of (quote:) “the joy which comes from the Holy Spirit.”
And in this text Paul invites others to the work of the Dominion of God. What’s clear is the work of God, the call of God, is a call to community. (Slight pause.)
Biblical scholar John Dominic Crossan makes an interesting comparison between the theology of John the Baptizer and Jesus. Crossan says based on the evidence in Scripture John claims the eschaton, the end times, happen when we meet God face to face.
Jesus, on the other hand, claims the Dominion of God is near, the Dominion of God is at hand, the Dominion of God needs to be lived into— now. This now is the urgency of now the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. so eloquently addressed.
Indeed, a Dominion at hand it is an invitation to community. A Dominion at hand is an invitation to collaboration, each according to their gifts as Paul says elsewhere.
Further, a Dominion at hand invites cooperation. Why? It’s a given that no one of us alone can fully accomplish the work of the Dominion on our own. A Dominion at hand says we are all in this together.
Crossan calls this kind of end times theology to which Jesus invites us collaborative eschatology— cooperation with God. And if the work of the Dominion is, in fact, at hand and it cannot be accomplished by an individual. The work of the Dominion is accomplished only when we form community and work cooperatively with God and with one another. (Slight pause.)
That bring us back to the idea that people living through a time of revolutionary change usually fail to grasp what’s going on around them. I want to suggest the modern revolution we face is we are seeing all kinds collaboration in ways we have never seen before.
Put another way, can you say “Facebook?” Just like the Newspaper business is not about delivering the news, Facebook is not about technology.
Facebook is about forming community. Our young people realize this. They realized it so much and so quickly they’ve moved on to Twitter, Instagram, etc., etc., etc. And many of them have left Facebook behind.
Therefore, I want to suggest we, the church, are well positioned to be on the edge of change. The question for us is will we be a big, slow-moving organization steeped in traditional ways and, therefore, have a hard time seeing what’s going on around us. Or will we heed the call of the Gospel and fully engage in cooperation, fully engage in community? Amen.
10/10/2014
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, New York
ENDPIECE— It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Congregational Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “Working in community has a problem. It’s a problem with which American culture is not comfortable. Community is messy, often not well organized, not efficient. Episcopal historian and theologian Diana Butler Bass says this about efficiency: ‘Efficiency is not innovation. Hurting people will not bring about the church of the future.’ Indeed, I think a part of the Christian message is this: community means innovation because community is collaborative. Hence, by definition community works toward the future church. Indeed, community is the future church.”
BENEDICTION: We have gathered, not just as a community, but as a community of faith. Let us respond to God, who is the true reality, in all that we are and say and do. Let the Holy Spirit dwell among us and may the peace of God which surpasses our understanding be with us this day and forever more. Amen.
Examples
“...you, in your turn, became imitators of us, followed the example set by us and by Jesus— receiving the Word in spite of great trials and persecution with the joy which comes from the Holy Spirit. In this way you became an example, a model, to all the believers in Macedonia and in Achaia.” — 1 Thessalonians 1:6-7.
Most of you know Bonnie and I had a long distance relationship when we were courting. She lived in Maine. I lived in New York City. She was a photographer on a newspaper. I did back office work in Wall Street firms.
When we decided to get hitched Bonnie was not real keen on living in the Big Apple, so I took the leap. I moved to Maine. That move made sense given the surface appearances of our job situations.
Wall Street had just gone through a serious downturn— the more things change... so Bonnie actually had a more stable employment situation. I never regretted the move, but perhaps we should have also seen a job at a newspaper as less than stable.
Bonnie was laid off in a ten percent cut back at the paper three years after we were married. Newspapers were not stable then. Newspapers are really not stable now.
I was reminded of that industry instability because I recently read an article from the Brookings Institute. It told a story about a vice president of The Washington Post who paid a visit to the garage workshop of Sergey Brin and Larry Page, two young Silicon Valley entrepreneurs looking for backers.
The purpose of the visit was to determine if the paper should invest in the new company these two had. The Post never put a dime in it. A couple of months later that company adopted a new name... Google.
The issue tackled by the article was simple. People living through a time of revolutionary change usually fail to grasp what’s going on around them.
The Washington Post and a lot of other newspapers would be in better shape had they invested in online ventures early. But big, slow-moving organizations steeped in traditional ways have a hard time accurately foreseeing next stages.
So, what really happens in the newspaper business? How does it work? Rumor to the contrary, newspapers are not in the business of delivering news. They make money with advertising. They are in the advertising business. Advertising is now done online.
In fact, CBS has announced you will be able to buy a subscription to all network programs to be delivered, watched, absorbed online. The cost is six dollars a month.
Why? Rumor to the contrary, CBS is not in the business of delivering entertainment. CBS is in the business of delivering advertising. And advertising is now done online.
So, how long has it taken any broadcast network to establish video online? CBS is the first. (Slight pause.) To reiterate, people living through a time of revolutionary change usually fail to grasp what’s going on around them. (Slight pause.)
We find these words in the work known as the Letter to the Church in Thessalonika, commonly called First Thessalonians. “...you, in turn, became imitators of us, followed the example set by us and by Jesus— receiving the Word in spite of great trials and persecution with the joy which comes from the Holy Spirit. In this way you became an example, a model, to all the believers in Macedonia and in Achaia.” (Slight pause.)
Scholars are in agreement about this. First Thessalonians is the earliest work of Paul. Paul is the earliest writer recorded in the New Testament.
Hence, I want to draw your attention to the first words in this passage, the first words of the earliest work in the New Testament. (Quote:) “From Paul, Silvanus and Timothy, to the people of the church in Thessalonika...” (Slight pause.)
When this passage was introduced, this was said. “Paul depicts an evangelism different from the conventional image of a unilateral action by an evangelist on a receptive yet passive audience. Here evangelism involves the interaction of Paul and co-workers with the Thessalonians, an interaction that leaves both sides changed.”
Let me unpack that a little for you. When we hear the word evangelism today many of us immediately picture someone asking, “Are you saved?” While that’s a caricature, a comic exaggeration, in terms of depicting our culture it’s also fairly accurate.
And, of course, there’s a logical problem with the question, “Are you saved.” The question is about the person asking it.
You see, if you’re the one asking that question, not the one of whom the question is being asked, you are simply projecting your doubt that “yes” could be the answer, should be the answer. Put another way, if you’re the one asking that question, your question illustrates that you— in a tacit way— doubt God might be alive, be real, be loving.
Let me put that another way yet again. “Are you saved?” is an individualistic question, a self-centered question, a question which has no relationship to the possibility that there is a cooperative community of faith to which God calls humanity. It is a question about you, as an individual, and thereby the question excludes community. (Slight pause.)
Paul is quite clear in the opening words of this letter. The Apostle is not acting alone. Paul is working with others— in this case Paul names Silvanus and Timothy. Later Paul insists the people, the whole church in Thessalonika are an example of (quote:) “the joy which comes from the Holy Spirit.”
And in this text Paul invites others to the work of the Dominion of God. What’s clear is the work of God, the call of God, is a call to community. (Slight pause.)
Biblical scholar John Dominic Crossan makes an interesting comparison between the theology of John the Baptizer and Jesus. Crossan says based on the evidence in Scripture John claims the eschaton, the end times, happen when we meet God face to face.
Jesus, on the other hand, claims the Dominion of God is near, the Dominion of God is at hand, the Dominion of God needs to be lived into— now. This now is the urgency of now the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. so eloquently addressed.
Indeed, a Dominion at hand it is an invitation to community. A Dominion at hand is an invitation to collaboration, each according to their gifts as Paul says elsewhere.
Further, a Dominion at hand invites cooperation. Why? It’s a given that no one of us alone can fully accomplish the work of the Dominion on our own. A Dominion at hand says we are all in this together.
Crossan calls this kind of end times theology to which Jesus invites us collaborative eschatology— cooperation with God. And if the work of the Dominion is, in fact, at hand and it cannot be accomplished by an individual. The work of the Dominion is accomplished only when we form community and work cooperatively with God and with one another. (Slight pause.)
That bring us back to the idea that people living through a time of revolutionary change usually fail to grasp what’s going on around them. I want to suggest the modern revolution we face is we are seeing all kinds collaboration in ways we have never seen before.
Put another way, can you say “Facebook?” Just like the Newspaper business is not about delivering the news, Facebook is not about technology.
Facebook is about forming community. Our young people realize this. They realized it so much and so quickly they’ve moved on to Twitter, Instagram, etc., etc., etc. And many of them have left Facebook behind.
Therefore, I want to suggest we, the church, are well positioned to be on the edge of change. The question for us is will we be a big, slow-moving organization steeped in traditional ways and, therefore, have a hard time seeing what’s going on around us. Or will we heed the call of the Gospel and fully engage in cooperation, fully engage in community? Amen.
10/10/2014
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, New York
ENDPIECE— It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Congregational Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “Working in community has a problem. It’s a problem with which American culture is not comfortable. Community is messy, often not well organized, not efficient. Episcopal historian and theologian Diana Butler Bass says this about efficiency: ‘Efficiency is not innovation. Hurting people will not bring about the church of the future.’ Indeed, I think a part of the Christian message is this: community means innovation because community is collaborative. Hence, by definition community works toward the future church. Indeed, community is the future church.”
BENEDICTION: We have gathered, not just as a community, but as a community of faith. Let us respond to God, who is the true reality, in all that we are and say and do. Let the Holy Spirit dwell among us and may the peace of God which surpasses our understanding be with us this day and forever more. Amen.
SERMON ~ Fall Meeting of the Susquehanna Association ~ “A Plethora of Pachyderms?”
Fall Meeting of the Susquehanna Association ~ Luke 10:1-11 [ILV]
A Plethora of Pachyderms?
“...Jesus appointed seventy-two others and sent them on ahead in pairs to every town and place the Rabbi intended to visit...” — Luke 10:1.
You may have noticed the title of my comments today: A Plethora of Pachyderms. To unpack that just a smidge, when we don’t talk about something it’s said, “There’s an elephant in the room.” If there are at least several elephants, perhaps it’s a plethora of pachyderms.
So, let me name one elephant, probably often mentioned in church parking lots but not too often mentioned inside the walls of our meeting houses. (Slight pause.) Have you heard? The church is dying.
Well, here’s what I have to say about that: poppycock! The church is not dying. Not even close. If the Dark Ages couldn’t kill the church, it is the height of egocentricity to think we can!
But let me offer some explanation concerning numbers. If you told someone who worked on Madison Avenue in advertising ‘the church is dying’ and then named any church in upstate New York as a larger proof the church is dying, the response you would get out of that person who works in advertising would be... laughter.
Why? People who work in adverting know demographics. Upstate New York, like many other rural areas, is losing population. So, when it comes to numbers, one church, a specific church, your church, my church, is not the issue. Indeed, church growth can often be seen in city areas and in areas called exurbs, areas just outside of suburbs.
And while this is a generality, it’s broadly true: census data tells us rural areas and suburbs are losing population. Exurbs and cities are gaining. Further— and we don’t often pay attention to this— a majority of Main Line churches are in rural areas.
In short, it’s mathematically inaccurate if not mathematically incompetent too, to separate church population from where churches are located. Indeed, on what locations do leaders tend to concentrate when planting churches today? Cities and exurbs.
But let’s set that aside and talk about New Testament times. Why? The New Testament can address another pachyderm who roams around the church. And this long-snouted beast also deals with demographics— New Testament demographics.
This is a given: in antiquity ninety percent of the population of the Mediterranean basin lived in what you and I would call slavery. And less than five percent of the population was literate.
Now, Jews and Christians are called “people of the book” both in ancient times and today. Also there is some clear Scriptural evidence Jesus could both read and write.
Hence and by definition, two statements can be made. Those who were literate, that group of less than five percent, offered leadership and were the ones deeply involved in Judaism and Christianity. Jesus was among those in that less five percent group.
To be clear, I am not coming close to saying anything like ‘all those in that era who could not read and write were banned from being people of the book.’ I am quite sure they were included. I am inviting us to focus on the reality of the demographics of ancient times and how they worked and to think about that.
One more item rarely discussed in the church today about New Testament times is the economic system active then. Biblical scholar John Dominic Crossan uses this label for the economic system found in that era: “Domination.” It was a system of Domination.
So ten percent lived off the work and the sweat of ninety percent. Once we label the economic system in those times as domination, I think it becomes easier to envision and comprehend a population of ninety percent enslaved and ninety-five percent illiterate.
There is another pachyderm from antiquity that needs to be addressed. Once again, this has to do with demographics.
Paul wrote letters to different locations in the Mediterranean Basin— a Letter to the Church in Thessalonika, a Letter to the Church in Rome, etc., etc., etc. What did these churches look like? How large were they?
It’s unlikely any of them had more than fifty people. Why do I say that? We believe those churches met in people’s houses. Even among the elite, very few had a house large enough to hold a meeting of more than fifty. These churches were very small.
Further, scholars tell us that by the year 100 of the Common Era— 70 years after the Resurrection event— the number of Christians in the entire Mediterranean basin was less than 10,000. Christianity was not exactly spreading like wild fire. (Slight pause.)
Well, Walt Disney told us elephants could fly... but I’m not so sure. You see, there’s another long snouted mammal, a Dumbo, flying around these days: when the American Revolution happened this was a Christian country; most people were Christians.
Well, that depends on definitions. If by Christian we mean church members, it would be hard to prove most people were Christians. You see, in 1776 the percentage of the population who were members of a church, any church, was seventeen percent.
Indeed, this church, a Congregational Church, and the Baptist Church across the park from us were both founded in 1814 and celebrate our 200th year in 2014. This church started with 14 members. The Baptists started with a similar number. So, it’s quite safe to say together the total number of church members, even after a year or two, was less than 50.
Our church historian, Patricia Evans, is also the Chenango County Historian. Pat tells me in the 1810 census— four years before these churches were founded— in the 1810 census the total population of Norwich was 2,550. And it probably went up in those four years between that point and when the churches were founded.
Well, this math is easy. If we go with 50 or less as membership and if we go with 2,550 in the area, less than two percent of the population here in Norwich were church members in 1814.
All this brings me back to the passage from Luke. (Quote:) “...Jesus appointed seventy-two others and sent them on ahead in pairs to every town and place the Rabbi intended to visit...” (Slight pause.)
I want to point out two things: first, when these disciples headed down the road into these towns, what did that world look like? What did their world look like? Would they have been discouraged? Would they have said their church is dying? (Slight pause.)
The next, I want to point out is the so called First Great Awakening was a religious revival in America. It happened between the 1730s and the 1750s. One preacher who gained notoriety at that point was George Whitefield. Large crowds often gathered to hear Whitefield preach.
But given the numbers I mentioned earlier, a minority of the population were church members, a fairly small minority. So how was it Whitefiled got crowds? This preacher had a secret.
The secret was to follow the example of Jesus. As much as a year before Whitefield was scheduled to preach in a town, disciples would go to that town. Flyers would be printed up and distributed.
The people who did this advanced work would do their best to gather groups and encourage interest. Jesus did the same. Jesus sent people to prepare the way.
That raises up another pachyderm. We tend to believe this maxim: “If you build it, they will come.”
The director of a non-profit in Norwich recently said to me that may have been true once (although he doubted it). But this, he said, is true: you need to go out, you need to be there, you need to be with the people you want to reach.
Some will come back; some won’t. But it’s not about you. It’s about the place at which people you meet are in their lives. If they listen, that also is about the place at which they are in their lives. If they don’t listen, that also is about the place at which they are in their lives.
This brings me to the last elephant. Work in the vineyard is hard. Work in the vineyard involves decades of effort, sometimes with little reward. Which is to say we who are involved in church work need to name that. This is hard work.
Why would I say that? When the seventy two were commissioned this is what was said: “Be on your way. And remember, I am sending you out as lambs in the midst of wolves. Do not carry a walking stick or knapsack; wear no sandals;...” Amen.
ENDPIECE: Biblical scholar said Nicholas Thomas Wright says this: New Testament times are just like today. Everybody believed in God. Few people took it seriously.
BENEDICTION: Redeemer Who sustains us, visit Your people; pour out Your courage upon us, that we may hurry to make welcome all people not only in our concern for others, but by serving them generously and faithfully in Your name.
A Plethora of Pachyderms?
“...Jesus appointed seventy-two others and sent them on ahead in pairs to every town and place the Rabbi intended to visit...” — Luke 10:1.
You may have noticed the title of my comments today: A Plethora of Pachyderms. To unpack that just a smidge, when we don’t talk about something it’s said, “There’s an elephant in the room.” If there are at least several elephants, perhaps it’s a plethora of pachyderms.
So, let me name one elephant, probably often mentioned in church parking lots but not too often mentioned inside the walls of our meeting houses. (Slight pause.) Have you heard? The church is dying.
Well, here’s what I have to say about that: poppycock! The church is not dying. Not even close. If the Dark Ages couldn’t kill the church, it is the height of egocentricity to think we can!
But let me offer some explanation concerning numbers. If you told someone who worked on Madison Avenue in advertising ‘the church is dying’ and then named any church in upstate New York as a larger proof the church is dying, the response you would get out of that person who works in advertising would be... laughter.
Why? People who work in adverting know demographics. Upstate New York, like many other rural areas, is losing population. So, when it comes to numbers, one church, a specific church, your church, my church, is not the issue. Indeed, church growth can often be seen in city areas and in areas called exurbs, areas just outside of suburbs.
And while this is a generality, it’s broadly true: census data tells us rural areas and suburbs are losing population. Exurbs and cities are gaining. Further— and we don’t often pay attention to this— a majority of Main Line churches are in rural areas.
In short, it’s mathematically inaccurate if not mathematically incompetent too, to separate church population from where churches are located. Indeed, on what locations do leaders tend to concentrate when planting churches today? Cities and exurbs.
But let’s set that aside and talk about New Testament times. Why? The New Testament can address another pachyderm who roams around the church. And this long-snouted beast also deals with demographics— New Testament demographics.
This is a given: in antiquity ninety percent of the population of the Mediterranean basin lived in what you and I would call slavery. And less than five percent of the population was literate.
Now, Jews and Christians are called “people of the book” both in ancient times and today. Also there is some clear Scriptural evidence Jesus could both read and write.
Hence and by definition, two statements can be made. Those who were literate, that group of less than five percent, offered leadership and were the ones deeply involved in Judaism and Christianity. Jesus was among those in that less five percent group.
To be clear, I am not coming close to saying anything like ‘all those in that era who could not read and write were banned from being people of the book.’ I am quite sure they were included. I am inviting us to focus on the reality of the demographics of ancient times and how they worked and to think about that.
One more item rarely discussed in the church today about New Testament times is the economic system active then. Biblical scholar John Dominic Crossan uses this label for the economic system found in that era: “Domination.” It was a system of Domination.
So ten percent lived off the work and the sweat of ninety percent. Once we label the economic system in those times as domination, I think it becomes easier to envision and comprehend a population of ninety percent enslaved and ninety-five percent illiterate.
There is another pachyderm from antiquity that needs to be addressed. Once again, this has to do with demographics.
Paul wrote letters to different locations in the Mediterranean Basin— a Letter to the Church in Thessalonika, a Letter to the Church in Rome, etc., etc., etc. What did these churches look like? How large were they?
It’s unlikely any of them had more than fifty people. Why do I say that? We believe those churches met in people’s houses. Even among the elite, very few had a house large enough to hold a meeting of more than fifty. These churches were very small.
Further, scholars tell us that by the year 100 of the Common Era— 70 years after the Resurrection event— the number of Christians in the entire Mediterranean basin was less than 10,000. Christianity was not exactly spreading like wild fire. (Slight pause.)
Well, Walt Disney told us elephants could fly... but I’m not so sure. You see, there’s another long snouted mammal, a Dumbo, flying around these days: when the American Revolution happened this was a Christian country; most people were Christians.
Well, that depends on definitions. If by Christian we mean church members, it would be hard to prove most people were Christians. You see, in 1776 the percentage of the population who were members of a church, any church, was seventeen percent.
Indeed, this church, a Congregational Church, and the Baptist Church across the park from us were both founded in 1814 and celebrate our 200th year in 2014. This church started with 14 members. The Baptists started with a similar number. So, it’s quite safe to say together the total number of church members, even after a year or two, was less than 50.
Our church historian, Patricia Evans, is also the Chenango County Historian. Pat tells me in the 1810 census— four years before these churches were founded— in the 1810 census the total population of Norwich was 2,550. And it probably went up in those four years between that point and when the churches were founded.
Well, this math is easy. If we go with 50 or less as membership and if we go with 2,550 in the area, less than two percent of the population here in Norwich were church members in 1814.
All this brings me back to the passage from Luke. (Quote:) “...Jesus appointed seventy-two others and sent them on ahead in pairs to every town and place the Rabbi intended to visit...” (Slight pause.)
I want to point out two things: first, when these disciples headed down the road into these towns, what did that world look like? What did their world look like? Would they have been discouraged? Would they have said their church is dying? (Slight pause.)
The next, I want to point out is the so called First Great Awakening was a religious revival in America. It happened between the 1730s and the 1750s. One preacher who gained notoriety at that point was George Whitefield. Large crowds often gathered to hear Whitefield preach.
But given the numbers I mentioned earlier, a minority of the population were church members, a fairly small minority. So how was it Whitefiled got crowds? This preacher had a secret.
The secret was to follow the example of Jesus. As much as a year before Whitefield was scheduled to preach in a town, disciples would go to that town. Flyers would be printed up and distributed.
The people who did this advanced work would do their best to gather groups and encourage interest. Jesus did the same. Jesus sent people to prepare the way.
That raises up another pachyderm. We tend to believe this maxim: “If you build it, they will come.”
The director of a non-profit in Norwich recently said to me that may have been true once (although he doubted it). But this, he said, is true: you need to go out, you need to be there, you need to be with the people you want to reach.
Some will come back; some won’t. But it’s not about you. It’s about the place at which people you meet are in their lives. If they listen, that also is about the place at which they are in their lives. If they don’t listen, that also is about the place at which they are in their lives.
This brings me to the last elephant. Work in the vineyard is hard. Work in the vineyard involves decades of effort, sometimes with little reward. Which is to say we who are involved in church work need to name that. This is hard work.
Why would I say that? When the seventy two were commissioned this is what was said: “Be on your way. And remember, I am sending you out as lambs in the midst of wolves. Do not carry a walking stick or knapsack; wear no sandals;...” Amen.
ENDPIECE: Biblical scholar said Nicholas Thomas Wright says this: New Testament times are just like today. Everybody believed in God. Few people took it seriously.
BENEDICTION: Redeemer Who sustains us, visit Your people; pour out Your courage upon us, that we may hurry to make welcome all people not only in our concern for others, but by serving them generously and faithfully in Your name.
Sunday, October 12, 2014
SERMON ~ 10/12/2014 ~ “My Way or the Highway”
10/12/2014 ~ Eighteenth Sunday after Pentecost ~ 28th Sunday in Ordinary Time ~ (Proper 23) ~ Exodus 32:1-14; Psalm 106:1-6, 19-23; Isaiah 25:1-9; Psalm 23; Philippians 4:1-9; Matthew 22:1-14 ~ Columbus Day/Indigenous Peoples Day on the Secular Calendar.
“When the people saw that a long time had elapsed and Moses had not come down from the mountain, many of them gathered around Aaron, and said, ‘Come, make gods for us, who shall go before us, who will lead us. We need this to be done because we do not know what has happened, what has become of this Moses, who brought us up out of the land of Egypt.’” — Exodus 32:1b
What I am about to relate is a scene from a move. The name of that flick does not matter particularly since the scene is a pretty standard one that gets played out over and over and over in different films. I, therefore, suspect most of you will recognize this as a theme rather than a scene.
Here’s the set up: two characters face a dangerous situation. The dialogue runs like this. (The pastor changes voice registers on alternating lines to indicate the two characters.)
(1) You’re scared, right?
(2) Maybe. Well, yeah.
(1) You see, the way this works is, you do the thing you’re scared of. And it’s only after its done that you get the courage to do it. The courage happens after you do it, not before. You got that?
(2) I guess so. But that’s stupid. It should be the other way around. You need to have courage or to get courage from someplace before you do something, don’t you think?
(1) You got that right. But that’s not the way it works in the real world. It works the other way around. I’ve never known it to work any other way. First ya gotta do it. [1] (Slight pause.)
My guess is most of us do not particularly like change. To be blunt, we are afraid of change. And to face change takes courage and since courage is available only in a rear view mirror we try to hang on to what’s familiar.
Frankly, I think it is good to remember the courage to face change and to deal with change is not usually something one acquires beforehand. Courage happens after the fact. (Slight pause.)
Now not this Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, but the following Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, I shall be on the Clergy Retreat of the New York Conference. Well, this may sound a bit boring but it is a description of what the retreat is about.
(Quote:) “During the retreat, participants will receive feedback on their own psychological type and their levels of stress compared to others. Psychological type theory will be reviewed and recent research on type and stress with various clergy groups... will be presented. Then participants will apply type theory to church-related stressful situations...” (Slight pause.)
To help participants prepare, we had to fill out a survey about stress in our lives. What filling out a survey about stress made me realize is any aspect of stress, any stress filled situation, can only be measured in comparison to other stress-filled situations.
So, let me draw a comparison for you. Which is more stressful: spending 14 months in a war zone, as I did, or being a pastor? Which is more stressful: while in said war zone being blown out of bed by incoming a couple of times, which happened to me, or being a pastor?
I’m sure you catch the drift. Stress can only be measure in terms of comparisons. Now, I am not saying the work of a pastor fails to be stressful. It is. Indeed, a number of people have said to me, “Oooo— I’m glad I don’t have your job.”
Well, that brings me to a merger of topics: stress and church and change. Most of us realize the church is changing. (Slight pause.)
No, let me correct that. The church is changing... again. (Slight pause.) No, let me correct that. The church is not just changing and the church is not just changing again. The church is about change. And change... is... stressful— change... is... stressful. (Slight pause.)
We find these words in Tanakh in the section known as the Torah in the work known as Exodus: “When the people saw that a long time had elapsed and Moses had not come down from the mountain, many of them gathered around Aaron, and said, ‘Come, make gods for us, who shall go before us, who will lead us. We need this done because we do not know what has happened, what has become of this Moses, who brought us up out of the land of Egypt.’” (Slight pause.)
With some interpretation, let me give you a shorthand version as to where in the story of Exodus this passage happens. The Israelites have crossed the Sea of Reeds. They are now wandering around in the wilderness near Mount Sinai.
Moses has already brought the tablets to the people and gone back to the mountain. The people have been and are nervous. They did not really want to follow Moses: too much stress and change. They did not really want to leave Egypt: too much change and stress.
“Hey! Aaron,” they say. “This Moses guy ain’t coming back. They had images for gods back in Egypt. Lots of peoples have images for gods. Despite what the tablets say, how’s about we make an image right here, right now. We’re used to it. It’s comfortable. It will make it seem like nothing’s changed. What da ya’ say?”
Aaron does not hesitate. “You got it. And we’ll even say this image is really the God Moses talks to, this Yahweh. That way it’ll look good. Besides, we need some focus. What kind of god would it be, if we had no image?” (Slight pause.)
All right— so that’s an interpretation. But I think the passage really does tell that story, even if it’s not told in quite that way.
Besides, telling it this way is one of the few ways this story makes sense. You see, this is an important moment in the drama commonly labeled as the salvation of Israel and the salvation of humanity. God compassionately embraced and delivered the Israelites. And what happened? The people restlessly turn away from Yahweh to gods of gold.
Therefore, I think the real key to this passage comes at the end of the story. (Quote:) “And so Yahweh, God, relented, had change of mind. And the disaster that threatened the Israelites was forestalled.”
Indeed, when this passage was introduced this was said (quote:) “There is one piece of today’s reading found in the Torah that has the potential to shock modern readers. It’s the idea that God might have a change of mind.”
If there’s anything we moderns don’t get, it’s not that God might only have a change of mind. God, you see, is a God of change. God is a God of transformation. It is we who resist change. It is we who resist transformation. It is we who have the audacity to say to God “we don’t want change.” (Slight pause.)
The Thought for Meditation in the bulletin today is from the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (Quote:) “We are now faced with the fact that tomorrow is today. We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now. In this unfolding conundrum of life and history, there is such a thing as being too late. This is no time for apathy or complacency. This is a time for vigorous and positive action.” (Slight pause.)
I think there is a difference, a really big difference, between the urgency of now to which God calls us and allowing for our false pretenses of personal willfulness, that which we might want to impose on and over the will of God. I think we sometimes allow our will rather than the will of God to be the rule of life. And way too often our will does not encompass change.
The Israelites try to block out the will of God. And sometimes we try to block out the will of God. It’s as if we say to God in a very egocentric manner, “my way or the highway.” Why? Why— we want to resist the places of change to which God encourages us.
And here’s a paradox. If we insist the church is not about change, if we say the church is not about transforming lives, that’s when church becomes really, really stressful.
Why? Deep down we all know the church needs to be about transformation. Deep down we know the church needs to be about making disciples. Deep down we know the church needs to be about change. And since we know that’s what we should be doing, when that change, that transformation, that molding of disciples does not happen, we feel stressed.
And what do we do when we’re stressed? We do exactly the opposite of what we should do. We resist change. (Slight pause.)
As that opening dialogue suggested, we need courage to change. But the only way to acquire that courage is to face change. The only way to acquire that courage is to do change. The only way to acquire that courage is to be change.
Can we? Will we? Well, this is interesting. Scripture tells us (quote:)“Yahweh, God, relented, had change of mind.” God is a God of change. Amen.
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, New York
10/12/2014
ENDPIECE— It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Congregational Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “This is an old one but I like it. ‘When the caterpillar became transformed and grew wings, the other caterpillars wanted their friend to change back into what always had been, into what was there before. “What,” they wanted to know, “had happened?” In a world filled with caterpillars transformation was not appreciated.’”
BENEDICTION: God can open our minds to what is true. God can fill our lives when we participate in the work of God’s realm, participate in seeking justice and peace and love. When we seek what is pleasing to God we are doing God’s will. And may the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, guard your hearts and your minds in Christ, Jesus and the unity of the Holy Spirit, this day and forever more. Amen.
[1] Adapted dialogue from the movie Three Kings (1999).
My Way or the Highway
“When the people saw that a long time had elapsed and Moses had not come down from the mountain, many of them gathered around Aaron, and said, ‘Come, make gods for us, who shall go before us, who will lead us. We need this to be done because we do not know what has happened, what has become of this Moses, who brought us up out of the land of Egypt.’” — Exodus 32:1b
What I am about to relate is a scene from a move. The name of that flick does not matter particularly since the scene is a pretty standard one that gets played out over and over and over in different films. I, therefore, suspect most of you will recognize this as a theme rather than a scene.
Here’s the set up: two characters face a dangerous situation. The dialogue runs like this. (The pastor changes voice registers on alternating lines to indicate the two characters.)
(1) You’re scared, right?
(2) Maybe. Well, yeah.
(1) You see, the way this works is, you do the thing you’re scared of. And it’s only after its done that you get the courage to do it. The courage happens after you do it, not before. You got that?
(2) I guess so. But that’s stupid. It should be the other way around. You need to have courage or to get courage from someplace before you do something, don’t you think?
(1) You got that right. But that’s not the way it works in the real world. It works the other way around. I’ve never known it to work any other way. First ya gotta do it. [1] (Slight pause.)
My guess is most of us do not particularly like change. To be blunt, we are afraid of change. And to face change takes courage and since courage is available only in a rear view mirror we try to hang on to what’s familiar.
Frankly, I think it is good to remember the courage to face change and to deal with change is not usually something one acquires beforehand. Courage happens after the fact. (Slight pause.)
Now not this Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, but the following Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, I shall be on the Clergy Retreat of the New York Conference. Well, this may sound a bit boring but it is a description of what the retreat is about.
(Quote:) “During the retreat, participants will receive feedback on their own psychological type and their levels of stress compared to others. Psychological type theory will be reviewed and recent research on type and stress with various clergy groups... will be presented. Then participants will apply type theory to church-related stressful situations...” (Slight pause.)
To help participants prepare, we had to fill out a survey about stress in our lives. What filling out a survey about stress made me realize is any aspect of stress, any stress filled situation, can only be measured in comparison to other stress-filled situations.
So, let me draw a comparison for you. Which is more stressful: spending 14 months in a war zone, as I did, or being a pastor? Which is more stressful: while in said war zone being blown out of bed by incoming a couple of times, which happened to me, or being a pastor?
I’m sure you catch the drift. Stress can only be measure in terms of comparisons. Now, I am not saying the work of a pastor fails to be stressful. It is. Indeed, a number of people have said to me, “Oooo— I’m glad I don’t have your job.”
Well, that brings me to a merger of topics: stress and church and change. Most of us realize the church is changing. (Slight pause.)
No, let me correct that. The church is changing... again. (Slight pause.) No, let me correct that. The church is not just changing and the church is not just changing again. The church is about change. And change... is... stressful— change... is... stressful. (Slight pause.)
We find these words in Tanakh in the section known as the Torah in the work known as Exodus: “When the people saw that a long time had elapsed and Moses had not come down from the mountain, many of them gathered around Aaron, and said, ‘Come, make gods for us, who shall go before us, who will lead us. We need this done because we do not know what has happened, what has become of this Moses, who brought us up out of the land of Egypt.’” (Slight pause.)
With some interpretation, let me give you a shorthand version as to where in the story of Exodus this passage happens. The Israelites have crossed the Sea of Reeds. They are now wandering around in the wilderness near Mount Sinai.
Moses has already brought the tablets to the people and gone back to the mountain. The people have been and are nervous. They did not really want to follow Moses: too much stress and change. They did not really want to leave Egypt: too much change and stress.
“Hey! Aaron,” they say. “This Moses guy ain’t coming back. They had images for gods back in Egypt. Lots of peoples have images for gods. Despite what the tablets say, how’s about we make an image right here, right now. We’re used to it. It’s comfortable. It will make it seem like nothing’s changed. What da ya’ say?”
Aaron does not hesitate. “You got it. And we’ll even say this image is really the God Moses talks to, this Yahweh. That way it’ll look good. Besides, we need some focus. What kind of god would it be, if we had no image?” (Slight pause.)
All right— so that’s an interpretation. But I think the passage really does tell that story, even if it’s not told in quite that way.
Besides, telling it this way is one of the few ways this story makes sense. You see, this is an important moment in the drama commonly labeled as the salvation of Israel and the salvation of humanity. God compassionately embraced and delivered the Israelites. And what happened? The people restlessly turn away from Yahweh to gods of gold.
Therefore, I think the real key to this passage comes at the end of the story. (Quote:) “And so Yahweh, God, relented, had change of mind. And the disaster that threatened the Israelites was forestalled.”
Indeed, when this passage was introduced this was said (quote:) “There is one piece of today’s reading found in the Torah that has the potential to shock modern readers. It’s the idea that God might have a change of mind.”
If there’s anything we moderns don’t get, it’s not that God might only have a change of mind. God, you see, is a God of change. God is a God of transformation. It is we who resist change. It is we who resist transformation. It is we who have the audacity to say to God “we don’t want change.” (Slight pause.)
The Thought for Meditation in the bulletin today is from the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (Quote:) “We are now faced with the fact that tomorrow is today. We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now. In this unfolding conundrum of life and history, there is such a thing as being too late. This is no time for apathy or complacency. This is a time for vigorous and positive action.” (Slight pause.)
I think there is a difference, a really big difference, between the urgency of now to which God calls us and allowing for our false pretenses of personal willfulness, that which we might want to impose on and over the will of God. I think we sometimes allow our will rather than the will of God to be the rule of life. And way too often our will does not encompass change.
The Israelites try to block out the will of God. And sometimes we try to block out the will of God. It’s as if we say to God in a very egocentric manner, “my way or the highway.” Why? Why— we want to resist the places of change to which God encourages us.
And here’s a paradox. If we insist the church is not about change, if we say the church is not about transforming lives, that’s when church becomes really, really stressful.
Why? Deep down we all know the church needs to be about transformation. Deep down we know the church needs to be about making disciples. Deep down we know the church needs to be about change. And since we know that’s what we should be doing, when that change, that transformation, that molding of disciples does not happen, we feel stressed.
And what do we do when we’re stressed? We do exactly the opposite of what we should do. We resist change. (Slight pause.)
As that opening dialogue suggested, we need courage to change. But the only way to acquire that courage is to face change. The only way to acquire that courage is to do change. The only way to acquire that courage is to be change.
Can we? Will we? Well, this is interesting. Scripture tells us (quote:)“Yahweh, God, relented, had change of mind.” God is a God of change. Amen.
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, New York
10/12/2014
ENDPIECE— It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Congregational Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “This is an old one but I like it. ‘When the caterpillar became transformed and grew wings, the other caterpillars wanted their friend to change back into what always had been, into what was there before. “What,” they wanted to know, “had happened?” In a world filled with caterpillars transformation was not appreciated.’”
BENEDICTION: God can open our minds to what is true. God can fill our lives when we participate in the work of God’s realm, participate in seeking justice and peace and love. When we seek what is pleasing to God we are doing God’s will. And may the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, guard your hearts and your minds in Christ, Jesus and the unity of the Holy Spirit, this day and forever more. Amen.
[1] Adapted dialogue from the movie Three Kings (1999).
Tuesday, October 7, 2014
SERMON ~ 10/05/2014 ~ “Focus”
10/05/2014 ~ Communion Sunday ~ 17th Sunday after Pentecost ~ 27th Sunday in Ordinary Time (Proper 22) ~ Exodus 20:1-4, 7-9, 12-20; Psalm 19; Isaiah 5:1-7; Psalm 80:7-15; Philippians 3:4b-14; Matthew 21:33-46 ~ Neighbors in Need ~ World Wide Communion Sunday.
Focus
“I press on toward the goal. My entire attention is focused on the finish line as I run toward the prize— the high calling of God in Christ, Jesus.” — Philippians 3:14.
It’s been said we are all good at something. The issue for each of us is finding out what that something is and focusing on it. (Slight pause.)
Many years ago I read the book Steps in Time. My guess is I read it in the 1980s, since that book was published in the '80s. Steps in Time is the autobiography of the famous dancer and movie actor Fred Astaire. [1]
Now to be clear, I think the world of Fred Astaire. Back when I was writing for theater, I even wrote a show that used the Astaire/Rogers musicals as a touchstone.
Coming back to Astaire’s autobiography, for me one thing jumped out. I reached one conclusion about Fred based on his own words. He was really, really, really good at picking his feet up and putting them down. He was really good at dancing.
Other than that, he liked to place bets on the ponies and eventually owned his own string of thoroughbreds. And he was really good at dancing.
In many ways, his entire life was focused on and around the dance, what dance looked like, how it could move people— effect their emotions— even help them be in touch with their own feelings in ways they had not imagined possible. Indeed, most people don’t know this, but after a movie was shot, Astaire would sit with the director and the editor of a film and assist them in the editing process.
Why? He was so good at dance that when it came to what he was seeing on just the rough cut of a film, he knew what dance needed look like. So he, himself, worked on editing each of his films.
All of which is to reiterate Astaire did something really, really, really well. He was good at dancing, all aspects of it.
Was that actually the only thing at which Astaire excelled? Well, it’s often said Astaire was not a great singer. However, sometimes you, yourself, don’t know how good you are at something. To give Mr. Astaire his due, every song writer of that era, from George and Ira Gershwin to Cole Porter to Jerome Kern to Irving Berlin said they never had a better interpreter of their songs.
So, yes there was something else Astaire was good at. While he may not have been a good singer, Fred was a great interpreter of songs. Now, given what I know about Astaire, and I probably know more than most people, I think there is a basic reason he was so good at dance. He was disciplined. He studied and learned and practiced and was, therefore, focused. (Slight pause.)
To take this in another direction for a moment, when Bonnie and I got married, Bonnie was working as a professional newspaper photographer. She was a very, very, very good newspaper photographer. She worked at it daily, She won New England Press Association awards for her work.
And, as you all know, she still is a very, very, very good photographer. And while she no longer works at a newspaper she has not stopped taking pictures.
So, when Bonnie and I got married I made my living as a writer. And when we got married I had absolutely no intention of going to seminary. I was not a preacher. I was a writer.
Now, the Rev. Dr. Bill Imes officiated at our wedding ceremony. In the middle of that service Bill gave a short homily. Among the things Bill noted was that Bonnie has a special way of seeing things— indeed. Then Bill, who had known me for only a couple of months at that point, said I had a special way of saying things.
Perhaps Bill was clairvoyant and already knew I would become a preacher. Or perhaps he simply thought I needed to focus more on something I did well and he zeroed in on an area where he thought I should concentrate.
As I said, we are all good at something. Bonnie puts it this way: I’m glad Joe became a preacher. Now at least he gets paid for all that hot air. (Not too subtle, is she?) But, as I also said earlier, the larger issue may be finding out whatever it is we are good at and simply doing it, focusing on it, by being disciplined about it— the art of discipline— study, learn, practice— the result of which is... focus. (Slight pause.)
These words are from the Letter to the Church at Philippi, commonly known as Philippians: “I press on toward the goal. My entire attention is focused on the finish line as I run toward the prize— the high calling of God in Christ, Jesus.” (Slight pause.)
It is sometimes facetiously said a Congregational service of worship is a hymn and sermon sandwich. While I’d be the first to say there is a lot more to it, I’d also want to admit there is at least a little veracity to the claim.
We did celebrate Communion today, so on this day we escaped the full press of the hymn and sermon sandwich trap. However, I’d like to draw your attention to the hymn and sermon part of the service this morning. And I’d like you to note as we heard from Mary Williams earlier that the hymns Mary and I chose to use were very, very focused.
The first hymn was Lord, I Wanna Be a Christian. After one reading you heard the anthem, Guide My Feet. After another reading we used Hush, Hush, Somebody’s Calling My Name. At the end of the service we’ll sing I Will Trust in the Lord.
What I want you to notice is each of these are out of the African American tradition. Now there are some people who, in a very specific way, misunderstand hymns which come out of the African American tradition.
These are the folks who think all hymns found in this tradition are about some kind of after-life, songs about some kind of heavenly reward. Put another way, there are people who take this genre to be hymns simply about the sweet by and by. As an aside, the hymn The Sweet By and By, itself, was written in 1868 by a couple of Caucasian fellows who lived in Wisconsin.
But back to the point at hand, I doubt any hymn which comes out of the African-American tradition is about the sweet by and by. When read carefully, hymns in the African American tradition are about what is needed right now.
These are hymns about the justice needed right now. These are hymns about the freedom needed right now. These are hymns about the fact that God walks with us as we strive to seek the will of God in the here and now. To read these works in any other way is to short change the tradition.
And I think that is akin what Paul is considering in this passage from Philippians. Paul ponders this question: how can we focus ourselves on the love God offers, the love with which God surrounds us, right now?
How can we train ourselves to be aware of the voice of God, right now? How can we seek the justice God would have us seek, right now? How can we learn about the freedom in which God would have live, right now?
What I want to stress is this reading speaks of the ordering of the universe and an ordering for human life— the focus of God. And Paul is not addressing what he, Paul, has done, insisting it is no of import.
Paul dismisses his part with these words. (Quote:) “More than that, I regard everything as loss because of the surpassing value of knowing Christ, Jesus, my Savior, for Whose sake I have forfeited all things. I regard everything else as rubbish, so that Christ may be my wealth...”
Paul also states the universe is ordered by God. (Quote:) “The justice I possess is that which comes through the faith of Christ. It has its origin in God and is based on faith.”
Hence, Paul lays out three precepts. First: God is the prime mover. Second: I, Paul, need to be ready to allow the grace God offers to move me. Last, how is that done? Discipline: study, learn, practice— the result of which is focus. (Slight pause.)
Well, you have heard me say this before. One thing I believe we forget too often is a very simple basic: love is a discipline. Love can be and needs to be studied. Love can be and needs to be learned. Love can be and needs to be practiced.
And that regimen of study and learning and practice is commonly called focus. Love is a focus of life which brings us closer to God and closer to neighbor. Amen.
ENDPIECE— It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Congregational Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “One of my Seminary professors once said it will not matter how good you are at preaching. What will matter is how well those who hear your sermons are at listening. And it does not even matter how well the Congregations listen to the pastors. It’s how well a Congregation listens to the Spirit of God that matters. Which I suppose is to say I need to preach as well as I can and then trust God will provide.”
BENEDICTION: Let us never fear to seek the truth God reveals. Let us live as a resurrection people. Let us understand every day as a new adventure in faith as the Creator draws us into community. And may we love God so much, that we love nothing else too much. May we be so in awe of God, that we are in awe of no one else and nothing else. Amen.
[1] Library of Congress information says a re-publication happened in 1981. It was first published in 1959 but that was before my time.
http://catalog.loc.gov/vwebv/holdingsInfo?searchId=10901&recCount=25&recPointer=9&bibId=883181
Focus
“I press on toward the goal. My entire attention is focused on the finish line as I run toward the prize— the high calling of God in Christ, Jesus.” — Philippians 3:14.
It’s been said we are all good at something. The issue for each of us is finding out what that something is and focusing on it. (Slight pause.)
Many years ago I read the book Steps in Time. My guess is I read it in the 1980s, since that book was published in the '80s. Steps in Time is the autobiography of the famous dancer and movie actor Fred Astaire. [1]
Now to be clear, I think the world of Fred Astaire. Back when I was writing for theater, I even wrote a show that used the Astaire/Rogers musicals as a touchstone.
Coming back to Astaire’s autobiography, for me one thing jumped out. I reached one conclusion about Fred based on his own words. He was really, really, really good at picking his feet up and putting them down. He was really good at dancing.
Other than that, he liked to place bets on the ponies and eventually owned his own string of thoroughbreds. And he was really good at dancing.
In many ways, his entire life was focused on and around the dance, what dance looked like, how it could move people— effect their emotions— even help them be in touch with their own feelings in ways they had not imagined possible. Indeed, most people don’t know this, but after a movie was shot, Astaire would sit with the director and the editor of a film and assist them in the editing process.
Why? He was so good at dance that when it came to what he was seeing on just the rough cut of a film, he knew what dance needed look like. So he, himself, worked on editing each of his films.
All of which is to reiterate Astaire did something really, really, really well. He was good at dancing, all aspects of it.
Was that actually the only thing at which Astaire excelled? Well, it’s often said Astaire was not a great singer. However, sometimes you, yourself, don’t know how good you are at something. To give Mr. Astaire his due, every song writer of that era, from George and Ira Gershwin to Cole Porter to Jerome Kern to Irving Berlin said they never had a better interpreter of their songs.
So, yes there was something else Astaire was good at. While he may not have been a good singer, Fred was a great interpreter of songs. Now, given what I know about Astaire, and I probably know more than most people, I think there is a basic reason he was so good at dance. He was disciplined. He studied and learned and practiced and was, therefore, focused. (Slight pause.)
To take this in another direction for a moment, when Bonnie and I got married, Bonnie was working as a professional newspaper photographer. She was a very, very, very good newspaper photographer. She worked at it daily, She won New England Press Association awards for her work.
And, as you all know, she still is a very, very, very good photographer. And while she no longer works at a newspaper she has not stopped taking pictures.
So, when Bonnie and I got married I made my living as a writer. And when we got married I had absolutely no intention of going to seminary. I was not a preacher. I was a writer.
Now, the Rev. Dr. Bill Imes officiated at our wedding ceremony. In the middle of that service Bill gave a short homily. Among the things Bill noted was that Bonnie has a special way of seeing things— indeed. Then Bill, who had known me for only a couple of months at that point, said I had a special way of saying things.
Perhaps Bill was clairvoyant and already knew I would become a preacher. Or perhaps he simply thought I needed to focus more on something I did well and he zeroed in on an area where he thought I should concentrate.
As I said, we are all good at something. Bonnie puts it this way: I’m glad Joe became a preacher. Now at least he gets paid for all that hot air. (Not too subtle, is she?) But, as I also said earlier, the larger issue may be finding out whatever it is we are good at and simply doing it, focusing on it, by being disciplined about it— the art of discipline— study, learn, practice— the result of which is... focus. (Slight pause.)
These words are from the Letter to the Church at Philippi, commonly known as Philippians: “I press on toward the goal. My entire attention is focused on the finish line as I run toward the prize— the high calling of God in Christ, Jesus.” (Slight pause.)
It is sometimes facetiously said a Congregational service of worship is a hymn and sermon sandwich. While I’d be the first to say there is a lot more to it, I’d also want to admit there is at least a little veracity to the claim.
We did celebrate Communion today, so on this day we escaped the full press of the hymn and sermon sandwich trap. However, I’d like to draw your attention to the hymn and sermon part of the service this morning. And I’d like you to note as we heard from Mary Williams earlier that the hymns Mary and I chose to use were very, very focused.
The first hymn was Lord, I Wanna Be a Christian. After one reading you heard the anthem, Guide My Feet. After another reading we used Hush, Hush, Somebody’s Calling My Name. At the end of the service we’ll sing I Will Trust in the Lord.
What I want you to notice is each of these are out of the African American tradition. Now there are some people who, in a very specific way, misunderstand hymns which come out of the African American tradition.
These are the folks who think all hymns found in this tradition are about some kind of after-life, songs about some kind of heavenly reward. Put another way, there are people who take this genre to be hymns simply about the sweet by and by. As an aside, the hymn The Sweet By and By, itself, was written in 1868 by a couple of Caucasian fellows who lived in Wisconsin.
But back to the point at hand, I doubt any hymn which comes out of the African-American tradition is about the sweet by and by. When read carefully, hymns in the African American tradition are about what is needed right now.
These are hymns about the justice needed right now. These are hymns about the freedom needed right now. These are hymns about the fact that God walks with us as we strive to seek the will of God in the here and now. To read these works in any other way is to short change the tradition.
And I think that is akin what Paul is considering in this passage from Philippians. Paul ponders this question: how can we focus ourselves on the love God offers, the love with which God surrounds us, right now?
How can we train ourselves to be aware of the voice of God, right now? How can we seek the justice God would have us seek, right now? How can we learn about the freedom in which God would have live, right now?
What I want to stress is this reading speaks of the ordering of the universe and an ordering for human life— the focus of God. And Paul is not addressing what he, Paul, has done, insisting it is no of import.
Paul dismisses his part with these words. (Quote:) “More than that, I regard everything as loss because of the surpassing value of knowing Christ, Jesus, my Savior, for Whose sake I have forfeited all things. I regard everything else as rubbish, so that Christ may be my wealth...”
Paul also states the universe is ordered by God. (Quote:) “The justice I possess is that which comes through the faith of Christ. It has its origin in God and is based on faith.”
Hence, Paul lays out three precepts. First: God is the prime mover. Second: I, Paul, need to be ready to allow the grace God offers to move me. Last, how is that done? Discipline: study, learn, practice— the result of which is focus. (Slight pause.)
Well, you have heard me say this before. One thing I believe we forget too often is a very simple basic: love is a discipline. Love can be and needs to be studied. Love can be and needs to be learned. Love can be and needs to be practiced.
And that regimen of study and learning and practice is commonly called focus. Love is a focus of life which brings us closer to God and closer to neighbor. Amen.
ENDPIECE— It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Congregational Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “One of my Seminary professors once said it will not matter how good you are at preaching. What will matter is how well those who hear your sermons are at listening. And it does not even matter how well the Congregations listen to the pastors. It’s how well a Congregation listens to the Spirit of God that matters. Which I suppose is to say I need to preach as well as I can and then trust God will provide.”
BENEDICTION: Let us never fear to seek the truth God reveals. Let us live as a resurrection people. Let us understand every day as a new adventure in faith as the Creator draws us into community. And may we love God so much, that we love nothing else too much. May we be so in awe of God, that we are in awe of no one else and nothing else. Amen.
[1] Library of Congress information says a re-publication happened in 1981. It was first published in 1959 but that was before my time.
http://catalog.loc.gov/vwebv/holdingsInfo?searchId=10901&recCount=25&recPointer=9&bibId=883181
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)