August 27, 2017 ~ Proper 16 ~ Twenty-first Sunday in Ordinary Time ~ Twelfth Sunday after Pentecost ~ Exodus 1:8-2:10; Psalm 124; Isaiah 51:1-6; Psalm 138; Romans 12:1-8; Matthew 16:13-20 ~ Service in the Founder’s Room.
Cultural Agendas
“...do not conform yourselves to this age or to this world. Rather, be transformed by the renewal of your minds, so that you may discern, that you may judge what the will of God is— that which is good and acceptable and pleasing and perfect.” — Romans 12:2.
I think most of you know I grew up in the 1950s and '60s in New York City. Obvious proof of the specific years which straddled my youth is that specific timing gave me an opportunity to serve my country.
Let me translate that: serve my country means I was drafted into the armed forces. The timing means I was afforded an opportunity to serve my country in Vietnam.
Also, as I have from time to time indicated, when I was young my family was relatively poor, as those things go. Which is not to say we were destitute. It is to say we continually scraped by as we made ends meet.
Part of that economic picture is, for his entire working career, my father was a teacher in a Catholic High School. Both then and now most teachers in parochial schools earn by far less than those in Public Schools. And indeed, once her children were old enough to fend for themselves when home alone, to help the finances my mother held a series of jobs from being a school crossing guard to working in the Department of Housing in the city.
That having been said, growing up in New York City gave me some amazing opportunities for exposure to the broader culture and to the arts then would have been afforded to a youngster from a family with limited income who lived elsewhere. Now, one of those opportunities came about because of some contacts my parents had made in the city and because of some sacrificers they were willing to make.
Between 1956 and 1960— five years— my brother, my sister and I spent the whole Summer at a fairly ritzy, all Catholic, Summer camp, located in East Hampton. This came about because my parents knew the owners of this camp.
And so my father worked as the camp bookkeeper and treasurer; my mother worked as a camp counselor for small girls, four and five years old. Now, what I am about to say would probably be illegal today. My parents did not get paid money for their work. Instead, their three children got a break from inner city life and went to Summer camp.
I was reminded about this because I am in a Facebook group of camp alumni. Last week someone posted a whole Summer’s worth of newsletters from the camp. And, sure enough, there was a write up in one of them about my Dad.
Now, I’ve labeled this as a fairly ritzy camp. What I probably should say is it was a camp for fairly ritzy people. Broadway stars and movie stars sent their kids to this camp.
Those of you with long memories might remember the actor Don Ameche. He sent his kids to this camp. Late in his career— 1985— Ameche won an Academy Award for his performance in the Ron Howard movie Cocoon.
Another interesting person at camp was the head counselor, Ed Danowski. Who? Ed Danowski. In the 1950s Danowski was the football coach at Fordham University.
But Ed was more famous than that. Danowski was the starting quarterback for the New York Football Giants from 1935 to 1939. He was on the team in '34 when the Giants won the NFL Championship and led the team in '38 when they won it again. In 1935 Danowski led the league in passing yards and touchdowns.
My point here is simple. Please think about how much things have changed. Put differently, imagine the current Giants quarterback, Eli Manning, who has also won the championship twice, ten years down the road being the head counselor at a Summer camp. I don’t care how “ritzy” a camp claimed to be. There is no way Eli Manning would be head counselor at any Summer camp. (Slight pause.)
These words are in Romans: “...do not conform yourselves to this age or to this world. Rather, be transformed by the renewal of your minds, so that you may discern, that you may judge what the will of God is— that which is good and acceptable and pleasing and perfect.” (Slight pause.)
Occasionally I will hear other pastors and even members of the laity complain we live in a time and in a culture that ignores the Gospel message. It seems to me one strain within that complaint is a “Woe is me” kind of sentiment. Why do I live in this time where people so readily ignore the message of hope, peace, joy, freedom, equity, love found in Scripture?
I have a reaction to that kind of complaint. Here is it: “Well, we have it a lot better than the Apostle Paul had it. After all, when Paul was preaching no one knew what Christianity was.”
“Paul had to start from scratch. Today, even if people do not listen or adhere to the message of Scripture, at least they know it’s out there. Paul had to preach in the context of the Roman Empire, where people had never even heard of the Christ.”
“And we,” say I, “we have this huge opportunity to preach in the context of the American Empire where people have at least heard of the Christ, even if people generally pay no heed to the message of hope, peace, joy, freedom, equity, love found in Scripture.” (Slight pause.)
I want to suggest what I just said implies a specific analysis of American history and who we are, now, as a country. I also want to suggest that, than if you take a look at the 1950s and today, you can see how things on the world stage have changed and how the culture has changed.
As we left the Second World War in our rear view mirror, there was really only one other major power— Soviet Russia. But over the course of these last 70 years we are it. There now really is no other major world power. There is us. No one else even comes close. Hence, we are a little like the Roman Empire. The Roman Empire was it. No one else came close.
Why do I say no one else comes close in terms of being an Empire? One statistic says it all.
We spend more than what the next eight highest spending countries combined together, spend on defense— we spend more than the next eight highest spending countries combined together spend on defense. That sounds empire to me. And, as a Biblical scholar, that sounds like Rome to me. [1]
Just to be clear and in case you think I’m making this statistic up, consider this chart. (The pastor holds up a chart— see the footnote about the chart.) We’re the red; this is everyone else. (The pastor moves from behind the pulpit and hands out copies of the chart to each group and there are groups because they are sitting at tables for this service.) [2] There is more where that came from in case you want it.
The chart comes from the Peter G. Peterson Foundation which was established by Mr. Peterson. He is a former U.S. Secretary of Commerce in the Nixon Administration and founder of the Blackstone Group, a financial-services company.
So, the foundation is not some radical, wacko-out there organization. These are simply the facts, the statistics. We spend more on defense than the next eight countries combined.
Indeed when it comes to empires, in ancient times the next largest empire— and we Westerners do not acknowledge or know about this since we concentrate on Western history— in ancient times the next largest empire after Rome was... China. And after the United States who today spends more on defense than any other country except us? China. We are the Roman Empire. And just like Rome, China is our next biggest rival— empires... the more things change.... I don’t have to finish that do I?
All that brings me back to what Paul had to say (quote:) “do not conform yourselves to this age or to this world. Rather, be transformed by the renewal of your minds, so that you may discern, that you may judge what the will of God is— that which is good... and acceptable... and pleasing” to God. (Slight pause.)
I need to emphasize something: saying we are the Roman Empire says nothing about our politics. It does not even say we should or should not be the Roman Empire.
It does say, if Paul was preaching in the context Roman Empire and what Paul preached was about the hope, peace, joy, freedom, equity and love found in Scripture, what should we be doing? What should we, as Christians, in our modern version of empire, be about?
Perhaps we need to be about the Gospel, the message of hope, peace, joy, freedom, equity and love found in Scripture. You see, in the sentence before the one I’ve been quoting Paul says we need to present ourselves (quote:) “as holy and acceptable to God.” (Slight pause.)
All that brings me back to Ed Danowski and Eli Manning, quarterbacks both. Times change. The context in which we live changes. Perhaps more to the point, our vision gets blurred by what is around us. Our vision gets blurred by the cultural context in which we live.
And that is precisely the point Paul makes. Our vision gets blurred, is blurred, because of the world in which we live.
Therefore, we do conform. We assume human empire is a given. And I think what Paul was stating quite clearly in the context of the Roman Empire is that the vision, God’s vision, for the world rejects empire.
God’s vision for the world encompasses hope, peace, joy, freedom, equity, love these things we in Scripture. And God’s vision is not at all like human empire. And that vision God has for the world, that vision needs to be our vision. (Slight pause.)
When the reading from Romans was introduced it was said Paul strives to place theology in the reality of the context, the situation in which people are living— the context of that time and that place. Theologian N. T. Wright has said New Testament times are exactly like our times in one way. In ancient times nearly everybody believed in God. Few people took God seriously. Wright insists the same is true today— nearly everyone believes in God; few take it seriously. The more things change.... I don’t have to finish that one, either, do I? (Slight pause.)
I think if we accept God’s vision for the world, a vision which encompasses hope, peace, joy, freedom, equity, love this wonderful wholeness found in Scripture, then we do take God seriously. But I also think, in order to take God seriously, in order to take the message offered in Scripture seriously we need to realize that we cannot be conformed to this age, to this world. Because this age and this world is not about the message of hope, peace, joy, freedom, equity, love we find in Scripture. Amen.
ENDPIECE: It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Choral Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “Do me a favor and consider this: if you do not think you are living in a time like the Roman Empire, or even if you do think you are living in such a time, sit down and read the works Paul actually wrote, as opposed to the works simply attributed to Paul. Those works in chronological order are: First Thessalonians, Galatians, First Corinthians, Philippians, Philemon, Second Corinthians and Romans. I think you will see that Paul’s writings address both living in an empire and the message of hope, peace, joy, freedom, equity, love found in Scripture.”
BENEDICTION: This service of worship is over but our service in the name of God continues outside these doors. May we love God so much, that we love nothing else too much. May we be so in awe God that we are in awe of no one else and nothing else. Amen.
[1] Note: to see the chart please go to this URL:
http://www.pgpf.org/sites/default/files/0053_defense-comparison.pdf
[2] The service was in the room where “coffee hour” normally happens so people were sitting at tables, in groups.
Sunday, August 27, 2017
Sunday, August 20, 2017
SERMON ~ August 20, 2017 ~ “Working with God”
August 20, 2017 ~ Proper 15 ~ Twentieth Sunday in Ordinary Time ~ Eleventh Sunday after Pentecost ~ Genesis 45:1-15; Psalm 133; Isaiah 56:1, 6-8; Psalm 67; Romans 11:1-2a, 29-32; Matthew 15: (10-20), 21-28 ~ Service in the Founder’s Room ~ Ceremony of Shalom.
Working with God
“Thus says Yahweh, God: / Maintain justice; do what is right, / for soon my salvation will come, / and my deliverance be revealed.” — Isaiah 56:1.
I have what these days we call a learning disability. I am dyslexic. What being dyslexic means is numbers and letters sometimes are perceived by me in a way which is not the way they are actually written. My brain interprets some numbers as being inverted, backwards.
Therefore to me, 12 can look like 21. Thank God for numbers like 11, 22, 33 and 44. There’s no way of mistaking them for what they are.
My brain also sometimes interprets some letters as being inverted, backwards. In fact, one time seeing letters in reverse presented a real church issue for me.
In New York City I belonged to All Angels Church. But every time I wrote the name down, it came out as All Angles. (Now some might think All Angles is an appropriate name for a church in New York City, but not really.)
Indeed and therefore, I will always be grateful I learned Hebrew in Seminary. You see, transliterated from the Hebrew the word “el”— e-l— is one of the names for God. And, of course, the letters ‘e and l’ are a part of the word ‘ang-el.’
And I learned that in Hebrew the word angel means messenger from God. So, for me, it is now easier when I see the word ‘ang-el’ separate the ‘e-l’ part of the word ‘angel’ out from the ‘a-n-g” part of the word ‘angel.’ For me it is easier to recognize the word is, in fact, a-n-g-e-l not a-n-g-l-e.
This brings me back to the fact that I am dyslexic. When I was in grade school back in 19xx (the pastor puts hand to mouth and mumbles) the teachers did not know what dyslexia was. They certainly did not test for it.
Now, Bonnie accuses me of having a photographic memory. But that’s not true. However, I believe dyslexia forces me to listen carefully and absorb much of what I hear, a talent I learned in grade school.
In fact, when I was in Seminary a teacher once handed back a paper she had assigned to the whole class and said most of the class would need to do the paper over. Why? She apologized for not handing out written instructions about the paper and insisted she must not have explained the assignment well since only a couple of people had complied with her verbal instructions.
I, on the other hand, must have listened very carefully and fully heard this professor’s verbal instructions. Guess who got an ‘A’ on that paper, first crack? Me, the one who had developed a keen sense of listening back in grade school. (Slight pause.)
We hear these words from the Scroll of the Prophet Isaiah in the third section of that work: “Thus says Yahweh, God: / Maintain justice; do what is right, / for soon my salvation will come, / and my deliverance be revealed.” (Slight pause.)
This is a given. We all have and have developed different ways to learn things. Testing tells us a majority of people— 65% according to one test— are visually oriented; a majority of people learn by seeing pictures. Perhaps that’s why movies are so popular.
Indeed, what first made Hollywood a world wide force was the silent movie. The language being used was purely visual and, therefore, quite universal.
But visual learning dates back much further than that. I have always thought the real proof most people learn by seeing is the existence of Medieval cathedrals found all over the Europan landscape. You see, the literacy rate in that era was very low.
And Scripture demands an ability to read and to interpret what is being read. But people did not need to read Scripture in Medieval times because the Scripture was visually presented to them in the stained glass windows and the statues of the aforementioned Cathedrals. (Slight pause.)
Having said Scripture demands an ability to read and interpret what is read, let me invite you back to the time of Third Isaiah, about 500 years before the common era. Just as in Medieval times, the literacy rate was low.
Despite that, what we today call Scripture existed. In fact, most Biblical scholars insist a book we actually could identify as the Torah, the first five books of the Bible, was already in place and available, 500 years before the common era. Of course, in order to read it you needed to be literate. And the literacy rate was low.
That brings up an interesting question. And what kind of Biblical theology do we find in the Torah, this written work? Biblical scholars would argue that the Hebrews did not have an organized theology, what we today would call systematic theology, a theology that demands being read.
I would, in fact, suggest Judaism is, by its nature, an Eastern, mystical religion, a religion about how things feel, something not particularly compatible with an organized, systematic, read theology. It is we Westerners who demand that in religion philosophic systems be mixed in with mysticism and, thereby, demanded a theology be organized, demanded a systematic theology.
Based on that premise, that the Hebrew people did not have an organized, systematic theology, what was the theology of the Hebrew people? How did the Hebrew people learn theology? Put another way, if a whole people can be said to have cultural traits, ways specific cultures do things— and I tink it’s a pretty fair statement to say cultures have traits— what was the learning style of the Hebrew people? (Slight pause.)
Those same aforementioned Biblical scholars often say the Hebrews did not have a theology. The Hebrews did theology. Action was how theology was expressed. That brings us back to the words of Isaiah— maintain justice, do what is right. (Slight pause.)
There is a related point to be made. Scripture is not like a newspaper. The intent of Scripture has nothing to do with the reporting of events. The intent of Scripture, especially the works we call the Prophets, is to reflect in a thoughtful way about what has happened and what people have done in response to God and what God has done, to reflect on that in a thoughtful way.
These words from Isaiah tell us doing the will of God is the kind of theology to which God invites us. That bids the obvious question: “what is the will of God?”
This passage provides an answer. Everyone, all people, are included in the realm of God, the work of God.
Foreigners, those who love the name of Yahweh, those who worship Yahweh are included in the realm of God, are called to do the work of God. Those who keep the Sabbath, do not profane it, those who keep the Covenant are included in the realm of God the work of God. (Slight pause.)
I have always maintained keeping the covenant is both the easiest and the hardest thing we will ever do. Keeping the covenant should be easy because the will of God is or perhaps should be obvious. Why? Defining the covenant is simple: love God; love neighbor.
Covenant is obviously hard since so few seem to be able to adhere to either part of that two part commitment of loving God and neighbor says. The difficult road of loving God and loving neighbor has been more than evident in our country in this last week.
Indeed, it should be clear there are many kinds of ways and many ways to be violent, which breaks covenant. Among them are social violence, economic violence, physical violence, emotional violence. I could go on, but I’ll let you supply your own types of violence that exists around us. And this is unquestionable: all violence is evil.
However, this is also clear: the Bible calls us to hope. The Bible calls us to persevere and to have faith in things not seen. (Slight pause.)
So, how do we strive to overcome this real and tangible evil we see around us, to have faith in things not seen? If we follow what Isaiah says, we are called to the action of keeping Covenant. But still how are we to act? (Slight pause.) I think I will rely on the words of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. in addressing that question, ‘how are we to act?’
(Quote:) “The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. Instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it. Through violence you may murder the liar, but you cannot murder the lie, nor establish the truth. Through violence you may murder the hater, but you do not murder hate.
In fact, violence merely increases hate....’
“Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.”
These are the words of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. And they are a call to the action known as Covenant, an action in which can all participate.
And perhaps the action to which we are called is the covenant of loving God and loving neighbor. So, instead of me intoning an “Amen” as I often to at the end of my comments I invite you, this congregation, to respond to the words of Dr. King with an “Amen” of your own. And the people said: amen. (And the response was loud and unified.)
08/20/2017
United Church of Christ
ENDPIECE: It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Choral Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “O.K. Did you see what I did at the end of the meditation today? I invited you to action. And that action to which I invited you was probably pretty easy. All you had to do was intone the word ‘Amen.’ But I also want to point out that the Covenant with God does not incorporate or condone coercion or violence of any kind— as attractive as that might be sometimes— when it comes to action.— no violence, no coercion when it comes to action. So, sometimes intoning an “Amen” as it affirms the will of God is what you need to do. But I think we all recognize when that is not enough all the time. A simple ‘Amen’ is not enough where and when evil is rampant we need to do more. And that is when action to halt evil needs to be taken.”
BENEDICTION: We are commissioned by God to carry the peace of God into the world. Our words and our deeds will be used by God, for we become messengers of the Word of God in our actions. Let us recognize that the transforming power of God is forever among us. 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 and nothing else. Amen.
[1] Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. from Strength to Love, 1963.
Working with God
“Thus says Yahweh, God: / Maintain justice; do what is right, / for soon my salvation will come, / and my deliverance be revealed.” — Isaiah 56:1.
I have what these days we call a learning disability. I am dyslexic. What being dyslexic means is numbers and letters sometimes are perceived by me in a way which is not the way they are actually written. My brain interprets some numbers as being inverted, backwards.
Therefore to me, 12 can look like 21. Thank God for numbers like 11, 22, 33 and 44. There’s no way of mistaking them for what they are.
My brain also sometimes interprets some letters as being inverted, backwards. In fact, one time seeing letters in reverse presented a real church issue for me.
In New York City I belonged to All Angels Church. But every time I wrote the name down, it came out as All Angles. (Now some might think All Angles is an appropriate name for a church in New York City, but not really.)
Indeed and therefore, I will always be grateful I learned Hebrew in Seminary. You see, transliterated from the Hebrew the word “el”— e-l— is one of the names for God. And, of course, the letters ‘e and l’ are a part of the word ‘ang-el.’
And I learned that in Hebrew the word angel means messenger from God. So, for me, it is now easier when I see the word ‘ang-el’ separate the ‘e-l’ part of the word ‘angel’ out from the ‘a-n-g” part of the word ‘angel.’ For me it is easier to recognize the word is, in fact, a-n-g-e-l not a-n-g-l-e.
This brings me back to the fact that I am dyslexic. When I was in grade school back in 19xx (the pastor puts hand to mouth and mumbles) the teachers did not know what dyslexia was. They certainly did not test for it.
Now, Bonnie accuses me of having a photographic memory. But that’s not true. However, I believe dyslexia forces me to listen carefully and absorb much of what I hear, a talent I learned in grade school.
In fact, when I was in Seminary a teacher once handed back a paper she had assigned to the whole class and said most of the class would need to do the paper over. Why? She apologized for not handing out written instructions about the paper and insisted she must not have explained the assignment well since only a couple of people had complied with her verbal instructions.
I, on the other hand, must have listened very carefully and fully heard this professor’s verbal instructions. Guess who got an ‘A’ on that paper, first crack? Me, the one who had developed a keen sense of listening back in grade school. (Slight pause.)
We hear these words from the Scroll of the Prophet Isaiah in the third section of that work: “Thus says Yahweh, God: / Maintain justice; do what is right, / for soon my salvation will come, / and my deliverance be revealed.” (Slight pause.)
This is a given. We all have and have developed different ways to learn things. Testing tells us a majority of people— 65% according to one test— are visually oriented; a majority of people learn by seeing pictures. Perhaps that’s why movies are so popular.
Indeed, what first made Hollywood a world wide force was the silent movie. The language being used was purely visual and, therefore, quite universal.
But visual learning dates back much further than that. I have always thought the real proof most people learn by seeing is the existence of Medieval cathedrals found all over the Europan landscape. You see, the literacy rate in that era was very low.
And Scripture demands an ability to read and to interpret what is being read. But people did not need to read Scripture in Medieval times because the Scripture was visually presented to them in the stained glass windows and the statues of the aforementioned Cathedrals. (Slight pause.)
Having said Scripture demands an ability to read and interpret what is read, let me invite you back to the time of Third Isaiah, about 500 years before the common era. Just as in Medieval times, the literacy rate was low.
Despite that, what we today call Scripture existed. In fact, most Biblical scholars insist a book we actually could identify as the Torah, the first five books of the Bible, was already in place and available, 500 years before the common era. Of course, in order to read it you needed to be literate. And the literacy rate was low.
That brings up an interesting question. And what kind of Biblical theology do we find in the Torah, this written work? Biblical scholars would argue that the Hebrews did not have an organized theology, what we today would call systematic theology, a theology that demands being read.
I would, in fact, suggest Judaism is, by its nature, an Eastern, mystical religion, a religion about how things feel, something not particularly compatible with an organized, systematic, read theology. It is we Westerners who demand that in religion philosophic systems be mixed in with mysticism and, thereby, demanded a theology be organized, demanded a systematic theology.
Based on that premise, that the Hebrew people did not have an organized, systematic theology, what was the theology of the Hebrew people? How did the Hebrew people learn theology? Put another way, if a whole people can be said to have cultural traits, ways specific cultures do things— and I tink it’s a pretty fair statement to say cultures have traits— what was the learning style of the Hebrew people? (Slight pause.)
Those same aforementioned Biblical scholars often say the Hebrews did not have a theology. The Hebrews did theology. Action was how theology was expressed. That brings us back to the words of Isaiah— maintain justice, do what is right. (Slight pause.)
There is a related point to be made. Scripture is not like a newspaper. The intent of Scripture has nothing to do with the reporting of events. The intent of Scripture, especially the works we call the Prophets, is to reflect in a thoughtful way about what has happened and what people have done in response to God and what God has done, to reflect on that in a thoughtful way.
These words from Isaiah tell us doing the will of God is the kind of theology to which God invites us. That bids the obvious question: “what is the will of God?”
This passage provides an answer. Everyone, all people, are included in the realm of God, the work of God.
Foreigners, those who love the name of Yahweh, those who worship Yahweh are included in the realm of God, are called to do the work of God. Those who keep the Sabbath, do not profane it, those who keep the Covenant are included in the realm of God the work of God. (Slight pause.)
I have always maintained keeping the covenant is both the easiest and the hardest thing we will ever do. Keeping the covenant should be easy because the will of God is or perhaps should be obvious. Why? Defining the covenant is simple: love God; love neighbor.
Covenant is obviously hard since so few seem to be able to adhere to either part of that two part commitment of loving God and neighbor says. The difficult road of loving God and loving neighbor has been more than evident in our country in this last week.
Indeed, it should be clear there are many kinds of ways and many ways to be violent, which breaks covenant. Among them are social violence, economic violence, physical violence, emotional violence. I could go on, but I’ll let you supply your own types of violence that exists around us. And this is unquestionable: all violence is evil.
However, this is also clear: the Bible calls us to hope. The Bible calls us to persevere and to have faith in things not seen. (Slight pause.)
So, how do we strive to overcome this real and tangible evil we see around us, to have faith in things not seen? If we follow what Isaiah says, we are called to the action of keeping Covenant. But still how are we to act? (Slight pause.) I think I will rely on the words of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. in addressing that question, ‘how are we to act?’
(Quote:) “The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. Instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it. Through violence you may murder the liar, but you cannot murder the lie, nor establish the truth. Through violence you may murder the hater, but you do not murder hate.
In fact, violence merely increases hate....’
“Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.”
These are the words of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. And they are a call to the action known as Covenant, an action in which can all participate.
And perhaps the action to which we are called is the covenant of loving God and loving neighbor. So, instead of me intoning an “Amen” as I often to at the end of my comments I invite you, this congregation, to respond to the words of Dr. King with an “Amen” of your own. And the people said: amen. (And the response was loud and unified.)
08/20/2017
United Church of Christ
ENDPIECE: It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Choral Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “O.K. Did you see what I did at the end of the meditation today? I invited you to action. And that action to which I invited you was probably pretty easy. All you had to do was intone the word ‘Amen.’ But I also want to point out that the Covenant with God does not incorporate or condone coercion or violence of any kind— as attractive as that might be sometimes— when it comes to action.— no violence, no coercion when it comes to action. So, sometimes intoning an “Amen” as it affirms the will of God is what you need to do. But I think we all recognize when that is not enough all the time. A simple ‘Amen’ is not enough where and when evil is rampant we need to do more. And that is when action to halt evil needs to be taken.”
BENEDICTION: We are commissioned by God to carry the peace of God into the world. Our words and our deeds will be used by God, for we become messengers of the Word of God in our actions. Let us recognize that the transforming power of God is forever among us. 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 and nothing else. Amen.
[1] Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. from Strength to Love, 1963.
Sunday, August 13, 2017
SERMON ~ August 13, 2017 ~ Yahweh, God, Omnipotent
August 13, 2017 ~ Proper 14 ~ Nineteenth Sunday in Ordinary Time ~ Tenth Sunday after Pentecost ~ Genesis 37:1-4, 12-28; Psalm 105: 1-6, 16-22, 45b; 1 Kings 19:9-18; Psalm 85:8-13; Romans 10:5-15; Matthew 14:22-33 ~ COMMUNION SUNDAY ~ Service in Founder’s Room ~ Service at North Guilford.
Yahweh, God, Omnipotent [1]
“Elijah replied, ‘I have been very zealous for Yahweh, God, Omnipotent.’” — 1 Kings 19:10a.
There is a test one can take— some call it a psychological test, the name of which is The Myers–Briggs Type Indicator. It was constructed by Katharine Briggs and her daughter Isabel Briggs Myers and is based on a theory proposed by the famous Swiss psychiatrist and psychoanalyst Carl Jung.
The test breaks people out into eight categories which are labeled as extrovert, introvert, sensing, intuitive, thinkers, feelers, judging— indicating those who seem to make judgements with some speed and perceiving for those who seem to readily perceive things before others. All these categories are designated with a one letter code for example ‘S’ for sensitive, ‘I’ for intuitive.
Further, all these categories can be mixed and matched in groups of four letters. Therefore, there are 16 possible categories into which individuals may fall, each category having a four letter code.
To translate: categories are commonly known four letters— for instance— INTJ, ESFJ, ISFP, etc., etc., etc. My standard line at this point is I don’t fit into any of those categories since I’m an ESPN. (Sorry— sports joke.)
In any case, people can be tested and over time it is not unusual for an individual to change categories. For instance, an introvert might change and become an extrovert.
Indeed, the first time I was tested, in my twenties, I tested as an introvert. But I left that category behind and eventually tested as an extrovert.
All that brings me to a little personal history which might explain the shift. As many of you know, I am a Vietnam veteran. When I was discharged, I did what a lot of Vietnam veterans did. I did some soul searching.
As to that process of self-examination, since I made it back I asked myself ‘why?’ Why had I survived when so many others had not? Some might even call that kind of reflection having a conversation with God.
A lot of us have asked that question about survival when 50,000 of us did not make it back. I, personally, still have no answer for it. I don’t expect I will, ever, have one.
But I think some of that introspection did lead me down a specific career path and that’s I want to talk about. I decided, having survived, I needed to be involved in someplace I felt spiritually called.
Now, some might say this process of self examination, since it did have to do with my sense of spirituality and there is not question about that, was me not just being introspective but me seeking the call of God. While I do not disagree with that, I think at that time at least, I primarily considered other aspects. I felt I needed to be someplace I thought I belonged, someplace I could call home, someplace which felt right.
And I loved theater. On top of that, I knew I could write. On top of that I knew I wanted to be a writer from about the time I was ten.
There was only one problem with of all this. Being involved with theater means being very public about one’s own being. And being public about one’s own being is not a place of particular comfort for an introvert.
On the other hand, being a writer is a solitary type of profession, is it not? After all, one goes off into an attic and writes, throws the manuscript out the attic window and others read it and don’t bother you anymore. That’s the way it works, is it not?
Well, that’s not the way it works if you write for the theater. Once a play gets produced— and that happened to me before I was thirty— once a play gets produced it means interacting with directors, designers, actors, etc., etc., etc. Theater is, you see, a collaborative art, not something done in solitude.
All of which is to say a requirement of theater is interaction with other people. And interactions with other people is a trait exhibited by extroverts. Ipso facto, I think that’s one reason I shifted from introvert to extrovert.
Perhaps I shifted because it was necessary. Perhaps it happened because of the experience of working in a collaborative art form. Perhaps I shifted because I sensed a place to which I was called, no matter how uncomfortable that place might have seemed. (Slight pause.)
We find these words in the work known as First Kings: “Elijah replied, ‘I have been very zealous for Yahweh, God, Omnipotent.’” (Slight pause.)
God, omnipotent— an odd phrase— what does it mean? The classic definition the word omnipotent says it is the quality of having unlimited power. Of course, logically, only monotheistic religions can a god whose attribute might be omnipotence. You can’t have two gods with unlimited power. That would be an oxymoron, would it not?
And while having unlimited power might be a common, dictionary definition, the question needs to be asked ‘is it a sound definition?’ For instance, can an all powerful God set up an impossible task and yet accomplish it? Can an omnipotent god create a rock so heavy that very same deity cannot lift it?
Further, Freud said omnipotence is simply megalomania or narcissism, therefore clearly not omnipotence. Indeed, there are a multitude of issues with the concept of omnipotence, at least the way we humans thing about it.
Indeed, I think the main problem with describing God as omnipotent comes because we relate the word only to human power, human understandings. And we humans tend to think in terms of power as brut force. (Slight pause.)
So, tell me— what if we humans thought of this omnipotent attribute of God simply as overwhelming, unconditional love? And what if this overwhelming, unconditional love meant God walks with us, no matter what the circumstance, no matter where we are? (Slight pause.)
That leads me to the other interesting words from this reading. Yahweh was not in the whirlwind, not in the earthquake, not in the fire. And then there was a sound of sheer silence. (Slight pause.)
How do we, how can we listen to and for the voice of God, this God Whose real voice is one of overwhelming, unconditional love? (Slight pause.) I suspect listening to the voice of God always encompasses a willingness to change. Put another way, can we turn away from an egocentric focus on self and turn toward a focus on God? (Slight pause.)
I, personally, always felt the call to be a writer was a call by God to do the will of God. But, equally, the demand made on me was that I needed to change.
Why? I was called into a very public domain. And equally, when I heard the call to be a pastor I realized that the very public domain to which I had previously been called prepared me to be involved in an even more public domain.
Here’s the brief story about the intertwining of these two— writing and standing in front of a congregation. As I have often said, I was a member of an Episcopal Church in New York City. And, with my friend Paul Lee Johnson, I wrote music for their choirs. Writing— you remember what I said about that. That’s this place introverts inhabit.
Then the pastor suggested to me I might be a suitable candidate for ordination. And then the pastor, perhaps trying to give me a little push, invited me to read Scripture at a service.
To this very day I can remember banging of my knees as they knocked together when I stood before that group of parishioners who knew me only as a writer, who knew me not as someone who ventured into public presentations. I also remember how many approached me at coffee hour and told me I did well with the reading and how much they appreciated it. And I also remember, of course, that very same pastor had me read over and over and over again, Sunday after Sunday after Sunday.
Hence, I believe for me there is a real connection with that path from being a writer to being a pastor. And, to be precise, the connection is being called into the public arena. Equally, the other connection is a willingness to listen to and to listen for the voice of God. Equally and finally, the last connection is a willingness to change. (Slight pause.)
So, is God omnipotent? Yes, God is omnipotent when one thinks of omnipotence not in terms of power.
God is omnipotent when one thinks of God in terms of overwhelming, unconditional love, in terms of God walking with us, no matter what the circumstance, no matter where we were at. And God is omnipotent when we are willing to change enough to hear the call of God for our life. Amen.
08/13/2017
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 Choral Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “Those of you who know something about my employment background know that being a theater person I had 100 different jobs. After all, I was a theater person. That’s what theater people do. But I always felt called. I think we need to understand that there are people who are called to be bankers. There are people who are called to be assembly line workers. But the call is what’s important. We need to be aware of God calling us, this God of omnipotent love.”
BENEDICTION: We are called to care in a world which can be uncaring, commissioned as lovers among some who may offer back indifference. Know this: God is with us in all our days. So, let us go forth knowing that the grace of God is deeper than our imagination, the strength of Christ is stronger than our need and the communion of the Holy Spirit is richer than all our togetherness. May God guide and sustain us today and in all our tomorrows. Amen.
[1] This was the weekend of the white supremacists violence in Charlottesville, Virginia. This prayer was offered in the course of the Prayers of the People.
This prayer is titled ‘To the God Whom We Have Forgotten, and Whom We Had Best Remember. It is by an Episcopal seminarian, Lauren Grubaugh, who was in Charlottesville, VA on 8/12/2017
To the God Whom we have forgotten; to the God Who is not male and is not white; to the God Who takes no pleasure in violence; to the God Who is Love; to the God Who is tender-hearted and warm of embrace; to the God Who is not deaf to Her children’s cries and is moved to tears by their suffering; to the God Whose law is love of neighbor, hospitality for the stranger, care for the weak; to the God Whose touch is healing, Whose gaze is compassion; Whose way is loving-kindness; to the God Who is Justice; to the God Who tramples fear and hatred under Her feet; to the God Who convicts our hearts, stirs our spirits, transforms our minds; to the God Who revels in the joyful dance of community and invites us to do the same; to the God Whose own child was lynched, hanging on a tree, not by God’s own hand, but because of the fear and hatred of those human beings Who feared the kind of world they were promised would be ushered in and hated the changes they would have to undergo to get there.
Our memory is so short: our failure to remember the sins of our parents, our aversion to repentance, is killing us. Our souls are wasting away. And black, brown, female, queer, Muslim, differently abled-bodies are dying.
O God Whom we have forgotten, we do not even know how to call on your name. We have not seen You in the faces of our sisters and brothers. We have not felt you in the pain of our neighbors, strangers, friends and enemies; O God Whom we have forgotten,
do not let our imaginations be infiltrated by war-mongering forces of violence.
Do not let our spirits be colonized by the depressing fear of our oppressors.
Transform our minds that do not know how to think of you existing without these heavy chains we have placed on ourselves and on each other.
Amen.
Yahweh, God, Omnipotent [1]
“Elijah replied, ‘I have been very zealous for Yahweh, God, Omnipotent.’” — 1 Kings 19:10a.
There is a test one can take— some call it a psychological test, the name of which is The Myers–Briggs Type Indicator. It was constructed by Katharine Briggs and her daughter Isabel Briggs Myers and is based on a theory proposed by the famous Swiss psychiatrist and psychoanalyst Carl Jung.
The test breaks people out into eight categories which are labeled as extrovert, introvert, sensing, intuitive, thinkers, feelers, judging— indicating those who seem to make judgements with some speed and perceiving for those who seem to readily perceive things before others. All these categories are designated with a one letter code for example ‘S’ for sensitive, ‘I’ for intuitive.
Further, all these categories can be mixed and matched in groups of four letters. Therefore, there are 16 possible categories into which individuals may fall, each category having a four letter code.
To translate: categories are commonly known four letters— for instance— INTJ, ESFJ, ISFP, etc., etc., etc. My standard line at this point is I don’t fit into any of those categories since I’m an ESPN. (Sorry— sports joke.)
In any case, people can be tested and over time it is not unusual for an individual to change categories. For instance, an introvert might change and become an extrovert.
Indeed, the first time I was tested, in my twenties, I tested as an introvert. But I left that category behind and eventually tested as an extrovert.
All that brings me to a little personal history which might explain the shift. As many of you know, I am a Vietnam veteran. When I was discharged, I did what a lot of Vietnam veterans did. I did some soul searching.
As to that process of self-examination, since I made it back I asked myself ‘why?’ Why had I survived when so many others had not? Some might even call that kind of reflection having a conversation with God.
A lot of us have asked that question about survival when 50,000 of us did not make it back. I, personally, still have no answer for it. I don’t expect I will, ever, have one.
But I think some of that introspection did lead me down a specific career path and that’s I want to talk about. I decided, having survived, I needed to be involved in someplace I felt spiritually called.
Now, some might say this process of self examination, since it did have to do with my sense of spirituality and there is not question about that, was me not just being introspective but me seeking the call of God. While I do not disagree with that, I think at that time at least, I primarily considered other aspects. I felt I needed to be someplace I thought I belonged, someplace I could call home, someplace which felt right.
And I loved theater. On top of that, I knew I could write. On top of that I knew I wanted to be a writer from about the time I was ten.
There was only one problem with of all this. Being involved with theater means being very public about one’s own being. And being public about one’s own being is not a place of particular comfort for an introvert.
On the other hand, being a writer is a solitary type of profession, is it not? After all, one goes off into an attic and writes, throws the manuscript out the attic window and others read it and don’t bother you anymore. That’s the way it works, is it not?
Well, that’s not the way it works if you write for the theater. Once a play gets produced— and that happened to me before I was thirty— once a play gets produced it means interacting with directors, designers, actors, etc., etc., etc. Theater is, you see, a collaborative art, not something done in solitude.
All of which is to say a requirement of theater is interaction with other people. And interactions with other people is a trait exhibited by extroverts. Ipso facto, I think that’s one reason I shifted from introvert to extrovert.
Perhaps I shifted because it was necessary. Perhaps it happened because of the experience of working in a collaborative art form. Perhaps I shifted because I sensed a place to which I was called, no matter how uncomfortable that place might have seemed. (Slight pause.)
We find these words in the work known as First Kings: “Elijah replied, ‘I have been very zealous for Yahweh, God, Omnipotent.’” (Slight pause.)
God, omnipotent— an odd phrase— what does it mean? The classic definition the word omnipotent says it is the quality of having unlimited power. Of course, logically, only monotheistic religions can a god whose attribute might be omnipotence. You can’t have two gods with unlimited power. That would be an oxymoron, would it not?
And while having unlimited power might be a common, dictionary definition, the question needs to be asked ‘is it a sound definition?’ For instance, can an all powerful God set up an impossible task and yet accomplish it? Can an omnipotent god create a rock so heavy that very same deity cannot lift it?
Further, Freud said omnipotence is simply megalomania or narcissism, therefore clearly not omnipotence. Indeed, there are a multitude of issues with the concept of omnipotence, at least the way we humans thing about it.
Indeed, I think the main problem with describing God as omnipotent comes because we relate the word only to human power, human understandings. And we humans tend to think in terms of power as brut force. (Slight pause.)
So, tell me— what if we humans thought of this omnipotent attribute of God simply as overwhelming, unconditional love? And what if this overwhelming, unconditional love meant God walks with us, no matter what the circumstance, no matter where we are? (Slight pause.)
That leads me to the other interesting words from this reading. Yahweh was not in the whirlwind, not in the earthquake, not in the fire. And then there was a sound of sheer silence. (Slight pause.)
How do we, how can we listen to and for the voice of God, this God Whose real voice is one of overwhelming, unconditional love? (Slight pause.) I suspect listening to the voice of God always encompasses a willingness to change. Put another way, can we turn away from an egocentric focus on self and turn toward a focus on God? (Slight pause.)
I, personally, always felt the call to be a writer was a call by God to do the will of God. But, equally, the demand made on me was that I needed to change.
Why? I was called into a very public domain. And equally, when I heard the call to be a pastor I realized that the very public domain to which I had previously been called prepared me to be involved in an even more public domain.
Here’s the brief story about the intertwining of these two— writing and standing in front of a congregation. As I have often said, I was a member of an Episcopal Church in New York City. And, with my friend Paul Lee Johnson, I wrote music for their choirs. Writing— you remember what I said about that. That’s this place introverts inhabit.
Then the pastor suggested to me I might be a suitable candidate for ordination. And then the pastor, perhaps trying to give me a little push, invited me to read Scripture at a service.
To this very day I can remember banging of my knees as they knocked together when I stood before that group of parishioners who knew me only as a writer, who knew me not as someone who ventured into public presentations. I also remember how many approached me at coffee hour and told me I did well with the reading and how much they appreciated it. And I also remember, of course, that very same pastor had me read over and over and over again, Sunday after Sunday after Sunday.
Hence, I believe for me there is a real connection with that path from being a writer to being a pastor. And, to be precise, the connection is being called into the public arena. Equally, the other connection is a willingness to listen to and to listen for the voice of God. Equally and finally, the last connection is a willingness to change. (Slight pause.)
So, is God omnipotent? Yes, God is omnipotent when one thinks of omnipotence not in terms of power.
God is omnipotent when one thinks of God in terms of overwhelming, unconditional love, in terms of God walking with us, no matter what the circumstance, no matter where we were at. And God is omnipotent when we are willing to change enough to hear the call of God for our life. Amen.
08/13/2017
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 Choral Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “Those of you who know something about my employment background know that being a theater person I had 100 different jobs. After all, I was a theater person. That’s what theater people do. But I always felt called. I think we need to understand that there are people who are called to be bankers. There are people who are called to be assembly line workers. But the call is what’s important. We need to be aware of God calling us, this God of omnipotent love.”
BENEDICTION: We are called to care in a world which can be uncaring, commissioned as lovers among some who may offer back indifference. Know this: God is with us in all our days. So, let us go forth knowing that the grace of God is deeper than our imagination, the strength of Christ is stronger than our need and the communion of the Holy Spirit is richer than all our togetherness. May God guide and sustain us today and in all our tomorrows. Amen.
[1] This was the weekend of the white supremacists violence in Charlottesville, Virginia. This prayer was offered in the course of the Prayers of the People.
This prayer is titled ‘To the God Whom We Have Forgotten, and Whom We Had Best Remember. It is by an Episcopal seminarian, Lauren Grubaugh, who was in Charlottesville, VA on 8/12/2017
To the God Whom we have forgotten; to the God Who is not male and is not white; to the God Who takes no pleasure in violence; to the God Who is Love; to the God Who is tender-hearted and warm of embrace; to the God Who is not deaf to Her children’s cries and is moved to tears by their suffering; to the God Whose law is love of neighbor, hospitality for the stranger, care for the weak; to the God Whose touch is healing, Whose gaze is compassion; Whose way is loving-kindness; to the God Who is Justice; to the God Who tramples fear and hatred under Her feet; to the God Who convicts our hearts, stirs our spirits, transforms our minds; to the God Who revels in the joyful dance of community and invites us to do the same; to the God Whose own child was lynched, hanging on a tree, not by God’s own hand, but because of the fear and hatred of those human beings Who feared the kind of world they were promised would be ushered in and hated the changes they would have to undergo to get there.
Our memory is so short: our failure to remember the sins of our parents, our aversion to repentance, is killing us. Our souls are wasting away. And black, brown, female, queer, Muslim, differently abled-bodies are dying.
O God Whom we have forgotten, we do not even know how to call on your name. We have not seen You in the faces of our sisters and brothers. We have not felt you in the pain of our neighbors, strangers, friends and enemies; O God Whom we have forgotten,
do not let our imaginations be infiltrated by war-mongering forces of violence.
Do not let our spirits be colonized by the depressing fear of our oppressors.
Transform our minds that do not know how to think of you existing without these heavy chains we have placed on ourselves and on each other.
Amen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)