02/24/2019 ~ Seventh Sunday after the Epiphany, Known in Some Traditions as the Seventh Sunday in Ordinary Time (Proper 2 ) ~ Genesis 45:3-11, 15; Psalm 37:1-11, 39-40; 1 Corinthians 15:35-38, 42-50; Luke 6:27-38.
Golden Rules
“Do to others as you would have them do to you.” — Luke 6:31
One of the adjunct professors at Bangor Seminary, the place I went to seminary, Dana Sawyer, had an interesting background. A Native American who grew up on the Penobscot Tribe reservation near Old Town, just north of Bangor, he had a Ph.D. in Far Eastern Religion.
Of course, you do not get that degree without having visited the Far East numerous times. Then he, a Native American with a degree in Far Eastern Religion, returned to Maine to teach at the University level. The particular class he taught at Bangor was, appropriately, World Religions.
This background was fascinating but something he said I found even more fascinating. He insisted the religion most practiced world wide, most practiced in America, was what he called folk religion.
What did he mean? (I could spend a half an hour unpacking that thought.) Here’s an American example he used: Fundamentalism is a folk religion, said he. How so? Fundamentalism has absolutely no basis in historic Christianity and began only in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
Following the Civil War, tensions developed among Christians in America. Scholarly Biblical criticism, a practice of Scriptural study which dates back millennia, started to be seen as something which encouraged social and cultural change. That very encouragement of social, cultural change was unacceptable to some, at least in part because of a resistance to social, cultural change.
And so, The Fundamentals, a series of papers, was published between 1910 and 1915, published in Los Angeles of all places, supported by an oil baron, right out of the Gilded Age who had some reason to resist social, cultural change because of his status. The bottom line is Christianity had never seen anything like organized Fundamentalism before. And this was organized by big money.
While many think Fundamentalism is ancient, obviously this is new, a little more than 100 years old. And it is, in fact, a largely American idea. This American idea spread to other faith traditions, Islamic Fundamentalism being the prime example. They had never had Fundamentalists before. I am sure the irony of that is not lost on you.
To put this into perspective, Fundamentalism is not a theological reevaluation of Christianity. This is a social movement, a cultural movement, whose mission was to resist change in society. I need to be clear. I am not saying people who follow Fundamentalism are insincere in what is believed. I am saying the movement itself stems from social, cultural and late origins.
United Church of Christ pastor Lillian Daniel has published a book whose title reflects my sentiments: Tired of Apologizing for a Church I Don’t Belong To is the title. The Christianity I know, the Christianity to which I belong, historic Christianity, cannot be labeled a folk religion as it is not based simply on a current cultural, social trend. Fundamentalism is based on what was a new cultural, social trend just 100 years ago and, hence, as Dana Sayer, my professor, said, can be labeled a folk religion. (Slight pause.)
From time to time many of you have heard me say I have Jesuit training. My follow up line after that is, “Scratch a Jesuit, you get a Protestant.” That would be me.
I was, however, never in a classroom taught by Jesuits. Rather, since my father taught at a Jesuit High School for his entire working career, Jesuits were my friends.
Jesuits came to family parties. I went on trips with Jesuits. I played softball and basketball with Jesuits. Jesuits staffed the Summer camp I attended.
Question: most of the time how do we really learn, especially how do we learn about life, about how to behave, about how life should be lived? We learn from family. We learn from friends.
A competent teacher will tell you a significant chunk of learning happens outside any classroom wall. When Jesuits are friends of the family, it is hard to not be influenced by their thinking, to not learn from their thinking. (Slight pause.)
Jesuit have an interesting practice of which I know. Every ten years they publish a list of four priorities which will be the “mission of the Jesuit order” for the next ten years. They just published a new list.
First, “show the way to God through discernment and... Spiritual Exercises.” Next, “walk with the poor, the outcasts of the world, those whose dignity has been violated, in a mission of reconciliation and justice.” Third, “accompany young people in the creation of a hope-filled future.” Last, “collaborate in the care of (the earth) our Common Home.” (Slight pause.)
We find this being spoken by the Christ in the work known as Luke/Acts in the portion called Luke: “Do to others as you would have them do to you.” (Slight pause)
The quote you just heard is often called The Golden Rule. It is found in many faith traditions and in many social traditions, in many cultures. It dates at least back to the Code of Hammurabi, 1,700 yeas before the birth of Christ. (Slight pause.)
Now, I think most of you are aware I had what might be called multiple careers before seminary. One piece of that was a nine year stint on and off working on Wall Street.
Do you know what The Golden Rule on Wall Street is? (Slight pause.) Those who have the gold make the rules. Its corollary is those who have power hoard power. Another corollary: those who dominate strive to perpetuate dominance.
These are cultural, secular golden rules. The question for us around that is simple: is following that golden rule, a cultural golden rule, a secular golden rule, the place to which God calls us, the place to which God calls the church? (Slight pause.)
Occasionally someone will say there are liberal interpretations of the Bible. Others will say there are conservative interpretations. Nether position is accurate.
What I am about to say is neither liberal nor conservative. The challenges with which Scripture presents us as we examine it, as we seek God’s Word and God’s will are multiple when it comes to the culture. The first challenge is that we need to identify the cultural trappings in Scripture which are based on the era in which Scripture was written.
That alone is not easy. After all, the first five books of the Bible, the Pentateuch, contain at least five different documents written over the course of a number centuries and then woven together so they appear to someone who reads the text only in translation and not in the original language to be just one, single, singular document. If you’re reading in the original languages the differences jump out at you.
Each of those documents, woven together as one, written in different eras, need to be unpacked for the cultural content in the era in which they were written. And, when you are reading the words in the original language, it becomes evident sometimes one sentence is written in one era and the very next sentence is written five hundred years later and addresses a different cultural context.
After that, after the cultural contents are identified, the question for us becomes what is God saying? To where does God call us?
So, not only do we need to identify the cultural, social content. We need to neutralize it as we seek the will of God.
But there is another challenge. What does our culture, today, say to us? You see, to identify what our culture today says to us, its influence on us, is an even harder task than looking at an ancient culture in the Scriptural text.
After all, perhaps we cannot fully identify all aspects of an ancient culture. But we can identify many of them.
I think identifying today’s culture is a more daunting challenge. Why? We are living in and with our own culture. It is second nature to us. We do not even notice it.
And just like we should strive to identify cultural practices in ancient times when we read Scripture and naturalize those, we need to identify today’s cultural trends. And then we need to neutralize today’s cultural trends and yet again ask ‘what is God saying?’ ‘To where does God call us?’ ‘To where does God call the church?’
All of this points us to one place when looking at Scripture. Will we be overcome, will we be overwhelmed by the culture which surrounds us when we read Scripture? (Slight pause.)
That brings me back to my friends the Jesuits and their current ten year program. I would sum up that ten year program with just several words: discernment; reconciliation and justice; the creation of a hope-filled future; the earth, our Common Home. (Slight pause.)
As I said, Scripture is neither liberal nor conservative. That summation of the Jesuit program is neither liberal nor conservative. Why? Living into and with these ideas is about a way of life. Living into and with these ideas is how we learn about life, about how we learn to behave, about how life should be lived, about living together.
Christianity is not about rules. Christianity is not about the culture. Christianity is about a way of life. That is one reason why each time the Jesuits post a program it’s for ten years. This is about a ten year exercise in practicing a way of life with specifics. To practice a way of life takes time.
Will anyone ever be perfect at the practice? No. The idea is to practice and strive to improve every day. Perhaps more importantly the idea is to strive, as well as we are able, to see the world as God sees the world. How does God see the world?
I hear this is just one of the things Jesus said about living life as we strive to know God and to know the will of God: “Do to others as you would have them do to you.” Now that, my friends, is not a golden rule. That is a counter-cultural idea since those words are about God’s culture, not human culture. Amen.
02/24/2019
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: “Let me quote Reinhold Niebuhr: ‘Nothing worth doing can be achieved in our lifetime; therefore we must be saved by hope. Nothing true or beautiful or good makes complete sense in any immediate context of history; therefore we must be saved by faith. Nothing we do, however virtuous, can be accomplished alone; therefore we must be saved by love.’ Do I get occasionally discouraged? Yes. But I understand my own frailty and mortality. I understand I live in a culture. I understand I need to pay attention to God’s culture. The culture is temporary. God is not.”
BENEDICTION: Let us go in joy and in love and in peace. God reigns. Therefore, let us go forth in the name of Christ proclaiming the peace of God which surpasses understanding. And may the face of God shine upon us; may the presence of Christ be with us; may the fire of the Spirit burn within us this day and forevermore. Amen.
Sunday, February 24, 2019
Sunday, February 17, 2019
SERMON ~ 02/17/2019 ~ “Attitudes and the Beatitudes”
02/17/2019 ~ Sixth Sunday after the Epiphany, Known in Some Traditions as the Sixth Sunday in Ordinary Time ~ (Proper 1 ) ~ Jeremiah 17:5-10; Psalm 1; 1 Corinthians 15:12-20; Luke 6:17-26.
Attitudes and the Beatitudes
“...the whole crowd was trying to touch Jesus for power came out of the Rabbi healing them all. Then Jesus looked at the disciples and said:...” — Luke 6:19-20a.
I have oftentimes regaled you with stories of my faith journey, my faith background or rather I should put that in the plural: my backgrounds. Briefly, I grew up in the Roman Catholic tradition, moved over to the Episcopalian tradition and wound up in the Congregational tradition.
I then went to Bangor Seminary where I had classmates across numerous traditions from Roman Catholic to Baptist to Unitarian to Quaker. In that situation one cannot avoid learning about how things are seen in these various faith traditions.
Just being in class with people from all those backgrounds is informative and stimulating. Outside the classroom conversations are simply amazing.
Given that background and education, it should not surprise you that I know, maintain contacts and friendships with folks across that spectrum. And so I want to tell a story about an Episcopal priest I knew.
He was a British national but had been ordained in the American Episcopal Church. He had been serving a church in Louisiana, all the way down on the delta. Then he got called to serve a church in New York City. Louisiana — New York City— these are two different worlds.
How different? The service in an Episcopal Church has about 40 or 45 minutes of just liturgy. The celebration of Communion is a given at nearly every main service.
Well, when serving that church in Louisiana if this priest did not preach for at least one hour at each of those services, the parishioners would have run him out of town. Once in New York City, if the sermon of this priest ran a half a second past twenty minutes, the parishioners would have run him out of town.
Please notice, what I just said has nothing to do with the theology, liturgy or preaching in an Episcopal Church. It does not even say anything about ‘what makes a good sermon?’
All this is totally and inexorably tied up in the culture of the churches that priest served. I don’t think I am telling any secrets if I said the culture on opposite sides of the Mason-Dixon line is a tad different.
In short, local church culture overrules and overcomes practice, sometimes theology, but certainly denominational norms. And this story more so about local culture, the culture in those two particular churches served by that priest and about how the local culture in those specific places holds sway, than it is even about that North-South divide. I know that because I know Episcopal Churches in New York City. I know Episcopal Churches where the sermon can’t be longer than ten minutes. I know Episcopal Churches in New York City where the sermon probably needs to be thirty minutes. (Slight pause.)
As I indicated earlier, this last week Saint Valentine’s Day was celebrated— cupids, flowers, candy, fancy dinners. [1] That’s the way it’s done, is it not? That’s the way we celebrate Saint Valentine’s Day, right? (Slight pause.)
Say what? Saint Valentine was a 3rd-century Roman priest, a bishop who ministered to persecuted Christians, a servant of God martyred for this work. For the life of me I cannot find the connection with Saint Valentine, a martyred priest and bishop and the thing we do with cupids, flowers, candy, fancy dinners. (Slight pause.) Can you say ‘it’s the culture?’
The way Saint Valentine’s day is celebrated is certainly not about the person whose name is fixed on that date. This, therefore, does need to be noticed: the culture finds excuses and fixates on specific ways of doing something just because the culture wants to do it that way, even when doing it the way the culture wants to do it makes absolutely no sense.
So, what should we call this? I’ve got it! Fake news— let’s call it fake news. (Slight pause.) No— I think someone has used that label already— probably not a good idea. (Slight pause.)
These words are found in the Gospel of Luke: “...the whole crowd was trying to touch Jesus for power came out of the Rabbi healing them all. Then Jesus looked at the disciples and said:...” (Long pause.)
I think most of you know since we publish this fact in our Newsletter, there is a Revised Common Lectionary, a list of recommended readings for each Sunday in the Liturgical Year. Among the readings this week three of the four assigned readings contain beatitudes. But what is a beatitude?
In the reading from Jeremiah we heard the Prophet say, “Blessed are those who / put their trust in Yahweh, God, / whose hope is with Yahweh, God.” In the Luke reading we heard Jesus insist, “You who are poor are blessed, / for the reign of God is yours.”
However and equally we heard Jeremiah say, “The human heart is devious / more deceitful / than anything else; / it is desperately sick—...” And then Jesus says, “...woe to you who are rich, / for you are now receiving / your consolation, your comfort / in full.”
This should be abundantly clear: a beatitude is not simply a declaration of something good or special or nice. And that is precisely why I started my comments with these specific words from Sermon on the Plain: “Then Jesus looked at the disciples and said:...” then I stopped. (Long pause.)
Question: what is Jesus doing here? What was Jeremiah doing? To what and to where are Jeremiah and Jesus trying to point us? What are we being told when we hear beatitudes? The evidence suggests it’s not simply about good, special or nice. (Slight pause.)
Theologian Richard Rhor claims the message God has for us is transformative because God is transformative. Therefore, in order to be faithful we need to strive to be transformed ourselves. [2]
Certainly one of our issues with God Who is transformative, one of the reasons we grapple to understand God as transformative, this God Who invites us to be transformed, is we get tied up in the messages with which our culture surrounds us. These cultural messages tend to be aimed at maintaining the status quo, making things just like they used to be in some imaginary time past when thing were perfect. I’m historian. I’m still looking for that time when things were perfect. (Slight pause.)
Coming back to the culture and to be clear, when I use the word ‘culture’ it applies to a multitude of levels. It applies to global culture, national culture, regional culture, local culture. I highlighted the Valentine’s celebration and the sermons in two Episcopal Churches as examples because one is national and one is quite local.
The New York Times recently published an article by a Dutch national who was here for graduate studies. She wrote about the Valentine’s Day festivities of cupids, flowers, candy, fancy dinners and her lack of understanding these.
Her spouse, an Israeli also here for graduate studies, for whom these rituals also seemed alien, was pressured by friends into bring her flowers and chocolate. He did. She was horrified.
She threatened divorce if he ever again brought overpriced roses or chocolates to her in mid-February. He was happy about that since all he wanted to do in mid-February was to concentrate on graduate work, study, research.
In the article her comments said these rituals try to perpetuate a lethal combination of Hollywood sentimentality and Victorian romanticism. She objected to the tyranny of perfect romance.
She prefers a flawed relationship over the fairy tale love of candlelight dinners, red roses, walks on the beach. To her imperfect love seems preferable to that. [3]
I am reminded lyricist Ira Gershwin, someone well known for writing love songs, wrote these words to a tune by his brother George in all the way back in 1931. It was meant to illustrate this dichotomy between romanticism and the reality of relationship by employing irony.
(Quote:) “Blah, blah, blah, blah— moon / Blah, blah, blah— above / Blah, blah, blah, blah— croon / Blah, blah, blah— love. / Tra la, la, la; tra la, la, la, la— merry month of May / Tra la, la, la; tra la, la, la, la— 'neath a cloud of grey.” [4] There are another couple of choruses but you get the idea and I don’t meant to bore you. (Slight pause.)
As to the culture of the local church, the story of the local differences between sermon length, it speaks about the need for the local church to see beyond its own walls. I think we are not terrible at that. But we can always be better on many, many levels.
This brings me back to the reflections of Richard Rhor on God, the God Who we Christians claim is transformative, the God Who we Christians claim can help us transform. Indeed, I want to suggest any beatitude we find in Scripture is not there to point to something good, special or nice.
That should be evident precisely because of the dichotomies heard in the beatitudes found in both Jeremiah and in the Sermon on the Plain. The place to which beatitudes point is in no way the kind of world our culture sees. The place to which beatitudes point is not the kind of world we see in front of us. The place to which beatitudes point is the kind of world God sees, God envisions.
And that is our challenge in a nutshell. The kind of world God sees, God envisions, is one where we put our trust and hope in Yahweh, God.
The kind of world God sees, the kind of world God envisions, is one where the hungry are fed. The kind of world God sees, the kind of world God envisions, is one where the equity, peace, justice, freedom, joy, hope, peace and love of God reigns. The question for us is can we also see, envision the kind of world which encompasses God’s vision. Your call. Amen.
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, New York
02/17/2019
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 me well know I often use the word covenant. What does it mean to covenant with God? Here’s the short version: it means we commit to growth— spiritual growth, growth in understanding, growth in wisdom, growth in love. Covenant means we strive to refuse to be trapped by our human failings, trapped by our culture.”
BENEDICTION: Depart in peace for God’s promised covenant is real and is forever. And may the love of God guide us, the word of the Christ empower us and the gifts of the Spirit dwell in us, this day and forever more. Amen.
[1] A the Children’s time the pastor gave out heart shaped things and asked of this showed love. These theologically astute children said “no.” God shows love and helping each other shows love.
[2] https://cac.org/personal-and-universal-2019-02-15/
[3] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/08/well/family/against-romance-an-un-valentine.html?fallback=0&recId=1HDWlqe73QC4MojjT4yPF1WFJzo&locked=0&geoContinent=NA&geoRegion=NY&recAlloc=home-geo&geoCountry=US&blockId=home-living-vi&imp_id=66027691&action=click&module=Smarter%20Living&pgtype=Homepage
[4] https://lyricsplayground.com/alpha/songs/b/blahblahblah.html
The song is Blah, Blah, Blah. It was in the 1931 film Delicious.
Attitudes and the Beatitudes
“...the whole crowd was trying to touch Jesus for power came out of the Rabbi healing them all. Then Jesus looked at the disciples and said:...” — Luke 6:19-20a.
I have oftentimes regaled you with stories of my faith journey, my faith background or rather I should put that in the plural: my backgrounds. Briefly, I grew up in the Roman Catholic tradition, moved over to the Episcopalian tradition and wound up in the Congregational tradition.
I then went to Bangor Seminary where I had classmates across numerous traditions from Roman Catholic to Baptist to Unitarian to Quaker. In that situation one cannot avoid learning about how things are seen in these various faith traditions.
Just being in class with people from all those backgrounds is informative and stimulating. Outside the classroom conversations are simply amazing.
Given that background and education, it should not surprise you that I know, maintain contacts and friendships with folks across that spectrum. And so I want to tell a story about an Episcopal priest I knew.
He was a British national but had been ordained in the American Episcopal Church. He had been serving a church in Louisiana, all the way down on the delta. Then he got called to serve a church in New York City. Louisiana — New York City— these are two different worlds.
How different? The service in an Episcopal Church has about 40 or 45 minutes of just liturgy. The celebration of Communion is a given at nearly every main service.
Well, when serving that church in Louisiana if this priest did not preach for at least one hour at each of those services, the parishioners would have run him out of town. Once in New York City, if the sermon of this priest ran a half a second past twenty minutes, the parishioners would have run him out of town.
Please notice, what I just said has nothing to do with the theology, liturgy or preaching in an Episcopal Church. It does not even say anything about ‘what makes a good sermon?’
All this is totally and inexorably tied up in the culture of the churches that priest served. I don’t think I am telling any secrets if I said the culture on opposite sides of the Mason-Dixon line is a tad different.
In short, local church culture overrules and overcomes practice, sometimes theology, but certainly denominational norms. And this story more so about local culture, the culture in those two particular churches served by that priest and about how the local culture in those specific places holds sway, than it is even about that North-South divide. I know that because I know Episcopal Churches in New York City. I know Episcopal Churches where the sermon can’t be longer than ten minutes. I know Episcopal Churches in New York City where the sermon probably needs to be thirty minutes. (Slight pause.)
As I indicated earlier, this last week Saint Valentine’s Day was celebrated— cupids, flowers, candy, fancy dinners. [1] That’s the way it’s done, is it not? That’s the way we celebrate Saint Valentine’s Day, right? (Slight pause.)
Say what? Saint Valentine was a 3rd-century Roman priest, a bishop who ministered to persecuted Christians, a servant of God martyred for this work. For the life of me I cannot find the connection with Saint Valentine, a martyred priest and bishop and the thing we do with cupids, flowers, candy, fancy dinners. (Slight pause.) Can you say ‘it’s the culture?’
The way Saint Valentine’s day is celebrated is certainly not about the person whose name is fixed on that date. This, therefore, does need to be noticed: the culture finds excuses and fixates on specific ways of doing something just because the culture wants to do it that way, even when doing it the way the culture wants to do it makes absolutely no sense.
So, what should we call this? I’ve got it! Fake news— let’s call it fake news. (Slight pause.) No— I think someone has used that label already— probably not a good idea. (Slight pause.)
These words are found in the Gospel of Luke: “...the whole crowd was trying to touch Jesus for power came out of the Rabbi healing them all. Then Jesus looked at the disciples and said:...” (Long pause.)
I think most of you know since we publish this fact in our Newsletter, there is a Revised Common Lectionary, a list of recommended readings for each Sunday in the Liturgical Year. Among the readings this week three of the four assigned readings contain beatitudes. But what is a beatitude?
In the reading from Jeremiah we heard the Prophet say, “Blessed are those who / put their trust in Yahweh, God, / whose hope is with Yahweh, God.” In the Luke reading we heard Jesus insist, “You who are poor are blessed, / for the reign of God is yours.”
However and equally we heard Jeremiah say, “The human heart is devious / more deceitful / than anything else; / it is desperately sick—...” And then Jesus says, “...woe to you who are rich, / for you are now receiving / your consolation, your comfort / in full.”
This should be abundantly clear: a beatitude is not simply a declaration of something good or special or nice. And that is precisely why I started my comments with these specific words from Sermon on the Plain: “Then Jesus looked at the disciples and said:...” then I stopped. (Long pause.)
Question: what is Jesus doing here? What was Jeremiah doing? To what and to where are Jeremiah and Jesus trying to point us? What are we being told when we hear beatitudes? The evidence suggests it’s not simply about good, special or nice. (Slight pause.)
Theologian Richard Rhor claims the message God has for us is transformative because God is transformative. Therefore, in order to be faithful we need to strive to be transformed ourselves. [2]
Certainly one of our issues with God Who is transformative, one of the reasons we grapple to understand God as transformative, this God Who invites us to be transformed, is we get tied up in the messages with which our culture surrounds us. These cultural messages tend to be aimed at maintaining the status quo, making things just like they used to be in some imaginary time past when thing were perfect. I’m historian. I’m still looking for that time when things were perfect. (Slight pause.)
Coming back to the culture and to be clear, when I use the word ‘culture’ it applies to a multitude of levels. It applies to global culture, national culture, regional culture, local culture. I highlighted the Valentine’s celebration and the sermons in two Episcopal Churches as examples because one is national and one is quite local.
The New York Times recently published an article by a Dutch national who was here for graduate studies. She wrote about the Valentine’s Day festivities of cupids, flowers, candy, fancy dinners and her lack of understanding these.
Her spouse, an Israeli also here for graduate studies, for whom these rituals also seemed alien, was pressured by friends into bring her flowers and chocolate. He did. She was horrified.
She threatened divorce if he ever again brought overpriced roses or chocolates to her in mid-February. He was happy about that since all he wanted to do in mid-February was to concentrate on graduate work, study, research.
In the article her comments said these rituals try to perpetuate a lethal combination of Hollywood sentimentality and Victorian romanticism. She objected to the tyranny of perfect romance.
She prefers a flawed relationship over the fairy tale love of candlelight dinners, red roses, walks on the beach. To her imperfect love seems preferable to that. [3]
I am reminded lyricist Ira Gershwin, someone well known for writing love songs, wrote these words to a tune by his brother George in all the way back in 1931. It was meant to illustrate this dichotomy between romanticism and the reality of relationship by employing irony.
(Quote:) “Blah, blah, blah, blah— moon / Blah, blah, blah— above / Blah, blah, blah, blah— croon / Blah, blah, blah— love. / Tra la, la, la; tra la, la, la, la— merry month of May / Tra la, la, la; tra la, la, la, la— 'neath a cloud of grey.” [4] There are another couple of choruses but you get the idea and I don’t meant to bore you. (Slight pause.)
As to the culture of the local church, the story of the local differences between sermon length, it speaks about the need for the local church to see beyond its own walls. I think we are not terrible at that. But we can always be better on many, many levels.
This brings me back to the reflections of Richard Rhor on God, the God Who we Christians claim is transformative, the God Who we Christians claim can help us transform. Indeed, I want to suggest any beatitude we find in Scripture is not there to point to something good, special or nice.
That should be evident precisely because of the dichotomies heard in the beatitudes found in both Jeremiah and in the Sermon on the Plain. The place to which beatitudes point is in no way the kind of world our culture sees. The place to which beatitudes point is not the kind of world we see in front of us. The place to which beatitudes point is the kind of world God sees, God envisions.
And that is our challenge in a nutshell. The kind of world God sees, God envisions, is one where we put our trust and hope in Yahweh, God.
The kind of world God sees, the kind of world God envisions, is one where the hungry are fed. The kind of world God sees, the kind of world God envisions, is one where the equity, peace, justice, freedom, joy, hope, peace and love of God reigns. The question for us is can we also see, envision the kind of world which encompasses God’s vision. Your call. Amen.
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, New York
02/17/2019
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 me well know I often use the word covenant. What does it mean to covenant with God? Here’s the short version: it means we commit to growth— spiritual growth, growth in understanding, growth in wisdom, growth in love. Covenant means we strive to refuse to be trapped by our human failings, trapped by our culture.”
BENEDICTION: Depart in peace for God’s promised covenant is real and is forever. And may the love of God guide us, the word of the Christ empower us and the gifts of the Spirit dwell in us, this day and forever more. Amen.
[1] A the Children’s time the pastor gave out heart shaped things and asked of this showed love. These theologically astute children said “no.” God shows love and helping each other shows love.
[2] https://cac.org/personal-and-universal-2019-02-15/
[3] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/08/well/family/against-romance-an-un-valentine.html?fallback=0&recId=1HDWlqe73QC4MojjT4yPF1WFJzo&locked=0&geoContinent=NA&geoRegion=NY&recAlloc=home-geo&geoCountry=US&blockId=home-living-vi&imp_id=66027691&action=click&module=Smarter%20Living&pgtype=Homepage
[4] https://lyricsplayground.com/alpha/songs/b/blahblahblah.html
The song is Blah, Blah, Blah. It was in the 1931 film Delicious.
Sunday, February 10, 2019
SERMON ~ 02/10/2019 ~ “I Traditioned”
READINGS: 02/10/2019 ~ Fifth Sunday after the Epiphany, Known in Some Traditions as the Fifth Sunday in Ordinary Time ~ Isaiah 6:1-8, (9-13); Psalm 138; 1 Corinthians 15:1-11; Luke 5:1-11.
I Traditioned
“For I, Paul, handed on to you first of all, as of first importance, what I, myself, had received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, and that Christ was buried, and that, on the third day, Christ was raised in accordance with the Scriptures.” — 1 Corinthians 15:3-4.
When I sensed a call to ordained ministry the first thing I did is I spoke with my Pastor. The first thing we did together is set up a discernment committee at my church. A discernment committee helps guide someone seeking ordination in that process and asks tough questions about what the specific sense of call might be.
Since I had not seen the inside of a classroom for 20 plus years at that point they suggested I take a class at Bangor Seminary to see how the academics went. I took survey course in the Hebrew Scriptures with Dr. Ann Johnston.
For the first paper she assigned she said we could be creative. We could, in fact, write a standard academic paper. Or we could write a play, a poem, do a painting.
The visual works would need a written explanation and written works would need plenty of footnotes. But we could do anything an artist might do.
I was a playwright. I wrote a play, a comedy, based on the story of the Burning Bush. That’s right: a comedy based on the story of the Burning Bush. Here’s an example of what was in the play.
MOSES: The bush— it burns but it is not consumed. How does that work?
GOD: Yeah.... I have my special effects people. They are very good. Someday I might let a guy named Cecil B. DeMille use them. But right now, they are my people.
The paper came back with an A+ on the top. Ann told me the A+ was because I had used what was in Scripture word for word but just added extra words to it.
I had been faithful to the Scripture, faithful to what the passage said. I had also clearly understood what the passage said. When someone did a work of art, that is what she looked for— faithfulness and understanding.
Ann also explained in writing a play I had engaged in an ancient Hebrew tradition called Midrash. That was the first time I had ever even heard the word Midrash. I wound up doing my Master’s Thesis on Midrash.
Those of you who have been here for Christmas Eve or Easter Sunday service know I usually offer a Midrash sermon, a Midrash meditation, on those feast days. The idea is to retell the story in a way which I hope helps people better understand it.
The best explanation of Midrash I have ever seen was written by Roman Catholic theologian Richard Rhor. This is some of that what Rhor stated. (Slight pause.)
Rather than seeking certain, unchanging answers, Midrash allows for many possibilities, many levels of faith-filled meaning relevant and applicable to the reader. This helps build empathy, understanding, relationship with the text.
Midrash lets a Scripture passage challenge you in a spiritual way. This allows a passage to help you change, grow, entice you to respond with questions.
Some of the questions could be ‘What does this passage ask of me?’ ‘How might this apply to my life, my family, my church, my neighborhood, my country?’
Rhor states biblical passages often proceed from historical incidents. But the real message conveyed by Scripture does not even try to communicate events with factual accuracy. The writers of Scripture are not journalists or historians. They are theologians.
Further, since before New Testament times rabbis have used the story telling called Midrash, this form called Midrash, to reflect on and communicate on at least four levels, the same levels we find in Scripture. The levels are literal meaning, deep meaning, comparative meaning, hidden meaning.
The literal does not get to the root so it is not helpful for the soul and it is the most dangerous level for and to reality. Deep meaning offers symbolic, allegoric applications. Comparative meaning compares different texts to explore new understanding.
Last, hidden meaning— hidden meaning gets at mystery. When hidden meaning is explored with the story telling of Midrash that encourages growth, learning and discourages literalism.
This is also clear. Jesus consistently ignored any exclusionary, triumphalist, punitive, texts found in the Hebrew Scriptures in favor of passages which emphasize inclusion, mercy, honesty, something Midrash does well— explore inclusion, mercy, honesty— these the reflections of theologian Richard Rhor. (Slight pause.)
And I Corinthians says: “For I, Paul, handed on to you first of all, as of first importance, what I, myself, had received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, and that Christ was buried, and that, on the third day, Christ was raised in accordance with the Scriptures.” (Slight pause.)
Paul here refers to the Scriptures. What Scriptures? The same Scriptures Jesus read, what we today commonly call the Hebrew Scriptures. So Paul is handing on the Hebrew Scriptures.
Now, there is no adequate translation for the words we translate as “I handed on.” The closest we can come is to say “I traditioned,” which is not good English. That’s why we don’t translate it that way. However, to say “I traditioned” does make sense in a peculiar kind of way.
To illustrate what that means, here’s an example I’ve used before. We all have family traditions. But do we do things the same way our grandparents did? No. Why? We took those traditions and made them our own.
And what has Paul done with the Hebrew Scriptures? Paul has explored those writings and now understands them in a new way. That brings up something I think is often misunderstood about this passage. (Quote:) “...that Christ died... that Christ was buried... that... Christ was raised.” (Slight pause.)
What is Paul doing here? Is Paul saying this is a prophecy found in the Hebrew Scriptures? I think we often take it that way. But is that what the Apostle to the Gentiles is getting at? (Slight pause.)
First, let’s state the obvious, something noted when this passage was introduced. It is not the Gospels but the letters of Paul which are the earliest writings found in the New Testament.
The apostle here quotes an early statement of faith which pre-dates Paul’s writings. Hence, the passage may reflect some of the earliest testimony about the resurrection.
Next, we need to realize Paul’s writings say precious little about the life of Jesus. In fact, the statement of faith found in this passage is one of the few places Paul says anything about the fact that the even Christ lived.
That having been said, Paul takes what the Hebrew Scriptures say about the Messiah— not what is said about Jesus but what is said about the Messiah— Paul takes what the Hebrew Scriptures say about the Messiah and expounds on that. And exactly what is said about the Messiah?
Promises are made about the Messiah. Do note, these are not prophecies about the Messiah. These are promises.
Paul then sees the promises about the Messiah and the reality of what happened to Jesus as one. Paul takes what was handed on, the promises about the Messiah, and traditions them, made them his own, brings understanding to them, passes that on.
Paul’s thinking is clearly in line with what the Hebrew Scriptures say. So Paul has done nothing radical but is simply being a good theologian. And in so doing Paul practices Midrash because Paul’s project is to explore meaning.
In that exploration Paul thereby allows, encourages growth, allows and learning. Therefore, just like Jesus, Paul does not settle for mere literalism. (Slight pause.)
I want to suggest we need to make Scripture our own. We need to try understand what Scripture meant in ancient times, in the time when the Hebrew Scriptures were written, in the time when the New Testament was written.
And then we need to try to understand Scripture for today, for our time, for us. Just as Paul did and just as Paul encourages others to do, we need to make Scripture our own. (Slight pause.)
So, what is a call to ministry? Perhaps a call to ministry is about Midrash, at least in part. Perhaps a call to ministry is about making Scripture our own.
I find it interesting that we, in the Protestant tradition believe we are all called to ministry, for we say we are called to be a priesthood of all believers. And yes, we are, thereby, called to make Scripture our own.
Making Scripture our own does not break with tradition. Indeed, do you remember what Ann Johnston, my Hebrew Scriptures professor, told me about why I got an A+? It was because I had been faithful to what the Scripture said. I might add I had been faithful to what the Scripture really said.
So how can we be faithful to Scripture? We can be faithful in the same way Jesus was faithful. We can be faithful by understanding that we need to emphasize inclusion, mercy, honesty— oh, yes— love. We need to emphasize God’s love for all people. Amen.
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, New York
02/10/2019
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: “I have told this story about Ann Johnston, my Hebrew Scriptures teacher, before. Another student said to me, ‘All Ann ever wants us to do is re-write Scripture.’ ‘No,’ said I. ‘Ann wants us to be able to talk about Scripture using our own words. Unless you use your own words it won’t make any sense to others. That brings me back to the priesthood of all believers. The purpose of talking about Scripture, using your own words, is not to convert anyone. The purpose is to support one another, care for one another, share the love of God with one another. When we do that we are ministering to one another, loving one another and doing ministry which is what being among the priesthood of believers is about.”
BENEDICTION: God heals and restores. God grants to us the grace and the talent to witness to the love God has for us. Let us be ready as we go into the world, for we are baptized in the power of the Spirit. And may the peace of Christ, which surpasses understanding, keep our minds and hearts in the companionship and will of the Holy Spirit, this day and forever more. Amen.
I Traditioned
“For I, Paul, handed on to you first of all, as of first importance, what I, myself, had received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, and that Christ was buried, and that, on the third day, Christ was raised in accordance with the Scriptures.” — 1 Corinthians 15:3-4.
When I sensed a call to ordained ministry the first thing I did is I spoke with my Pastor. The first thing we did together is set up a discernment committee at my church. A discernment committee helps guide someone seeking ordination in that process and asks tough questions about what the specific sense of call might be.
Since I had not seen the inside of a classroom for 20 plus years at that point they suggested I take a class at Bangor Seminary to see how the academics went. I took survey course in the Hebrew Scriptures with Dr. Ann Johnston.
For the first paper she assigned she said we could be creative. We could, in fact, write a standard academic paper. Or we could write a play, a poem, do a painting.
The visual works would need a written explanation and written works would need plenty of footnotes. But we could do anything an artist might do.
I was a playwright. I wrote a play, a comedy, based on the story of the Burning Bush. That’s right: a comedy based on the story of the Burning Bush. Here’s an example of what was in the play.
MOSES: The bush— it burns but it is not consumed. How does that work?
GOD: Yeah.... I have my special effects people. They are very good. Someday I might let a guy named Cecil B. DeMille use them. But right now, they are my people.
The paper came back with an A+ on the top. Ann told me the A+ was because I had used what was in Scripture word for word but just added extra words to it.
I had been faithful to the Scripture, faithful to what the passage said. I had also clearly understood what the passage said. When someone did a work of art, that is what she looked for— faithfulness and understanding.
Ann also explained in writing a play I had engaged in an ancient Hebrew tradition called Midrash. That was the first time I had ever even heard the word Midrash. I wound up doing my Master’s Thesis on Midrash.
Those of you who have been here for Christmas Eve or Easter Sunday service know I usually offer a Midrash sermon, a Midrash meditation, on those feast days. The idea is to retell the story in a way which I hope helps people better understand it.
The best explanation of Midrash I have ever seen was written by Roman Catholic theologian Richard Rhor. This is some of that what Rhor stated. (Slight pause.)
Rather than seeking certain, unchanging answers, Midrash allows for many possibilities, many levels of faith-filled meaning relevant and applicable to the reader. This helps build empathy, understanding, relationship with the text.
Midrash lets a Scripture passage challenge you in a spiritual way. This allows a passage to help you change, grow, entice you to respond with questions.
Some of the questions could be ‘What does this passage ask of me?’ ‘How might this apply to my life, my family, my church, my neighborhood, my country?’
Rhor states biblical passages often proceed from historical incidents. But the real message conveyed by Scripture does not even try to communicate events with factual accuracy. The writers of Scripture are not journalists or historians. They are theologians.
Further, since before New Testament times rabbis have used the story telling called Midrash, this form called Midrash, to reflect on and communicate on at least four levels, the same levels we find in Scripture. The levels are literal meaning, deep meaning, comparative meaning, hidden meaning.
The literal does not get to the root so it is not helpful for the soul and it is the most dangerous level for and to reality. Deep meaning offers symbolic, allegoric applications. Comparative meaning compares different texts to explore new understanding.
Last, hidden meaning— hidden meaning gets at mystery. When hidden meaning is explored with the story telling of Midrash that encourages growth, learning and discourages literalism.
This is also clear. Jesus consistently ignored any exclusionary, triumphalist, punitive, texts found in the Hebrew Scriptures in favor of passages which emphasize inclusion, mercy, honesty, something Midrash does well— explore inclusion, mercy, honesty— these the reflections of theologian Richard Rhor. (Slight pause.)
And I Corinthians says: “For I, Paul, handed on to you first of all, as of first importance, what I, myself, had received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, and that Christ was buried, and that, on the third day, Christ was raised in accordance with the Scriptures.” (Slight pause.)
Paul here refers to the Scriptures. What Scriptures? The same Scriptures Jesus read, what we today commonly call the Hebrew Scriptures. So Paul is handing on the Hebrew Scriptures.
Now, there is no adequate translation for the words we translate as “I handed on.” The closest we can come is to say “I traditioned,” which is not good English. That’s why we don’t translate it that way. However, to say “I traditioned” does make sense in a peculiar kind of way.
To illustrate what that means, here’s an example I’ve used before. We all have family traditions. But do we do things the same way our grandparents did? No. Why? We took those traditions and made them our own.
And what has Paul done with the Hebrew Scriptures? Paul has explored those writings and now understands them in a new way. That brings up something I think is often misunderstood about this passage. (Quote:) “...that Christ died... that Christ was buried... that... Christ was raised.” (Slight pause.)
What is Paul doing here? Is Paul saying this is a prophecy found in the Hebrew Scriptures? I think we often take it that way. But is that what the Apostle to the Gentiles is getting at? (Slight pause.)
First, let’s state the obvious, something noted when this passage was introduced. It is not the Gospels but the letters of Paul which are the earliest writings found in the New Testament.
The apostle here quotes an early statement of faith which pre-dates Paul’s writings. Hence, the passage may reflect some of the earliest testimony about the resurrection.
Next, we need to realize Paul’s writings say precious little about the life of Jesus. In fact, the statement of faith found in this passage is one of the few places Paul says anything about the fact that the even Christ lived.
That having been said, Paul takes what the Hebrew Scriptures say about the Messiah— not what is said about Jesus but what is said about the Messiah— Paul takes what the Hebrew Scriptures say about the Messiah and expounds on that. And exactly what is said about the Messiah?
Promises are made about the Messiah. Do note, these are not prophecies about the Messiah. These are promises.
Paul then sees the promises about the Messiah and the reality of what happened to Jesus as one. Paul takes what was handed on, the promises about the Messiah, and traditions them, made them his own, brings understanding to them, passes that on.
Paul’s thinking is clearly in line with what the Hebrew Scriptures say. So Paul has done nothing radical but is simply being a good theologian. And in so doing Paul practices Midrash because Paul’s project is to explore meaning.
In that exploration Paul thereby allows, encourages growth, allows and learning. Therefore, just like Jesus, Paul does not settle for mere literalism. (Slight pause.)
I want to suggest we need to make Scripture our own. We need to try understand what Scripture meant in ancient times, in the time when the Hebrew Scriptures were written, in the time when the New Testament was written.
And then we need to try to understand Scripture for today, for our time, for us. Just as Paul did and just as Paul encourages others to do, we need to make Scripture our own. (Slight pause.)
So, what is a call to ministry? Perhaps a call to ministry is about Midrash, at least in part. Perhaps a call to ministry is about making Scripture our own.
I find it interesting that we, in the Protestant tradition believe we are all called to ministry, for we say we are called to be a priesthood of all believers. And yes, we are, thereby, called to make Scripture our own.
Making Scripture our own does not break with tradition. Indeed, do you remember what Ann Johnston, my Hebrew Scriptures professor, told me about why I got an A+? It was because I had been faithful to what the Scripture said. I might add I had been faithful to what the Scripture really said.
So how can we be faithful to Scripture? We can be faithful in the same way Jesus was faithful. We can be faithful by understanding that we need to emphasize inclusion, mercy, honesty— oh, yes— love. We need to emphasize God’s love for all people. Amen.
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, New York
02/10/2019
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: “I have told this story about Ann Johnston, my Hebrew Scriptures teacher, before. Another student said to me, ‘All Ann ever wants us to do is re-write Scripture.’ ‘No,’ said I. ‘Ann wants us to be able to talk about Scripture using our own words. Unless you use your own words it won’t make any sense to others. That brings me back to the priesthood of all believers. The purpose of talking about Scripture, using your own words, is not to convert anyone. The purpose is to support one another, care for one another, share the love of God with one another. When we do that we are ministering to one another, loving one another and doing ministry which is what being among the priesthood of believers is about.”
BENEDICTION: God heals and restores. God grants to us the grace and the talent to witness to the love God has for us. Let us be ready as we go into the world, for we are baptized in the power of the Spirit. And may the peace of Christ, which surpasses understanding, keep our minds and hearts in the companionship and will of the Holy Spirit, this day and forever more. Amen.
Sunday, February 3, 2019
SERMON ~ 02/03/2019 ~ “Agape”
READINGS: 02/03/2019 ~ Fourth Sunday after the Epiphany ~ Known in Some Traditions as the Fourth Sunday in Ordinary Time ~ Jeremiah 1:4-10; Psalm 71:1-6; 1 Corinthians 13:1-13; Luke 4:21-30 ~ Schedule to Join the Church - Todd Bachman and Elizabeth Bronson Scheduled to Join Church ~ Soup and Bread Pot Luck Lunch ~ Communion Sunday.
Agape
“Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things and has the power to endure all things. Love never ends.” — 1 Corinthians 13:7-8a
Some of you know this. My bet is not everyone knows this. I am currently a member of the Board of the New York Conference of the United Church of Christ. No— the Board does not have a fancier name than that. It’s simply the Board.
As to my participation on Boards with the Denomination, a long time ago I traveled to Cleveland a number of times in the course of two years and participated in an ad hoc Board with the Church at the National Level. It was formed to examine a specific issue. But my current commitments in our denomination are with the Susquehanna Association and the New York Conference.
The Association commitments— three Boards, the Committee on Authorized Ministry, the General Ministry Team and the Unified Fitness Review Board— take up more time than my duties with the Conference Board. But in this coming week I will execute one of those duties with that Board.
Now that the fiscal year is completed and accounting done, as a member of the Board I shall be writing a number of thank you notes to churches who contributed funds to the Conference. Those funds used to be called O.C.W.M.— Our Churches Wider Mission. They are now called L.C.B.S.— Local Church Basic Support. We in the United Church of Christ like to abbreviate all of these names.
Either way the money represents what each church voluntarily gives to the Conference, a portion of which is passed on to the Church at the National Level. Perhaps key questions here are why should local Churches voluntarily give money to the Conference? And why would a member of the Board, as opposed to the Conference Minister for instance, be sending out those kinds of missives? (Slight pause.)
For a moment let me take you back to what happened at my first formal Board meeting. We were privileged to have the General Counsel of the National Church offer a two hour course in the ethical standards expected not just of church boards but of all non-profit boards.
One of the things which stuck in my brain was the discussion of a specific ethical standard. As is true of many non-profit boards, members of the Conference Board come from specific segments of a broad constituency. In this case Board members come from all our Associations across the Conference. And in my case, I am from the Susquehanna Association.
However, once on a Board the ethical standard for any non-profit but especially churches, says the origin of a constituency, that specific affiliation, is a moot point. As a Board member any individual member is now responsible to represent the whole.
In short, I am there to represent not just the Susquehanna Association, not just this church, but the whole Conference, from churches on Long Island to churches in Manhattan, to churches on the St. Lawrence Seaway, to churches in the Rochester area to churches in the Buffalo area to churches in the Jamestown area. I am there to represent churches large and to represent churches small. Again, to represent the whole is an ethical standard. (Slight pause.)
These words are found in 1 Corinthians: “Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things and has the power to endure all things. Love never ends.” (Slight pause.)
As was mentioned when this reading was introduced, there are six words in Greek for love. We speakers of English are confined to one word.
Here is the list of those Greek words with a brief explanation of each. Eros, a physical expression of love; Philia, friendship sometimes referred to as brotherly or sisterly love; Ludus, playful love; Pragma, longstanding love; Philautia, love of self and to be clear we are not talking about a positive reference as refers to vanity as opposed to a protective love of self.
Last we have Agape. Agape is unconditional, altruistic, universal, inclusive love.
It is fairly well known that, in this passage, Paul addresses Agape. I would also say when we gather around the table as we did this morning, we are directly addressing Agape love, unconditional, altruistic, universal, inclusive love.
And yes, as a community we should be aware we need to have a special affinity for one another. As a community we need to be aware we are bonded in and by Agape love for one another.
But the very meaning of the word should also instruct us about the greater impact, the effect of Agape love. Agape love should not and does not end in this place with those gathered around the table. Agape love should not and does not end with those here gathered.
The very meaning of the word should instruct us that, having bonded here in this place at this time around that table, this unconditional, altruistic, universal, inclusive love needs to move beyond this place, this time, that table. [The pastor has pointed to the Communion table in this worship space.] Indeed, the very symbol of the table, the sharing of a meal, speaks to the human universality of Paul’s intent. The tactile experience of the cup and the bread, the reality of that, should speak to us about the meaning of Agape love. (Slight pause.)
Earlier in this service it was wonderful to receive new members into our Congregation. In the ceremony we pray that (quote:), “Together may we live in the Spirit, binding one another up in love, sharing in the life and worship of the church... and serving the world....”— the world. (Slight pause.)
That brings me back to my service in the Susquehanna Association and the New York Conference. You may not be aware of this. In terms of our polity each member of this church is a member of the Susquehanna Association. Each member of this church is a member of the New York Conference.
In fact, the positions I hold on these boards are not meant solely for members of the clergy. They all have members of the laity serving on them. The last member of the laity to serve on the New York Conference Board was the late Ron Herrett. And I think I’m not wrong about this for those of you who remember Don Burr I believe he also served on the New York Conference Board.
So, your Agape love, your unconditional, altruistic, universal, inclusive love does not end with this church. Agape love, your unconditional, altruistic, universal, inclusive love extends— it extends to our Conference, our Association. Indeed, our collective responsibility— all of us, not just the pastor— our collective responsibility to the Association and to the Conference is an outgrowth of the universality of Agape love.
But there is more. Agape love invites us to see all humanity— not just Christians, all humanity— with the eyes of another of those Greek words for love— Philia, love for all our brothers and sisters. In fact, Philia goes beyond love for brothers and sisters. Philia is about love for all God’s creation. (Slight pause.)
I need to add one thing. We Christians have yet another name for Agape. We call it covenant love. And covenant love is in many ways demanding.
What covenant love demands of us is growth. Covenant love demands learning. Covenant love demands that we see new horizons constantly, that we remember the past but leave it in the past. Perhaps most importantly covenant love demands that we hold one another’s humanity and well being as precious. (Slight pause.)
We all know and can probably recite by heart Paul’s words. (Quote:) “Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things and has the power to endure all things. Love never ends.” The challenge for us is can we meet that standard? Amen.
02/03/2019
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, NY
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: “You may have heard it said we need faith, hope and charity and the Bible tells us that. But the Bible does not tell us that. Agape translates into Latin as Caritas. Caritas was then translated into the Anglo-Saxon language tree as charity. But when that translation happened it still meant Agape, unconditional, altruistic, universal, inclusive love. It did not mean charity, giving something to someone in need. And as I may have just illustrated Paul’s challenge to us in using the word Agape is much more demanding than charity.”
BENEDICTION: Let us, above all, surround ourselves with the perfect love of God, a love which binds everything together in harmony. 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.
Agape
“Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things and has the power to endure all things. Love never ends.” — 1 Corinthians 13:7-8a
Some of you know this. My bet is not everyone knows this. I am currently a member of the Board of the New York Conference of the United Church of Christ. No— the Board does not have a fancier name than that. It’s simply the Board.
As to my participation on Boards with the Denomination, a long time ago I traveled to Cleveland a number of times in the course of two years and participated in an ad hoc Board with the Church at the National Level. It was formed to examine a specific issue. But my current commitments in our denomination are with the Susquehanna Association and the New York Conference.
The Association commitments— three Boards, the Committee on Authorized Ministry, the General Ministry Team and the Unified Fitness Review Board— take up more time than my duties with the Conference Board. But in this coming week I will execute one of those duties with that Board.
Now that the fiscal year is completed and accounting done, as a member of the Board I shall be writing a number of thank you notes to churches who contributed funds to the Conference. Those funds used to be called O.C.W.M.— Our Churches Wider Mission. They are now called L.C.B.S.— Local Church Basic Support. We in the United Church of Christ like to abbreviate all of these names.
Either way the money represents what each church voluntarily gives to the Conference, a portion of which is passed on to the Church at the National Level. Perhaps key questions here are why should local Churches voluntarily give money to the Conference? And why would a member of the Board, as opposed to the Conference Minister for instance, be sending out those kinds of missives? (Slight pause.)
For a moment let me take you back to what happened at my first formal Board meeting. We were privileged to have the General Counsel of the National Church offer a two hour course in the ethical standards expected not just of church boards but of all non-profit boards.
One of the things which stuck in my brain was the discussion of a specific ethical standard. As is true of many non-profit boards, members of the Conference Board come from specific segments of a broad constituency. In this case Board members come from all our Associations across the Conference. And in my case, I am from the Susquehanna Association.
However, once on a Board the ethical standard for any non-profit but especially churches, says the origin of a constituency, that specific affiliation, is a moot point. As a Board member any individual member is now responsible to represent the whole.
In short, I am there to represent not just the Susquehanna Association, not just this church, but the whole Conference, from churches on Long Island to churches in Manhattan, to churches on the St. Lawrence Seaway, to churches in the Rochester area to churches in the Buffalo area to churches in the Jamestown area. I am there to represent churches large and to represent churches small. Again, to represent the whole is an ethical standard. (Slight pause.)
These words are found in 1 Corinthians: “Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things and has the power to endure all things. Love never ends.” (Slight pause.)
As was mentioned when this reading was introduced, there are six words in Greek for love. We speakers of English are confined to one word.
Here is the list of those Greek words with a brief explanation of each. Eros, a physical expression of love; Philia, friendship sometimes referred to as brotherly or sisterly love; Ludus, playful love; Pragma, longstanding love; Philautia, love of self and to be clear we are not talking about a positive reference as refers to vanity as opposed to a protective love of self.
Last we have Agape. Agape is unconditional, altruistic, universal, inclusive love.
It is fairly well known that, in this passage, Paul addresses Agape. I would also say when we gather around the table as we did this morning, we are directly addressing Agape love, unconditional, altruistic, universal, inclusive love.
And yes, as a community we should be aware we need to have a special affinity for one another. As a community we need to be aware we are bonded in and by Agape love for one another.
But the very meaning of the word should also instruct us about the greater impact, the effect of Agape love. Agape love should not and does not end in this place with those gathered around the table. Agape love should not and does not end with those here gathered.
The very meaning of the word should instruct us that, having bonded here in this place at this time around that table, this unconditional, altruistic, universal, inclusive love needs to move beyond this place, this time, that table. [The pastor has pointed to the Communion table in this worship space.] Indeed, the very symbol of the table, the sharing of a meal, speaks to the human universality of Paul’s intent. The tactile experience of the cup and the bread, the reality of that, should speak to us about the meaning of Agape love. (Slight pause.)
Earlier in this service it was wonderful to receive new members into our Congregation. In the ceremony we pray that (quote:), “Together may we live in the Spirit, binding one another up in love, sharing in the life and worship of the church... and serving the world....”— the world. (Slight pause.)
That brings me back to my service in the Susquehanna Association and the New York Conference. You may not be aware of this. In terms of our polity each member of this church is a member of the Susquehanna Association. Each member of this church is a member of the New York Conference.
In fact, the positions I hold on these boards are not meant solely for members of the clergy. They all have members of the laity serving on them. The last member of the laity to serve on the New York Conference Board was the late Ron Herrett. And I think I’m not wrong about this for those of you who remember Don Burr I believe he also served on the New York Conference Board.
So, your Agape love, your unconditional, altruistic, universal, inclusive love does not end with this church. Agape love, your unconditional, altruistic, universal, inclusive love extends— it extends to our Conference, our Association. Indeed, our collective responsibility— all of us, not just the pastor— our collective responsibility to the Association and to the Conference is an outgrowth of the universality of Agape love.
But there is more. Agape love invites us to see all humanity— not just Christians, all humanity— with the eyes of another of those Greek words for love— Philia, love for all our brothers and sisters. In fact, Philia goes beyond love for brothers and sisters. Philia is about love for all God’s creation. (Slight pause.)
I need to add one thing. We Christians have yet another name for Agape. We call it covenant love. And covenant love is in many ways demanding.
What covenant love demands of us is growth. Covenant love demands learning. Covenant love demands that we see new horizons constantly, that we remember the past but leave it in the past. Perhaps most importantly covenant love demands that we hold one another’s humanity and well being as precious. (Slight pause.)
We all know and can probably recite by heart Paul’s words. (Quote:) “Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things and has the power to endure all things. Love never ends.” The challenge for us is can we meet that standard? Amen.
02/03/2019
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, NY
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: “You may have heard it said we need faith, hope and charity and the Bible tells us that. But the Bible does not tell us that. Agape translates into Latin as Caritas. Caritas was then translated into the Anglo-Saxon language tree as charity. But when that translation happened it still meant Agape, unconditional, altruistic, universal, inclusive love. It did not mean charity, giving something to someone in need. And as I may have just illustrated Paul’s challenge to us in using the word Agape is much more demanding than charity.”
BENEDICTION: Let us, above all, surround ourselves with the perfect love of God, a love which binds everything together in harmony. 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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)