06/24/2012 ~ Proper 7 ~ Twelfth Sunday in Ordinary Time ~ Fourth Sunday after Pentecost ~ 1 Samuel 17:(1a, 4-11, 19-23), 32-49; Psalm 9:9-20 or 1 Samuel 17:57-18:5, 18:10-16; Psalm 133; Job 38:1-11; Psalm 107:1-3, 23-32; 2 Corinthians 6:1-13; Mark 4:35-41 ~ Annual Organizational Meeting in Our 198th Year; A Ceremony of Shalom for Martha and Bob O’Keefe ~ a Ceremony Honoring Members in Long Standing.
Open Wide Your Hearts [1]
“We have spoken frankly to you Corinthians; we have opened our hearts wide to you. There is no restriction in our affections; we are not holding anything back; you, on the other hand, are holding back your affection from us. It would be fair— I speak as to children— if you would open your hearts as widely to us as we do to you.” — 2 Corinthians 6:11-13.
As you are probably aware because of the picture on the front page of The Evening Sun Wednesday, I once again hosted the Community Honors Banquet, the 15th time we’ve celebrated the honor students. This year I decided that, instead of asking one of my colleagues to offer the Invocation and Benediction, I’d do it myself.
This is part of the prayer I used as a Benediction (quote): “Give us, we pray, gentle reminders that true love is a discipline and is, therefore, not arrogant or boastful or rude. Grant us the grace that we may we be strengthened to work in Your service among all people.” (Slight pause.)
Love as a discipline: I’ve said that from this pulpit. But, I suspect, I’ve not repeated it in a while. I think it’s a worthy concept— love as a discipline. But further and also, love is the discipline through which we do accomplish the work of God among all people. (Slight pause.)
Yesterday morning on National Public Radio, Scott Simon interviewed three-time Olympic swimming gold medalist, now a law professor, Nancy Hogshead-Makar. Among the interesting things she said was that those gold medals were not the most important aspect of her participation in sports.
The most important aspect, she said, was that she did it. She said she went to practice on days she did not want to go to practice, when with every cell in her body did not want to go to practice.
But she also knew she needed to be committed to something bigger than being in a good mood on any particular day. In short, participation was a discipline. And success, she discovered, was not in the medals. The medals were a side-effect. The discipline, itself, was the success. (Slight pause.)
We, in the church, are or should be engaged in the discipline of love. I want to suggest that, just as an athlete needs to go someplace to practice, it is a good idea to gather for worship. It is a place we can practice the discipline of love just through out interactions with one another.
But we also know the discipline of love needs to go beyond these walls. On the other hand, if we do here what we are instructed to do in Scripture— instructed in Scripture— love one another— this becomes and is a safe place to practice. If any of us takes a tumble while we practice, we are surrounded by coaches who will help us.
Hence, I want to offer this reminder: this building is not the church. You are, we are the church. And how do we ensure that we remain vital as we practice? I think Paul has a pretty good answer: “open wide our hearts.” Amen.
06/24/2012
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: “In the work Christianity After Religion Diana Butler Bass says this: if you want to knit, you don’t study the doctrines of knitting. You go find a knitter, someone who will teach you knitting. You form a relationship with that person, you sit with a group of knitters and then you start to learn by doing and by practice. Christianity is something we do, a practice. You can, indeed, study Christian doctrines. But Christianity is learned by forming relationships with practitioners and then by doing and by practice.”
RESPONSIVE BENEDICTION:
PASTOR: Now go! Go, led by the marvelous light of Christ! Go, be a blessing!
MANY: Let us be a blessing! Let us be a light for the world! Let us be the Body of Christ! Amen! And again— Amen!
ONE: And may we love God so much, that we love nothing else too much. May we be so in awe of God, that we are in awe of no one else and nothing else. Amen.
[1] Note: this is a homily— a short sermon— in part because of the Ceremony of Shalom and the Annual Meeting both of which took place in the context of this service of worship.
Sunday, July 1, 2012
Sunday, June 3, 2012
06/03/2012 ~ Trinity Sunday ~ First Sunday after Pentecost ~ Ninth Sunday in Ordinary Time ~ Proper 4 ~ Isaiah 6:1-8; Psalm 29; Romans 8:12-17; John 3:1-17 ~ Inter-generational Sunday.
JOE: Tom Rasely! Did you know that strange as it may seem, the Bible is about Baseball.
TOM: Baseball? Baseball was invented by Abner Doubleday. And he invented it right over in Cooperstown, New York. Now, Abraham is in the Bible. But Abraham probably lived about four thousand years ago. Moses is in the Bible. But Moses probably lived about three thousand years ago. Jesus is in the Bible. But Jesus lived about two thousand years ago. And they all lived in what we today call the Middle East. The Middle East— that’s thousands and thousands and thousands of miles away from here. Even by jet, that would take better than a half a day to get there. Abner Doubleday lived in Cooperstown, New York, about forty-five miles away and by car it’s an hour from here. Now, legend has it that Doubleday invented Baseball there, in Cooperstown, in 1839. I know because I’ve been in the Hall of Fame in Cooperstown and that’s what it says, right there in the Hall of Fame. And if there is anything I know, it’s that 1839 is not thousands of years ago. 1839 is only about 170 years ago.
LINDA: Tom— Baseball is in the Bible. The first words in Genesis say: “In the Big Inning...”
TOM: Oh, yeah?
JOE: Yeah.
TOM: Well who’s on first?
LINDA: What do you mean?
TOM: All baseball players have funny names. And some of those names are even pretty strange. I mean, in the past baseball players have had names like Dizzy Dean. And Moose Skowron— he played for the Yankees. And today we have Joba Chamberlain— Joba Chamberlain— that name doesn’t sound like the name of a baseball player. That sounds like a character out of Star Wars. But a guy named Joba Chamberlain plays for the New York Yankees. At least when he’s not on the disabled list. Anyway, Charles Dillon Stengel— speaking of funny names— Charles Dillon Stengel is known to most people as Casey Stengel. And Casey said you can’t have a baseball team without a catcher— so let’s forget about a catcher and start on First Base. If the Bible is about Baseball, who’s on First?
LINDA: What do you mean who’s on first?
TOM: If the Bible is about baseball, what’s the name of the player who plays first base in the Bible?
JOE: What is not the name of the one who plays first base on the Bible baseball team.
TOM: I know that! Who’s on first?
JOE: Who is not the name of the one who plays first base on the Bible baseball team.
TOM: Can one of you please tell me the name of the person who is playing the position of first base on this Bible baseball team?
LINDA: I AM.
TOM: You play first base?
LINDA: No.
TOM: I didn’t think you were playing first base. So, who is the name of the person playing first?
JOE: I AM.
TOM: You play first base?
JOE: No.
TOM: O.K. We got that straight now. You’re not playing first. And you’re not playing first. So, who is playing first?
LINDA AND JOE (TOGETHER): I AM.
TOM: No. Wait! You can’t both be playing first!
JOE: No. We’re not.
TOM: So, who is playing first?
LINDA AND JOE (TOGETHER): I AM.
TOM: All right. You’ve got two people playing first base.
LINDA: No. You don’t understand. When Moses asked God to tell Moses what the name of God is so Moses could tell the people of Israel that name, the word God used to identify God’s own self was the Hebrew word Yahweh.
JOE: And the Hebrew word Yahweh is, in Hebrew, a form of the verb to be. Hence, the name of God is...
LINDA AND JOE (TOGETHER): I AM.
TOM: No. That can’t possible be right. No one can be named ‘I AM.’ It’s just too strange.
JOE: Hey! If someone can be named Dizzy or Moose or Joba, how can you say ‘I AM’ is a strange name?
TOM: Well, I guess you have a point. But I’ve heard people call God by a lot of names. I’ve heard God called Creator. I’ve heard God called the Light. I’ve heard God called Rock— now that name sounds like a baseball player— Rock. I’ve heard God called Father.
LINDA: Yes. God is called by a lot of names in the Bible. But of all those names you mentioned, Father is the one you will never find in the Bible.
TOM: What do you mean Father is not in the Bible. Didn’t Jesus teach the disciples to start a basic prayer to God with the words “Our Father...”?
LINDA: No.
TOM: What do you mean no? We said a prayer that started with the words “Our Father...” just a couple of minutes ago and I know Jesus taught that prayer to the disciples.
LINDA: No. The prayer Jesus taught the disciples was more personal and more intimate than that. Jesus told the disciples to pray saying “Our Daddy...”
TOM: But this is God! That sounds way too...too... too informal— “Our Daddy...”
LINDA: But that’s what it really says in Scripture in the original language— “Our Daddy.”
TOM: All right, so where did we get Father?
JOE: We got it from the Romans. They called their chief God ‘Father.’ So, the term ‘Father’ is not in the Bible. It just started being used because the Romans were using it for their god.
TOM: But the Romans worshiped a lot of gods; the Romans were pagans.
JOE: I think you’ve made my point. They were pagans.
LINDA: And since God is not called Father in the Bible, maybe we should just stick with the name Yahweh— “I AM.”
TOM: I AM is on first?
JOE: I AM is on first.
TOM: O.K. Who’s on second? Bet I got you with that one. Who plays second base on this Bible team? It ain’t ‘I AM’ is it?
LINDA: No. It ain’t I AM.
JOE: Jesus is on second.
LINDA: Today we celebrate the Trinity and in the Trinity Jesus is known as the Second Person of the Trinity. Jesus is on Second.
TOM: Oh, yeah? Think you’re smart with that one, do you? (Mocking.) Jesus is known as the Second person of the Trinity. So, Jesus is on Second. Well, I know my theology too. And Jesus had two natures. Jesus is fully human and Jesus is fully divine. So, maybe Jesus is not just on second. Nah, nah, na, na, na!
JOE: Shortstop.
TOM: What? Shortstop?
JOE: Shortstop.
TOM: Jesus plays shortstop.
JOE: You are right on that one, O grand inquisitor of all things baseball and Bible. Our Christian claim is that Jesus is fully human and fully divine. So, Jesus gets to play second. And Jesus gets to play shortstop too.
TOM: Who’s on second?
JOE: Jesus.
TOM: Who plays shortstop?
LINDA: Jesus.
TOM: But how can someone play two positions?
LINDA: Tom... it’s Jesus.
TOM: (Resigned.) Yeah.... fully human; fully divine.
LINDA: Right.
TOM: O.K. Explain that. Explain how someone can play two positions.
JOE: Tom... it’s Jesus.
TOM: (Resigned again.) Right. O.K. It’s Jesus. But you still have the hot corner! You haven’t got the hot corner covered yet!
LINDA: The hot corner?
TOM: Third base! Where you have to be ready for someone dropping down a bunt. Where the batters hit wicked shots right down the line! And you don’t have it covered! Wham! Crack! And there goes a line drive right over the bag...
JOE: Tom. Tom. Tom. Tom. You know who covers the hot corner.
TOM: I do?
JOE: You do.
TOM: (Pause.) The Spirit of God?
JOE: See? You do know your theology. The Spirit of God, sometimes called the Holy Spirit, sometimes called the Paraclete...
TOM: Hold it! Hold it! Hold it! That the Holy Spirit is called the Paraclete really proves the Bible is about baseball!
JOE: That the Holy Spirit is called the Paraclete really proves the Bible is about baseball?
TOM: Of course it does! The Holy Spirit must be wearing a pair of cletes.
JOE: Right. Well, the Holy Spirit is sometimes called the Paraclete, sometimes called the Spirit which is present to us, sometimes called the Spirit in our midst... the Spirit is there to handle all those bunts which might catch us unaware and all the hot shots down right the line.
LINDA: The Spirit of God is always with us. The gifts of the Spirit, the gifts God gives us are many: wisdom, knowledge, healing, prophecy, discernment. The Spirit of God is at work in our lives. And we can rely on the Spirit to guide us through life.
JOE: And our experience of God, the example of Jesus and the guidance of the Spirit is the real reason we say Baseball is mirrored in the Bible.
TOM: Why do you say that?
JOE: Tom, what’s the object of the game of baseball?
TOM: To score runs?
LINDA: Close! Not quite right, though. The object of the game is to be safe at home.
JOE: And if we pay attention to the fact that God, the Great I AM is on first...
LINDA: And Jesus plays both second and short...
JOE: And the Spirit covers third...
LINDA: And that God, Jesus and the Spirit is the Trinity and that God, Jesus and the Spirit are the Trinity...
JOE: When we pay attention to all that...
TOM: I know. I know. We will be safe at home with God.
JOE: Safe at home...
LINDA: Safe at home...
LINDA AND JOE: Amen!
TOM: 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: “Who is on first? One of my Seminary professors posted this on Facebook. On Trinity Sunday we celebrate the mysterious love that provides the cement for the universe. Love must always have its object, and God, as God truly is, is always a community of love. All things are rooted in that love and all things will return to that love. We can no more escape that love than we can escape gravity or other forces deep in our nature. And God is always one step beyond our understanding. After all, God who could be understood by theologians would be subject to manipulation by them.”
BENEDICTION:
PASTOR: The blessing for today is used by natives of the islands in the South Pacific. Let us recite it together as a Unison Prayer.
MANY: O Jesus, please be the canoe that holds me up in the sea of life. Please be the rudder that keeps me on straight paths. Be the outrigger that supports me in times of stress. Let Your Spirit be the sail that carries me though each day. Keep me safe, so that I can paddle on steady in the voyage called life. God of all, bless us so we may have calm seas, a warm sun and clear nights filled with stars. Amen.
[1] It needs to be noted that in the posting of this sermon on the web there will be some discrepancies between the published text and the audio file, since the recording of this happened when three people exchanged dialogue in “real time” and in real time intentional and unintentional additions and cuts happen. But the text is close to the recording.
[2] It needs to be noted that this sermon came after a Children’s Time during which the Pastor tried on a lot of baseball hats with the emblems of different teams and asked the children to identify the teams. The pastor then asked: which team is God on? And one youngster got it right: God is on everyone’s team. The pastor then immediately transitions into this sermon. The parts were played by Pastor Joe Connolly. Tom Rasely, Music Associate and Linda Oehme, Deacon and a Member of the Executive Council.
Baseball, the Bible and the Trinity [1]
A Tri-logue (A Dialogue for Three People) [2]
A Tri-logue (A Dialogue for Three People) [2]
JOE: Tom Rasely! Did you know that strange as it may seem, the Bible is about Baseball.
TOM: Baseball? Baseball was invented by Abner Doubleday. And he invented it right over in Cooperstown, New York. Now, Abraham is in the Bible. But Abraham probably lived about four thousand years ago. Moses is in the Bible. But Moses probably lived about three thousand years ago. Jesus is in the Bible. But Jesus lived about two thousand years ago. And they all lived in what we today call the Middle East. The Middle East— that’s thousands and thousands and thousands of miles away from here. Even by jet, that would take better than a half a day to get there. Abner Doubleday lived in Cooperstown, New York, about forty-five miles away and by car it’s an hour from here. Now, legend has it that Doubleday invented Baseball there, in Cooperstown, in 1839. I know because I’ve been in the Hall of Fame in Cooperstown and that’s what it says, right there in the Hall of Fame. And if there is anything I know, it’s that 1839 is not thousands of years ago. 1839 is only about 170 years ago.
LINDA: Tom— Baseball is in the Bible. The first words in Genesis say: “In the Big Inning...”
TOM: Oh, yeah?
JOE: Yeah.
TOM: Well who’s on first?
LINDA: What do you mean?
TOM: All baseball players have funny names. And some of those names are even pretty strange. I mean, in the past baseball players have had names like Dizzy Dean. And Moose Skowron— he played for the Yankees. And today we have Joba Chamberlain— Joba Chamberlain— that name doesn’t sound like the name of a baseball player. That sounds like a character out of Star Wars. But a guy named Joba Chamberlain plays for the New York Yankees. At least when he’s not on the disabled list. Anyway, Charles Dillon Stengel— speaking of funny names— Charles Dillon Stengel is known to most people as Casey Stengel. And Casey said you can’t have a baseball team without a catcher— so let’s forget about a catcher and start on First Base. If the Bible is about Baseball, who’s on First?
LINDA: What do you mean who’s on first?
TOM: If the Bible is about baseball, what’s the name of the player who plays first base in the Bible?
JOE: What is not the name of the one who plays first base on the Bible baseball team.
TOM: I know that! Who’s on first?
JOE: Who is not the name of the one who plays first base on the Bible baseball team.
TOM: Can one of you please tell me the name of the person who is playing the position of first base on this Bible baseball team?
LINDA: I AM.
TOM: You play first base?
LINDA: No.
TOM: I didn’t think you were playing first base. So, who is the name of the person playing first?
JOE: I AM.
TOM: You play first base?
JOE: No.
TOM: O.K. We got that straight now. You’re not playing first. And you’re not playing first. So, who is playing first?
LINDA AND JOE (TOGETHER): I AM.
TOM: No. Wait! You can’t both be playing first!
JOE: No. We’re not.
TOM: So, who is playing first?
LINDA AND JOE (TOGETHER): I AM.
TOM: All right. You’ve got two people playing first base.
LINDA: No. You don’t understand. When Moses asked God to tell Moses what the name of God is so Moses could tell the people of Israel that name, the word God used to identify God’s own self was the Hebrew word Yahweh.
JOE: And the Hebrew word Yahweh is, in Hebrew, a form of the verb to be. Hence, the name of God is...
LINDA AND JOE (TOGETHER): I AM.
TOM: No. That can’t possible be right. No one can be named ‘I AM.’ It’s just too strange.
JOE: Hey! If someone can be named Dizzy or Moose or Joba, how can you say ‘I AM’ is a strange name?
TOM: Well, I guess you have a point. But I’ve heard people call God by a lot of names. I’ve heard God called Creator. I’ve heard God called the Light. I’ve heard God called Rock— now that name sounds like a baseball player— Rock. I’ve heard God called Father.
LINDA: Yes. God is called by a lot of names in the Bible. But of all those names you mentioned, Father is the one you will never find in the Bible.
TOM: What do you mean Father is not in the Bible. Didn’t Jesus teach the disciples to start a basic prayer to God with the words “Our Father...”?
LINDA: No.
TOM: What do you mean no? We said a prayer that started with the words “Our Father...” just a couple of minutes ago and I know Jesus taught that prayer to the disciples.
LINDA: No. The prayer Jesus taught the disciples was more personal and more intimate than that. Jesus told the disciples to pray saying “Our Daddy...”
TOM: But this is God! That sounds way too...too... too informal— “Our Daddy...”
LINDA: But that’s what it really says in Scripture in the original language— “Our Daddy.”
TOM: All right, so where did we get Father?
JOE: We got it from the Romans. They called their chief God ‘Father.’ So, the term ‘Father’ is not in the Bible. It just started being used because the Romans were using it for their god.
TOM: But the Romans worshiped a lot of gods; the Romans were pagans.
JOE: I think you’ve made my point. They were pagans.
LINDA: And since God is not called Father in the Bible, maybe we should just stick with the name Yahweh— “I AM.”
TOM: I AM is on first?
JOE: I AM is on first.
TOM: O.K. Who’s on second? Bet I got you with that one. Who plays second base on this Bible team? It ain’t ‘I AM’ is it?
LINDA: No. It ain’t I AM.
JOE: Jesus is on second.
LINDA: Today we celebrate the Trinity and in the Trinity Jesus is known as the Second Person of the Trinity. Jesus is on Second.
TOM: Oh, yeah? Think you’re smart with that one, do you? (Mocking.) Jesus is known as the Second person of the Trinity. So, Jesus is on Second. Well, I know my theology too. And Jesus had two natures. Jesus is fully human and Jesus is fully divine. So, maybe Jesus is not just on second. Nah, nah, na, na, na!
JOE: Shortstop.
TOM: What? Shortstop?
JOE: Shortstop.
TOM: Jesus plays shortstop.
JOE: You are right on that one, O grand inquisitor of all things baseball and Bible. Our Christian claim is that Jesus is fully human and fully divine. So, Jesus gets to play second. And Jesus gets to play shortstop too.
TOM: Who’s on second?
JOE: Jesus.
TOM: Who plays shortstop?
LINDA: Jesus.
TOM: But how can someone play two positions?
LINDA: Tom... it’s Jesus.
TOM: (Resigned.) Yeah.... fully human; fully divine.
LINDA: Right.
TOM: O.K. Explain that. Explain how someone can play two positions.
JOE: Tom... it’s Jesus.
TOM: (Resigned again.) Right. O.K. It’s Jesus. But you still have the hot corner! You haven’t got the hot corner covered yet!
LINDA: The hot corner?
TOM: Third base! Where you have to be ready for someone dropping down a bunt. Where the batters hit wicked shots right down the line! And you don’t have it covered! Wham! Crack! And there goes a line drive right over the bag...
JOE: Tom. Tom. Tom. Tom. You know who covers the hot corner.
TOM: I do?
JOE: You do.
TOM: (Pause.) The Spirit of God?
JOE: See? You do know your theology. The Spirit of God, sometimes called the Holy Spirit, sometimes called the Paraclete...
TOM: Hold it! Hold it! Hold it! That the Holy Spirit is called the Paraclete really proves the Bible is about baseball!
JOE: That the Holy Spirit is called the Paraclete really proves the Bible is about baseball?
TOM: Of course it does! The Holy Spirit must be wearing a pair of cletes.
JOE: Right. Well, the Holy Spirit is sometimes called the Paraclete, sometimes called the Spirit which is present to us, sometimes called the Spirit in our midst... the Spirit is there to handle all those bunts which might catch us unaware and all the hot shots down right the line.
LINDA: The Spirit of God is always with us. The gifts of the Spirit, the gifts God gives us are many: wisdom, knowledge, healing, prophecy, discernment. The Spirit of God is at work in our lives. And we can rely on the Spirit to guide us through life.
JOE: And our experience of God, the example of Jesus and the guidance of the Spirit is the real reason we say Baseball is mirrored in the Bible.
TOM: Why do you say that?
JOE: Tom, what’s the object of the game of baseball?
TOM: To score runs?
LINDA: Close! Not quite right, though. The object of the game is to be safe at home.
JOE: And if we pay attention to the fact that God, the Great I AM is on first...
LINDA: And Jesus plays both second and short...
JOE: And the Spirit covers third...
LINDA: And that God, Jesus and the Spirit is the Trinity and that God, Jesus and the Spirit are the Trinity...
JOE: When we pay attention to all that...
TOM: I know. I know. We will be safe at home with God.
JOE: Safe at home...
LINDA: Safe at home...
LINDA AND JOE: Amen!
TOM: 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: “Who is on first? One of my Seminary professors posted this on Facebook. On Trinity Sunday we celebrate the mysterious love that provides the cement for the universe. Love must always have its object, and God, as God truly is, is always a community of love. All things are rooted in that love and all things will return to that love. We can no more escape that love than we can escape gravity or other forces deep in our nature. And God is always one step beyond our understanding. After all, God who could be understood by theologians would be subject to manipulation by them.”
BENEDICTION:
PASTOR: The blessing for today is used by natives of the islands in the South Pacific. Let us recite it together as a Unison Prayer.
MANY: O Jesus, please be the canoe that holds me up in the sea of life. Please be the rudder that keeps me on straight paths. Be the outrigger that supports me in times of stress. Let Your Spirit be the sail that carries me though each day. Keep me safe, so that I can paddle on steady in the voyage called life. God of all, bless us so we may have calm seas, a warm sun and clear nights filled with stars. Amen.
[1] It needs to be noted that in the posting of this sermon on the web there will be some discrepancies between the published text and the audio file, since the recording of this happened when three people exchanged dialogue in “real time” and in real time intentional and unintentional additions and cuts happen. But the text is close to the recording.
[2] It needs to be noted that this sermon came after a Children’s Time during which the Pastor tried on a lot of baseball hats with the emblems of different teams and asked the children to identify the teams. The pastor then asked: which team is God on? And one youngster got it right: God is on everyone’s team. The pastor then immediately transitions into this sermon. The parts were played by Pastor Joe Connolly. Tom Rasely, Music Associate and Linda Oehme, Deacon and a Member of the Executive Council.
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
SERMON ~ 05/27/2012 ~ The Presence of the Spirit
05/27/2012 ~ Day of Pentecost ~ Acts 2:1-21 or Ezekiel 37:1-14; Psalm 104:24-34, 35b; Romans 8:22-27 or Acts 2:1-21; John 15:26-27; 16:4b-15 ~ Memorial Day Weekend on the Secular Calendar.
“Amazed and astonished, they asked, ‘Surely all these people speaking are Galileans. How does it happen that each of us hears these words in our own native language?’” — Acts 2:7-8
I have, on occasion and from this pulpit, quoted the Anglican Bishop and theologian Nicholas Thomas Wright. Among my favorite of Wright’s quotes is this one: “Modern times are no different than New Testament times. In New Testament Times nearly everybody believed in God or the gods. [1] Very few people took it seriously.”
A recent survey suggests in the neighborhood of 92 to 94 percent of Americans believe in some kind of God. To be clear, in naming God some of those included in that statistic may refer to God simply as a “Higher Power” or use some other euphemism. Others have a more traditional view when it comes to naming God.
There are, in fact, many ways to express a belief in God or to name God. The point is no matter how Americans name God, a belief in some God is a dominant opinion.
On the other hand, in that same survey, one taken by Baylor University, it also suggests one way to look at this American belief in God is by defining the type of God— not the name of God but the type of God— in which one believes. That section of the survey says Americans actually believe in four different Gods.
The four Gods are named in this way: the Authoritarian God. This is, of course, the God of rules and retribution.
The Benevolent is another type of God Who showed up in the survey. And, to be clear, in the benevolent category we get not only the God of Love but the God Who often gets intertwined in this concept: the gift giving God.
That’s the gift giving God as in “Dear God, may I please win a million dollars.” This is the ‘I’m giving away money God’ made popular by many television evangelists.
In the next category, the survey used the term Critical God. ‘Critical God’ was, perhaps, a poor choice of words to use in creating the category but generally, what the survey was getting at is that God is a God of some kind of justice.
The problem here is this category includes both a God Whose outlook is one where justice might be for all people and a God Who encompasses the claim that justice can be applied only on an individual basis— one person at a time. Hence, this is a God of justice for the individual, justice for one but not for all.
The fourth God named in the survey is the Distant God. This is the God who set the universe in motion and who now has little to do with that universe or with humanity.
And what percentage of the votes did the competing Gods get? The results in descending order are these: the Authoritarian God had 31 percent of the vote. The Distant God had 24. The Benevolent God came in at 23 percent and the Critical God at 16 percent. Add up all those percentages and it’s a 94 percent total, right in line with the number of people who claim a belief in God.
I found all this information in the book Christianity After Religion: the End of the Church and the Birth of a New Spiritual Awakening by Diana Butler Bass. [2] And, using her words to illustrate the results found in this survey, none of these four types of Gods particularly resembles in any kind of classical definition the Christian God or the Jewish God or the Muslim God.
Indeed, there is only one problem with the this set of four Gods. No. I take that back there are a whole slew of problems with this set of four Gods. Right now, however, I want to point out just one problem among the slew.
The Authoritarian God, the Distant God, the Benevolent God and the Critical God are all, largely, human Gods. And I label these as human Gods because, as defined, these seem to be largely invented by humanity. And these four descriptions of God do not even come close to the God we find in Scripture.
Further, and perhaps more to the point, these are all old fashioned Gods. How so? No matter how far back you go in history, even back beyond New Testament times, even back beyond the origins of the Hebrew people, you will find these four Gods: Authoritarian, Distant, Benevolent and Critical.
These have remained in vogue from generation to generation, from civilization to civilization. What you will not find among these Gods is, again, the God of Scripture. (Slight pause.)
So, what God is present in Scripture? What God can we see described in Scripture? (Slight pause.) I want to suggest the God we find in Scripture is a God of change— a God of change. (Slight pause.)
And these words are from the work know as Luke/Acts in the section we call Acts: “Amazed and astonished, they asked, ‘Surely all these people speaking are Galileans. How does it happen that each of us hears these words in our own native language?’” (Slight pause.)
To take the events recorded in this passage in a literal way is more of a mistake than to take nearly any other passage in all of Scripture in a literal way . This passage is not about speaking in tongues or hearing those tongues. This is not about a rushing wind or tongues of fire.
This is about the presence of the Spirit of God. And either we believe that the Spirit is present to us now, or we do not.
Further, part of the point offered is no one in this narrative— no one— is excluded from the display of the grace God offers. Unlike other moments— the transfiguration, to use one example where only an inner few are witnesses to the work of God’s Spirit— unlike other moments, everyone is included at Pentecost.
The tongues of fire rest upon each disciple. The crowd gathers because each one has heard the disciples speaking in the native tongue of each.
Just to make sure not even the least astute reader misses the inclusiveness of the moment, the list of place names traces a wide sweep throughout the ancient world. What happens at Pentecost is, thus, no inner mystical experience. It is outpouring of the Spirit of God that touches every life.
As must also be clear, not everyone there, not everyone listening responds to the winds of new life, the fires of new life, the change that is happening. And yet new life, change is precisely what this seems to be about. The Spirit of God is present, sudden, unmerited, amazing.
Hence, I want to suggest Pentecost does mean God acts in our lives. And I want to suggest Pentecost means the presence of the Spirit of God— that Spirit— invites our participation.
You see, the proclamation that the Spirit of God is here and among us is a common thread in all Scripture. And that the Spirit of God invites us to shed old ways, old Gods, human Gods, is a common theme throughout all Scripture. (Slight pause.)
The retired Episcopal Bishop, a prolific writer of books and articles, John Shelby Spong, has said this (quote): “We walk into the mystery of God. We never arrive. And if we think we arrive we become an idolater.’
Perhaps that quote illustrates the real problem with the Authoritarian, Distant, Benevolent and Critical Gods. These Gods can be pigeon holed. These Gods are static. But a God who is still speaking— and certainly once clear message of Pentecost is that God still speaks— a God who is still speaking is a God who calls us to change.
I think the singular challenge presented to the church, presented to us by Scripture is this: will we recognize that God is present to us and always calling us to new places, to different horizons, to reach beyond a limited vision of what the world can be to an expansive vision of what the world can be. In short, will we participate in new life, the change offered by the Spirit? Amen.
05/27/2012
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: “In my comments I quoted Diana Butler Bass from her work Christianity After Religion: the End of the Church and the Birth of a New Spiritual Awakening. In this work she speaks about a pastor who is leaving the ministry and the church because (quote): ‘In the church I spent more time discussing the replacement of the church roof than discerning the purpose of the church.’ Indeed, the point Bass is making in claiming there is a new spiritual awakening is that this is happening outside of the confines of church, or at least outside the church as it has been known for at least a couple hundred years. I want to suggest that in our denomination and in this church are more attuned to and ready for that awakening. On the other hand and as I also suggested, to partake in the new life offered by the Spirit might necessitate change.”
BENEDICTION: Let us acknowledge our many gifts. Let us seek to use them for the common good. Let us commit ourselves as people of action. God, the creator, is at work in our midst. The Holy Spirit is present to us. Jesus, the Christ, lives among us. Let us go from this worship to continue our worship with work and witness. And may the peace of Christ, which surpasses our understanding keep our hearts, minds and spirits centered on God, this day and forevermore. Amen.
[1] A note on punctuation: for the most part I’ve capitalized God, even with that may be considered by some to be grammatically ( and perhaps theologically) questionable.
[2] From that book pp. 49-51.
The Presence of the Spirit
“Amazed and astonished, they asked, ‘Surely all these people speaking are Galileans. How does it happen that each of us hears these words in our own native language?’” — Acts 2:7-8
I have, on occasion and from this pulpit, quoted the Anglican Bishop and theologian Nicholas Thomas Wright. Among my favorite of Wright’s quotes is this one: “Modern times are no different than New Testament times. In New Testament Times nearly everybody believed in God or the gods. [1] Very few people took it seriously.”
A recent survey suggests in the neighborhood of 92 to 94 percent of Americans believe in some kind of God. To be clear, in naming God some of those included in that statistic may refer to God simply as a “Higher Power” or use some other euphemism. Others have a more traditional view when it comes to naming God.
There are, in fact, many ways to express a belief in God or to name God. The point is no matter how Americans name God, a belief in some God is a dominant opinion.
On the other hand, in that same survey, one taken by Baylor University, it also suggests one way to look at this American belief in God is by defining the type of God— not the name of God but the type of God— in which one believes. That section of the survey says Americans actually believe in four different Gods.
The four Gods are named in this way: the Authoritarian God. This is, of course, the God of rules and retribution.
The Benevolent is another type of God Who showed up in the survey. And, to be clear, in the benevolent category we get not only the God of Love but the God Who often gets intertwined in this concept: the gift giving God.
That’s the gift giving God as in “Dear God, may I please win a million dollars.” This is the ‘I’m giving away money God’ made popular by many television evangelists.
In the next category, the survey used the term Critical God. ‘Critical God’ was, perhaps, a poor choice of words to use in creating the category but generally, what the survey was getting at is that God is a God of some kind of justice.
The problem here is this category includes both a God Whose outlook is one where justice might be for all people and a God Who encompasses the claim that justice can be applied only on an individual basis— one person at a time. Hence, this is a God of justice for the individual, justice for one but not for all.
The fourth God named in the survey is the Distant God. This is the God who set the universe in motion and who now has little to do with that universe or with humanity.
And what percentage of the votes did the competing Gods get? The results in descending order are these: the Authoritarian God had 31 percent of the vote. The Distant God had 24. The Benevolent God came in at 23 percent and the Critical God at 16 percent. Add up all those percentages and it’s a 94 percent total, right in line with the number of people who claim a belief in God.
I found all this information in the book Christianity After Religion: the End of the Church and the Birth of a New Spiritual Awakening by Diana Butler Bass. [2] And, using her words to illustrate the results found in this survey, none of these four types of Gods particularly resembles in any kind of classical definition the Christian God or the Jewish God or the Muslim God.
Indeed, there is only one problem with the this set of four Gods. No. I take that back there are a whole slew of problems with this set of four Gods. Right now, however, I want to point out just one problem among the slew.
The Authoritarian God, the Distant God, the Benevolent God and the Critical God are all, largely, human Gods. And I label these as human Gods because, as defined, these seem to be largely invented by humanity. And these four descriptions of God do not even come close to the God we find in Scripture.
Further, and perhaps more to the point, these are all old fashioned Gods. How so? No matter how far back you go in history, even back beyond New Testament times, even back beyond the origins of the Hebrew people, you will find these four Gods: Authoritarian, Distant, Benevolent and Critical.
These have remained in vogue from generation to generation, from civilization to civilization. What you will not find among these Gods is, again, the God of Scripture. (Slight pause.)
So, what God is present in Scripture? What God can we see described in Scripture? (Slight pause.) I want to suggest the God we find in Scripture is a God of change— a God of change. (Slight pause.)
And these words are from the work know as Luke/Acts in the section we call Acts: “Amazed and astonished, they asked, ‘Surely all these people speaking are Galileans. How does it happen that each of us hears these words in our own native language?’” (Slight pause.)
To take the events recorded in this passage in a literal way is more of a mistake than to take nearly any other passage in all of Scripture in a literal way . This passage is not about speaking in tongues or hearing those tongues. This is not about a rushing wind or tongues of fire.
This is about the presence of the Spirit of God. And either we believe that the Spirit is present to us now, or we do not.
Further, part of the point offered is no one in this narrative— no one— is excluded from the display of the grace God offers. Unlike other moments— the transfiguration, to use one example where only an inner few are witnesses to the work of God’s Spirit— unlike other moments, everyone is included at Pentecost.
The tongues of fire rest upon each disciple. The crowd gathers because each one has heard the disciples speaking in the native tongue of each.
Just to make sure not even the least astute reader misses the inclusiveness of the moment, the list of place names traces a wide sweep throughout the ancient world. What happens at Pentecost is, thus, no inner mystical experience. It is outpouring of the Spirit of God that touches every life.
As must also be clear, not everyone there, not everyone listening responds to the winds of new life, the fires of new life, the change that is happening. And yet new life, change is precisely what this seems to be about. The Spirit of God is present, sudden, unmerited, amazing.
Hence, I want to suggest Pentecost does mean God acts in our lives. And I want to suggest Pentecost means the presence of the Spirit of God— that Spirit— invites our participation.
You see, the proclamation that the Spirit of God is here and among us is a common thread in all Scripture. And that the Spirit of God invites us to shed old ways, old Gods, human Gods, is a common theme throughout all Scripture. (Slight pause.)
The retired Episcopal Bishop, a prolific writer of books and articles, John Shelby Spong, has said this (quote): “We walk into the mystery of God. We never arrive. And if we think we arrive we become an idolater.’
Perhaps that quote illustrates the real problem with the Authoritarian, Distant, Benevolent and Critical Gods. These Gods can be pigeon holed. These Gods are static. But a God who is still speaking— and certainly once clear message of Pentecost is that God still speaks— a God who is still speaking is a God who calls us to change.
I think the singular challenge presented to the church, presented to us by Scripture is this: will we recognize that God is present to us and always calling us to new places, to different horizons, to reach beyond a limited vision of what the world can be to an expansive vision of what the world can be. In short, will we participate in new life, the change offered by the Spirit? Amen.
05/27/2012
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: “In my comments I quoted Diana Butler Bass from her work Christianity After Religion: the End of the Church and the Birth of a New Spiritual Awakening. In this work she speaks about a pastor who is leaving the ministry and the church because (quote): ‘In the church I spent more time discussing the replacement of the church roof than discerning the purpose of the church.’ Indeed, the point Bass is making in claiming there is a new spiritual awakening is that this is happening outside of the confines of church, or at least outside the church as it has been known for at least a couple hundred years. I want to suggest that in our denomination and in this church are more attuned to and ready for that awakening. On the other hand and as I also suggested, to partake in the new life offered by the Spirit might necessitate change.”
BENEDICTION: Let us acknowledge our many gifts. Let us seek to use them for the common good. Let us commit ourselves as people of action. God, the creator, is at work in our midst. The Holy Spirit is present to us. Jesus, the Christ, lives among us. Let us go from this worship to continue our worship with work and witness. And may the peace of Christ, which surpasses our understanding keep our hearts, minds and spirits centered on God, this day and forevermore. Amen.
[1] A note on punctuation: for the most part I’ve capitalized God, even with that may be considered by some to be grammatically ( and perhaps theologically) questionable.
[2] From that book pp. 49-51.
Sunday, May 20, 2012
SERMON ~ 05/20/2012 ~ Look Busy!
05/20/2012 ~ Seventh Sunday of Easter (If Ascension not observed here) ~ Acts 1:15-17, 21-26; Psalm 1; 1 John 5:9-13; John 17:6-19.
05/17/2012 ~ Ascension of the Lord ~ Acts 1:1-11; Psalm 47 or Psalm 93; Ephesians 1:15-23; Luke 24:44-53.
(Note: used Acts 1:1-14 which combines some of the Acts reading from the Ascension and some of the Acts reading for the 7th Sunday after Easter. Also used John 15:1-8 and some of that reading was assigned the previous week. This was done to match the Anthem.)
“They {the two messengers dressed in dazzling, bright robes} asked, ‘You Galileans, why do you stand looking at the sky? Jesus has been taken from you. Jesus will return in the same way.’” — Acts 1:11.
Here’s a confession: I eat fast food too often. And so, I was standing in Burger King this week, waiting for my order of fast food when someone came to the counter and ordered fifty meals to go, fifty burgers to go.
I was glad about 2 things: first, I was glad I had placed my order before they did. And second, I was glad I did not have to shlep fifty Burger King meals someplace. After all, who goes into a fast food joint and places an order like that?
Oh. Yeah. I did. It was a long, long time ago. I was a Junior in High School. As most of you are aware, at that point in my life, I was living in New York City.
So, how many people do you know, besides me, who have walked into a New York City Greek style dinner— the kind of place Saturday Night Live parodied as a “Cheeseburger, Cheeseburger!” joint— how many people do you know, besides me, who have walked into a New York City Greek style dinner and ordered two hundred cups of coffee... to go? I think that would be me and only me you know whose done that. I walked into a Greek dinner and ordered two hundred cups of coffee... to go. [1] (Slight pause.)
But how? Why? (Slight pause.) As have mentioned before, I grew up Roman Catholic. There was and there perhaps there still is a common practice among Catholics called Communion Breakfasts.
What that means is a group of people with a common bond— some kind of club— this small group goes to Mass together. Going to Mass together: that’s the Communion part.
Then this group repairs someplace to have breakfast together— that’s the breakfast part. This breakfast is followed by a speaker. That’s the real reason this is done: the message part.
So, coming back to the Greek dinner part, the Catholic club at my public high school sponsored a Communion Breakfast. So early in the morning, some of us went to do the set up in the high school cafeteria.
There was a coffee maker in the cafeteria, so we figured coffee would not be a problem. But we suddenly realized not one of us knew how to run it.
That’s when the adult supervisor of the club stuck some cash in my hand and told me that right when the mass was ending I need to leave. I needed to run to the Greek restaurant down the street and I needed to order two hundred cups of coffee... to go. And I did— 200 cups of coffee to go. After all, what’s a breakfast without coffee? (Slight pause.)
The speakers at these breakfasts follow a script, a formula. They start with religious joke. Or two. If they had nothing particularly interesting or inventive to say, it would be three or four jokes.
And then they would end by encouraging us to be involved the work of the church. Again, that was the real reason for the gathering— encouragement to be involved the work of the church.
The jokes were often the same, breakfast, after breakfast, after breakfast. If you had attended only a couple of these functions you could probably repeat the lines right along with the speaker.
And social pressure said you were expected to laugh, even if you had heard the joke five times or five hundred times. It was the protocol. There was one joke, in particular— a shaggy dog style of joke— about the work of the church, which got told over and over and over again.
This it is. Father O’Malley, recently ordained and, therefore, assigned to officiate at the 7:00 a.m. Mass on a Sunday morning in the dead of winter at Saint Aloysius Church in Brooklyn, New York, faces the congregation and starts to say “the Lord be with you.” He suddenly realizes that coming down the center isle— in full glory— is Himself— the Christ. And Father O’Malley— he’s a newbie. He just doesn’t know what to do.
So he runs to the sacristy, picks up the phone and calls Monsignor Dolan in the rectory. “Monsignor Dolan— this is Father O’Malley. I’m over at the church celebrating Mass and I looked up and Himself is coming down the center isle in glory. What should I do?”
The monsignor puts Father O’Malley on hold and calls Bishop Flaherty. You know where this is going, don’t you? The Bishop puts the monsignor on hold and calls the Cardinal. The Cardinal puts the Bishop on hold and calls the Pope. The Cardinal tells the Pope that Himself is coming down the center isle at Saint Aloysius Church in Brooklyn, New York, and asks the Pope what should Father O’Malley do. And what does the Pope say? “Look busy!” (Slight pause.)
And these words are from the work know as Luke/Acts in the section we call Acts: “They {the two messengers dressed in dazzling, bright robes} asked, ‘You Galileans, why do you stand looking at the sky? Jesus has been taken from you. Jesus will return in the same way.’” (Slight pause.)
If there is anything the church has excelled at for about two thousand years, it is our ability to look busy. The church universal, in its own way, has conquered empires, tended to the dissolution of others, built governments, tended to the dissolution of others, captured lands, built cathedrals, acted as a landlord and maintained incomparable organizational structures. The church has influenced, both for ill and for good, nearly every step of world history for those two thousand years.
And over time the church has been on every last side of every last issue of social progression and social regression you care to name. On a more local and modern basis, church people have crowded committees— inside and outside of churches— built local churches (as opposed to cathedrals), built local schools, hospitals and built up towns and cities. Yes, the church has looked very busy.
But should we look busy? Is looking busy the real job of the church? Is looking busy our job? Or is the church called to do more than looking busy.
Indeed, what is church about? Is church about looking busy? What is it to which we are called? Is it something other than looking busy? (Slight pause.)
In this passage it states what the disciples do after Jesus is no longer with them. (Quote): “With one mind, together, they devoted themselves to constant prayer.” (Slight pause.) Now, that’s an interesting way to look busy— the group, the church, with one mind devoted itself to prayer.
And, I think, that is what points us to the kind of busy we might embrace as a church. You see, I take this to mean the real work of the church, the work toward which the church always needs to be pointing, is the transformation of lives.
This is clear in the reading: we, the church, are called to transform lives first through prayer and discernment. But after that, how are lives transformed, after that prayer and discernment? Lives are transformed one person at a time.
Lives, you see, are transformed in the midst of progression and in the midst of regression. But progression and regression— those are movements. They sometimes take centuries to evolve. Put differently, we are called to think globally but to act locally— one on one on one on one.
And most of the time, lives are transformed in a much more subtle, quiet way. Lives are transformed between people, people interacting with one another on a personal level.
Lives and transformed with one on one interaction. And that is where true social justice lies— with one on one interaction. I need to be clear: social action, the pursuit of the justice God would have us seek, is necessary— meaning larger and larger groups.
But the basis of social justice work, its real core, is when lives are transformed by one person helping another person. Lives are transformed when one person says something meaningful to the other. Lives are transformed when one person offers of themselves to the other.
Perhaps, then, the real question for the church is this: are we bold enough to become that deeply involved with the lives of those around us, especially the poor, the oppressed, the outcast? Are we courageous enough to not just be busy. Are we courageous enough to be involved? (Slight pause.)
And yes, it can look good— very, very good— when we look busy. But we should not be concerned with looking good. We should be concerned with doing good.
In the end, lives are transformed only when each of us is and all of us are— with one mind, as this reading says— when each of us is and all of us are willing to undertake that project: doing good. And so, I think being church does not mean being busy.
Indeed, it is only when each of us and all of us are willing to take part in the transformation of lives that we really are and that we really become church. And the transformation of lives is something we can only do together, with each other— tugging on that yarn [1] — in community. Amen.
05/20/2012
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: “I once heard this said: ‘There are two things you can’t do alone. One is to be married. The other is to be a Christian.’ Unless we interact with one another, unless we support one another, unless we hold one another up, deeply interact with one another, it becomes hard to get to the point where lives are transformed.”
BENEDICTION: The work and the will of God is placed before us. Further, we are called to be faithful and seek to do God’s will and work. In so doing, may we love God so much, that we love nothing else too much. May we be so in awe of God, that we are in awe of no one else and nothing else. Amen.
[1] It does need to be noted that in the first half of this sermon there was a lot of laughter from the congregation because of the stories being told.
[2] At the Children’s Time the pastor unraveled a ball of yarn until everyone in the nave was holding on to it and asked everyone to pull on the string and to realize we were all attached. And we are not just attached by the yarn. We are attached by God.
05/17/2012 ~ Ascension of the Lord ~ Acts 1:1-11; Psalm 47 or Psalm 93; Ephesians 1:15-23; Luke 24:44-53.
(Note: used Acts 1:1-14 which combines some of the Acts reading from the Ascension and some of the Acts reading for the 7th Sunday after Easter. Also used John 15:1-8 and some of that reading was assigned the previous week. This was done to match the Anthem.)
Look Busy!
“They {the two messengers dressed in dazzling, bright robes} asked, ‘You Galileans, why do you stand looking at the sky? Jesus has been taken from you. Jesus will return in the same way.’” — Acts 1:11.
Here’s a confession: I eat fast food too often. And so, I was standing in Burger King this week, waiting for my order of fast food when someone came to the counter and ordered fifty meals to go, fifty burgers to go.
I was glad about 2 things: first, I was glad I had placed my order before they did. And second, I was glad I did not have to shlep fifty Burger King meals someplace. After all, who goes into a fast food joint and places an order like that?
Oh. Yeah. I did. It was a long, long time ago. I was a Junior in High School. As most of you are aware, at that point in my life, I was living in New York City.
So, how many people do you know, besides me, who have walked into a New York City Greek style dinner— the kind of place Saturday Night Live parodied as a “Cheeseburger, Cheeseburger!” joint— how many people do you know, besides me, who have walked into a New York City Greek style dinner and ordered two hundred cups of coffee... to go? I think that would be me and only me you know whose done that. I walked into a Greek dinner and ordered two hundred cups of coffee... to go. [1] (Slight pause.)
But how? Why? (Slight pause.) As have mentioned before, I grew up Roman Catholic. There was and there perhaps there still is a common practice among Catholics called Communion Breakfasts.
What that means is a group of people with a common bond— some kind of club— this small group goes to Mass together. Going to Mass together: that’s the Communion part.
Then this group repairs someplace to have breakfast together— that’s the breakfast part. This breakfast is followed by a speaker. That’s the real reason this is done: the message part.
So, coming back to the Greek dinner part, the Catholic club at my public high school sponsored a Communion Breakfast. So early in the morning, some of us went to do the set up in the high school cafeteria.
There was a coffee maker in the cafeteria, so we figured coffee would not be a problem. But we suddenly realized not one of us knew how to run it.
That’s when the adult supervisor of the club stuck some cash in my hand and told me that right when the mass was ending I need to leave. I needed to run to the Greek restaurant down the street and I needed to order two hundred cups of coffee... to go. And I did— 200 cups of coffee to go. After all, what’s a breakfast without coffee? (Slight pause.)
The speakers at these breakfasts follow a script, a formula. They start with religious joke. Or two. If they had nothing particularly interesting or inventive to say, it would be three or four jokes.
And then they would end by encouraging us to be involved the work of the church. Again, that was the real reason for the gathering— encouragement to be involved the work of the church.
The jokes were often the same, breakfast, after breakfast, after breakfast. If you had attended only a couple of these functions you could probably repeat the lines right along with the speaker.
And social pressure said you were expected to laugh, even if you had heard the joke five times or five hundred times. It was the protocol. There was one joke, in particular— a shaggy dog style of joke— about the work of the church, which got told over and over and over again.
This it is. Father O’Malley, recently ordained and, therefore, assigned to officiate at the 7:00 a.m. Mass on a Sunday morning in the dead of winter at Saint Aloysius Church in Brooklyn, New York, faces the congregation and starts to say “the Lord be with you.” He suddenly realizes that coming down the center isle— in full glory— is Himself— the Christ. And Father O’Malley— he’s a newbie. He just doesn’t know what to do.
So he runs to the sacristy, picks up the phone and calls Monsignor Dolan in the rectory. “Monsignor Dolan— this is Father O’Malley. I’m over at the church celebrating Mass and I looked up and Himself is coming down the center isle in glory. What should I do?”
The monsignor puts Father O’Malley on hold and calls Bishop Flaherty. You know where this is going, don’t you? The Bishop puts the monsignor on hold and calls the Cardinal. The Cardinal puts the Bishop on hold and calls the Pope. The Cardinal tells the Pope that Himself is coming down the center isle at Saint Aloysius Church in Brooklyn, New York, and asks the Pope what should Father O’Malley do. And what does the Pope say? “Look busy!” (Slight pause.)
And these words are from the work know as Luke/Acts in the section we call Acts: “They {the two messengers dressed in dazzling, bright robes} asked, ‘You Galileans, why do you stand looking at the sky? Jesus has been taken from you. Jesus will return in the same way.’” (Slight pause.)
If there is anything the church has excelled at for about two thousand years, it is our ability to look busy. The church universal, in its own way, has conquered empires, tended to the dissolution of others, built governments, tended to the dissolution of others, captured lands, built cathedrals, acted as a landlord and maintained incomparable organizational structures. The church has influenced, both for ill and for good, nearly every step of world history for those two thousand years.
And over time the church has been on every last side of every last issue of social progression and social regression you care to name. On a more local and modern basis, church people have crowded committees— inside and outside of churches— built local churches (as opposed to cathedrals), built local schools, hospitals and built up towns and cities. Yes, the church has looked very busy.
But should we look busy? Is looking busy the real job of the church? Is looking busy our job? Or is the church called to do more than looking busy.
Indeed, what is church about? Is church about looking busy? What is it to which we are called? Is it something other than looking busy? (Slight pause.)
In this passage it states what the disciples do after Jesus is no longer with them. (Quote): “With one mind, together, they devoted themselves to constant prayer.” (Slight pause.) Now, that’s an interesting way to look busy— the group, the church, with one mind devoted itself to prayer.
And, I think, that is what points us to the kind of busy we might embrace as a church. You see, I take this to mean the real work of the church, the work toward which the church always needs to be pointing, is the transformation of lives.
This is clear in the reading: we, the church, are called to transform lives first through prayer and discernment. But after that, how are lives transformed, after that prayer and discernment? Lives are transformed one person at a time.
Lives, you see, are transformed in the midst of progression and in the midst of regression. But progression and regression— those are movements. They sometimes take centuries to evolve. Put differently, we are called to think globally but to act locally— one on one on one on one.
And most of the time, lives are transformed in a much more subtle, quiet way. Lives are transformed between people, people interacting with one another on a personal level.
Lives and transformed with one on one interaction. And that is where true social justice lies— with one on one interaction. I need to be clear: social action, the pursuit of the justice God would have us seek, is necessary— meaning larger and larger groups.
But the basis of social justice work, its real core, is when lives are transformed by one person helping another person. Lives are transformed when one person says something meaningful to the other. Lives are transformed when one person offers of themselves to the other.
Perhaps, then, the real question for the church is this: are we bold enough to become that deeply involved with the lives of those around us, especially the poor, the oppressed, the outcast? Are we courageous enough to not just be busy. Are we courageous enough to be involved? (Slight pause.)
And yes, it can look good— very, very good— when we look busy. But we should not be concerned with looking good. We should be concerned with doing good.
In the end, lives are transformed only when each of us is and all of us are— with one mind, as this reading says— when each of us is and all of us are willing to undertake that project: doing good. And so, I think being church does not mean being busy.
Indeed, it is only when each of us and all of us are willing to take part in the transformation of lives that we really are and that we really become church. And the transformation of lives is something we can only do together, with each other— tugging on that yarn [1] — in community. Amen.
05/20/2012
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: “I once heard this said: ‘There are two things you can’t do alone. One is to be married. The other is to be a Christian.’ Unless we interact with one another, unless we support one another, unless we hold one another up, deeply interact with one another, it becomes hard to get to the point where lives are transformed.”
BENEDICTION: The work and the will of God is placed before us. Further, we are called to be faithful and seek to do God’s will and work. In so doing, may we love God so much, that we love nothing else too much. May we be so in awe of God, that we are in awe of no one else and nothing else. Amen.
[1] It does need to be noted that in the first half of this sermon there was a lot of laughter from the congregation because of the stories being told.
[2] At the Children’s Time the pastor unraveled a ball of yarn until everyone in the nave was holding on to it and asked everyone to pull on the string and to realize we were all attached. And we are not just attached by the yarn. We are attached by God.
Sunday, May 13, 2012
05/13/2012 ~ SERMON ~ Inclusion
05/13/2012 ~ Sixth Sunday of Easter ~ Acts 10:44-48; Psalm 98; 1 John 5:1-6; John 15:9-17 ~ Mother’s Day ~ Festival of the Christian Home on the Christian Calendar.
“Then Peter asked, ‘Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?’” — Acts 10:46b-47.
My brother in law, Bonnie’s brother, Jack Scott is, in one sense and literally, among the very first Baby Boomers. That generation labeled as Baby Boomers were, generally, the children of the soldiers who returned from World War II.
Now Bonnie’s Dad— just back from the war— and her Mom, got married right on V.J. Day, August the 14th, 1945. When they came out of the church where their ceremony had taken place every church bell in town was pealing and they knew it wasn’t for them. But at first, they could not figure out why all those bells were clanging away.
Bonnie’s brother, Jack, was born— you guessed it— nine months and six days later— May the 20th, 1946— a close call. We have great fun pulling Jack’s leg about that. Fortunately, Bonnie and I are younger— much, much younger than that. But we are also in this so called Baby Boomer generation.
To be clear, there is an official definition of a Baby Boomer, and it is not someone born on or after that nine month deadline— May the 14th, 1946. The definition is more inclusive than that.
According to the United States Census Bureau a Baby Boomer is someone born anytime in the entire year starting in 1946. The group then goes all the way to anyone born in 1965. Born between 1946 and 1965? You are a member of the Baby Boomers, do not pass ‘Go’ and do not collect $200.
I hope this does not sound too defensive of me, but I think my generation has been blamed for a lot we did not cause. We just happened to be standing around when this stuff happened.
We were the first generation to grow up with television. But we did not cause television. But hence, we also endured The Brady Bunch, Gilligan’s Island and Happy Days. These were not created by us. These were created by people older than us. We were just, as I said, standing around and they were inflicted on us.
And we also were standing around when transistor radios, The Beatles, The Motown Sound and Disco happened. Baby Boomers did not cause these things. We were not in control. We were merely consumers.
Now, perhaps most notoriously, the Baby Boomers have been called the “Me Generation.” Indeed, it has been said that Baby Boomers are called the “Me Generation” because, early on they/we developed a youth culture which seemed to focus heavily on self-fulfillment.
As a counter to that argument, I would suggest Baby Boomers also entered a world in which, unless you take care of yourself, no one else will. I would suggest Baby Boomers entered a world in which, unless you blow your own horn, no one else will.
I would suggest Baby Boomers entered a world in which, just because of our sheer numbers, just because there are so many of us, if we did just stand around and do nothing it would soon become— to use a cliche— a dog eat dog world. In that kind of world, looking out for number one is not an option. Looking out for number one is an imperative. (Slight pause.)
This fact might surprise some of you. The professional boxer Muhammad Ali, born Cassius Marcellus Clay, is not a Baby Boomer. He was born in 1942, so he is too old to qualify. And yet, it was he who proclaimed, “I am the greatest.”
Despite the fact that Ali is not a member of the Baby Boomer generation, I have often wondered if it was that slogan— I am the greatest— and the attitude it proclaims which fully and quite truly captured the Baby Boomer sentiment. Be yourself. Take care of yourself. Proclaim yourself. No one else will do it. (Slight pause.)
And these words are from Luke/Acts in the section known as Acts: “Then Peter asked, ‘Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?’” (Slight pause.)
Back in 1952, back when people were just figuring out the Baby Boom which named a generation was happening, a great 20th Century theologian, Paul Tillich, published a book— The Courage to Be. In many ways the title of that book was prophetic because it named an aspect of what Boomers needed— they needed the courage to be.
At the same time, the book also outlined the problem with a premise of only looking out for number one, the problem with the premise of seeing the world exclusively as dog eat dog. The problem? If I only look out for number one, if you only take ‘me’ into account, what happens to the person standing next to me, next to us? What happens to all those around us, those with whom we live? (Slight pause.)
Here is another way to look at it: yes— we do need courage to be. We do need courage to be ourselves. We do need courage to fully be ourselves, to openly be ourselves, to unequivocally be ourselves, to unabashedly be ourselves. And that having been said, how are we to look at the command of Jesus heard in the Gospel reading that we are to not love just ourselves but that we (quote) “love one another.” (Slight pause.)
Earlier, when the reading from Luke/Acts was introduced, you were encouraged to read the entire Tenth Chapter when you get a chance. If you do so, you will see it contains a full, open, unequivocal and unabashed message.
The message says the Spirit of God works not just in or through special, select individuals. The Spirit of God works not just in or through a chosen few. The Spirit of God moves with whom and in whom and through whom the Spirit of God will move.
And no one can or should tell you in whom and with whom and through whom the Spirit will of God move. And certainly no one can or should presume to tell God in whom and with whom and through whom the Spirit of God will move.
Further, based on what Jesus says, it would seem likely that the Spirit of God moves in everyone. (Quote): “I appointed you to go and bear fruit— fruit that will endure....” (Slight pause.)
Well, given the readings perhaps it is fitting that today we celebrate Mother’s Day on the secular calendar. You see, we need to recognize that we are all brothers and sisters of one another. We are all sons and daughters. And we are all related to one another.
Indeed, we need to recognize the Holy Spirit nurtures each of us. But we also need to recognize that the Holy Spirit nurtures all of us. We need to recognize that we are all children of God, children of the Spirit of God.
We are all members of one family. We are all members of the family of God.
Once we recognize that we are all children of God, nurtured by the Spirit, it starts to make sense that God would not condemn us for being who we are. It becomes clear to us that the arms of the Holy Spirit enfold us— both each of us and all of us— with the love about which Jesus speaks. It becomes clear that, as children of God, we need to accept one another, love one another, nurture one another. (Slight pause.)
If I may be so bold, I think the generation coming to maturity today— some of whom graced us with their talents several minutes ago— this generation knows better and often articulates this better than we Boomers. [1] And this is what they say: we are all in this together. We need to mutually support one another.
I think they know about the fragility of the earth, the environment. I think they appreciate both their own strengths and their own frailties. And, because of that, they do hear the “love one another” message loud and clear.
Yes, each of us can flourish as an individual. But each of us flourishes best when we are loved by those around us and supported by those around us.
So, to come back to those words of Paul Tillich, perhaps what we need is not just the courage to be and not even just the courage to be me. Perhaps what we really need is the courage to be us, together— sometimes a tall order. But why do we need the courage to be us? Jesus said (quote): “love one another.” Amen.
05/13/2012
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: “It does, I think, take great courage to be. And I think it takes even greater courage to be me. But I want to suggest that the greatest measure of courage we can have is the courage to be us— and that means everyone. Us— as in all people— no exceptions.”
BENEDICTION: May the Holy Spirit inspire our words, and God’s love in Christ empower our deeds, as, in Christ, we are no longer servants, but friends, learning to love as we have been loved. And may the peace of God which surpasses our understanding keep our hearts and minds in the knowledge of God, the love of Jesus, the Christ, and the companionship of the Holy Spirit, this day and forevermore. Amen.
[1] The Madrigal Singers of Norwich High School under the direction of Mary Mayo graced us with their presence on this day.
Inclusion
“Then Peter asked, ‘Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?’” — Acts 10:46b-47.
My brother in law, Bonnie’s brother, Jack Scott is, in one sense and literally, among the very first Baby Boomers. That generation labeled as Baby Boomers were, generally, the children of the soldiers who returned from World War II.
Now Bonnie’s Dad— just back from the war— and her Mom, got married right on V.J. Day, August the 14th, 1945. When they came out of the church where their ceremony had taken place every church bell in town was pealing and they knew it wasn’t for them. But at first, they could not figure out why all those bells were clanging away.
Bonnie’s brother, Jack, was born— you guessed it— nine months and six days later— May the 20th, 1946— a close call. We have great fun pulling Jack’s leg about that. Fortunately, Bonnie and I are younger— much, much younger than that. But we are also in this so called Baby Boomer generation.
To be clear, there is an official definition of a Baby Boomer, and it is not someone born on or after that nine month deadline— May the 14th, 1946. The definition is more inclusive than that.
According to the United States Census Bureau a Baby Boomer is someone born anytime in the entire year starting in 1946. The group then goes all the way to anyone born in 1965. Born between 1946 and 1965? You are a member of the Baby Boomers, do not pass ‘Go’ and do not collect $200.
I hope this does not sound too defensive of me, but I think my generation has been blamed for a lot we did not cause. We just happened to be standing around when this stuff happened.
We were the first generation to grow up with television. But we did not cause television. But hence, we also endured The Brady Bunch, Gilligan’s Island and Happy Days. These were not created by us. These were created by people older than us. We were just, as I said, standing around and they were inflicted on us.
And we also were standing around when transistor radios, The Beatles, The Motown Sound and Disco happened. Baby Boomers did not cause these things. We were not in control. We were merely consumers.
Now, perhaps most notoriously, the Baby Boomers have been called the “Me Generation.” Indeed, it has been said that Baby Boomers are called the “Me Generation” because, early on they/we developed a youth culture which seemed to focus heavily on self-fulfillment.
As a counter to that argument, I would suggest Baby Boomers also entered a world in which, unless you take care of yourself, no one else will. I would suggest Baby Boomers entered a world in which, unless you blow your own horn, no one else will.
I would suggest Baby Boomers entered a world in which, just because of our sheer numbers, just because there are so many of us, if we did just stand around and do nothing it would soon become— to use a cliche— a dog eat dog world. In that kind of world, looking out for number one is not an option. Looking out for number one is an imperative. (Slight pause.)
This fact might surprise some of you. The professional boxer Muhammad Ali, born Cassius Marcellus Clay, is not a Baby Boomer. He was born in 1942, so he is too old to qualify. And yet, it was he who proclaimed, “I am the greatest.”
Despite the fact that Ali is not a member of the Baby Boomer generation, I have often wondered if it was that slogan— I am the greatest— and the attitude it proclaims which fully and quite truly captured the Baby Boomer sentiment. Be yourself. Take care of yourself. Proclaim yourself. No one else will do it. (Slight pause.)
And these words are from Luke/Acts in the section known as Acts: “Then Peter asked, ‘Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?’” (Slight pause.)
Back in 1952, back when people were just figuring out the Baby Boom which named a generation was happening, a great 20th Century theologian, Paul Tillich, published a book— The Courage to Be. In many ways the title of that book was prophetic because it named an aspect of what Boomers needed— they needed the courage to be.
At the same time, the book also outlined the problem with a premise of only looking out for number one, the problem with the premise of seeing the world exclusively as dog eat dog. The problem? If I only look out for number one, if you only take ‘me’ into account, what happens to the person standing next to me, next to us? What happens to all those around us, those with whom we live? (Slight pause.)
Here is another way to look at it: yes— we do need courage to be. We do need courage to be ourselves. We do need courage to fully be ourselves, to openly be ourselves, to unequivocally be ourselves, to unabashedly be ourselves. And that having been said, how are we to look at the command of Jesus heard in the Gospel reading that we are to not love just ourselves but that we (quote) “love one another.” (Slight pause.)
Earlier, when the reading from Luke/Acts was introduced, you were encouraged to read the entire Tenth Chapter when you get a chance. If you do so, you will see it contains a full, open, unequivocal and unabashed message.
The message says the Spirit of God works not just in or through special, select individuals. The Spirit of God works not just in or through a chosen few. The Spirit of God moves with whom and in whom and through whom the Spirit of God will move.
And no one can or should tell you in whom and with whom and through whom the Spirit will of God move. And certainly no one can or should presume to tell God in whom and with whom and through whom the Spirit of God will move.
Further, based on what Jesus says, it would seem likely that the Spirit of God moves in everyone. (Quote): “I appointed you to go and bear fruit— fruit that will endure....” (Slight pause.)
Well, given the readings perhaps it is fitting that today we celebrate Mother’s Day on the secular calendar. You see, we need to recognize that we are all brothers and sisters of one another. We are all sons and daughters. And we are all related to one another.
Indeed, we need to recognize the Holy Spirit nurtures each of us. But we also need to recognize that the Holy Spirit nurtures all of us. We need to recognize that we are all children of God, children of the Spirit of God.
We are all members of one family. We are all members of the family of God.
Once we recognize that we are all children of God, nurtured by the Spirit, it starts to make sense that God would not condemn us for being who we are. It becomes clear to us that the arms of the Holy Spirit enfold us— both each of us and all of us— with the love about which Jesus speaks. It becomes clear that, as children of God, we need to accept one another, love one another, nurture one another. (Slight pause.)
If I may be so bold, I think the generation coming to maturity today— some of whom graced us with their talents several minutes ago— this generation knows better and often articulates this better than we Boomers. [1] And this is what they say: we are all in this together. We need to mutually support one another.
I think they know about the fragility of the earth, the environment. I think they appreciate both their own strengths and their own frailties. And, because of that, they do hear the “love one another” message loud and clear.
Yes, each of us can flourish as an individual. But each of us flourishes best when we are loved by those around us and supported by those around us.
So, to come back to those words of Paul Tillich, perhaps what we need is not just the courage to be and not even just the courage to be me. Perhaps what we really need is the courage to be us, together— sometimes a tall order. But why do we need the courage to be us? Jesus said (quote): “love one another.” Amen.
05/13/2012
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: “It does, I think, take great courage to be. And I think it takes even greater courage to be me. But I want to suggest that the greatest measure of courage we can have is the courage to be us— and that means everyone. Us— as in all people— no exceptions.”
BENEDICTION: May the Holy Spirit inspire our words, and God’s love in Christ empower our deeds, as, in Christ, we are no longer servants, but friends, learning to love as we have been loved. And may the peace of God which surpasses our understanding keep our hearts and minds in the knowledge of God, the love of Jesus, the Christ, and the companionship of the Holy Spirit, this day and forevermore. Amen.
[1] The Madrigal Singers of Norwich High School under the direction of Mary Mayo graced us with their presence on this day.
Friday, May 11, 2012
SERMON ~ 05/06/2012 ~ Learning and Understanding
05/06/2012 ~ Fifth Sunday of Easter ~ Acts 8:26-40; Psalm 22:25-31; 1 John 4:7-21; John 15:1-8 ~ Communion Sunday.
“So Philip ran up to {the chariot} and heard the Ethiopian reading the prophet Isaiah and asked, ‘Do you understand what you are reading?’ The Ethiopian replied, ‘How can I, unless someone guides me?’ and invited Philip to get into the chariot and sit.” — Acts 8:30-31.
In the book The Power of Habit Charles Duhigg tells this story. In the fall of 1987 Wall Street analysts and investors gathered in a hotel ballroom in New York City to hear the new Chief Executive Officer of the Aluminum Company of America. A very large company, ALCOA had fallen on hard times. Management had made many missteps, misstep after misstep. Profits and return had plummeted.
The person the ALCOA board chose to be the CEO was one Paul O’Neill. Eventually, O’Neill would become the first Secretary of the Treasury for George W. Bush. More important for this story, however, is the fact that O’Neill would turn the fortunes of ALCOA around with amazing speed. But anyone gathered in that room on that morning would have thought a turn around quite unlikely.
Now, O’Neill looked every inch the CEO. Though only fifty-one, he already had a shock of white hair. He also had a ramrod posture and a warm smile. He looked confident, dignified, solid. Then he opened his mouth.
“I want to talk to you about worker safety,” he started. “Many of our employees work with metals processed at 1500 degrees and with machines that can kill the operator when not used according to strict standards. And despite dangerous working conditions, our safety record is good compared to most companies, even ones without dangerous working conditions. However, every year ALCOA workers do miss work because of injuries.”
The audience of analysts and investors was, at best, confused. At these kinds of meetings where new CEO types are introduced, it is usual to follow a predictable protocol, a script. A new CEO would start with a self-deprecating joke, admit to sleeping through class work at Harvard and then make a promise to boost profits and lower costs.
O’Neill never went near this formula. Instead, this is what O’Neill said and promised: “I intend to make ALCOA the safest company in America. I intend to go for zero injuries.”
Even before O’Neill had finished some of the analysts and investors in the audience ran for the doors, found pay phones— this was 1987 when pay phones were all they had— they ran for the doors, found pay phones and called their brokers. “Sell” was the order they gave. “Sell any ALCOA in my portfolio.”
As I’ve already indicated, since O’Neill went on to make ALCOA one of the most profitable companies on the planet, selling the stock at that point was not a particularly wise choice. How did O’Neill make ALCOA profitable? He got everyone in the company to do one key thing right.
And, in fact, it turns out there are some habits that are or can be keystone habits. These keystone habits matter more than others. In the case of ALCOA it turned out to be safety— the safest company in America.
These keystone habits are different from situation to situation and sometimes even from person to person. But when you figure out what keystone habit is necessary, these can influence how a person thinks, works, feels, spends time and communicates. (Slight pause.)
And these words are from the work known as Luke / Acts in the section called Acts: “So Philip ran up to {the chariot} and heard the Ethiopian reading the prophet Isaiah and asked, ‘Do you understand what you are reading?’ The Ethiopian replied, ‘How can I, unless someone guides me?’ and invited Philip to get into the chariot and sit.” (Slight pause.)
I occasionally mention one of my mentors in ministry, the Rev. Carol Anderson. Carol was among the first officially ordained women in the Episcopal Church. Once, I was among a group of friends she had to her tiny Upper West Side apartment. The rooms were literally lined with bookcases.
One person pointed at the shelves and said, “Carol, you can’t tell me you’ve read all these books, can you?”
“No,” she responded. “But I know exactly what’s in each of them.”
Now that I, myself, have gone through the process of hazing we Christians call getting a Master of Divinity Degree, I can attest to that concept. No, I have not read all the books in my possession. But I know what’s in them. More importantly, I know where to look in the library.
Indeed, when I was still in the early stages of Elementary School, perhaps the third grade at least that’s my memory of it, my mother took me to a public library and taught me how to use the card catalogue. And I don’t mean the card catalogue in the children’s section. She taught me how to use the adult card catalogue. As any librarian knows, knowing where to look and what to look for is vital. (Slight pause.)
This (the pastor holds up a Bible) is a library. It is not one book. It is a series of books— a library with all kinds of different literature. One needs to know how to interpret what one reads. It is a vital skill when it comes to the Bible.
And knowing where to look and what to look for is vital. Further, having someone you trust, someone who can act like a reference librarian, to point you toward where to look and what to look for can be key also. (Slight pause.)
The Ethiopian in this reading is looking at the prophet Isaiah, is looking at that scroll. But that court official is lost. Why? Have you ever read Isaiah? There are plenty of places to get lost. You need to know where to look and what to look for.
To be clear: God provides guidance and God sometimes even provides a reference librarian. In this case, Philip is empowered by God to be a reference librarian and, thereby, an instrument of God.
And we also need to remember that the prime command of God to the Jewish people as it is laid out in the Shema is hear. That’s hear, not listen— hear— to actively seek the voice of God.
Therefore, it is a safe assumption that the voice of God will not be static, that the voice of God will speak and is still speaking. Further, if we are a people of the Book— and as I just indicated what that means is we are really a people of the library— if we are a people of the Book there will be a lot to hear from our still speaking God in the Book and, therefore, much to discern. (Slight pause.)
That brings me back to that little story about Paul O’Neill. If there is anything to be learned from that story, it’s that we need to form productive habits, keystone habits. I want to suggest that, for we Christians, people of the library, the productive habit we need to form is one of learning. We need to form the habit of learning from Scripture— from the library.
In order for that to be a really productive habit, we need to know where to look in Scripture. We need to know how to read what we find in Scripture. Just based on the experience of that court official, we can be staring at a passage all day and still not quite get it.
Indeed, reading Scripture is not just a matter of learning where to look. After all, memorizing where to look, memorizing what Scripture says— and I am sure we all know people who can recite Scripture chapter and verse— memorizing what Scripture says borders on a party game. It begins to sound like an old Irving Berlin song (the pastor intones some notes here from the Irving Berlin song Anything You Can Do from the Musical Annie Get Your Gun): “Any verse you can quote I can quote quicker. I can quote Scripture much slicker than you.”
My point is it is not just a matter of knowing where to look. It’s a matter of understanding what it says.
All of which is to say, we should never read Scripture thinking it will be readily transparent. What the story of Philip and the court official tells us is that was not the case in New Testament times. Why should Scripture be immediately understandable to us now, except if we bring our own egocentricity to it?
And I guess this is also to say Scripture is something with which we need to grapple and study. It is then and only then, when study and learning become habit, that we will also form helpful habits for life.
In short, the reading and the study of Scripture needs to be a keystone habit for Christians— people of the library. Believe it or not, when the reading and study of Scripture becomes a keystone habit, a lot of other things will fall into place for us. Like what? Well, like that old— you know— ‘love neighbor; love God’ stuff. Amen.
05/06/2012
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: “Why do I keep saying ‘Love neighbor; love God’ is the central theme in all of Scripture? Because I am in the habit of reading and studying Scripture and, for me, that message is what leaps out of nearly every page of the library.”
BENEDICTION: Live for God in every moment of the day. Seek to know the places to which God calls us. Because we are loved we may dare to love others. God first loved us, so we must not hesitate to show the fruits of abiding in Christ. And may the peace of God which surpasses all understanding keep our hearts and minds in the knowledge of God, the love of Jesus, the Christ, and the companionship of the Holy Spirit, this day and forevermore. Amen.
Learning and Understanding
“So Philip ran up to {the chariot} and heard the Ethiopian reading the prophet Isaiah and asked, ‘Do you understand what you are reading?’ The Ethiopian replied, ‘How can I, unless someone guides me?’ and invited Philip to get into the chariot and sit.” — Acts 8:30-31.
In the book The Power of Habit Charles Duhigg tells this story. In the fall of 1987 Wall Street analysts and investors gathered in a hotel ballroom in New York City to hear the new Chief Executive Officer of the Aluminum Company of America. A very large company, ALCOA had fallen on hard times. Management had made many missteps, misstep after misstep. Profits and return had plummeted.
The person the ALCOA board chose to be the CEO was one Paul O’Neill. Eventually, O’Neill would become the first Secretary of the Treasury for George W. Bush. More important for this story, however, is the fact that O’Neill would turn the fortunes of ALCOA around with amazing speed. But anyone gathered in that room on that morning would have thought a turn around quite unlikely.
Now, O’Neill looked every inch the CEO. Though only fifty-one, he already had a shock of white hair. He also had a ramrod posture and a warm smile. He looked confident, dignified, solid. Then he opened his mouth.
“I want to talk to you about worker safety,” he started. “Many of our employees work with metals processed at 1500 degrees and with machines that can kill the operator when not used according to strict standards. And despite dangerous working conditions, our safety record is good compared to most companies, even ones without dangerous working conditions. However, every year ALCOA workers do miss work because of injuries.”
The audience of analysts and investors was, at best, confused. At these kinds of meetings where new CEO types are introduced, it is usual to follow a predictable protocol, a script. A new CEO would start with a self-deprecating joke, admit to sleeping through class work at Harvard and then make a promise to boost profits and lower costs.
O’Neill never went near this formula. Instead, this is what O’Neill said and promised: “I intend to make ALCOA the safest company in America. I intend to go for zero injuries.”
Even before O’Neill had finished some of the analysts and investors in the audience ran for the doors, found pay phones— this was 1987 when pay phones were all they had— they ran for the doors, found pay phones and called their brokers. “Sell” was the order they gave. “Sell any ALCOA in my portfolio.”
As I’ve already indicated, since O’Neill went on to make ALCOA one of the most profitable companies on the planet, selling the stock at that point was not a particularly wise choice. How did O’Neill make ALCOA profitable? He got everyone in the company to do one key thing right.
And, in fact, it turns out there are some habits that are or can be keystone habits. These keystone habits matter more than others. In the case of ALCOA it turned out to be safety— the safest company in America.
These keystone habits are different from situation to situation and sometimes even from person to person. But when you figure out what keystone habit is necessary, these can influence how a person thinks, works, feels, spends time and communicates. (Slight pause.)
And these words are from the work known as Luke / Acts in the section called Acts: “So Philip ran up to {the chariot} and heard the Ethiopian reading the prophet Isaiah and asked, ‘Do you understand what you are reading?’ The Ethiopian replied, ‘How can I, unless someone guides me?’ and invited Philip to get into the chariot and sit.” (Slight pause.)
I occasionally mention one of my mentors in ministry, the Rev. Carol Anderson. Carol was among the first officially ordained women in the Episcopal Church. Once, I was among a group of friends she had to her tiny Upper West Side apartment. The rooms were literally lined with bookcases.
One person pointed at the shelves and said, “Carol, you can’t tell me you’ve read all these books, can you?”
“No,” she responded. “But I know exactly what’s in each of them.”
Now that I, myself, have gone through the process of hazing we Christians call getting a Master of Divinity Degree, I can attest to that concept. No, I have not read all the books in my possession. But I know what’s in them. More importantly, I know where to look in the library.
Indeed, when I was still in the early stages of Elementary School, perhaps the third grade at least that’s my memory of it, my mother took me to a public library and taught me how to use the card catalogue. And I don’t mean the card catalogue in the children’s section. She taught me how to use the adult card catalogue. As any librarian knows, knowing where to look and what to look for is vital. (Slight pause.)
This (the pastor holds up a Bible) is a library. It is not one book. It is a series of books— a library with all kinds of different literature. One needs to know how to interpret what one reads. It is a vital skill when it comes to the Bible.
And knowing where to look and what to look for is vital. Further, having someone you trust, someone who can act like a reference librarian, to point you toward where to look and what to look for can be key also. (Slight pause.)
The Ethiopian in this reading is looking at the prophet Isaiah, is looking at that scroll. But that court official is lost. Why? Have you ever read Isaiah? There are plenty of places to get lost. You need to know where to look and what to look for.
To be clear: God provides guidance and God sometimes even provides a reference librarian. In this case, Philip is empowered by God to be a reference librarian and, thereby, an instrument of God.
And we also need to remember that the prime command of God to the Jewish people as it is laid out in the Shema is hear. That’s hear, not listen— hear— to actively seek the voice of God.
Therefore, it is a safe assumption that the voice of God will not be static, that the voice of God will speak and is still speaking. Further, if we are a people of the Book— and as I just indicated what that means is we are really a people of the library— if we are a people of the Book there will be a lot to hear from our still speaking God in the Book and, therefore, much to discern. (Slight pause.)
That brings me back to that little story about Paul O’Neill. If there is anything to be learned from that story, it’s that we need to form productive habits, keystone habits. I want to suggest that, for we Christians, people of the library, the productive habit we need to form is one of learning. We need to form the habit of learning from Scripture— from the library.
In order for that to be a really productive habit, we need to know where to look in Scripture. We need to know how to read what we find in Scripture. Just based on the experience of that court official, we can be staring at a passage all day and still not quite get it.
Indeed, reading Scripture is not just a matter of learning where to look. After all, memorizing where to look, memorizing what Scripture says— and I am sure we all know people who can recite Scripture chapter and verse— memorizing what Scripture says borders on a party game. It begins to sound like an old Irving Berlin song (the pastor intones some notes here from the Irving Berlin song Anything You Can Do from the Musical Annie Get Your Gun): “Any verse you can quote I can quote quicker. I can quote Scripture much slicker than you.”
My point is it is not just a matter of knowing where to look. It’s a matter of understanding what it says.
All of which is to say, we should never read Scripture thinking it will be readily transparent. What the story of Philip and the court official tells us is that was not the case in New Testament times. Why should Scripture be immediately understandable to us now, except if we bring our own egocentricity to it?
And I guess this is also to say Scripture is something with which we need to grapple and study. It is then and only then, when study and learning become habit, that we will also form helpful habits for life.
In short, the reading and the study of Scripture needs to be a keystone habit for Christians— people of the library. Believe it or not, when the reading and study of Scripture becomes a keystone habit, a lot of other things will fall into place for us. Like what? Well, like that old— you know— ‘love neighbor; love God’ stuff. Amen.
05/06/2012
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: “Why do I keep saying ‘Love neighbor; love God’ is the central theme in all of Scripture? Because I am in the habit of reading and studying Scripture and, for me, that message is what leaps out of nearly every page of the library.”
BENEDICTION: Live for God in every moment of the day. Seek to know the places to which God calls us. Because we are loved we may dare to love others. God first loved us, so we must not hesitate to show the fruits of abiding in Christ. And may the peace of God which surpasses all understanding keep our hearts and minds in the knowledge of God, the love of Jesus, the Christ, and the companionship of the Holy Spirit, this day and forevermore. Amen.
Sunday, April 29, 2012
04/29/2012 ~ Fourth Sunday of Easter ~ Acts 4:5-12; Psalm 23; 1 John 3:16-24; John 10:11-18 ~ 5th Sunday Hymn Sing.
“My children, our love must not simply be words or pure talk. It must be true love, which shows itself to be true in action.” — 1 John 3:18
There is a thesis gaining popularity and I think I buy into it. The thesis says talent is overrated. Now, don’t get me wrong. Neither I nor this thesis which claims talent is overrated dismisses talent, per se.
So let me try to put what sounds like a dismissal of talent into everyday language. If I had the talent to hit a golf ball 300 yards, I would not be in the pulpit each Sunday morning. I’d be teeing up for the final round of a PGA event right? But I don’t have the talent to hit a golf ball 300 yards.
And as an aside, just so I’m clear about this— Bonnie says my driving may not be good enough for the tour, but it’s not my driving that has kept me off the tour. It’s my putting.
My personal problems with putting aside, I’m sure you get the point of the golf analogy. Talent is not just important. It is necessary. And no one is dismissing the necessity of talent.
But if no one is dismissing the necessity of talent, how can it be said that talent is overrated? (Slight pause.) We now live in a scientific age. Modern research pierces hocus-pocus ideas. So, today we realize, for instance, that Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart was, at an early age, not blessed by the gods with an innate ability to compose. That is simply a silly idea.
Today we understand the early abilities Mozart displayed were not the product of some supernaturally large gift. That’s because we realize the early compositions he produced were nothing particularly special but were actually take offs of other people’s work, based on things he had probably heard.
Don’t misunderstand the thrust here: Mozart was very, very good, a very talented musician and that talent could be seen at a very early age. But today he would be seen as exceptional only when placed among other youngsters who are musically run of the mill. Given his early work, Mozart would not stand out as superior or extraordinary when considered among today’s top prodigies.
Coming back to golf, what Mozart had was the same thing Tiger Woods had— an ability to acutely focus for long periods of time on one thing, one area, and he had a father intent on improving the skills his son exhibited. Mozart played a lot of piano at a very young age. And Mozart also had the ability to synthesize, to analyze, to understand, to internalize, what he learned.
Woods played a lot of golf at a very young age. And Woods also had the ability to synthesize, to analyze, to understand, to internalize, what he learned.
Further, it’s quite likely both Mozart and Woods got in 10,000 hours of practice early. Hence, Tiger and Amadeus were able to build from practice and ability to the places they eventually moved.
In short, it is only once he honed the talent that he had that Mozart became an extraordinary composer. It is only once he honed the talent that he had that Woods became an extraordinary golfer. I do need to stress that an ability to synthesize, to analyze, to internalize is necessary. And these cannot be separated from working intensely at a craft for a long period of time.
Indeed, let me come back to that 10,000 hours of practice, because that number is not plucked out of thin air. The latest research suggests a prosaic, democratic, even puritanical view of the world is in order.
The latest research claims a key factor in separating the accomplished from the run of the mill is not some divine spark. It is not even a high I.Q.
Indeed, key factor separating geniuses from the accomplished from the run of the mill is deliberate, intentional practice. But let me offer one additional definition. Practice is not merely repetition.
In this case the word practice means performance, engagement, working at a craft, until it is synthesized and internalized. And the research says top performers are the ones who rigorously practice, engage their craft. (Slight pause.)
And these words are from the work known as First John: “My children, our love must not simply be words or pure talk. It must be true love, which shows itself to be true in action.” (Slight pause.)
In her work Leaving Church, the Reverend Barbara Brown Taylor says this (quote): “The whole purpose of the Bible, it seems to me, is to convince people to set the written word down in order to become living words in the world for God’s sake. For me, this willing conversion of ink back to blood— of ink back to blood— is the full substance of faith.” (Slight pause.)
As I hope you saw by the narrative I offered after you start with some talent, even if it’s just a little talent, there are two strains in a discussion about how someone becomes good at something. One is study. The second is performance, engagement. One needs to study. Knowledge is necessary. Given study, performance can be empowered when performance, engagement, is what follows.
I have, however, misled you a little by using Mozart and Woods as examples. Why? I am not talking about attaining a genius level here. The claim I’m making is that pretty near anyone can get at least good through study and engagement.
You see, when I started to golf, I was lucky to hit a drive 100 yards. Sometimes I was lucky to hit a drive 50 yards.
Where am I at now, after some study and practice? Provided I hit the ball well— not always a given— but provided I hit the ball well, I can get it out to about 200 yards, sometimes more. And I can hit it fairly straight. Or as Bonnie likes to say, the squirrels in the woods no longer have to wear hard hats when I’m on the course.
Now, it’s unlikely— no, it’s not unlikely— it’s not possible that I will ever hit the ball 300 yards. I am not that talented. But I am happy to be where I am at— not a superstar— just a guy out there playing. And I am happy to be me, to do what I do on the course.
My mentor in ministry and my friend, the Reverend Dr. Bill Imes, on short notice was once called on to preach at a meeting in place of a preacher with national reputation. I asked him if he was worried.
He said he was not at all worried. All he could be was himself in the pulpit. So, he would be himself and that would be just fine. He also said he figured that’s what God wanted of each of us. Be yourself; honesty counts.
Indeed, it has been said God does not call us because of our talent. God calls us because of our willingness. So, perhaps the question is this: are we willing to study what Scripture has to offer about the dominion of God and, having studied in an effort to discern the call of God, are we willing to participate in the dominion?
Put in a more colloquial way, are we willing not just to talk the talk? Are we willing to also walk the walk? Are we willing to put our words into action?
There are, after all, about 2,500 verses in the Bible about the poor. And nearly all of them call on us to help the poor. And absolutely none of them blame the poor for being poor— none of them blame the poor for being poor.
You see, a question for us is this: ‘when we wrestle with Scripture, when we wrestle with the Word, are we, then, in turn, called to action? Or, in the words of the Biblical scholar Miguel De La Torre (quote): “There are consequences when we truly wrestle with the biblical text, when we struggle to see the face of God.” (Slight pause.)
There is an old saying which runs this way: “Jacob was a cheater. Peter had a temper. David had an affair. Noah got drunk. Jonah ran away from God. Paul committed murder. Gideon was insecure. Marian gossiped. Martha worried. Thomas doubted. Sarah was impatient. Elijah was depressed. Moses stuttered. Zaccheus was short. Abraham was old. And, of course, Lazarus was dead. But God does not call the qualified. God qualifies the called.” (Slight pause.)
So, what does it mean to live one’s life fully? I want to suggest that we need to practice, engage. We need to practice living. But, most of all, it means we need to be willing to participate in the dominion of God, to practice what we preach.
And I think that’s what the writer of First John is getting at when these words were recorded (quote): “My children, our love must not simply be words or pure talk. It must be true love, which shows itself to be true in action.” Amen.
04/29/2012
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: (The pastor holds up a small wooden cross which was used at the Children’s Time and has people painted on the front and says:) “I think this cross, with people on it, can be a reminder that we are not just a community. We are all one in Christ and we are called by God to act as one in Christ.”
BENEDICTION: We are invited to make God’s house our home. We are equipped by the grace of God to help others on their journeys. God leads us beside still waters and restores our soul. God’s love in Jesus, the Christ, has blessed us and we shall dwell in the house of the true shepherd. Amen.
Actions and Words
“My children, our love must not simply be words or pure talk. It must be true love, which shows itself to be true in action.” — 1 John 3:18
There is a thesis gaining popularity and I think I buy into it. The thesis says talent is overrated. Now, don’t get me wrong. Neither I nor this thesis which claims talent is overrated dismisses talent, per se.
So let me try to put what sounds like a dismissal of talent into everyday language. If I had the talent to hit a golf ball 300 yards, I would not be in the pulpit each Sunday morning. I’d be teeing up for the final round of a PGA event right? But I don’t have the talent to hit a golf ball 300 yards.
And as an aside, just so I’m clear about this— Bonnie says my driving may not be good enough for the tour, but it’s not my driving that has kept me off the tour. It’s my putting.
My personal problems with putting aside, I’m sure you get the point of the golf analogy. Talent is not just important. It is necessary. And no one is dismissing the necessity of talent.
But if no one is dismissing the necessity of talent, how can it be said that talent is overrated? (Slight pause.) We now live in a scientific age. Modern research pierces hocus-pocus ideas. So, today we realize, for instance, that Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart was, at an early age, not blessed by the gods with an innate ability to compose. That is simply a silly idea.
Today we understand the early abilities Mozart displayed were not the product of some supernaturally large gift. That’s because we realize the early compositions he produced were nothing particularly special but were actually take offs of other people’s work, based on things he had probably heard.
Don’t misunderstand the thrust here: Mozart was very, very good, a very talented musician and that talent could be seen at a very early age. But today he would be seen as exceptional only when placed among other youngsters who are musically run of the mill. Given his early work, Mozart would not stand out as superior or extraordinary when considered among today’s top prodigies.
Coming back to golf, what Mozart had was the same thing Tiger Woods had— an ability to acutely focus for long periods of time on one thing, one area, and he had a father intent on improving the skills his son exhibited. Mozart played a lot of piano at a very young age. And Mozart also had the ability to synthesize, to analyze, to understand, to internalize, what he learned.
Woods played a lot of golf at a very young age. And Woods also had the ability to synthesize, to analyze, to understand, to internalize, what he learned.
Further, it’s quite likely both Mozart and Woods got in 10,000 hours of practice early. Hence, Tiger and Amadeus were able to build from practice and ability to the places they eventually moved.
In short, it is only once he honed the talent that he had that Mozart became an extraordinary composer. It is only once he honed the talent that he had that Woods became an extraordinary golfer. I do need to stress that an ability to synthesize, to analyze, to internalize is necessary. And these cannot be separated from working intensely at a craft for a long period of time.
Indeed, let me come back to that 10,000 hours of practice, because that number is not plucked out of thin air. The latest research suggests a prosaic, democratic, even puritanical view of the world is in order.
The latest research claims a key factor in separating the accomplished from the run of the mill is not some divine spark. It is not even a high I.Q.
Indeed, key factor separating geniuses from the accomplished from the run of the mill is deliberate, intentional practice. But let me offer one additional definition. Practice is not merely repetition.
In this case the word practice means performance, engagement, working at a craft, until it is synthesized and internalized. And the research says top performers are the ones who rigorously practice, engage their craft. (Slight pause.)
And these words are from the work known as First John: “My children, our love must not simply be words or pure talk. It must be true love, which shows itself to be true in action.” (Slight pause.)
In her work Leaving Church, the Reverend Barbara Brown Taylor says this (quote): “The whole purpose of the Bible, it seems to me, is to convince people to set the written word down in order to become living words in the world for God’s sake. For me, this willing conversion of ink back to blood— of ink back to blood— is the full substance of faith.” (Slight pause.)
As I hope you saw by the narrative I offered after you start with some talent, even if it’s just a little talent, there are two strains in a discussion about how someone becomes good at something. One is study. The second is performance, engagement. One needs to study. Knowledge is necessary. Given study, performance can be empowered when performance, engagement, is what follows.
I have, however, misled you a little by using Mozart and Woods as examples. Why? I am not talking about attaining a genius level here. The claim I’m making is that pretty near anyone can get at least good through study and engagement.
You see, when I started to golf, I was lucky to hit a drive 100 yards. Sometimes I was lucky to hit a drive 50 yards.
Where am I at now, after some study and practice? Provided I hit the ball well— not always a given— but provided I hit the ball well, I can get it out to about 200 yards, sometimes more. And I can hit it fairly straight. Or as Bonnie likes to say, the squirrels in the woods no longer have to wear hard hats when I’m on the course.
Now, it’s unlikely— no, it’s not unlikely— it’s not possible that I will ever hit the ball 300 yards. I am not that talented. But I am happy to be where I am at— not a superstar— just a guy out there playing. And I am happy to be me, to do what I do on the course.
My mentor in ministry and my friend, the Reverend Dr. Bill Imes, on short notice was once called on to preach at a meeting in place of a preacher with national reputation. I asked him if he was worried.
He said he was not at all worried. All he could be was himself in the pulpit. So, he would be himself and that would be just fine. He also said he figured that’s what God wanted of each of us. Be yourself; honesty counts.
Indeed, it has been said God does not call us because of our talent. God calls us because of our willingness. So, perhaps the question is this: are we willing to study what Scripture has to offer about the dominion of God and, having studied in an effort to discern the call of God, are we willing to participate in the dominion?
Put in a more colloquial way, are we willing not just to talk the talk? Are we willing to also walk the walk? Are we willing to put our words into action?
There are, after all, about 2,500 verses in the Bible about the poor. And nearly all of them call on us to help the poor. And absolutely none of them blame the poor for being poor— none of them blame the poor for being poor.
You see, a question for us is this: ‘when we wrestle with Scripture, when we wrestle with the Word, are we, then, in turn, called to action? Or, in the words of the Biblical scholar Miguel De La Torre (quote): “There are consequences when we truly wrestle with the biblical text, when we struggle to see the face of God.” (Slight pause.)
There is an old saying which runs this way: “Jacob was a cheater. Peter had a temper. David had an affair. Noah got drunk. Jonah ran away from God. Paul committed murder. Gideon was insecure. Marian gossiped. Martha worried. Thomas doubted. Sarah was impatient. Elijah was depressed. Moses stuttered. Zaccheus was short. Abraham was old. And, of course, Lazarus was dead. But God does not call the qualified. God qualifies the called.” (Slight pause.)
So, what does it mean to live one’s life fully? I want to suggest that we need to practice, engage. We need to practice living. But, most of all, it means we need to be willing to participate in the dominion of God, to practice what we preach.
And I think that’s what the writer of First John is getting at when these words were recorded (quote): “My children, our love must not simply be words or pure talk. It must be true love, which shows itself to be true in action.” Amen.
04/29/2012
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: (The pastor holds up a small wooden cross which was used at the Children’s Time and has people painted on the front and says:) “I think this cross, with people on it, can be a reminder that we are not just a community. We are all one in Christ and we are called by God to act as one in Christ.”
BENEDICTION: We are invited to make God’s house our home. We are equipped by the grace of God to help others on their journeys. God leads us beside still waters and restores our soul. God’s love in Jesus, the Christ, has blessed us and we shall dwell in the house of the true shepherd. Amen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)