Sermon ~ 11/13/2011 ~ Building

11/13/2011 ~ Proper 28 ~ The Thirty-third Sunday in Ordinary Time ~ Twenty-Second Sunday after Pentecost ~ Judges 4:1-7; Psalm 123; Zephaniah 1:7, 12-18; Psalm 90:1-8, (9-11), 12; 1 Thessalonians 5:1-11; Matthew 25:14-30 ~ Enlistment/Stewardship Sunday.

Building

“Therefore, encourage one another and build up each other, as, indeed, you are already doing.” — 1 Thessalonians 5:11.

I need to start my comments today in a bit of an unusual way. As you can see, there is a basket up front. In that basket are what the Prayer Shawl Ministry Group calls Pocket Prayer Shawls— small crocheted squares in a cacophony of colors.

I’d like to invite everyone, each individual, to come forward and get a Pocket Prayer Shawl. It’s yours to keep. If you would rather I bring some to you from which you can choose, I can do that. I’ve got a separate basket. So, please come forward and get a Prayer Shawl— a Pocket Prayer Shawl. (Pause, while this happens.)

So, what are prayer shawls? Some of these words are taken from the folder which describes the Prayer Shawl Ministry in this church.

In 1997 Janet Bristow and Victoria Galo graduated from the Women’s Leadership Institute at Hartford Seminary in Connecticut. They started an outreach ministry with knitters and others who make crafts, a ministry people all over America then took up.

Shawls, as I am sure you’re aware, have been made for centuries around the world. The shawls and other crafts created by people participating in this ministry are created in and with prayer. Doing this work also brings to mind a truth: God empowers us to create and God empowers us to give.

Since the people involved are focused in this way, with an understanding that God is central to the enterprise, the making of the shawls— to concentrate just on shawls— is both a universal action and an action which embraces each individual blessed by the ministry.

Indeed, the making of shawls and the distribution of them is symbolic of an inclusive, unconditionally loving God. So, God blesses those who create and give.

And the finished products, whatever they may be, are meant to beautifully comfort, wrap, enfold, cover, give solace, nurture, hug and shelter. Therefore, God blesses those who receive.

The intent is that those who give the works remember why they are doing this work and Who is the prime giver. The intent is that those who receive the works remember these have been given with the kindness and the generosity of spirit God intends. Last, these items are a way of remembering our connectivity to one another. (Slight pause.)

Clearly, a prayer shawl ministry is a ministry of not just of this church but many churches. So, I’d like to talk about churches for a moment. (Slight pause.)

There is no question about this: local churches are in a very, very basic way, grass roots organizations. This is especially true in the denomination known as the United Church of Christ because in our structure there is no hierarchy. There are no bishops telling us what to do or defining who we are. Those of us in the Congregational tradition are, by definition, involved in a grass roots organization.

Put differently, the basic structure in the United Church of Christ is the local church. If for no other reason, that means our connectivity to one another on this local level and then moving out from this local level, this feeling of first being grass roots and then moving further is of great and paramount importance.

So, how do we support one another? How are we in covenant with one another? How are we grass roots? (Slight pause.)

You may be aware that there are three written histories of this church. The first one, published in 1879, contains the By-laws of the Church current then and names the officers in that structure.

So, what do the By-laws indicate it meant, indicate what we did, to be in covenant with each other then? (Slight pause.) In this document, the town is divided into four quadrants. Deacons were assigned to these areas, these quadrants. The well being of each soul living in these quadrants (member or not) was the responsibility of those deacons.

To be clear: this was not simply an assignment to look after spiritual needs. This also meant being aware of the physical needs of people, both members and non-members alike. Today, we would probably call that the work of outreach— outreach both to members and non-members. In short, what the By-laws laid out then meant being connected to one another as members of the church and being connected to one another as members of the human race, being connected to one another as children of God. The By-laws say that was important.

Are we organized in a different way today? Yes. But the work of outreach is still here and the work of outreach is still the same. In short, it still means being connected to one another as members of the church and being connected to one another as members of the human race, being connected to one another as children of God. (Slight pause.)

I think I need to offer a definition. What is outreach? Outreach is simply this: kindness. Indeed, let me ask: is not kindness the first measure of faith? Is not kindness the first measure of faith? (Slight pause.)

I have a friend who has been a college teacher his entire professional life in the New York City area. But he grew up in Rome, New York.

At his request to me this church has been sending his elderly aunt, who still lives in Rome, our newsletter. He recently asked me if we would be so kind as to change the address to which we send the newsletter, since he has had to move her to a nursing facility.

His e-mail with that request says she has (quote): “...immensely enjoyed your mailings. She especially likes the little stories and anecdotes and feels pride in having not only shared some of them with her minister in this region but also being informed by him that he’s used some of them in his own sermons.” (Slight pause.)

Doing that, sending that newsletter, is just a small kindness. But it means something to someone.

This church was doing a kindness in sending the Newsletter to my friend’s aunt. But most of us did not know we were doing that. Being connective sometimes means something to someone, even when we don’t know it’s happening, even when our understanding of what is happening is not direct. (Slight pause.)

So, why did I want to help the Prayer Shawl Ministry give out Pocket Prayer Shawls today? This might be an obvious question. (Slight pause.) They are meant to be a reminder that for us, for this church, doing outreach means being connective, being kind.

So let me suggest that you take your pocket prayer shawl and put it in your pocket or on your desk or on your night-stand, or even use a magnet to attach it to your refrigerator door. Put it someplace where you will see it and be able to touch it regularly, feel its texture.

Let it be a tactile point of reference for your memory. I want to suggest if you put it in an obvious, accessible place, it will be a reminder that connectivity is central to our lives as Christians and that kindness is central to our lives as Christians. (Slight pause.)

So, what does all this have to do with the fact that this is our Stewardship Sunday, our Enlistment Sunday? (Slight pause.) Paul tells us to (quote): “...encourage one another and build up each other...” (Slight pause.)

Outreach is connectivity and kindness and faithfulness all wrapped up into one. It is a part of building up each other. Clearly not all of what we do but certainly a good portion of what we do, together, as a church, in connectivity with one another, is empowered a pledge.

And pledging is not meant simply to be a place where we give away money— write a check and forget about what that means or what that has the potential to do. Pledging is meant as a sign that we stand in solidarity— in solidarity with everyone in this church, in solidarity with everyone in this town, with everyone in this state, with everyone on this planet. (Slight pause.)

You see, solidarity in our connectivity and in our kindness and in our faithfulness to the Word of God is the place to which God calls humanity. So, in solidarity and in connectivity and in kindness we are called to encourage one another and build up each other. Building each other up— that, that is real stewardship. (Slight pause.)

I am sure you have heard me say this way too often. The basic message is: “Love God. Love neighbor.” Easy right? Well, yes. If we connect with people. If we are kind. If we are faithful. Amen.

11/13/2011
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, NY

ENDPIECE: It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Choral Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “The words of the second verse in the closing hymn say this: ‘Teach us, O God, Your lessons, / as in our daily life / we struggle to be human / and search for hope and faith. / Teach us to care for people, / for all, not just for some, / to love them as we find them, / or as they may become’ (Slight pause.) It has been said that the ancient Hebrews did not have a theology. They did theology. I think that is the call to Congregational Churches. We do theology.”

BENEDICTION: A kind and just God sends us out into the world as bearers of truth which surpasses our understanding. God watches over those who respond in love. So, let us love God so much, that we love nothing else too much. Let us be in awe of no one else and nothing else because we are so in awe of God. Amen.

Sermon ~ 11/06/2011 ~ Knowing the Day and the Hour

11/06/2011 ~ Proper 27 ~ Thirty-second Sunday in Ordinary Time ~ Twenty-First Sunday after Pentecost ~ Joshua 24:1-3a, 14-25; Psalm 78:1-7; Wisdom of Solomon 6:12-16 or Amos 5:18-24; Wisdom of Solomon 6:17-20 or Psalm 70; 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18; Matthew 25:1-13 ~ COMMUNION SUNDAY.

Knowing the Day and the Hour

“...Jesus then said, ‘Stay awake, for you know neither the day nor the hour.’” — Matthew 25:13.

Bonnie and I have a G.P.S.— a Global Positioning System— for our car. And we really like it. Having the G.P.S. for trips to places with which we are not totally familiar, like the trip to Philadelphia slightly over a week ago, just makes things easier.

Now, interestingly, this week I bumped into a friend here in Norwich and we got to talking about how easy the G.P.S. makes things. He then told me this story.

His granddaughter called him from her cell phone. She also lives in Norwich. She was in Herkimer when she called— about 55 miles away. “Grandpa,” she said, sounding upset. “I’m in Herkimer.”

“So?” he asked.

“How do I get back to Norwich?”

A little flustered and not quite understanding what the problem was, my friend said, “Well, first you’ve got to get on Route 8.”

And then grandpa got really a big surprise. His granddaughter did not know what Route 8 was. His granddaughter did not know where Route 8 was. His granddaughter had never read a map in her life.

Now, she is young. She has been driving only a year. But she had totally and always and only relied on her G.P.S. And she had left the G.P.S. at home.

A friend had guided her to Herkimer but then that friend decided to stay there. She was afraid to call her Dad and tell him that. So, she called Grandpa.

And, indeed, Grandpa was probably more understanding, or at least a little more sympathetic about it than Dad would have been. So, as dangerous as this is, over the phone Grandpa talked her back to Route 8 and once she got far enough along Route 8 to notice some landmarks she recognized, she was able to make her way to Norwich. (Slight pause.)

In today’s bulletin you will find something Tom Rasely and I wrote. It’s a new Christmas Carol called One Angel Sings. Would you please take a moment to pull it out and look at it? (Pause as the Pastor waits for the congregation to do this.)

Tom and I have had a conversation a number of times which runs like this. The piece of paper on which this music is printed (the Pastor hold up the music) is nothing more than a road map. It is not the music itself.

You cannot hold the paper up to your ear and listen to it. (The pastor holds the paper up to his ear.) The paper does not make the music come alive. The music comes alive through your experience of it.

Further, that piece of paper with music printed on it is simply a series of landmarks— a roadmap of sorts. These landmarks do become familiar once you’ve experienced them. But you need to experience them to gain that familiarity.

Now you’ve never heard this music because it’s never been sung by a congregation. So, let’s do that. Let’s see what the experience of this Christmas Carol, newly written, this roadmap, is like. Bob will play through it once and then we’ll all sing it together. Bob— it’s all yours— once then three— right.

One angel sings / both silent and plain: / “A Child is born— Emmanuel now!” / And suddenly shouts / from heaven are heard / as the many heavenly hosts / cry out a refrain.

Chorus: “Glory to God, the peace of God reigns. / Glory to God, the Alpha, Omega. / Glory to God whose presence is here. / The peace of God reigns” / the angels proclaim.

One Angel sings / and freedom abounds. / A Child is born / and God is with us. / The peace of God / whose presence resounds. / And we respond to God / with songs of praise.

Chorus.

Let’s stand for the last one!

One angel’s voice / both silent yet clear / says God lives among us / now in the world. / And suddenly shouts / from heaven are heard! / As the many heavenly hosts / cry out the refrain:

Chorus. [1]


(Pause.) Please be seated. [To the organist:] Thank you Bob! [To the Congregation:] And thank you all for singing that.

So, just looking at the road map is quite a different experience than traveling on this road, is it not? And when you stood it was a different experience, right?

So, I want to suggest that when you experienced the road laid out on this map rather than just looking at it (the pastor hold up the paper with the song printed on it), you lived out the road in time, you lived with the road in time.

If you take the journey the map laid out, you have to be in relationship with the journey over time. And, as the words and music moved forward through time, the relationship changed and shifted.

Now, you did follow the landmarks on the paper. And despite not initially really knowing the landmarks since this is a piece of music you have never seen before, you were, in fact and none-the-less, faithful to those landmarks and responded to them. And I’d also bet every time you sang another verse, the landmarks became more familiar through your previous experience.

To be clear and perhaps even redundant: when you were only looking at the road map, you may have been able to imagine what it should be like and what it could be like. But, even if you could imagine what it would or could be like, you’d probably have to admit that experiencing it, living it, is different than imagining it. (Slight pause.)

And these are words we find being used by Jesus in the Gospel commonly called Matthew: “...Jesus then said, ‘Stay awake, for you know neither the day nor the hour.’”

Before the passage from the Gospel was read it was said society seems to want to know when the end times will happen. It was also said that may have been true in the era recorded by the Gospels.

After all, Jesus gives what I take as at least an admonition, and perhaps a clear warning (quote): “...you know neither the day nor the hour.” In short, realizing the error of that kind of thinking which must have been going on then, Jesus points it out.

But besides actually wanting to know the day and the hour clearly an error according to Jesus, I happen to think people make a second error when examining this story. People tend to ask: ‘what did the wise attendants do which helped them be wise, helped them successful?’

But that’s the wrong question. The question which needs to be asked is: ‘How did the wise attendants do that which helped them to be wise, be successful?’ How did they do it, as opposed to what did they do?

I think the ‘how’ in this story is that they are willing to engage in process. Their wisdom comes not from what they did— having enough oil. It comes from how they did it— being faithful to the task at hand.

You see, knowing about the ‘what’ of a situation is simply mechanical. It takes no thought, no relationship, no process. In this case, it just took a little oil. On top of that, engaging in the ‘how’ of a situation, which is exactly what these attendants did, does not worry about the outcome, does not worry about results.

Put a different way, today people often say ‘winning isn’t everything. Winning is the only thing.’ So, whatever happened to this motto: ‘It’s not whether you win or lose. It’s how you play the game’?

I think that’s what this story is really about— how we play the game. You see, we often take this— as I said— as a story about who wins and who loses. But it is not.

Neither is it a story about having oil on hand. It is a story about an approach to life. Suppose the wedding party had been still later than they already were? The so called ‘wise’ attendants may have run out of oil too.

That would have made them no less wise. That would have been no less faithful. Indeed, what makes the wise attendants wise is that they were faithful to the process, faithful the place to which they are called. (Slight pause.)

Theologian Friedrich Nietzsche is unfortunately known for coining the phrase ‘God is dead.’ But the following phrase certainly ranks as one of his more important conclusions (quote): “The ‘Dominion of Heaven’ is a condition of the heart— not something that comes ‘upon the earth’ or ‘after death.’” The Dominion of heaven is a condition of the heart. (Slight pause.)

I think this goes without question: life is a dynamic dialogue with God. The dialogue is ongoing, continual. It is a process. Life needs to be a condition of the heart. Living life needs to be a condition of the heart.

Hence, the key for us is a willingness to engage in the process. We may win. We may lose. But it is the journey, the experience— not the map and not the landmarks and not even the end result which counts.

So, let us concentrate on what we need to do. Based on the words of Jesus, the end times are clearly of no concern. We need to simply strive to be faithful. We need to simply strive to do what God calls us to do.

In short, we need to work on the process called loving God and loving neighbor. Having a map may be good. Noticing where the landmarks are is helpful. But engaging— engaging in the journey— that is key. Amen.

11/06/2011
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 invite you to look at the Thought for Meditation courtesy of Sister Joan Chittister (quote): ‘Life is not about knowing exactly what we are meant to do. It’s about doing what must be done that makes our lives a song.’ Making our life a song is a process.”

BENEDICTION: The knowledge that God loves us frees us for joyous living. So, let us trust in the love God offers. Let us also be fervent in prayer as we make choices daily, and seek to do God’s will and walk in God’s way traveling on our Christian journey. And may the peace of God which surpasses all understanding and the abiding truth of Christ keep our hearts and minds in the knowledge, love and companionship of the Holy Spirit this day and forever more. Amen.

[1] Copyright 2011 - Tom Rasely and Joseph Connolly. If you want to hear what the hymn sounds like, the audio of this sermon will be posted on the web site of the United Church of Christ, First Congregational of Norwich after 11/09/2011.

Sermon ~ 10/30/2011 ~ Holy Work

October 30, 2011 ~ Proper 26 ~ Thirty-first Sunday in Ordinary Time ~ Twentieth Sunday after Pentecost ~ (If All Saints Not Observed on This Day) ~ Joshua 3:7-17; Psalm 107:1-7, 33-37; Micah 3:5-12; Psalm 43; 1 Thessalonians 2:9-13; Matthew 23:1-12 ~ Fifth Sunday Hymn Sing ~ Reformation Sunday ~ Budget Information Meeting.

Holy Work

“They do all their deeds, to be seen by others; their works are performed to be seen; they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes, their tassels, long.” — Matthew 23:5


Well, it is the season of little hobgoblins, is it not? If you are home when Trick or Treat time comes tomorrow, it’s likely you will be visited by costumed little ones, sometimes even costumed older folks, as they go on a quest for sweets. But what is, as this older form of English has it, Hallow-een?

It is, more formally, All-Hallows-Evening. Hence Halloween is the evening before All Hallows Day or the Day of All Who Are Holy, the Saints, better known as the Feast of All Saints, November the First. In any case, since this is the time of All Hallows Eve (and by the way, have you noticed Halloween is no longer a day but a whole season?) tomorrow being the actual date, I thought I’d offer an amazing statistic about how we Americans have come to celebrate Halloween.

So, what do you think the current estimate is of how much Americans spend each year on costumes and candies and parties as we celebrate Halloween? (Slight pause.) Would you believe the tab on these items currently runs at about seven billion dollars— seven billion dollars? (Slight pause.)

Now, when I said seven billion dollars is an amazing statistic, let me put that in perspective with another amazing statistic. How much do you think all candidates for President of the United States in the major political parties spent in 2008? Now, this calculation is the total spent by all the significant Republican Candidates and all the significant Democratic candidates together in the campaign which ran two years from 2006 to 2008? (Slight pause.) Would you believe that total was two billion dollars? (Slight pause.)

O.K. We spend seven billion dollars each year on costumes and candies and parties to celebrate a holiday which we made up, a holiday which has nothing to do with the real day which should be celebrated— All Saints Day. And then, over the course of two years, Americans spent two billion dollars in deciding who the leader of the most powerful nation in the world should be, or as the position is often named: the leader of the free world.

Can anyone explain that to me? Can anyone make any sense of that except by writing it off as a cultural phenomena? (Slight pause.)

Many think the worst year of the Great Depression was 1933. That was the year my late mother would have been nine. When I was a child, she would let us go out to do the Trick or Treat routine. After all, had we not gone Trick or Treating we might have been ostracized by our friends, our own peer group.

On the other hand, she often wondered out loud, so I think she meant all her children to hear it, why we might partake in this somewhat self centered exercise on the evening of all that is holy. You see, she would explain, aside from the fact that the day which celebrates all who are holy is more important, when she was growing up, in inner city poverty in the midst of the Great Depression, a common practice was for children to put on their worst clothes, clothes with holes and stains, on Thanksgiving.

And then, on that day— Thanksgiving Day not Halloween— they’d go out and knock on doors and say to anyone who answered: “Do you have anything for the ragamuffins?” The real question they were asking is: ‘do you have anything for us— children who live in poverty as you offer thanks to God for what you have?’

Was it meant to be a guilt trip? Probably. But they did this in the hope that the person answering the door might be generous. They hoped they would get not candy, but something more nourishing like an apple or a banana or a potato or a yam or (the saints be praised) something even more valuable like a nickel or a dime. (Slight pause.)

And we find these words in the work known as Matthew: “They do all their deeds, to be seen by others; their works are performed to be seen; they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes, their tassels, long.” (Slight pause.)

Tradition has it that Halloween— the Eve Before the Feast of All the Saints— is the day in 1517 on which Martin Luther nailed 95 Thesis to the Cathedral Door in Wittenberg, Germany. Theologians count this as a turning point in the history of the church, the point at which the Reformation became real.

Theologians will tell you the great instruction of Luther is we are justified by faith, not by works. But I want to suggest what is embodied by those 95 Thesis is much more subtle than the simplicity of the saying ‘justified by faith, not by works’ makes it appear. After all, one could logically conclude from that sound bite that works should not be a part of the undertaking of our life with God, that works are superfluous, unnecessary.

In fact, the place Luther starts the 95 Thesis is by saying Jesus calls us to (quote:) “repent.” And from the Biblical perspective, what is repentance? Repentance is handing our whole life over to God.

And what does that mean— ‘handing our whole life over to God’? (Slight pause.) It means constantly seeking to do the will of God and constantly seeking to do the work of God. (Slight pause.)

Now, I don’t want anyone here to think that I am some kind of ogre, that I am against fun or against Halloween. I am not. I’ve been know to give out candy on Halloween. (I just did it, didn’t I?) [1]

I’ve also been known to occasionally root for a specific baseball team, especially an underdog. (I just love it that the underdog Saint Louis Cardinals won the series.) I’ve even been known to do and to say all kinds of frivolous things— if you have ever seen me and Tom Rasely, you know that’s true! [2] In short, I’ve been known to have some real fun.

But I also like to think I try to put things into perspective. And I don’t think it’s a good thing that we spend seven billion dollars on Halloween, for instance. The practice seems to be not just cultural but culturally ego-centric.

And I think that is what Jesus is getting at in condemning those who wear phylacteries and fringes and tassels. This seems to be not simply cultural but culturally ego-centric, something done with neither sincerity nor, more importantly, a desire to seek the will of God and do the work of God. (Slight pause.)

So, what is work, really? Why should we do it, really? And how does it fit into being justified by faith? (Slight pause.)

The work we are called by God to do is first seeking the will of God and second, seeking out ways to fulfill that will. Based on the Biblical witness, the work to which God calls us seems clear: protect the human rights of all people, especially the outcast and the needy.

Is there a human right to food? Is there a human right to be clothed? Is there a human right to be housed? Is there a human right to health care? If so, we should be striving to feed those who are hungry, to clothe those who wear tatters, to shelter those who are homeless and to comfort and to strive to cure those who are ill.

I am not saying any of these are easy. These are all tall orders. I am saying there is a Biblical call, an invitation by God, to be about this work. (Slight pause.)

A couple of minutes ago you heard about some of this work from Cathy and Gary. [3] And, indeed, in November we will also have our Annual Thanksgiving Basket effort where we help feed nearly 500 families— a major piece of work.

We will also be a part of Operation Christmas Child. [4] Last, we will have our so called ‘enlistment campaign,’ and will make some determinations about supporting a part of our outreach ministries.

This is all the work of God and, historically, this church has been outstanding in its efforts in these areas. All of which is to say if we are justified by faith, we also need to be doing the will of God and the work of God. We need to constantly be about repentance and, therefore, to be about steering our lives toward God. We need to constantly be seeking the ways in which God would have us walk.

Last, there is one thing the work to which God calls us is not. It is not fire insurance, as in: if I do this, it will be a sure path to heaven. And doing this work will keep me out of you know where— H-E-double hockey sticks. Indeed, if there is any kind of fire insurance, it is embodied by trusting God and seeking the will of God and acting in the work to which God calls us. Amen.

10/30/2011
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: “Who are saints? What are saints? Saints are people set aside to do the work of God. We are, you see, all saints. Friday morning bright Fall sunlight fell around Bonnie and I as we visited the Philadelphia area and as we looked around the graveyard of the Episcopal Church of Saint James the Less for some of Bonnie’s ancestors. I noticed a tombstone for the Fifth Bishop of Pennsylvania, one Ozi W. Whitaker, who died in 1911. On the stone was this inscription: ‘Well Done Good and Faithful Servant.’ And I think that’s the point. Do it well; trust God; that’s it.”

BENEDICTION: Go from here in the Spirit of Christ. Dare to question that which is false and that which holds us captive. Count it a privilege that God calls upon us to be in covenant and to work in the vineyard. And may the peace of Christ which passes all understanding keep our hearts and minds in the love, knowledge and companionship of God the Creator, Christ the redeemer and the Holy Spirit the sanctifier this day and forever more. Amen.

[1] Note: the pastor gave out candy at the Children’s Time.
[2] Tom Rasely is the Music Associate at the church. The pastor and Tom have written sermons together which have a comedic bent.
[3] Cathy Hammons, Chair of the Deacons and Gary Gray, a member of this church and a volunteer at the food pantry spoke about working at Our Daily Bread Food Pantry at the Episcopal Church.
[4] For the first time this year the church will participate in the widely known activity Operation Christmas Child.

Sermon ~ 10/23/2011 ~ Loving God

10/23/2011 ~ Thirtieth Sunday in Ordinary Time ~ Nineteenth Sunday after Pentecost ~ Proper 25 ~ Deuteronomy 34:1-12; Psalm 90:1-6, 13-17; Leviticus 19:1-2, 15-18; Psalm 1; 1 Thessalonians 2:1-8; Matthew 22:34-46 ~ Children’s Time: Operation Christmas Child.

Loving God

[Jesus was asked this question by the expert on the law.] “‘Teacher, which commandment of the law is the greatest?’ Jesus answered, ‘You shall love the Most High God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’” — Matthew 22:37.

The week the well known entrepreneur and inventor Steve Jobs died, I used some memorable quotes of his in my comments. Jobs was something more than a celebrity, perhaps icon is the closest description, so I am not the only one referencing this zen master of computers in comments on the world around us, in comments about the society in which we live.

I was reminded of that because of an article in a newsletter I get which comes out of the University of Chicago Divinity School. That article also referred to Jobs as the author wondered about the memorial displays to the inventor which seemed to spontaneously spring up outside of Apple Stores all around the world right after he died.

These shrines— and that is certainly what they are: shrines— contained personal messages, flowers, candles, homemade artwork and images of Jobs. The writer of the article, Benjamin E. Zeller a Professor at Brevard College, wondered if public memorials like these reveal something profound for those who study religious practice as it plays out in the public square. Indeed, do not these spontaneous shrines seem to somehow be religious memorials? [1]

In fact, many have referred to Apple as a ‘cult,’ as if it was somehow connected with religion, and referred Jobs its ‘chief priest.’ I do not see it that way. The company is a simply a computer and media concern at the forefront of design and was led by an enormously talented individual.

On the other hand, there are lots of things in popular culture which look like and give the appearance of practices associated with religion. After all, the same kind of memorials suddenly appeared upon the death of Princess Diana.

And these days football games show all the trappings of people gathered for religious events. They all stand up and sit down at the same time, don’t they.

For me, a serious baseball fan, this might be too close to the bone but at the World Series game last night someone had a banner which said: “WE BELIEVE.” Believe? Believe in what? In baseball? In the team? Are these some kind of minor gods? (Slight pause.)

I would insist the aforementioned practices are not religious nor do they fulfill religious rituals. These shrines I mentioned are a cultural practice— a cultural ritual, not a religious one. (Slight pause.)

This is clear: much of what passes as religious practice in our society has little, in particular, to do with religion or the practice thereof. These merely have ritualistic trappings. And these trappings, as I said, are cultural.

You see, memorials to the deceased are a fairly common practice world wide both currently and historically. Let’s face it: what are the Pyramids except memorial shrines? In fact, memorial shrines are not a theologically central part— not a theologically central part— I’m going to say that one more time: not a theologically central part— of any major religion. Shrines are not central.

But, if that’s the case, it begs these questions: ‘What is religion?’ ‘What is the culture?’ And ‘What is the difference?’ (Slight pause.)

And these words are found in the work known as Matthew: “‘Teacher, which commandment of the law is the greatest?’ Jesus answered, ‘You shall love the Most High God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’” (Slight pause.)

There is a cultural argument which runs throughout all Scripture. And time and time again that cultural argument is countered with a theological argument.

I need to be clear when I use the term theological. Theology is about relationship, intimate relationship, nothing else— I’m going to say that one more time too— theology is about relationship, intimate relationship, nothing else. The conflicting positions between culture and theology can readily be stated this way: is our intimacy with God— is our intimacy with God— determined by a set of rules or is our intimacy with God determined by relationship? (Slight pause.)

Now, when I say there is an argument between the culture and theology throughout Scripture, you need to realize Jesus says nothing new here but is simply quoting Deuteronomy 6:4 and Leviticus 19:18. This is old stuff. And Jesus gives the theological answer, the intimate answer, the relational answer to the question being asked.

But the question put to Jesus is not about theology. The question put to Jesus is not about relationship. The question put to Jesus is clearly on the cultural side of that ledger because it asks (quote): “Teacher, which commandment of the Law is the greatest?” and it is asked by (quote): “an expert on the law.”

The rabbis counted 613 commands in the Torah. Among them there were 248 positive commands and 365 negative commands.

Although rabbinical teachers would also indulge in giving summaries of the Law, there was a self serving view among many that all commandments were equal. Why self serving? Because a lot of these 613 commandments were about mere ceremony.

They were, in short, cultural in nature— cultural in nature. Jesus responds by insisting that our relationship with God and with the children of God must take precedence.

Now I’m going to draw a little chart for you.

[There is an easel with newsprint on the platform where the pastor is speaking. The liturgist sets up the easel and the pastor goes to it and draws a box.]

If you promulgate unbending rules, the requirement is clear. You must live inside the box. There’s no way out.

[The pastor draws arrows from the lines which make up the edge of the box going toward the center.]

The requirement of relationship, on the other hand, is that you acknowledge rules are there, but that you are invited to be in intimate relationship with God.

[The pastor draws arrows going out from the lines which make up the the edge of the box.]

Intimate relationship invites you to live out from the box, live out from the rules. (Slight pause.)

It seems obvious (it certainly seems obvious to me) that this cultural/theological argument has been going on for millennia. And what can I say? It seems obvious to me on which side of this divide Jesus stands: the relationship side. (Slight pause.)

That still begs the question: “What is this loving God stuff and loving neighbor stuff about?” (Slight pause.) I think... loving God and loving neighbor is about... intimacy. And, boy, does that frighten our culture.

Indeed, what makes another person real to us? Is it not personal interaction and experience of that person? That is intimacy.

And at what level does that personal interaction, that intimacy, with someone else and that experience with someone else transform into trust? (Slight pause.) At what level does personal interaction, that intimacy, with God, that experience with God transform into trust? (Slight pause.)

If you do not have an intimate relationship with God, you will not love God. If you do not have an intimate relationship with God, you will not trust God.

And, in fact, if you do not have an intimate relationship with others, you will not love them and you will not trust them. And this one might be the big stumbling block: in fact, if you do not have an intimate relationship with yourself, you will not love yourself and you will not trust yourself.

So, what happens when you do not trust yourself? You readily buy into the culture and whatever the culture is selling. Buying into the culture becomes really problematic when you buy into the culture for signs of reassurance, signs of reassurance which claims that you are whole. Believe me: the culture out there cannot make any of us whole.

Further, I also want to suggest that this looking to the culture for reassurance of self is merely a way of avoiding intimacy. And I want to suggest that loving God and loving neighbor is not only a key to intimacy with God and neighbor, but if you are fully open to loving yourself, then it becomes a key to not just trusting yourself but to respecting yourself and to knowing yourself fully.

Last, I do not want to diminish the task of loving God and loving neighbor and loving self and make that task sound easy. After all, it seems to me this is a very counter-cultural task and it seems to me this has been a counter-cultural task for millennia. Further, I doubt that any of us will ever be perfect at it. That does not mean we should cease to work at it.

I do want you to rest assured that loving God and loving neighbor and loving self can and does lead us on fruitful paths. These are the paths called love, hope, freedom, peace and joy. Amen.

10/23/2012
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, NY

ENDPIECE: It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Choral Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “Scripture is riddled with cultural artifacts. Polygamy is culturally often acceptable in the narratives found in the Hebrew Scriptures. Slavery was clearly culturally acceptable in the era the Christian Scriptures are written. The Southern States here in America used those passages to justify slavery before the Civil War. Just because pieces of Scripture contains cultural artifacts does not mean they are theologically acceptable. Remember: theology is about relationship, intimate relationship, nothing else.”

BENEDICTION: God sends us into the world ready and equipped. God is with us each day and every day. We can trust God Whose love is steadfast and sure. Let us commit to doing God’s will and God’s work. And may God’s presence be with us this day and forevermore. Amen.

[1] The article was written by Benjamin E. Zeller in the e-mail Newsletter Sightings. He is Assistant Professor of Religious Studies, Coordinator of the Religion and Philosophy Major, and Director of Honors at Brevard College, a private liberal arts college in North Carolina's Appalachian Mountains. His academic website is http://www.nrms.net.

Sermon ~ 10/16/2011 ~ “Kabod”

10/16/2011 ~ Twenty-ninth Sunday in Ordinary Time ~ Eighteenth Sunday after Pentecost ~ Proper 24 ~ Exodus 33:12-23 ~ Psalm 99; Isaiah 45:1-7; Psalm 96:1-9, (10-13); 1 Thessalonians 1:1-10; Matthew 22:15-22.

Kabod

“When my glory passes by you, I will place you in the cleft of the rock and I will cover you with my hand until I have passed by.” — Exodus 33:22


How many people here this morning remember those ancient times when dinosaurs roamed the face of the earth called the 1980s? If you remember that era, you may remember a classic television advertisement. (If you don’t remember it, you can find this commercial on youtube.)

The product in question is Memorex recording tapes and the commercials featured a person often called the “First Lady of Song,” vocalist Ella Fitzgerald. The tag line in the ads was: “Is it live or is it Memorex?”

Of course, the idea illustrated by the commercial was that Ella singing live could shatter a glass with her voice. But the quality of the Memorex tape was so perfect even a recording of Ella’s voice would give you the same result: a shattered glass.

Let me assure you this advertisement presented a serious scientific fact. If Ella’s voice live could shatter a glass, a good quality tape recording of her voice played through a high quality speaker system could do the same thing: shatter a glass.

But that leaves open the question: ‘Does a recording, no matter how accurate, offer the same experience as a live performance?’ Was there something about the innate charisma and warmth and vitality and genuineness and intimacy of an Ella Fitzgerald— or, to be more modern about it is there something about the innate charisma and warmth and vitality and genuineness and intimacy of a Lady Gaga or a Taylor Swift— something present in a live performance situation that a recording cannot possibly capture? (Slight pause.)

Many of you know I worked as a writer mostly in theater and you might, therefore, expect me to favor the live performance of theater over, for instance, movies or television. The short answer is: yes, you are right. I do favor live theater over movies or television. Even when television is being broadcast (quote, unquote) “live” as the euphemism has it— broadcasting things like baseball games. For me there is still a second hand quality to that experience.

Now, does that keep me from watching baseball games on the tube? No. But, would I rather be at the ballpark watching and experiencing these athletes.

And whether we’re talking about live performance in theater or live performance in sports or a live performance at a concert or a live performance for a club act, I think live performance, experiencing what is happening— in person, myself, live— is always a better experience. A recorded performance or a performance broadcast through some box or projected on a screen— these always feel like somehow flat— a second hand reality. (Slight pause.)

Now, I have seen, in person, a goodly share of baseball games in my times. And I’ve even been to a World Series game— only one game— but I have been to one. It was Game 2 of the 1986 Series at Shea Stadium, the Boston Red Sox against the New York Mets, a Championship eventually won by the Mets.

However, by the 7th inning of Game 2 the Mets were behind 7 to 3. It was a cold night, the temperature hovered in the high forties at best. The score was so lopsided, the stands began to empty out in the 7th inning.

My Dad was with me at the game. Given the temperature, we were both bundled up to protect from the cold. And we also had what might charitably be called nosebleed seats, way, way up in the left field stands and that wind was blowing good.

Dad was not really in the best of health so, trying to be sensitive and given the score and given that by the 7th inning many, many people were already involved in a mass exodus, streaming to their cars and to the Subway, I asked my Dad if he wanted to leave. All he said was: “This is a World Series game.” (Slight pause.)

Is it live or is it Memorex? (Slight pause.)

And in the 33rd Chapter of Exodus, we hear these words: “When my glory passes by you, I will place you in the cleft of the rock and I will cover you with my hand until I have passed by.” (Slight pause.)

In Hebrew the word used for glory, as in ‘glory of God,’ is kabod— that’s the sermon title— “Kabod.” But what is it? What does kabod really mean? What does glory really mean?

Indeed, why is it in this theophany, in this description of the real presence of God, are we not given some concrete facts about God? Why are we not told what it feels like to be in the presence of God? And why does Scripture always rely on images and metaphor when describing God? Is it possible God is indescribable? (Slight pause.)

It is of interest that this passage, which speaks about the glory of God, once again, utters, proclaims the Name of God— ‘I AM.’ The Hebrew word we take to be this name is Yahweh. And Yahweh is a verb— ‘to be.’

So, this name of God is not a noun. Hence, ‘to be’ is, in one sense, not a name, not a naming, although God insists it is. And ‘to be’ is also clearly not just a verb. ‘To be’ implies and even is a state of being. (Slight pause.)

I want to suggest that this glory of God, this kabod, is also a state of being. In fact, I want to suggest the only way to described God is as a state of being. But how can you describe a state of being? It cannot be described.

Indeed, God cannot be recorded as if on tape. God cannot be reproduced. You cannot playback God. Memorex, or anything else, cannot fix the real presence of God. God can only be... experienced. (Slight pause.)

In Philippians Paul addresses something the Apostle labels as “the peace of God which surpasses all understanding.” There are a number of translations for these words. Among them are these— the New International Version which says, “...the peace of God, which transcends all understanding...” The New Living Translation has it as, “...God’s peace, which exceeds anything we can understand.” The New American Standard Bible uses this: “...the peace of God, which surpasses all comprehension...”

The International Standard Version says, “...God’s peace, which goes far beyond anything we can imagine...” The Aramaic Bible in Plain English favors “...God, Who is greater than every mind...” The Bible in Basic English uses “...the peace of God, which is deeper than all knowledge...” The Weymouth New Testament says, “...the peace of God, which transcends all our powers of thought...”

Now, what we in the 21st Century do not realize is this so called “peace of God” is not an absence of violence or an absence conflict. The peace of God is, rather, the actual and real presence of God in our midst. And Christian theology makes the claim that with the advent of Jesus, God is now with us and God will always be among us.

Hence, I think one point Paul is making in addressing the peace of God is that God is always in our midst. And needless to say, sometimes we don’t recognize or acknowledge the presence of God. But God is there. This, I think, is the “I AM” of God— always there, God who is a form of the verb “to be,” God who is a state of being.

Still, that leaves the question: ‘What is this kabod of God, this glory of God? How is it different than the presence of God? (Slight pause.)

This is what I think: it’s possible that the kabod of God, the glory of God is the active experience of God. And God cannot be experience second hand. God is not available on tape. So, I want to suggest that a prime place for us to experience God is in one another, as in ‘love your neighbor.’

And I also want to suggest that we can experience God first hand. We can experience God, among other places, in silence. And we can experience God in song. And we can experience God slim ripples of a breeze. And we can experience the soft, healing touch we know when we realize a memory of a loved one no longer with us still speaks.

In short, there are many ways we each experience the Glory of God, not simply the passive presence of God but the active Spirit of God moving in our lives. But the key is: that experience, our individual experience, is like the experience of no one else. And so, as our own experience, it cannot really be described. It is our experience, and our experience only.

Perhaps that is why an experience of God is not like Memorex. This experience of God is not second hand. And this experience of God is real. And this experience of God is full. And this experience of God is live, not Memorex, not tape. (Slight pause.)

What is kabod? What is the glory of God? We experience the glory of God when God acts in our lives. We experience the glory of God when we feel hope, when we know love, when we touch peace, when we find joy, when we taste freedom, when memory is real. Amen.

10/16/2011
United Church if 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: “Is it live or is it Memorex? Why do we need to worship God? After all, God is self sufficient. God does not need us to offer worship to God. I think we need to be in communal worship because it is an opportunity to experience God with each other and to experience God in our own individual way. But worship is live. It is not second hand. It is not Memorex.”

BENEDICTION: We have gathered, not just as a community, but as a community of faith. Let us respond to God, who is the true reality, in all that we are and say and do. Let the Holy Spirit dwell among us and may the peace of God which surpasses our understanding be with us this day and forever more. Amen.

Sermon ~ 10/09/2011 ~ Euodia and Syntyche and the Culture

10/09/2011 ~ Proper 23 ~ Twenty-eighth Sunday in Ordinary Time ~ Seventeenth Sunday after Pentecost; Exodus 32:1-14; Psalm 106:1-6, 19-23; Isaiah 25:1-9; Psalm 23; Philippians 4:1-9; Matthew 22:1-14.

Euodia and Syntyche and the Culture

“Do it in this way: I urge Euodia and I urge Syntyche to be of the same mind, to come to an agreement with each other in Christ.” — Philippians 4:2

I am sure you all know the co-founder of Apple Computers, Steve Jobs, died this week. His was a classic American success story. The company he helped start had its first base of operations in his parent’s garage and money was borrowed from relatives to get it going. Apple is now worth over $350 billion— that’s billion with a ‘B.’

Edwin Catmull, computer scientist and co-founder of Pixar, the animated film production company Jobs helped become a giant in the motion picture industry, quoted Jobs as saying this: “You need a lot more than vision— you need stubbornness, tenacity, belief and patience to stay the course.” Indeed and as that quote might indicate, it has often been reported Jobs was one of those rare people who was both demanding, a perfectionist— difficult to work for— and beloved by those who worked for him.

The reports written this week about his life say he was— among other things— an entrepreneur, an inventor, a leader of industries, in fact several industries— music, motion pictures, computers— a CEO, an innovator in marketing and in advertising. Some even claim he was a prophet.

In different ways all these assessments are true. I want to suggest Jobs also was a keen observer of the culture. Hence, he understood how the culture in which we live influences people. He also understood most people don’t realize they are influenced by their culture. Thereby, my claim is he understood that sometimes culture, itself, stands in the way of not just progress but fairness, even justice.

You see, when you look at the names of the products for which Jobs is most famous, what do you find? “-i-”— i-pod, i-mac, i-tunes, i-pad, i-touch, i-phone. In just using those names it’s clear Jobs understood a basic human desire which transcends culture: none of us want to be controlled by the culture. But, to be blunt, it’s likely most of us are controlled by the culture. We don’t want to be but we are. And we don’t even recognize that we are. (Slight pause.) More on that in a bit.

Joan Chittister is a Catholic Benedictine nun, a social activist and a well known author. In just the last 4 years she has published 10 books. Like many writers these days, she maintains a blog. This week she had blog post titled A Too Modern Fairy Tale. It addressed how any culture operates.

“Every culture, including ours,” she said, “raises its children on fairy tales— archetypes of social relationships.... It is in fairy tales we learn our place in life at a very early age.”

“Social roles, human ideals are clearly defined. Human types and public values emerge in vivid colors— ogres... witches,... princes, authority... obedience are painted in broad, bright strokes.” In many fairy tales, little girls learn the proper roles of women in society.

In Cinderella, for instance, little girls learn beauty really counts and men value them for their looks, not their brains, said Joan. With The Little Mermaid girls learn to be silent and listen since nice girls are not loud, sassy, confident, self-initiating. In Hansel and Gretel they find out who is in charge as Gretel goes along, trusting, dependent on Hansel’s strength and wisdom.

We like to think fairy tales come from another era, an ancient mythical, whimsical, foolish kind of unsophisticated place but, Sister Chittister pointed out, these themes were played out in real life at the Supreme Court in June. 5 male justices, with no support and in fact serious dissent from the 3 justices who are women, ruled against a group of women who brought suit against Walmart for discrimination.

The women who brought the suit realized 65 percent of the hourly workers in the company are women. Only 33 percent of the managers are. The company appointed men, not women, to positions of leadership. They also realized women were commonly paid less than men doing the same work.

You see, the claim being made was that de facto discrimination existed. By definition, de facto discrimination is institutionalized only by the fact of its existence, by its practice. Hence, by definition, de facto discrimination means the condition does not exist by edict. It is not a written rule.

Even though the claim being made was one of de facto discrimination, not discrimination embodied by a written rule, Justice Scalia wrote an opinion— the majority opinion— using these words. (Quote): “Even if every single one of the anecdotes is true,” he said addressing the evidence presented, “that would not demonstrate the entire company operates under a general policy of discrimination.” So, you see— wink, wink, nudge, nudge— de facto discrimination does not exist unless there is a written policy enshrining de facto discrimination— which exists only when there is no written rule— wink, wink, nudge, nudge.

Chittister comments (quote): “On the weight of this decision the fairy tales go on: women are not to be valued for their work;... women aren’t meant to lead; Hansel will do that for them.... most of all, women are not meant to be mouthy mermaids, to speak up for themselves, to take matters into their own hands. They are to be silent and do what they’re told.” {1} (Slight pause.)

And these words are from the work known as Philippians: “Do it in this way: I urge Euodia and I urge Syntyche to be of the same mind, to come to an agreement with each other in Christ.” (Slight pause.)

I need to define culture. Culture can be thought of on a large scale. Culture can be thought of on a small scale. You can have a national culture. You can have a company culture. You can have a family culture. But cultures, large and small, exert influences on us we often do not even recognize.

Healthcare professionals will tell you smoking, for instance, tends to be cultural. Just this week a report released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said the three groups of workers where smoking is most likely to be found are miners, construction workers and food service workers. {2}

Just the fact that a prevalence toward smoking can be located in those sub-cultures says the existence of cultural, social pressure to smoke in those specific cultures is real. Further, social pressure is rarely even noticed by the people who live within those cultural arenas. [Slight pause.] Hey! How about a smoke break? Sure. Why not? [Slight pause.] (If you think I didn’t see that while I was in the Army, you’ve got another thing coming.)

This is clear: Euodia and Syntyche are women. These names are names given to women in New Testament times. This is clear: Euodia and Syntyche are leaders in the church in Philippi.

However, and literally for centuries, these names— Euodia and Syntyche— were translated as if they were male names, this despite the fact that if one consults the original Greek, it is clear they are female. Why? Is it not likely the dominant male culture discounted the possibility that women could have been leaders in New Testament times? (Slight pause.)

This too is clear: in New Testament times men and only men counted in the culture. Patriarchy ruled. Men were in charge. And yet, here are two women singled out by Paul as leaders in a church. (Slight pause.)

So, what’s going on here? What could have altered not just the thinking of these early Christians but their actions to the point where they both realized and understood the culture in which they lived presented them with fairy tales about the worth of people?

What could have altered their thinking to the point where they realized the culture in which they lived did not model how God would have people live? What prompted them to realize that given the reality of God and the reality of God as revealed in Jesus, these fairy tales about male dominance and superiority which ruled their culture were simply preposterous and were to be ignored? (Slight pause.)

Paul calls for Euodia and Syntyche to (quote): “be of the same mind, to come to an agreement with each other in Christ.” Whatever disagreement they had is not directly mentioned and is lost to antiquity. But, in the context of this letter the request both to them and to us is clear: this is a call to see the world the way God sees the world.

Our (quote): “...thoughts should be wholly directed to all that is true, all that is honorable, all that deserves respect, all that is honest, all that is just, all that is pure, all that is decent, all that is pleasing, all that is commendable, all that is virtuous, all that is excellent and all that is worthy of praise.”

In short, just as was true for these early Christians, we need to avoid being confused or overwhelmed by the culture in which we find ourselves. We need to heed a call of God to equity, to justice, to unity, to harmony, to freedom, to hope and to love. (Slight pause.)

In a commencement address at Stanford University in 2005 Steve Jobs said this (quote): “Don’t be trapped by dogma— [dogma] is living with the results of other people’s thinking.” {3} (Slight pause.)

My friends, the culture in which we live is a place filled with dogma— the thinking of other people. But we need to think for ourselves and we need to pay attention to the thinking of God.

The thinking of God, the culture in which God would have us live is a holy culture. It is a culture in which loving God and loving neighbor is key. The simple name for this holy culture is covenant.

Now, if we adopt a way of thinking in which the culture of covenant is foremost, will we occasionally be invited to think in ways that our own culture might frown on? Yes.

But don’t take my word for that. Why don’t you ask Paul and Euodia and Syntyche. My bet is they saw this culture of covenant, a culture of loving God and loving neighbor as the place to which we are all called by God.

And my bet is they saw the places where the culture which surrounded them violated that. And they said: “We will be in covenant. We will love God and we will love neighbor. Amen.

10/09/2011
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: “Steve Jobs said ‘Don’t be trapped by dogma’ and defined dogma as the result of other people’s thinking. Indeed, in theology the difference between dogma and doctrine is this: dogma is someone else telling you what to believe— someone else’s thinking. Doctrine is an explanation of what you believe. We, in the United Church of Christ, have doctrine. We explain what we believe. We do not espouse dogma. We do not tell people what to believe. That is our culture.”

BENEDICTION: God can open our minds to what is true. God can fill our lives when we participate in the work of God’s realm, participate in seeking justice and peace and love. When we seek what is pleasing to God we are doing the will of God. And may the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, guard your hearts and your minds in Christ, Jesus, and in the unity of the Holy Spirit, this day and forever more. Amen.

{1} http://ncronline.org/blogs/where-i-stand/too-modern-fairy-tale#.TosDXfJIA9o.facebook

{2} http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/44720458/ns/today-today_health/t/jobs-where-workers-are-most-likely-smoke/#.TpC9vJSA1NQ

{3} http://news.stanford.edu/news/2005/june15/jobs-061505.html

Sermon ~ October 2, 2011 ~ TEN?

October 2, 2011 ~ Proper 22 ~ Twenty-seventh Sunday in Ordinary Time ~ Sixteenth Sunday after Pentecost ~ Exodus 20:1-4, 7-9, 12-20; Psalm 19; Isaiah 5:1-7; Psalm 80:7-15; Philippians 3:4b-14; Matthew 21:33-46 ~ Neighbors in Need Offering ~ World Wide Communion Sunday.

TEN?

A Dialogue by Tom Rasely and Joe Connolly

TOM: OK, ladies and jelly-spoons. Today we’re going talk about the Ten Commandments.

JOE: The what?

TOM: No, not ‘The What.’ The Ten Commandments. You know, like in the movie you’ve probably seen on television— they filmed it back in the 1950s. It had Charlton Heston in it. He played Moses. The movie got it’s name from the Ten Commandments that God gave to Moses. So, the Ten Commandments I want to talk about are the Ten Commandments you can find in the Bible in the Book called Exodus— Exodus in the 20th Chapter.

JOE: Exodus? Yeah, I know Exodus was a movie, but I thought that was a movie with Paul Newman and Eva Marie Saint, not Charlton Heston. And it was they made in the 1960s, not the 1950s.

TOM: No, no, no. The Heston movie is a story about ancient Israel.

JOE: I thought the Paul Newman and Eva Marie Saint movie was about Israel.

TOM: (Annoyed.) Well, it is. But the movie with Heston is called The Ten Commandments. And it tells the story about Israel, a story from the book of Exodus that’s in the Bible. It’s story is about what happened 3,000 years ago. The Paul Newman and Eva Marie Saint movie called Exodus but tells the story about the founding of the modern country known as Israel. That story is about what happened just 60 years ago.

JOE: Well, then, they’re still both movies about Israel.

TOM: O.K. wonderful! You’re a movie critic, are you? So which one are you? Siskel or Ebert?

JOE: Siskel is no longer with us. He died.

TOM: Great— you should be Siskel, then.

JOE: Right— now about this Ten Commandments stuff— I could be wrong, but I thought you could also find the Ten Commandments in the Bible in places other than the 20th Chapter of Exodus.

TOM: You can find them in other places in the Bible. There is a different version of the Ten Commandments in the 5th Chapter of Deuteronomy. And there is yet another version in the 34th chapter of Exodus. But I wanted to talk only about the ones in the 20th Chapter of Exodus. [1]

JOE: But, hold on. If there are Ten Commandments in Exodus 34 and Ten Commandments in Deuteronomy 5 and Ten Commandments in Exodus 20, that makes 30 Commandments, doesn’t it? That would be a lot of commandments to follow. Sounds kind of hard. And why would you want to talk only about the Ten Commandments in Exodus 20? What makes them so special?

TOM: (Simmering.) O.K. Now, today I want to talk about the Ten Commandments we find in the 20th Chapter of Exodus. O.K.? (Pause.)

JOE: O.K. (Slight pause.) They are not commandments, you know.

TOM: (Sarcastic.) Oh right. They’re only called The Ten Commandments. They’re not really commandments. I should have known that— all that ‘thou shalt not’ stuff. They can’t really mean it, right?

JOE: I’m serious. They are not commandments. They are Words.

TOM: That’s brilliant. What else would they be?

JOE: No, I mean they are Words. Words with a capital ‘W.’

TOM: Ooh! W-W-W-words. Yeah, that makes sense.

JOE: What I mean is: they’re not commands. There is actually no command tense in the Hebrew Language. So, in Hebrew, you can’t give anyone a command. Therefore, they cannot be commandments but they are and they can be called Words— capital ‘W’ Words, meaning Words from God. In fact, in Hebrew they are referred to by three different names. They are called “the ten words,” or “the ten sayings” or “the ten matters” but in Hebrew they are not called the “Ten Commandments.” Even when the phrase which describes what we so inaccurately call the “Ten Commandments” is spoken in the Greek, the Greek word used is “decalogue.” Decalogue means “ten words” or “ten terms.” Bottom line: it does not mean “Ten Commandments.”

TOM: Fine. Next you’re going to say that there aren’t really ten of them. (Slight pause.)

JOE: There aren’t.

TOM: Of course there are ten of them.

JOE: How can you be so sure?

TOM: Because there’s a copy cut in stone right in the capital building of the State of South Carolina— etched in the side of the building— two tablets. (Slight pause.) I saw it on CNN. (Slight pause.) I saw it on FOX News. (Slight pause.) So, I know it’s true. (Slight pause.) I even saw it on MSNBC. OK?

JOE: Well (sighs), that image of two tablets we often find on the walls of buildings is a representation of what we have come to call the Ten Commandments— or at least it’s a representation of the ones found in the 20th Chapter of the Book called Exodus. But, in fact, just within those ten, different groups look at them in different ways. Jewish people number them differently than Reformed Protestants who number them differently again than those in the Orthodox tradition who number them differently again than those who are Catholics and Lutherans. And so, yes— even when numbered differently, as all these different traditions do, ten is the traditional number we use when we refer to them. But ten is not really the issue here.

TOM: So, what do you mean ten isn’t the issue? Look, I’ve got a Bible right here, and this is what says right there in the chapter heading “The Ten Commandments.” There: what do you think of that?

JOE: Well, when you consider how the Bible was put together, you quickly come to an understanding that all those chapter headings were added much, much later by editors. They were put there by people who did not write the actual words of in the Bible.

TOM: Oh, yeah, right— and I suppose the chapter and verse numbers were added later too.

JOE: They were.

TOM: Oh come on. Don’t be ridiculous. Peter and Paul made sure chapters and verses were in the King James Bible. That’s the one Peter and Paul used, isn’t it? And, look, how else could those early Hebrews know where to find all their favorite verses if things weren’t numbered? Bookmarks hadn’t been invented yet, and they sure were a long way from being able to look up things on-line, like I do. I really like Google, don’t you? You can find anything.

JOE: Now, now, now— slow down. And let’s start at the beginning, shall we? How was the Bible written?

TOM: Well, well... maybe it wasn’t written. Maybe it just came together.

JOE: Yes, well some people do think that it just came together, kind of by itself. But the Bible was written and compiled and edited by people across the expanse of a long, long period of time. The Hebrew Scriptures were written and compiled and edited over the course of almost the entire one thousand years before Jesus was born. In fact, if we look at just the first five books of the Bible, the Pentateuch, we know this section contains at least four documents written different at very different times by different people. This portion of Scripture was written between about one thousand years before Jesus was born and about 500 years before Jesus was born. Then, these four documents were combined into one document probably right after the Jews spent time in captivity, in exile in Babylon. And, needless to say, if the Pentateuch came together about 500 years before Jesus was born, that’s about... oh,... (Joe makes calculations in the air) 2,100 years before the King James Bible was translated and published.

TOM: All right, that’s all very interesting. But I really don’t care about ancient Hebrew and ancient Greek or about this document stuff or when the Bible was published or even about translating. I just care about the Ten Commandments. So, let’s get back to them.

JOE: Well, now, you may not care about ancient Hebrew or Ancient Greek, or about when the Bible was published or even about translating, but translating from these ancient languages is really the key here. You see, contrary to popular belief, Paul and Peter did not speak or write in Elizabethan English. Those two apostles many have communicated in ancient Greek, but certainly not in 17th Century English. Now, we know Paul could actually write in Greek, since one part of a letter by Paul says it is written in his own hand. But we are not even sure if Peter did write. Maybe he just dictated and what he said got written down. So, it’s possible someone, maybe a scribe— a secretary— just copied down what Peter said.

TOM: Peter had a secretary? Cool.

JOE: Like I said, the New Testament, the Christian Scriptures, are all written in ancient Greek. The Scriptures used by the Israelites are written mostly in ancient Hebrew. And, since most of us speak English and read Scripture in English, we need to realize we are not reading the original version. I’d suggest that in order to really understand what is being said, you need to know something about translation and how that works. Then, on top of that, while you probably don’t need to be fluent in ancient Hebrew and ancient Greek, it is helpful to know just a little bit about how those languages work.

TOM: Like I said, that’s all very interesting. But I really don’t care about ancient Hebrew and ancient Greek and I still don’t care about translating. I just care about the Ten Commandments. So, let’s get back to them.

JOE: You do have a one track agenda, don’t you?

TOM: I was thinking maybe it would be a good idea if the Ten Commandments got an update.

JOE: An update??

TOM: Yeah. Like number 1: “No other gods.” I mean, come on. This is the 21st century; we’re supposed to be open-minded. How can we stand for “no other gods?”

JOE: Open minded? That’s more like empty minded.

TOM: What?

JOE: I didn’t say anything.

TOM: And then there’s number 2.

JOE: What’s wrong with that one?

TOM: Not one, two.

JOE: All right, is there something the matter with that one too?

TOM: One-two? (They look at each other.) Skip it. The problem is number two is way long. I mean, you start off with “You shall not make for yourself any graven image,” and by the time you get to the part with “thousands of them that love me keep my commandments,” you’ve pretty much lost track of what you were reading. And then you’ve got this “jealous God” business. I thought God was supposed to be… you know... nice.

JOE: Oh?

TOM: You know, kind of like a holy Santa Claus or something.

JOE: Oh???

TOM: Yeah, like Santa Claus. We ask and God gives.

JOE: God as Santa Claus?

TOM: And number 3. Look at number 3. “You shall not take the name of the Lord in vain.” I mean, GOD! Who would do a thing like that? And then along comes number 4, talking about the Sabbath. First of all, who uses a word like Sabbath anymore? And then six days this, and six days that, and six days blah, blah, blah. It’s all over the Scripture. I just want things more simple— modern.

JOE: Really. God as Santa Claus? Jolly? Fat?

TOM: Boy, you sure have a way of straying from the point. This is not about God. This is about the Ten Commandments. So, let’s get back to them. And I guess we could leave the next bunch alone, right?

JOE: Oh, really?

TOM: Yeah. I mean, it’s probably still not a good idea to murder or steal or bear false witness or commit adultery. So we leave them. Although, poor old Dr. Phil to say nothing of Jerry Springer— and who would want to say anything about Jerry Springer— poor old Dr. Phil would be out of a job if people didn’t murder or steal or bear false witness or commit adultery, wouldn’t he?

JOE: Any other thoughts, Mr. Scribe?

TOM: Only one. And that’s number 10.

JOE: One is ten? That can’t be right.

TOM: No, there are ten-or however you want to put it, but I want to talk about one.

JOE: What’s that about tenors? We aren’t talking about the choir, you know.

TOM: Are you doing that on purpose?

JOE: But you just said tenor…

TOM: Look, ten— just ten! Just ten! Not tenor! Ten— number ten— it’s got that business of coveting. I have to tell you, I’ve lived in the same place all my life and never once have I coveted my neighbor’s ox. Or my neighbor’s a… my neighbor’s a...

JOE: Donkey?

TOM: (Relieved.) OK, yeah, right! My neighbor’s donkey. Anyway, enough with the coveting. If I really, really want something but don’t actually get it, I’m just dreaming about it, right? No foul, no harm. Right? Who cares? So, you see? I think the Ten Commandments really do need to be re-worked— this coveting stuff has got to go.

JOE: Well, that’s a lot of history you’d be throwing away.

TOM: Well, I sure don’t like throwing history away. So, maybe if we just brought the coveting up to date it would make more sense. Maybe it should say, “Don’t covert your neighbor’s truck” or “Don’t covert your neighbor’s swimming pool.” You know— just make it modern.

JOE: Well, the ten commandments already were re-worked, you know.

TOM: Oh? When? Did Fox News cover that? They are fair and balanced. They cover everything. I’m sure Fox would not miss a re-work of the ten commandments. Re-working the ten commandments— that would be news.

JOE: I guess I need to bring you up to speed. The Ten Commandments were re-worked. You can find that re-working in the Gospels.

TOM: Godspell? Isn’t that a musical?

JOE: Not Godspell. The re-working of the Ten Commandments is in the Gospels. The Gospels— the first four books you find in the New Testament? The story of Jesus?

TOM: Oh, those! And Jesus revised the Ten Commandments? In the Gospels?

JOE: Yup! Revised and abridged. In the Gospels you can find where Jesus said there are just two commandments.

TOM: Two??? Who’s going to set that up on a stone on some state capital building? Two is simply not impressive enough.

JOE: Look at what Jesus says in the book of Matthew, chapter 22, starting with verse 37…

TOM: Oh, so I was right about that chapter and verse thing, huh?

JOE: (Ahem.) When Jesus was asked what is the greatest Word from God, this was the answer: “‘Love God with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ On these two hang all the Law and Prophets.”

TOM: All of it, huh?

JOE: Yes. And then in the book that we know as The Gospel According to the School of John, in chapter 13, verse 34, it says, “A new [commandment] I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another.”

TOM: That’s it?

JOE: That’s it. That’s all that is needed.

TOM: And you’re saying they’re not commandments?

JOE: They are imperatives. They are a call to action. They are a call for interaction. And they are Words... Words to us and for us. They are Words offered to you and Words offered to me. They need no revision; they do need application. They need no particular scrutiny to be understood; they do need to be heeded.

TOM: Well, I suppose so. But the Ten Commandments are still there behind those two Jesus talked about, even if it’s like you said— not Ten Commandments but ten Words.

JOE: Well.....

TOM: Well what?

JOE: Perhaps the basic question is not about commandments at all. Perhaps the basic questions the Bible addresses is simple: What is Scripture about? Is the Bible about the decrees of God or is the Bible about the character of God? If the Bible is about the decrees of God, then there are not just ten commandments. There are 613 commandments to be found in the Torah. These are what the Rabbis call The Law of Moses.

TOM: 613? I could never keep track of 613 commandments, let alone obey them!

JOE: Well, don’t worry about keeping track of all those commandments. After all, if you accept what Jesus said about the two commandments, then it can it all actually be reduced to just one Word.

TOM: Yeah, right— one Word.

JOE: No. It’s true. What Jesus said can all be reduced to just one Word.

TOM: All right, Mr. Smarty-pants— one Word. What it is?

JOE: Covenant.

TOM: Covenant? What does that mean?

JOE: Some say Covenant is the structure by which the biblical text organizes itself. But it goes beyond that. The word covenant illustrates the relationship we need to have with God and the relationships we need to have with each other. Covenant means commitment. Covenant means a commitment living with one another. Covenant means a commitment to respecting one another. Covenant means a commitment to appreciating the gifts God gives to each of us. Covenant means a commitment to listening to one another. Covenant is a commitment to growth, a commitment to the sharing of joy, a commitment to the making of peace, a commitment to a future of hope, a commitment to the reality of love. Covenant explains, illuminates and illustrates the character of God. So, you see? One word— covenant— one Word— capital ‘W’ word. So, what do you say to that?

TOM: (Thinking with a shrug.) Amen?

JOE: Amen.

10/02/2011
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, NY

ENDPIECE: It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Choral Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “There is no question about this: Scripture is not about rules. It is about relationship— relationship with God and relationships with others and the relationship in which these intersect. Those relationships are what Scripture labels as covenant.”

BENEDICTION: Let us never fear to seek the truth God reveals. Let us live as a resurrection people. Let us understand every day as a new adventure in faith as the Creator draws us into community. And may we love God so much, that we love nothing else too much. May we be so in awe of God, that we are in awe of no one else and nothing else. Amen.

[1] Deuteronomy 5:6-21; Exodus 34:1-27; Exodus 20:2-17.