05/08/5016 ~ Seventh Sunday of Easter and the Last Sunday of Eastertide ~ Celebrated in Some Traditions as the Sunday Closest to the Ascension ~ (If Ascension not observed here) ~ * Acts 16:16-34; Psalm 97; Revelation 22:12-14, 16-17, 20-21; John 17:20-26 ~ * During Eastertide a reading from Acts is often substituted for the lesson from the Hebrew Bible ~ Often Celebrated as the Festival of the Christian Home on the Church Calendar ~ Mother’s Day in the Secular Calendar. NOTE: 05/08/2016 ~ Ascension readings are: Acts 1:1-11; Psalm 47 or Psalm 93; Ephesians 1:15-23; Luke 24:44-53.
Resurrection/Ascension
“While blessing them, the Savior withdrew from them and was carried to heaven. And the disciples worshiped the risen Christ and returned to Jerusalem filled with great joy.” — Luke 24:51-52.
Have you ever gone someplace that you know that you had never been before and yet you feel like you are right at home? Have you, even though you know you had never been at that place, felt like— in some frame of reference, in some time/space continuum that defies mere logic, someplace that logic on its own cannot describe— have you felt like you, in fact, had been in that very place at some point?
I admit I have felt that way a number of times. Let me offer two examples which stand out in my memory, tow personal memories. I entered Bangor Theological Seminary in January of 1992. The first official function I attended was, therefore, January Convocation, just before the start of Spring Term classes.
At that Convocation the first preacher I heard from the pulpit in the chapel at the Seminary was the Rev. Dr. Avery Post. As you may know, Post was the pastor here in Norwich from 1952 to 1957.
I cannot tell you with any stretch of my memory what Avery said. I can tell you I felt comfortable. It was like I was sitting there listening to a friend and that friend was inviting me to come home. Little did I know four and a half years later I would follow in the footsteps of Dr. Post and come here to Norwich.
But the fact that the preaching of Dr. Post was exquisite or I wound up here is a side note. More to my point is my level of comfort. To me it felt like that place, that space in the chapel, that atmosphere was quite familiar.
It was strange— I knew it had all never happened before but it felt like it had all happened before. What’s more, it felt like I knew all of it, the place, the space, that time, on an intimate level. It felt like I was reacquainting myself with a piece of myself that I had lost and now had found. (Slight pause.)
A second example rom my personal history. I have often regaled you with stories, either publically or privately regaled you with stories, of how Bonnie and I met on an island off the coast of Maine. And yes, that week the Maine fog set in and we, along with about 25 other people, were stuck on the island for a couple of days. The rest is history— or at least our history— and I’ve told you about that.
But what I have not often said is the year we met was not my first time on the island. I first set foot on that island two years before Bonnie and I met. Further, that first time I was on the island— and I cannot explain why this is true— the rocks, the dock, the vista from the shore, the cabins— all felt familiar.
To be clear: not only had I never been on that island. I had never set foot in the State of Maine before. I was a city kid. Maine was not exactly a part of my vocabulary.
However and similar to my Bangor Seminary experience, to me the island felt like I, in some frame of reference or in some time/space continuum that defies mere logic, had been there before. The sense of that place, that space was quite familiar to me.
What’s more, it felt like I knew that place, all of it, on an intimate level. It felt like I was reacquainting myself with a piece of myself I had lost and now had found. (Slight pause.)
We find these words in Luke/Acts in the section of that work commonly called the Gospel of Luke: “While blessing them, the Savior withdrew from them and was carried to heaven. And the disciples worshiped the risen Christ and returned to Jerusalem filled with great joy.” (Slight pause.)
Earlier, before the reading from the Gospel, we heard those words from the Gospel introduced this way (quote:) “The work known as Luke and the work known as Acts are two volumes of the same work by the same author written at the same time. Hence, it’s clear the same author writing at the same time gives two different versions of what is commonly called the Ascension.” (Slight pause.)
This should, indeed, be evident even to a casual listener or reader: the stories are similar but they are not the same. That leads us to an obvious question: why? Why would this work— and scholars insist these two books of Scripture come from the same source, written at the same time— why would these works offer two versions of the same incident? (Slight pause.)
Well, let’s back track a little and ask a different question, two in fact. First, ‘what is Resurrection?’ And, having asked that question, the companion question needs to be asked: ‘what is Ascension?’ (Slight pause.)
Every Easter Sunday I invariable say these words (quote): “It needs to be noted Resurrection is not reanimation nor is it resuscitation. That has never been a Christian belief. Resurrection is what it says it is: Resurrection.”
A similar statement can be made for Ascension: Ascension is not a movement to a place, a location on a map. A G.P.S. will not take you to a destination called Ascension. That Ascension means a movement from one location to another location has never been a Christian belief. Ascension is what it says it is: Ascension.
Equally, Ascension does not indicate the reality of the Risen Christ is diminished, that Christ is no longer alive, that Christ is no longer with us, that Christ fails to be present to us here, now. This brings us back to the obvious question the two readings present: “why would this work, Luke/Acts, offer two versions of the same incident?” (Slight pause.)
I think one of the ways we often fail in our reading and our understanding of Scripture is we tend to think the writers were stupid. We insist they were so stupid that they could see things only through a literal lens. Because we get these two stories with different details from the same source, clearly there is no intent on the part of Luke and Acts to depict the Resurrection or the Ascension by using a literal form.
You see, if we take the reports we find in Scripture of the Crucifixion as realistic and disturbing (and we probably should), then the reports we find in Scripture of the Resurrection and the Ascension insist we must take them as metaphysical and disturbing. You can’t have one without the other.
To be blunt, for me there does seem to be an insistence by what we find in Luke and in Acts about the Resurrection and the Ascension that the report not simply metaphysical and, therefore, is only abstract, not tangible. To take these words as only abstract would be to inject a possibility into the meaning that the Resurrection and the Ascension totally lacks any kind of reality.
So yes, I think the words we find in Scripture are meant to be seen as and to describe a conjunction of time, place, and space— a continuum. And I also see these words as a revelation about the intense love God has for humanity. I also see these words as a revelation about the intense longing for God that humanity has— an existential longing or God. And all of these sentiments are real, tangible.
I think this is an important point: we must not see the great revelation of God in Jesus as simply being about an event as if it is a big, important ball game. Oh well, you’re looking forward to the Super Bowl here. How about the World Series? No! That’s not what it’s about.
When we do that, when we take that read on Scripture— we relegate the God events which happen in the life of humanity and in our own lives to simply having a beginning and having an end. To do so limits the possibility of an eternal God.
Indeed, the Resurrection and the Ascension are not about a beginning and an ending. The Resurrection and the Ascension are about God Who loves and about God Who is with us now. The Resurrection and the Ascension are about God Who loves and about God Who lives.
The Resurrection and the Ascension are about God Who loves and about God Who acts in our lives. The Resurrection and the Ascension are about God Who loves and about God Who is real. (Slight pause.)
And yes, I believe there are God moments in our lives. Sometimes God moments happen when we find ourselves in a place we’ve never been before but a place we somehow already know in an intimate way.
And yes, sometimes God moments happen with the death of a loved one. And yes, sometimes God moments happen with the birth of a child. The situations are numerous. God moments do happen.
And often God moments are not about the specific beginnings and endings we experience at specific times. God moments are about the presence of God in our lives, the presence of God in our lives now and the presence of God forever. The Resurrection, the Ascension are about the presence of God in our lives forever and for now. Amen.
05/08/2016
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: “Huston Smith, now 96 years old, is a religious studies scholar. A book he wrote, The World’s Religions, which has sold over 2 million copies, is mandatory reading for seminarians and probably should be for everyone. This is what Smith has said about the relationship of logic and religion: ‘Rationalism and Newtonian science has lured us into dark woods, but a new metaphysics can rescue us.’ Or as I like to say when we spake about God what we are addressing is theo-logic.”
BENEDICTION: We can find the presence of God in unexpected places. God’s light leads us to places we thought not possible just moments ago. God’s love abounds and will live with us throughout eternity. The grace of God is deeper than our imagination. The strength of Christ is stronger than our needs. The communion of the Holy Spirit is richer than our togetherness. May the One Triune God sustain us today and throughout the infinity of what is commonly called tomorrow. Amen.
Sunday, May 8, 2016
Sunday, May 1, 2016
SERMON ~ 05/01/2016 ~ “Pentecost Daily”
05/01/2016 ~ Sixth Sunday of Easter ~ *Acts 16:9-15; Psalm 67; Revelation 21:10, 22-22:5; John 14:23-29 or John 5:1-9 ~ Communion Sunday ~ * During Eastertide a reading from Acts is often substituted for the lesson from the Hebrew Bible.
Pentecost Daily
“...the Advocate, the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, / whom Abba, God, will send in my name, / will teach you, instruct you in everything; / and She will remind you of all that I have said to you.” — John 14:26.
I need to start with an apology. I apologize because I know some of you will find my comments today totally and incredibly boring.
Why? I want to address church structure. (Now that I’ve named where I am going with this I think I can already hear the snoring commence.)
I’m going there in part because I stumbled across an article written by a Baptist, Jeffery Brumley, which led me to thinking about church structure. The article had a provocative title. Can Congregational Polity Weather Cultural Challenges? [1]
Why such a title? Well, said Brumley, we live in an era when we are fond of claiming we like democracy, an era when we all want to get our own say. But democracy has a trade off.
Yes, democracy is defined as one member, one vote. But in a democracy that one vote counts only insofar as the voter is also willing to participate in the work that vote supports. (And we won’t even go to what that means in civil life. But it means something.)
In a true democracy authority is not passed off to someone else or to a committee. Each person needs both to claim authority by voting and to exercise authority through action, involvement. That’s the way a true democracy works.
The article pointed out while we live in a era that claims to like democracy, the exercise of direct power, we also live in an era when a lot of people are fond of letting others execute decisions and thereby we avoid direct involvement.
That having been said— now here’s the really boring part— this is my explanation of the three basic patterns of church structure. There are three prime forms— Episcopal, Congregational and Presbyterian.
To be clear, the explanations of each one I am about to offer are the simple, short definitions. But they are adequate. Which is also to say I could do at least a half hour on each of these and then you would be really bored.
Episcopal church structure is any church with Bishops or with a well defined hierarchy. The hierarchy, the ruling group, is in charge in these churches. They make decisions and a decision can mean one size fits all.
Congregational structure, on the other hand and on paper at least, is a clear cut form of straightforward democracy. Further, there is no denominational hierarchy, no Bishops. No one can give an order to the local church in a Congregational structure about anything. And yes, we fall into that category.
Presbyterian structure is perhaps the most complex. Local churches elect representatives to a regional body. These, in turn, elect representatives to a larger region which, in turn, elects representatives to a national body.
In a Presbyterian structure, the national body rather than individuals such as Bishops can tell the local churches what to do. Therefore through this process, local autonomy is surrendered to the national committee structure.
I believe Congregational form, Congregational structure, is ideally suited to enable a congregation to be who we really are together, to be where we are, together. Hence, the Spirit can work so that each church is an expression of its own context and is flexible to minister in its own context. Perhaps more to the point, with Congregational structure each member can be empowered by the Spirit to be an expression of their own context and flexible to minister in their own context.
I am sure for some that description of Congregational government sounds like shear chaos, anarchy— everyone does their own thing. To me that sounds like shared authority and shared responsibility.
I also need to emphasize I believe the Spirit can and will work in all the structures I’ve just described. But, needless to say, I also believe the Spirit can be most effective in a Congregational structure. (Slight pause.)
We find these words in the work we know as the Gospel According to the School of John: “...the Advocate, the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, / whom Abba, God, will send in my name, / will teach you, instruct you in everything; / and She will remind you of all that I have said to you.” (Slight pause.)
All this brings us to an interesting place, an interesting question. What is the Spirit about? (Slight pause.)
Poet and pastor Maren Tirabassi has written a poem which illuminates what listening to the language of the Spirit might be like. I want to recite part of it. The title is Pneuma-lingual— the language of the Spirit. (Slight pause.)
“I used to teach ESL – / English as a Second Language. / So on Pentecost every year / I pray for SSL / for myself and for the church I love— / Spirit as a Second Language— SSL.”
“Pentecost – / Spirit for Speakers of Other Languages— / the day when everyone heard / the words they knew.”
“So Pentecost us now, O God, / let us learn / to conjugate the Spirit, / shed the comfortable accents / of churchy insider talk, / fit our mouths to something strange— mostly verbs, / present tense, active voice / not many possessive pronouns” — the words of Maren Tirabassi. [2] (Slight pause.)
Jesus says the Spirit will teach us, instruct us, remind us. So, what is the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, reminding us about lately? What is the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, reminding you about lately? (Slight pause.) Here’s what I can guarantee: whatever the Holy Spirit is saying to each of us and to all of us, it’s not about church structure.
At its best church structure is, pardon the expression, a necessary evil. Indeed, to the extent that the church— all church— is a human institution, structure is essential.
But structure is human language. We need to listen for and to hear the language of the Spirit. We need to listen for and to a spiritual language. I would, in fact, suggest listening to the Holy Spirit is like, as Tirabassi implies, learning a second language. (Slight pause.)
I’ve said this before. In part because we tend to look at Scripture as a narrative, we envision the stories presented as happening in the past rather than happening to us today. So, our proclivity is to see the Resurrection of Jesus and the Pentecost event, the Holy Spirit visiting the church, as happening in the past.
But, as Tirabassi also says, we need to be aware that the Spirit can indeed (quote:) “Pentecost us now!” We need to hear the Holy Spirit, the language of the Spirit today, now. We need to be aware that today, now, the Holy Spirit is alive and with us, present.
And today, now, Pentecost does happen daily, when we listen. We can have a daily Pentecost when we attune ourselves to the language of the Spirit.
And what does the Spirit say? I firmly believe the Spirit says seek the peace God wants, now. I firmly believe the says Spirit seek freedom and equality for all, now. I firmly believe the Spirit empowers each of us to be kind, thoughtful, caring, now.
All of which is to say we need to be attuned to the Word and the work of the Spirit among us today, now. How does that happen? Well, yes— occasionally— our frail, human church structure might help, despite its own self. But more to the point, we need to listen for the Word of the Spirit in one another— listen for the Word of the Spirit in one another— and to act upon that Word.
Indeed, what is really central to Congregational polity, Congregational structure is listening for the Word of God we hear from one another acting on the Word of God we hear from one another. And so we need to listen to one another and learn from one another. Why is that? Well let me be parochial. As Congregationalists our firm belief is the Spirit speaks to each of us and to all of us, daily, now. Our firm belief is the Spirit is active in each of us and all of us, daily, now.
And we also believe Spirit forms us to be a community, speaks to all of us as a community, now. After all, when Jesus said this (quote:) “...the Advocate, the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, / whom Abba, God, will send in my name, / will teach you, instruct you in everything; / and She will remind you of all that I have said to you.” When the Risen Christ was speaking to all the disciples and saying this, the truth is it was not and is not in past tense. The Risen Christ was saying is saying this to us to us even today, now. Amen.
05/01/2016
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: “A week ago Bonnie and I attended the Susquehanna Association Meeting— speaking of Congregational polity. Our former parishioner, who many of you know and who now lives in Homer, her childhood home and attends the Homer United Church of Christ— Lynn Olcott was there. She sent us an e-mail which says in part: ‘It was fun to see you and it got me thinking about when I was a kid in the U.U. church— that’s Unitarian Universalist— I got the impression of a huge, inclusive, present God but as an adult it seemed to me the U.U. message had changed to one of the high-minded absence of God. And that must be how I have found my way to the U.C.C. sanctuaries.’ I do need to add I think we here strive to see God as present, with us now. It’s a mark of this church.”
BENEDICTION: We can find the presence of God in unexpected places. God’s light leads us to places we thought not possible just moments ago. God’s love abounds and will live with us throughout eternity. The grace of God is deeper than our imagination. The strength of Christ is stronger than our needs. The communion of the Holy Spirit is richer than our togetherness. May the One Triune God sustain us today and throughout the infinity of what is commonly called tomorrow. Amen.
[1]
https://baptistnews.com/2016/04/14/baptist-leaders-wonder-can-congregational-polity-weather-cultural-challenges/
[2] This poem was slightly altered for this context— two stanzas were removed. It was posted on Maren Tirabassi Facebook page. It is, hence and by definition, public.
Pentecost Daily
“...the Advocate, the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, / whom Abba, God, will send in my name, / will teach you, instruct you in everything; / and She will remind you of all that I have said to you.” — John 14:26.
I need to start with an apology. I apologize because I know some of you will find my comments today totally and incredibly boring.
Why? I want to address church structure. (Now that I’ve named where I am going with this I think I can already hear the snoring commence.)
I’m going there in part because I stumbled across an article written by a Baptist, Jeffery Brumley, which led me to thinking about church structure. The article had a provocative title. Can Congregational Polity Weather Cultural Challenges? [1]
Why such a title? Well, said Brumley, we live in an era when we are fond of claiming we like democracy, an era when we all want to get our own say. But democracy has a trade off.
Yes, democracy is defined as one member, one vote. But in a democracy that one vote counts only insofar as the voter is also willing to participate in the work that vote supports. (And we won’t even go to what that means in civil life. But it means something.)
In a true democracy authority is not passed off to someone else or to a committee. Each person needs both to claim authority by voting and to exercise authority through action, involvement. That’s the way a true democracy works.
The article pointed out while we live in a era that claims to like democracy, the exercise of direct power, we also live in an era when a lot of people are fond of letting others execute decisions and thereby we avoid direct involvement.
That having been said— now here’s the really boring part— this is my explanation of the three basic patterns of church structure. There are three prime forms— Episcopal, Congregational and Presbyterian.
To be clear, the explanations of each one I am about to offer are the simple, short definitions. But they are adequate. Which is also to say I could do at least a half hour on each of these and then you would be really bored.
Episcopal church structure is any church with Bishops or with a well defined hierarchy. The hierarchy, the ruling group, is in charge in these churches. They make decisions and a decision can mean one size fits all.
Congregational structure, on the other hand and on paper at least, is a clear cut form of straightforward democracy. Further, there is no denominational hierarchy, no Bishops. No one can give an order to the local church in a Congregational structure about anything. And yes, we fall into that category.
Presbyterian structure is perhaps the most complex. Local churches elect representatives to a regional body. These, in turn, elect representatives to a larger region which, in turn, elects representatives to a national body.
In a Presbyterian structure, the national body rather than individuals such as Bishops can tell the local churches what to do. Therefore through this process, local autonomy is surrendered to the national committee structure.
I believe Congregational form, Congregational structure, is ideally suited to enable a congregation to be who we really are together, to be where we are, together. Hence, the Spirit can work so that each church is an expression of its own context and is flexible to minister in its own context. Perhaps more to the point, with Congregational structure each member can be empowered by the Spirit to be an expression of their own context and flexible to minister in their own context.
I am sure for some that description of Congregational government sounds like shear chaos, anarchy— everyone does their own thing. To me that sounds like shared authority and shared responsibility.
I also need to emphasize I believe the Spirit can and will work in all the structures I’ve just described. But, needless to say, I also believe the Spirit can be most effective in a Congregational structure. (Slight pause.)
We find these words in the work we know as the Gospel According to the School of John: “...the Advocate, the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, / whom Abba, God, will send in my name, / will teach you, instruct you in everything; / and She will remind you of all that I have said to you.” (Slight pause.)
All this brings us to an interesting place, an interesting question. What is the Spirit about? (Slight pause.)
Poet and pastor Maren Tirabassi has written a poem which illuminates what listening to the language of the Spirit might be like. I want to recite part of it. The title is Pneuma-lingual— the language of the Spirit. (Slight pause.)
“I used to teach ESL – / English as a Second Language. / So on Pentecost every year / I pray for SSL / for myself and for the church I love— / Spirit as a Second Language— SSL.”
“Pentecost – / Spirit for Speakers of Other Languages— / the day when everyone heard / the words they knew.”
“So Pentecost us now, O God, / let us learn / to conjugate the Spirit, / shed the comfortable accents / of churchy insider talk, / fit our mouths to something strange— mostly verbs, / present tense, active voice / not many possessive pronouns” — the words of Maren Tirabassi. [2] (Slight pause.)
Jesus says the Spirit will teach us, instruct us, remind us. So, what is the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, reminding us about lately? What is the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, reminding you about lately? (Slight pause.) Here’s what I can guarantee: whatever the Holy Spirit is saying to each of us and to all of us, it’s not about church structure.
At its best church structure is, pardon the expression, a necessary evil. Indeed, to the extent that the church— all church— is a human institution, structure is essential.
But structure is human language. We need to listen for and to hear the language of the Spirit. We need to listen for and to a spiritual language. I would, in fact, suggest listening to the Holy Spirit is like, as Tirabassi implies, learning a second language. (Slight pause.)
I’ve said this before. In part because we tend to look at Scripture as a narrative, we envision the stories presented as happening in the past rather than happening to us today. So, our proclivity is to see the Resurrection of Jesus and the Pentecost event, the Holy Spirit visiting the church, as happening in the past.
But, as Tirabassi also says, we need to be aware that the Spirit can indeed (quote:) “Pentecost us now!” We need to hear the Holy Spirit, the language of the Spirit today, now. We need to be aware that today, now, the Holy Spirit is alive and with us, present.
And today, now, Pentecost does happen daily, when we listen. We can have a daily Pentecost when we attune ourselves to the language of the Spirit.
And what does the Spirit say? I firmly believe the Spirit says seek the peace God wants, now. I firmly believe the says Spirit seek freedom and equality for all, now. I firmly believe the Spirit empowers each of us to be kind, thoughtful, caring, now.
All of which is to say we need to be attuned to the Word and the work of the Spirit among us today, now. How does that happen? Well, yes— occasionally— our frail, human church structure might help, despite its own self. But more to the point, we need to listen for the Word of the Spirit in one another— listen for the Word of the Spirit in one another— and to act upon that Word.
Indeed, what is really central to Congregational polity, Congregational structure is listening for the Word of God we hear from one another acting on the Word of God we hear from one another. And so we need to listen to one another and learn from one another. Why is that? Well let me be parochial. As Congregationalists our firm belief is the Spirit speaks to each of us and to all of us, daily, now. Our firm belief is the Spirit is active in each of us and all of us, daily, now.
And we also believe Spirit forms us to be a community, speaks to all of us as a community, now. After all, when Jesus said this (quote:) “...the Advocate, the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, / whom Abba, God, will send in my name, / will teach you, instruct you in everything; / and She will remind you of all that I have said to you.” When the Risen Christ was speaking to all the disciples and saying this, the truth is it was not and is not in past tense. The Risen Christ was saying is saying this to us to us even today, now. Amen.
05/01/2016
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: “A week ago Bonnie and I attended the Susquehanna Association Meeting— speaking of Congregational polity. Our former parishioner, who many of you know and who now lives in Homer, her childhood home and attends the Homer United Church of Christ— Lynn Olcott was there. She sent us an e-mail which says in part: ‘It was fun to see you and it got me thinking about when I was a kid in the U.U. church— that’s Unitarian Universalist— I got the impression of a huge, inclusive, present God but as an adult it seemed to me the U.U. message had changed to one of the high-minded absence of God. And that must be how I have found my way to the U.C.C. sanctuaries.’ I do need to add I think we here strive to see God as present, with us now. It’s a mark of this church.”
BENEDICTION: We can find the presence of God in unexpected places. God’s light leads us to places we thought not possible just moments ago. God’s love abounds and will live with us throughout eternity. The grace of God is deeper than our imagination. The strength of Christ is stronger than our needs. The communion of the Holy Spirit is richer than our togetherness. May the One Triune God sustain us today and throughout the infinity of what is commonly called tomorrow. Amen.
[1]
https://baptistnews.com/2016/04/14/baptist-leaders-wonder-can-congregational-polity-weather-cultural-challenges/
[2] This poem was slightly altered for this context— two stanzas were removed. It was posted on Maren Tirabassi Facebook page. It is, hence and by definition, public.
Sunday, April 24, 2016
SERMON ~ 04/24/2016 ~ “By Example”
04/24/2016 ~ Fifth Sunday of Easter ~ * Acts 11:1-18; Psalm 148; Revelation 21:1-6; John 13:31-35 ~ * During Eastertide a reading from Acts is often substituted for the lesson from the Hebrew Bible ~ Blessing of the Quilts.
By Example
“I give you a new commandment: Love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know you are my disciples, if you truly love one another.” — John 13:34-35.
Well, I have some bad news for us. We are being manipulated. The kind of manipulation I want to address is subtle, so subtle we do not even notice it. Let me give you an example of how we are, in that subtle way, manipulated.
Who here has ever gone to a supermarket just for a quart of milk? My bet is mostly everyone has done that. I, personally, have never been in a supermarket where the milk is in the front of the store. It’s always in the back of the store.
Indeed, in case you have not noticed, supermarkets are not only purposefully constructed to send you to the back for milk. They are constructed so the most inviting food, the fresh food, is located around the edge of the selling space.
Here’s what this means: you are forced to go past all this good stuff to get a quart of milk, itself good stuff, but also something most people buy with great regularity. And do you know what the result of making you walk through the whole store to buy milk is?
Well, who here has gone to the supermarket just for a quart of milk and left with other stuff? My bet is the answer to that question is: “most of us.”
All of which is to say, yes— we are all being manipulated— manipulated into buying more than we intended. And, in this case, it’s my bet we are manipulated in a way so subtle we do not even notice it.
The first time I came across this kind of manipulation was back when the dinosaurs roamed the earth in Nineteen sev [mumble, mumble]. I worked for Bloomingdale’s in New York City. The main New York City store takes up the square block between Lexington and Third Avenues and Fifty-ninth and Sixtieth Streets.
Well, back when I was working there a decision needed to be made about ‘should the store put in new elevators or new escalators on the Third Avenue End.’ That was not a small or a minor decision. Elevators would have cost about two million dollars. Escalators would have cost about six million, back then a hefty sum. Even today, a hefty sum.
They chose escalators— the expensive choice. Why? Whereas escalators cost about three times more than elevators, a study showed escalators would generate three times the business in real dollars per year than the cost of the elevators. In short, putting in escalators in that store instead of elevators would pay back their cost in just one year and add profit year after year after year.
Why do escalators make a difference in what people purchase? Just like a supermarket where people walk past merchandise to buy milk, escalators entice people to make a purchase by letting them see merchandise as they glide up and down those moving staircases.
The long and the short of this is, even though we rarely realize it, we are regularly manipulated but do not know it. We are blissfully unaware of it.
Now, the example I just used says we are manipulated by architecture. But we are also manipulated by social pressure. We are also manipulated by the culture which surrounds us. And we are, most of the time, still unaware of those factors also.
So, I think the challenge for us is straightforward: how do we become aware of the ways in which we are manipulated? And once we are aware that we are manipulated, how do we manage our lives in such a way as to overcome that. (Slight pause.)
We find these words in the Gospel According to the School of John: “I give you a new commandment: Love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know you are my disciples, if you truly love one another.” (Slight pause.)
When the reading from Luke/Acts was introduced it was said this is one of the most pivotal readings in all Scripture. That having been said, at Bible Study on Wednesday— by the way, everyone is invited to come to Bible Study, 6:00 p.m. on Wednesdays— except this Wednesday 'cause choir is taking vacation so we are going to take vacation one week from Bible study. At Bible Study I noted it was fascinating that those who compiled the Revised Common Lectionary, these assigned readings, placed these two readings on the same Sunday. Indeed, a reading from Acts is standard in Eastertide. But the reading from John, instead of continuing with post Resurrection stories as the lectionary has been doing, went to a scene from just before the crucifixion.
So, I would suggest the pairing of these readings is purposeful. Why? I think the Acts reading points directly at the reading from John and is a reflection about love.
You see, part of what Peter says is this (quote:) “At that very moment three couriers arrived at the house where we were. They had been sent to me from Caesarea.”
Let me unpack that for you. These people were from Caesarea. That is a city built on the Mediterranean coast by the Romans, for the Romans, inhabited by the Romans. In short, since they came from Caesarea they were Romans. Romans were gentiles. Jews did not mix with gentiles. Gentiles were unclean.
But Peter had this vision. And the vision told Peter clean and unclean in the way Peter had always looked at it, in the way that Peter’s culture looked at it and in the way Peter’s tradition looked at it, was completely and totally a cultural understanding of reality and had no basis in a real faith.
The revelation for Peter was simple. Peter suddenly realized the old way in which the disciple saw things was an example of manipulation.
The culture had manipulated how Peter saw the world, Peter’s ability to see reality. And what had been Peter’s cultural way of looking at the world was not the way God looked at the world. (Slight pause.)
At the start of my comments today I said I have some bad news. We are being manipulated.
But there is also good news. You see, we need to work at being aware of how God might see the world. And God sees past manipulation, even subtle manipulation. And my main concern is that we need to strive to overcome the culture of the world— the secular culture and the religious culture— and come to an understanding how these cultures manipulate us.
But how might that happen? How can we be empowered to see the world as God might see the world, not as our cultures might see the world?
That question brings me to what Jesus said in that quote from John. Let me say it one more time: “I give you a new commandment: Love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know you are my disciples, if you truly love one another.”
This is clear: Jesus was a doer. It was in doing that the love of Jesus is expressed.
So, that poses one more obvious question: ‘how can we learn to express love?’ You see, I believe most people learn not by hearing or by seeing or by reading. Most people learn by doing.
And when we do for each other is when we often come to a recognition that cultural barriers— all kinds of barriers— are things that manipulate us. And we learn that all kinds of barriers can get broken down simply by doing. (Slight pause.)
In a couple of moments we shall bless, dedicate, these wonderful quilts. [1] Therefore and needless to say, today we have a clear cut and tangible example of doing. And by doing, by making these quilts, those who made them are expressing not just their love.
Those who made these quilts are saying that no child should have a barrier placed in their path due simply to their station or situation. Those who made these quilts are saying we give these freely.
Those who made these quilts are saying there are no barriers because we of what we do. There are no barriers because we take action. And it’s action— it is action— that breaks down walls. It is action that breaks down barriers. (Slight pause.)
So, how is love, deep love, expressed? Love is expressed in the action that breaks down barriers. Love is expressed by example. Love is expressed by doing. Amen.
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, New York
04/24/2015
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’d like to leave you with a thought from one Theodor Geisel, better known as Dr. Seuss. (Quote:) “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It’s not.”
BENEDICTION: Hear now this blessing: God is with us, always. When we love one another, God is pleased. And may the steadfast love of God and the peace of Christ, which surpasses understanding, keep our minds and hearts in the companionship and will of the Holy Spirit, this day and forever more. Amen.
[1] There was, in fact, a Blessing— a Dedication of 34 quilts after the sermon. These quilts are destined for newborns at Chenango Memorial Hospital and for the Domestic Violence Program at Catholic Charities.
By Example
“I give you a new commandment: Love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know you are my disciples, if you truly love one another.” — John 13:34-35.
Well, I have some bad news for us. We are being manipulated. The kind of manipulation I want to address is subtle, so subtle we do not even notice it. Let me give you an example of how we are, in that subtle way, manipulated.
Who here has ever gone to a supermarket just for a quart of milk? My bet is mostly everyone has done that. I, personally, have never been in a supermarket where the milk is in the front of the store. It’s always in the back of the store.
Indeed, in case you have not noticed, supermarkets are not only purposefully constructed to send you to the back for milk. They are constructed so the most inviting food, the fresh food, is located around the edge of the selling space.
Here’s what this means: you are forced to go past all this good stuff to get a quart of milk, itself good stuff, but also something most people buy with great regularity. And do you know what the result of making you walk through the whole store to buy milk is?
Well, who here has gone to the supermarket just for a quart of milk and left with other stuff? My bet is the answer to that question is: “most of us.”
All of which is to say, yes— we are all being manipulated— manipulated into buying more than we intended. And, in this case, it’s my bet we are manipulated in a way so subtle we do not even notice it.
The first time I came across this kind of manipulation was back when the dinosaurs roamed the earth in Nineteen sev [mumble, mumble]. I worked for Bloomingdale’s in New York City. The main New York City store takes up the square block between Lexington and Third Avenues and Fifty-ninth and Sixtieth Streets.
Well, back when I was working there a decision needed to be made about ‘should the store put in new elevators or new escalators on the Third Avenue End.’ That was not a small or a minor decision. Elevators would have cost about two million dollars. Escalators would have cost about six million, back then a hefty sum. Even today, a hefty sum.
They chose escalators— the expensive choice. Why? Whereas escalators cost about three times more than elevators, a study showed escalators would generate three times the business in real dollars per year than the cost of the elevators. In short, putting in escalators in that store instead of elevators would pay back their cost in just one year and add profit year after year after year.
Why do escalators make a difference in what people purchase? Just like a supermarket where people walk past merchandise to buy milk, escalators entice people to make a purchase by letting them see merchandise as they glide up and down those moving staircases.
The long and the short of this is, even though we rarely realize it, we are regularly manipulated but do not know it. We are blissfully unaware of it.
Now, the example I just used says we are manipulated by architecture. But we are also manipulated by social pressure. We are also manipulated by the culture which surrounds us. And we are, most of the time, still unaware of those factors also.
So, I think the challenge for us is straightforward: how do we become aware of the ways in which we are manipulated? And once we are aware that we are manipulated, how do we manage our lives in such a way as to overcome that. (Slight pause.)
We find these words in the Gospel According to the School of John: “I give you a new commandment: Love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know you are my disciples, if you truly love one another.” (Slight pause.)
When the reading from Luke/Acts was introduced it was said this is one of the most pivotal readings in all Scripture. That having been said, at Bible Study on Wednesday— by the way, everyone is invited to come to Bible Study, 6:00 p.m. on Wednesdays— except this Wednesday 'cause choir is taking vacation so we are going to take vacation one week from Bible study. At Bible Study I noted it was fascinating that those who compiled the Revised Common Lectionary, these assigned readings, placed these two readings on the same Sunday. Indeed, a reading from Acts is standard in Eastertide. But the reading from John, instead of continuing with post Resurrection stories as the lectionary has been doing, went to a scene from just before the crucifixion.
So, I would suggest the pairing of these readings is purposeful. Why? I think the Acts reading points directly at the reading from John and is a reflection about love.
You see, part of what Peter says is this (quote:) “At that very moment three couriers arrived at the house where we were. They had been sent to me from Caesarea.”
Let me unpack that for you. These people were from Caesarea. That is a city built on the Mediterranean coast by the Romans, for the Romans, inhabited by the Romans. In short, since they came from Caesarea they were Romans. Romans were gentiles. Jews did not mix with gentiles. Gentiles were unclean.
But Peter had this vision. And the vision told Peter clean and unclean in the way Peter had always looked at it, in the way that Peter’s culture looked at it and in the way Peter’s tradition looked at it, was completely and totally a cultural understanding of reality and had no basis in a real faith.
The revelation for Peter was simple. Peter suddenly realized the old way in which the disciple saw things was an example of manipulation.
The culture had manipulated how Peter saw the world, Peter’s ability to see reality. And what had been Peter’s cultural way of looking at the world was not the way God looked at the world. (Slight pause.)
At the start of my comments today I said I have some bad news. We are being manipulated.
But there is also good news. You see, we need to work at being aware of how God might see the world. And God sees past manipulation, even subtle manipulation. And my main concern is that we need to strive to overcome the culture of the world— the secular culture and the religious culture— and come to an understanding how these cultures manipulate us.
But how might that happen? How can we be empowered to see the world as God might see the world, not as our cultures might see the world?
That question brings me to what Jesus said in that quote from John. Let me say it one more time: “I give you a new commandment: Love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know you are my disciples, if you truly love one another.”
This is clear: Jesus was a doer. It was in doing that the love of Jesus is expressed.
So, that poses one more obvious question: ‘how can we learn to express love?’ You see, I believe most people learn not by hearing or by seeing or by reading. Most people learn by doing.
And when we do for each other is when we often come to a recognition that cultural barriers— all kinds of barriers— are things that manipulate us. And we learn that all kinds of barriers can get broken down simply by doing. (Slight pause.)
In a couple of moments we shall bless, dedicate, these wonderful quilts. [1] Therefore and needless to say, today we have a clear cut and tangible example of doing. And by doing, by making these quilts, those who made them are expressing not just their love.
Those who made these quilts are saying that no child should have a barrier placed in their path due simply to their station or situation. Those who made these quilts are saying we give these freely.
Those who made these quilts are saying there are no barriers because we of what we do. There are no barriers because we take action. And it’s action— it is action— that breaks down walls. It is action that breaks down barriers. (Slight pause.)
So, how is love, deep love, expressed? Love is expressed in the action that breaks down barriers. Love is expressed by example. Love is expressed by doing. Amen.
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, New York
04/24/2015
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’d like to leave you with a thought from one Theodor Geisel, better known as Dr. Seuss. (Quote:) “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It’s not.”
BENEDICTION: Hear now this blessing: God is with us, always. When we love one another, God is pleased. And may the steadfast love of God and the peace of Christ, which surpasses understanding, keep our minds and hearts in the companionship and will of the Holy Spirit, this day and forever more. Amen.
[1] There was, in fact, a Blessing— a Dedication of 34 quilts after the sermon. These quilts are destined for newborns at Chenango Memorial Hospital and for the Domestic Violence Program at Catholic Charities.
Sunday, April 17, 2016
SERMON ~ 04/17/2016 ~ “The Message”
04/17/2016 ~ Fourth Sunday of Easter ~ *Acts 9:36-43; Psalm 23; Revelation 7:9-17; John 10:22-30 — * During Eastertide a reading from Acts is often substituted for the lesson from the Hebrew Bible.
The Message
“Jesus answered, ‘I have told you, I did tell you, but you do not believe.’” — John 10:25a.
It’s likely you have all heard of the so called “man in the moon.” And in fact if, on the evening of a full moon, you squint your eyes a bit and tilt your head slightly while staring at the moon you can somewhat make out an image that presents itself in a number of ways, one or several of which can be seen as a bit like a human face.
Indeed, there’s a common perception, largely both Northern and Western, of a face on the surface of the moon with eyes, a nose and an open mouth. This particular human face can be seen in the North but can also be seen in tropical regions on both sides of the equator. However, seeing a face in the moon becomes somewhat more problematic and is observed less frequently— eventually not at all— as one moves towards the South Pole.
Given that, have you ever heard about the “rabbit in the moon?” There is a tradition, more prevalent in the East and in the Southern hemisphere than in the West and North, that the image available to the human psyche is a rabbit.
The idea of a rabbit image exists in many cultures but is certainly more prevalent in East Asian folklore and, interestingly since particular place this is in the West, in Aztec mythology. The point of noting that this rabbit is seen in those locations is to insist this image is not exclusively Eastern or Southern, just as the so called “man in the moon” is not exclusively Northern or Western. Hence, there must be some cultural influence in play.
On top of that, there are still other cultures which identify a monkey or an otter or a jackal when they look toward the full moon but nothing else— no man, no rabbit. One obvious question arises from all of this: are we humans looking at the same thing in the sky? If we are looking at the same thing, why are we not seeing the same thing?
I do need to note the obvious. There are many studies which tell us our brain supplies a complete image where only a sketchy semblance of an outline exists.
So are these images simply our imagination at work? Or are there other factors? Certainly, from what I just indicated, the culture in which we live might be influential when it comes to what we see but many other things do seem to enter into the mix. (Slight pause.)
Let me move in a different direction for a moment with what I think of as an interesting question. What is a poem? Is it possible a poem is a strange thing which operates as nothing else in the world operates? After all, a poem is not like instructive writing, like directions on how to build a cabinet. Nor is a poem narrative writing. Only rarely does a poem tell a story in a linear way and when a poem does tell a story, it probably finds unique ways of transmitting it.
So, what is a poem and, additionally, what is the function of poetry? Is a poem “a painting in words?” Is a poem “a medium in which self-expression happens?” Is a poem “a song that sometimes rhymes and can illustrate beauty?”
Or is a poem all of these and, at the very same time, none of these? Are all these good descriptions of a poem and at one and the same time totally inadequate? ]1] (Slight pause.)
We find these words in the work known as the Gospel According to the School of John: “Jesus answered, ‘I have told you, I did tell you, but you do not believe.’” (Slight pause.)
In this passage Jesus is simply answering a question. And the reply offered by Jesus reminds us that an understanding of who this Rabbi is cannot be reduced to a matter of deciding whether Jesus measures up to some preconceived notion of either how a Messiah ought to act or even how a divine figure ought to act.
Jesus eludes prior categories and also totally redefines cherished titles drawn from Israel’s past. Those titles include, for example, Messiah, Chosen One, Anointed, Begotten of God. While being labeled with such titles, Jesus seems to transcend and thereby transform them all.
And yes, if you have not noticed, there is a problem with the very question being asked by the religious authorities. As a reminder, this is the question: “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are really the Messiah, tell us plainly.”
The question and because of that, those asking the question, seems to assume a decision about the Messiah is merely a matter of processing information. Hence, if Jesus will provide the data, they can arrive at a reasoned conclusion.
The response Jesus offers rejects that kind of logic. “My sheep hear my voice.”
Put differently and in, perhaps, more modern, vernacular terms this an interpretation of what Jesus is saying: “I have been speaking in the language poets use. So I have been speaking in the language consistent with the World of God, the Dominion of God. Have you not been listening?”
“I have been drawing an outline on the face of the moon and that outline reflects the face of God. Can you not see a full picture given the lines I have drawn?” (Slight pause.)
One of the big mistakes— the term I used in my meditations over the last two weeks was heresy but, as I said last week, heresy is probably too harsh a term— one of the big mistakes we make when we read Scripture is we take it to be— largely— narrative, story written in a logical, linear way. Scripture was not then and was never written in the moment, as soon as events happened, like a report in a newspaper. And Scripture was never intended as narrative.
Scripture looks back on what has happened and reflects on it. Scripture is, thereby, like any work of art, not a set of facts but a reflection. More precisely, Scripture is a theological reflection, a meditation about God. Being a reflection, being meditation, makes Scripture, by definition, a work of art.
That Scriptures is a meditation may come as a shock to many, since that image does not conform to our cultural perceptions concerning Scripture. Our cultural bias says Scripture is more a report of what happened than about theology, more a report of what happened than a theological refection.
But the long and the short of this is theological reflection and theology, itself, is never about narrative. Theology is not about explaining with precision. Theology is about the poetic.
And yes, the definition of theology is the science of the study of God, and that sounds both exact and exacting. But, just like poetry, Biblical theology paints pictures in words. Just like poetry, what Biblical theology offers is self-expression. Just like poetry, Biblical theology strives to display beauty.
Theology is all of these and, at the very same time, none of these. These are all good descriptions of theology and, at the very same time, totally inadequate. Indeed, what do you see on the face of the moon? And are the possibilities of what you can see, your vision, overwhelmed by the culture in which you live? (Slight pause.)
All of that leaves us with a question, perhaps a challenging one. What is our own perception of Jesus? How do we, each of us, see Jesus? What is the message of Jesus?
The challenge presented in that is each one of us has to decide how we see Jesus. Each one of us has to decide how each of us sees the Dominion of God. Each one of us has to decide what the message of Jesus is. And each one of us has to decide how that plays out in our life.
But there is an added challenge. There is what each one of us, sees as individuals. But then the next question to be asked: ‘what does the community of faith, as a whole, see?’
Then there is, perhaps, an even larger issue. Is our individual vision of Jesus and our communal vision of Jesus, our individual understanding of the Dominion of God and our communal vision of God overwhelmed by the culture in which we live? Does the culture blur our vision, blur our understanding of Jesus, blur our understanding of God? (Slight pause.)
Let me end by reciting the thought for meditation in the bulletin today. It’s an aphorism from Kallistos Ware, a bishop with the Eastern Orthodox Church. (Quote:) “It is not the task of Christianity to provide easy answers for every question. It is the task of Christianity to make us progressively aware of a mystery. God is not so much the object of our knowledge as the cause of our wonder.” Amen.
04/17/2016
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: “Two things I want to say— I said the Bible is about theology but to be more narrow, the Bible is about the theology of love. Second, when I entered Bangor Seminary Malcom Warford was the President there. This is what he said in a published article: ‘When you don’t believe in God, you believe in every god that comes along, a tame domesticated one with a small ‘g.’ When you trade mystery for security you end up with trivialization.’”
BENEDICTION: Let us go out from this place in the sure knowledge that God is at the center of our lives. Let us go out from this place in the sure knowledge that God’s love abounds. Let us go out from this place and strive to have our deeds bear witness to God’s love. And may the steadfast love of God and the peace of Christ, which surpasses understanding, keep our minds and hearts in the companionship and will of the Holy Spirit, this day and forever more. Amen.
[1]
These ideas are found in this article:
http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2013/11/what-is-a-poem/281835/?utm_source=SFFB
The Message
“Jesus answered, ‘I have told you, I did tell you, but you do not believe.’” — John 10:25a.
It’s likely you have all heard of the so called “man in the moon.” And in fact if, on the evening of a full moon, you squint your eyes a bit and tilt your head slightly while staring at the moon you can somewhat make out an image that presents itself in a number of ways, one or several of which can be seen as a bit like a human face.
Indeed, there’s a common perception, largely both Northern and Western, of a face on the surface of the moon with eyes, a nose and an open mouth. This particular human face can be seen in the North but can also be seen in tropical regions on both sides of the equator. However, seeing a face in the moon becomes somewhat more problematic and is observed less frequently— eventually not at all— as one moves towards the South Pole.
Given that, have you ever heard about the “rabbit in the moon?” There is a tradition, more prevalent in the East and in the Southern hemisphere than in the West and North, that the image available to the human psyche is a rabbit.
The idea of a rabbit image exists in many cultures but is certainly more prevalent in East Asian folklore and, interestingly since particular place this is in the West, in Aztec mythology. The point of noting that this rabbit is seen in those locations is to insist this image is not exclusively Eastern or Southern, just as the so called “man in the moon” is not exclusively Northern or Western. Hence, there must be some cultural influence in play.
On top of that, there are still other cultures which identify a monkey or an otter or a jackal when they look toward the full moon but nothing else— no man, no rabbit. One obvious question arises from all of this: are we humans looking at the same thing in the sky? If we are looking at the same thing, why are we not seeing the same thing?
I do need to note the obvious. There are many studies which tell us our brain supplies a complete image where only a sketchy semblance of an outline exists.
So are these images simply our imagination at work? Or are there other factors? Certainly, from what I just indicated, the culture in which we live might be influential when it comes to what we see but many other things do seem to enter into the mix. (Slight pause.)
Let me move in a different direction for a moment with what I think of as an interesting question. What is a poem? Is it possible a poem is a strange thing which operates as nothing else in the world operates? After all, a poem is not like instructive writing, like directions on how to build a cabinet. Nor is a poem narrative writing. Only rarely does a poem tell a story in a linear way and when a poem does tell a story, it probably finds unique ways of transmitting it.
So, what is a poem and, additionally, what is the function of poetry? Is a poem “a painting in words?” Is a poem “a medium in which self-expression happens?” Is a poem “a song that sometimes rhymes and can illustrate beauty?”
Or is a poem all of these and, at the very same time, none of these? Are all these good descriptions of a poem and at one and the same time totally inadequate? ]1] (Slight pause.)
We find these words in the work known as the Gospel According to the School of John: “Jesus answered, ‘I have told you, I did tell you, but you do not believe.’” (Slight pause.)
In this passage Jesus is simply answering a question. And the reply offered by Jesus reminds us that an understanding of who this Rabbi is cannot be reduced to a matter of deciding whether Jesus measures up to some preconceived notion of either how a Messiah ought to act or even how a divine figure ought to act.
Jesus eludes prior categories and also totally redefines cherished titles drawn from Israel’s past. Those titles include, for example, Messiah, Chosen One, Anointed, Begotten of God. While being labeled with such titles, Jesus seems to transcend and thereby transform them all.
And yes, if you have not noticed, there is a problem with the very question being asked by the religious authorities. As a reminder, this is the question: “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are really the Messiah, tell us plainly.”
The question and because of that, those asking the question, seems to assume a decision about the Messiah is merely a matter of processing information. Hence, if Jesus will provide the data, they can arrive at a reasoned conclusion.
The response Jesus offers rejects that kind of logic. “My sheep hear my voice.”
Put differently and in, perhaps, more modern, vernacular terms this an interpretation of what Jesus is saying: “I have been speaking in the language poets use. So I have been speaking in the language consistent with the World of God, the Dominion of God. Have you not been listening?”
“I have been drawing an outline on the face of the moon and that outline reflects the face of God. Can you not see a full picture given the lines I have drawn?” (Slight pause.)
One of the big mistakes— the term I used in my meditations over the last two weeks was heresy but, as I said last week, heresy is probably too harsh a term— one of the big mistakes we make when we read Scripture is we take it to be— largely— narrative, story written in a logical, linear way. Scripture was not then and was never written in the moment, as soon as events happened, like a report in a newspaper. And Scripture was never intended as narrative.
Scripture looks back on what has happened and reflects on it. Scripture is, thereby, like any work of art, not a set of facts but a reflection. More precisely, Scripture is a theological reflection, a meditation about God. Being a reflection, being meditation, makes Scripture, by definition, a work of art.
That Scriptures is a meditation may come as a shock to many, since that image does not conform to our cultural perceptions concerning Scripture. Our cultural bias says Scripture is more a report of what happened than about theology, more a report of what happened than a theological refection.
But the long and the short of this is theological reflection and theology, itself, is never about narrative. Theology is not about explaining with precision. Theology is about the poetic.
And yes, the definition of theology is the science of the study of God, and that sounds both exact and exacting. But, just like poetry, Biblical theology paints pictures in words. Just like poetry, what Biblical theology offers is self-expression. Just like poetry, Biblical theology strives to display beauty.
Theology is all of these and, at the very same time, none of these. These are all good descriptions of theology and, at the very same time, totally inadequate. Indeed, what do you see on the face of the moon? And are the possibilities of what you can see, your vision, overwhelmed by the culture in which you live? (Slight pause.)
All of that leaves us with a question, perhaps a challenging one. What is our own perception of Jesus? How do we, each of us, see Jesus? What is the message of Jesus?
The challenge presented in that is each one of us has to decide how we see Jesus. Each one of us has to decide how each of us sees the Dominion of God. Each one of us has to decide what the message of Jesus is. And each one of us has to decide how that plays out in our life.
But there is an added challenge. There is what each one of us, sees as individuals. But then the next question to be asked: ‘what does the community of faith, as a whole, see?’
Then there is, perhaps, an even larger issue. Is our individual vision of Jesus and our communal vision of Jesus, our individual understanding of the Dominion of God and our communal vision of God overwhelmed by the culture in which we live? Does the culture blur our vision, blur our understanding of Jesus, blur our understanding of God? (Slight pause.)
Let me end by reciting the thought for meditation in the bulletin today. It’s an aphorism from Kallistos Ware, a bishop with the Eastern Orthodox Church. (Quote:) “It is not the task of Christianity to provide easy answers for every question. It is the task of Christianity to make us progressively aware of a mystery. God is not so much the object of our knowledge as the cause of our wonder.” Amen.
04/17/2016
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: “Two things I want to say— I said the Bible is about theology but to be more narrow, the Bible is about the theology of love. Second, when I entered Bangor Seminary Malcom Warford was the President there. This is what he said in a published article: ‘When you don’t believe in God, you believe in every god that comes along, a tame domesticated one with a small ‘g.’ When you trade mystery for security you end up with trivialization.’”
BENEDICTION: Let us go out from this place in the sure knowledge that God is at the center of our lives. Let us go out from this place in the sure knowledge that God’s love abounds. Let us go out from this place and strive to have our deeds bear witness to God’s love. And may the steadfast love of God and the peace of Christ, which surpasses understanding, keep our minds and hearts in the companionship and will of the Holy Spirit, this day and forever more. Amen.
[1]
These ideas are found in this article:
http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2013/11/what-is-a-poem/281835/?utm_source=SFFB
Sunday, April 10, 2016
SERMON ~ 04/10/2016 ~ “The Gentiles”
04/10/2016 ~ Third Sunday of Easter ~ *Acts 9:1-6, (7-20); Psalm 30; Revelation 5:11-14; John 21:1-19 ~ * During Eastertide a reading from Acts is often substituted for the lesson from the Hebrew Bible.
The Gentiles
“...Christ said to Ananias, ‘Go anyway. Saul is the instrument I have chosen to bring my Name to the Gentiles, to rulers and before the people of Israel.’” — Acts 9:15.
You have heard me say time and time again I grew up in New York City. What many people do not realize or understand about New York is it’s not just one big city. It is, in fact, a series of tiny towns, small villages, each with its own distinct atmosphere.
Why would I say that? How does that play out, perhaps is a more important question? There are people who, for instance, live in Queens but have never been outside of Queens, never even been outside of their own small neighborhood, never taken the short trip to Manhattan.
Why have they not gone the couple of miles into Manhattan, which would bring them into the center of what many claim to be the greatest city in the country and perhaps the world? To be blunt, the big city frightens them. So they refuse to go.
I was reminded that New York is a series of tiny towns and villages because of an article in the New York Times this week. The story was about the neighborhood known as Bay Ridge, in Brooklyn.
This is a quote from the article. “Barbara Noone, who was born in Bay Ridge 75 years ago and has lived there for all but her grammar school days, said the three-square-mile community overlooking New York Harbor provides both the convenience of the city and the feel of a village.” (Slight pause.)
Later in the writing another resident, Andrew Gounardes, likened Bay Ridge to a modern-day Mayberry— Mayberry inside of New York City? It’s a place, said Gounardes, which has old-school charm even while it continues to reinvent itself. [1]
Please don’t mis-understand. Bay Ridge clearly is in the middle of a very large city. The argument being made is it can feel intimate.
This brings me back to the idea the article stated— New York— a series of tiny towns, small villages. Hence, when one is ensconced in a neighborhood, it becomes easy to forget the larger aspects of city life which are quite expansive, cosmopolitan, broad.
And yet, being too aware of the enormity of the city can make it way too easy to forget about these little areas where you are in a tiny town, a small village. In short, these two— the city and the towns inside the city— need to be held in tension.
I would, therefore, maintain these two aspects, the large and the small, need to be seen as a whole in order to paint a picture of the reality of city life. You may try to forget one of these aspects but the other will still, hauntingly, be there. (Slight pause.)
To place a slightly different perspective on this, here’s something the late playwright and librettist Peter Stone once said. (Quote:) “The writing of Broadway shows is a cottage industry. The cottages happen to be on the Upper West Side of Manhattan and on the West End in London. But Broadway is still a cottage industry, no mater where the cottages are located.”
My point is simple: we may want to ignore some of where we come from. But the entirely of one’s background matters. So for me, personally, to say where I grew up— New York City— gave me an opportunity to be immersed in the arts and theater and that has had an enormous influence on my life— that statement is totally accurate.
But for me to deny that I grew up in a New York City neighborhood known as Bushwick— a neighborhood which when I was young housed a relatively impoverished population, a neighborhood with a significant amount of crime, a neighborhood where a reasonable goal was to escape— for me to deny that section of truth— is for me to cleanse a particular element of my heritage to a place beyond recognition. Indeed, if I do not recognize these two pieces, recognize the reality of both, recognize there is both a tension and a unity there, is for me to deny a truth of my heritage. (Slight pause.)
We find these words in Luke/Acts: “...Christ said to Ananias, ‘Go anyway. Saul is the instrument I have chosen to bring my Name to the Gentiles, to rulers and before the people of Israel.’” (Slight pause.)
In the meditation I offered last week I said this (quote:) “There is a great American heresy.” Then I said there are probably a number of great American heresies and that I wanted to point out just one.
So, I’d like to offer yet another great American heresy today. Here we go. (Slight pause.) Only the so called New Testament counts. The Hebrew Scriptures do not matter. The God of the so called Old Testament was an angry God, a God of violence. The God of the Christian Scriptures, the God of the New Testament, is a God of love, a non-violent God. Therefore, only Jesus counts. Only Jesus matters. (Slight pause.)
If everyone here has not heard this or similar rhetoric, I would be very, very surprised. What makes these sentiments heretical is they are simply untrue. Further, they are untrue in a number of ways.
For starters, in case you haven’t heard this— Jesus was a Jew. All the disciples were Jews. Paul was a Jew. For them there was only one set of Scriptures. That is what we today call the Old Testament.
What we today call the New Testament did not even exist. And those who wrote what became the New Testament did not know and did not even think they were writing Scripture when they recorded it.
On top of that, for these Jews there was only the God of the Hebrew Scriptures. And the God they found in the Hebrew Scriptures was not an angry God, not a God of violence. The God they found in the Hebrew Scriptures was a God of love.
So, what we are really privy to in this passage and in the New Testament is the Jewish people coming to grips with a new understanding of what God is doing. And central to that new understanding of what God is doing is they recognize God has raised Jesus.
In this passage Ananias is told that Paul will bring the message of Christ, who has been raised, to a new group of people on behalf of the Jews. And that new group of people are the gentiles. Gentiles— people who are not Jews— gentiles— that would be, mostly, us.
And the fact that the Word will be brought to gentiles is a part of this new understanding of what God is doing. That gentiles might hear about this Jewish God or might care about how this Jewish God interacts with humanity is a new understanding for Jewish people.
So, I think what many of us miss here is the continuity of all of this. The mission given to Paul is to spread the Word about Jesus who has been raised by the God of the Jewish Scriptures, the Hebrew Scriptures. And what the followers of Jesus understand is that the God of love found in the Hebrew Scriptures has been and is working through Jesus. (Slight pause.)
This brings me back to the idea that there is a unity and a tension to be found in many aspects of life. And unless we see and understand the unity and the tension between the Hebrew Scriptures and the Christian Scriptures, unless we embrace both the Hebrew Scriptures and the Christian Scriptures, we deny a truth about our own heritage. (Slight pause.)
Having referred to heresies, I need to say the very existence of heresy of not this holding onto both sections in the Bible and seeing and understanding the unity and the tension therein. This particular heresy has many explanations. But let me point to one explanation.
We humans like simple, easy answers. Let me tell you, if you want simple, easy answers you will not find those in Scripture. Don’t go there looking for simple and easy answers.
What you do find in Scripture is something about the character of God. What you do find in Scripture is something about the living God. And the living God knows something about the real world, something about life. And, the last time I looked, the real world is a messy place. Life is not neat.
Paradoxically, the living God, who knows the real world, who knows life, does have a relatively simply message to offer. It’s the message called love— loving the real world.
The last time I looked there is nothing about loving in the real world which is simple or easy. But if I understand what Scripture says, our calling as Christians is that we need to love the real world, the real world in all its tensions and with all its flaws and with all its messy-ness. A calling— love the real world. Amen.
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, New York
04/10/2016
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’ve used, as I noted, the word ‘heresy’ these last two weeks, but perhaps that’s too harsh a word. Looked at in another way these are not heresies. They are merely cultural fantasies— fictions like George Washington cutting down the cheery tree— cute but not true when looked at it in a serious way. So it is with cultural fantasies about Scripture— they may be cute but not true when looked at in a serious way. And when we do so, when we look at Scripture in a serious way, at least we have a chance of having the scales of those cultural fantasies removed from our eyes. Or as I sometimes say, I don’t take Scripture literally. I take Scripture seriously.”
BENEDICTION: Let us go where God leads us, for surely God leads us to embrace our neighbor with love. Let us follow where Christ has gone, and see the great commandment of loving God and loving neighbor as a watchword. And may the steadfast love of God and the peace of Christ, which surpasses understanding, keep our minds and hearts in the knowledge, companionship and will of the Holy Spirit, this day and forever more. Amen.
[1] The NY Times article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/10/realestate/living-in-bay-ridge-brooklyn.html?emc=edit_tnt_20160406&nlid=11820119&tntemail0=y&_r=0
The Gentiles
“...Christ said to Ananias, ‘Go anyway. Saul is the instrument I have chosen to bring my Name to the Gentiles, to rulers and before the people of Israel.’” — Acts 9:15.
You have heard me say time and time again I grew up in New York City. What many people do not realize or understand about New York is it’s not just one big city. It is, in fact, a series of tiny towns, small villages, each with its own distinct atmosphere.
Why would I say that? How does that play out, perhaps is a more important question? There are people who, for instance, live in Queens but have never been outside of Queens, never even been outside of their own small neighborhood, never taken the short trip to Manhattan.
Why have they not gone the couple of miles into Manhattan, which would bring them into the center of what many claim to be the greatest city in the country and perhaps the world? To be blunt, the big city frightens them. So they refuse to go.
I was reminded that New York is a series of tiny towns and villages because of an article in the New York Times this week. The story was about the neighborhood known as Bay Ridge, in Brooklyn.
This is a quote from the article. “Barbara Noone, who was born in Bay Ridge 75 years ago and has lived there for all but her grammar school days, said the three-square-mile community overlooking New York Harbor provides both the convenience of the city and the feel of a village.” (Slight pause.)
Later in the writing another resident, Andrew Gounardes, likened Bay Ridge to a modern-day Mayberry— Mayberry inside of New York City? It’s a place, said Gounardes, which has old-school charm even while it continues to reinvent itself. [1]
Please don’t mis-understand. Bay Ridge clearly is in the middle of a very large city. The argument being made is it can feel intimate.
This brings me back to the idea the article stated— New York— a series of tiny towns, small villages. Hence, when one is ensconced in a neighborhood, it becomes easy to forget the larger aspects of city life which are quite expansive, cosmopolitan, broad.
And yet, being too aware of the enormity of the city can make it way too easy to forget about these little areas where you are in a tiny town, a small village. In short, these two— the city and the towns inside the city— need to be held in tension.
I would, therefore, maintain these two aspects, the large and the small, need to be seen as a whole in order to paint a picture of the reality of city life. You may try to forget one of these aspects but the other will still, hauntingly, be there. (Slight pause.)
To place a slightly different perspective on this, here’s something the late playwright and librettist Peter Stone once said. (Quote:) “The writing of Broadway shows is a cottage industry. The cottages happen to be on the Upper West Side of Manhattan and on the West End in London. But Broadway is still a cottage industry, no mater where the cottages are located.”
My point is simple: we may want to ignore some of where we come from. But the entirely of one’s background matters. So for me, personally, to say where I grew up— New York City— gave me an opportunity to be immersed in the arts and theater and that has had an enormous influence on my life— that statement is totally accurate.
But for me to deny that I grew up in a New York City neighborhood known as Bushwick— a neighborhood which when I was young housed a relatively impoverished population, a neighborhood with a significant amount of crime, a neighborhood where a reasonable goal was to escape— for me to deny that section of truth— is for me to cleanse a particular element of my heritage to a place beyond recognition. Indeed, if I do not recognize these two pieces, recognize the reality of both, recognize there is both a tension and a unity there, is for me to deny a truth of my heritage. (Slight pause.)
We find these words in Luke/Acts: “...Christ said to Ananias, ‘Go anyway. Saul is the instrument I have chosen to bring my Name to the Gentiles, to rulers and before the people of Israel.’” (Slight pause.)
In the meditation I offered last week I said this (quote:) “There is a great American heresy.” Then I said there are probably a number of great American heresies and that I wanted to point out just one.
So, I’d like to offer yet another great American heresy today. Here we go. (Slight pause.) Only the so called New Testament counts. The Hebrew Scriptures do not matter. The God of the so called Old Testament was an angry God, a God of violence. The God of the Christian Scriptures, the God of the New Testament, is a God of love, a non-violent God. Therefore, only Jesus counts. Only Jesus matters. (Slight pause.)
If everyone here has not heard this or similar rhetoric, I would be very, very surprised. What makes these sentiments heretical is they are simply untrue. Further, they are untrue in a number of ways.
For starters, in case you haven’t heard this— Jesus was a Jew. All the disciples were Jews. Paul was a Jew. For them there was only one set of Scriptures. That is what we today call the Old Testament.
What we today call the New Testament did not even exist. And those who wrote what became the New Testament did not know and did not even think they were writing Scripture when they recorded it.
On top of that, for these Jews there was only the God of the Hebrew Scriptures. And the God they found in the Hebrew Scriptures was not an angry God, not a God of violence. The God they found in the Hebrew Scriptures was a God of love.
So, what we are really privy to in this passage and in the New Testament is the Jewish people coming to grips with a new understanding of what God is doing. And central to that new understanding of what God is doing is they recognize God has raised Jesus.
In this passage Ananias is told that Paul will bring the message of Christ, who has been raised, to a new group of people on behalf of the Jews. And that new group of people are the gentiles. Gentiles— people who are not Jews— gentiles— that would be, mostly, us.
And the fact that the Word will be brought to gentiles is a part of this new understanding of what God is doing. That gentiles might hear about this Jewish God or might care about how this Jewish God interacts with humanity is a new understanding for Jewish people.
So, I think what many of us miss here is the continuity of all of this. The mission given to Paul is to spread the Word about Jesus who has been raised by the God of the Jewish Scriptures, the Hebrew Scriptures. And what the followers of Jesus understand is that the God of love found in the Hebrew Scriptures has been and is working through Jesus. (Slight pause.)
This brings me back to the idea that there is a unity and a tension to be found in many aspects of life. And unless we see and understand the unity and the tension between the Hebrew Scriptures and the Christian Scriptures, unless we embrace both the Hebrew Scriptures and the Christian Scriptures, we deny a truth about our own heritage. (Slight pause.)
Having referred to heresies, I need to say the very existence of heresy of not this holding onto both sections in the Bible and seeing and understanding the unity and the tension therein. This particular heresy has many explanations. But let me point to one explanation.
We humans like simple, easy answers. Let me tell you, if you want simple, easy answers you will not find those in Scripture. Don’t go there looking for simple and easy answers.
What you do find in Scripture is something about the character of God. What you do find in Scripture is something about the living God. And the living God knows something about the real world, something about life. And, the last time I looked, the real world is a messy place. Life is not neat.
Paradoxically, the living God, who knows the real world, who knows life, does have a relatively simply message to offer. It’s the message called love— loving the real world.
The last time I looked there is nothing about loving in the real world which is simple or easy. But if I understand what Scripture says, our calling as Christians is that we need to love the real world, the real world in all its tensions and with all its flaws and with all its messy-ness. A calling— love the real world. Amen.
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, New York
04/10/2016
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’ve used, as I noted, the word ‘heresy’ these last two weeks, but perhaps that’s too harsh a word. Looked at in another way these are not heresies. They are merely cultural fantasies— fictions like George Washington cutting down the cheery tree— cute but not true when looked at it in a serious way. So it is with cultural fantasies about Scripture— they may be cute but not true when looked at in a serious way. And when we do so, when we look at Scripture in a serious way, at least we have a chance of having the scales of those cultural fantasies removed from our eyes. Or as I sometimes say, I don’t take Scripture literally. I take Scripture seriously.”
BENEDICTION: Let us go where God leads us, for surely God leads us to embrace our neighbor with love. Let us follow where Christ has gone, and see the great commandment of loving God and loving neighbor as a watchword. And may the steadfast love of God and the peace of Christ, which surpasses understanding, keep our minds and hearts in the knowledge, companionship and will of the Holy Spirit, this day and forever more. Amen.
[1] The NY Times article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/10/realestate/living-in-bay-ridge-brooklyn.html?emc=edit_tnt_20160406&nlid=11820119&tntemail0=y&_r=0
Sunday, April 3, 2016
SERMON ~ 04/03/2016 ~ “Receiving the Spirit”
04/03/2016 ~ Second Sunday of Easter ~ *Acts 5:27-32; Psalm 118:14-29 or Psalm 150; Revelation 1:4-8; John 20:19-31 ~ Communion Sunday — *During Eastertide a reading from Acts is often substituted for the lesson from the Hebrew Bible.
Receiving the Spirit
“The disciples were filled with joy when they saw Jesus, who said to them again, ‘Peace be with you. As Abba, God, has sent me, so I am sending you.’ After saying this, Jesus breathed on them and said, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit.’” — John 20:20b-22.
Some of you have heard me mention that in 1986, thirty years ago— a year before I met Bonnie— I did a three day battery of psychological and skills testing. Or as I like to call it, “Three days of ‘Tell me, what does this ink blot mean?’” In all seriousness, the point of these tests, this kind of testing, is to assess the skill set of an individual to see if those skills are being effectively used.
To say the least, it was an intensive, multifaceted process. And, certainly, the reason anyone does this type of skills testing is to help that individual better understand and cope with and interact with the world.
Now, one of the cautions offered to me about both the results which were presented and the very process itself, was do not— under any circumstances— think in terms of this three day experience as being finished. It is not.
I was told that I would still be thinking about what was presented to me and the challenges ahead of me and the work ahead of me for many, many, many years. They said you will be processing what you did and what you heard about yourself and what you learned about yourself, indeed, for many, many, many years.
That sentiment is still true these thirty years later. I still, occasionally, reflect on the insights I gained from that experience. And because I still think about what happened, because I reflect on that experience, I still, occasionally, make new discoveries about how I interact with the world. In short, the experience equipped me with tools for life, helped me move forward, be renewed constantly if I chose to use the tools. (Slight pause.)
You have probably heard me say this before also. Three years before I entered into that process of skills testing, in 1983, my mother died. It would be foolish of me or anyone else to say the experience of the death of a parent or any loved one does not linger with us for many, many, many years.
Despite the fact that this was thirty-three years ago I still think about it— still, occasionally, reflect on it. Sometimes I think about something in my family history and realize I don’t know about it in detail that history.
And so, I am given to wonder if either my late mother or my late father, who died in 1998, or my grandparents whom I knew might know, might be able to tell me about some information concerning my family history. But the finality offered in an answer they might have is just not available.
Hence, all I have is a reflection about something I will probably never know with certainty. And perhaps the finality I seek— some form of definitive answer— is in truth artificial, an illusion.
I suppose that says we all like closure. We all like finality. But is that simply what we like, as opposed to what we need?
Is it possible that the idea of process— living through some time, through space, through experience— is it possible that process is the only thing that is real, the only thing of which we can be certain. Perhaps process is not just a different way of looking at and assessing life. Perhaps it is the prime way of looking at and assessing life. (Slight pause.)
We find these words in the Gospel According to the School of John: “The disciples were filled with joy when they saw Jesus, who said to them again, ‘Peace be with you. As Abba, God, has sent me, so I am sending you.’ After saying this, Jesus breathed on them and said, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit.’” (Slight pause.)
There are three distinct sections in this reading. The first two, the encounter of the disciples with Jesus but without Thomas and the later encounter with Thomas, are clearly tied together and part of the same story.
I maintain the third section, that part that says (quote:) “Jesus did many other signs— signs which are not recorded in this book” can be seen as a lynchpin for the story of Thomas. It offers instruction on why and how the story about Thomas and the disciples are of import. Why? How? The Spirit, you see, kept moving.
There is a great American heresy. (There are probably a number of great American heresies, but let me point out just one.)
This particular great American heresy says once an incident has passed it is complete, final. There are no more effects. As that relates to faith, many American Christians might express that heresy using words like this: “I was born again on April the 3rd, 1997 at three o’clock in the afternoon.”
The implication of that sentiment is straightforward. Everything is now complete, done, finished. The possibility that the Spirit of God might be still active and working and moving feels negated because this event is named and resides at a specific time in the past
And that time is now over. And I think we hear those kinds of statements because many of us see the Gospel stories being as located in the past.
But the words we heard from the Gospel today are not meant to illustrate an event in history. To take a narrative approach to the resurrection, to say it happened once, long ago, is simply an inaccurate way to look at what we Christians claim about Jesus.
The resurrection is not just an event that happened. It is an event that changes everything for all people for all time. The point of the resurrection is that Jesus lives and that Jesus lives, now. The point of the resurrection is that the Spirit is alive and dwells among us, now.
What is, perhaps, even more important is this: because of the resurrection, because the Spirit dwells among us, we are invited by God to learn from our experience of God. Because of the resurrection, because the Spirit dwells among us, we are invited by God to change.
Because of the resurrection, because the Spirit dwells among us, we are invited by God to process. Because of the resurrection, because the Spirit dwells among us, we are invited by God to grow. (Slight pause.)
Today, as we do monthly, we celebrated the Sacrament of Communion. Sometimes the Sacrament is referred to as a re-enactment or a commemoration of the Last Supper.
But what if each time we celebrate the sacrament we are invited to learn something new for today by our participation? What if we learn something new for today about our bonds with one another?
I believe the Spirit invites us to learn something new for today each and every day. I think the Spirit constantly invites us to live in the Spirit and into the Spirit. (Slight pause.)
So, what does it mean to live in the Spirit? What does it mean to live into the Spirit?
It means we are invited to be renewed. It means we are invited to develop and to hone who we can be, who we are willing to be, to fully be the one who God invites us to be. And this means, I think, we are invited to change. This means, I think, we are invited to grow.
Things are not static, ever. And living in and into the Spirit also means we are invited to see the world as God sees it. This is a world in which peace is possible.
This is a world where freedom can be a reality. This is a world in which equity is not a dream. This is a world in which the love God offers reigns.
This is a world whose boundaries are limited only by our willingness or lack thereof to participate in the Dominion of God. The Dominion of God— what is the Dominion of God? The Dominion of God is the world not as we see it. The Dominion of God is the world as God sees it— active, changing, alive, growing— a world of hope, a world of peace, world of joy, a world of love. Amen.
04/03/2016
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: “Speaking of American heresies, as I was earlier, let me offer another one. It is often said God is the answer. Think about this: what if God is not an answer but God is a question, perhaps even an open ended question? Or if the Spirit of God lives, rather than God being a question or an answer do we simply need to be in dialogue with God? Does that dialogue invite us to grow in the Spirit? Or is thinking about being in dialogue with God too uncomfortable, too challenging?”
BENEDICTION: Go out in the compassion and love God provides. Praise the deeds of God by the way you live. And may the steadfast love of God and the peace of Christ, which surpasses understanding, keep our minds and hearts in the companionship and will of the Holy Spirit, this day and forever more. Amen.
Receiving the Spirit
“The disciples were filled with joy when they saw Jesus, who said to them again, ‘Peace be with you. As Abba, God, has sent me, so I am sending you.’ After saying this, Jesus breathed on them and said, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit.’” — John 20:20b-22.
Some of you have heard me mention that in 1986, thirty years ago— a year before I met Bonnie— I did a three day battery of psychological and skills testing. Or as I like to call it, “Three days of ‘Tell me, what does this ink blot mean?’” In all seriousness, the point of these tests, this kind of testing, is to assess the skill set of an individual to see if those skills are being effectively used.
To say the least, it was an intensive, multifaceted process. And, certainly, the reason anyone does this type of skills testing is to help that individual better understand and cope with and interact with the world.
Now, one of the cautions offered to me about both the results which were presented and the very process itself, was do not— under any circumstances— think in terms of this three day experience as being finished. It is not.
I was told that I would still be thinking about what was presented to me and the challenges ahead of me and the work ahead of me for many, many, many years. They said you will be processing what you did and what you heard about yourself and what you learned about yourself, indeed, for many, many, many years.
That sentiment is still true these thirty years later. I still, occasionally, reflect on the insights I gained from that experience. And because I still think about what happened, because I reflect on that experience, I still, occasionally, make new discoveries about how I interact with the world. In short, the experience equipped me with tools for life, helped me move forward, be renewed constantly if I chose to use the tools. (Slight pause.)
You have probably heard me say this before also. Three years before I entered into that process of skills testing, in 1983, my mother died. It would be foolish of me or anyone else to say the experience of the death of a parent or any loved one does not linger with us for many, many, many years.
Despite the fact that this was thirty-three years ago I still think about it— still, occasionally, reflect on it. Sometimes I think about something in my family history and realize I don’t know about it in detail that history.
And so, I am given to wonder if either my late mother or my late father, who died in 1998, or my grandparents whom I knew might know, might be able to tell me about some information concerning my family history. But the finality offered in an answer they might have is just not available.
Hence, all I have is a reflection about something I will probably never know with certainty. And perhaps the finality I seek— some form of definitive answer— is in truth artificial, an illusion.
I suppose that says we all like closure. We all like finality. But is that simply what we like, as opposed to what we need?
Is it possible that the idea of process— living through some time, through space, through experience— is it possible that process is the only thing that is real, the only thing of which we can be certain. Perhaps process is not just a different way of looking at and assessing life. Perhaps it is the prime way of looking at and assessing life. (Slight pause.)
We find these words in the Gospel According to the School of John: “The disciples were filled with joy when they saw Jesus, who said to them again, ‘Peace be with you. As Abba, God, has sent me, so I am sending you.’ After saying this, Jesus breathed on them and said, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit.’” (Slight pause.)
There are three distinct sections in this reading. The first two, the encounter of the disciples with Jesus but without Thomas and the later encounter with Thomas, are clearly tied together and part of the same story.
I maintain the third section, that part that says (quote:) “Jesus did many other signs— signs which are not recorded in this book” can be seen as a lynchpin for the story of Thomas. It offers instruction on why and how the story about Thomas and the disciples are of import. Why? How? The Spirit, you see, kept moving.
There is a great American heresy. (There are probably a number of great American heresies, but let me point out just one.)
This particular great American heresy says once an incident has passed it is complete, final. There are no more effects. As that relates to faith, many American Christians might express that heresy using words like this: “I was born again on April the 3rd, 1997 at three o’clock in the afternoon.”
The implication of that sentiment is straightforward. Everything is now complete, done, finished. The possibility that the Spirit of God might be still active and working and moving feels negated because this event is named and resides at a specific time in the past
And that time is now over. And I think we hear those kinds of statements because many of us see the Gospel stories being as located in the past.
But the words we heard from the Gospel today are not meant to illustrate an event in history. To take a narrative approach to the resurrection, to say it happened once, long ago, is simply an inaccurate way to look at what we Christians claim about Jesus.
The resurrection is not just an event that happened. It is an event that changes everything for all people for all time. The point of the resurrection is that Jesus lives and that Jesus lives, now. The point of the resurrection is that the Spirit is alive and dwells among us, now.
What is, perhaps, even more important is this: because of the resurrection, because the Spirit dwells among us, we are invited by God to learn from our experience of God. Because of the resurrection, because the Spirit dwells among us, we are invited by God to change.
Because of the resurrection, because the Spirit dwells among us, we are invited by God to process. Because of the resurrection, because the Spirit dwells among us, we are invited by God to grow. (Slight pause.)
Today, as we do monthly, we celebrated the Sacrament of Communion. Sometimes the Sacrament is referred to as a re-enactment or a commemoration of the Last Supper.
But what if each time we celebrate the sacrament we are invited to learn something new for today by our participation? What if we learn something new for today about our bonds with one another?
I believe the Spirit invites us to learn something new for today each and every day. I think the Spirit constantly invites us to live in the Spirit and into the Spirit. (Slight pause.)
So, what does it mean to live in the Spirit? What does it mean to live into the Spirit?
It means we are invited to be renewed. It means we are invited to develop and to hone who we can be, who we are willing to be, to fully be the one who God invites us to be. And this means, I think, we are invited to change. This means, I think, we are invited to grow.
Things are not static, ever. And living in and into the Spirit also means we are invited to see the world as God sees it. This is a world in which peace is possible.
This is a world where freedom can be a reality. This is a world in which equity is not a dream. This is a world in which the love God offers reigns.
This is a world whose boundaries are limited only by our willingness or lack thereof to participate in the Dominion of God. The Dominion of God— what is the Dominion of God? The Dominion of God is the world not as we see it. The Dominion of God is the world as God sees it— active, changing, alive, growing— a world of hope, a world of peace, world of joy, a world of love. Amen.
04/03/2016
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: “Speaking of American heresies, as I was earlier, let me offer another one. It is often said God is the answer. Think about this: what if God is not an answer but God is a question, perhaps even an open ended question? Or if the Spirit of God lives, rather than God being a question or an answer do we simply need to be in dialogue with God? Does that dialogue invite us to grow in the Spirit? Or is thinking about being in dialogue with God too uncomfortable, too challenging?”
BENEDICTION: Go out in the compassion and love God provides. Praise the deeds of God by the way you live. And may the steadfast love of God and the peace of Christ, which surpasses understanding, keep our minds and hearts in the companionship and will of the Holy Spirit, this day and forever more. Amen.
Sunday, March 27, 2016
SERMON ~ 03/27/2016 ~ “Christ Lives”
03/27/2016 ~ Resurrection of the Christ ~ Easter Day ~ Also Known as The Feast of the Resurrection ~ *Acts 10:34-43 or Isaiah 65:17-25; Psalm 118:1-2, 14-24; 1 Corinthians 15:19-26 or Acts 10:34-43; John 20:1-18 or Luke 24:1-12; Added Reading: 1 Corinthians 15:3-7 [ILV] ~ * During Eastertide a reading from Acts is often substituted for the lesson from the Hebrew Bible.
A READING FROM THE GOSPELS — Luke 24:1-12 [Inclusive Language Version]
INTRODUCTION: It needs to be noted there are no Resurrection stories in Scripture, no stories about Jesus emerging from the tomb. There are only post resurrection stories. It also needs to be noted Resurrection is not reanimation nor is it resuscitation. That has never been a Christian belief. Resurrection is what it says it is: Resurrection. Last, in an era when women were at best second class citizens, women are deeply involved throughout the post resurrection stories in all the Gospels. This fact in that particular era confronts us with an obvious question: what does that fact about the role the women played tell us about the message of equity offered by God? Hear now this reading from the Gospel we have come to know as Luke.
[1] On the first day of the week, at the first sign of dawn, the women came to the tomb, bringing spices they had prepared. [2] They found the stone rolled away from the tomb; [3] when they entered they did not find the body of Jesus.
[4] They were at a loss as to what to think about this. Then suddenly two figures in dazzling garments stood beside them. [5] Terrified, the women bowed to the ground. One of the two said, “Why do you look for the Living One among the dead? Jesus is not here; Christ has risen. [6] Remember what Jesus said to you, while you were still in Galilee— [7] that the Chosen One must be delivered into the hands of sinners and be crucified and on the third day rise again.” [8] With this reminder the words of Jesus came back to them.
[9] When they returned from the tomb, they told all this to the Eleven and to all the others. [10] Now the women who had experienced this and reported all these things were Mary of Magdala, Joanna and Mary the mother of James. The other women who were with those three also told these things to the apostles. [11] But these words seemed to those who listened to be an idle tale, nonsensical, and they refused to believe them. [12] Peter, however, got up and ran to the tomb. Upon getting there this apostle stooped and looked in but could see nothing but the linen cloths, the wrappings, on the ground. Then Peter left, amazed at what had occurred.
This is the Gospel of Jesus, Who is the Christ, the Messiah, the One Who has been raised.
*************************************************************************
Christ Lives
“Peter, however, got up and ran to the tomb. Upon getting there this apostle stooped and looked in but could see nothing but the linen cloths, the wrappings, on the ground. Then Peter left, amazed at what had occurred.” — Luke 24:12.
The disciple headed back down the road. Peter— his real name was Simon and since the day the Rabbi, the teacher, had given him the name Peter that is what everyone called him— Peter was exhausted.
Of course, he had been running. He was a little older than the others who followed the Rabbi so that rag-tag group looked to him for leadership. Despite his age, he was not in bad shape. So, it may not have simply been the distance covered running to the tomb which led to the exhaustion.
No... no, indeed— there were other reasons. The first was that he really expected to see the remains of his friend in that tomb, no matter what the women said. Tombs... tombs— these were the final resting place, the final destination, were they not?
But his friend Yahushua— in Greek the name is Jesus, but Peter knew the Rabbi by the Jewish name Yahushua— Yahushua kept saying wait for three days after I die. Just wait three days.
And so, after three days— somehow, some way— Jesus was no longer there, no longer in the tomb where Peter knew they had placed the earthly remains of his friend. Peter had watched when they buried the Rabbi. And now the tomb was empty.
So, was the exhaustion felt by Peter caused by the strain of running? Probably not. Surely, at least in part, the exhaustion arose from seeing nothing in the tomb except the wrappings on the ground. It left Peter emotionally exhausted.
After all, when Jesus preached all over Galilee, Peter was there. When Jesus healed the sick, Peter was there. When Jesus fed five thousand, Peter was there. When Jesus recited parables— something the Rabbi did over and over and over again— Peter was there.
When Jesus asked that pivotal question, “Who do you say that I am?” Peter had the answer. Jesus was the Messiah, the Christ. Right after that, when Jesus was transfigured and the three disciples heard a voice, loud and clear, a voice which insisted Jesus was the Chosen One, Peter... was... there. (Slight pause.)
And yes, when Jesus was taken as a prisoner of the state, Peter was there also. When Jesus was taken to the house of the High Priest not only was Peter there. Upon being confronted, Peter denied any knowledge of Jesus. And this happened just as the Rabbi said it would. The painful memory of the incident made Peter sigh as he walked. (Slight pause.)
What came next, in retrospect, seemed inevitable. Having become a prisoner of the state, Jesus— Jesus, Peter’s friend, Jesus, Peter’s teacher, Jesus, Peter’s guide, Jesus, Peter’s companion— Jesus was murdered by the state, crucified by the Romans. And Peter was there when that happened too, watching from afar as his friend... died.
But now, now this... this... empty tomb— the wrappings... so yes— Peter was... exhausted. And no, this exhaustion did not come from running. This was emotional exhaustion. Peter was spent. (Slight pause.)
Peter trod toward the center of Jerusalem, toward the house where the other disciples waited, knowing there was yet another emotional hill to climb. He needed to face the women.
It was the women who, on the first day of the week, at dawn, went to the tomb. It was the women who found the tomb empty. It was the women who were told “Why do you look for the Living One among the dead? Jesus is not here; Christ has risen.”
It was the women who, on returning from the tomb told the Eleven and the others about the empty tomb. It was the women... who no one believed. It was the women... who were ridiculed. It was the women... who were told their tale was idle, nonsensical.
And now Peter— the only one among the other followers of Jesus who even went to the tomb, Peter— the only one among them willing to face the reality of the empty tomb, Peter— the leader of this small band— Peter needed to affirm the women. They were, after all, right. He wondered if they would, in turn, ridicule him because of how the others had ridiculed them. (Slight pause.)
When Peter burst through the door into the large room where the whole group waited there was a cacophony of chatter. Peter raised a hand. What had been a wall of noise turned into immediate silence.
“It’s true,” he said, gesturing toward the women who were gathered in a corner. “They are right. The tomb is empty. (Slight pause.) I’m exhausted. Let me sit.”
And so he did. He sat on a bench. Perhaps the flood of emotions finally caught up with him. Suddenly it felt like the weight of the world was pressing down on his back. The women were the first to notice his distress.
From the corner of the room, this question was asked: “Peter, are you all right?”
Peter knew that voice. It was Mary of Magdala. She was perceptive. She knew when something was amiss before anyone else knew.
Peter, his eyes closed, responded. “Yes. I’m all right. I’ll be fine.”
And that’s when it happened. His body began to quake. Peter sobbed. Tears streamed down his face, his beard. He wept and wept and wept.
“Peter? Peter?” It was Mary’s voice. He was sure it was Mary’s voice.
The disciple felt a hand softly touch his shoulder. The touch was tender, healing, loving... familiar. “That is sweet of her,” thought Peter. “Mary is trying to offer solace in my time of need.”
After a bit, Peter got control of himself. Slowly, the crying ceased. Slowly, he wiped the tears away. “After all,” he thought trying to force his sense of logic and order to impose itself on his emotions, “there are only so many tears one can shed before one runs dry.”
The hand on his shoulder patted three times and then lifted away. He opened his eyes. Across the room was Mary of Magdala and the other women. Quickly he looked around. No one was behind him. No one was near him. No one had dared come near him.
“Mary! Were you just near me? Behind me?”
All she offered was a quizzical look. “No.”
“Someone was behind me. Someone was touching me.”
Everyone in the room stared at him not knowing what to say. This was, after all, Peter. He saw everything clearly. He had been the first one to see Jesus as the Messiah. He had been the first one to see Jesus as the Christ.
He pointed toward the end of the room. He pointed toward the women. He shouted as loud as he could. “You are right!” he said. “Jesus is risen! Jesus is the Christ.”
The women smiled. It was a knowing smile. But they said nothing.
Peter was emotionally drained but at the same time somehow filled with joy. Again, quieter Peter said it: “Jesus is risen! Jesus is the Christ.” (Long pause.) Amen.
03/27/2016 - Easter Day, The Feast of the Resurrection
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, New York
BENEDICTION: Hear now this blessing and then please join with me in the responsive Easter acclamation found in the bulletin. May the peace of God, which passes all understanding, keep your hearts and minds in the love of Christ, Jesus, and in the knowledge of the Holy Spirit this day and forever. And please join with me in the Easter Acclamation.
ONE: Rejoice, people of God! Christ is risen from the dead! Go in peace to love and serve God. Christ is with you always. Alleluia! Christ is Risen!
MANY: Christ is risen, indeed. Alleluia!
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 need to say two things: first, in Aramaic, the language which would have been spoken in Roman Palestine in New Testament times, to be saved meant to be made alive. Second, I am sure the well known American composer Irving Berlin was a nice fellow. He wrote Easter Parade and also a lesser know Easter Song, It’s a Lovely Day, Happy Easter. I want to suggest, however, that to merely say, ‘Happy Easter’ is not a Christian sentiment. So, let me make a suggestion: if someone walks up to you today and says, ‘Happy Easter’ shake their hand and say, ‘Christ is risen.’ ‘Christ is risen’ is the Christian sentiment.”
A READING FROM THE GOSPELS — Luke 24:1-12 [Inclusive Language Version]
INTRODUCTION: It needs to be noted there are no Resurrection stories in Scripture, no stories about Jesus emerging from the tomb. There are only post resurrection stories. It also needs to be noted Resurrection is not reanimation nor is it resuscitation. That has never been a Christian belief. Resurrection is what it says it is: Resurrection. Last, in an era when women were at best second class citizens, women are deeply involved throughout the post resurrection stories in all the Gospels. This fact in that particular era confronts us with an obvious question: what does that fact about the role the women played tell us about the message of equity offered by God? Hear now this reading from the Gospel we have come to know as Luke.
[1] On the first day of the week, at the first sign of dawn, the women came to the tomb, bringing spices they had prepared. [2] They found the stone rolled away from the tomb; [3] when they entered they did not find the body of Jesus.
[4] They were at a loss as to what to think about this. Then suddenly two figures in dazzling garments stood beside them. [5] Terrified, the women bowed to the ground. One of the two said, “Why do you look for the Living One among the dead? Jesus is not here; Christ has risen. [6] Remember what Jesus said to you, while you were still in Galilee— [7] that the Chosen One must be delivered into the hands of sinners and be crucified and on the third day rise again.” [8] With this reminder the words of Jesus came back to them.
[9] When they returned from the tomb, they told all this to the Eleven and to all the others. [10] Now the women who had experienced this and reported all these things were Mary of Magdala, Joanna and Mary the mother of James. The other women who were with those three also told these things to the apostles. [11] But these words seemed to those who listened to be an idle tale, nonsensical, and they refused to believe them. [12] Peter, however, got up and ran to the tomb. Upon getting there this apostle stooped and looked in but could see nothing but the linen cloths, the wrappings, on the ground. Then Peter left, amazed at what had occurred.
This is the Gospel of Jesus, Who is the Christ, the Messiah, the One Who has been raised.
*************************************************************************
Christ Lives
“Peter, however, got up and ran to the tomb. Upon getting there this apostle stooped and looked in but could see nothing but the linen cloths, the wrappings, on the ground. Then Peter left, amazed at what had occurred.” — Luke 24:12.
The disciple headed back down the road. Peter— his real name was Simon and since the day the Rabbi, the teacher, had given him the name Peter that is what everyone called him— Peter was exhausted.
Of course, he had been running. He was a little older than the others who followed the Rabbi so that rag-tag group looked to him for leadership. Despite his age, he was not in bad shape. So, it may not have simply been the distance covered running to the tomb which led to the exhaustion.
No... no, indeed— there were other reasons. The first was that he really expected to see the remains of his friend in that tomb, no matter what the women said. Tombs... tombs— these were the final resting place, the final destination, were they not?
But his friend Yahushua— in Greek the name is Jesus, but Peter knew the Rabbi by the Jewish name Yahushua— Yahushua kept saying wait for three days after I die. Just wait three days.
And so, after three days— somehow, some way— Jesus was no longer there, no longer in the tomb where Peter knew they had placed the earthly remains of his friend. Peter had watched when they buried the Rabbi. And now the tomb was empty.
So, was the exhaustion felt by Peter caused by the strain of running? Probably not. Surely, at least in part, the exhaustion arose from seeing nothing in the tomb except the wrappings on the ground. It left Peter emotionally exhausted.
After all, when Jesus preached all over Galilee, Peter was there. When Jesus healed the sick, Peter was there. When Jesus fed five thousand, Peter was there. When Jesus recited parables— something the Rabbi did over and over and over again— Peter was there.
When Jesus asked that pivotal question, “Who do you say that I am?” Peter had the answer. Jesus was the Messiah, the Christ. Right after that, when Jesus was transfigured and the three disciples heard a voice, loud and clear, a voice which insisted Jesus was the Chosen One, Peter... was... there. (Slight pause.)
And yes, when Jesus was taken as a prisoner of the state, Peter was there also. When Jesus was taken to the house of the High Priest not only was Peter there. Upon being confronted, Peter denied any knowledge of Jesus. And this happened just as the Rabbi said it would. The painful memory of the incident made Peter sigh as he walked. (Slight pause.)
What came next, in retrospect, seemed inevitable. Having become a prisoner of the state, Jesus— Jesus, Peter’s friend, Jesus, Peter’s teacher, Jesus, Peter’s guide, Jesus, Peter’s companion— Jesus was murdered by the state, crucified by the Romans. And Peter was there when that happened too, watching from afar as his friend... died.
But now, now this... this... empty tomb— the wrappings... so yes— Peter was... exhausted. And no, this exhaustion did not come from running. This was emotional exhaustion. Peter was spent. (Slight pause.)
Peter trod toward the center of Jerusalem, toward the house where the other disciples waited, knowing there was yet another emotional hill to climb. He needed to face the women.
It was the women who, on the first day of the week, at dawn, went to the tomb. It was the women who found the tomb empty. It was the women who were told “Why do you look for the Living One among the dead? Jesus is not here; Christ has risen.”
It was the women who, on returning from the tomb told the Eleven and the others about the empty tomb. It was the women... who no one believed. It was the women... who were ridiculed. It was the women... who were told their tale was idle, nonsensical.
And now Peter— the only one among the other followers of Jesus who even went to the tomb, Peter— the only one among them willing to face the reality of the empty tomb, Peter— the leader of this small band— Peter needed to affirm the women. They were, after all, right. He wondered if they would, in turn, ridicule him because of how the others had ridiculed them. (Slight pause.)
When Peter burst through the door into the large room where the whole group waited there was a cacophony of chatter. Peter raised a hand. What had been a wall of noise turned into immediate silence.
“It’s true,” he said, gesturing toward the women who were gathered in a corner. “They are right. The tomb is empty. (Slight pause.) I’m exhausted. Let me sit.”
And so he did. He sat on a bench. Perhaps the flood of emotions finally caught up with him. Suddenly it felt like the weight of the world was pressing down on his back. The women were the first to notice his distress.
From the corner of the room, this question was asked: “Peter, are you all right?”
Peter knew that voice. It was Mary of Magdala. She was perceptive. She knew when something was amiss before anyone else knew.
Peter, his eyes closed, responded. “Yes. I’m all right. I’ll be fine.”
And that’s when it happened. His body began to quake. Peter sobbed. Tears streamed down his face, his beard. He wept and wept and wept.
“Peter? Peter?” It was Mary’s voice. He was sure it was Mary’s voice.
The disciple felt a hand softly touch his shoulder. The touch was tender, healing, loving... familiar. “That is sweet of her,” thought Peter. “Mary is trying to offer solace in my time of need.”
After a bit, Peter got control of himself. Slowly, the crying ceased. Slowly, he wiped the tears away. “After all,” he thought trying to force his sense of logic and order to impose itself on his emotions, “there are only so many tears one can shed before one runs dry.”
The hand on his shoulder patted three times and then lifted away. He opened his eyes. Across the room was Mary of Magdala and the other women. Quickly he looked around. No one was behind him. No one was near him. No one had dared come near him.
“Mary! Were you just near me? Behind me?”
All she offered was a quizzical look. “No.”
“Someone was behind me. Someone was touching me.”
Everyone in the room stared at him not knowing what to say. This was, after all, Peter. He saw everything clearly. He had been the first one to see Jesus as the Messiah. He had been the first one to see Jesus as the Christ.
He pointed toward the end of the room. He pointed toward the women. He shouted as loud as he could. “You are right!” he said. “Jesus is risen! Jesus is the Christ.”
The women smiled. It was a knowing smile. But they said nothing.
Peter was emotionally drained but at the same time somehow filled with joy. Again, quieter Peter said it: “Jesus is risen! Jesus is the Christ.” (Long pause.) Amen.
03/27/2016 - Easter Day, The Feast of the Resurrection
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, New York
BENEDICTION: Hear now this blessing and then please join with me in the responsive Easter acclamation found in the bulletin. May the peace of God, which passes all understanding, keep your hearts and minds in the love of Christ, Jesus, and in the knowledge of the Holy Spirit this day and forever. And please join with me in the Easter Acclamation.
ONE: Rejoice, people of God! Christ is risen from the dead! Go in peace to love and serve God. Christ is with you always. Alleluia! Christ is Risen!
MANY: Christ is risen, indeed. Alleluia!
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 need to say two things: first, in Aramaic, the language which would have been spoken in Roman Palestine in New Testament times, to be saved meant to be made alive. Second, I am sure the well known American composer Irving Berlin was a nice fellow. He wrote Easter Parade and also a lesser know Easter Song, It’s a Lovely Day, Happy Easter. I want to suggest, however, that to merely say, ‘Happy Easter’ is not a Christian sentiment. So, let me make a suggestion: if someone walks up to you today and says, ‘Happy Easter’ shake their hand and say, ‘Christ is risen.’ ‘Christ is risen’ is the Christian sentiment.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)