July 30, 2017 ~ Proper 12 ~ Seventeenth Sunday In Ordinary Time ~ Eighth Sunday after Pentecost ~ Genesis 29:15-28; Psalm 105:1-11, 45b or Psalm 128; 1 Kings 3:5-12; Psalm 119:129-136; Romans 8:26-39; Matthew 13:31-33, 44-52 ~ VBS Sunday ~ A Union Service with the First Baptist Church.
The Certainty of Love
“For I am certain, I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor rulers, neither things present nor things future, neither heights nor depths— neither powers nor anything else in all creation— will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ, Jesus, our Savior.” — Romans 8:38-39.
My congregation, the United Church of Christ, First Congregational, and perhaps a even a good number of people of the First Baptist congregation have heard me say this numerous times. I have a background in professional theater.
But I was not an actor, a performer, which is what most people think when you say you worked in theater. I worked behind the scenes.
To be clear, I primarily worked as a writer. Writing is both my talent and my passion. But I did hold down jobs in other lines of theatrical employment.
Besides writing among the many jobs with which I was involved was being a stage manager for an off-off-Broadway show, a business manager for a children’s theater, being a director, designing and building sets, consulting on lighting and sound design and working for the theatrical charity The Actors’ Fund of America.
Now, I just denied that I worked as a performer, as an actor. This is true. But there is one thing concerning performance, acting, I need to mention. For a couple of semesters I attended one of the best acting schools in New York City, the American Academy of Dramatic Arts.
Why? As a writer, I thought it was a good idea to learn what actors do and how actors do what they do. My premise was, if I knew something about the craft of acting, what I wrote for actors would be more polished. I think my assessment proved to be largely true.
Which brings me to a question: what is the job of an actor, really? (Slight pause.) Actors try to convince you, me, us, the audience to suspend our disbelief. Now there’s a $64 term: suspend our disbelief. What does it mean? (Slight pause.)
Suspension of disbelief is defined as a willingness to set aside one’s own critical faculties in order to believe. Put another way, when we see things on stage or on screen we know what is real— we know what is real— and what is not real. For instance (the pastor reaches under the pulpit and pulls out the puppet being used in Vacation Bible School), a red panda puppet does not really talk. But we suspend our disbelief. We allow for that. [1]
Equally, in films we know cars are not driving a hundred plus miles an hour and super-heros do not fly. But we suspend our disbelief. We allow for that.
When it comes to the stage, we know people do not suddenly burst into song to express themselves. We know the actor playing Hamlet does not really kill anyone. But we suspend our disbelief. We allow for that.
So, what do actors really do? The work of an actor is to invite us to suspend our disbelief.
Actors invite us to see cars traveling at high speed, super-heros who fly, people who suddenly burst into song to express themselves, murder being committed on stage. But none of that is real. None of that actually happens.
And we know none of that really happens. So, the work of an actor is to invite us, an audience, to participate in their art.
Hence and paradoxically, in order for an actor to be successful we need to participate in what the actor presents, collaborate with the actor in the art of acting. How? We need to suspend our disbelief. Thereby movies, theater, even story telling in novels requires our input, our participation.
Now, there is one more very important point to consider about suspending disbelief. The reason one might want to suspend disbelief is not to try to fool ourselves into thinking what is not real is real. We know what is real. The reason we might want to suspend disbelief is so we can explore a large truth, a deep truth, in a story. (Slight pause.)
The Thought for Meditation in the bulletin today is penned by G. K. Chesterton, a Christian writer and apologist often referred to as the “prince of paradox.” This is the quote: “Fairy tales do not tell children the dragons exist. Children already know that dragons exist. Fairy tales tell children dragons can be conquered.”
This points to a large truth, a deep truth. Why do children know dragons exist? Because children do not— do not— take dragons literally. They understand dragons represent a larger truth, a deeper truth than any dragons conjured up by skilled actors.
What is that deep truth? The world is not always a stable, reasonable, logical, friendly place. The world can have sharp edges. It does not take long for children to figure that out.
Equally— and this is the large truth, the deep truth children learn from dragon stories— the world needs to be engaged. All the things in life, in the world, which are unstable, unreasonable, illogical, unfriendly need to be dealt with, need to be faced head on. (Slight pause.)
When I was in Seminary, the very first class— the very first class— I attended was a survey course in New Testament. As sometimes happened in these classes, the professor invited us to introduce ourselves one at a time.
That having been tended to, that professor made a statement which has stuck with me all these years. (Quote:) “The New Testament is about confrontation. In saying that, I am not equating confrontation with fighting or violence.”
“In saying the New Testament is about confrontation,” he went on, “I am saying the New Testament is about confronting the world around us with love and in love and confronting one another with love and in love.” Let me repeat that: The New Testament is about confronting the world around us with love and in love and confronting one another with love and in love. (Slight pause.)
Before the passage from Romans was read it was said this reading asks two pivotal questions: is God good? Does God love? These are central, large, deep questions.
So when Paul insists with certainty that nothing will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ the Apostle is addressing a central truth, a large truth, a deep truth in response to those questions. The answer of Paul is and, indeed, our answer needs to be an unequivocal ‘yes.’ God is good. God loves.
But I want to grapple with Paul’s premise and, indeed, our ways of belief a little more. Hence, I need to point out three things about Paul. First, you can search the writings of the Apostle up, down and sideways and you will find no details about the life of Christ, no details about the story of Jesus.
Second and hence, Paul spends no time with story, no time dealing with suspension of disbelief. For Paul, God is real. It is a given. No suspended disbelief is necessary.
Last, we need to be aware Paul makes a significant proclamation. In the Messiah, in Jesus, in the Christ, Paul knows God more fully than Paul has ever known God.
Therefore, Paul draws an obvious conclusion. A) if God is real, the love God offers is real.
Put another way, Paul says the love God offers is not acknowledged because of suspended disbelief. The love of God is so real the suspended disbelief is unnecessary. And, since Paul knows God in Jesus more fully than Paul has ever know God before, Paul insist that in the Messiah, in Jesus, in the Christ, the love of God is tangible. (Slight pause.)
All that brings us back to the proclamation of Paul in Romans (quote:) “For I am certain, I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor rulers, neither things present nor things future, neither heights nor depths— neither powers nor anything else in all creation— will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ, Jesus, our Savior.”
This is a really simple message. The love of God as expressed in Christ, the Messiah, exists, is real, is tangible. And what we are called on to do is participate in the love of God which is real, is tangible.
And so indeed, children know dragons exist. And children also know the love of God exists, the love of God is real. So we do not have to pretend or suspend our disbelief. We simply need to participate. The love of God is real. Amen.
07/30/2017
United Church of Christ, First Congregational.
VBS Sunday ~ A Union Service with the First Baptist Church
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: “When someone says ‘the love of God is real’ that, of course, begs the question: what is real? We live in a society that likes to measure things. We live in a society which says if you cannot measure something it is not real. Well, I invite you to measure hope, freedom, wisdom, peace, joy, love. Good luck with that.”
BENEDICTION: This is the blessing used by natives of the islands in the South Pacific: O Jesus, please be the canoe that holds me up in the sea of life. Please be the rudder that keeps me on a straight path. Be the outrigger that supports me in times of stress. Let Your Spirit be the sail that carries me though each day. Keep me safe, so that I can paddle on steady in the voyage called life. God of all, bless us so we may have calm seas, a warm sun and clear nights with star filled skies. Amen.
[1] This being the kick-off Sunday for Vacation Bible School and a red panda puppet being the character in the Vacation Bible School this year, there was a skit at the Children’s Time in which said puppet participated.
Sunday, July 30, 2017
Sunday, July 9, 2017
SERMON ~ 07/09/2017 ~ “Set Free”
07/09/2017 ~ Proper 9 ~ Fourteenth Sunday in Ordinary Time ~ Fourth Sunday after Pentecost ~ Genesis 24:34-38, 42-49, 58-67 ; Psalm 45:10-17 or Song of Solomon 2:8-13; Zechariah 9:9-12 ~ Psalm 145:8-14; Romans 7:15-25a (Note: used through 8:2); Matthew 11:16-19, 25-30.
Set Free
“There is, therefore, now no longer any condemnation for those who are in Christ, Jesus. For, you see, the law of the Spirit— the Spirit of life in Christ, Jesus— has set you free from the law of sin and of death.” — Romans 8:1-2.
This is a fact: most pastors use sermon illustrations. Some, perhaps even most illustrations, are stories. Some pastors use canned stories, not that there’s anything wrong with that.
Some pastors use personal stories. I often fall into that camp. I am about to use a very personal story. But I also need to say I’ve used this story before.
However, there are two factors which might excuse the repetition. First, what I am about to say is a much more detailed telling of this story than the last time I used it.
Second, I looked it up. (These days we save all our writings on computers and we can do a word search.) I used this story nine years ago. And that is quite some time.
I therefore apologize if you are bored by hearing a story about my late Grandmother Margaret Schwartz a second time. But it has been nine years since anyone heard it. So, on with the story. (Slight pause.)
My grandmother Margaret, my mother’s mother, was born in 1886. 1886— that’s 3 years after the Brooklyn Bridge was completed. 1886— Grover Cleveland was the President— the first term for Cleveland, the only president who was defeated on running for a second term but decided to run a third time and then did win a second term. By the way, if you think politics today are wacky, you know nothing about politics between 1866 and 1912. Take my word for that.
Back to my grandmother: she was born on a farm in Brooklyn, New York. Think about that for a moment: a farm... in Brooklyn. The area of the City of Brooklyn— it was a city then— the area of the City of Brooklyn in which she was born was known as Pigtown. It derived its name from the fact that major, large pig farms were located there. In fact, before World War II if Americans consumed meat the odds are it was pork, not beef.
And, yes, Brooklyn was both quite rural— it had farms— but Brooklyn was a city. In fact, Manhattan and Brooklyn were often referred to as twin cities. They would not merge into the unified entity we know today called New York City until 1898.
When my grandmother was still a young child both her parents died. She was an orphan. Relatives placed on a ship headed for San Francisco. She lived there with an aunt and an uncle.
Therefore and by definition, she sailed around the horn of South America to get to the west coast by ship. There was no Panama Canal yet.
An independent soul— perhaps because she was an orphan— by 1905 when she was 19, she had saved enough money to return to the east coast on her own. There was still no Panama Canal. It would not open until 1914.
So she took a trans-continental train back to New York City. As a consequence, she missed the 1906 San Francisco earthquake by a year.
In New York, she went into business for herself— and mind you this was a young woman who went into business for herself in the first decade of the 20th Century. Did I say she was independent? And what kind of business did she start? She bought a horse and a wagon and established a short haul moving business. This was a strong woman on many levels.
Now, family legend has it that she could beat up any man in Brooklyn. I will not stand by the veracity of that statement. On the other hand, my own mother told me she was there when she saw her mother, my grandmother— all five foot two of her— overcome and disarm a man who was threatening a room full of people with a gun. (Slight pause.)
She did not have an easy life. She married late, again not a usual situation for a woman in the early 20th Century. Her husband died before the birth of her second daughter who was my mother. So, she was a single mother with two daughters when the Great Depression hit in 1929. She was 43.
I am sure that by 1929 her moving business had graduated to having a horseless carriage to move items. But I am equally sure no one was interested in moving anywhere once the depression hit. So her little business went belly up.
There were still enclaves of wealthy professionals living in Brooklyn, despite the hard times. As the depression progressed she made her living largely by cleaning the houses of wealthy people— doctors and lawyers to name to groups of which I’m aware that she helped. She was, in today’s terminology, a domestic worker. Thereby, she lived at the lower end of the economic scale.
Besides teaching me perseverance by the very example of her life, one of the great gifts my Grandmother gave me was this saying: “It’s an easy life... if you don’t weaken.” And, indeed, given the brief background of her life I’ve just offered— the difficulty of it, the hardness of her life, the straight out bad luck— this saying could be pointed to as words to live by for all of us— “It’s an easy life... if you don’t weaken.” (Pause.)
We find these words in the work commonly called Romans: “There is, therefore, now no longer any condemnation for those who are in Christ, Jesus. For, you see, the law of the Spirit— the Spirit of life in Christ, Jesus— has set you free from the law of sin and of death.” (Slight pause.)
Romans 7— and we heard a chunk of it— depicts a battle. This battle is a battle of and for human life, the soul, in some ways the battle of our inner selves, what we today might call a psychological battle.
There is the strong desire to do good, a strong desire to serve God and one another. That is counterbalanced by what might be called an enemy within us.
Some might call that enemy sin. Paul, in fact, calls it sin. (Quote:) “But with my flesh I serve and I am a slave to the law of sin which dwells within me.”
And yes, sin is the label often used to name a broken relationship with God. Buy I also need to state the word sin, itself, is simply shorthand for a multitude of human problems.
Therefore, we need to realize the word sin simply names a broken relationship with God. Hence, it is also about our own struggle with our own self, our own brokenness, our own frailty, our own weakness.
To be clear, this inner battle can be labeled an enemy and we can and perhaps should call it sin, since the word sin is shorthand for this brokenness. And when we refer to this struggle in the aforementioned bellicose terms, call it an enemy, we need to realize, as Paul seems to be insisting, that some part of our own inner self is capable of perverting the best human motives and actions.
Now, I think the premise Paul presents is clear: on its own, humanity has not the strength to resist the overwhelming issues of self struggle, our own brokenness, our own frailty. It would also seem to me this concept, a concept with a long theological history, is a basic premise of organizations such as Alcoholics Anonymous: simply admit we are powerless.
Further Paul states that, insidiously, even the law of God can be used by this internal struggle to destroy. Given that reality, Paul comes to a realization: only God— only God who Paul knows more fully through the resurrected Christ than Paul has ever known God before— only God can intervene in this struggle.
Of course, such intervention, these “victories” are not always visible to the unassisted human eye. But Paul is clear: because of knowing God through and in the resurrected Christ, those who do enter into discipleship more fully find, in their relationship to God through Christ, a new understanding of empowerment and a new understanding of service to each other. (Slight pause.)
We Americans like what we call independence. Hence, we like to think we can do everything on our own. We like to think we are the only one who can fix things, make something work.
I believe what is pivotal here, however, is to come back to what my Grandmother said. “It’s an easy life... if you don’t weaken.” That having been said, the question becomes how can we not weaken? How do we avoid succumbing to human weakness, human frailty, human brokenness? (Slight pause.)
Like Paul, I want to suggest relying on God is key. God can be and is our help when we feel frail. God is and can be our help when we are overwhelmed.
When we trust in God we are set free to do the work of God. Trusting God and not trusting in just ourselves— trusting God and not trusting in just ourselves— now there’s a hard concept for some, especially for we Westerners in the Early Twentieth-first Century.
However, I think what Paul says is clear: when we rely on God we can see things in ways we never have before. When we rely on God we can see possibilities we never have seen before. The result of that reliance— and hear this clearly— the result of that reliance is no one is condemned, no one is shortchanged. Again, a hard concept for we Westerners in the early Twenty-first Century— no one is condemned, no one is shortchanged.
Indeed, this is the way Paul puts it (quote:) “There is, therefore, now no longer any condemnation for those who are in Christ, Jesus. For, you see, the law of the Spirit— the Spirit of life in Christ, Jesus— has set you free from the law of sin and of death.” Amen.
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, New York
07/09/2019
ENDPIECE: It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Choral Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “Earlier, in the Children’s Time, we said the red panda puppet is a super-hero and the super-heros of this year’s Vacation Bible School will seek to teach our children to ‘Do Good, Seek Peace and Go After It!’ Here is another little super-hero I keep in my office. It is a frog. The frog is there to remind me to F-R-O-G— ‘forever rely on God.’ How can we all be super-heros? When we rely on God.”
BENEDICTION: May God bless our minds and help us as we think; may God bless our lips and help us as we speak; and may God bless our hearts and help us as we love. And may we receive this blessing in the name of the Triune God— Creator, Redeemer, and Sustainer. Amen.
Set Free
“There is, therefore, now no longer any condemnation for those who are in Christ, Jesus. For, you see, the law of the Spirit— the Spirit of life in Christ, Jesus— has set you free from the law of sin and of death.” — Romans 8:1-2.
This is a fact: most pastors use sermon illustrations. Some, perhaps even most illustrations, are stories. Some pastors use canned stories, not that there’s anything wrong with that.
Some pastors use personal stories. I often fall into that camp. I am about to use a very personal story. But I also need to say I’ve used this story before.
However, there are two factors which might excuse the repetition. First, what I am about to say is a much more detailed telling of this story than the last time I used it.
Second, I looked it up. (These days we save all our writings on computers and we can do a word search.) I used this story nine years ago. And that is quite some time.
I therefore apologize if you are bored by hearing a story about my late Grandmother Margaret Schwartz a second time. But it has been nine years since anyone heard it. So, on with the story. (Slight pause.)
My grandmother Margaret, my mother’s mother, was born in 1886. 1886— that’s 3 years after the Brooklyn Bridge was completed. 1886— Grover Cleveland was the President— the first term for Cleveland, the only president who was defeated on running for a second term but decided to run a third time and then did win a second term. By the way, if you think politics today are wacky, you know nothing about politics between 1866 and 1912. Take my word for that.
Back to my grandmother: she was born on a farm in Brooklyn, New York. Think about that for a moment: a farm... in Brooklyn. The area of the City of Brooklyn— it was a city then— the area of the City of Brooklyn in which she was born was known as Pigtown. It derived its name from the fact that major, large pig farms were located there. In fact, before World War II if Americans consumed meat the odds are it was pork, not beef.
And, yes, Brooklyn was both quite rural— it had farms— but Brooklyn was a city. In fact, Manhattan and Brooklyn were often referred to as twin cities. They would not merge into the unified entity we know today called New York City until 1898.
When my grandmother was still a young child both her parents died. She was an orphan. Relatives placed on a ship headed for San Francisco. She lived there with an aunt and an uncle.
Therefore and by definition, she sailed around the horn of South America to get to the west coast by ship. There was no Panama Canal yet.
An independent soul— perhaps because she was an orphan— by 1905 when she was 19, she had saved enough money to return to the east coast on her own. There was still no Panama Canal. It would not open until 1914.
So she took a trans-continental train back to New York City. As a consequence, she missed the 1906 San Francisco earthquake by a year.
In New York, she went into business for herself— and mind you this was a young woman who went into business for herself in the first decade of the 20th Century. Did I say she was independent? And what kind of business did she start? She bought a horse and a wagon and established a short haul moving business. This was a strong woman on many levels.
Now, family legend has it that she could beat up any man in Brooklyn. I will not stand by the veracity of that statement. On the other hand, my own mother told me she was there when she saw her mother, my grandmother— all five foot two of her— overcome and disarm a man who was threatening a room full of people with a gun. (Slight pause.)
She did not have an easy life. She married late, again not a usual situation for a woman in the early 20th Century. Her husband died before the birth of her second daughter who was my mother. So, she was a single mother with two daughters when the Great Depression hit in 1929. She was 43.
I am sure that by 1929 her moving business had graduated to having a horseless carriage to move items. But I am equally sure no one was interested in moving anywhere once the depression hit. So her little business went belly up.
There were still enclaves of wealthy professionals living in Brooklyn, despite the hard times. As the depression progressed she made her living largely by cleaning the houses of wealthy people— doctors and lawyers to name to groups of which I’m aware that she helped. She was, in today’s terminology, a domestic worker. Thereby, she lived at the lower end of the economic scale.
Besides teaching me perseverance by the very example of her life, one of the great gifts my Grandmother gave me was this saying: “It’s an easy life... if you don’t weaken.” And, indeed, given the brief background of her life I’ve just offered— the difficulty of it, the hardness of her life, the straight out bad luck— this saying could be pointed to as words to live by for all of us— “It’s an easy life... if you don’t weaken.” (Pause.)
We find these words in the work commonly called Romans: “There is, therefore, now no longer any condemnation for those who are in Christ, Jesus. For, you see, the law of the Spirit— the Spirit of life in Christ, Jesus— has set you free from the law of sin and of death.” (Slight pause.)
Romans 7— and we heard a chunk of it— depicts a battle. This battle is a battle of and for human life, the soul, in some ways the battle of our inner selves, what we today might call a psychological battle.
There is the strong desire to do good, a strong desire to serve God and one another. That is counterbalanced by what might be called an enemy within us.
Some might call that enemy sin. Paul, in fact, calls it sin. (Quote:) “But with my flesh I serve and I am a slave to the law of sin which dwells within me.”
And yes, sin is the label often used to name a broken relationship with God. Buy I also need to state the word sin, itself, is simply shorthand for a multitude of human problems.
Therefore, we need to realize the word sin simply names a broken relationship with God. Hence, it is also about our own struggle with our own self, our own brokenness, our own frailty, our own weakness.
To be clear, this inner battle can be labeled an enemy and we can and perhaps should call it sin, since the word sin is shorthand for this brokenness. And when we refer to this struggle in the aforementioned bellicose terms, call it an enemy, we need to realize, as Paul seems to be insisting, that some part of our own inner self is capable of perverting the best human motives and actions.
Now, I think the premise Paul presents is clear: on its own, humanity has not the strength to resist the overwhelming issues of self struggle, our own brokenness, our own frailty. It would also seem to me this concept, a concept with a long theological history, is a basic premise of organizations such as Alcoholics Anonymous: simply admit we are powerless.
Further Paul states that, insidiously, even the law of God can be used by this internal struggle to destroy. Given that reality, Paul comes to a realization: only God— only God who Paul knows more fully through the resurrected Christ than Paul has ever known God before— only God can intervene in this struggle.
Of course, such intervention, these “victories” are not always visible to the unassisted human eye. But Paul is clear: because of knowing God through and in the resurrected Christ, those who do enter into discipleship more fully find, in their relationship to God through Christ, a new understanding of empowerment and a new understanding of service to each other. (Slight pause.)
We Americans like what we call independence. Hence, we like to think we can do everything on our own. We like to think we are the only one who can fix things, make something work.
I believe what is pivotal here, however, is to come back to what my Grandmother said. “It’s an easy life... if you don’t weaken.” That having been said, the question becomes how can we not weaken? How do we avoid succumbing to human weakness, human frailty, human brokenness? (Slight pause.)
Like Paul, I want to suggest relying on God is key. God can be and is our help when we feel frail. God is and can be our help when we are overwhelmed.
When we trust in God we are set free to do the work of God. Trusting God and not trusting in just ourselves— trusting God and not trusting in just ourselves— now there’s a hard concept for some, especially for we Westerners in the Early Twentieth-first Century.
However, I think what Paul says is clear: when we rely on God we can see things in ways we never have before. When we rely on God we can see possibilities we never have seen before. The result of that reliance— and hear this clearly— the result of that reliance is no one is condemned, no one is shortchanged. Again, a hard concept for we Westerners in the early Twenty-first Century— no one is condemned, no one is shortchanged.
Indeed, this is the way Paul puts it (quote:) “There is, therefore, now no longer any condemnation for those who are in Christ, Jesus. For, you see, the law of the Spirit— the Spirit of life in Christ, Jesus— has set you free from the law of sin and of death.” Amen.
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, New York
07/09/2019
ENDPIECE: It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Choral Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “Earlier, in the Children’s Time, we said the red panda puppet is a super-hero and the super-heros of this year’s Vacation Bible School will seek to teach our children to ‘Do Good, Seek Peace and Go After It!’ Here is another little super-hero I keep in my office. It is a frog. The frog is there to remind me to F-R-O-G— ‘forever rely on God.’ How can we all be super-heros? When we rely on God.”
BENEDICTION: May God bless our minds and help us as we think; may God bless our lips and help us as we speak; and may God bless our hearts and help us as we love. And may we receive this blessing in the name of the Triune God— Creator, Redeemer, and Sustainer. Amen.
Sunday, July 2, 2017
SERMON ~ July 2, 2017 ~ “Rewards?”
July 2, 2017 ~ Proper 8 (13) ~ Fourth Sunday after Pentecost ~ Genesis 22:1-14; Psalm 13; Jeremiah 28:5-9; Psalm 89:1-4, 15-18; Romans 6:12-23; Matthew 10:40-42 ~ The Sunday Before the Secular Holiday Known as Independence Day; Communion Sunday.
Rewards?
“But the truth is whoever gives even a cup of cold water to one of these lowly ones just for being a disciple will not lack a reward.” — Matthew 10:42.
As was mentioned earlier, Bonnie and I will be leaving after the service today, headed to Maine to visit family. We will be back by next Sunday. And what better week to go than the week that has the Fourth of July in the midst of it?
One of the things we have planned will, however, not be in Maine but will happen on our return trip. We will visit the Rev. Dr. Bill Imes, now retired, and his wife Judy for lunch on the day we return.
Bill was, of course, one of my mentors in ministry. He preached at my ordination. Bonnie says a lot of people tried to get me to go to Seminary over the years. Bill got it done. Since we have not seen Bill and Judy in quite a while, I expect we shall have a lot to talk about and have a good time seeing each other.
Bill and Judy now live in Easthampton, Massachusetts. Easthampton is just a short detour off I-90, so the visit won’t be hard to accomplish.
Now, Bill graduated from Seminary in 1969. He went to Yale. Back when he was a seminarian even at Yale, a relatively urban institution, and even back in the late 1960s, one of the things the professors stressed was the physical places in this country in which Main Line Churches largely and mostly reside.
Back then they said the natural habitat of Main Line Churches was what they called “town and country.” Therefore, Seminaries, even urban ones like Yale, felt they were training pastors who would serve churches located in towns and in the countryside.
To put some geographic teeth into that statement, let me translate it this way. Main Line Churches are largely in places like Norwich— towns— and in the country— places like Preble for example, about an hour and twenty minutes West of here. One of our fine U.C.C. churches resides in Preble. And if, on your travels, your destination is not Preble, if on any trip you simply travel through Preble, don’t blink. You’ll miss it— country.
My point in bringing this up— the fact that 50 years ago we all knew Main Line Churches were largely in town and in country locations— is there is a boldfaced lie that goes around about Main Line Churches. This is the lie: Main Line Churches are losing population.
Guess what? The places where Main Line Churches exist are losing population. Ipso facto, Main Line Churches are losing population. But that loss has little to do with the churches, themselves.
Example: since I came to Norwich more than twenty years ago the data says the population has gone down by about 30%. That’s more than 1% year. Which is also to say, yes, numbers in the Main Line have diminished. But you need to ask ‘what is the real reason for that?’
Indeed, there are plenty of Main Line Churches experiencing growth. Guess where those churches are located?
They are in suburbs and exurbs and those areas are experiencing growth. But, generally, there are few Main Line Churches in those areas. (Slight pause.)
There is a second bold faced lie out there concerning church population. This lie says Main Line Churches are too liberal to be popular. Conservative churches grow. Liberal churches do not.
That lie was recently addressed, dare I say destroyed, in an interview given by Diana Butler Bass. Bass is a church historian and theologian and an independent scholar who writes broadly on American religion and culture.0
She started this interview by noting the Southern Baptist Convention, clearly a conservative group, has lost more than one million members in the last decade, the last ten years. And, if you stretch back for five or six years before that, the losses would be well the million, nearly trwo.
So, what’s happening? Yes, many of these churches are located in areas losing population also. But there is a second reason which Bass addressed.
This is a quote: “Cultural circumstances— cultural circumstances— surrounding religious life and religious choice are far more important than any theology.... The issue is not whether you’re a liberal or a conservative.... That is irrelevant.”
Southern Baptists are culturally, she noted, now going through what liberal churches went through about 30 or 40 years ago. In the mid-20th century mainline Protestants had grown cozy with cultural power and the status quo. Being comfortable with the status quo undermined their ability to have or to offer a prophetic vision for the world. The inability to have or to offer a prophetic vision undermined their ability to be anything other than the church of just getting along.
So, culturally, conservative churches filled that void. But then they also got comfortable with their own brand of cultural power. Now they are being confronted by issues concerning race, concerning gender and gender identity, and other issues concerning justice.
Bass continued (quote:), “Evangelicals have been completely unable to address these in any meaningful way. The leaders of evangelical churches have continued their alliance with the powers that be, the status quo, and their children are saying, ‘We don’t buy it.’”
“Not only is the younger generation walking away. The younger generation says, ‘We will not be the church of the status quo. We do not want to be the church of Caesar.’” (Slight pause.)
We find these words in the work known as Matthew: “But the truth is whoever gives even a cup of cold water to one of these lowly ones just for being a disciple will not lack a reward.” (Slight pause.)
The message we hear in this brief passage indicates a revitalization of family relations is possible but it goes beyond that. These words say the establishment of a new family is also possible, a new family bound together by a common commitment to do the will of God. However, the new family does not automatically emerge to replace the support of the old family ties.
The new family must be born, be refreshed, renewed. And that new family must be born, be refreshed, renewed in the context of mission. Community is out there, beyond the current community, in the context of mission. This community needs to be welcomed, in the context of mission.
Put another way, this community, in fact, needs to receive a cup of cold water. And the old community and new community alike, can be bonded together with the divine presence in the context of mission. (Slight pause.)
We live in a society, in a world, that thinks everything has a price, everything can be bought and/or sold, a deal can be made for everything, anything. Therefore, I think when we read these words from Matthew we believe the important part of the verse I quoted is “...a disciple will not lack a reward.” We hear these words and we hear and we see transaction.
But and therefore, we tend to ignore these words: “...whoever gives even a cup of cold water to one of these...” That dichotomy begs the question: what is a disciple? What is discipleship? What does it mean to be a disciple? (Slight pause.)
In that same interview Diana Butler Bass said this (quote:) “This is the real issue for churches: are you a congregation that provides a way of life, meaningful life, for people which can help them navigate through chaotic times. Are you a congregation that provides a way to be able to connect with God, to experience a new sense of the Holy Spirit, to be able to empower love and to be compassionate? That is what makes religious communities vibrant, not whether they are liberal or conservative.” [1] (Slight pause.)
The Dominion of God is not about transactions. The Dominion of God is not about rewards. The Dominion of God is not about who has the most wherewithal when they die.
The church is not about transactions. The church is not about rewards. The church is not about who has the most wherewithal when they die.
The church is about striving to provide a way of meaningful life for people to help them navigate through chaotic times. The church is about helping people connect with God.
The church is about the experience of a new sense of the Holy Spirit. The church is about empowering love. The church is about being be able to be compassionate. (Slight pause.) The church is about giving a cup of water. (Slight pause.)
The question before us, the question before this congregation, any congregation, is not a question about power or any kind of reward or even survival. The question before this congregation and any congregation is did we, were we, providing a way of meaningful life for people to help them navigate in chaotic times?
Did we, were we, helping people to connect with God? Did we, were we, helping people experience a new sense of the Holy Spirit? Are we, can we empower love and compassion? (Slight pause.) Did we give a cup of water, simply a cup of cold water? Amen.
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, New York.
07/02/2017
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: “This is a poem by Tod Jenkins called The Gospel. ‘When the gospel no longer / sounds like good news, / maybe our measure / of what is good – / and the people for whom / it was intended – / has slipped a few / too many notches. // We are not called / to shoehorn the gospel / into our narratives / of comfort and security, / but to open our hearts and lives / to love’s expansive reach. // We are made to fit love, / not the other way around. // Keep stretching. / It’s reaching toward you now; / has been since / before your first breath; / will be forevermore.’ I probably don’t need to add anything to that.”
BENEDICTION: May we love God so much, that we love nothing else too much. May we be so in awe of God, that we are in awe of no one else and nothing else. Amen.
[1] A summary of this interview is found at this URL.
https://baptistnews.com/article/diana-butler-bass-sbc-decline-dispels-idea-liberal-denominations-die/#.WVJodRMrJsM
Rewards?
“But the truth is whoever gives even a cup of cold water to one of these lowly ones just for being a disciple will not lack a reward.” — Matthew 10:42.
As was mentioned earlier, Bonnie and I will be leaving after the service today, headed to Maine to visit family. We will be back by next Sunday. And what better week to go than the week that has the Fourth of July in the midst of it?
One of the things we have planned will, however, not be in Maine but will happen on our return trip. We will visit the Rev. Dr. Bill Imes, now retired, and his wife Judy for lunch on the day we return.
Bill was, of course, one of my mentors in ministry. He preached at my ordination. Bonnie says a lot of people tried to get me to go to Seminary over the years. Bill got it done. Since we have not seen Bill and Judy in quite a while, I expect we shall have a lot to talk about and have a good time seeing each other.
Bill and Judy now live in Easthampton, Massachusetts. Easthampton is just a short detour off I-90, so the visit won’t be hard to accomplish.
Now, Bill graduated from Seminary in 1969. He went to Yale. Back when he was a seminarian even at Yale, a relatively urban institution, and even back in the late 1960s, one of the things the professors stressed was the physical places in this country in which Main Line Churches largely and mostly reside.
Back then they said the natural habitat of Main Line Churches was what they called “town and country.” Therefore, Seminaries, even urban ones like Yale, felt they were training pastors who would serve churches located in towns and in the countryside.
To put some geographic teeth into that statement, let me translate it this way. Main Line Churches are largely in places like Norwich— towns— and in the country— places like Preble for example, about an hour and twenty minutes West of here. One of our fine U.C.C. churches resides in Preble. And if, on your travels, your destination is not Preble, if on any trip you simply travel through Preble, don’t blink. You’ll miss it— country.
My point in bringing this up— the fact that 50 years ago we all knew Main Line Churches were largely in town and in country locations— is there is a boldfaced lie that goes around about Main Line Churches. This is the lie: Main Line Churches are losing population.
Guess what? The places where Main Line Churches exist are losing population. Ipso facto, Main Line Churches are losing population. But that loss has little to do with the churches, themselves.
Example: since I came to Norwich more than twenty years ago the data says the population has gone down by about 30%. That’s more than 1% year. Which is also to say, yes, numbers in the Main Line have diminished. But you need to ask ‘what is the real reason for that?’
Indeed, there are plenty of Main Line Churches experiencing growth. Guess where those churches are located?
They are in suburbs and exurbs and those areas are experiencing growth. But, generally, there are few Main Line Churches in those areas. (Slight pause.)
There is a second bold faced lie out there concerning church population. This lie says Main Line Churches are too liberal to be popular. Conservative churches grow. Liberal churches do not.
That lie was recently addressed, dare I say destroyed, in an interview given by Diana Butler Bass. Bass is a church historian and theologian and an independent scholar who writes broadly on American religion and culture.0
She started this interview by noting the Southern Baptist Convention, clearly a conservative group, has lost more than one million members in the last decade, the last ten years. And, if you stretch back for five or six years before that, the losses would be well the million, nearly trwo.
So, what’s happening? Yes, many of these churches are located in areas losing population also. But there is a second reason which Bass addressed.
This is a quote: “Cultural circumstances— cultural circumstances— surrounding religious life and religious choice are far more important than any theology.... The issue is not whether you’re a liberal or a conservative.... That is irrelevant.”
Southern Baptists are culturally, she noted, now going through what liberal churches went through about 30 or 40 years ago. In the mid-20th century mainline Protestants had grown cozy with cultural power and the status quo. Being comfortable with the status quo undermined their ability to have or to offer a prophetic vision for the world. The inability to have or to offer a prophetic vision undermined their ability to be anything other than the church of just getting along.
So, culturally, conservative churches filled that void. But then they also got comfortable with their own brand of cultural power. Now they are being confronted by issues concerning race, concerning gender and gender identity, and other issues concerning justice.
Bass continued (quote:), “Evangelicals have been completely unable to address these in any meaningful way. The leaders of evangelical churches have continued their alliance with the powers that be, the status quo, and their children are saying, ‘We don’t buy it.’”
“Not only is the younger generation walking away. The younger generation says, ‘We will not be the church of the status quo. We do not want to be the church of Caesar.’” (Slight pause.)
We find these words in the work known as Matthew: “But the truth is whoever gives even a cup of cold water to one of these lowly ones just for being a disciple will not lack a reward.” (Slight pause.)
The message we hear in this brief passage indicates a revitalization of family relations is possible but it goes beyond that. These words say the establishment of a new family is also possible, a new family bound together by a common commitment to do the will of God. However, the new family does not automatically emerge to replace the support of the old family ties.
The new family must be born, be refreshed, renewed. And that new family must be born, be refreshed, renewed in the context of mission. Community is out there, beyond the current community, in the context of mission. This community needs to be welcomed, in the context of mission.
Put another way, this community, in fact, needs to receive a cup of cold water. And the old community and new community alike, can be bonded together with the divine presence in the context of mission. (Slight pause.)
We live in a society, in a world, that thinks everything has a price, everything can be bought and/or sold, a deal can be made for everything, anything. Therefore, I think when we read these words from Matthew we believe the important part of the verse I quoted is “...a disciple will not lack a reward.” We hear these words and we hear and we see transaction.
But and therefore, we tend to ignore these words: “...whoever gives even a cup of cold water to one of these...” That dichotomy begs the question: what is a disciple? What is discipleship? What does it mean to be a disciple? (Slight pause.)
In that same interview Diana Butler Bass said this (quote:) “This is the real issue for churches: are you a congregation that provides a way of life, meaningful life, for people which can help them navigate through chaotic times. Are you a congregation that provides a way to be able to connect with God, to experience a new sense of the Holy Spirit, to be able to empower love and to be compassionate? That is what makes religious communities vibrant, not whether they are liberal or conservative.” [1] (Slight pause.)
The Dominion of God is not about transactions. The Dominion of God is not about rewards. The Dominion of God is not about who has the most wherewithal when they die.
The church is not about transactions. The church is not about rewards. The church is not about who has the most wherewithal when they die.
The church is about striving to provide a way of meaningful life for people to help them navigate through chaotic times. The church is about helping people connect with God.
The church is about the experience of a new sense of the Holy Spirit. The church is about empowering love. The church is about being be able to be compassionate. (Slight pause.) The church is about giving a cup of water. (Slight pause.)
The question before us, the question before this congregation, any congregation, is not a question about power or any kind of reward or even survival. The question before this congregation and any congregation is did we, were we, providing a way of meaningful life for people to help them navigate in chaotic times?
Did we, were we, helping people to connect with God? Did we, were we, helping people experience a new sense of the Holy Spirit? Are we, can we empower love and compassion? (Slight pause.) Did we give a cup of water, simply a cup of cold water? Amen.
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, New York.
07/02/2017
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: “This is a poem by Tod Jenkins called The Gospel. ‘When the gospel no longer / sounds like good news, / maybe our measure / of what is good – / and the people for whom / it was intended – / has slipped a few / too many notches. // We are not called / to shoehorn the gospel / into our narratives / of comfort and security, / but to open our hearts and lives / to love’s expansive reach. // We are made to fit love, / not the other way around. // Keep stretching. / It’s reaching toward you now; / has been since / before your first breath; / will be forevermore.’ I probably don’t need to add anything to that.”
BENEDICTION: May we love God so much, that we love nothing else too much. May we be so in awe of God, that we are in awe of no one else and nothing else. Amen.
[1] A summary of this interview is found at this URL.
https://baptistnews.com/article/diana-butler-bass-sbc-decline-dispels-idea-liberal-denominations-die/#.WVJodRMrJsM
Sunday, June 25, 2017
SERMON ~ June 25, 2017 ~ “The Unexamined Life”
June 25, 2017 ~ Third Sunday after Pentecost ~ Proper 7 (12) ~ Genesis 21:8-21; Psalm 86:1-10, 16-17; Jeremiah 20:7-13; Psalm 69:7-10, (11-15), 16-18; Romans 6:1b-11; Matthew 10:24-39 ~ Annual Organizational Meeting of the Church in Our 213th Year; A Ceremony of Recognition as We Honor Members in Long Standing; the Sixtieth Anniversary of the, Church at the National Level, the United Church of Christ.
The Unexamined Life
“You who have found your own life will lose it; you who lose your own life for my sake will find it.” — Matthew 10:39.
Many of you know in my younger years I was a church member in the Roman Catholic tradition. In that context, as a member in a Roman Catholic Church, one is expected to go to confession.
When I was in grade school the nuns always taught us that, in order to prepare for the Sacrament of Confession— and do note in the Roman tradition Confession is a Sacrament— in order to prepare for the Sacrament of Confession a person had to do what was called an examination of conscience. Or so the nuns said. But what is meant by an examination of conscience? (Slight pause.)
Perhaps the informative question to ask here is the obvious one: ‘what is sin?’ In our Western culture we have somehow decided sin can be defined as specific acts committed by individuals.
Therefore, if little Tommy in Sister Mary Patrick’s 4th Grade class happens to accidentally lift a chocolate bar from the supermarket shelf and, unobserved, slip it in a pocket while shopping with Mom— well, that should be confessed. Hence, in the course of the aforementioned examination of conscience, little Tommy needs to count this as a sin.
In fact, Little Tommy needs to calculate what sins have been committed since the last time he went to confession and be ready to confess each of these. And this tends to be the practice to which many adhere from the 4th Grade forward until death. Assessing sin becomes a game of numbers. What was done? How often did you do it?
“Are you sorry for it” might not even be a part of the picture. Indeed, if one sees some act as sin but keeps doing it over and over, it becomes hard to envision a state of actual confession, handing one’s self over to God about one’s own behavior.
Well, why does little Tommy often account for sin this way when an examination of conscience is employed? Believe me, my 4th grade teacher, Sister Mary Patrick, used that little Tommy example of the lifted chocolate bar to explain an examination of conscience. Hence, for many an accounting mode becomes a reality. How many times, how often?
Of course, lifting a chocolate bar from the supermarket shelf does seem to fall under the heading of ‘Thou shalt not steal’ and all that rot. Therefore, this action and act is a sin, something you, individually, and you as an individual, can and might do.
But is that sin? (Slight pause.) Since I have made this point many times here before, I hope it will not surprise you if I say that, from the Biblical perspective, lifting a chocolate bar from the local supermarket shelf is, at best, a minor offense and probably not worthy of the name sin.
There are two things that need to be said about sin, from the Biblical perspective. First, sin is a corporate offense, something done by the community or in the community, not necessarily done by the individual. Second and therefore, what kind of act should be defined as sin? The definition of sin from that Biblical perspective is quite simple. Sin is missing the mark. What mark?
The mark is that in some way our covenant relationship with God has been broken and our covenant relationship with one another has been broken. In fact and from the Biblical perspective, sin is always considered to be so corporate, so communal, that the Biblical concept of sin says if any one of us offends God or one another, if any one individual breaks covenant, we have all offended God and one another, we have all broken covenant.
To reiterate, sin is not individual. I know that sounds un-American. It’s theologically quite sound. Sin is not individual. To make the claim that sin is only individual is a very secular way to look at it. Sin is corporate. And, I might add, sin is not a game of numbers: ‘how many times did I do what?’
All that brings us back to covenant. When we break covenant with God and one another, we miss the mark. It’s that simple. (Slight pause.)
We find these words in the work known as Matthew. “You who have found your own life will lose it; you who lose your own life for my sake will find it.” (Slight pause.)
Socrates was a Greek philosopher who lived from approximately 470 to 399 Before the Common Era and is one of the founders of Western philosophy. This is among many things Socrates is famous for saying: “The unexamined life is not worth living.”
The examined life— to be clear, not the unexamined life but the examined life— is what philosophy is about. Why do I say that? Well, what does the word philosophy mean? Philosophy is a combination of two Greek words— philo and sophia.
I am sure you know Philadelphia is the city of brotherly love. Well, philo means love. Sophia is a common name for women. But sophia is also the Greek word for wisdom or virtue. Hence, philosophy is the love of or the pursuit of wisdom or the love of or the pursuit of virtue.
Hence, when we examine our lives what are we really doing? When we examine our lives we are not trying to decide if we are guilty of lifting a candy bar off a shelf. When we examine our lives— or as the Nuns would have had it, when we examine our conscience— we are trying to see if we have fully pursued wisdom, virtue. If we have not fully pursued wisdom, virtue, or put another way if we have not adhered to a covenant with God and one another, we have missed the mark. (Slight pause.)
And that turns me toward another modern Western concept, the thought that we are constantly and always good, without fault. We hit on this earlier in the Prayers of the People.
In that litany of Confession, which we often use in the seasons of Lent and Advent, first one person says “I confess to God and in the company of the people of God that my life and the life of the all the world is not whole.”
Then everyone responds, “May God forgive you, Christ renew you and the Spirit enable you to grow in love.” Once that happened then this was said: “We confess to God and in the company of the people of God that each of our lives and the life of all the world is not whole.” That was then followed by an expression of forgiveness.
This, my friends, illustrates the examined life. And it also brings us directly back to the words attributed to Jesus (quote:) “You who have found your own life will lose it; you who lose your own life for my sake will find it.”
You see the love of or the pursuit of wisdom, the love of or the pursuit of virtue is not about us. The love and the pursuit of covenant is not about us. Nor is it about goals or numbers. The love of or the pursuit of wisdom, the love of or the pursuit of virtue, the pursuit of covenant, the love of covenant is about a purity of heart and about doing for others.
An examination of life is about being in covenant with one another. And we need to come to that place— being in covenant with one another— because God is in covenant with us.
Or as it says in another section of the reading from Matthew (quote:) “...not a single sparrow will fall to the ground without the knowledge of Abba, God.” These words about sparrows are really, you see, about what happens when we are in covenant.
Why would I say these words about sparrows is about what happens when we are in covenant? Because, as the lyric in the hymn we used earlier says, “God’s eye is on the sparrow, and I know God watches me.”
So, God’s eye is on the sparrow. And yes, God is in covenant with us. And God, who is in covenant with us, invites us to be in covenant with one another. Why? We are all children of God. Or, if you like, we are all sparrows.
And, as children of God, as God’s sparrows, we need to see to each other’s well being, to each other’s welfare, to each other’s well-ness, to each other’s wholeness. And perhaps most importantly, we need to see to each other’s holiness. We need to see each other as holy. Seeing each other as holy: that is what I call the pursuit of virtue, the pursuit of wisdom, the pursuit of... covenant. Amen.
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, NY
06/25/2017 - Sunday of the Annual Meeting
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: “Robert Green Ingersoll, born in Dobbs Ferry, was an American lawyer, a Civil War veteran and political leader. He said, ‘In nature there are neither rewards nor punishments; there are consequences.’ And, indeed, we tend to divide things up into rewards or punishments, hence we divide things up into winners and losers. But in God’s economy there are no winners or losers. There are sparrows.”
BENEDICTION: May we love God so much, that we love nothing else too much. May we be so in awe of God, that we are in awe of no one else and nothing else. Amen.
The Unexamined Life
“You who have found your own life will lose it; you who lose your own life for my sake will find it.” — Matthew 10:39.
Many of you know in my younger years I was a church member in the Roman Catholic tradition. In that context, as a member in a Roman Catholic Church, one is expected to go to confession.
When I was in grade school the nuns always taught us that, in order to prepare for the Sacrament of Confession— and do note in the Roman tradition Confession is a Sacrament— in order to prepare for the Sacrament of Confession a person had to do what was called an examination of conscience. Or so the nuns said. But what is meant by an examination of conscience? (Slight pause.)
Perhaps the informative question to ask here is the obvious one: ‘what is sin?’ In our Western culture we have somehow decided sin can be defined as specific acts committed by individuals.
Therefore, if little Tommy in Sister Mary Patrick’s 4th Grade class happens to accidentally lift a chocolate bar from the supermarket shelf and, unobserved, slip it in a pocket while shopping with Mom— well, that should be confessed. Hence, in the course of the aforementioned examination of conscience, little Tommy needs to count this as a sin.
In fact, Little Tommy needs to calculate what sins have been committed since the last time he went to confession and be ready to confess each of these. And this tends to be the practice to which many adhere from the 4th Grade forward until death. Assessing sin becomes a game of numbers. What was done? How often did you do it?
“Are you sorry for it” might not even be a part of the picture. Indeed, if one sees some act as sin but keeps doing it over and over, it becomes hard to envision a state of actual confession, handing one’s self over to God about one’s own behavior.
Well, why does little Tommy often account for sin this way when an examination of conscience is employed? Believe me, my 4th grade teacher, Sister Mary Patrick, used that little Tommy example of the lifted chocolate bar to explain an examination of conscience. Hence, for many an accounting mode becomes a reality. How many times, how often?
Of course, lifting a chocolate bar from the supermarket shelf does seem to fall under the heading of ‘Thou shalt not steal’ and all that rot. Therefore, this action and act is a sin, something you, individually, and you as an individual, can and might do.
But is that sin? (Slight pause.) Since I have made this point many times here before, I hope it will not surprise you if I say that, from the Biblical perspective, lifting a chocolate bar from the local supermarket shelf is, at best, a minor offense and probably not worthy of the name sin.
There are two things that need to be said about sin, from the Biblical perspective. First, sin is a corporate offense, something done by the community or in the community, not necessarily done by the individual. Second and therefore, what kind of act should be defined as sin? The definition of sin from that Biblical perspective is quite simple. Sin is missing the mark. What mark?
The mark is that in some way our covenant relationship with God has been broken and our covenant relationship with one another has been broken. In fact and from the Biblical perspective, sin is always considered to be so corporate, so communal, that the Biblical concept of sin says if any one of us offends God or one another, if any one individual breaks covenant, we have all offended God and one another, we have all broken covenant.
To reiterate, sin is not individual. I know that sounds un-American. It’s theologically quite sound. Sin is not individual. To make the claim that sin is only individual is a very secular way to look at it. Sin is corporate. And, I might add, sin is not a game of numbers: ‘how many times did I do what?’
All that brings us back to covenant. When we break covenant with God and one another, we miss the mark. It’s that simple. (Slight pause.)
We find these words in the work known as Matthew. “You who have found your own life will lose it; you who lose your own life for my sake will find it.” (Slight pause.)
Socrates was a Greek philosopher who lived from approximately 470 to 399 Before the Common Era and is one of the founders of Western philosophy. This is among many things Socrates is famous for saying: “The unexamined life is not worth living.”
The examined life— to be clear, not the unexamined life but the examined life— is what philosophy is about. Why do I say that? Well, what does the word philosophy mean? Philosophy is a combination of two Greek words— philo and sophia.
I am sure you know Philadelphia is the city of brotherly love. Well, philo means love. Sophia is a common name for women. But sophia is also the Greek word for wisdom or virtue. Hence, philosophy is the love of or the pursuit of wisdom or the love of or the pursuit of virtue.
Hence, when we examine our lives what are we really doing? When we examine our lives we are not trying to decide if we are guilty of lifting a candy bar off a shelf. When we examine our lives— or as the Nuns would have had it, when we examine our conscience— we are trying to see if we have fully pursued wisdom, virtue. If we have not fully pursued wisdom, virtue, or put another way if we have not adhered to a covenant with God and one another, we have missed the mark. (Slight pause.)
And that turns me toward another modern Western concept, the thought that we are constantly and always good, without fault. We hit on this earlier in the Prayers of the People.
In that litany of Confession, which we often use in the seasons of Lent and Advent, first one person says “I confess to God and in the company of the people of God that my life and the life of the all the world is not whole.”
Then everyone responds, “May God forgive you, Christ renew you and the Spirit enable you to grow in love.” Once that happened then this was said: “We confess to God and in the company of the people of God that each of our lives and the life of all the world is not whole.” That was then followed by an expression of forgiveness.
This, my friends, illustrates the examined life. And it also brings us directly back to the words attributed to Jesus (quote:) “You who have found your own life will lose it; you who lose your own life for my sake will find it.”
You see the love of or the pursuit of wisdom, the love of or the pursuit of virtue is not about us. The love and the pursuit of covenant is not about us. Nor is it about goals or numbers. The love of or the pursuit of wisdom, the love of or the pursuit of virtue, the pursuit of covenant, the love of covenant is about a purity of heart and about doing for others.
An examination of life is about being in covenant with one another. And we need to come to that place— being in covenant with one another— because God is in covenant with us.
Or as it says in another section of the reading from Matthew (quote:) “...not a single sparrow will fall to the ground without the knowledge of Abba, God.” These words about sparrows are really, you see, about what happens when we are in covenant.
Why would I say these words about sparrows is about what happens when we are in covenant? Because, as the lyric in the hymn we used earlier says, “God’s eye is on the sparrow, and I know God watches me.”
So, God’s eye is on the sparrow. And yes, God is in covenant with us. And God, who is in covenant with us, invites us to be in covenant with one another. Why? We are all children of God. Or, if you like, we are all sparrows.
And, as children of God, as God’s sparrows, we need to see to each other’s well being, to each other’s welfare, to each other’s well-ness, to each other’s wholeness. And perhaps most importantly, we need to see to each other’s holiness. We need to see each other as holy. Seeing each other as holy: that is what I call the pursuit of virtue, the pursuit of wisdom, the pursuit of... covenant. Amen.
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, NY
06/25/2017 - Sunday of the Annual Meeting
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: “Robert Green Ingersoll, born in Dobbs Ferry, was an American lawyer, a Civil War veteran and political leader. He said, ‘In nature there are neither rewards nor punishments; there are consequences.’ And, indeed, we tend to divide things up into rewards or punishments, hence we divide things up into winners and losers. But in God’s economy there are no winners or losers. There are sparrows.”
BENEDICTION: May we love God so much, that we love nothing else too much. May we be so in awe of God, that we are in awe of no one else and nothing else. Amen.
Sunday, June 18, 2017
SERMON ~ 06/18/2017 ~ “The Journey Called Salvation”
06/18/2017 ~ Second Sunday after Pentecost ~ Proper 6 ~ 11th Sunday in Ordinary Time ~ Genesis 18:1-15, (21:1-7); Psalm 116:1-2, 12-19; Exodus 19:2-8a; Psalm 100; Romans 5:1-8; Matthew 9:35-10:8, (9-23) ~ Father’s Day.
The Journey Called Salvation
“Then Moses went up to God; and Yahweh— God— called out from the mountain and said, “This is what you shall say to the house of Jacob, what you are to tell the Israelites: ‘You saw for yourselves that which I did to Egypt, and how I bore you, carried you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself.’” — Exodus 19:3-4.
In case you have not heard, this year marks the 40th anniversary of the space opera Star Wars. And yes, it is a film beloved by many.
And yes, Star Wars earned more money that year than any other movie. How much more? In 1977, the year it was released, Star Wars earned more than twice as much money as its closest competitor which, by the way, was Smokey and the Bandit.
Now movie studios are corporations seeking profit. Because of the earnings potential in the Star Wars model of movie making, studios recognized a lucrative cash stream was available. This changed the way the film industry operated. These blockbuster style movies have become the cultural norm, especially in the Summer.
However, I think many, many, many years hence, or perhaps even “a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away...,” when historians look at Star Wars, how much money the film earned and how it changed the movie industry will be a minor topic. I think the more likely topic will be “how did this film enter into, feed into and even meld with the psyche of America.”
And here’s an obvious question on that count. ‘What is it about the psyche of this nation which enabled, empowered this film to enthrall us?’ (Slight pause.)
Well, what is Star Wars about... really? Is the film simply about Luke Skywalker and Princess Leia Organa and Han Solo and the Wookiee Chewbacca and the Jedi Knight Obi-Wan Kenobi, as they traverse across galaxies? Is that what it’s about? Or is it about something else, perhaps something more engaging, more central than mere action? (Slight pause.)
I want to suggest Star Wars taps into our psyche— and by labeling Star Wars as tapping into the American psyche I was not giving the film the credit it is due. Star Wars does not just tap into the American psyche. Star Wars taps into our human psyche. In any case, I want to suggest Star Wars taps into our psyche because it is about three very basic human experiences.
Star Wars is about the journey— the journey called life. Star Wars is about freedom— human freedom. Additionally, in the story there is a sense of some kind of spirit reality, a reality beyond human understanding, which seems to be a constant presence. (Slight pause.)
We find these words in the work known as Exodus: “Then Moses went up to God; and Yahweh— God— called out from the mountain and said, “This is what you shall say to the house of Jacob, what you are to tell the Israelites: ‘You saw for yourselves that which I did to Egypt, and how I bore you, carried you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself.’” (Slight pause.)
We Christians— especially Western Christians— often seem to be comfortable with what the early church and even the church historic would label as a heresy. That heresy says the salvation offered by God started with Jesus. I won’t go as far as to call this a heresy, but I would certainly label the idea that salvation started with Jesus as a misunderstanding of or an inaccurate reading of the message in the Hebrew Scriptures.
Even a cursory reading of the Exodus should clearly tell anyone God offers salvation. (Quote:) “You saw for yourselves that which I did to Egypt, and how I bore you, carried you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself.” These words describe the action of God and action— especially that action— constitutes salvation. That action is salvation.
Now, my guess is, especially Western Christians, don’t count the action of God in our lives as having anything to do with salvation. Why? Besides the idea that salvation started with Jesus, Western Christians seemed to have grasped onto the notion that salvation is somehow postponed to an afterlife.
And that, indeed, points out a second way we misunderstand, don’t understand, fail to understand the message in Scripture. We equate afterlife with salvation.
Now given that, I find it interesting that often oppressed communities clearly and obviously understand the salvation God offers can be seen as the present action of God. Oppressed communities understand salvation as something tangible, real, something which can happen and even is happening now.
The best proof I can offer about how oppressed communities see salvation as a possibility in the present tense are two hymns based in the experience of African-American community. These two hymns are Go Down Moses and In Egypt under Pharaoh, a hymn we used today. These hymns reference the experience of God as something which can happen now and, therefore, something which should be equated with salvation.
So, why do oppressed communities equate the experience of God right now, in our time, in our midst, with salvation? (Slight pause.) Let’s, for a moment, go back to Star Wars and, once again, explore how that film taps into the human psyche.
I made three claims about that story. Star Wars is about the journey called life. It’s about freedom— human freedom. And in the story there is a sense of some kind of spirit reality beyond human understanding which seems to be a constant presence. (Slight pause.)
You see, Star Wars is not about Luke and Leia and Han and Chewbacca and Obi-Wan as they travel across galaxies. That is merely the story.
So too it is with the Exodus story. Indeed, when this passage was introduced it was said the Sinai episode is at the center of Exodus. It is central to Exodus. And what should draw our attention about that story?
The Exodus story has some basic ideas which tap into the human psyche. The Exodus story tells us life is a journey. The Exodus story tells us that the journey moves us toward freedom. The Exodus story tells us there is some sense of a spirit reality beyond human understanding which seems to be a constant presence.
Star Wars fans call that spirit reality the force. Readers of the Hebrew Scriptures and the Christian Scriptures call that spirit reality God. (Slight pause.)
All this should lead us to ask yet another obvious question. If that is a valid reading of the Hebrew Scriptures and accurately assesses how the Hebrew Scriptures address salvation, how should we be reading New Testament on the topic of salvation? (Slight pause.)
Street corner evangelists sometimes ask the question: “Are you saved?” The implication is somewhere, somehow there is a goal to be achieved. But is that the message of Jesus about salvation? (Slight pause.)
In the reading from Matthew we heard these words (quote): “...go make this proclamation: ‘The reign of heaven has drawn near.’” Biblical scholars agree on this. The message of Jesus in the Gospels is clear: God is near. God is with us on the journey. On that journey God walks with us toward the freedom God offers. (Slight pause.)
You see, the prime message of Scripture— the Hebrew Scriptures and the Christian Scriptures— is this basic: life is a journey. The journey moves us toward freedom because of the presence of God. And, by the way, there is a sense of some kind of spirit reality beyond human understanding which seems to be a constant presence. And we call that presence God. Amen.
06/18/2017
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, New York
ENDPIECE: It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Choral Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “I’ve said this here before. It bears repeating. The late poet Maya Angelou said she was always surprised when someone told her they were a Christian. She was under the impression that took a lifetime to accomplish. Life is a journey. The journey moves us toward freedom. God walks with us.”
BENEDICTION: Let God’s love be our first awareness each day. Let God’s love flow through our every activity. Let us rejoice that God frees us to be witnesses for God. Let us understand every day as a new adventure in faith because the Creator draws us into community. And may we love God so much that we love nothing else too much. May we be so in awe of God that we are in awe of no one else and nothing else. Amen.
The Journey Called Salvation
“Then Moses went up to God; and Yahweh— God— called out from the mountain and said, “This is what you shall say to the house of Jacob, what you are to tell the Israelites: ‘You saw for yourselves that which I did to Egypt, and how I bore you, carried you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself.’” — Exodus 19:3-4.
In case you have not heard, this year marks the 40th anniversary of the space opera Star Wars. And yes, it is a film beloved by many.
And yes, Star Wars earned more money that year than any other movie. How much more? In 1977, the year it was released, Star Wars earned more than twice as much money as its closest competitor which, by the way, was Smokey and the Bandit.
Now movie studios are corporations seeking profit. Because of the earnings potential in the Star Wars model of movie making, studios recognized a lucrative cash stream was available. This changed the way the film industry operated. These blockbuster style movies have become the cultural norm, especially in the Summer.
However, I think many, many, many years hence, or perhaps even “a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away...,” when historians look at Star Wars, how much money the film earned and how it changed the movie industry will be a minor topic. I think the more likely topic will be “how did this film enter into, feed into and even meld with the psyche of America.”
And here’s an obvious question on that count. ‘What is it about the psyche of this nation which enabled, empowered this film to enthrall us?’ (Slight pause.)
Well, what is Star Wars about... really? Is the film simply about Luke Skywalker and Princess Leia Organa and Han Solo and the Wookiee Chewbacca and the Jedi Knight Obi-Wan Kenobi, as they traverse across galaxies? Is that what it’s about? Or is it about something else, perhaps something more engaging, more central than mere action? (Slight pause.)
I want to suggest Star Wars taps into our psyche— and by labeling Star Wars as tapping into the American psyche I was not giving the film the credit it is due. Star Wars does not just tap into the American psyche. Star Wars taps into our human psyche. In any case, I want to suggest Star Wars taps into our psyche because it is about three very basic human experiences.
Star Wars is about the journey— the journey called life. Star Wars is about freedom— human freedom. Additionally, in the story there is a sense of some kind of spirit reality, a reality beyond human understanding, which seems to be a constant presence. (Slight pause.)
We find these words in the work known as Exodus: “Then Moses went up to God; and Yahweh— God— called out from the mountain and said, “This is what you shall say to the house of Jacob, what you are to tell the Israelites: ‘You saw for yourselves that which I did to Egypt, and how I bore you, carried you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself.’” (Slight pause.)
We Christians— especially Western Christians— often seem to be comfortable with what the early church and even the church historic would label as a heresy. That heresy says the salvation offered by God started with Jesus. I won’t go as far as to call this a heresy, but I would certainly label the idea that salvation started with Jesus as a misunderstanding of or an inaccurate reading of the message in the Hebrew Scriptures.
Even a cursory reading of the Exodus should clearly tell anyone God offers salvation. (Quote:) “You saw for yourselves that which I did to Egypt, and how I bore you, carried you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself.” These words describe the action of God and action— especially that action— constitutes salvation. That action is salvation.
Now, my guess is, especially Western Christians, don’t count the action of God in our lives as having anything to do with salvation. Why? Besides the idea that salvation started with Jesus, Western Christians seemed to have grasped onto the notion that salvation is somehow postponed to an afterlife.
And that, indeed, points out a second way we misunderstand, don’t understand, fail to understand the message in Scripture. We equate afterlife with salvation.
Now given that, I find it interesting that often oppressed communities clearly and obviously understand the salvation God offers can be seen as the present action of God. Oppressed communities understand salvation as something tangible, real, something which can happen and even is happening now.
The best proof I can offer about how oppressed communities see salvation as a possibility in the present tense are two hymns based in the experience of African-American community. These two hymns are Go Down Moses and In Egypt under Pharaoh, a hymn we used today. These hymns reference the experience of God as something which can happen now and, therefore, something which should be equated with salvation.
So, why do oppressed communities equate the experience of God right now, in our time, in our midst, with salvation? (Slight pause.) Let’s, for a moment, go back to Star Wars and, once again, explore how that film taps into the human psyche.
I made three claims about that story. Star Wars is about the journey called life. It’s about freedom— human freedom. And in the story there is a sense of some kind of spirit reality beyond human understanding which seems to be a constant presence. (Slight pause.)
You see, Star Wars is not about Luke and Leia and Han and Chewbacca and Obi-Wan as they travel across galaxies. That is merely the story.
So too it is with the Exodus story. Indeed, when this passage was introduced it was said the Sinai episode is at the center of Exodus. It is central to Exodus. And what should draw our attention about that story?
The Exodus story has some basic ideas which tap into the human psyche. The Exodus story tells us life is a journey. The Exodus story tells us that the journey moves us toward freedom. The Exodus story tells us there is some sense of a spirit reality beyond human understanding which seems to be a constant presence.
Star Wars fans call that spirit reality the force. Readers of the Hebrew Scriptures and the Christian Scriptures call that spirit reality God. (Slight pause.)
All this should lead us to ask yet another obvious question. If that is a valid reading of the Hebrew Scriptures and accurately assesses how the Hebrew Scriptures address salvation, how should we be reading New Testament on the topic of salvation? (Slight pause.)
Street corner evangelists sometimes ask the question: “Are you saved?” The implication is somewhere, somehow there is a goal to be achieved. But is that the message of Jesus about salvation? (Slight pause.)
In the reading from Matthew we heard these words (quote): “...go make this proclamation: ‘The reign of heaven has drawn near.’” Biblical scholars agree on this. The message of Jesus in the Gospels is clear: God is near. God is with us on the journey. On that journey God walks with us toward the freedom God offers. (Slight pause.)
You see, the prime message of Scripture— the Hebrew Scriptures and the Christian Scriptures— is this basic: life is a journey. The journey moves us toward freedom because of the presence of God. And, by the way, there is a sense of some kind of spirit reality beyond human understanding which seems to be a constant presence. And we call that presence God. Amen.
06/18/2017
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, New York
ENDPIECE: It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Choral Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “I’ve said this here before. It bears repeating. The late poet Maya Angelou said she was always surprised when someone told her they were a Christian. She was under the impression that took a lifetime to accomplish. Life is a journey. The journey moves us toward freedom. God walks with us.”
BENEDICTION: Let God’s love be our first awareness each day. Let God’s love flow through our every activity. Let us rejoice that God frees us to be witnesses for God. Let us understand every day as a new adventure in faith because the Creator draws us into community. And may we love God so much that we love nothing else too much. May we be so in awe of God that we are in awe of no one else and nothing else. Amen.
Sunday, May 28, 2017
SERMON ~ 05/28/2017 ~ “It’s Complicated”
05/28/2017 ~ Seventh Sunday of Easter (If Ascension not observed here) ~ *Acts 1:6-14; Psalm 68:1-10, 32-35; 1 Peter 4:12-14; 5:6-11; John 17:1-11 ~ Note: Ascension Readings: *Acts 1:1-11; Psalm 47 or Psalm 93; Ephesians 1:15-23; Luke 24:44-53 ~ Memorial Day Weekend on the Secular Calendar.
It’s Complicated
“All these were constantly devoting themselves to prayer, together with certain women, including Mary the mother of Jesus, as well as the sisters and brothers of Jesus.” — Acts 1:14.
I want to start with an obvious question: what is family? Notice, I did not ask ‘who are your blood relatives?’ I asked ‘what is family?’ (Slight pause.)
A couple of weeks ago Bonnie and I drove to Connecticut— five hours each way— to go to a memorial service. The service and the reception after it lasted at best three hours. Was this service for a blood relative? No. Not even close.
Was this person a significant part of our lives? Yes. Therefore, no matter what blood lines might say, was she family? Yes she was— family however you want to put that— family, extended family, whatever. As a common saying goes these days— especially when it comes to relationships— it’s complicated. (Slight pause.)
I have on occasion mentioned my late cousin Roseanna Genevieve McCool. Rose, as I just indicated, was true family, a blood relative— a cousin. Rose was the daughter of my paternal grandfather’s sister.
Roses’s mother died young and for many years Rose and her father lived in an apartment in the same house where my paternal grandfather and his wife lived. It was, in fact, a house my grandparents owned. Rose and her father rented the upstairs apartment.
When I was very young both Rose’s father and my grandfather’s wife died. One consequence of that was, instead of being simply a cousin, Rose became much more of a grandmother figure in my family life, in the structure of my family, for me.
Was Rose a grandmother, my grandmother? No. Was she a grandmother figure? Yes. So, even within the context of blood relations, things can be... complicated. (Slight pause.)
One more family story: Bonnie and I have a niece, Heather, who lives in Dallas. In early July she and her five year old son, Henry, will be visiting her Dad, Bonnie’s brother Jack, in Deer Isle, Maine. Since we have not seen Heather and Henry in two years and Maine is a lot closer than Dallas, Bonnie and I will be traveling to Maine to join in on the visit. (Slight pause.)
Except everything I just said about how Heather and Henry are related to us is wrong. Well, it is, in one sense, not wrong. But it is certainly... inaccurate.
How so? Heather is the daughter of Jack’s first wife, Susan. But she is not Jack’s daughter. They, we, are not related by blood. Even though Heather is not related to Jack, after Susan and Jack got a divorce, Jack had custody of Heather.
Heather calls Jack “Dad.” And she addresses her biological father not with any term of endearment like Dad. Heather addresses her biological father by his first name. (Slight pause.)
So, what is family— really? It is complicated, is it not? (Slight pause.) And even though it is complicated, we experience it, we live with the reality of it, we know the complexity of it, do we not? As I said— family— it’s... complicated. (Slight pause.)
We find these words in the work known as Luke/Acts in the section commonly referred to as Acts: “All these were constantly devoting themselves to prayer, together with certain women, including Mary the mother of Jesus, as well as the sisters and brothers of Jesus.” (Slight pause.)
Over time it has become evident to me people are often not comfortable with what Scripture really says, its reality, its complexity. Scripture... it’s complicated.
I think in part because of that complexity we tend to make up things about Scripture. And the things we make up often simplify what Scripture actually says.
For instance— as I have said many times— there are two Nativity stories, stories of the birth of Jesus, in the four Gospels— one in Luke with angels and shepherds and one in Matthew with a star and Magi. These are two stories written at two different times, by at least two different authors, addressed to two different audiences.
These stories exist not to report on the birth of Jesus but to make theological points about the Messiah. And what do we do with them? We mesh them together as if they were one. We simplify their complexity. After all, how many Christmas pageants have you seen with these stories told as if they were one?
But they are not in any way unified. Clearly one of many theological points Luke tries to make is the birth of the Messiah should be announced, proclaimed to the poor, the outcast.
Clearly one of many theological points Matthew tries to make is to tie the story of the Messiah to Jewish heritage, the Exodus. And in simplifying these two stories, in meshing them together, we miss the theological points. We flatten out the theological points they make. We make it theologically bland. We also make the stories culturally acceptable while blithely ignoring their theological thrust.
And, as I am sure you know, there are only two nativity stories in the four Gospels. Hence, two Gospels totally ignore the birth of the Messiah.
Why would two Gospels dismiss the nativity of the Messiah so completely, especially when our culture makes those stories so central? I would suggest those two Gospels discount the birth stories for two reasons.
First, those two Gospels have their own theological points to make and can make those points without considering the birth of the Messiah. Second, the nativity stories we do have are not at all about the actual birth of the Messiah, except from the theological perspective.
Indeed, the nativity stories are there to make specific theological points. But those points have nothing to do with angels or shepherds or stars or Magi. Like I said— it’s complicated. (Slight pause.)
So, did you notice in the story from Acts Jesus has sisters and brothers? And that’s not just one sister and one brother. That’s sisters and brothers— plural. And have you noticed our culture pretty much obliterates that little detail? Indeed, from other passages in Scripture it’s clear the Apostle James is plainly and unambiguously labeled a brother, meaning a blood relative, of Jesus.
So, Jesus had sisters and brothers. Or at least that’s what it says. To reiterate, from what I’ve heard I am fairly certain— folk religion, populist religion, popular culture, is in large denial about Jesus having had any brothers, any sisters. (Slight pause.)
Now, here’s yet a different question: ‘given what I said earlier, are these people labeled as sisters and brothers actually sisters and brothers? Or are they some kind of extended family? (Slight pause.)
Not long after I came to Norwich to be the pastor at this church a parishioner asked me why I was so passionate about Scripture. This is the answer I gave. As I read what Scripture has to say, the people are real for me, alive for me. The situations are real, alive for me.
The way I see it, the people and the situations we find in Scripture are complicated. Therefore, the people and the situations seem real to me.
And then, there is the theology. What are these people, real people, these situations, real situations, trying to tell me, trying to tell us about the reality of God. (Slight pause.) I would suggest the reality of God— theological reality or any other kind of reality— the reality of God is just like our own every day reality, just like all reality. It’s complicated. (Slight pause.)
Or is it? My own perception is we make the reality of God more complicated than it actually is. How? We overlay the reality of God with cultural trappings, imposed culturally acceptable falsehoods, which have little or nothing to do with God’s truth. (Slight pause.)
That brings me back to the question: ‘what is family— really?’ Family— family is who you share your life with, who you share your love with.
And what is God’s truth? God’s truth is we are all part of God’s family. And that is not complicated. As I have said here many times over, God loves us and wants to covenant with us. That’s God’s truth.
So, God’s truth is we are all children of God. We are all a part of the family of God. And that, my friends, is as complicated or as simple as you make it out to be. So, is the love of God, as that loves is reflected in each of us, complicated? Your call. Amen.
05/28/2017
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, New York.
ENDPIECE: It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Choral Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “The great American composer/lyricist Stephen Sondheim wrote this lyric: ‘Anyone can whistle, / That’s what they say— / Easy. / Anyone can whistle / Any old day— Easy. / It’s all so simple: / Relax, let go, let fly. / So someone tell me why / Can’t I? / I can dance a tango, / I can read Greek— / Easy. / I can slay a dragon / Any old week— Easy. / What’s hard is simple. / What’s natural comes hard. / Maybe you could show me / How to let go, / Lower my guard, / Learn to be... free. / Maybe if you whistle, / Whistle for me.’ Sometimes, especially when it comes to covenant love, we need to Relax, let go, let fly.”
BENEDICTION: God promises to empower our witness. The Holy Spirit is present to us. Jesus, the Christ, lives among us. Let us go from this worship to continue our worship with work and witness. And may the peace of Christ, which surpasses our understanding keep our hearts, minds and spirits centered on God, this day and forevermore. Amen.
It’s Complicated
“All these were constantly devoting themselves to prayer, together with certain women, including Mary the mother of Jesus, as well as the sisters and brothers of Jesus.” — Acts 1:14.
I want to start with an obvious question: what is family? Notice, I did not ask ‘who are your blood relatives?’ I asked ‘what is family?’ (Slight pause.)
A couple of weeks ago Bonnie and I drove to Connecticut— five hours each way— to go to a memorial service. The service and the reception after it lasted at best three hours. Was this service for a blood relative? No. Not even close.
Was this person a significant part of our lives? Yes. Therefore, no matter what blood lines might say, was she family? Yes she was— family however you want to put that— family, extended family, whatever. As a common saying goes these days— especially when it comes to relationships— it’s complicated. (Slight pause.)
I have on occasion mentioned my late cousin Roseanna Genevieve McCool. Rose, as I just indicated, was true family, a blood relative— a cousin. Rose was the daughter of my paternal grandfather’s sister.
Roses’s mother died young and for many years Rose and her father lived in an apartment in the same house where my paternal grandfather and his wife lived. It was, in fact, a house my grandparents owned. Rose and her father rented the upstairs apartment.
When I was very young both Rose’s father and my grandfather’s wife died. One consequence of that was, instead of being simply a cousin, Rose became much more of a grandmother figure in my family life, in the structure of my family, for me.
Was Rose a grandmother, my grandmother? No. Was she a grandmother figure? Yes. So, even within the context of blood relations, things can be... complicated. (Slight pause.)
One more family story: Bonnie and I have a niece, Heather, who lives in Dallas. In early July she and her five year old son, Henry, will be visiting her Dad, Bonnie’s brother Jack, in Deer Isle, Maine. Since we have not seen Heather and Henry in two years and Maine is a lot closer than Dallas, Bonnie and I will be traveling to Maine to join in on the visit. (Slight pause.)
Except everything I just said about how Heather and Henry are related to us is wrong. Well, it is, in one sense, not wrong. But it is certainly... inaccurate.
How so? Heather is the daughter of Jack’s first wife, Susan. But she is not Jack’s daughter. They, we, are not related by blood. Even though Heather is not related to Jack, after Susan and Jack got a divorce, Jack had custody of Heather.
Heather calls Jack “Dad.” And she addresses her biological father not with any term of endearment like Dad. Heather addresses her biological father by his first name. (Slight pause.)
So, what is family— really? It is complicated, is it not? (Slight pause.) And even though it is complicated, we experience it, we live with the reality of it, we know the complexity of it, do we not? As I said— family— it’s... complicated. (Slight pause.)
We find these words in the work known as Luke/Acts in the section commonly referred to as Acts: “All these were constantly devoting themselves to prayer, together with certain women, including Mary the mother of Jesus, as well as the sisters and brothers of Jesus.” (Slight pause.)
Over time it has become evident to me people are often not comfortable with what Scripture really says, its reality, its complexity. Scripture... it’s complicated.
I think in part because of that complexity we tend to make up things about Scripture. And the things we make up often simplify what Scripture actually says.
For instance— as I have said many times— there are two Nativity stories, stories of the birth of Jesus, in the four Gospels— one in Luke with angels and shepherds and one in Matthew with a star and Magi. These are two stories written at two different times, by at least two different authors, addressed to two different audiences.
These stories exist not to report on the birth of Jesus but to make theological points about the Messiah. And what do we do with them? We mesh them together as if they were one. We simplify their complexity. After all, how many Christmas pageants have you seen with these stories told as if they were one?
But they are not in any way unified. Clearly one of many theological points Luke tries to make is the birth of the Messiah should be announced, proclaimed to the poor, the outcast.
Clearly one of many theological points Matthew tries to make is to tie the story of the Messiah to Jewish heritage, the Exodus. And in simplifying these two stories, in meshing them together, we miss the theological points. We flatten out the theological points they make. We make it theologically bland. We also make the stories culturally acceptable while blithely ignoring their theological thrust.
And, as I am sure you know, there are only two nativity stories in the four Gospels. Hence, two Gospels totally ignore the birth of the Messiah.
Why would two Gospels dismiss the nativity of the Messiah so completely, especially when our culture makes those stories so central? I would suggest those two Gospels discount the birth stories for two reasons.
First, those two Gospels have their own theological points to make and can make those points without considering the birth of the Messiah. Second, the nativity stories we do have are not at all about the actual birth of the Messiah, except from the theological perspective.
Indeed, the nativity stories are there to make specific theological points. But those points have nothing to do with angels or shepherds or stars or Magi. Like I said— it’s complicated. (Slight pause.)
So, did you notice in the story from Acts Jesus has sisters and brothers? And that’s not just one sister and one brother. That’s sisters and brothers— plural. And have you noticed our culture pretty much obliterates that little detail? Indeed, from other passages in Scripture it’s clear the Apostle James is plainly and unambiguously labeled a brother, meaning a blood relative, of Jesus.
So, Jesus had sisters and brothers. Or at least that’s what it says. To reiterate, from what I’ve heard I am fairly certain— folk religion, populist religion, popular culture, is in large denial about Jesus having had any brothers, any sisters. (Slight pause.)
Now, here’s yet a different question: ‘given what I said earlier, are these people labeled as sisters and brothers actually sisters and brothers? Or are they some kind of extended family? (Slight pause.)
Not long after I came to Norwich to be the pastor at this church a parishioner asked me why I was so passionate about Scripture. This is the answer I gave. As I read what Scripture has to say, the people are real for me, alive for me. The situations are real, alive for me.
The way I see it, the people and the situations we find in Scripture are complicated. Therefore, the people and the situations seem real to me.
And then, there is the theology. What are these people, real people, these situations, real situations, trying to tell me, trying to tell us about the reality of God. (Slight pause.) I would suggest the reality of God— theological reality or any other kind of reality— the reality of God is just like our own every day reality, just like all reality. It’s complicated. (Slight pause.)
Or is it? My own perception is we make the reality of God more complicated than it actually is. How? We overlay the reality of God with cultural trappings, imposed culturally acceptable falsehoods, which have little or nothing to do with God’s truth. (Slight pause.)
That brings me back to the question: ‘what is family— really?’ Family— family is who you share your life with, who you share your love with.
And what is God’s truth? God’s truth is we are all part of God’s family. And that is not complicated. As I have said here many times over, God loves us and wants to covenant with us. That’s God’s truth.
So, God’s truth is we are all children of God. We are all a part of the family of God. And that, my friends, is as complicated or as simple as you make it out to be. So, is the love of God, as that loves is reflected in each of us, complicated? Your call. Amen.
05/28/2017
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, New York.
ENDPIECE: It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Choral Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “The great American composer/lyricist Stephen Sondheim wrote this lyric: ‘Anyone can whistle, / That’s what they say— / Easy. / Anyone can whistle / Any old day— Easy. / It’s all so simple: / Relax, let go, let fly. / So someone tell me why / Can’t I? / I can dance a tango, / I can read Greek— / Easy. / I can slay a dragon / Any old week— Easy. / What’s hard is simple. / What’s natural comes hard. / Maybe you could show me / How to let go, / Lower my guard, / Learn to be... free. / Maybe if you whistle, / Whistle for me.’ Sometimes, especially when it comes to covenant love, we need to Relax, let go, let fly.”
BENEDICTION: God promises to empower our witness. The Holy Spirit is present to us. Jesus, the Christ, lives among us. Let us go from this worship to continue our worship with work and witness. And may the peace of Christ, which surpasses our understanding keep our hearts, minds and spirits centered on God, this day and forevermore. Amen.
Sunday, May 14, 2017
SERMON ~ 05/14/2017 ~ “God Among Us Now”
05/14/2017 ~ Fifth Sunday of Easter ~ *Acts 7:55-60; Psalm 31:1-5, 15-16; 1 Peter 2:2-10; John 14:1-14 ~ Mother’s Day on the Secular Calendar or the Festival of the Christian Home on the Church Calendar ~ The Sacrament of Baptism; the Rite of Confirmation.
God Among Us Now
As you know, earlier we had a celebration of Baptism. Baptism is a sacrament, a sacrament being an outward and visible sign of the grace of God. But there are a number of ways to look at Baptism. Let me elaborate.
For instance, it can be said in and with and by Baptism we welcome someone into a community of faith, a local church. It can said in and with and by Baptism we welcome someone into not just the local community of faith but the greater Christian community. It can be said in and with and by Baptism we welcome someone as a child of God.
But equally, it can be said Baptism is simply an acknowledgment on our part the newly Baptized is already a member of the local community of faith, already a member of the greater community, already a child of God. Put differently, nothing we do— no act of ours— makes a person a member of the local or greater community of faith or a child of God. Nothing we do imposes, dispenses, administers or inflicts some kind magic on an individual which in some way alters them.
To be clear, this claim is not to say the very ritual, the very act, the very actions we take, the celebration of the sacrament of Baptism— in and of itself— fails to be significant. It is significant. Our actions are the very thing the definition claims: an outward sign.
What I am trying to say about this ritual, this act, this sacrament— Baptism— is we should not read into the ritual, the act, the sacrament our cultural misconceptions or our desires, our wants, our emotions, our dreams about what Baptism is or is not. The nature of this sacrament, the nature of the two sacraments of the Protestant tradition— Baptism and Communion— is that they are not about us. (Slight pause.)
So, if the sacraments are not about us, what are they about? (Slight pause.) The sacraments are about God and the grace of God and the presence of God. (Slight pause.) Sacraments are about God and the grace of God and the presence of God. (Slight pause.)
We find these words in the work know as the Gospel according to the School of John: “Philip said to Jesus, ‘Rabbi, show us God, and we will be satisfied.’ Jesus replied, ‘Have I been with you all this time, Philip, and you still do not know me? Whoever has seen me has seen Abba God. How can you say, ‘Show us God’?” (Slight pause.)
I want to try a little thirty or forty second experiment. What I am going to ask is that each of us find another person, just one, perhaps someone whom you are sitting near and I was going to say this person should not really be a relative but we have so many folks who are relatives today, maybe we can get away with that. But if possible not a relative, O.K.? The idea was to take relationship of relative out of the equation but it will be tougher today. [1]
So, if you’re not sitting near someone, please move toward them. And this means someone needs to go with Bob Oehme— Bob— he came down from the loft he’s in back— I warned him, so this is good— he’s not up at the organ. O.K. Everyone get a partner. If there are is an odd number of people here today there will be one group of three. (Pause while people rearrange themselves.)
O.K. Looks like everyone’s paired up. Now, please do what I ask when I say ‘go’ everyone look into the eyes of your partner. This will last about thirty or forty seconds and I’ll time it.
Don’t say anything. There is no need to touch one another. Just look into the eyes of your partner. And I will let you know when time is up. O.K. Go! (Pause for the duration.) Amen. O.K.! If you moved too far you can go back to where you were if you want to— not a problem. Go ahead. (Pause for people to reassemble.)
O.K. I am not going to offer answers about this time together, but the obvious questions are: ‘How did that feel?’ Awkward. ‘What did you see?’ I am sure each of you has your own answer. Equally, I am sure for some people it was deeply moving. Others may have been asking, “What is Joe trying to get me into now?” (Slight pause.)
Now that we’ve had this exercise, let’s go back to the sacraments. I suggested the sacraments are not about us. The sacraments are about God and the grace of God and the presence of God.
Hence, for me, the Sacraments beg the question, “Where is God?” Indeed, let’s take what Philip says (quote:) “Rabbi, show us God and we will be satisfied.” I think the underlying question being asked by Philip really is, “Where... is... God?” (Slight pause.)
Given that question— “Where is God?” let’s turn to the rite we will be celebrating in a few moments, the Rite of Confirmation. In the Protestant tradition— as opposed to the Roman Catholic tradition— we do not call Confirmation a sacrament. We call it a rite of the church.
And, just like Baptism, it is a ritual performed in community. Just like Baptism, I would argue one of the things Conformation is about is community. Last I would argue, just like Baptism, the grace of God makes God’s own self available to us in the Rite of Confirmation.
However, I would also argue that, unlike Baptism, with Confirmation both the individual and we in the community of faith need to be proactive in participating in the grace offered by God with the rite. Indeed, while the grace of God is present, the reality of that grace is it needs our active participation to come to a state of full fruition, to come to a place of full enhancement.
In fact, over the years I’ve said Confirmation is not a rite of passage for teens. The Rite of Conformation is often looked at that way but to see Confirmation as a rite of passage is a very, very, very secular way of looking at it.
What I have said is all adults should go through the process of Confirmation every fifteen or twenty years. Why? The point of Confirmation is that it can be a process of renewal, refreshment and revitalization for us on our faith journey. Our active participation is a key part of the rite because continues once the ritual is finished.
The culture has unfortunately attached baggage to the rite. The first piece of baggage is the aforementioned idea that Confirmation is a right of passage. It is not.
Another is many think Confirmation is something which happens to them rather than the person being confirmed striving to participate in and with the grace God offers. The short version of my point is simple. Our active participation with God is vital not just or only in the process called Confirmation but in the journey called life. (Slight pause.)
All this circles back to asking you to look into the eyes of your neighbor. And all this circles back to what I think Philip is really asking: “Where is God?” (Slight pause.)
You see, the claim of Christianity is simple. Christ lives. But Christ lives where— in time, in space, in a place? (Slight pause.)
I want to suggest Christ is here, among us. Christ lives with us. Christ is reflected in each of us and in all of us, reflected in the community. Indeed, we call it the community of Christ.
I also want to suggest two things are necessary to constitute the community of Christ. First, the grace of God as found in the sacraments is necessary. God acts; we experience the grace of God.
Second, our participation in the grace God offers as found in the rites of the church such as Confirmation and our participation in the life of the church is vital. Together these rituals are a reminder to us that God is with us, Christ lives, and that the community which surrounds us is the dwelling place of God. God lives among us; Christ is with us.
Further, given the grace God offers through this community of Christ, we can find forgiveness, equity, peace, joy, hope, freedom and the love of God in each of us as we support one another on the journey called life. So, as we experience this journey called life, let’s keep looking in each others eyes. Why? God lives among us; Christ is with us. Amen.
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, New York
05/14/2017
ENDPIECE: It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Choral Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “It has been argued we Americans have a religious culture. I would suggest, rather, that we are not a religious culture. We are culturally religious. That’s a big difference. And I think being culturally religious— a religiosity which derives from the culture— is not what God seeks. Rather God encourages us to participate with God in this world in a religious culture which embodies forgiveness, equity, peace, joy, hope, freedom and the love of God in each other as we support each other on the journey called life. Culturally religious populations only pretend to embodied forgiveness, equity, peace, joy, hope, freedom and love. Pretending doesn’t work with God.”
BENEDICTION: Jesus assures us we will be empowered to do great works. We are, in fact, representatives of Christ, as we share the gifts God has granted us. And may the love of God the creator which is real, the Peace of Christ which surpasses all understanding and the companionship of the Holy Spirit which is ever present, keep our hearts and minds in the knowledge of God and in the care of God this day and forever more. Amen.
[1] As the Sacrament of Baptism and the Rite of Confirmation were both celebrated this day and the Bell Choir played two anthems, there were a lot of visitors and relatives present.
God Among Us Now
As you know, earlier we had a celebration of Baptism. Baptism is a sacrament, a sacrament being an outward and visible sign of the grace of God. But there are a number of ways to look at Baptism. Let me elaborate.
For instance, it can be said in and with and by Baptism we welcome someone into a community of faith, a local church. It can said in and with and by Baptism we welcome someone into not just the local community of faith but the greater Christian community. It can be said in and with and by Baptism we welcome someone as a child of God.
But equally, it can be said Baptism is simply an acknowledgment on our part the newly Baptized is already a member of the local community of faith, already a member of the greater community, already a child of God. Put differently, nothing we do— no act of ours— makes a person a member of the local or greater community of faith or a child of God. Nothing we do imposes, dispenses, administers or inflicts some kind magic on an individual which in some way alters them.
To be clear, this claim is not to say the very ritual, the very act, the very actions we take, the celebration of the sacrament of Baptism— in and of itself— fails to be significant. It is significant. Our actions are the very thing the definition claims: an outward sign.
What I am trying to say about this ritual, this act, this sacrament— Baptism— is we should not read into the ritual, the act, the sacrament our cultural misconceptions or our desires, our wants, our emotions, our dreams about what Baptism is or is not. The nature of this sacrament, the nature of the two sacraments of the Protestant tradition— Baptism and Communion— is that they are not about us. (Slight pause.)
So, if the sacraments are not about us, what are they about? (Slight pause.) The sacraments are about God and the grace of God and the presence of God. (Slight pause.) Sacraments are about God and the grace of God and the presence of God. (Slight pause.)
We find these words in the work know as the Gospel according to the School of John: “Philip said to Jesus, ‘Rabbi, show us God, and we will be satisfied.’ Jesus replied, ‘Have I been with you all this time, Philip, and you still do not know me? Whoever has seen me has seen Abba God. How can you say, ‘Show us God’?” (Slight pause.)
I want to try a little thirty or forty second experiment. What I am going to ask is that each of us find another person, just one, perhaps someone whom you are sitting near and I was going to say this person should not really be a relative but we have so many folks who are relatives today, maybe we can get away with that. But if possible not a relative, O.K.? The idea was to take relationship of relative out of the equation but it will be tougher today. [1]
So, if you’re not sitting near someone, please move toward them. And this means someone needs to go with Bob Oehme— Bob— he came down from the loft he’s in back— I warned him, so this is good— he’s not up at the organ. O.K. Everyone get a partner. If there are is an odd number of people here today there will be one group of three. (Pause while people rearrange themselves.)
O.K. Looks like everyone’s paired up. Now, please do what I ask when I say ‘go’ everyone look into the eyes of your partner. This will last about thirty or forty seconds and I’ll time it.
Don’t say anything. There is no need to touch one another. Just look into the eyes of your partner. And I will let you know when time is up. O.K. Go! (Pause for the duration.) Amen. O.K.! If you moved too far you can go back to where you were if you want to— not a problem. Go ahead. (Pause for people to reassemble.)
O.K. I am not going to offer answers about this time together, but the obvious questions are: ‘How did that feel?’ Awkward. ‘What did you see?’ I am sure each of you has your own answer. Equally, I am sure for some people it was deeply moving. Others may have been asking, “What is Joe trying to get me into now?” (Slight pause.)
Now that we’ve had this exercise, let’s go back to the sacraments. I suggested the sacraments are not about us. The sacraments are about God and the grace of God and the presence of God.
Hence, for me, the Sacraments beg the question, “Where is God?” Indeed, let’s take what Philip says (quote:) “Rabbi, show us God and we will be satisfied.” I think the underlying question being asked by Philip really is, “Where... is... God?” (Slight pause.)
Given that question— “Where is God?” let’s turn to the rite we will be celebrating in a few moments, the Rite of Confirmation. In the Protestant tradition— as opposed to the Roman Catholic tradition— we do not call Confirmation a sacrament. We call it a rite of the church.
And, just like Baptism, it is a ritual performed in community. Just like Baptism, I would argue one of the things Conformation is about is community. Last I would argue, just like Baptism, the grace of God makes God’s own self available to us in the Rite of Confirmation.
However, I would also argue that, unlike Baptism, with Confirmation both the individual and we in the community of faith need to be proactive in participating in the grace offered by God with the rite. Indeed, while the grace of God is present, the reality of that grace is it needs our active participation to come to a state of full fruition, to come to a place of full enhancement.
In fact, over the years I’ve said Confirmation is not a rite of passage for teens. The Rite of Conformation is often looked at that way but to see Confirmation as a rite of passage is a very, very, very secular way of looking at it.
What I have said is all adults should go through the process of Confirmation every fifteen or twenty years. Why? The point of Confirmation is that it can be a process of renewal, refreshment and revitalization for us on our faith journey. Our active participation is a key part of the rite because continues once the ritual is finished.
The culture has unfortunately attached baggage to the rite. The first piece of baggage is the aforementioned idea that Confirmation is a right of passage. It is not.
Another is many think Confirmation is something which happens to them rather than the person being confirmed striving to participate in and with the grace God offers. The short version of my point is simple. Our active participation with God is vital not just or only in the process called Confirmation but in the journey called life. (Slight pause.)
All this circles back to asking you to look into the eyes of your neighbor. And all this circles back to what I think Philip is really asking: “Where is God?” (Slight pause.)
You see, the claim of Christianity is simple. Christ lives. But Christ lives where— in time, in space, in a place? (Slight pause.)
I want to suggest Christ is here, among us. Christ lives with us. Christ is reflected in each of us and in all of us, reflected in the community. Indeed, we call it the community of Christ.
I also want to suggest two things are necessary to constitute the community of Christ. First, the grace of God as found in the sacraments is necessary. God acts; we experience the grace of God.
Second, our participation in the grace God offers as found in the rites of the church such as Confirmation and our participation in the life of the church is vital. Together these rituals are a reminder to us that God is with us, Christ lives, and that the community which surrounds us is the dwelling place of God. God lives among us; Christ is with us.
Further, given the grace God offers through this community of Christ, we can find forgiveness, equity, peace, joy, hope, freedom and the love of God in each of us as we support one another on the journey called life. So, as we experience this journey called life, let’s keep looking in each others eyes. Why? God lives among us; Christ is with us. Amen.
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, New York
05/14/2017
ENDPIECE: It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Choral Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “It has been argued we Americans have a religious culture. I would suggest, rather, that we are not a religious culture. We are culturally religious. That’s a big difference. And I think being culturally religious— a religiosity which derives from the culture— is not what God seeks. Rather God encourages us to participate with God in this world in a religious culture which embodies forgiveness, equity, peace, joy, hope, freedom and the love of God in each other as we support each other on the journey called life. Culturally religious populations only pretend to embodied forgiveness, equity, peace, joy, hope, freedom and love. Pretending doesn’t work with God.”
BENEDICTION: Jesus assures us we will be empowered to do great works. We are, in fact, representatives of Christ, as we share the gifts God has granted us. And may the love of God the creator which is real, the Peace of Christ which surpasses all understanding and the companionship of the Holy Spirit which is ever present, keep our hearts and minds in the knowledge of God and in the care of God this day and forever more. Amen.
[1] As the Sacrament of Baptism and the Rite of Confirmation were both celebrated this day and the Bell Choir played two anthems, there were a lot of visitors and relatives present.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)