A dozen or so years ago I attended a "stewardship conference" in Daytona Beach at the behest, and on the dime, of a denominational office. Several of my colleagues from the eastern U.S. were there, as well. One evening at dinner a fellow clergy-type bragged about how in a recent sermon he "railed against Bush (President George W.) and his policies." I thought to myself, "That poor congregation."
As a veteran by then of a couple of decades of preaching I once made that same mistake, although I was much younger when I did so. It was during the Reagan Nightmare (see, I did it again!), and the Lectionary served up a belt-high fastball with some Old Testament text about "old men" doing things with idols that were detrimental to the life of the community of God's people.
Well (as Reagan himself was wont to say), I swung at that fastball and couldn't resist declaring something to the effect of, "Until we say 'No!' to nuclear weapons we are as guilty of idolatry as President Reagan and all the other old men who think weapons and the threat of war provide our salvation!"
There was an audible gasp from someone in the congregation and Mary told me later that another person said, "I guess we know who he's voting for." Yep, it was Walter Mondale that time.
When it comes to preaching it seems to me there is a fine line between "prophetic" and pathetic. I was on the wrong side of that line, as was the guy who did his railing when Dubya held the keys to the White House.
For a semester or two at my seminary there was a theology professor visiting from Great Britain. I no longer remember his name, but from what I recall of the class I took with him we wrestled with this notion of prophecy. We were assigned to write a paper dealing with then-current issues, giving theological reflection and a prophetic word. The professor clearly didn't like what we wrote. Citing example after example from our efforts he kept making comments such as, "Where is the prophetic message? Everybody is against racism and sexism and all the other 'isms' you decried!"
Maybe not everybody... But, he made his point, and all these years later I still think about that.
As I understand prophecy it's not so much simply predicting the future, but rather has more to do with seeing the world and its realities through the eyes of God, or through a heart that is in tune with God. That is, "How does what is happening in the world line up with God's intentions for life, and what are the likely outcomes or consequences when there is a disconnect between the two?" Identifying all of that, as I see it, gets into the realm of prophecy.
Ah, but there's the rub: How do we know what God intends? It's there in the Bible, you say?
I challenge you to listen to sermons or Bible exposition by a dozen or so preachers coming at the text from various theological slants and tell me about God's intentions.
It seems to me that one can judge authentic prophecy by how much it challenges the status quo. If it's always "those people over there" who are offending God and likely to spend eternity screaming in burning agony while breathing in Sulphur fumes, then that's not prophecy. If our outlook and actions are challenged, and we're called to higher regard for others, and to be more mindful of how what we say and do have detrimental effects on the lives of people near and far, then prophecy is coming our way.
After all, in biblical days (and even in our lifetime) prophets weren't given medals and parades. They were put to death.
Prophecy, however, is not simply about negativity and rear end-kicking (although that may be an effective way to get our attention).
Prophecy, as stated earlier, points to God's intentions, and THAT is abundant life for all of God's Creation. To me, that is a clear message of scripture. God creates in love and desires for that love to fill every corner of life. It's not for White middle-class and higher Americans only. It's for everyone everywhere, only we have a tendency to mess that up as if there isn't enough of anything to go around.
So, problems abound. Conflict and tension ignite non-stop bitterness and violence. We have to get ours (and more, actually) at the expense of others. Then we bemoan our troubles, we demonize "them," and happiness eludes us.
I used to know a guy who sensed he was on the wrong path with all of his acquisitions and claimed privileges. He made a major life adjustment, taking on the challenges of living in service to others. When I brought him in to talk to student groups during my days running a seminar program his ideas always generated the most thinking and discussion among the students.
His message was straight-forward and, I would say, prophetic: "If you want to change the world, the first thing you need to do is change yourself."
Thursday, August 30, 2018
Tuesday, July 31, 2018
I Think I'll Quit Watching The News...
Every day brings more head-shaking developments for those of us who believe that turning back the clock to "Make America Great Again" is not only counter-productive but disgraceful. This isn't just about promoting one political party over the other. This is about the future of freedom, democracy, and a strong, unified nation. We are, after all, supposed to be the United States of America.
During the years I worked on Capitol Hill introducing groups of inquiring people to policy-makers, researchers, think-tankers, journalists, lobbyists and other advocates, and activists in my role directing the work of a seminar program I met scores of people representing various viewpoints. Some from opposing sides were compelling, some were clearly partisan, some were inspiring, and some were downright offensive, but that's who we are as a people. And together we can "move the ball forward," as the phrase goes, each contributing his or her insights, wisdom, and experiences. Together, we craft our shared life into something reflective of the vision of our Revolutionary Founders.
At least, that's how it's supposed to work, and how I believe the RF intended for it to work. Lately, though, it's not working, and it's getting worse all the time.
Here's a question to ponder: What is the "greatness" of America that needs restoring? Perhaps the underlying question relates to what "un-did" this "greatness."
To me, it's all about power and wealth. Those who have them always fear losing them. Those who don't have them, seek them. This presents a clash that lately has taken on, let's say, "biblical" proportions.
As women, ethnic minorities and others who are not White, male, and heterosexual find their voices and make strides in the power/wealth struggle those at the top of the heap (mainly White male heterosexuals) do whatever they can to counteract, even tamp down those who begin to slip the shackles that hold them back from the abundant life intended by God for all of Creation. (Ah, now we're starting to get to the biblical proportions of our little exercise)
We live in times that include the fomenting of suspicion and fear of Muslims. We live in times that include reactionary attempts to prevent certain immigrants from becoming part of our immigrant-based populace. We live in times that include a "shoot first and take names later" mentality when it comes to African-Americans (or to call the police when African-Americans engage in common, ordinary activities. just because they're black). We live in times that include efforts to take away women's ability to control their own bodies and health. We live in times that include "Christians" discriminating against LGBTQ folks because their "lifestyle" violates the religious liberties of said "Christians." We live in times when guns, and campaign contributions from the NRA, are more precious than the lives of our fellow citizens and their children. We live in times that include admiration for dictators and despots while giving the finger to our democracy-practicing allies. You can fill in the rest. It can get depressing to enumerate what we wake up to every day.
Today's example is Attorney General Jeff Sessions announcing the establishment of a "Religious Liberty Task Force."
Sessions, who already is in trouble with his own church, the United Methodists, stated that “we have gotten to the point where courts have held that morality cannot be a basis for law; where ministers are fearful to affirm, as they understand it, holy writ from the pulpit; and where one group can actively target religious groups by labeling them a ‘hate group’ on the basis of their sincerely held religious beliefs”
Sessions claimed all religions would be protected against discrimination. He also quoted The Boss, who said, "We'll be saying 'Merry Christmas' again." Personally, I have no confidence that this Task Force will be a positive, life-affirming endeavor.
I take issue with Sessions' claim that "ministers are fearful to affirm, as they understand it, holy writ from the pulpit." First of all, if the "ministers" to whom he refers preach a message of oppressing those who are different, they DO NOT understand "holy writ." And certainly, there are far too many ignoramus preachers seeking a wider following by showing how much judgment and wrath they can heap on people seen as "less than" in various ways.
"Hate group" is a valid description of such groups headed by those with these "sincerely held religious beliefs." I have no doubt as to the sincerity of these beliefs. Unfortunately, the only underpinnings they have are those related to self-service and power-seeking. The Bible constantly is twisted to justify one's prejudices.
There is nothing wrong with wishing someone "Happy Holidays," especially if you do or do not know whether that person celebrates differently from you. And, no one is stopping anyone from saying, "Merry Christmas." The only inhibitor to that is respect for the dignity of another person's traditions. If the Task Force seeks to codify "Merry Christmas," it defeats its own stated goals.
Why do we put up with all of this?
I wrote to my senators and representative expressing my disgust with the direction of our nation, but, of the two who responded, one simply disagreed and the other sent a letter about something else entirely. No surprise here, given who these guys are, but I didn't want to not be on record about what I see as a destructive manipulation of our common future.
Maybe some want to go back to "the good old days." Life was simpler. There weren't so many complications. It was Great!
Unless you weren't White, male, "Christian," heterosexual, observed diverse traditions, or otherwise were excluded from the dominant culture.
During the years I worked on Capitol Hill introducing groups of inquiring people to policy-makers, researchers, think-tankers, journalists, lobbyists and other advocates, and activists in my role directing the work of a seminar program I met scores of people representing various viewpoints. Some from opposing sides were compelling, some were clearly partisan, some were inspiring, and some were downright offensive, but that's who we are as a people. And together we can "move the ball forward," as the phrase goes, each contributing his or her insights, wisdom, and experiences. Together, we craft our shared life into something reflective of the vision of our Revolutionary Founders.
At least, that's how it's supposed to work, and how I believe the RF intended for it to work. Lately, though, it's not working, and it's getting worse all the time.
Here's a question to ponder: What is the "greatness" of America that needs restoring? Perhaps the underlying question relates to what "un-did" this "greatness."
To me, it's all about power and wealth. Those who have them always fear losing them. Those who don't have them, seek them. This presents a clash that lately has taken on, let's say, "biblical" proportions.
As women, ethnic minorities and others who are not White, male, and heterosexual find their voices and make strides in the power/wealth struggle those at the top of the heap (mainly White male heterosexuals) do whatever they can to counteract, even tamp down those who begin to slip the shackles that hold them back from the abundant life intended by God for all of Creation. (Ah, now we're starting to get to the biblical proportions of our little exercise)
We live in times that include the fomenting of suspicion and fear of Muslims. We live in times that include reactionary attempts to prevent certain immigrants from becoming part of our immigrant-based populace. We live in times that include a "shoot first and take names later" mentality when it comes to African-Americans (or to call the police when African-Americans engage in common, ordinary activities. just because they're black). We live in times that include efforts to take away women's ability to control their own bodies and health. We live in times that include "Christians" discriminating against LGBTQ folks because their "lifestyle" violates the religious liberties of said "Christians." We live in times when guns, and campaign contributions from the NRA, are more precious than the lives of our fellow citizens and their children. We live in times that include admiration for dictators and despots while giving the finger to our democracy-practicing allies. You can fill in the rest. It can get depressing to enumerate what we wake up to every day.
Today's example is Attorney General Jeff Sessions announcing the establishment of a "Religious Liberty Task Force."
Sessions, who already is in trouble with his own church, the United Methodists, stated that “we have gotten to the point where courts have held that morality cannot be a basis for law; where ministers are fearful to affirm, as they understand it, holy writ from the pulpit; and where one group can actively target religious groups by labeling them a ‘hate group’ on the basis of their sincerely held religious beliefs”
Sessions claimed all religions would be protected against discrimination. He also quoted The Boss, who said, "We'll be saying 'Merry Christmas' again." Personally, I have no confidence that this Task Force will be a positive, life-affirming endeavor.
I take issue with Sessions' claim that "ministers are fearful to affirm, as they understand it, holy writ from the pulpit." First of all, if the "ministers" to whom he refers preach a message of oppressing those who are different, they DO NOT understand "holy writ." And certainly, there are far too many ignoramus preachers seeking a wider following by showing how much judgment and wrath they can heap on people seen as "less than" in various ways.
"Hate group" is a valid description of such groups headed by those with these "sincerely held religious beliefs." I have no doubt as to the sincerity of these beliefs. Unfortunately, the only underpinnings they have are those related to self-service and power-seeking. The Bible constantly is twisted to justify one's prejudices.
There is nothing wrong with wishing someone "Happy Holidays," especially if you do or do not know whether that person celebrates differently from you. And, no one is stopping anyone from saying, "Merry Christmas." The only inhibitor to that is respect for the dignity of another person's traditions. If the Task Force seeks to codify "Merry Christmas," it defeats its own stated goals.
Why do we put up with all of this?
I wrote to my senators and representative expressing my disgust with the direction of our nation, but, of the two who responded, one simply disagreed and the other sent a letter about something else entirely. No surprise here, given who these guys are, but I didn't want to not be on record about what I see as a destructive manipulation of our common future.
Maybe some want to go back to "the good old days." Life was simpler. There weren't so many complications. It was Great!
Unless you weren't White, male, "Christian," heterosexual, observed diverse traditions, or otherwise were excluded from the dominant culture.
Saturday, July 14, 2018
Two Baptists, Two Revelations
Once in an Elders meeting at a church of which I was the pastor we went through the usual sleep-inducing agenda, avoiding real spiritual matters, as usual, when at the end of the meeting one of the married couples in the group pulled out a flyer. It promoted an event of some sort that was geared toward homophobes.
The saintly wife of the couple declared, "I don't know what to say to gay people."
The unspoken response in my head was, "How about extending a friendly hand and saying, 'Hello, my name is (Mrs. Ethno Centric). Welcome to our church!'" But, since I didn't think she could handle that, I did not say it aloud.
She and her husband went on to display the flyer and suggested we promote the event among our church membership.
No longer was silence an option for me. I pointed out the rogues gallery of white males pictured on the flyer: Newt Gingrich, Donald Wildmon, James Dobson, and others, and said something to the effect, "These guys are all homophobic, so what are they going to do? Tell us how evil gay people are?"
"Well, I, uh..."
I continued. "You know, these guys and much of the Religious Right basically are aligned with the Republican Party. They spout views and opinions that are reflective of the party, which is predominantly anti-gay. And there is nothing inherently Christian about them."
"I didn't know that," Mrs. Centric replied.
The other elders elected, as usual, not to share any thoughts, and the meeting soon came to a conclusion. It wasn't too long afterwards that the Centrics withdrew from the church. My being OK with that wasn't quite in line with The Purpose Of The Church (that is, "Get all the members you can so we can pay the bills and keep the doors open."), but then, there were numerous aspects of the church that I found it difficult to abide.
The Ethno Centrics, I later was told, began attending First Baptist Church. I'm sure they were much more at ease there.
Anyway, this all came to mind when I read there was a recent Non-Meeting of the Minds between two prominent Baptists: Jimmy Carter and Franklin Graham.
In an interview, Jimmy Carter concluded a few remarks by suggesting that Jesus would approve of gay marriage. Franklin Graham, it turned out, begged to differ. In fact, he went so far as to say that not only would there be no Holy Approval of such an abomination, but God wants to kill Gays.
Now, whatever one thinks of gay marriage (and I personally favor it), it seems to me that Graham went too far in his assertion. To be clear, whether he intended it or not (you decide!), Graham was granting permission, even giving incentive, for violence against gay people.
Jesus, whom both of these Baptists likely would agree is the Son of God, spent an awful lot of time tending to those considered "unclean" according to the dictates of his own faith tradition: the sick, women having their periods, women in general, adulterers, even dead people. He is nowhere quoted in the Bible, nor do any of his reported actions suggest, that he was anti-gay. In fact, it is entirely a non-issue.
Graham quoted some texts used to promote homophobia among "true believers," but his interpretation not only is questionable, but seems to me to contradict the nature of God that comes across as a general trend throughout the whole of scripture. Plus, he appears to be silent on a lot of other "sins" that might cause some of his Republican buddies to sweat.
I can see how Graham's stated views would make him popular among a particular political base, and I can understand that his proclamations (not only anti-gay, but anti-liberal and anti-Democrat) would lead to a bump in donations to his "ministry." But perhaps an intervention or even institutionalization would be more appropriate for someone so dedicated to hate and violence while claiming the name of Christ.
And really, one of the first things that popped into my head when I initially read about all of this was that the only people Jesus seemed to have serious disagreements with were officious, hypocritical, self-serving religious "leaders."
Although, he is not quoted as suggesting they should be put to death.
The saintly wife of the couple declared, "I don't know what to say to gay people."
The unspoken response in my head was, "How about extending a friendly hand and saying, 'Hello, my name is (Mrs. Ethno Centric). Welcome to our church!'" But, since I didn't think she could handle that, I did not say it aloud.
She and her husband went on to display the flyer and suggested we promote the event among our church membership.
No longer was silence an option for me. I pointed out the rogues gallery of white males pictured on the flyer: Newt Gingrich, Donald Wildmon, James Dobson, and others, and said something to the effect, "These guys are all homophobic, so what are they going to do? Tell us how evil gay people are?"
"Well, I, uh..."
I continued. "You know, these guys and much of the Religious Right basically are aligned with the Republican Party. They spout views and opinions that are reflective of the party, which is predominantly anti-gay. And there is nothing inherently Christian about them."
"I didn't know that," Mrs. Centric replied.
The other elders elected, as usual, not to share any thoughts, and the meeting soon came to a conclusion. It wasn't too long afterwards that the Centrics withdrew from the church. My being OK with that wasn't quite in line with The Purpose Of The Church (that is, "Get all the members you can so we can pay the bills and keep the doors open."), but then, there were numerous aspects of the church that I found it difficult to abide.
The Ethno Centrics, I later was told, began attending First Baptist Church. I'm sure they were much more at ease there.
Anyway, this all came to mind when I read there was a recent Non-Meeting of the Minds between two prominent Baptists: Jimmy Carter and Franklin Graham.
In an interview, Jimmy Carter concluded a few remarks by suggesting that Jesus would approve of gay marriage. Franklin Graham, it turned out, begged to differ. In fact, he went so far as to say that not only would there be no Holy Approval of such an abomination, but God wants to kill Gays.
Now, whatever one thinks of gay marriage (and I personally favor it), it seems to me that Graham went too far in his assertion. To be clear, whether he intended it or not (you decide!), Graham was granting permission, even giving incentive, for violence against gay people.
Jesus, whom both of these Baptists likely would agree is the Son of God, spent an awful lot of time tending to those considered "unclean" according to the dictates of his own faith tradition: the sick, women having their periods, women in general, adulterers, even dead people. He is nowhere quoted in the Bible, nor do any of his reported actions suggest, that he was anti-gay. In fact, it is entirely a non-issue.
Graham quoted some texts used to promote homophobia among "true believers," but his interpretation not only is questionable, but seems to me to contradict the nature of God that comes across as a general trend throughout the whole of scripture. Plus, he appears to be silent on a lot of other "sins" that might cause some of his Republican buddies to sweat.
I can see how Graham's stated views would make him popular among a particular political base, and I can understand that his proclamations (not only anti-gay, but anti-liberal and anti-Democrat) would lead to a bump in donations to his "ministry." But perhaps an intervention or even institutionalization would be more appropriate for someone so dedicated to hate and violence while claiming the name of Christ.
And really, one of the first things that popped into my head when I initially read about all of this was that the only people Jesus seemed to have serious disagreements with were officious, hypocritical, self-serving religious "leaders."
Although, he is not quoted as suggesting they should be put to death.
Wednesday, July 11, 2018
Knees and Fists: Hope Dies Last
The following was inspired by an interview with Malcolm Jenkins that appeared in the May issue of The Atlantic. Jenkins plays football for the Philadelphia Eagles, and while he hasn't taken a knee during the National Anthem prior to his games, he and other Eagles players have raised their fists.
Players who kneel or raise fists have been characterized as "unpatriotic" and worse by many football fans and observers who do not understand the nature of their protest, or who are threatened by minority voices questioning and challenging the injustices of our society.
Malcolm Jenkins and many other NFL players do not simply protest injustice. They are raising money and working to address the divisions and inequalities in American society. Jenkins has started a foundation for such matters and has recruited numerous other players, black and white, and solicited funds, even from the NFL itself.
If you have not seen the May issue of The Atlantic, it is a simple matter to look up Malcolm Jenkins and his foundation online to learn what really is behind the NFL anthem protests and what those protesting are doing in response.
Thoughtlessly criticizing, caricaturing, name-calling, belittling, and condemning people who actively seek a better, more just society is a long-standing American practice. Thank goodness for Malcolm Jenkins, his cohorts, those who have risked much in the past, and those who will risk in the future that all people may be treated as though they really were "created equal."
Here is what I wrote:
Players who kneel or raise fists have been characterized as "unpatriotic" and worse by many football fans and observers who do not understand the nature of their protest, or who are threatened by minority voices questioning and challenging the injustices of our society.
Malcolm Jenkins and many other NFL players do not simply protest injustice. They are raising money and working to address the divisions and inequalities in American society. Jenkins has started a foundation for such matters and has recruited numerous other players, black and white, and solicited funds, even from the NFL itself.
If you have not seen the May issue of The Atlantic, it is a simple matter to look up Malcolm Jenkins and his foundation online to learn what really is behind the NFL anthem protests and what those protesting are doing in response.
Thoughtlessly criticizing, caricaturing, name-calling, belittling, and condemning people who actively seek a better, more just society is a long-standing American practice. Thank goodness for Malcolm Jenkins, his cohorts, those who have risked much in the past, and those who will risk in the future that all people may be treated as though they really were "created equal."
Here is what I wrote:
KNEES
AND FISTS: HOPE DIES LAST
All
of our nation’s excesses on display
For
three hours on Sunday afternoon:
Militaristic
glory;
Suffocating
Consumerism;
The
hunger for Violence;
We’re
Good, You’re Evil;
The
Vicarious Thrill of Beating, Humiliating, and Ridiculing The Other.
“Ladies
and Gentlemen, please rise, remove your hats and direct your attention to the
50-yard line and join the great
Country
and Western vocal star
As
we Honor America by singing our National Anthem!”
But
taking a knee as our Civil Religion is practiced
Before
millions In the National Television audience?
Raising
a fist as we roll out our Icons
For
misty-eyed and lumpy-throated worship?
That’s
Blasphemy! That’s Unpatriotic! That’s Ungrateful! That’s Un-American!
Knees
were taken in Southern cities five decades ago as dogs, fire hoses
And
hatred bore down.
Fists
were raised as Olympic gold was awarded in Mexico City in 1968
As
disproportionate ranks of Blacks and other expendables
Fought
and died in Vietnam.
Knees
are taken and fists are raised today as Injustice still plagues these United States, As our prisons overflow
(don’t worry, we can always build more!),
As
those who are sworn to enforce emphasize the Force (deadly, though it is).
Knees
are taken and fists are raised
In
the Hope that the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave
One
day
Will
live up to its self-assured and self-proclaimed Identity and Promise.
Hope
drives, motivates, comforts, inspires, emboldens.
Hope,
as it is said, “Dies Last.”
But
like the glaciers and rivers
That
carved Majesty into our landscape, Hope plods and drags,
Tapping
the fearful and the paranoid on their shoulders
Rather
than slapping their faces.
Those
who embrace it wait,
Often
suffer,
Find
themselves vilified,
And
disappear before its fulfillment.
But
it moves.
Hope
moves.
Hope
carves.
Hope
transforms.
Although
not usually on Sunday afternoon
During
those three hours
When
our Nation’s Excesses
All
are on display.
Thursday, February 15, 2018
Enough is enough!
Here is the message I sent to my U.S. Senators and Member of the House of Representatives. What message did you send?
In the first six weeks of 2018 there have been 18 school
shootings. That’s three per week. There is no reason anyone needs an assault
rifle or smoke grenades or any of the other weapons used in these attacks.
Trading innocent lives for campaign contributions from the
NRA is unconscionable. It is decades
past time to stand up to the NRA and the paranoia it foments.
Hunters do not need assault rifles. The government is not coming to take away
peoples’ guns. The NRA and its interests
threaten and destroy the lives of the citizens you supposedly represent.
Enough is enough.
You sought the power to influence the direction of our country. Use it now to do something good and relegate
the NRA to the scrap heap of history.
Wednesday, July 12, 2017
A Bit of a Head-Scratcher
At times I enjoy the messages that churches put on the signs in their yards. Some will simply list the sermon title for the following Sunday. Some give enticements for folks to come inside. Some use subscription services that provide generic messages. Some try to be clever.
Frankly, I doubt anyone ever decided to join a church -- much less show up out of the blue on a Sunday morning -- because they were so inspired by the words on the church sign.
In fact, many of the messages are downright off-putting. I guess those are the ones I enjoy the most, and I will invariably say to Mary, as we drive by the church, "Let's go there this Sunday." Of course, the notion is forgotten before we are even past the end of the church property.
Negative messages are even posted by some congregations on their signs: "What part of 'Thou Shalt Not' don't you understand? -- God." There is a whole series of those. I'm sure they are especially effective.
Currently, there is a message on the sign of a church near where we live. The church is a small independent fundamentalist church of some variety or other, and their sign, right in plain view for everyone to see as they drive by, proclaims, "There are no Atheists in Hell."
Huh?
Does that mean Atheists don't go to Hell? Does it mean once an Atheist arrives in Hell he or she suddenly becomes a believer? And doesn't that mean they wouldn't go to or stay in Hell?
What is "Hell," anyway? Is it a place? Is it just a bad word we're not supposed to say, or we might end up there? Is it the place Jesus referred to as "Sheol," which as I understand it was some sort of continuously-smouldering garbage dump on the outskirts of town?
And why would an Atheist be frightened of Hell? If they don't believe in God, there is no reason to think God's "judgment" is real, and that one might end up in whatever Hell might be.
So, I guess I just don't understand the point of the message on the sign.
Maybe I'm over-thinking this. Or maybe whoever approved and posted the message was doing some under-thinking.
Whatever the case, it occurs to me that many churches with changeable-message signs are wasting that opportunity. Why not use the sign to give witness to some of the meaningful, life-building, love-promoting tenets of the teachings of Jesus?
Are those tenets too boring or irrelevant that whoever is responsible for coming up with the messages has to think of "clever" ways to get the attention of the people who pass by their church buildings?
Or maybe churches are just too afraid of not fitting in with the dominant societal culture, norms and expectations.
To me, that's one of the biggest struggles facing the church today. The church is so reflective of the world around it that it has slid into the realm of the irrelevant. Why be a part of the church -- and by extension, the faith -- if it's just more of the same soul-deadening nonsense associated with what one of my accounting teachers in college always called "chasing that dollar bill."
It seems to me that churches should be offering an alternative, something that lifts people out of the anxiety, fear, angst, dread, alienation, and everything else that closes in around us all the time.
I don't think Jesus died so that his "followers" would do everything they can to conform to the world and its ways.
Yet, it continues, and the church suffers, the world suffers, and people suffer as a result.
Why the church doesn't see that, to me, is a real head-scratcher.
Oh, by the way, the best sign I ever saw associated with a place of worship actually was a banner instead of a sign. It hung on a fence outside the Friends Meeting of Washington, and was placed there immediately following the 9/11 attacks. As far as I know, it still hangs there today.
The banner read, "War is not the answer." Too counter-cultural for you? Perhaps Christianity makes some demands that you are not willing to meet.
Does that make you an Atheist? I hope not, because we know where Atheists, uh, well, don't end up. Or something. I think. I'm not sure...
Frankly, I doubt anyone ever decided to join a church -- much less show up out of the blue on a Sunday morning -- because they were so inspired by the words on the church sign.
In fact, many of the messages are downright off-putting. I guess those are the ones I enjoy the most, and I will invariably say to Mary, as we drive by the church, "Let's go there this Sunday." Of course, the notion is forgotten before we are even past the end of the church property.
Negative messages are even posted by some congregations on their signs: "What part of 'Thou Shalt Not' don't you understand? -- God." There is a whole series of those. I'm sure they are especially effective.
Currently, there is a message on the sign of a church near where we live. The church is a small independent fundamentalist church of some variety or other, and their sign, right in plain view for everyone to see as they drive by, proclaims, "There are no Atheists in Hell."
Huh?
Does that mean Atheists don't go to Hell? Does it mean once an Atheist arrives in Hell he or she suddenly becomes a believer? And doesn't that mean they wouldn't go to or stay in Hell?
What is "Hell," anyway? Is it a place? Is it just a bad word we're not supposed to say, or we might end up there? Is it the place Jesus referred to as "Sheol," which as I understand it was some sort of continuously-smouldering garbage dump on the outskirts of town?
And why would an Atheist be frightened of Hell? If they don't believe in God, there is no reason to think God's "judgment" is real, and that one might end up in whatever Hell might be.
So, I guess I just don't understand the point of the message on the sign.
Maybe I'm over-thinking this. Or maybe whoever approved and posted the message was doing some under-thinking.
Whatever the case, it occurs to me that many churches with changeable-message signs are wasting that opportunity. Why not use the sign to give witness to some of the meaningful, life-building, love-promoting tenets of the teachings of Jesus?
Are those tenets too boring or irrelevant that whoever is responsible for coming up with the messages has to think of "clever" ways to get the attention of the people who pass by their church buildings?
Or maybe churches are just too afraid of not fitting in with the dominant societal culture, norms and expectations.
To me, that's one of the biggest struggles facing the church today. The church is so reflective of the world around it that it has slid into the realm of the irrelevant. Why be a part of the church -- and by extension, the faith -- if it's just more of the same soul-deadening nonsense associated with what one of my accounting teachers in college always called "chasing that dollar bill."
It seems to me that churches should be offering an alternative, something that lifts people out of the anxiety, fear, angst, dread, alienation, and everything else that closes in around us all the time.
I don't think Jesus died so that his "followers" would do everything they can to conform to the world and its ways.
Yet, it continues, and the church suffers, the world suffers, and people suffer as a result.
Why the church doesn't see that, to me, is a real head-scratcher.
Oh, by the way, the best sign I ever saw associated with a place of worship actually was a banner instead of a sign. It hung on a fence outside the Friends Meeting of Washington, and was placed there immediately following the 9/11 attacks. As far as I know, it still hangs there today.
The banner read, "War is not the answer." Too counter-cultural for you? Perhaps Christianity makes some demands that you are not willing to meet.
Does that make you an Atheist? I hope not, because we know where Atheists, uh, well, don't end up. Or something. I think. I'm not sure...
Wednesday, October 19, 2016
A Door? A Stairway?
Two unrelated incidents from my years in the church recently came to mind. The first was when I worked for the Quakers and was not active as a congregational pastor. The church we attended at the time had a "young adults" Sunday morning class (these young adults were all in their late 30's, but who was counting? -- I guess the group had been together as a class since they truly were young adults), and I was asked to lead it. I forget now what the topic or book study was to be at the time (I did several with them), but a week or two before I was to begin as their "teacher," a couple from the group came up to me and expressed their appreciation that I was going to step into the role, saying, "so you can help us know how to get into heaven."
The second incident occurred a number of years later. A young couple in the church where I was the pastor at the time celebrated the birth of their first child. Visiting them in the hospital, I saw their joy first-hand. The mother made a reference to having the newborn baptized. This surprised me because both she and her husband were active members in the church, and the whole movement that eventuated in our denomination, dating back to the American frontier, included two straight-forward tenets regarding its practice: Communion (the Lord's Supper, or as some traditions refer to it, the Eucharist) was a part of every worship service; and, baptism took the form of immersion for those who made a confession of faith that "Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God." In other words, we practice "believer's baptism." Both tenets were intended to demonstrate a "restoration" of the New Testament faith and practice of the first followers of Jesus.
Well, the new mom in this case wasn't entirely on board. Maybe we should baptize the infant "just to be sure." It didn't happen, unless they took him to another church that did practice infant baptism.
It has been a very long time since I considered the Christian faith as a means to "go to heaven." (Those who have/had the misfortune of attending years worth of church meetings might, in fact, hold an alternate view of what it's all about!)
One reason I don't think of the faith as a path to heaven is that there is an implication that God can be manipulated. Sprinkling water on a baby doesn't convince God that if the baby should meet an early, tragic end, he/she "goes to heaven." Baptism is symbolic of giving one's life to following Jesus. In my mind, part of that is trusting God to do the right thing -- in all circumstances. This is important for parents of newborns to keep in mind, especially if they have been baptized, themselves. The water comes from a faucet in the church building, supplied by a well, or the city.
Similarly, believing an accepted list of doctrines, or not saying bad words, consuming alcohol, dancing, playing cards, or (name someone else's sin) doesn't force God's hand when the time of transition comes about. "You're stuck, God. I played by the rules. You have to let me in." (I would dare say that most folks who claim they live by the Ten Commandments, or that the commandments make or break one's ability to get their heavenly ticket punched, can't even list all ten of them.)
The fact is, there is NOTHING we can do to "earn" God's grace.
This all came up because last Sunday at the church we now attend, the text for the day was the story of the woman with the 12-year hemorrhage who approached Jesus, touched "the hem of his cloak," and was healed. Jesus felt power going out from himself when the woman touched him, asked who did it, and when she confessed, he said, "Your faith has made you well (or whole, or healed you)."
The temptation in preaching from this text is to make it strictly an example of Jesus' ability to give physical healing, or a "cure," for some malady or disease. It's also possible to take it a step further to say something along the lines of "Jesus can help you when you're feeling low, or things don't go your way, or when you're confused about something."
OK, if that's what you want to do.
To me the story gets at the heart of what the Christian faith really is all about. While the woman was bleeding all those years, with no relief, her very life was slipping away. She turned to Jesus to get her life back, and she got it.
Now, the notion of "life" has many dimensions, it seems to me. Simply breathing and having a heartbeat may provide a definition of life, but likely most people would not trade places with someone on a ventilator. The person on the ventilator is "alive," but is hardly experiencing life.
Jesus spoke of the "realm of God," or the "realm of heaven." OK, his words are translated as "kingdom," but let's not limit Jesus only to male-dominant images. The "realm of God/heaven"
was described by Jesus as being "at hand." Or, he sometimes said it "is like..." In other words, the realm is now. It's here. You can live in it, you can embrace it, you can be defined by it.
This is what the story of the bleeding woman teaches: grabbing hold of Jesus and what he taught/stood for/exemplified gives one the life found in the realm of God/heaven. Indeed, it gives life as God intended -- abundant and everlasting for all of Creation.
Assuming one's place in heaven while doubting the same place for others does not fit in God's realm.
Assuming scarcity of the earth's blessings and the need to accumulate them at the expense of others is not a heavenly realm virtue.
Assuming religious postures and affecting religious jargon while embracing cultural norms that separate, alienate, and encourage an attitude of "me first," isn't "touching the hem of Jesus' garment."
The values of agape love, seeking what is best for others, generosity and sharing, compassion (not just feeling "sorry," but entering into the situation of those who suffer), and yes, sacrifice, are life-giving. They are realm living. They heal us. They make us whole. They introduce "salvation" into our very being.
Again, I don't worry about what happens next, after death, because:
a. I can't do anything about it;
b. I trust God to do what's right;
c. What God does in all circumstances is right.
What I can concern myself with, and what I can do, is seek to grab hold of Jesus and be made whole by his touch, stepping into the realm of God, the realm of heaven, the realm of LIFE.
The second incident occurred a number of years later. A young couple in the church where I was the pastor at the time celebrated the birth of their first child. Visiting them in the hospital, I saw their joy first-hand. The mother made a reference to having the newborn baptized. This surprised me because both she and her husband were active members in the church, and the whole movement that eventuated in our denomination, dating back to the American frontier, included two straight-forward tenets regarding its practice: Communion (the Lord's Supper, or as some traditions refer to it, the Eucharist) was a part of every worship service; and, baptism took the form of immersion for those who made a confession of faith that "Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God." In other words, we practice "believer's baptism." Both tenets were intended to demonstrate a "restoration" of the New Testament faith and practice of the first followers of Jesus.
Well, the new mom in this case wasn't entirely on board. Maybe we should baptize the infant "just to be sure." It didn't happen, unless they took him to another church that did practice infant baptism.
It has been a very long time since I considered the Christian faith as a means to "go to heaven." (Those who have/had the misfortune of attending years worth of church meetings might, in fact, hold an alternate view of what it's all about!)
One reason I don't think of the faith as a path to heaven is that there is an implication that God can be manipulated. Sprinkling water on a baby doesn't convince God that if the baby should meet an early, tragic end, he/she "goes to heaven." Baptism is symbolic of giving one's life to following Jesus. In my mind, part of that is trusting God to do the right thing -- in all circumstances. This is important for parents of newborns to keep in mind, especially if they have been baptized, themselves. The water comes from a faucet in the church building, supplied by a well, or the city.
Similarly, believing an accepted list of doctrines, or not saying bad words, consuming alcohol, dancing, playing cards, or (name someone else's sin) doesn't force God's hand when the time of transition comes about. "You're stuck, God. I played by the rules. You have to let me in." (I would dare say that most folks who claim they live by the Ten Commandments, or that the commandments make or break one's ability to get their heavenly ticket punched, can't even list all ten of them.)
The fact is, there is NOTHING we can do to "earn" God's grace.
This all came up because last Sunday at the church we now attend, the text for the day was the story of the woman with the 12-year hemorrhage who approached Jesus, touched "the hem of his cloak," and was healed. Jesus felt power going out from himself when the woman touched him, asked who did it, and when she confessed, he said, "Your faith has made you well (or whole, or healed you)."
The temptation in preaching from this text is to make it strictly an example of Jesus' ability to give physical healing, or a "cure," for some malady or disease. It's also possible to take it a step further to say something along the lines of "Jesus can help you when you're feeling low, or things don't go your way, or when you're confused about something."
OK, if that's what you want to do.
To me the story gets at the heart of what the Christian faith really is all about. While the woman was bleeding all those years, with no relief, her very life was slipping away. She turned to Jesus to get her life back, and she got it.
Now, the notion of "life" has many dimensions, it seems to me. Simply breathing and having a heartbeat may provide a definition of life, but likely most people would not trade places with someone on a ventilator. The person on the ventilator is "alive," but is hardly experiencing life.
Jesus spoke of the "realm of God," or the "realm of heaven." OK, his words are translated as "kingdom," but let's not limit Jesus only to male-dominant images. The "realm of God/heaven"
was described by Jesus as being "at hand." Or, he sometimes said it "is like..." In other words, the realm is now. It's here. You can live in it, you can embrace it, you can be defined by it.
This is what the story of the bleeding woman teaches: grabbing hold of Jesus and what he taught/stood for/exemplified gives one the life found in the realm of God/heaven. Indeed, it gives life as God intended -- abundant and everlasting for all of Creation.
Assuming one's place in heaven while doubting the same place for others does not fit in God's realm.
Assuming scarcity of the earth's blessings and the need to accumulate them at the expense of others is not a heavenly realm virtue.
Assuming religious postures and affecting religious jargon while embracing cultural norms that separate, alienate, and encourage an attitude of "me first," isn't "touching the hem of Jesus' garment."
The values of agape love, seeking what is best for others, generosity and sharing, compassion (not just feeling "sorry," but entering into the situation of those who suffer), and yes, sacrifice, are life-giving. They are realm living. They heal us. They make us whole. They introduce "salvation" into our very being.
Again, I don't worry about what happens next, after death, because:
a. I can't do anything about it;
b. I trust God to do what's right;
c. What God does in all circumstances is right.
What I can concern myself with, and what I can do, is seek to grab hold of Jesus and be made whole by his touch, stepping into the realm of God, the realm of heaven, the realm of LIFE.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)