Monthly Archives: June 2009

Friday at Annual Conference

Posted on by
1

If there was a theme for my experience at Annual conference last Friday, it was “Communication Breakdown”. I was attending a number of events related to lay-speaking which, I believe, were not part of previous annual conferences.

This influx of several hundred people outside the normal routine of registration resulted in a number of instances where essentially the left hand did not know what the right hand was doing. It seems clear to me that while it was a good idea to have these special events, the design of the process was not clearly thought out. Next year, there will be a new event and I hope that they will look over what happened this year to insure that next year’s process goes a little more smoothly.

The event on Friday was an Evangelism workshop led by Kwasi Kena, Director of Evangelism Ministries for the General Board of Discipleship.

There was one instance where communication did not break down and at least one gentleman is glad that it didn’t. During the Evangelism workshop that I was attending, this gentleman took ill and it was necessary to call for medical assistance. Quick thinking on the part of the Hofstra students who were assisting with other tasks got the medical personnel there quickly and this individual was attended to and received the medical attention he needed. But it wasn’t simply just modern communication that was involved. Dr. Kena’s wife, Safiyah Fosua (Director of Preaching Ministries for the General Board of Discipleship) led the lay speakers gathered in continuous prayer while waiting for the medical personnel to arrive, while the medical personnel attended to the gentleman, and as he was transported to medical facilities elsewhere. There was a sense that the Holy Spirit was present and it brought to mind the number of times that we ask for the power of the Holy Spirit to bring healing to the sick in our prayers on Sunday. And, the report that we received at the end of the seminar was that the gentleman was in good condition and nothing serious happened.

The seminar on evangelism was interesting for at least two reasons. First, the definition of evangelism that Dr. Kena offered was radically different from what I believe the public understanding of evangelism is. This definition of evangelism was a three part definition and was more than just a preaching of the Gospel. It was also a proclamation of what God is doing in the world right now and a call for people to participate.

And this definition of evangelism was tied to the definition of discipleship. And here again, the definition offered for discipleship was radically different from what is the public perception of discipleship. Many people assume that the message of Matthew 28: 19 (“go into the world and make disciples of all the nations”) means to force people into following Jesus. But Dr. Kena pointed out that we need to teach people what the message of Jesus is. I could not help but think that his definition of discipleship was more in tune with Clarence Jordan’s translation, “make students of all races and initiate them into the family of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Teach them to live by all that I outlined for you.” (From the Cotton Patch Gospel translation by Clarence Jordan)

He concluded the workshop by offering a series of questions critical to the growth of the church and any other church in today’s society:

  1. Do you want to attract new members? Why?
  2. Why do you want to grow?
  3. Why are we doing whatever it is that we are doing?
  4. Why are we doing whatever it is that we are doing the way we are doing it?
  5. Why does God want this church in this community? What does it mean to be faithful to God’s intended purpose for this church?
  6. What’s the good news that this church expresses? Why should I join this congregation? What good will it do?

He concluded with three focusing questions, questions that lay speakers and lay leaders should take with them back to their churches and into their communities.

  1. Regarding the people you are trying to reach, what do we want to see happen as a result of their coming within the sphere of influence of our ministry?
  2. What are we offering, from their point of view that would make it worth their while to get involved with us?
  3. (And what I thought was the most challenging question of all) What price are we willing to pay in order to be able to reach others?

Considering the problems that marked that day, both before the seminar and later, I could have easily written off this day. But hearing Dr. Kena and seeing the presence of the Holy Spirit in that place, of knowing that there is a message being presented that contradicts the message that too many churches (including those in our denomination) are presenting made the effort worthwhile. And I know that what Dr. Kena said on Friday and again on Saturday (more on that in the next post), influenced what I wrote and said in my message on Sunday (“The Bottom of the Ninth”). And if the measure of success is how well you use what you learn, then this was a very successful seminar.

The Sacrifices We Make

Posted on by
1

This is the message I presented at Walker Valley United Methodist Church for the 3rd Sunday after Pentecost, 2 July 2000.  The Scriptures are 1 Samuel 17: 1, 17 – 27, 2 Corinthians 8: 7 – 15, and Mark 5: 21 – 43.

——————————————

On this date in 1776, the Continental Congress completed the majority of work that was announced two days later, the 4th of July, as the Declaration of Independence. The Declaration of Independence was a statement outlining reasons why the British colonies in America had the right to be free and independent. No doubt there were those then who felt that the actions being taken that day were rash and irresponsible; that to declare independence, to take action against the British government was fool hardy and stupid. Every man who signed that document knew that, by fixing his name to it, he was signing his own death warrant. Should the fight for independence fail, they would be the first to be hanged as traitors to the crown.

But the writers, the signers, and those who support the cause of independence knew that freedom could not come without a price. If sacrifices were not made, freedom could not be won.

I think sometimes that we forget that there is a price to be paid for the freedoms we have.

But what is freedom? That may be one of the most difficult concepts one is every asked to define. Freedom could be considered one’s ability to choose and guide one’s own life. To a sixteen-year-old, freedom is a driver’s license. Freedom to worship at a church of one’s choosing, our very presence here today, was one of the reasons this country was founded. I really think that the political debates that we will listen to over the course of the next few months, nor matter what is actually said, will center on a definition of freedom.

What is the cost of freedom? That is the hidden question. As we have all discovered at some point in time, becoming freedom does not come cheap. To the sixteen-year old, having a driver’s license means nothing if there is no gas in the car, or for that matter, if there is no car. When we leave home and are finally free, we find out that we must still pay the rent and utilities.

I grew up on Air Force bases in the fifties and sixties where B-52 bombers sat at the end of the runways with their bomb bay doors open. . As long as those planes sat on the runway with the bomb bay doors open, we knew we were safe. For those planes were the alert planes, scheduled only to fly if we went to war with the Soviet Union. The cost of freedom in those days was eternal vigilance.

The cost of freedom sometimes calls for us to make sacrifices. Sometimes we have to give up the things that we hold dearly if we are to be free. That is another reason why we are here today. Because the ultimate freedom is the freedom from sin and death and to gain that freedom we must make sacrifices.

David asked the people of Israel to lament over the death of Saul and Jonathan. This is a most interesting passage because, at the time of Saul’s death, David and he were extreme enemies. Yet David knew that it was Saul’s military leadership that had raised the standard of royalty and enriched the nation. David was also asking the people to cry out for the death of Jonathan because of the great personal loss that represented. The death of Saul and Jonathan represent the sacrifices that Israel had to make if it were to remain strong and free.

The Gospel reading for today represents what it takes for us to gain freedom. The woman in the story had suffered from over twelve years from a condition that made her, in the eyes of the community, unclean. Literally, she would not have been allowed to come into contact with anyone that day. She had already, as Mark noted, given everything she had financially to the physicians of that day, only to have her condition grow worse. Against that backdrop, she sought out Jesus.

Somehow she had heard of Jesus; perhaps touching Jesus’ cloak had healed someone else. Surely, she must have feared embarrassment having her condition revealed to the crowd. But her faith that Jesus could heal her was sufficient enough reason to act.

And Jesus’ own acts show us that he sacrificed something as well that day. The story about the woman is inserted into another story about Jesus and his disciples going to a friend’s house. Jesus interrupts that travel and takes the time to find this woman and let her know how it was that she was healed. If he had not done so, that woman and others would have thought that the healing came from some magical quality found in the clothing, not His divine will.

Jesus sought enough of that woman to find her. This, of course, caused great dismay among the disciples, who were anxious to reach their destination. But Jesus’ actions and kind words eased the fear of the woman. Jesus showed that it was her faith in Him that healed her, not some other action or belief.

The idea of faith is continued in the rest of the Gospel as well. When Jesus and the disciples finally reached Jarius’ house, they find that his daughter had died. And the people around him are angry that he was late, for if he had gotten there on time, the daughter would have lived. But Jesus pointed out that there was nothing to be afraid of if they would only continue to believe.

What Jesus gives us goes far beyond anything that we might have to give. There is nothing we can do to match the sacrifice that Jesus made on the cross. But that is the point about freedom from sin and death, as Paul explained in the passage we read from 2 Corinthians this morning. Jesus gave up all that he had so that we could become richer.

This weekend, as we celebrate the freedoms that were won some two hundred and twenty four years ago, let us also celebrate the freedom that was won some two thousand years ago as well. Let us remember those whose sacrifices made it possible for us to be hear today and let us also remember what we are asked to do today so that others can enjoy the same freedoms tomorrow.

We may not like making the sacrifices that we are called to make. We may not want to be a representative of Christ. But as Paul pointed out to the Corinthians, it is only right that what you have gained through Christ, you should share with others. The writer Glen Clark points out

The first lesson God gives us in training our will is to make us go halfway with him. He first put us through a series of disciplines to se if we are worthy to make his team. After this lesson is learned we discover that there are many, many times that God goes all the way with us. Over and over again he gives us far more that we have any right to ask. We call this “his Grace,” which goes so much farther than “his law” requires that he should go. God’s mercy goes so much farther than mere human justice goes.

And then there are the many times when God gives us the opportunity to go all the way with him. He did that with Job. He did it with Abraham. He used it as a school for many of his greatest saints and leaders. One of the great privileges he may give to you — if he is preparing for you great leadership — is the opportunity sometime of going all the way with him. One of those who did this was Thomas à Kempis. Hear his profession of faith:

O Lord, thou knowest what is the better way; let this or that be done as thou shalt please. Give what thou wilt, and how much thou wilt, and when thou wilt. Deal with me as thou knowest, and best pleaseth thee, and is most for thy honor. Set me where thou wilt, and deal with me in all things as thou wilt. I am in thy hand; turn me round and turn be back again, even as a wheel. Behold I am thy servant, prepared for all things; for I desire not to live unto myself, but unto thee; and Oh that I could do it worthy and perfectly! (From I Will Lift Up Mine Eyes by Glenn Clark)

The call for freedom always carries a cost; to be free means that we must give up something. To be free from sin and death, we must give up everything. Yet in giving up everything, we gain everything. We don’t always see the gain in the sacrifice we make, but when we realize that when Christ gave His life for us on the cross, that sacrifice meant everything for us today.

Are you prepared to make such a sacrifice? Are you prepared to gain your freedom? Consider the sacrifices that you must make.


 

The Bottom of the Ninth

Posted on by
1

I will be at Mountainville United Methodist Church (Mountainville, NY) on Sunday, June 14th; the service starts at 10 and everyone is welcome.  I will also be there on June 28th.  The Scriptures for this Sunday, the 2nd Sunday after Pentecost, are 1 Samuel 15: 34 – 16: 13, 2 Corinthians 5: 6 – 10 (11 – 13), 14 – 17, and Mark 4: 26 – 34.

————————————

There is probably no more dramatic scene in sports today than the manager of a baseball team striding to the pitcher’s mound in the bottom of ninth inning with the outcome of the game to be decided. I suppose that one might have the same feeling in a basketball game with the score tied and the outcome decided by the shooter standing at the free-throw line or during a football game with the kicker coming out to kick the winning field goal.

But those events don’t have the question of choice that seems to come in a baseball game. The manager must make a decision about who he will call and the other manager must also make a decision as to whether or not there must be a change in who will bat.

And I think that element of choice comes in handy when one is a lay speaker and the call is made at the last minute for someone to cover the pulpit at a church in a local district (which is why I am here today – I got the call about one hour before I was to leave for Annual Conference). The analogy also holds for the church in general as the church, in general, and the denomination as well are faced with questions of what will happen next.

The recent survey by the Barna Group brings into question the nature of the church in the coming years. While people who responded to this survey indicated that faith played an extremely important part of their life, the church did not. It isn’t how people worship but the message that the present church sends to the people in its particular area. And the message that many people today are receiving is not a good one; it speaks of hypocrisy and exclusion. The only biblical message that the modern church gives to the people today is that the church today is almost like the church that Jesus saw, monolithic, rigid in structure and fixed to the law rather than the spirit.

The question that we face today is very simple. Will the church remain as it is, monolithic, rigid, and more interested in adhering to the law rather than following the Spirit, or will it change to meet the needs of the people? I hope the answer to that question is the latter rather than the former but that will also require some major rethinking on the part of all involved.

There is also a question that is flirting around the cosmos about the nature of the world in which we live. There are those who are convinced, absolutely and without a doubt that we are in the End Times as described in the Book of Revelation. They are equally convinced that there must be a radical restructuring of the world and a return to “Christian” values if there is to be any hope for the world.

Now, it should be noted that in my notes I put the word “Christian” inside quotes because I am becoming more and more convinced that what people are pushing is not what the Gospel message is about nor is it what Jesus sought when he walked the roads and pathways of the Galilee.

The other day, there was letter to the editor in my local paper that took umbrage with something that President Obama said about this country and Christianity. The writer’s reply was that this was a Christian country, founded on Christian principles and that the founding fathers were devout Christians.

There is no doubt in my mind that our founding fathers and founding mothers believed in God but I also believed that it is more proper to say that most of them were deists. Their beliefs in the Creator of this universe came from rational thought and an outgrowth of the Enlightenment period. If truth were to be told, many of our Founding Fathers probably avoided church like the plague but belonged to the church because it was expected.

And while many fundamentalists will tell you of Thomas Jefferson being guided by God in the writing of the Declaration of Independence, they tend to avoid telling you about his Bible and the removal of anything that smacked of “magic or mysticism”. In Jefferson’s Bible, there is no mention of any of Jesus’ miracles because Jefferson didn’t believe in them. (From “Don’t Know Much About History”)

And every time that I hear that this is a Christian nation, I remember what it was like to grow up in the South, where segregation was the law and it was enforced because it was in the Bible that the races should be separated. How can we escape the label of hypocrisy when verses in the Bible are used to justify hatred, exclusion, and even war?

And as a chemist and a chemical educator, you can’t imagine the grief that I get for even thinking that I can walk in the fields of science and religion with ease and comfort. And amidst the fervor and tumult that comes with the debate on the inclusion of “intelligent design” in today’s science curriculum, I came across the following description of someone important to the nature of science today.

He saw no conflict between his Christian faith and his scientific activity. During his forty years as a canon, he faithfully served his church with extraordinary commitment and courage. At the same time, he studied the world “which has been built for us by the Best and Most Orderly Workman of all.” He pursued his science with a sense of “loving duty to seek the truth in all things, in so far as God has granted that to human reason.” He declared that although his views were “difficult, almost inconceivable, and quite contrary to the opinion of the multitude, nevertheless in what follows we will with God’s help make them clearer than day – at least for those who are not ignorant of the art of mathematics. (From The Galileo Connection by Charles E. Hummel)

The individual in this paragraph was Nikolai Copernicus. In reading the short biography that Charles Hummel put together in his book The Galileo Connection I also discovered that Johannes Kepler was also a devout Christian whose interests in science often ran counter to the beliefs of the community. Parenthetically, Kepler, whose work was central to Galileo’s work and the confirmation of the Copernican model of the universe, died without a church. He would not sign a statement affirming a creed in the Lutheran church and so the Lutheran church denied him communion and employment in Lutheran universities. And because he was a Lutheran, the Catholic Church denied him communion and employment. (from the Galileo Connection)

We live at a time when our faith is being questioned and we must decide how we shall respond to the challenge and question of faith in our time. It is not enough to say that we need to return to our Christian values because I am not totally sure that many people know what those values are. We are very much like Samuel in today’s Old Testament reading, looking at Jesse’s sons and seeking the one that will lead us out of oblivion and back into power and prominence.

I find a parallel between Samuel’s efforts to find a successor for Saul with our attempts to find an answer to the problems of the world. We look at the rich, the strong, the powerful but we never think of looking at the internal or interior qualities. Each time that Samuel saw something that he liked in one of Jesse’s sons, God showed him the internal fault that could cause problems later. And this caused confusion for Samuel because he knew that God had brought him to Jesse but could not see why he was brought there. And then God told him about the other son, the one that Jesse would call the “runt.” It was David who had the internal qualities that were necessary for leadership.

Now, I do not believe that we need to look for a leader like David, per se. First, that would keep us in the same loop that has brought us to this point today. Second, we know today that David, despite his anointing and blessing, will succumb to the temptations that often accompany one’s rise to power.

The problem is that we, ourselves, too often seek such a rise in power because we like the trappings that come with the power and, just like David did, feel that we can control the temptations. But just as the answer to Samuel’s search came in an unexpected manner, so too does the answer to our questions. It will not be found in raw power but in our own ability to use what we have been given, both in terms of faith and reason to find the answer.

Paul’s words to the Corinthians today speak of a confidence found through Christ. Our faith empowers us to go beyond what we might think we can do. Like the parable of the mustard see, great results can come from little results.

The challenge to our faith is not because we are no longer a Christian nation. The challenge arises because we do not know what our faith means. And because we do not know what our faith means, we do not know how to respond to the challenges, except in terms that we are familiar with – power and greed.

We seek to control our thoughts and our deeds, where we long for days past when everything was clear and well-defined. We seek a structure of sectarian and secular law. But those days were never as clear and as well-defined as we would have preferred. But what is missing is the message of love and hope that Christ first taught us.

It has lead to what one might call the bottom of the ninth and we are on the losing side of the baseball game. But it need not be the end of the game. Rather, when we accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior, the game begins anew. When we let the Holy Spirit into our lives, we become empowered and able to make the changes in this world that will bring life to the sick and dying, hope for the downtrodden, and freedom to those who are oppressed.

The manager strides to the mound and calls upon the relief pitcher; his opposite number makes a decision about who should come to bat. And the game is decided on the decisions that are made at that time. You have the opportunity to make a decision that will change it from the end of the old game to the beginning of a new one; you have the opportunity to change the outcome, if you will but answer the call. What shall you do?

The Future For The Church

Posted on by
Reply

These are my thoughts prior to my attendance this Friday and Saturday at Annual Conference.  I am hoping to add one or two pieces while I am there.

—————————————————————–

This most certainly won’t be the last piece written about the future of and for the church. It is not the first time I have thought about it nor will it be the last either. But this is the week of Annual Conference and if there ever was a time when the future of and for the church to be considered, it is this week.

This is the first time that I will get a chance to attend Annual Conference. I am not going as a delegate nor am I attending the entire conference. Rather I am going for a series of events related to lay speaking and because of an invitation from the Bishop to all the lay speakers of the district to attend.

This invitation and this trip to Annual Conference comes at a time when the Barna Group has come out with new research (see “Americans Are Exploring New Ways of Experiencing God”) that quite possibly questions the future for the church. First, the good news is that 90% of those surveyed indicated that their own personal faith is a very important part of their life. But the rest of the story, as it were, does not bode well for the traditional and established church.

Forty-five per cent of those surveyed are willing to try a new church and 71% are more than likely to develop their own beliefs on their own, rather than follow the beliefs they may have been taught. Two out of every three adults are quite willing to seek faith experiences outside the traditional setting.

What I found interesting in this report was at the end of the article. Many people are now relying on marketplace ministries for the spiritual experience and millions of adults are becoming increasingly reliant on faith-based media (television, radio, and the Internet) for religious experience and expression. In addition, 7% of adults attend a house church; this is a seven-fold increase in the past decade. The first piece of information shocks me; the second one is not surprising.

I am shocked by any statement that states that one’s religious experience can be obtained through the media. It isn’t so much that I believe that you have to be with people in order to gain the experience but that much of what is in the media is, in my estimation, on the order of fraudulent and false teaching. People are searching for something and they are willing to look for it anywhere; they will accept as truthful anything that is in the medium that they trust. The research tells us that they don’t trust the traditional church (and why should they, with the history of the traditional church for hypocrisy and self-serving rhetoric?). So anyone who offers a message that makes someone feel good is likely to easily gain followers.

By the same token, does merely watching something through media qualify as an experience? Media-based services allow people to isolate themselves from others. They don’t have to be involved with the less-fortunate, those who are suffering, or those who are somehow different from them. Christianity has never been about simply observing what is happening but rather about being part of the process. But, for too many Americans, observing qualifies as “membership” and that’s all they want. It has long been noted that many of today’s “modern” churches have removed the symbols of the church because it makes the congregation uncomfortable. Christianity is not about making people uncomfortable but it should serve as a reminder of what we are call to do as Christians. But too many people don’t want that part of the process; they want to feel good about being a Christian and they want to make sure that they are not called to do anything.

Jim, in his answer to my comment to his post “Church Dropouts – Church not just important”, suggests that Americans feel that we can have it all and that we have fitted the faith to our needs instead of fitting into our faith.

But there are some who see the message of the television hucksters and charlatans for what it is and they easily cast that aside. They turn away from what is out there and look for what once was there.

Now, a house church is similar to what was the church two-thousand years ago and if anything is to be learned from the emergent church trend, it is that there is a movement to return to the roots that first fostered the growth of the church.

Perhaps it is easy to classify a house church as simple gatherings where the experiences are genuine and dynamic. The fellowship between individuals would be similar, I think, to the gatherings of two-thousand years ago, where people gathered together to share common experiences and rejoice in the presence of Christ in their lives.

Several years ago, I took part in a quality control seminar. It was my hope that I would learn something about quality control but I quickly learned that what was being taught was what I already knew (see “To Search For Excellence”). And what I know about quality control (or at least what I think I know) is that it won’t work unless everyone from the top management down to the bottom level of workers buys into the process and works for the process, the process isn’t going to work. And what we have going on in the church today is that the top management is safely ensconced in their offices and they are blind to what is going on outside the walls of said offices. And when they come out and they see dwindling numbers in the churches, they seek to apply quick and easy fixes to problems that have been deep and long in development.

I think that is one of the reasons why there was such an interest in mega-churches a few years ago. We had come to believe that big is better and if we work on making our churches bigger, then all will be well. But the big church model will not work (if, in fact, it ever did) if there aren’t sufficient people to build a “big” church.

The problem for the traditional church (and by this I mean one that meets in a church-type building on a Sunday morning and is independent of denominational definition) is that it has the same problem that many of our traditional businesses (read automotive or steel, for example) face. The old methods don’t work and insisting on maintaining the old ways can only lead to ruin.

There are those who long for the “good old days”, the days before the Renaissance and the development of free-thinking, when the church was the authority and the arbitrator for all of life. No one questioned the church in those days and there are those who want the church to have the same sense of authority today. There are those who perhaps are a little more liberal in their thought but they don’t want anyone messing with their concept of church because church is a block of time on Sunday that is not to be messed with; once that time is over, they can do whatever they so desire for they have met the requirements they believe they must meet to qualify for a good life and its subsequent rewards.

And there are some who seek that moment in time when they can re-establish that connection with God through Christ and the Holy Spirit that gives meaning to their lives in a world devoid of meaning for anything but greed and self-interest.

I would like to think that I am going to see more of the latter than I am the former views when I go to Annual Conference. But I have read the reports of past Annual Conferences and I don’t think that will be the case. And when I leave from my short stay at Annual Conference, I do not know if it will be seeing the future of the church or wondering if the church will even have a future.

That is not an optimistic way to end these thoughts so I will leave you with something I wrote about being a lay speaker. Lay speaking, to me, is more than a few hours spent on a Sunday morning. It is part of your soul, planted and nourished by the Spirit. It is about designing a worship service so that the Spirit is present and people come away feeling revived and renewed by the time they spent in worship. It is about answering the call from the Lord to spread the good news through one’s words, one’s deeds, one’s thoughts, and one’s actions. The answer can never be found in a traditional “bottom line” sense but rather in that one individual who comes to you afterwards and tells you that what was said and done that day helped them through a rough time.

Regardless of what happens this week in Annual Conference and regardless of what happens in the United Methodist Church in the remainder of this year and the years to come, I will work to make that moment possible. That will be the future for the church.

Facing Goliath

Posted on by
Reply

This is the message I presented at Tompkins Corners United Methodist Church for the 2nd Sunday after Pentecost, 18 June 2003.  The Scriptures are 1 Samuel 17: (1, 4 – 11, 19 – 23) 32 – 49, 2 Corinthians 6: 1 – 13, and Mark 4: 35 – 41.

——————————————

There are times when I wish that Thomas Dewey had won the presidential election of 1948. Now it has to be understood that this is one of the events clearly before my time and that I had no chance to vote for Dewey and that I probably would have, if I could have, voted for Truman. But had Dewey won that election, it would have made my life easier. For it would have meant that the “ghost” of Harry Truman would not be following me today. Actually, it is not Harry Truman who follows me but rather his image as the “man from Independence.”

By now you know that I am an alumnus of Truman State University. Truman State is located in Kirksville, MO and when it was known as Northeast Missouri State University, many people thought it was located in a suburb outside St. Louis. This is only natural since there is a suburb named Kirkwood outside St. Louis.

With the change in the school name, an amazing thing occurred. Truman State University, once located in a suburb of St. Louis, was now located in a suburb of Kansas City. Because President Truman was a preeminent Kansas City politician when he was a Senator for Missouri before becoming Vice-President and later President, many people assume that any school named after him would be in that vicinity. But Truman State never moved and is almost as far from Kansas City as it is from St. Louis. The only school in the Independence area named after Truman is Truman High School, where my youngest daughter is assistant Band Director.

And the confusion about Independence goes beyond where I graduated from college. In the course of my career, I lived and worked in Independence, KS. I still have a number of items with the ICC logo on them that cause people to ask me where I am from. When I reply “Independence, Kansas” they more often than not reply, “O, yes. That’s right outside Kansas City,” meaning, of course, Independence, Missouri.

In a manner of speaking, Independence, Kansas, is just outside Kansas City, much like Kirksville is just outside both Kansas City and St. Louis. But both are on the order of a two-hour drive from the big cities and I don’t think that qualifies either of them as suburbs. Not just yet, anyway.

But in what is considered the penultimate political upset, Truman beat Dewey, David beat Goliath, and I must continue to deal with misconceptions about Missouri and Kansas’s geography.

We are a nation that loves the underdog. We looked for reasons to root against the New York Yankees and the Boston Celtics during the 50’s and 60’s. When the New York Mets made that wonderful improbable run in 1969, the majority of the world was rooting from them, though in good conscious, we all knew that they did not stand a chance against the mighty Baltimore Orioles.

And who could forget the shock felt across the nation when Joe Namath proclaimed that his New York Jets would defeat the Baltimore Colts in the 1969 Super Bowl. After all, the American Football League was just a “Mickey Mouse league” in the eyes of the true believers and there was no way that they could even think of playing against any team from the National Football League. When the NCAA Division I basketball tournament is set up in March of each year, we hope that one of the 16th seeds might just win a first round game. Of course, it doesn’t happen but we hope that it will.

We like to root for the underdog in the hopes that there will be an upset but we are realistic enough to know that such occurrences are rare and far between so it is better to pick the favorite and go on from there. And when it comes to our own everyday, rather ordinary lives, we do not want to chase windmills, we do not want to fight battles against overwhelming odds, we do not want the hassle of taking on great corporate giants. We don’t mind going to see the “Man from La Mancha”, we just don’t want to live that life.

We are flat uncomfortable with anything that changes or threatens to change our lives. We may not like our lives as they are about but we are comfortable with them as they are and do not want anything to change them. We are much like the disciples, who when the winds came off the mountains surrounding the Sea of Galilee and started rocking the boat and causing the water to come in, felt panic and fear.

Our own Methodist heritage includes a similar episode of a boat tossed about on a stormy sea and the panic and fears that it created. When the ship on which he was traveling to America encountered rough seas, John Wesley became very seasick and so frightened by the experience that he thought he was going to die. The whole episode challenged Wesley to examine his relationship with God. This uncertainty in his own life was further compounded because he observed a number of Moravian missionaries praying and celebrating the presence of God in their lives. They suffered thorough the hardships of the voyage, the cramped conditions, and bad food but remained calm. The examples set forth by the Moravians on that trip and during the time in America would give many examples to John Wesley about the role of Christ in one’s life.

In turn, he would give them the ground work for setting up a new denomination, the one that ultimately became the Evangelical United Brethren Church and the heritage that I bring to the pulpit.

Wesley came to America in hopes of saving his own soul. He thought that by preaching and learning the Gospel through mission work to the colonists and Indians living in Georgia, he might find that elusive link to God. The episode on the ship only added more questions to Wesley’s life rather than provide answers. In his mind, Wesley was concerned that his own relationship with God was not right, for if it were right, he would not have feared death but rather would have welcomed the chance to go to heaven. For Wesley, the question was one of how they could remain serene and at peace with the world when there was so much danger all around. It was that serenity and inner peace that Wesley would seek throughout his ministry in America and ultimately find in the church on Aldersgate Street in London.

Ann gave me two books for father’s day, both of which deal with faith in today’s world. They posed essentially the same question, “How can there be a God today when there is so much sickness, death, war, and violence in the world?” In one case, the author almost entirely discounts the presence of God because no god would allow the suffering of the world to continue. I am still reading to find out what the other author feels, though I think that in the end his conclusions will be entirely different.

If we are to have faith, we must have a belief that there is a God who can calm the seas, provide peace to a troubled times. By the same token, we must understand that this same God has given us abilities and knowledge over the years, knowledge and ability that will help us to find solutions for the problems that we face.

Thus, it is up to us to see the work of God put forth in this world. Paul was writing to the Corinthians because they were failing to see how faith was put forth in their lives. He had already pointed out that those who live for themselves after having been saved will have received the Grace of God but they will miss out on the heavenly rewards gained through service to Him. Paul continually encouraged those who had been saved to work out or develop their own salvation. (2 Corinthians 5: 15)  For the Corinthians this was a vital point.

For Paul pointed out that they were failing. They were saved, it was true, but they were doing nothing to advance or work out their salvation. And if they were doing nothing, then their faith would fail them eventually. I think that is one thing that we need to critically understand. If we do not continually work with our faith, we will find ourselves quickly falling behind. We are quick to say that God is no longer around but that is because we are not looking for Him.

Paul’s encouragement is very simple. God is always ready to listen to us and to help if only we turn to Him. If we find fault with what we consider the work of God, perhaps it is because we are not doing the work that is expected of us. There is no task too great for us to undertake if we understand that we can rely on God.

But that is the problem. We often expect God to be there in the tough times because we quickly forget him during the good times. The story of David and Goliath is indicative of this idea. Some say that Goliath was killed because the stone that David threw hit a soft spot in Goliath’s skull. Some scholars claim that the description of Goliath suggests a malformation of the forehead and that a stone striking would do bodily harm. But somewhere along the way, David had to use his sling and strike down Goliath. His own personal fears had to be put aside and he found comfort in knowing that God was there with him.

We are going to have to face Goliath some time in our lives. It may be something big and on which several people rely; then again, it could be something small and only important to us individually and privately. But we will have to face him. It will be a time of trouble and tribulation if, like the Corinthians, we have put our salvation aside. It will be a time of turmoil if, like Wesley, we expect things that are not to be.

If our faith is the same faith of the Moravians, we will find peace and comfort when the seas of our lives are tossing us around. If our faith is like that of John Wesley, we will find a warmth and assurance when Christ is present ion our lives. And when we need it most, to calm our fears and steady our nerves in face of the most monumental of tasks, we will find the faith that provided David with the steady nerves and calmness need to fell Goliath with a tiny stone from a sling.

These are things that we cannot find in ourselves but only through God. Our faith lies not in our own abilities but rather in the knowledge that God is there if we look for Him. We do so by finding Christ. We are going to have to face Goliath someday but we do not have to do it alone. If we acknowledge that Christ is your Savior and we accept the Holy Spirit in hearts, then we are able to meet and defeat any challenge before us. The challenge this day is then to accept Christ into our heart and show the world that the Spirit still lives by what we do in celebration of God’s presence in our lives.

Against All Odds

Posted on by
Reply

This is the message I presented at Walker Valley United Methodist Church for the 2nd Sunday after Pentecost, 25 June 2000.  The Scriptures are 1 Samuel 17: (1, 4 – 11, 19 – 23) 32 – 49, 2 Corinthians 6: 1 – 13, and Mark 4: 35 – 41.

——————————————

For some reason that is totally unknown to me, I have always, with the possible exception of the UCLA Bruins basketball team and my own alma maters, rooted for the underdog. Though there have been times in the past when Truman State, Missouri, and Iowa qualify as true underdogs. There seems to be something about rooting for the little guy or the small school beating the bigger school in the big game of the year.

When the English driver and world champion Jimmy Clark came to drive in the Indianapolis 500 back in the early 60’s, the experts claimed that he didn’t stand a chance. His car, a Ford-powered Lotus, didn’t have the power and he didn’t have the expertise needed to drive 500 miles. To win at Indy, it was said, required a big, front-engine-powered car and experience on the oval at Indy. That year, 1963 I think, Jimmy Clark finished second. The next year, the team came back with the Woods Brothers from North Carolina, a stock car oriented group, working the pits and providing the subtle difference that gave Jimmy Clark the win that year. After Jimmy Clark won at Indy, the manner in which oval track racing was done was changed forever.

That same summer, the team favored to win the National League pennant was the Philadelphia Phillies. The Phillies had the pitching, the hitting, the defense, and one of the best managers, Gene Mauch, in the business. But the St. Louis Cardinals put on a closing finish and beat the Phillies for the National League title on the last day of the 1964 season. In the World Series that year, the Cardinals played the Yankees in what has to be considered one of the monumental “David and Goliath” battles. For the Yankees was the quintessence of dynasties and believed to be unbeatable. But the Cardinals prevailed and were the world champions of professional baseball. It is interesting to note that four years later, the Cardinals took on the role of Goliath and lost to a new “David”, the Detroit Tigers.

In 1969, New York saw two teams overcome the underdog label and defeated established and powerful teams. That January, a brash young quarterback from Alabama not only promised but flat out guaranteed that his team, from the upstart young professional football league, would beat the veteran and experienced team from the established pro football league. Of course, Joe Namath and the New York Jets went on to beat the Baltimore Colts in the third AFL – NFL championship game (the Super Bowl designation came later) and pro football as we know it was changed forever.

That summer, as the world watched Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin take the first steps on the moon, another perennial underdog took on the task of overcoming long odds and the established view that they could not win. But as Neil Armstrong took those first momentous steps on the moon, the New York Mets defeated the Montreal Expos and took over first place in the National League East division. Those Amazing Mets as they were known continued to confound the experts as they won the division title and defeated the Atlanta Braves in the first league playoff series to become the National League champions. And in the World Series, the Mets beat the Baltimore Orioles, surprising all the experts except those who had come to know that Mets of 1969 were not the lovable, losing team of the early 60’s. And just like the Jets victory changed the nature of professional football, the Mets win changed the nature of baseball as well.

But none of these events just occurred. In every case, there were individuals who were dedicated to the success of the efforts. Jimmy Clark was already a world champion when he came to Indianapolis and the team organizer, Colin Chapman, were committed to the concept of success. The decision to use the Woods Brothers team in the pits was also a sign of commitment to success. The 1964 Cardinals were a team just getting organized around a foundation of Bob Gibson, Curt Flood, Ken Boyer, Julian Javier, Bill White, and Lou Brock. They knew what they were capable of and what it took to win. The Jets were a team committed to winning and Joe Namath knew what his team’s strengths were and how to best use those strengths to defeat the Colts. Tom Seaver also knew that the character of the Mets had changed from the early days and that winning was no longer just an occasional thing but something to be gained through hard work and perseverance.

David’s battle with Goliath is often seen in the terms as these events that I have described. After all, the battle described in the Old Testament reading for today was the original “David vs. Goliath” match. And while we might think it foolish to take on a nine foot, nine inch giant whose armor weighed closed to 125 pounds and spearhead weighed close to nine pounds armed only with a slingshot, David knew what the slingshot could do and how to control it for the best results. And like all those who have lost such monumental matches, Goliath overestimated the abilities of his opponents.

But David was more than just experienced with the slingshot in this battle with Goliath. He also had a deep, abiding faith in God. Rather than trust in armor that he could not wear nor carry a sword that he could not hold David went into battle armed only with his faith.

Paul speaks of that same faith in the letter to the Corinthians. At that time, he wrote this letter many Corinthians were against Paul. The flavor of the passage that we read today is that no matter what was placed in front of him, no matter how long the odds, Paul’s faith in God would keep him going. He also reminded the readers of this letter when he quoted Isaiah in verse 2, “In an acceptable time I have heard you, and in the day of salvation I have helped you.”, that God does listen and that He does give help. All they, the Corinthians, all we have to do is turn to him in faith. (2 Corinthians 6: 2 — quoting Isaiah 49: 8)

We may not fully understand this concept of faith that Paul was writing about. We certainly cannot conceive of the power of the Holy Spirit as it was expressed in the Gospel reading today. Like the disciples, we asked what manner of man is that who can calm the seas and cause the winds to calm down. More often than not, we are like the Israelite army, cowering in fear when they first faced Goliath.

But Jesus told his disciples and us to not be afraid but to have faith, to believe in Him who would not forget them.

David went into battle not trusting in his sword and shield but only in God. Paul endured the physical hardships of the ministry and the taunting and words of deceit solely because his faith kept him strong.

Still, while we read these words and hear these great stories, we wonder if God does work. We see the world and wonder where faith is. You have heard me speak of Grace UMC in St. Cloud, MN. Here was a church that eleven years ago was facing what some would have considered insurmountable odds. With a declining attendance, an inability to pay the bills and a congregation divided. But this summer, through hard work and dedication of the church members, they are completing the building of a new sanctuary. This was not accomplished because of anything the pastor or the administrative council or even a brash young lay speaker did but rather because the congregation allowed the Holy Spirit to come into their lives and guide and direct them.

But, that’s Minnesota, you say. And besides that’s an old story. This is now and New York. Each month, I get a statement from the District Superintendent showing the current standings of churches in the district with respect to paid apportionments.

This month, this list shows three churches which have paid their 2000 apportionments in full. Another nineteen churches are up to date, that is, have paid 42% of their apportionments. Another twelve churches are only one month behind. There is a fourth category with seven churches in it. These seven churches, while not having paid their apportionments in full, have paid more than 42% of them. Among those seven is a church that probably hasn’t been on the list and certainly not in this category is this church, Walker Valley UMC. I am sure there are some who saw this list and wonder what is going on out there.

But whatever might be said, it is the faith of the members, neither the district superintendent’s pastoral assistant nor the administrative council can take credit for this accomplishment. It is the members of the church who, through their faith and dedication, brought about this accomplishment.

I received one other item in the mail this week with the listing of apportionments. At this time, I would ask Bill Keller, last year’s administrative council chair, and Marty Upright, this year’s administrative council chair, to come forward and accept this certificate showing that we paid our 1999 apportionments in full.

People see many barriers in front of them. Many churches fail because they think that the barriers cannot be overcome. Yet, when the Holy Spirit is present, when people allow the Holy Spirit to work in their lives, no barrier is that big.

We face many challenges each day, both separately and as a church. The invitation today is to let Christ into your life, to let the Holy Spirit guide and direct you. It may seem as though the odds are against you, but they more than even out when you let Christ into your life.

[1]

In The Beginning

Posted on by
Reply

This Sunday, Trinity Sunday, I am  at Dover United Methodist Church in Dover Plains, NY (Location of church).  The service starts at 11 and you are welcome to attend.  The Scriptures are Isaiah 6: 1 – 8, Romans 8: 12 – 17, and John 3: 1- 17.

I am tentatively scheduled to be at Gaylordsville United Methodist Church (Gaylordsville, CT) July 5, 12, and 19.  The services there start at 9:30 and you are welcome to attend.

————————————–

“Who will rid me of this troublesome priest?” Henry II spoke these words, or words to that effect, in expressing his dissatisfaction with Thomas Beckett, Archbishop of Canterbury.

Thomas Beckett was royal chancellor to King Henry II. In 1162, following the death of the archbishop of Canterbury, Henry appointed him to be the new archbishop. Henry must have thought that, with their friendship, he could more easily control the church and get the church to more easily support the crown’s policies. But Beckett did not go along with this plan. The man who was a layperson one day, an ordained priest the next, and the most powerful clergyman, the Archbishop of Canterbury, on the third day took his job very seriously.

Beckett would not allow the king and crown to engulf the church. Henry’s plan to gain authority that properly belonged to the church failed because Beckett would not allow such an uncontrolled usurpation of power.

Those who knew Beckett before his appointment found it amazing that he, Beckett, would come even close to being a man of God. But he grew into the job and the position. He understood what he had been called by God to do and refused to do what Henry wished that he would do. In exasperation, Henry made a passing remark that he wished someone would dispose of this headache.

Now, it cannot be said with any degree of certainty that Henry wanted his friend killed or whether he spoke his words out of frustration and/or anger. Nor can it be said that Thomas, who clearly sought power through his friendship with Henry, wanted the power of the church for himself.

But four young knights, William de Tracy, Reginald fitzUrse, Hugh de Morville, and Richard le Bret, all who hoped to rise in favor with Henry, heard the words as a command. So they rode off to Canterbury and assassinated Beckett on the high altar of the cathedral. The four knights were disgraced and Henry found himself seeking repentance for his thoughts and actions. (See http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/becket.htm; also Servants, Misfits, and Martyrs by James C. Howell.)

The theme of this Sunday is “Peace with Justice.” It comes some two weeks after four young men from this area were arrested for conspiring to bomb two synagogues in New York City in the misguided notion that they would be rewarded by Allah. And it comes one week after a physician was killed in the narthex of his church by someone who was angered that he, the doctor, was involved in abortions. It is neither the time nor the place to discuss whether what Dr. William Tiller did was right or wrong.

But it is interesting to note how many individuals, using the banner of God and the church, have literally endorsed Dr. Tiller’s murder. The message of far-right secular and sectarian groups and individuals is often filled with hatred and suggestions of violence. It should not be surprising that some individuals, be they Christian, Muslim, or any faith, would read those words and feel that it was acceptable, proper, and appropriate to take the actions that were planned for New York City and carried out in Wichita, Kansas.

I agree with the editorial staff of the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette wrote

. . .“the shouts of those who care only about ending abortion drown out all others. The shouting makes it impossible for people to work toward reducing the need for abortion and improving life for everyone.” (“Where is the outrage?”)

When I first began lay speaking, I used a reference to Patrick Henry’s famous speech (“give me liberty or give me death”) in one of my sermons. A colleague of mine, after seeing an early draft of that sermon, commented that I was one of the most conservative Methodists that he knew. This came as a shock to me because, first of all, I never have considered myself a conservative Methodist, and second, I knew several other Methodist preachers who were far more conservative that me. He also said that what I had written could serve as a justification for actions such as the bombing of an abortion clinic. Since I did not feel that way then (nor do I feel that way today) I immediately went back and rewrote that portion of the sermon.

But it still remains that there are those today who would and do use such words as a call for action. But if there is to be Peace and Justice in this world today, it cannot come with the methods that are used to take away peace and deny justice to the people of the world. And that is what the church today must face.

The words of too many people, portraying themselves as spokespersons of the church, are words of hate, anger, and exclusion that would take away peace, justice, and freedom. But the words of the church, from its very beginning, have been words of peace, justice, and freedom.

We recall the words in Deuteronomy that spoke of the care that each individual was to show for their neighbor,

When you happen on someone who’s in trouble or needs help among your people with whom you live in this land that God, your God, is giving you, don’t look the other way pretending you don’t see him. Don’t keep a tight grip on your purse. No. Look at him, open your purse, lend whatever and as much as he needs. Don’t count the cost. Don’t listen to that selfish voice saying, “It’s almost the seventh year, the year of All-Debts-Are-Canceled,” and turn aside and leave your needy neighbor in the lurch, refusing to help him. He’ll call God’s attention to you and your blatant sin. (The Message – Deuteronomy 15: 7 – 8)

We recall the words of Acts in which the people gathered together as a community, sharing all that they had for the benefit of all. There are also other writings outside the Bible that tell us that people gathered together in the name of Christ and lived in what we would today call communes. It may have been that these early Christians gathered together for protection as much as for worship. The people of that early church were persecuted for their refusal to fit into the social system of that day, which included publically acknowledging the emperor as god.

But somewhere along the timeline of history, perhaps after Constantine made Christianity acceptable, the church moved away from its beginnings and began to evolve into what it is today. The church today is more a reflection of what mankind wants the church to be, not what God intended.

I have written about what I see as the transition of the church from what it once was (though I perhaps didn’t always know that) into what it has become. But it is clear to me today that the church today is more a reflection of today’s society than it should be. I am not alone in this thought.

Gretta Vosper, pastor and author of the book “With or Without God: Why the Way We Live is More Important Than What We Believe”, suggests the church of today is no longer appropriate for today’s society. While I may disagree with some of her ideas, I do agree with her question, “Can the church slough off the encrustations of two millennia of ecclesial doctrine and theology in order to address the world’s most urgent needs?”

She continues with the idea that the core message of Christianity carries its own authority. It does not need a doctrine to validate it nor an external expert or supernatural authority to tell us it is right. A church which focuses on the core message need not fear the disciplines of science, history, archeology, psychology or literature; it will only be enhanced by such disciplines. It will also be a church open and enhanced by critical thinking for such thinking will enhance the message.

The problem is that this core message is too often expressed in terms of today’s society. And the result is that many people have turned the message into their version of the truth and they condemn those who refuse to accept their version. It isn’t just the far right of the spectrum; it is those who speak in terms of “this is the way that we have always done it”, even when they themselves don’t understand what it is that they are doing.

It is a concern that has been a part of the United Methodist Church almost from its very beginning. John Wesley once said

I am not afraid that the people called Methodists should ever cease to exist either in Europe or America. But I am afraid lest they should only exist as a dead sect, having the form of religion without the power. And this undoubtedly will be the case unless they hold fast the doctrine, spirit, and discipline with which they first set out. (“Thoughts upon Methodism” – 1786)

The title of this sermon, “In The Beginning”, came about because I am concerned about the church and its role in society. The church, from its very beginning has been concerned with peace and justice. But if there is to be peace with justice today, then we must remember how this church began.

Perhaps it is appropriate that today is also Trinity Sunday. I saw a statement the other day that basically stated that if you cannot imagine the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as One, then you would have difficulty with the message of Christianity. And if your view of Christianity is tied to the present worldview, where what the church, its mission and its words are determined by what others say, then it will be very difficult to accept the Triune God.

This was the problem that Nicodemus had. He was locked into a worldview that could not imagine being reborn; he could not imagine the changing power of the Holy Spirit as Paul described it to the Romans. But if your heart is open to Jesus Christ, then your mind can be open to the power of the Holy Spirit.

Isaiah had a vision of God sitting on his throne, much like the painting that you all see each Sunday (“What I See”). I am sure that the words that we heard this morning in our first reading (Isaiah 6: 1 – 8) adequately express the fear that filled Isaiah’s heart and mind. John Wesley also had a vision of the world; he saw a world in which the church was called to its original vision but from which it had turned away in favor of societal acceptance.

But I don’t think that we were ever supposed to be seen in terms of societal acceptance. From almost the very beginning of our history, we have been told to do what is right, not necessarily what is socially acceptable.

“Don’t pass on malicious gossip. “Don’t link up with a wicked person and give corrupt testimony. Don’t go along with the crowd in doing evil and don’t fudge your testimony in a case just to please the crowd. And just because someone is poor, don’t show favoritism in a dispute. (The Message – Exodus 23: 2)

There are two visions of the church today. One is that of an antiquated and dying institution that ignores the world around it in favor of days long past. It is a church in which things are done for reasons long forgotten.

The other is a vision of the church as it was two thousand years ago, of a community that opened its hearts and minds to all those who sought peace, of a community that cared for everyone regardless of background. It is a vision that says that when we gather together at the communion table, we gather in fellowship and remembrance as those who began the church did, remembering the words of Christ to the disciples and the others gathered together in the Upper Room but celebrating the fellowship of the presence.

It is the vision of the church that Wesley had some two hundred and fifty years ago when he saw a church more interested in its own well-being and self-preservation than it was in the well-being of the people. Wesley believed that God had raised the people called Methodists to reform the nation, particularly the church, and to spread scriptural holiness over the land. The institutions and practices of the Methodist movement were designed to enable Methodists to participate in God’s mission in the world. (From John Wesley and the Emerging Church by Hal Knight – http://www.umerging.org/uploads/media/John_Wesley_and_the_Emerging_Church.pdf)

And today, we are the messengers for this vision. As we come to the table this morning, we are called to bring forth the vision, not only of John Wesley, but of those who gathered two thousand years ago in fellowship and remembrance. We have the chance today to continue what began two thousand years ago, a chance to begin again the mission of the church. Just as God asked Isaiah who will carry forth the vision, so too does God ask us. And just as Isaiah answered, so must we answer the same. This can be the end of the church but it can also be the beginning. How shall you respond?

Where in the world is Jimmy Hoffa?

Posted on by
1

I am probably not the first to mention this but with the announcement that Giants Stadium is to be torn down, maybe we will finally find out where Jimmy Hoffa is buried.  The question now being asked is if Geraldo Rivera will host some sort of documentary looking through the rubble of the stadium searching for his body.

———————————————————

And I am reminded of the following story:

An old man lived alone in the country.  He wanted to plant his tomato garden but it was very hard work because the ground was hard.  His only son, who used to help him, was in prison. The old man wrote a letter to his son and described his predicament.

Dear son,

I am feeling pretty badly because it looks like I won’t be able to plant my tomato garden this year.  I’m getting too old to be digging up a garden plot.  I know that if you were here my troubles would be over.  I know you would be happy to dig the plot for me.

Love, Papa

A few days later he received a letter from his son.

Papa,

Don’t dig up that garden.  That’s where I buried the bodies.

Love, your son

At 4 am the next morning, FBI agents and local police arrived and dug up the entire area without finding any bodies.  They apologized to the old man and left.  That same day the old man received another letter from his son.

Dear Papa,

Go ahead and plant the tomatoes now.  That’s the best I could do under the circumstances.

 

 

How Will It Get Done?

Posted on by
Reply

This is the message I presented at Tompkins Corners United Methodist Church for Trinity Sunday, 15 June 2003.  The Scriptures are Isaiah 6: 1 – 8, Romans 8: 12 – 17, and John 3: 1- 17.  This was also Father’s Day.

——————————————

In the early part of 1775, the Continental Congress passed a series of resolutions calling for the thirteen colonies to defy the provisions of the Stamp Act recently enacted by the British government. As part of those resolutions, the Continental Congress called upon each of the thirteen colonies to support these resolutions. So it was that on March 23, 1775, Patrick Henry rose before the delegates of the Virginia Convention meeting in St. John’s Church in Richmond, VA to give perhaps the most impassioned speech of the pre-Revolutionary period.

And though this speech, with its ringing closing statement of “Give me liberty or give me death”, was the clarion call for war with Britain, it was at its heart a cry for justice. Like so many of those who called for action, Patrick Henry could not see how life under British rule and its colonial policies of taxation without representation could be considered fair under any circumstances. And like many, neither could he see a resolution of the problems through negotiation. If the colonists were to achieve the freedom they sought in this country, actions were necessary, not words of accommodation and one-sided compromise.

But more importantly, Patrick Henry understood that peace could not be achieved at the expense of liberty. For as he spoke, it is said that he had visions of his wife, Sarah Shelton, in his mind. As he spoke of the coming and inevitable war with Britain, he knew of the war his wife was fighting with the demons of mental illness.

Society’s cure for mental illness in those times was to simply lock up the mentally ill and treat them as a threat to society. To have peace with society, Patrick Henry could have put his wife in a mental asylum but he chose to keep her at home. Two rooms in the basement of their home were set aside for her so that in the rare moments of lucidity, she could be with the family and the children. But though it was her home, it was still a prison. Sadly, Sarah died just a few months before Patrick Henry rose that day in March of 1775.

On this day, when we celebrate peace with justice, it is important to know that you cannot have one without the other. When someone uses that phrase so often as the call for freedom, “Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?” you will know what drove Patrick Henry to seek freedom for this country.

Some twelve years ago, I first used this reference to Patrick Henry. A colleague of mine, after seeing a draft of the sermon, commented that I was one of the more conservative Methodists that he knew. This came as quite a shock to me since I knew several preachers who were more conservative than I and I have never thought of myself as conservative. He also said that what I wrote was a justification for actions, such as the bombing of abortion clinics, that he would have approved but which I then and still today find reprehensible.

Patrick Henry’s call for action in the defense of liberty rings well in many right-wing political circles and is found on many right wing based web sites. One site, in fact, is a fundamentalist church whose pastor used the speech in a sermon a year ago as a call for Christians to take action against the moral decay and decline of civilization. But the actions that others take today and justify with the words of Patrick Henry spoke are no better than the actions they oppose.

Peace with Justice is not just a slogan but rather an affirmation of what this country is about. But it cannot be found in ways that take away freedom. You can never have freedom if members of society are oppressed and equal opportunities are not given to all.

Utilizing violence, especially in today’s world, as a means to solve violence will never work. It is easy to use the call for action and war as Patrick Henry did. Perhaps war was inevitable in 1775 but that was because neither side was willing to take the steps to successfully resolve the conflict.

We still live in a world where hatred and violence are almost commonplace, expression of love and compassion are most clearly needed. We live in a world which almost daily invokes Exodus 21: 23 – 24, “But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.” So it is that we need to be reminded that Jesus said, “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.'” But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.” (Matthew 5: 38 – 39)

Jesus continued by commanding us to love our enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you.” (Matthew 5: 43 – 44) Jesus was responding to the saying that you could love your neighbor but should hate your enemy. This phrase, “hate your enemies”, can be found nowhere in the Old Testament but it was then and still is today an accepted part of society. Jesus spoke of the love that we were to give to all people, not just those we like. God does not lower the standards of righteousness simply to accommodate our sinfulness; rather, he gives us the power to keep His righteous standard.

The causes of war are poverty, oppression and hatred. Until such time as those causes are eliminated there can never be peace. Some will chastise me for what I say today. But then there were those who took exception to what Patrick Henry said. But if we are to be true to the Gospel message, if we are to show that God’s love is real, then we must speak out.

That I believe is a critical role of the church, to speak out against injustice, to speak out against oppression, to speak out against hatred. How many times did Jesus challenge society to do the right thing, how many times did Jesus do that which society did not want done?

Being a part of society, being the conscience of society is what the church is all about. It is what should have been the case from the beginning of the church but has not been. But it has to be more than just words. There must be action behind the words. When John Wesley began his ministry, others had cried out from the pulpit with concerns for the lower classes and poor of England. But it was done with the assumption that the only way for those in need to be saved was by emulating the upper classes.

Wesley believed that it was not necessary for the working and lower classes to be like the upper classes. Salvation was not a matter of a better life style; it was and should be the acceptance of Jesus Christ as one’s own Savior. So the role of the church was to help them find that path. And if that path was blocked because society put up obstacles, then the church should be tearing down the obstacles.

Like Nicodemus, people come to the church seeking answers. And the answers he received that evening years ago caused him great concern. For he was being asked to reconsider how he saw his life.

The acceptance of Christ as one’s Savior is a life changing experience. It is the experience that Nicodemus was troubled about; it is an experience that causes much trouble even today. It is not so much that we must, as Nicodemus asked, return to our mother’s womb but rather we must change the way in which we live.

This causes us, just as it caused Nicodemus, trouble. For we cannot see a way to change our lives. Unfortunately, in this day and age, too many people claim to be born again but still live the same life as before. And because they do not change their lives, their thinking is limited and out-dated.

If we look at the verses in John that come right after today’s reading, we see that acceptance of Christ as the Savior brings a new light and a new understanding to the ways of the world. But if we do not believe, if we do not accept then we continue in the old ways, ways that lead to failure.

With Christ and the presence of the Holy Spirit, we lead a new life. Our actions and decisions are based upon what our new life is about. This is, what I feel, Paul was saying to the Romans. It is the spirit of God that guides us in our life after coming to Christ. So it should be the Spirit of God that people see in our actions.

In accepting Christ, we are given a new life and a new way of seeing things. We must see what we do in terms of what Jesus did and why He did it. We must see life in the same terms as Jesus did. The Gospel reminds us today that it was love that provided the reason for God’s actions; it will be love that provides the reason for our actions. If there is not love in what we do, then we are as guilty as those who claim to be born again but judge and condemn those who are not.

Just as Patrick Henry called for action in 1775, so too is God calling us today, asking us as he did Isaiah, “Whom shall I send?”

We now that we should answer God’s call. We know that only by our efforts will the Gospel be realized. But we are reluctant to answer because we do not how it will be done. But just as Nicodemus was perplexed and reluctant to accept the idea of being born again, so too are we. We know that a life in Christ will yield the results we seek; but we are reluctant to give away what we think is our freedom.

But the freedom that we think we have is simply enslavement to the power of sin and death. The true freedom we seek will come through Christ and all we have to do is hear the words of Paul again to know that is true.

We know that, with the Holy Spirit in our lives, we have a new direction and a new sense of how things can be done. The question of the day is “How will it get done? How will we, as individuals in this world, change the world around us?” We know that the answer lies in our acceptance of Christ.