Quick to Listen, Slow to Speak

26 January 2020

Exodus 15:22-27; James 1:19-27; Matthew 7:24-29

Rev. Mark Norman, the district superintendent for the Southeast District in Arkansas, recently shared a thing on his FB page: “The most common greeting in the Zulu tribe is ‘Sawubona’.  It literally means ‘I see you, you are important to me, and I value you’.”  It is more than a general greeting that acknowledges the presence of another.

The spirit of ‘Sawubona’ goes beyond simple acknowledgement.  It addresses what I think is the most fundamental need we all share, regardless of race or gender, rich or poor, liberal or conservative; to be acknowledged as human beings with feelings, with needs, with fears, with hopes and dreams.  The heart of ‘Sawubona’ acknowledges more than presence; it sees the person – one who is also created in the Divine Image.

There was a time when I could recall names easily.  I don’t remember that I did anything special to remember the name.  Now I often struggle to remember names of persons I’m not in regular contact with.  Though we might write it off as a problem of aging, I wonder if I hear and then readily dismiss a name subconsciously because I failed to acknowledge the person; I only note the presence. 

Something that hits a little closer to home – and the point I hope to make – is interaction at Annual Conference.  Last year a young lady approached me with a pamphlet.  Before she reached me, however, I had already written her off.  Why?  Because she was wearing one of those rainbow stoles.  I do not remember the pamphlet she offered me, and I don’t remember what she looked like.  I certainly don’t remember her name, though I do recall her introducing herself. 

My judgment of this person was clouded by an “issue” I was sure she would try to sell.  It’s happened before with others.  As a result, I diminished her as a person.  Writing off her stole as a purely political statement, I was not the least bit interested in engaging in a debate about what I believe and justifying to her why I believe it. 

A like-minded friend had suggested maybe she and others should not be wearing those stoles because they cause others to jump to certain conclusions – but do they?  Is the inanimate piece of cloth the cause of my adverse reaction?  Or is there something deeper within myself that needs some work?

It occurs to me this “issue” that seems to be at the heart of the division within so many denominations is much more complex than we might think.  The complexity is not because the Scripture is vague; it isn’t.  Rather, the complexity is due to the fact that this issue involves persons.  So our issue – our collective issue, regardless of what we believe – is persons. 

In his Letter from a Birmingham Jail, Dr. King made the case that the issue of racial justice was not strictly a matter of laws on the books.  Rather, due to selective enforcement, it was the diminishing of an entire race of people only because of the color of their skin.  In that culture and in that time, they were “less than”.

I see the parallel with this issue and our predetermined agendas approaching General and Annual Conference.  We think we have to deal with an issue (both sides are guilty), but we do not – cannot, will not - get past the issue because we reject the spirit and the heart of ‘Sawubona’ - I see you, you are important to me, and I value you.  We do not see the person, and we do not value the person.  Because personhood is distorted by an issue, those with whom we disagree become “less than”.

In our Wesleyan Methodist tradition, “holy conferencing” is considered to be among the many means of grace we must engage and practice consistently.  These “holy conferences” are not only our formal Conferences in which forms are submitted and reports are made.  Holy conferencing also includes small group gatherings, Bible study groups, and visitations; “safe spaces”, for lack of a better term, because everyone should feel safe and free to share their thoughts without being attacked – as long as they are not attacking or diminishing the thoughts of others. 

What makes them modes of “holy conferencing” is not only giving everyone a chance to express what’s on their minds but, perhaps more importantly, listening carefully to what is being said.  Sadly, this is the component of “holy conferencing” which has been largely missing.  And because this component is missing, we are all the poorer for it. 

There is nothing “holy” going on when we diminish persons because an issue has become more important.  In “holy conferencing”, we must always be seeking to “produce God’s righteousness” (James 1:20), not win arguments.

It is written in the Proverbs (16:20); “Those who are attentive to a matter will prosper, and happy are those who trust in The Lord”.  We should probably take note that the Teacher does not say, “Those who win arguments will prosper”.  No, the Teacher places the burden of “holy conferencing” (respectful conversation) upon all who are “attentive to a matter”.  This means listening as carefully as we should speak. 

Some have asked a valid question: Are we required to hear what we perceive to be an unbiblical point of view?  “Happy are those who trust in The Lord”, the Teacher wrote.  So if we “trust in The Lord”, what are we afraid of when hearing a point of view that does not align with our own?  Our fear, our genuine fear, should be that of diminishing the sacred value of the person whose opinion goes against everything we believe – because it is still not about an issue.

It has been said the Gospel is less about how to get into the Kingdom of Heaven after we die, and more about how to live in the Kingdom of Heaven before we die.  Before such a statement can begin to make sense, we have to learn to “Listen to what the Spirit is saying to the churches”, as our Lord said more than once in The Revelation.   

It may also be said The Lord speaks to His people through the most unlikely sources, perhaps sometimes from the very persons whose words make our blood boil!  Maybe we’re being “tested” as Israel was being tested in the wilderness.  If we are really being tested, it becomes all the more important for us to remember that “our struggle is not against flesh and blood” (Ephesians 6:12).  So if our struggle is not against flesh and blood (that is, persons), perhaps we need to revisit our issues and how we approach one another.

For the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven, the burden is on us to try always to remember our issue is not with persons.  It is to remember, as it is written, that “one does not live by bread alone but by every word that comes from the mouth of God” (Deuteronomy 8:3).  The Word which came from the Mouth of The Lord’s Anointed One, thus, is “Love one another as I have loved you”.

It is much more important that we learn to listen - in the spirit of Sawubona - and be slow to speak.  Our UMC and our nation are hopelessly divided because everyone is diminished in the eyes of others, and we have all been reduced to mere “issues”.  More importantly, because we tend to diminish the “other”, no one is listening to “what the Spirit is saying to the Church”. 

And yet, throughout the noise of all the issues, our Lord calls to us; “Listen!  I am standing at the door, knocking; if you hear My voice and open the door, I will come in to you and eat with you, and you with Me” (Revelation 3:20).  Are we listening?  Are we really listening?  May it be so, Lord.  Amen.

Reconnecting Self to Source

19 January 2020

Isaiah 49:1-7; Psalm 40:1-11; 2 Peter 1:19-21; John 1:29-42

Both Isaiah and Jeremiah recognized they were not just called to do what The Lord would call them to do; they both seemed to understand their calling happened long before they were even aware (we Methodists understand it as prevenient grace).  Isaiah spoke as one who had been claimed in his mother’s womb, but the prophet Jeremiah added a twist; “the Word of The Lord came to me saying, ‘Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations” (1:4-5).

Even though The Lord had commissioned each of these prophets for a particular time in Israel’s and Judah’s history, these men – and many others - would encounter nothing but resistance - not because The Lord did not follow through or back them up, but because what they preached went against everything the pop culture of their time had come to embrace.  The essence of living, then as now, was this: to each his own. 

The world these prophets spoke of was counter-cultural.  The very idea that The Lord’s “chosen people” could possibly fall from grace and be removed from “The Promised Land” was inconceivable.  Surely they understood The Lord as faithful, but reciprocity of faithfulness was not the narrative.  Because it was every man for himself in a completely self-absorbed culture, these prophets were rejected by the very people they had been sent to warn.

What escaped The Lord’s people amidst all this gloom and doom – which makes the prophets very hard to read even for us today – was the call to repentance.  The Lord did not judge and execute in a matter of days; He gave His people ample time over generations and through more than one prophet to see the signs, repent, and be spared the judgment.  Sadly, it is likely these prophets were not recognized as true prophets until after the fact, but the culture’s rejection of these prophets in their calling did not change who these prophets were born to be.

“The Word of The Lord came to [Jeremiah] saying, “Before you were formed in the womb, I knew you …”  Standing from the truth of Jeremiah’s commission as a prophet, you and I should recognize The Lord’s prevenient grace in this proclamation; “Before you were formed in the womb, I knew you”. 

If this statement is true for one, it must be true for all.  Though Jeremiah would be commissioned a prophet, not everyone is called to be a prophet.  It is undeniable, however, that everyone “formed in the womb” is known … and called to one task or another.  This, I think, is an important element in the Church which has been overlooked or neglected for a very long time.  Decades, perhaps; even centuries.

The reason for this neglect is not necessarily because of a wide-spread and wholesale rejection of The Lord.  It is the narrative of the “call” which I think has been so narrowly defined as to have virtually no meaning outside of a call to pastoral ministry, whether as a church pastor, a chaplain, or a missionary. 

The Roman Catholic Church teaches seven sacraments, as opposed to the two taught in the Methodist tradition.  Among those seven sacraments is the one of “holy orders”.  As a young catechumen, I was taught that this sacrament is reserved exclusively for those called to serve as priests, nuns, and monks. 

The textbook definition of “sacrament” is to be understood as a sacred moment when The Lord gives fully of Himself; baptism and Holy Communion certainly fit that criteria.  In those two acts, we are “given” more than we can really comprehend.  We are certainly given life through each, but “holy orders” recognizes each life as one commissioned in service to The Lord, His Word, and His people.

Meaning?  There is not one baptized soul among us who is not “called” and commissioned to one task or another.  Even among those who have yet to be baptized into The Lord’s Covenant, there is not one soul among them who is not “known” by the Father even before conception.  This, I think, demands more of our attention than to only be “saved” so we can dismiss the threat of hell.

Think about it like this.  As John tells it, the Baptizer came to understand his calling in this way: “I came baptizing with water for this reason: that [Messiah] might be revealed to Israel” (John 1:31).  This makes a powerful declaration about baptism itself, doesn’t it?  And since we continue the practice of baptism and Messiah has already been revealed, we must come to understand baptism itself as much more than a simple rite of passage.  It should be better understood as a moment of revelation.

Question, then: when the Baptizer said, “I myself did not know Him”, was he referring to Jesus of Nazareth as the One not known to him?  Or was he referring to Jesus as the Anointed One, the Messiah?  Jesus and John were cousins.  Though they may have not grown up together, it seems unlikely they would not have at least known one another.  Yet when Jesus came on to the scene, the Baptizer proclaimed, “Here is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (vs 29).  That’s a pretty bold declaration from one who claims not to have known Him.

The Father knows His creation; but somewhere between the conception of life and the coming of age, we lose all sense of who we really are.  And if we live a life devoid of faith and only get baptized as a matter of ritual, we never really gain the sense of self necessary to serve our Father and His people.  In a manner of speaking, we seek only to serve ourselves.  Faith and religion become only incidental.

Somewhere through the historic teachings of the Church and our own coming of age through baptism and confirmation, if the Church is faithful in Her task, these young catechumens become much more than “saved”; they become whom they were “known” to be even before conception.  They are reconnected in a meaningful way to the very Source of Life and Living. 

Though the Church does rituals that are important in the life of the Church, we must not get lost in being ritualistic without being realistic.  We are “known” from long before, and we are – without exception – “called” to a task.  It is time to connect to that task and become who we have always been before education, training, and jobs distracted us. 

We are “known” by the Father.  It is long past time for us to know Him so we can finally know ourselves.  Amen.

Fish or Cut Bait

12 January 2020

Isaiah 42:1-9; Psalm 29; Acts 10:34-43; Matthew 4:12-22

When His ministry on earth was done, our Shepherd commissioned the Church: “Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.  Teach them to obey everything I have taught you, and remember I am with you always, until the end of the age.”  Matthew 28:19-20 NRSV

When Jesus began His public ministry, after He had been baptized and after He had been tested in the wilderness by the “tempter”, He started with an assurance rather than a threat: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near” (Matthew 4:17).  Then He began calling – and “making” – disciples.  He began with Peter and Andrew and followed with James and John.  Others would come later, but their journey toward becoming more than they were when they were called would be three years in the making.  This, I think, is significant for us to note.

This seems to be a sticking point with many churches, especially those desperate to add to their numbers.  Big numbers are great.  Professions of faith and baptisms, new members joining, worship attendance, Bible study groups, and even tithes and other offerings are all noted by the Conference as the measure of vitality, of effectiveness. 

While there is some validity to these numbers telling a story about how alive a church really is, it is important for the church to bear in mind that actually making disciples – particularly making disciples equipped and prepared to make disciples themselves, which is the entire point - is a long game. 

It is not about getting a potential convert to say a prayer; it is about teaching potential disciples the importance of prayer.  It is about transforming lives and communities.  It is about helping individuals to move beyond being mere “believers” and becoming followers.  And I think perhaps because Jesus’ hour could not come until the disciples were properly prepared to take the reins, it should probably suggest to us that “making disciples” goes beyond creating converts. 

By the Holy Spirit alone rather than by our compelling arguments, persons can have a clarifying moment of conviction.  Moving beyond that moment will require an intentional community with a strong sense of purpose and self, a lot of time and patience, and a lot of effort to help and to encourage these new believers – and old ones - to stay the course and stay connected to the community of faith in discipleship.  We know the course – the Journey itself – is long and hard.  We know there are far too many tempting distractions, but we also know life itself – going to school, earning a living, spending quality time with our families – can become distractions in and of themselves.  Soon, if we are not on our guard, even these things become the entire point of our existence.

Yet through the course of developing, the journey of becoming, some distractions may prove to be so compelling that what is of everlasting importance, that which will last beyond any given moment of distraction, can be lost.  Sometimes it is lost momentarily, in which case the Church must work to draw them back while being patient with them. 

Sometimes, however, the distractions can be so overwhelming that the once-future disciple can become lost in choosing another, less challenging, less risky, and more “popular” path.  For the Church, it is always about knowing when to “fish”, and when to “cut bait” while also making sure the Door is always open and a lifeline is at the ready.  As Jesus taught His disciples before sending them out to share the Good News, if they won’t hear it, shake off the dust and move along (Matthew 10:14).  Do not get caught up in senseless and unprofitable arguments!

The Christian faith is not about beating errant members over the head or threatening non-believers with hell until they come around, but this does not mean we cannot hold one another accountable.  Jesus issued a simple challenge, and four men chose to drop everything to see what this “fishing for people” was all about.  Jesus never said, “If you don’t claim Me as your personal Lord and Savior, you are going to hell”.  He said, “Follow Me”.  So they followed Him … for three years. 

Even after three years, one did fall away; but was his sin of betrayal worse than the betrayal of the others who ran when circumstances became sketchy?  Dangerous?  This tells us that even our best efforts may not be enough, but Jesus always is enough.  They learned this after His Resurrection.

So discipleship is not a “moment”; it is an investment.  In keeping with the Great Commission, it is working to ensure through the generations that the communities entrusted to our care will always have the Gospel.  We dare not presume to think “someone” will always be willing if we do not teach the faith.  Discipleship is also up close and personal.  It demands relationships.  It requires disciples to first earn the trust of the wider community.  This means actively listening rather than merely waiting our turn to talk. 

It means conveying to the community and to future disciples that we are in it for the long haul – through good times and bad, through successes and failures, through agreements and disagreements.  It always means we care about something other than ourselves and our personal beliefs or churning out big numbers for the Conference.

The Church across denominational lines has been in steady decline since the 60’s; and while we may have our favorite “fall guy” to blame for the decline (pick your poison), we must acknowledge the fact that it is never just one thing. 

Yet as easy as it is to blame what we would call “ungodly” external forces, including the devil himself, maybe it is time the Church looked more closely within.  Like acknowledging the many external forces that may contribute to the decline, we must be willing to face a certain reality – while there may be no one particular person within the Church solely responsible for the decline, the collective Church – the congregation itself – must determine how we function as a whole.

This kind of evaluation is not easy; introspection in being honest with oneself never is.  But until we are first willing to be honest with ourselves, we cannot expect we will ever be honest with those we are charged to reach and to teach and, yes, to love. 

There are no guarantees for success, at least not on our terms or by our own standards.  But as long as we try, as long as we are diligent about the True Mission of the Church to “make disciples”, we have this assurance from our Shepherd as well: “I am with you always”.  To the very End. 

Can we then see the Church Herself is that very Promise?  Pray, then, that we live and learn and love – and fish - as though it were so.  To the Very End.  Amen.

I Love You, but ...

5 January 2020 – 2^nd Sunday of Christmas

Deuteronomy 6:4-9; Psalm 51:10-17; Ephesians 4:17-24; John 1:1-5, 10-18

What is love if there are conditions placed on that love?  Thinking about the first Commandment; “I am The Lord your God.  You will have no other gods before Me” and Moses’ affirmation of that Commandment, “You shall love The Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” – coupled with Jesus affirming that affirmation with the Greatest of all Commandments (Matthew 22:37), it occurs to me that as much as we casually toss about the “L” word, we don’t seem to know what it really means.

Remember how St. Paul defines unconditional love: “While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (Romans 5:8).  That is, while humanity was unaware of this unconditional love, before we could even spell “righteousness”, let alone understand it, while we were in open rebellion, The Lord our God reached out in a profound and unmistakable way and did a thing we can hardly comprehend.

Love does not mean things will always work in our favor, however.  In 1 Kings 3:16-28, King Solomon made a decision that would be perplexing to anyone except a parent.  Recall that two women shared a home, and each had given birth.  In the night, one of the children had died.  The woman whose child had died switched the kids before the other woman was aware.  When she awoke, she realized the dead child at her breast was not hers.

They went to the king, each claiming the live child was her own.  When the king offered to cut the live child in half so they could each have a share, the real mother deferred to the other woman for the sake of keeping her child alive.  Though there was the risk she would not be allowed to raise and love her own child, she was willing to take that risk for the sake of her child’s life.  The God-given wisdom of King Solomon could then see only a mother could make such a choice.

Limits placed on expressions of love are sometimes necessary, and those limits can put relationships at risk.  “I love you, but …” we can sometimes see that what others want is not always in their best interests.  It is discerning the difference between genuine need and intense desire.  Love would fulfill a genuine need – regardless of how one may feel about the person with the need.

We often confuse love with infatuation, which is pure emotion, but more than even this is the thin line between love and lust.  I’ve said it before, but it bears repeating: lust is not always about physical intimacy – though in the biblical context, that seems to be most applicable.  Thinking more broadly, however, what we lust is more about intense desire than it is about genuine need.  Knowing the difference between love and lust means knowing when and where to draw the line for the greater good.

Loving The Lord with all we have and with all we are is even trickier for many, perhaps for most.  A simple thing such as attending worship is an expression of love.  It means we are willing to put self aside for the sake of Another.  Yet there are too many who have given in to what Dietrich Bonhoeffer called “cheap grace” and have been lulled into a false sense of love as in what one happens to be feeling at any given time rather than what one is willing to do. 

“I love You, Lord, but …” attending worship is not my thing.  I don’t like the music.  I don’t like the preacher.  I don’t like the prayers.  I don’t like the responsorial psalms.  I don’t like … well, you get the idea.  It isn’t hard to nitpick a worship service – especially when the service itself is not consumer-driven.  That is, worship planners are aware – or should be aware – that the only One who is to be pleased in worship is the Object of our worship.

“I love You, Lord, and I want a personal relationship with You, but …” Sunday school and Bible study just don’t do it for me.  Prayer is not really my thing and, besides, I don’t really have time.  I’ll just pray on the fly.

The sad thing is there is not a soul among us who does not throw one or more of these excuses out there.  Given the past few months, I have allowed myself to become so easily distracted to the point that I have been reading and studying in crunch time.  And while you have been very gracious to me, these distractions have not been deliberate choices but incidentals.  Because I have not been primarily focused on The Lord and what He would ask of me – and being a preacher is secondary – I have allowed my spiritual fuel tank to run dangerously low.

Given the world we live in, that is not a good place for any of us to be.  Our children need us to be focused now more than ever, and they need us to be parents, not pals.  “I love You, Lord, but …” becomes too easy, and the thing we need to be focused on – The Lord’s will for us – becomes secondary to our own preferences.

You may be aware the United Methodist Church is back in the secular news.  A group of United Methodists have created a proposal – with the help of an independent mediator (if that tells us anything) to submit to General Conference in May to facilitate an amicable separation.  While we must not become too distracted by this particular thing, it occurs to me that perhaps too many of us have become so accustomed to “I love You, Lord, but …” that we have lost sight of what He would require of us.  Though we are told this proposal has been agreed upon unanimously, it is hard to believe this would be what our Father would ask of us – especially when the separation proposal is so narrowly focused. 

Is our God so narrowly focused?  Not likely, but I think the point where we find ourselves as a Body is the direct result of a lot of dangerously low spiritual fuel tanks.  The proposal splits the United Methodist Church down the middle between this side’s want and that side’s desire – each claiming the Will of God.  No matter how we spin it or how we try to find our own “side” in this never-ending battle, we must awaken to the probability that where we are is the direct result of a complacent Church more focused on human desire than on Divine Will. 

If there is to be a New Year’s resolution to come from the Body of Christ, it must be a resolve to learn to focus first on Him.  “Seek first the Kingdom of God and His righteousness, and everything you need will be added to you”.  Our Shepherd spoke these words some 2000 years ago.  Perhaps it is time now to take Him at His Word, and “seek first” that which matters to us all – as individuals and as a body - so we can honestly live into what it means to be the genuine Body of Christ.

It won’t be easy, but it is always necessary – perhaps now more than ever.  To the glory of the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit.  Let the Body of Christ so pray – Amen!