Philippians 3:17-4:1
Luke 13:31-35
The other night at our OT Survey class I quoted a TV character and was promptly told that I probably watch too much TV. Well, I’ve admitted that much, but M*A*S*H and gangster movies don’t count as “too much”. Besides, sometimes even TV writers have something worth listening to!
Though I’ve never actually watched this particular show, A&E has a series called “Intervention” which is about addicts and their loved ones who pull out all the stops and “intervene” in their lives before they are completely destroyed. As it goes for addicts, including alcoholics, interventions become necessary because just when we might think someone has actually “hit bottom”, we find their downward spiral to be substantially “bottomless”. And we intervene because we genuinely care. We actually “love” that person whose life is spinning out of control, that person who is on the road to perdition and, ultimately, his own destruction; we love because we care enough to go out of our way and actually DO something for them, regardless of what may be required of us.
I often wonder why we Christians are not so aggressive when it comes to “intervention” on behalf of those whose souls are “in danger of the judgment”. And I don’t mean public protests and curses and name-calling against those who do not live according to our personal mandates and preferences. I mean a genuine, heartfelt, soulful, sanctified way of love by which we can see these persons and feel genuine care and concern for these persons because, through the spiritual growth that is sanctification, we have been empowered and enabled to see them through the eyes of the Lord.
Paul challenges the Philippians in much the same way, particularly when he challenges them to “imitate” him but most notably when he speaks of those “enemies of the Cross” for whom he weeps. There is a spiritual certainty within his compassion by which he is convinced that these people who worship their own “bellies” (i.e., fleshly desires) and are on the path of spiritual destruction are completely unaware of their impending doom, blinded as they are by their own selfish indulgences. In their blissful ignorance, these have become “enemies of the Cross” because they fail to comprehend the sacrificial nature of Christianity itself. Perhaps it is they fail to understand that when it comes to allegiance to Christ, there is no middle ground, there is no “kinda sorta”, there is no “after I finish everything else”. Jesus clearly admonishes His disciples that they either “is” or they “ain’t”, and that allegiance goes much further and much deeper than self-proclaimed salvation.
These to whom Paul refers – and these many whom we know today – are also the very ones to whom Jesus refers when He speaks of the many who were and are “unwilling” to be gathered into His protective embrace. And yet, in spite of their “unwillingness”, Jesus is still on the path of the mother of all “interventions” even as those on the path of self-destruction cannot appreciate it or even comprehend what is about to take place, so engrossed in their own lives as they are to the point of being deaf and blind, not only living in darkness but taking genuine joy and pleasure from it. Worse, perhaps, is that they find no shame.
St John Chrysostom, a 4th century Church father and bishop of Constantinople, reckoned that it might not be as bad to live such a life as one of such self-destruction “in secret” as it would to bring such behavior better suited to darkness out into the light. At least in the darkness, there is evidence of a conscience, an element of one’s being that may still have hope of redemption. These seem to at least be aware of their own shame and would much prefer that it not be so well known. For the “enemies of the Cross”, however, they bring what they believe to be their own “glory” into the light where it is revealed by the Word of the Lord, by the Light that is Christ, as their ultimate shame. Just as it will soon be their judgment and spiritual death. The Church does not use such language much anymore, does it?
For an example we could be so bold as to point to a protest which took place at a cathedral in Chicago on February 14. The church was celebrating its regular Sunday Mass but was also inviting married couples to renew their own vows to one another during the Mass. It was to be a celebration of married love. A homosexual rights group chose to use this cathedral and its celebratory Mass as a venue by which to “protest” the Catholic Church’s refusal to change its stand on homosexual behavior. These people obviously have no shame and are so blinded as to believe that the Lord God is subject to our protests. Even worse, they showed an utter disrespect and disregard for the rights of those in worship and for the rights of those who simply do not and will not agree with them.
Or we could choose other, less conspicuous examples of personal excess, selfish indulgences, ignoring the Body of Christ in favor of pursuing one’s own personal desires. And there are any number of examples that fall somewhere between the seemingly innocuous and the blatantly obvious. In the end, however, the standard of one’s own faith can be measured by the willful efforts made to grow in faith … and in Christ-like, sacrificial love; that love which ignores the needs and the glory of self and actively pursues the needs and the glory of others.
“Whatever”, that cavalier proclamation spanning a couple of generations that suggests a “take it or leave it” attitude, is not an option in the Body of Christ just as such condescension was not an option for Jesus. The commitment was as absolute and as unwavering as the compassion felt for those who kept – and still keep – the Church and life in the Body of Christ safely at arm’s length. There can be no such thing as a benign faith that simply exists but does not actually “live” and grow and flourish and that feels no shame in its contempt and hatefulness. Simply believing in a possibility or a concept is not the same as abiding faith.
I think there is much more that is exemplified in Jesus’ lamentation and Paul’s tears to those who are still working and striving and growing in such faith and in such love that they can appreciate Jesus’ sacrificial love even for those kept Him at arm’s length, those who “killed the prophets and stoned those who were sent” to them to proclaim the Day of the Lord, as well as for those many who were prepared – at all costs – to intervene and stop the cycle of self-destruction and ultimate judgment that will come sooner or later.
I read an article years ago written by a tax protester who not only tried to use the US Constitution to prove that he did not have to pay taxes but also used Paul’s statement of “citizenship” to prove that he was not subject to the nation’s laws because he was not a citizen of the US. It was a stretch, to say the least, but there have been others who have tried and failed. The problem with these few, however, is that they missed the entire point of what Paul was suggesting, blinded as they were by trying to use Scripture – and the Lord’s name in VAIN! – to their own selfish ends.
We cannot “use” our heavenly citizenship as a means to our own end, and we must not use our “resident” status to avoid those things we would rather not do. Instead, we embrace our faith and sanctification to do those things we GET TO DO, like share the Good News, to sacrifice even ourselves in spiritual “intervention” for those on the road to destruction.
The Truth is within us according to Holy Scripture. We are of a much higher calling than to simply grab all we can for ourselves. But if the “pursuit of happiness” means more to us than the Lord as our “light” and “salvation” and “stronghold”, if we are more apt to quote the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence than we are Holy Scirpture, then we will spend our lives in blind indulgence and in constant fear of tomorrow because we fear we do not have “enough” today. We will become of those for whom Jesus lamented, those who refused His protective embrace and kept Him at arm’s length, refusing to heed His call to Eternal Life after the grave, and peace and contentment in this life before the grave.
The Lord have mercy on us, forgive us our sins, and bring us into everlasting Life.
Amen.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Checks and (Im)balances
Even as a Republican, I find no fault in a Democratic majority in Congress. Such an overwhelming and near super-majority, however, has the potential to become a foundational problem unique to the republic that is this country. The genuine problem exists, regardless of the party in majority, because the Madisonian system of checks and balances within the federal government is pushed completely out of balance. As it is, the legislative branch and its substantial majority is running in tandem with the executive branch rather than keeping the other in check, deficit spending is completely out of control, unsustainable levels of spending are being initiated, and the polled majority of Americans is completely disenchanted and disenfranchised.
"But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others. The provision for defense must in this, as in all other cases, be made commensurate to the danger of attack. Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place. It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government …This policy of supplying, by opposite and rival interests, the defect of better motives, might be traced through the whole system of human affairs, private as well as public. We see it particularly displayed in all the subordinate distributions of power, where the constant aim is to divide and arrange the several offices in such a manner as that each may be a check on the other -- that the private interest of every individual may be a sentinel over the public rights. These inventions of prudence cannot be less requisite in the distribution of the supreme powers of the State." – Federalist #51
What happens to the republic, then, when one branch of government virtually surrenders its constitutionally imposed independence from another, even by a vote of the people, to the point that there is no distinction between the two and the minority is all but ignored, regardless of the ideal or principle pursued? James Madison held, seemingly in spite of the intent of the Constitution as expressed in the preamble to “promote the general welfare”, that the rights of an individual should not be usurped.
It has been expressed by the so-called “Tea Party” movement that individual rights are being trampled in favor of the “general welfare” by way of the continuing debate on health care reform. The polled majority clearly rejects any and all government mandates in health care or health insurance matters, yet the majority in Congress seems to be following lock-step behind the president in seeing to a $1 trillion government-sponsored health care/insurance package that compels participation even by those who do not wish to participate. It is, as expressed recently by one speaker in the finest tradition of the Revolution, “taxation without representation” as we are forced to participate or help to finance such an aggressive government mandate.
There can be no easy answers to the dilemma now faced by the Republicans in Congress and those they have been elected to represent. As it happens, the party not in majority is always accused of being that “fly in the ointment” by which progress, in whatever form, is slowed. But when “progress” runs away so callously and so aggressively as to reject, ignore, and dismiss the concerns of those in the minority, we witness again the tyranny of the past by and through which the nation rose up in defiance. Reasonable men did not prevail, and needless bloodshed ensued.
Surely we can do much better today, especially in matters of health care, but such efforts toward a genuine greater good will require honor rather than power, an attribute I fear is in short supply even among the honorable due to the preponderance of anger and vindictiveness.
"But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others. The provision for defense must in this, as in all other cases, be made commensurate to the danger of attack. Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place. It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government …This policy of supplying, by opposite and rival interests, the defect of better motives, might be traced through the whole system of human affairs, private as well as public. We see it particularly displayed in all the subordinate distributions of power, where the constant aim is to divide and arrange the several offices in such a manner as that each may be a check on the other -- that the private interest of every individual may be a sentinel over the public rights. These inventions of prudence cannot be less requisite in the distribution of the supreme powers of the State." – Federalist #51
What happens to the republic, then, when one branch of government virtually surrenders its constitutionally imposed independence from another, even by a vote of the people, to the point that there is no distinction between the two and the minority is all but ignored, regardless of the ideal or principle pursued? James Madison held, seemingly in spite of the intent of the Constitution as expressed in the preamble to “promote the general welfare”, that the rights of an individual should not be usurped.
It has been expressed by the so-called “Tea Party” movement that individual rights are being trampled in favor of the “general welfare” by way of the continuing debate on health care reform. The polled majority clearly rejects any and all government mandates in health care or health insurance matters, yet the majority in Congress seems to be following lock-step behind the president in seeing to a $1 trillion government-sponsored health care/insurance package that compels participation even by those who do not wish to participate. It is, as expressed recently by one speaker in the finest tradition of the Revolution, “taxation without representation” as we are forced to participate or help to finance such an aggressive government mandate.
There can be no easy answers to the dilemma now faced by the Republicans in Congress and those they have been elected to represent. As it happens, the party not in majority is always accused of being that “fly in the ointment” by which progress, in whatever form, is slowed. But when “progress” runs away so callously and so aggressively as to reject, ignore, and dismiss the concerns of those in the minority, we witness again the tyranny of the past by and through which the nation rose up in defiance. Reasonable men did not prevail, and needless bloodshed ensued.
Surely we can do much better today, especially in matters of health care, but such efforts toward a genuine greater good will require honor rather than power, an attribute I fear is in short supply even among the honorable due to the preponderance of anger and vindictiveness.
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Broken Barriers
Luke 4:1-13
O Lord our God, on this First Sunday of Lent as we prepare ourselves to endure the coming 40 days, by Your blessed and Holy Spirit, bring us to a remembrance of those times when we completely trusted You and You alone. Bless this gathering and time of worship, that our hearts and minds would be open to Your Presence and Your Grace. Make us mindful of our need to repent, and make us mindful of your mercy to forgive. In the Name and by the Blood of Your Beloved Son, we ask and we pray. Amen.
“When the devil had finished every test, He departed from [Jesus] until an opportune time.” – Luke 4:13
I often wonder if there is ever a time in which we are not being tested, at least to one degree or another, by the Lord or by the tempter. And in that vein, I wonder if this is the reason why the Bible and our own John Wesley admonished us to be in constant prayer, “praying without ceasing”, studying Scripture, attending to those means of grace and Sacraments of the Church and learning to look at the world through the Lord’s eyes and not our own. This, of course, is that state of spiritual perfection we strive to achieve as we continue to grow in faith and in love, but we are also reminded almost daily that we are not … quite … there … yet.
The way Luke presents it – or at least, the way our English translation presents Luke – the evil one had exhausted “every” test. To me this means the devil had run out of options…. for the moment. He offered to Jesus every possible temptation that would come near to destroying just about any other mortal human, and Jesus either passed these tests or He failed them – all depending, of course, on one’s perspective.
He passed, of course, according to His divine Being; He really could have done no less, but this we know only with our 20/20 biblical hindsight. Jesus depended on the Word of the Lord to see Him through these particular temptations, these worldly challenges. Yet according to what we might consider to be more “normal” standards of human living, He failed miserably.
Think about it. According to your standards and mine, what fool in his right mind would turn down all that Jesus had turned down: FOOD after a 40-day fast, unlimited power and authority over all the kingdoms of the world, or super-human strength so as to never be hurt or feel pain?? Think of how much we could do FOR THE LORD if we only had all these resources and these powers at our command and disposal! Isn’t this a more “normal” standard of how the faithful think in terms of worldly possessions and relationships?? And then to use Scripture passages, regardless of proper context or appropriate application and only in increments as they will personally suit us at any particular time, well, isn’t this also how the faithful world turns?
To wait “until an opportune time” is somewhat ominous because what is implied, if not outright stated, is that the battle between good and evil, between Heaven and hell is far from over. Surely the evil one saw this moment as much of an “opportune” time as there would be and knowing human behavior as he must surely know, if “now” does not quite work out, there will always be “later”. What is “opportune” on any given day may not work as well, for instance, three days after payday as it might three days BEFORE payday, right?
The “opportune” time is usually at our weak moments, when we are stressed, when we are under the gun in any given situation whether it is at work, at home, or at play. There will always be a “more” opportune time to trip someone up. Always. And isn’t it ironic that in these moments of weakness when we are more subject to temptation, it is also in these moments of weakness when the Lord is at His mightiest, according to St. Paul (2 Corinthians 12:7-10)? Or is it that we are more susceptible to whatever influence will give us immediate relief or satisfaction? Of course, it all depends on which part of our self we choose to please and nurture.
The way this encounter reads, we are presented with an image of Jesus that is very hungry and maybe a bit physically weakened by the lack of food but is still calm, cool, and collected. The evil one offers one thing, and Jesus very casually dismisses him. However, some scholars suggest Jesus may have been internally conflicted. This is an interesting perspective when we consider that traditionally we have been taught that after His baptism, Jesus was led “by the Spirit”, of course, just as it is written, to deal exclusively with this imminent confrontation. In other words, Jesus knew by the Spirit exactly where He was going and what or whom He would be faced with.
Now to say that Jesus was simply going to the wilderness to pray and to fast in preparation for His earthly ministry is not off the mark, but it would be difficult to make this connection if He were to have been led only to deal with the evil one, the evil one perhaps waiting 40 days until Jesus is weakened to the point of human temptation. All of this matters and it all makes perfect sense, but we also must remember that Jesus was both divine and human. Surely it is possible for a conflict, at least on some level, to be present even within Jesus Himself. In fact, would a broader perspective on this passage suggest that the evil one could well represent the “flesh” that seems to be in almost constant conflict with the Spirit? Surely we can attest to this truth on any given day. Be hurt by someone? Hate them. It’s easy, it pleases us, and it suits us for the moment. But to forgive them? That takes some doing, some effort, some prayer, some spiritual discipline. We have to choose.
We know what struggle and temptation mean to us on a human level, but we don’t often make the disconnect between what we want and what we genuinely need because we confuse the two. To us, they are often one and the same. This “disconnect” is that barrier by which we relate to what we are tempted with only in how it will affect us physically or emotionally. In other words, we refuse something not because it may harm us spiritually but because it may wreck our diets, hurt our budgets, or damage a relationship. I dare suggest that we do not consider how powerful temptations can be and how spiritually destructive they can be if we surrender to them.
We are reminded on Ash Wednesday that there is a distinctive disconnect between our bodies and minds – and – our souls even as they can work in unison to a particular end. One will absolutely, positively, imminently die; there is no escape from this harsh truth even as we will virtually go to the ends of the earth and spare no expense in avoiding this certain reality.
The other seems more incidental to us and is often taken for granted. We don’t pay nearly as much attention to our spiritual well-being as we do our physical, mental, or emotional well-being. And we worry more about our human relationships than we do our spiritual one with the Lord. If we foul up with someone we love, we will pull out all the stops and beg and plead for forgiveness. But how many of us have heard Christians wave their hands and very casually, almost mindlessly say, ‘The Lord forgives me’ – yet they never really bothered to ask for that forgiveness. They simply expect it and thus take it for granted. How many of US are guilty of this very thing?
When we avoid those means of grace and those Sacraments of the Church, we avoid dealing with that better part of us which was imparted to us from Heaven and was given to us for a specific purpose: to empower us to reject evil and embrace good. We must surely understand that when humanity was created in the Divine Image, it had nothing to do with our faces, our skin tone, or the color of our hair. It stands to reason, then, that it is the SOUL that is the true reflection of that Divine part of us that requires as much, or more, attention than the rest of our being because it is the part which will endure forever.
There was once a barrier that prevented our human self from violating that spiritual and better part of our self. It was the Divine Image in which we were created. And that barrier was broken the day humanity chose the pleasure and self-satisfaction of the mortal self over the edification of the spiritual self, when it was made clear that we trust our own instincts over our soul that is informed, taught, and led by the Holy One. Once that barrier was broken, it just got easier to the point that today we attempt to re-create God into an image more aesthetically pleasing to our mortal, physical self.
As we navigate this challenge time that is Lent, let us recognize that better part of our self – our soul – as that part which enables and empowers us to reconstruct that broken barrier by learning again to Trust In Him, to surrender ourselves to Him so that He may, by His own Mighty Acts, restore us to that Divine Image. Amen.
Almighty and Everlasting God and Father, your blessed Son was led by the Spirit to be tempted by Satan and to prepare Himself for His earthly ministry. Come quickly to help us who are assaulted by these many and same temptations we face each day. And as You know the weakness of each of us, let each of us find You mighty to save – from ourselves AND from the evil one; through Christ Jesus our Lord, Your beloved Son. Amen.
O Lord our God, on this First Sunday of Lent as we prepare ourselves to endure the coming 40 days, by Your blessed and Holy Spirit, bring us to a remembrance of those times when we completely trusted You and You alone. Bless this gathering and time of worship, that our hearts and minds would be open to Your Presence and Your Grace. Make us mindful of our need to repent, and make us mindful of your mercy to forgive. In the Name and by the Blood of Your Beloved Son, we ask and we pray. Amen.
“When the devil had finished every test, He departed from [Jesus] until an opportune time.” – Luke 4:13
I often wonder if there is ever a time in which we are not being tested, at least to one degree or another, by the Lord or by the tempter. And in that vein, I wonder if this is the reason why the Bible and our own John Wesley admonished us to be in constant prayer, “praying without ceasing”, studying Scripture, attending to those means of grace and Sacraments of the Church and learning to look at the world through the Lord’s eyes and not our own. This, of course, is that state of spiritual perfection we strive to achieve as we continue to grow in faith and in love, but we are also reminded almost daily that we are not … quite … there … yet.
The way Luke presents it – or at least, the way our English translation presents Luke – the evil one had exhausted “every” test. To me this means the devil had run out of options…. for the moment. He offered to Jesus every possible temptation that would come near to destroying just about any other mortal human, and Jesus either passed these tests or He failed them – all depending, of course, on one’s perspective.
He passed, of course, according to His divine Being; He really could have done no less, but this we know only with our 20/20 biblical hindsight. Jesus depended on the Word of the Lord to see Him through these particular temptations, these worldly challenges. Yet according to what we might consider to be more “normal” standards of human living, He failed miserably.
Think about it. According to your standards and mine, what fool in his right mind would turn down all that Jesus had turned down: FOOD after a 40-day fast, unlimited power and authority over all the kingdoms of the world, or super-human strength so as to never be hurt or feel pain?? Think of how much we could do FOR THE LORD if we only had all these resources and these powers at our command and disposal! Isn’t this a more “normal” standard of how the faithful think in terms of worldly possessions and relationships?? And then to use Scripture passages, regardless of proper context or appropriate application and only in increments as they will personally suit us at any particular time, well, isn’t this also how the faithful world turns?
To wait “until an opportune time” is somewhat ominous because what is implied, if not outright stated, is that the battle between good and evil, between Heaven and hell is far from over. Surely the evil one saw this moment as much of an “opportune” time as there would be and knowing human behavior as he must surely know, if “now” does not quite work out, there will always be “later”. What is “opportune” on any given day may not work as well, for instance, three days after payday as it might three days BEFORE payday, right?
The “opportune” time is usually at our weak moments, when we are stressed, when we are under the gun in any given situation whether it is at work, at home, or at play. There will always be a “more” opportune time to trip someone up. Always. And isn’t it ironic that in these moments of weakness when we are more subject to temptation, it is also in these moments of weakness when the Lord is at His mightiest, according to St. Paul (2 Corinthians 12:7-10)? Or is it that we are more susceptible to whatever influence will give us immediate relief or satisfaction? Of course, it all depends on which part of our self we choose to please and nurture.
The way this encounter reads, we are presented with an image of Jesus that is very hungry and maybe a bit physically weakened by the lack of food but is still calm, cool, and collected. The evil one offers one thing, and Jesus very casually dismisses him. However, some scholars suggest Jesus may have been internally conflicted. This is an interesting perspective when we consider that traditionally we have been taught that after His baptism, Jesus was led “by the Spirit”, of course, just as it is written, to deal exclusively with this imminent confrontation. In other words, Jesus knew by the Spirit exactly where He was going and what or whom He would be faced with.
Now to say that Jesus was simply going to the wilderness to pray and to fast in preparation for His earthly ministry is not off the mark, but it would be difficult to make this connection if He were to have been led only to deal with the evil one, the evil one perhaps waiting 40 days until Jesus is weakened to the point of human temptation. All of this matters and it all makes perfect sense, but we also must remember that Jesus was both divine and human. Surely it is possible for a conflict, at least on some level, to be present even within Jesus Himself. In fact, would a broader perspective on this passage suggest that the evil one could well represent the “flesh” that seems to be in almost constant conflict with the Spirit? Surely we can attest to this truth on any given day. Be hurt by someone? Hate them. It’s easy, it pleases us, and it suits us for the moment. But to forgive them? That takes some doing, some effort, some prayer, some spiritual discipline. We have to choose.
We know what struggle and temptation mean to us on a human level, but we don’t often make the disconnect between what we want and what we genuinely need because we confuse the two. To us, they are often one and the same. This “disconnect” is that barrier by which we relate to what we are tempted with only in how it will affect us physically or emotionally. In other words, we refuse something not because it may harm us spiritually but because it may wreck our diets, hurt our budgets, or damage a relationship. I dare suggest that we do not consider how powerful temptations can be and how spiritually destructive they can be if we surrender to them.
We are reminded on Ash Wednesday that there is a distinctive disconnect between our bodies and minds – and – our souls even as they can work in unison to a particular end. One will absolutely, positively, imminently die; there is no escape from this harsh truth even as we will virtually go to the ends of the earth and spare no expense in avoiding this certain reality.
The other seems more incidental to us and is often taken for granted. We don’t pay nearly as much attention to our spiritual well-being as we do our physical, mental, or emotional well-being. And we worry more about our human relationships than we do our spiritual one with the Lord. If we foul up with someone we love, we will pull out all the stops and beg and plead for forgiveness. But how many of us have heard Christians wave their hands and very casually, almost mindlessly say, ‘The Lord forgives me’ – yet they never really bothered to ask for that forgiveness. They simply expect it and thus take it for granted. How many of US are guilty of this very thing?
When we avoid those means of grace and those Sacraments of the Church, we avoid dealing with that better part of us which was imparted to us from Heaven and was given to us for a specific purpose: to empower us to reject evil and embrace good. We must surely understand that when humanity was created in the Divine Image, it had nothing to do with our faces, our skin tone, or the color of our hair. It stands to reason, then, that it is the SOUL that is the true reflection of that Divine part of us that requires as much, or more, attention than the rest of our being because it is the part which will endure forever.
There was once a barrier that prevented our human self from violating that spiritual and better part of our self. It was the Divine Image in which we were created. And that barrier was broken the day humanity chose the pleasure and self-satisfaction of the mortal self over the edification of the spiritual self, when it was made clear that we trust our own instincts over our soul that is informed, taught, and led by the Holy One. Once that barrier was broken, it just got easier to the point that today we attempt to re-create God into an image more aesthetically pleasing to our mortal, physical self.
As we navigate this challenge time that is Lent, let us recognize that better part of our self – our soul – as that part which enables and empowers us to reconstruct that broken barrier by learning again to Trust In Him, to surrender ourselves to Him so that He may, by His own Mighty Acts, restore us to that Divine Image. Amen.
Almighty and Everlasting God and Father, your blessed Son was led by the Spirit to be tempted by Satan and to prepare Himself for His earthly ministry. Come quickly to help us who are assaulted by these many and same temptations we face each day. And as You know the weakness of each of us, let each of us find You mighty to save – from ourselves AND from the evil one; through Christ Jesus our Lord, Your beloved Son. Amen.
Thursday, February 18, 2010
The Truth Hurts
Las Vegas NV mayor Oscar Goodman is still stinging from President Obama having singled out that town as an example of what not to do if money is tight, so much so that the mayor has refused an invitation to meet with the president while he’s in town. The president simply said, and I say this as a non-supporter of Mr. Obama, that we must all set our own priorities according to our own means and needs: don’t spend a weekend in Vegas if you’re saving for your kids’ college. What’s wrong with that?
What is wrong with that is that Vegas depends heavily, if not entirely, on tourism and gambling, and apparently Mr. Obama has referenced Las Vegas and perhaps Reno more than once in speaking about priorities. For you and me, it is important that we save our money. For Goodman, it is important that we come to Vegas and spend our money - and then leave with empty pockets.
Come on, America. There is plenty with which to take issue against President Obama but when he’s right, he’s right. Give him a little credit. Maybe he’s not a gambler. Maybe he and his wife are as successful as they are because they do not take unnecessary or foolish risks. Maybe they recognize that with limited resources, there are limited choices. Maybe Mr. Obama’s point would not have been lost had he simply said something like, ‘there are less expensive vacations and get-aways than gambling junkets’. Then again, the president would then likely have over-torqued the screws of more than one city mayor since gambling has become so pervasive in this country.
So what? Those who do not have money to burn are indeed fools if they take their limited resources and lay them on a craps table (surely there is a relevant reason why it is called “craps”) or buy lottery tickets. They have that freedom, that right to do what they please with what they have, however much or little they do have, but maybe sometimes we all need to be kicked in the teeth when we become so overwhelmed with our own brand of stupid that we cannot see how ridiculous we can sometimes be when we forget that with “rights” come “responsibility”.
I’m not crazy about the choices Mr. Obama has made as president and I’ve lost all confidence in this administration (not like there was much to lose although I try always to be at least hopeful) and this Congress. This does not mean that the president cannot sometimes say something worth listening to: if you do not have it to blow, don’t blow it!
What is wrong with that is that Vegas depends heavily, if not entirely, on tourism and gambling, and apparently Mr. Obama has referenced Las Vegas and perhaps Reno more than once in speaking about priorities. For you and me, it is important that we save our money. For Goodman, it is important that we come to Vegas and spend our money - and then leave with empty pockets.
Come on, America. There is plenty with which to take issue against President Obama but when he’s right, he’s right. Give him a little credit. Maybe he’s not a gambler. Maybe he and his wife are as successful as they are because they do not take unnecessary or foolish risks. Maybe they recognize that with limited resources, there are limited choices. Maybe Mr. Obama’s point would not have been lost had he simply said something like, ‘there are less expensive vacations and get-aways than gambling junkets’. Then again, the president would then likely have over-torqued the screws of more than one city mayor since gambling has become so pervasive in this country.
So what? Those who do not have money to burn are indeed fools if they take their limited resources and lay them on a craps table (surely there is a relevant reason why it is called “craps”) or buy lottery tickets. They have that freedom, that right to do what they please with what they have, however much or little they do have, but maybe sometimes we all need to be kicked in the teeth when we become so overwhelmed with our own brand of stupid that we cannot see how ridiculous we can sometimes be when we forget that with “rights” come “responsibility”.
I’m not crazy about the choices Mr. Obama has made as president and I’ve lost all confidence in this administration (not like there was much to lose although I try always to be at least hopeful) and this Congress. This does not mean that the president cannot sometimes say something worth listening to: if you do not have it to blow, don’t blow it!
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Thus Begins the Journey
Matthew 6:1-6, 16-21
For many, Ash Wednesday is very nearly comical especially if done in the morning because it gives folks all day to make wise cracks about the “smudge” on our foreheads while trying not to be disrespectful of our faith or our religion. Still, even among the faithful Ash Wednesday is not taken very seriously. It has, unfortunately, been reduced to little more than a dogmatic “something we do”, sort of like “opening ceremonies” into that strange time in the church calendar called Lent. Lent will still be Lent whether we attend an Ash Wednesday service or not.
The significance of Ash Wednesday is epitomized in what Jesus is teaching the disciples in Matthew’s Gospel, summed up in vs. 21: Where your treasure is, there your heart will be also, but there is much more to the significance of Ash Wednesday, far more than a mere mark of time or smudge on the forehead. Before we can enter into the season of Lent and begin that incredible – and, yes, necessarily painful - journey to the Cross, there is something we must be mindful of first.
This small passage [from Matthew] is taken too often to mean exclusively material possessions. This is not entirely wrong, of course, but there is no single category exclusive to this passage because our hearts are broad and our desires varied. It is not only material possessions that come between us and the Lord. I recall a political science class I took a few years ago in which the instructor challenged us to name just one part of our lives that is not affected by politics. Whether or not we would agree with any particular public policy was not the point. The point was simply that there is no portion of our lives that is not addressed or affected, directly or indirectly, by public policy. In this same vein, then, it is reasonable to conclude that there is no thing and no person that does not have at least the potential to come between us and the Lord.
It has been debated in philosophy and theology whether we are bodies with souls – or – souls with bodies. The debate centers on which is purposeful and which is incidental, which is primary and which is secondary. Can one act independently of the other? If so, which one is dependent? In other words, does the body tell the soul how the cow ate the cabbage – or – does the soul inform and influence the actions of the body? Obviously the answers will depend on one’s perspective. The Talmud offers this much: The character of a life depends upon the care which the individual devotes to keeping his soul pure and unstained.
Throughout other Talmudic literature there are taught the distinctions between the soul and the body, the soul being that portion of us which enables us to choose the good and reject the evil. However, we are painfully aware of that other certain fact: we have minds filled with thoughts, principles, and ideals that are imparted to us as we grow and learn. We are influenced by our senses that pick up on things which please us, things which seem to make perfect sense and fit so well into our lives, especially since we also live in a world in which it is proclaimed as a virtual doctrine and virtue of man: look out for #1.
Clearly our bodies (including our minds) are influenced by external forces that surround us throughout our lives while our souls, imparted to us from Heaven, come predisposed toward good and equipped with the ability to identify and reject evil. Somewhere along the line, it becomes a matter of will. The struggle which seems to be inherent to our very existence, body and soul, from the beginning is a matter of worldly influence and spiritual contemplation.
This all brought to mind the movie, “Radio”, with Ed Harris and Cuba Gooding, Jr. Cuba played the part of “Radio”, a mentally handicapped man who was befriended by “Coach” Ed Harris. Long story made short, “Coach” came to realize while we may presume to have the desire and the need to “teach” such folks as “Radio”, in reality it is folks like “Radio” who teach us – if we are willing to learn. “Radio” was not the handicapped one; it is we who are handicapped who are unable or unwilling to see, and be influenced by, the goodness that surrounds us. As “Coach” pointed out, “Radio treats us ALL THE TIME the way we wish we treated each other even PART OF THE TIME.” We of a more cynical if worldly nature, we who call ourselves “normal”, have been conditioned and have conditioned ourselves toward survival and self-indulgence. This is the body which is at odds with that predisposed and divine soul.
Ash Wednesday is an important discipline that helps us to begin the incredible journey called Lent by challenging us to empty ourselves of all those conditions, those things, those persons, those influences that serve to do little more than to separate us from the Holy. It is the time when we are reminded of the curse of our humanity, that free will curse that chose knowledge over faith, when humanity chose the mortal body over the immortal soul. It is where the truly desired “treasure” of self was chosen, and humanity was cast out – body AND soul – from Paradise, that perfect place and state of being for which we were created in the very beginning.
It is the time when we are reminded that our bodies are simply the dust of the earth, to which they are destined to return. That is the value and worth of our mere mortal bodies in the realm of eternity. The state of our souls, however, will be determined by how we navigate this incredible journey and how near to the Cross we will choose to go.
Amen.
For many, Ash Wednesday is very nearly comical especially if done in the morning because it gives folks all day to make wise cracks about the “smudge” on our foreheads while trying not to be disrespectful of our faith or our religion. Still, even among the faithful Ash Wednesday is not taken very seriously. It has, unfortunately, been reduced to little more than a dogmatic “something we do”, sort of like “opening ceremonies” into that strange time in the church calendar called Lent. Lent will still be Lent whether we attend an Ash Wednesday service or not.
The significance of Ash Wednesday is epitomized in what Jesus is teaching the disciples in Matthew’s Gospel, summed up in vs. 21: Where your treasure is, there your heart will be also, but there is much more to the significance of Ash Wednesday, far more than a mere mark of time or smudge on the forehead. Before we can enter into the season of Lent and begin that incredible – and, yes, necessarily painful - journey to the Cross, there is something we must be mindful of first.
This small passage [from Matthew] is taken too often to mean exclusively material possessions. This is not entirely wrong, of course, but there is no single category exclusive to this passage because our hearts are broad and our desires varied. It is not only material possessions that come between us and the Lord. I recall a political science class I took a few years ago in which the instructor challenged us to name just one part of our lives that is not affected by politics. Whether or not we would agree with any particular public policy was not the point. The point was simply that there is no portion of our lives that is not addressed or affected, directly or indirectly, by public policy. In this same vein, then, it is reasonable to conclude that there is no thing and no person that does not have at least the potential to come between us and the Lord.
It has been debated in philosophy and theology whether we are bodies with souls – or – souls with bodies. The debate centers on which is purposeful and which is incidental, which is primary and which is secondary. Can one act independently of the other? If so, which one is dependent? In other words, does the body tell the soul how the cow ate the cabbage – or – does the soul inform and influence the actions of the body? Obviously the answers will depend on one’s perspective. The Talmud offers this much: The character of a life depends upon the care which the individual devotes to keeping his soul pure and unstained.
Throughout other Talmudic literature there are taught the distinctions between the soul and the body, the soul being that portion of us which enables us to choose the good and reject the evil. However, we are painfully aware of that other certain fact: we have minds filled with thoughts, principles, and ideals that are imparted to us as we grow and learn. We are influenced by our senses that pick up on things which please us, things which seem to make perfect sense and fit so well into our lives, especially since we also live in a world in which it is proclaimed as a virtual doctrine and virtue of man: look out for #1.
Clearly our bodies (including our minds) are influenced by external forces that surround us throughout our lives while our souls, imparted to us from Heaven, come predisposed toward good and equipped with the ability to identify and reject evil. Somewhere along the line, it becomes a matter of will. The struggle which seems to be inherent to our very existence, body and soul, from the beginning is a matter of worldly influence and spiritual contemplation.
This all brought to mind the movie, “Radio”, with Ed Harris and Cuba Gooding, Jr. Cuba played the part of “Radio”, a mentally handicapped man who was befriended by “Coach” Ed Harris. Long story made short, “Coach” came to realize while we may presume to have the desire and the need to “teach” such folks as “Radio”, in reality it is folks like “Radio” who teach us – if we are willing to learn. “Radio” was not the handicapped one; it is we who are handicapped who are unable or unwilling to see, and be influenced by, the goodness that surrounds us. As “Coach” pointed out, “Radio treats us ALL THE TIME the way we wish we treated each other even PART OF THE TIME.” We of a more cynical if worldly nature, we who call ourselves “normal”, have been conditioned and have conditioned ourselves toward survival and self-indulgence. This is the body which is at odds with that predisposed and divine soul.
Ash Wednesday is an important discipline that helps us to begin the incredible journey called Lent by challenging us to empty ourselves of all those conditions, those things, those persons, those influences that serve to do little more than to separate us from the Holy. It is the time when we are reminded of the curse of our humanity, that free will curse that chose knowledge over faith, when humanity chose the mortal body over the immortal soul. It is where the truly desired “treasure” of self was chosen, and humanity was cast out – body AND soul – from Paradise, that perfect place and state of being for which we were created in the very beginning.
It is the time when we are reminded that our bodies are simply the dust of the earth, to which they are destined to return. That is the value and worth of our mere mortal bodies in the realm of eternity. The state of our souls, however, will be determined by how we navigate this incredible journey and how near to the Cross we will choose to go.
Amen.
Hear No Evil ...
Not that I completely disagree with the Palins in this latest battle with TV’s “Family Guy”, a ridiculous animated show (not a serious endeavor like my beloved “South Park”, of course) in which nothing is sacred. Not that such things should not be challenged at least on some fundamental level, of course, because ignorance and bigotry run amuck is justice denied. We as a nation are a little better than that. However, in this particular case and with Gov. Palin’s scrap with David Letterman still relatively fresh, something becomes clear, I think: the Palins perhaps spend too much time watching TV. And I say this because surely they have actually seen and heard for themselves (rather than heard about) that which they judge to be offensive.
I think many are sure Gov. Palin may be spending so much time on the road and giving speeches because she is positioning herself for a possible presidential run in 2012. No problem in that, of course, but here is a very serious problem: she may be a little too sensitive for her own good AND she needs to pick her battles. A chief executive cannot possibly address every single issue and its minute details that come down the pike, so the president must prioritize and delegate. If Mrs. Palin has delegated her daughter to seek out and/or deal with these issues that really are not issues, then so much for the judgment of this potential candidate.
This nation has some serious problems that require serious solutions. Spending too much time worrying about TV personalities and animated shows, both of which are impossible to take seriously, may indicate a very shallow perspective on what is truly important. A naïve belief that all social idiots and insensitive jerks can or even should be dealt with is naiveté at its very worst, and there is no place in the Oval Office for that.
The current administration alone should be ample proof that idealism, even at its very best, must be tempered with a certain realism by which we can imagine a better world and work toward a better world, but we cannot demand it by simply complaining about it or calling names through the media. Take a look at how congressional Democrats and Republicans deal with one another. THEY DON’T. They “release” letters to one another through the national media (do they ever actually mail them or send them to the intended recipient via courier?) and they stand at the rotunda and give speeches filled with accusations toward one another, but they don’t talk to one another.
Gov. Palin may give great and rousing speeches and be a good cheerleader for the GOP, but the Democrats have President Obama. See how well that seems to be working for them.
I think many are sure Gov. Palin may be spending so much time on the road and giving speeches because she is positioning herself for a possible presidential run in 2012. No problem in that, of course, but here is a very serious problem: she may be a little too sensitive for her own good AND she needs to pick her battles. A chief executive cannot possibly address every single issue and its minute details that come down the pike, so the president must prioritize and delegate. If Mrs. Palin has delegated her daughter to seek out and/or deal with these issues that really are not issues, then so much for the judgment of this potential candidate.
This nation has some serious problems that require serious solutions. Spending too much time worrying about TV personalities and animated shows, both of which are impossible to take seriously, may indicate a very shallow perspective on what is truly important. A naïve belief that all social idiots and insensitive jerks can or even should be dealt with is naiveté at its very worst, and there is no place in the Oval Office for that.
The current administration alone should be ample proof that idealism, even at its very best, must be tempered with a certain realism by which we can imagine a better world and work toward a better world, but we cannot demand it by simply complaining about it or calling names through the media. Take a look at how congressional Democrats and Republicans deal with one another. THEY DON’T. They “release” letters to one another through the national media (do they ever actually mail them or send them to the intended recipient via courier?) and they stand at the rotunda and give speeches filled with accusations toward one another, but they don’t talk to one another.
Gov. Palin may give great and rousing speeches and be a good cheerleader for the GOP, but the Democrats have President Obama. See how well that seems to be working for them.
Sunday, February 14, 2010
The Majesty of it All
Exodus 34:29-35
Luke 9:28-36
Holy God and Father, upon the mountain You revealed Your Messiah, who by His death and Resurrection would fulfill both the Law and the Prophets. By His Transfiguration enlighten our path that we may dare to share and suffer with Him in the service of humanity and so share in the everlasting glory of Him who lives and reigns with You and the Holy Spirit. One God, forever and ever. AMEN.
Last year on Transfiguration Sunday, I shared this: Moses and Elijah could well be a part of the “great cloud of witnesses”, those having lived such lives to which we should all aspire while we also recognize that we cannot have Jesus without the journey to the Cross. It is admirable, perhaps, to want to build dwellings for these so their glorified presence can be known, but this world is not where they belong. They had their time and their task, and they fulfilled these faithfully. Now it is our time, and our task lay just ahead.
We do not “belong here”, either. But we have our places here just as they did. And we will one day have our places in the light of the glory witnessed by Jesus’ disciples. And spoken of only AFTER the Resurrection. Because, I think, that is ultimately the Way – and destination - of the Cross.
It is rare, if ever, that I go back and dig through old sermons because I believe that if the Word of the Lord is living and dynamic – and I do – then it is utterly unfair to rehash old thoughts. If the Lord is continually moving in and through us, then we must continually be moving in and through Him – but forward, not backward. An entire year has passed since I spoke those words, and we would all hope I’ve learned at least a little something in the course of a year! Besides, it is often that I read my old stuff and wonder just what in the world I was thinking when I wrote it!!
I remember Billy Graham once preaching that the Bible gives us very little information about hell except in Luke’s Gospel about Lazarus and the rich man (16:19-26). By the same token, the Gospels give us very little of a literal view of the full glory of the Lord except in the Transfiguration. There are also glorified images in the apocalyptic literature of the last days, such as in Revelation and Daniel, but in all instances we are given the best description human words can offer to describe that which is fully incomprehensible. The 2nd century scholar and theologian, Origen, put it this way: [Jesus] is beheld in the form of God according to our capacity for knowledge.
So it is in the limited capacity of our ability to comprehend by which we are shown the fullness of the Divine Glory and Majesty, not unlike the days when Moses descended from the mountain “with the skin of his face … shining” so much so that the Israelites “were afraid to come near him.” They knew something remarkable had taken place and they knew Moses had had an encounter with the Lord but because it was beyond their ability to understand what they were seeing, it made them afraid.
The disciples were “terrified”, according to Luke, as they were overshadowed by that great cloud from which the Voice of the Lord affirmed what Peter had previously confessed (Luke 9:20a): that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God. Moses and Elijah join Jesus in this moment in eternity and, according to Luke, speak with Him concerning His impending death. NRSV uses the term, “departure”, but Greek translations suggest a more literal use of “exodus” to more accurately describe what will soon take place in Jerusalem. If we think in terms of “exodus” rather than merely “departure”, then we can segue from Epiphany to Lent and, ultimately, to Easter not only in the earthly life of Jesus Himself but also in the life cycle of the faithful – here and now and for what is to come, even if we are incapable of comprehending.
Something really big is taking place at this incredible moment of the Transfiguration, and the disciples maybe came very near to missing the whole thing, “weighed down with sleep” as they were, but the language of Luke also seems to suggest they managed to somehow stay awake in spite of their fatigue, making the encounter surreal, almost dream-like. And this may be significant because the Lord has spoken so often and so clearly to many of his prophets by way of dreams. It is during this state when we are most vulnerable, of course, but we are also quiet, still, and better able to hear what the Lord says because we are not distracted by the noise of the world. In our dreams the Lord has our undivided attention.
In this moment in eternity, what we may be witnessing is the complete, unabridged, and unmanipulated (by human thought and opinion) image of the fullness and glory of the Lord’s majesty in the Law (Moses), the prophets (Elijah) and the Gospel (the Good News in and through the Christ). Even with all this, while we may be getting a small taste of a Divine Image, there is also something much more that is being presented to us: the “conversation” Luke refers to of Jesus’ impending “departure”, or “exodus”.
Thinking in terms of the Exodus of the OT when the Israelites were set free from bondage, the imagery is made more powerful for us when we grasp the notion that even though the Lord came to us freely in the person of Jesus, there may still be the need to somehow be set “free” from that human body, divine though He was because humanity has limits. As was previously shared, there is only so much we can do. Thinking about Jesus performing miracles in that human body, there are still limits to even His humanity; the human body, resilient though it may be, can only take so much especially in a world that is utterly and completely, if only physically, separated from the Divine.
Just as the Israelites had to be freed from their human bondage by incomprehensible power, so must we be released from our own humanity and the incomprehensible power of sin and death by sharing in the divinity of the Christ, if only for a moment, in the Eucharist, when we are in complete submission and sharing in the Passover meal just before the New Exodus, prepared as we must be to follow Him without hesitation or reservation into what will soon be our New Reality. It is within this context that John Wesley encouraged Methodists to share the Lord’s Supper as often as they gathered together in His Holy Name.
Before we can go WITH Him, however, we must prepare ourselves THROUGH Him. This preparation necessarily includes those means of grace, including the Sacraments of baptism and Holy Communion, so that we can be enabled to endure the journey He endured while on this earth. We share in His earthly experiences so that we may soon share in His Heavenly Glory. The Transfiguration was necessary not only as a means of revealing the fullness and majesty of the Heavenly Glory of the Lord, but also as The End to which we must all aspire: life without end.
Amen.
Luke 9:28-36
Holy God and Father, upon the mountain You revealed Your Messiah, who by His death and Resurrection would fulfill both the Law and the Prophets. By His Transfiguration enlighten our path that we may dare to share and suffer with Him in the service of humanity and so share in the everlasting glory of Him who lives and reigns with You and the Holy Spirit. One God, forever and ever. AMEN.
Last year on Transfiguration Sunday, I shared this: Moses and Elijah could well be a part of the “great cloud of witnesses”, those having lived such lives to which we should all aspire while we also recognize that we cannot have Jesus without the journey to the Cross. It is admirable, perhaps, to want to build dwellings for these so their glorified presence can be known, but this world is not where they belong. They had their time and their task, and they fulfilled these faithfully. Now it is our time, and our task lay just ahead.
We do not “belong here”, either. But we have our places here just as they did. And we will one day have our places in the light of the glory witnessed by Jesus’ disciples. And spoken of only AFTER the Resurrection. Because, I think, that is ultimately the Way – and destination - of the Cross.
It is rare, if ever, that I go back and dig through old sermons because I believe that if the Word of the Lord is living and dynamic – and I do – then it is utterly unfair to rehash old thoughts. If the Lord is continually moving in and through us, then we must continually be moving in and through Him – but forward, not backward. An entire year has passed since I spoke those words, and we would all hope I’ve learned at least a little something in the course of a year! Besides, it is often that I read my old stuff and wonder just what in the world I was thinking when I wrote it!!
I remember Billy Graham once preaching that the Bible gives us very little information about hell except in Luke’s Gospel about Lazarus and the rich man (16:19-26). By the same token, the Gospels give us very little of a literal view of the full glory of the Lord except in the Transfiguration. There are also glorified images in the apocalyptic literature of the last days, such as in Revelation and Daniel, but in all instances we are given the best description human words can offer to describe that which is fully incomprehensible. The 2nd century scholar and theologian, Origen, put it this way: [Jesus] is beheld in the form of God according to our capacity for knowledge.
So it is in the limited capacity of our ability to comprehend by which we are shown the fullness of the Divine Glory and Majesty, not unlike the days when Moses descended from the mountain “with the skin of his face … shining” so much so that the Israelites “were afraid to come near him.” They knew something remarkable had taken place and they knew Moses had had an encounter with the Lord but because it was beyond their ability to understand what they were seeing, it made them afraid.
The disciples were “terrified”, according to Luke, as they were overshadowed by that great cloud from which the Voice of the Lord affirmed what Peter had previously confessed (Luke 9:20a): that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God. Moses and Elijah join Jesus in this moment in eternity and, according to Luke, speak with Him concerning His impending death. NRSV uses the term, “departure”, but Greek translations suggest a more literal use of “exodus” to more accurately describe what will soon take place in Jerusalem. If we think in terms of “exodus” rather than merely “departure”, then we can segue from Epiphany to Lent and, ultimately, to Easter not only in the earthly life of Jesus Himself but also in the life cycle of the faithful – here and now and for what is to come, even if we are incapable of comprehending.
Something really big is taking place at this incredible moment of the Transfiguration, and the disciples maybe came very near to missing the whole thing, “weighed down with sleep” as they were, but the language of Luke also seems to suggest they managed to somehow stay awake in spite of their fatigue, making the encounter surreal, almost dream-like. And this may be significant because the Lord has spoken so often and so clearly to many of his prophets by way of dreams. It is during this state when we are most vulnerable, of course, but we are also quiet, still, and better able to hear what the Lord says because we are not distracted by the noise of the world. In our dreams the Lord has our undivided attention.
In this moment in eternity, what we may be witnessing is the complete, unabridged, and unmanipulated (by human thought and opinion) image of the fullness and glory of the Lord’s majesty in the Law (Moses), the prophets (Elijah) and the Gospel (the Good News in and through the Christ). Even with all this, while we may be getting a small taste of a Divine Image, there is also something much more that is being presented to us: the “conversation” Luke refers to of Jesus’ impending “departure”, or “exodus”.
Thinking in terms of the Exodus of the OT when the Israelites were set free from bondage, the imagery is made more powerful for us when we grasp the notion that even though the Lord came to us freely in the person of Jesus, there may still be the need to somehow be set “free” from that human body, divine though He was because humanity has limits. As was previously shared, there is only so much we can do. Thinking about Jesus performing miracles in that human body, there are still limits to even His humanity; the human body, resilient though it may be, can only take so much especially in a world that is utterly and completely, if only physically, separated from the Divine.
Just as the Israelites had to be freed from their human bondage by incomprehensible power, so must we be released from our own humanity and the incomprehensible power of sin and death by sharing in the divinity of the Christ, if only for a moment, in the Eucharist, when we are in complete submission and sharing in the Passover meal just before the New Exodus, prepared as we must be to follow Him without hesitation or reservation into what will soon be our New Reality. It is within this context that John Wesley encouraged Methodists to share the Lord’s Supper as often as they gathered together in His Holy Name.
Before we can go WITH Him, however, we must prepare ourselves THROUGH Him. This preparation necessarily includes those means of grace, including the Sacraments of baptism and Holy Communion, so that we can be enabled to endure the journey He endured while on this earth. We share in His earthly experiences so that we may soon share in His Heavenly Glory. The Transfiguration was necessary not only as a means of revealing the fullness and majesty of the Heavenly Glory of the Lord, but also as The End to which we must all aspire: life without end.
Amen.
Saturday, February 06, 2010
Pure Religion
Luke 5:1-11
A couple of thoughts from John Wesley:
• In the year 1725, being in the twenty-third year of my age, I met with Bishop Taylor's Rule and Exercises of Holy Living and Dying. In reading several parts of this book, I was exceedingly affected; that part in particular which relates to purity of intention. Instantly I resolved to dedicate all my life to God, all my thoughts, and words, and actions; being thoroughly convinced, there was no medium; but that every part of my life (not some only) must either be a sacrifice to God, or myself, that is, in effect, to the devil. Can any serious person doubt of this, or find a medium between serving God and serving the devil?
• In the year 1729, I began not only to read, but to study, the Bible, as the one, the only standard of truth, and the only model of pure religion. Hence I saw, in a clearer and clearer light, the indispensable necessity of having "the mind which was in Christ," and of "walking as Christ also walked;" even of having, not some part only, but all the mind which was in him; and of walking as he walked, not only in many or in most respects, but in all things. And this was the light, wherein at this time I generally considered religion, as an uniform following of Christ, an entire inward and outward conformity to our Master.
Even though the year has only just begun, it’s already been a busy one. There have been those heart-wrenching appeals from UMCOR and other agencies for Haiti’s earthquake recovery efforts and UMCOR’s continued work in Indonesia, Afghanistan, and other parts of the world; there was the “Catch the Vision” appeal and the Wesley Foundation, the Hannah Medical Baby Bottle Campaign, the regular tithes and offerings, and the other grateful recipients of your benevolence and generosity. When the dust finally began to settle, I found myself agreeing almost mindlessly to the MDA lock-up thing for “Jerry’s kids”, and now we are handing out the Lenten jars to prepare for our annual gift to mission. And let’s not forget Emily’s need for 500lbs of sugar for the homeless shelter!
Before I entered the preaching ministry, I was lay leader at another church. I recall a time when it seemed that no matter which way I turned, someone had his or her hand out in an appeal for money. Some were fund-raisers for one thing or another, some were charitable endeavors, but all were important in their own way and in their own place. When the fund-raisers began setting up in the narthex and virtually blocked the door into the sanctuary, however, I began to make some noise because what I believed I was witnessing was the creation of an inhospitable worship environment.
Visitors who were not familiar with the goings-on at our little church felt like they had to pay “admission” to attend worship! What is worse is that these efforts “weeded out” those who just did not have the money to spare, or they were made to feel as though what they had given was “not enough”. It was not that they did not want to give; it simply was that they didn’t have any more to give – so they stopped coming. Often I didn’t even want to be there. It made me think of Jesus’ efforts to cleanse the Temple and rid the place of the money-changers who sold overpriced, but arguably necessary, items for worship such as animals and “local money”. Jesus blasted them all by accusing them of turning the Holy Father’s “house of prayer” into a “den of thieves”. I don’t think we’re quite there, of course, but I see the necessity of raising the “red flag” so that we evaluate what we do and why we do it.
It is fair and honest that we should be made aware of what is happening in our communities and in our United Methodist Church, at home and abroad. Indeed, it is a way by which we take ownership through our apportionments for the work of the Church and to know what is going on and to be given an opportunity to help where we can. In the midst of “information overload”, however, is the very real danger of distractions of such an overwhelming magnitude that we forget why we gather here in the first place. I guess I’m always mindful of, and a little sensitive to, the many who have walked away and freely separated themselves from the Body of Christ because of the so-called “money grubbers”, those who stand accused of making “church” about little more than the acquisition of money to create a “feel good” religion consisting of dollars but very little sense of self, purpose, or mission.
In Luke’s gospel (5:1-11) we clearly see the power of the Lord working, but I don’t think we see clearly enough that there is far more to the story than simply a boat-load of fish, a miracle of sorts attributed to the Lord since they didn’t catch anything before. There is an analogy at work in the story that probably doesn’t get the attention it deserves. It is a prelude of things to come for the disciples … and for Christ’s Holy Church. And it has not so much to do with the fish or the nets themselves but what must take place before the first net is cast. It is a matter of not only knowing where to cast the nets … but when … and how often. And there is only One Way we are going to come by that knowledge. Anything outside of this is a guess.
As the earlier quotes from John Wesley indicated, he was also aware of the dangers of the many distractions we are continually faced with, as much within the Church as out. There is not a charity or a church mission out there that does not deserve at least our prayerful consideration, but we must also be mindful of our limitations; there is only so much we can do. Even in my morning prayer time, I get a little overwhelmed myself whenever I try to remember everyone and everything I’ve been requested to pray for. Needless to say, the list is endless! Whenever I walk away from the prayer time, I often feel like such an utter failure because there is never a time that I don’t make it out of the sanctuary before I realize there was someone or something I forgot to mention in my prayers! Often I cannot even recall whether I simply said, “Thank you, Lord”.
To be perfectly honest, there are some days when I cannot bring myself to my knees at the prayer rail because the need is so great out there that I don’t even know where to begin – or where to end. I tell myself that my own “net” is only so big and will only do so much and that I shouldn’t wear myself out worrying about such things, but that’s not so easy to walk away from – or into! It occurs to me, however, that this is probably the thrust of the story in Luke’s gospel. It seems to be as simple as this: the nets came back empty before because the disciples did it all on their own based on their OWN experiences, their OWN knowledge, for their OWN gain. They were relying on their OWN resources to get the job done, not realizing that the REAL job was just ahead.
Wesley saw the Bible as the “only” model, the “only” standard of what we can know of “pure religion”, but it also seems a pretty broad stroke when the Bible is as big as it is. It covers a lot of ground, a great expanse of human history, and there are a lot of different English translations. How can we possibly narrow it down to what constitutes “pure religion” and what our proper focus should be? Grace? Of course. Generosity? Certainly. Charity? Absolutely. But without proper spiritual guidance, we are casting our individual nets into an open sea based solely on what WE like, what WE think, and what WE think we know, and what we may personally gain from it. We hope for the best, of course, but then blame the weather or any number of other factors – including one another – when the net result is not what we expected or hoped for.
In the middle of all this, however, this “scatter-shot” affect of religious endeavor, we finally reach that point of spiritual fatigue because we finally realize that no matter how much we do or how much we give, it will never be enough. We give to one, and find that there are three more waiting in the wings. As happens too often, when we get tired we … just … quit. We run out of juice, we run out of money, and we even run out of prayer.
The focus of the effort to restore Methodism is to restore holiness. Not “social” holiness, as in finding our place in society or within this secular culture, important as that is in its own context. But I think we have fallen away from what should be our focus as we gather. This is not a “meetin’ house”, and it is not a social gathering. It is a place of worship, and our focus must necessarily be on adoration of Him, worshipping Him, giving thanks to Him, praying to Him not for special favors but simply trying to find the words to express what is on our hearts –absent the “wish list”, of course.
We focus on Him and Him alone so that we know exactly where – and when - we are to cast our one “net” as the Body of Christ we are called to be, not the several “nets” working independently to see who can catch the most, who might have been “more” right. But we must also be mindful of the possibility that we may also be called to draw in our “nets” from efforts that produce nothing, to stop wasting our resources, our time, and our energies on that which may make us feel good about ourselves but will do nothing for the Kingdom of Heaven. There is no place in the Body of Christ for “feel good” religion, and there certainly is no place in the Kingdom of Heaven for “sacred cows”.
Let us search for and find the “pure religion” we desperately need in our worship of the Lord. Let worship be about “pure worship” and let the “purity of our intentions” be revealed to us as His will … and not our own.
Amen.
A couple of thoughts from John Wesley:
• In the year 1725, being in the twenty-third year of my age, I met with Bishop Taylor's Rule and Exercises of Holy Living and Dying. In reading several parts of this book, I was exceedingly affected; that part in particular which relates to purity of intention. Instantly I resolved to dedicate all my life to God, all my thoughts, and words, and actions; being thoroughly convinced, there was no medium; but that every part of my life (not some only) must either be a sacrifice to God, or myself, that is, in effect, to the devil. Can any serious person doubt of this, or find a medium between serving God and serving the devil?
• In the year 1729, I began not only to read, but to study, the Bible, as the one, the only standard of truth, and the only model of pure religion. Hence I saw, in a clearer and clearer light, the indispensable necessity of having "the mind which was in Christ," and of "walking as Christ also walked;" even of having, not some part only, but all the mind which was in him; and of walking as he walked, not only in many or in most respects, but in all things. And this was the light, wherein at this time I generally considered religion, as an uniform following of Christ, an entire inward and outward conformity to our Master.
Even though the year has only just begun, it’s already been a busy one. There have been those heart-wrenching appeals from UMCOR and other agencies for Haiti’s earthquake recovery efforts and UMCOR’s continued work in Indonesia, Afghanistan, and other parts of the world; there was the “Catch the Vision” appeal and the Wesley Foundation, the Hannah Medical Baby Bottle Campaign, the regular tithes and offerings, and the other grateful recipients of your benevolence and generosity. When the dust finally began to settle, I found myself agreeing almost mindlessly to the MDA lock-up thing for “Jerry’s kids”, and now we are handing out the Lenten jars to prepare for our annual gift to mission. And let’s not forget Emily’s need for 500lbs of sugar for the homeless shelter!
Before I entered the preaching ministry, I was lay leader at another church. I recall a time when it seemed that no matter which way I turned, someone had his or her hand out in an appeal for money. Some were fund-raisers for one thing or another, some were charitable endeavors, but all were important in their own way and in their own place. When the fund-raisers began setting up in the narthex and virtually blocked the door into the sanctuary, however, I began to make some noise because what I believed I was witnessing was the creation of an inhospitable worship environment.
Visitors who were not familiar with the goings-on at our little church felt like they had to pay “admission” to attend worship! What is worse is that these efforts “weeded out” those who just did not have the money to spare, or they were made to feel as though what they had given was “not enough”. It was not that they did not want to give; it simply was that they didn’t have any more to give – so they stopped coming. Often I didn’t even want to be there. It made me think of Jesus’ efforts to cleanse the Temple and rid the place of the money-changers who sold overpriced, but arguably necessary, items for worship such as animals and “local money”. Jesus blasted them all by accusing them of turning the Holy Father’s “house of prayer” into a “den of thieves”. I don’t think we’re quite there, of course, but I see the necessity of raising the “red flag” so that we evaluate what we do and why we do it.
It is fair and honest that we should be made aware of what is happening in our communities and in our United Methodist Church, at home and abroad. Indeed, it is a way by which we take ownership through our apportionments for the work of the Church and to know what is going on and to be given an opportunity to help where we can. In the midst of “information overload”, however, is the very real danger of distractions of such an overwhelming magnitude that we forget why we gather here in the first place. I guess I’m always mindful of, and a little sensitive to, the many who have walked away and freely separated themselves from the Body of Christ because of the so-called “money grubbers”, those who stand accused of making “church” about little more than the acquisition of money to create a “feel good” religion consisting of dollars but very little sense of self, purpose, or mission.
In Luke’s gospel (5:1-11) we clearly see the power of the Lord working, but I don’t think we see clearly enough that there is far more to the story than simply a boat-load of fish, a miracle of sorts attributed to the Lord since they didn’t catch anything before. There is an analogy at work in the story that probably doesn’t get the attention it deserves. It is a prelude of things to come for the disciples … and for Christ’s Holy Church. And it has not so much to do with the fish or the nets themselves but what must take place before the first net is cast. It is a matter of not only knowing where to cast the nets … but when … and how often. And there is only One Way we are going to come by that knowledge. Anything outside of this is a guess.
As the earlier quotes from John Wesley indicated, he was also aware of the dangers of the many distractions we are continually faced with, as much within the Church as out. There is not a charity or a church mission out there that does not deserve at least our prayerful consideration, but we must also be mindful of our limitations; there is only so much we can do. Even in my morning prayer time, I get a little overwhelmed myself whenever I try to remember everyone and everything I’ve been requested to pray for. Needless to say, the list is endless! Whenever I walk away from the prayer time, I often feel like such an utter failure because there is never a time that I don’t make it out of the sanctuary before I realize there was someone or something I forgot to mention in my prayers! Often I cannot even recall whether I simply said, “Thank you, Lord”.
To be perfectly honest, there are some days when I cannot bring myself to my knees at the prayer rail because the need is so great out there that I don’t even know where to begin – or where to end. I tell myself that my own “net” is only so big and will only do so much and that I shouldn’t wear myself out worrying about such things, but that’s not so easy to walk away from – or into! It occurs to me, however, that this is probably the thrust of the story in Luke’s gospel. It seems to be as simple as this: the nets came back empty before because the disciples did it all on their own based on their OWN experiences, their OWN knowledge, for their OWN gain. They were relying on their OWN resources to get the job done, not realizing that the REAL job was just ahead.
Wesley saw the Bible as the “only” model, the “only” standard of what we can know of “pure religion”, but it also seems a pretty broad stroke when the Bible is as big as it is. It covers a lot of ground, a great expanse of human history, and there are a lot of different English translations. How can we possibly narrow it down to what constitutes “pure religion” and what our proper focus should be? Grace? Of course. Generosity? Certainly. Charity? Absolutely. But without proper spiritual guidance, we are casting our individual nets into an open sea based solely on what WE like, what WE think, and what WE think we know, and what we may personally gain from it. We hope for the best, of course, but then blame the weather or any number of other factors – including one another – when the net result is not what we expected or hoped for.
In the middle of all this, however, this “scatter-shot” affect of religious endeavor, we finally reach that point of spiritual fatigue because we finally realize that no matter how much we do or how much we give, it will never be enough. We give to one, and find that there are three more waiting in the wings. As happens too often, when we get tired we … just … quit. We run out of juice, we run out of money, and we even run out of prayer.
The focus of the effort to restore Methodism is to restore holiness. Not “social” holiness, as in finding our place in society or within this secular culture, important as that is in its own context. But I think we have fallen away from what should be our focus as we gather. This is not a “meetin’ house”, and it is not a social gathering. It is a place of worship, and our focus must necessarily be on adoration of Him, worshipping Him, giving thanks to Him, praying to Him not for special favors but simply trying to find the words to express what is on our hearts –absent the “wish list”, of course.
We focus on Him and Him alone so that we know exactly where – and when - we are to cast our one “net” as the Body of Christ we are called to be, not the several “nets” working independently to see who can catch the most, who might have been “more” right. But we must also be mindful of the possibility that we may also be called to draw in our “nets” from efforts that produce nothing, to stop wasting our resources, our time, and our energies on that which may make us feel good about ourselves but will do nothing for the Kingdom of Heaven. There is no place in the Body of Christ for “feel good” religion, and there certainly is no place in the Kingdom of Heaven for “sacred cows”.
Let us search for and find the “pure religion” we desperately need in our worship of the Lord. Let worship be about “pure worship” and let the “purity of our intentions” be revealed to us as His will … and not our own.
Amen.
Friday, February 05, 2010
Don't Ask, Don't Tell
The Congress, at the behest of the president, is beginning debate to consider a repeal of the 1993 “Don’t ask, Don’t tell” policy regarding homosexuals serving in the US armed forces. Prior to the 1993 law, those accused of homosexual conduct could be separated from the armed forces for that alone. In a nutshell, no gays allowed.
Enter the “Don’t ask, Don’t tell” law. Under the current law homosexuals can serve, but they are required to keep their orientation to themselves; recruiters and commanders are prohibited from asking. On its surface, it sounds like the current policy is at least adequate for the time being and for probably more reasons than any can list. There are many questions, however, and one can only suppose the Congress and Pentagon will hash these out as the debate progresses.
Whether the president wishes to acknowledge this fact or not, however, we are a nation at war. Our military members are stretched thin with more than enough on their plates. Now may not be the best time to distract them with social policy debates, particularly debates that attempt to re-engineer that very unique culture that is the US armed forces. We are into an election year; the last thing we need is political grand-standing on so important a subject as this in a time of war; election-year grandstanding needs no more ammo.
Our brothers and sisters, our sons and daughters, our fathers and our mothers who proudly wear the uniform of the United States of America are warriors. They are trained, geared, and oriented toward battle. Theirs is a culture foreign to the typical civilian, and what they are trained to do is virtually unthinkable in many respects.
It must also be noted that the enemy we currently face is one like no other. We are not at war with nations; there is no cohesive entity with which treaties may be negotiated. The enemy we face is cold, calculating, and blood-thirsty. They are, for all intents and purposes, entirely uncivilized. They are barbarians, murderers, and thieves. They willingly, if eagerly, cut the throats of their prisoners, military or civilian, with jagged swords and record the screams and images as their innocent victims beg and plead for their lives to be spared. Some may suggest they do it for kicks and giggles, but it is more likely they calculate such acts to invoke raw terror into the hearts of potential enemies and future targets, primarily civilian targets. They have no honor, they know no shame, and they lack any sense of human compassion or decency on any level. The brave men and women of our armed forces must be not only trained but conditioned to face this enemy.
The mindset of a warrior trained to face this enemy is a focused one … and a harsh one. These are not “killers” we ask to defend us; they are warriors. There is a distinctive difference, of course, but these warriors must always be mindful that theirs is not a social culture or even a sub-culture, and the military does not exist so that folks who run out of other career options have somewhere to go, but exists only because a strong national defense is a fundamental key to the stability of our nation. Like a movie character military commander once stated so aptly, “We are here to defend democracy; not practice it.”
It stands to reason, then, that what is being discussed and proposed for the military community and culture may be entirely out of place, at least during this critical time. Military commanders have a full mission plate. And while this may sound somewhat sub-human, they cannot be overly concerned with individual feelings, “feel good” social justice, or even individual human rights. Members of the armed forces exist for one reason: to prepare for, and engage in if necessary, armed conflict. Social distractions and individual rights are not conducive to such an environment for this reason alone: we care more that they come home alive, having done their jobs well.
In the military culture, it must also be considered that one is not “free to be me” because such a mindset implies and actually promotes individualism. The military functions in terms of “units”, not persons. So while the military commander should not be so eager to sacrifice an entire unit toward a foolish endeavor, what they do on a daily basis is always dangerous because the mission itself must necessarily be the primary focus. Considering a military venture in terms of individual lives that might be lost would cause most rational, reasonable civilians to withdraw; the military and its commanders cannot. This entire debate can be reduced to its most common denominator, in terms of human relationships and the potential risks they pose in the military environment.
For instance, under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, “fraternization” is prohibited. Simply stated, those in authority must not become chummy with those subordinates who serve or might serve under their authority. In my own time in the Marine Corps, I witnessed ineffective NCO’s who were buddies with some pretty bad actors. When it came time for the sergeants to act like sergeants, they found themselves bound by friendship rather than by duty. Those of us outside that special circle found ourselves bearing the brunt of whatever consequences may have been because the sergeants expended more energy trying to preserve the friendship rather than exercise the authority entrusted to them.
You wanna talk about poor morale? Trying spending extra time on guard duty or in the chow hall scrubbing pots and pans because “Sergeant Buddy-Chum” saved his pal from taking his turn. It happens, and it has likely been happening for far too long, and it does cause problems within the social and authoritarian structure of that unit. The problem is not corrected until authority is recovered. Will a repeal of DADT further complicate such disciplinary and morale problems because Sergeant So-And-So now has the hots for Private This-and-That?
A repeal of the current policy opens doors that few have yet to seriously consider. For all practical purposes, an individual ceases to be an individual once he or she steps off the bus at the recruit training center. It does not even matter whether one is married. Under this nation’s current circumstances, one is all but “owned”; lock, stock, and barrel by the US government for one purpose: maintaining a strong national defense and facing a cold-blooded enemy. Neither personal feelings nor social standing have a place in the readiness of a unit trained, equipped, and geared to fight. It is not pretty nor can it be made more attractive. It is bloody, it is dangerous, and lives will be lost. Let’s leave this fight for perhaps another day so that our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines can deal with the task at hand.
Enter the “Don’t ask, Don’t tell” law. Under the current law homosexuals can serve, but they are required to keep their orientation to themselves; recruiters and commanders are prohibited from asking. On its surface, it sounds like the current policy is at least adequate for the time being and for probably more reasons than any can list. There are many questions, however, and one can only suppose the Congress and Pentagon will hash these out as the debate progresses.
Whether the president wishes to acknowledge this fact or not, however, we are a nation at war. Our military members are stretched thin with more than enough on their plates. Now may not be the best time to distract them with social policy debates, particularly debates that attempt to re-engineer that very unique culture that is the US armed forces. We are into an election year; the last thing we need is political grand-standing on so important a subject as this in a time of war; election-year grandstanding needs no more ammo.
Our brothers and sisters, our sons and daughters, our fathers and our mothers who proudly wear the uniform of the United States of America are warriors. They are trained, geared, and oriented toward battle. Theirs is a culture foreign to the typical civilian, and what they are trained to do is virtually unthinkable in many respects.
It must also be noted that the enemy we currently face is one like no other. We are not at war with nations; there is no cohesive entity with which treaties may be negotiated. The enemy we face is cold, calculating, and blood-thirsty. They are, for all intents and purposes, entirely uncivilized. They are barbarians, murderers, and thieves. They willingly, if eagerly, cut the throats of their prisoners, military or civilian, with jagged swords and record the screams and images as their innocent victims beg and plead for their lives to be spared. Some may suggest they do it for kicks and giggles, but it is more likely they calculate such acts to invoke raw terror into the hearts of potential enemies and future targets, primarily civilian targets. They have no honor, they know no shame, and they lack any sense of human compassion or decency on any level. The brave men and women of our armed forces must be not only trained but conditioned to face this enemy.
The mindset of a warrior trained to face this enemy is a focused one … and a harsh one. These are not “killers” we ask to defend us; they are warriors. There is a distinctive difference, of course, but these warriors must always be mindful that theirs is not a social culture or even a sub-culture, and the military does not exist so that folks who run out of other career options have somewhere to go, but exists only because a strong national defense is a fundamental key to the stability of our nation. Like a movie character military commander once stated so aptly, “We are here to defend democracy; not practice it.”
It stands to reason, then, that what is being discussed and proposed for the military community and culture may be entirely out of place, at least during this critical time. Military commanders have a full mission plate. And while this may sound somewhat sub-human, they cannot be overly concerned with individual feelings, “feel good” social justice, or even individual human rights. Members of the armed forces exist for one reason: to prepare for, and engage in if necessary, armed conflict. Social distractions and individual rights are not conducive to such an environment for this reason alone: we care more that they come home alive, having done their jobs well.
In the military culture, it must also be considered that one is not “free to be me” because such a mindset implies and actually promotes individualism. The military functions in terms of “units”, not persons. So while the military commander should not be so eager to sacrifice an entire unit toward a foolish endeavor, what they do on a daily basis is always dangerous because the mission itself must necessarily be the primary focus. Considering a military venture in terms of individual lives that might be lost would cause most rational, reasonable civilians to withdraw; the military and its commanders cannot. This entire debate can be reduced to its most common denominator, in terms of human relationships and the potential risks they pose in the military environment.
For instance, under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, “fraternization” is prohibited. Simply stated, those in authority must not become chummy with those subordinates who serve or might serve under their authority. In my own time in the Marine Corps, I witnessed ineffective NCO’s who were buddies with some pretty bad actors. When it came time for the sergeants to act like sergeants, they found themselves bound by friendship rather than by duty. Those of us outside that special circle found ourselves bearing the brunt of whatever consequences may have been because the sergeants expended more energy trying to preserve the friendship rather than exercise the authority entrusted to them.
You wanna talk about poor morale? Trying spending extra time on guard duty or in the chow hall scrubbing pots and pans because “Sergeant Buddy-Chum” saved his pal from taking his turn. It happens, and it has likely been happening for far too long, and it does cause problems within the social and authoritarian structure of that unit. The problem is not corrected until authority is recovered. Will a repeal of DADT further complicate such disciplinary and morale problems because Sergeant So-And-So now has the hots for Private This-and-That?
A repeal of the current policy opens doors that few have yet to seriously consider. For all practical purposes, an individual ceases to be an individual once he or she steps off the bus at the recruit training center. It does not even matter whether one is married. Under this nation’s current circumstances, one is all but “owned”; lock, stock, and barrel by the US government for one purpose: maintaining a strong national defense and facing a cold-blooded enemy. Neither personal feelings nor social standing have a place in the readiness of a unit trained, equipped, and geared to fight. It is not pretty nor can it be made more attractive. It is bloody, it is dangerous, and lives will be lost. Let’s leave this fight for perhaps another day so that our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines can deal with the task at hand.
Monday, January 25, 2010
Justice Delayed
Enjoying my lunch at home today, I was watching “The People’s Court”. Sometimes those shows can really be funny, if pathetic, and today was no exception. It was not the show itself, however, that got my attention. Rather, it was the incredible number of lawyer ads from personal-injury attorneys who are all but begging folks who suffer the misfortune of an ACCIDENT to sue those with whom they were involved. That’s not the real issue, though. It was not the one or two commercials (I’ve grown accustomed to ignoring these guys), but I got this incredible sense of déjà vu when the same commercial aired not once, not twice, but three times within the same commercial break in the show! And it was not just that one attorney; there were three different ones! I guess it makes perfect sense that this particular time during this particular show (folks suing one another) these commercials would air, but it also made me wonder how we have reached such a point that “fault” equals “guilt” and that justice is measured in dollars and cents.
Even when discussing the issue of “justice”, is it “just” that a person can hire an attorney who works for percentages (“you don’t pay if we don’t win”) rather than on retainer (cash up front) but would compel a potential defendant to hire an attorney at $150-$200 per hour in defense? What is “just” about that? It seems to me that such an arrangement, an arrangement that seems to be advocated and defended by not only our court system but also by our Congress, presumes a certain level of guilt when the poor “victim” whose contingency-fee attorney seeks only “justice” for his hapless client in the form of a substantial settlement, and the “guilty” party is forced to actually hire and pay for an attorney.
Having once been employed by a trucking company, I’ve been involved in a couple of these suits brought by “victims” who hired these contingency-fee attorneys. Rarely do these cases actually make it to court. The contingency-fee attorneys request this and this and that and that so much so that a company and its insurance carrier finally crunch numbers and realize it to be much cheaper to simply settle and make the suit go away. Funny thing is, they usual take the settlement, making it clear that “justice” was the last thing on their minds. They were, and are, little more than legal pirates protected by a system go awry.
We weep for the poor souls who understand that wealthy people can hire the finest legal minds at anywhere from $500-$800 per hour and usually get deals that some poor sap with a public defender could not expect nor hope to attain. Yet it does not seem to occur to many others that a lawyer who works only on a percentage vs. an attorney who rightfully charges for his or her services by the hour is inherently unfair, especially when the success of the outcome is measured strictly in terms of how much or how little was awarded in damages. Even if the defendant wins, he or she is still stuck with a major lawyer bill for defense.
Actual damage awards that cover what insurance companies refused to cover, those costs that can be substantiated, are understandable. Courts exist to settle such “language” disputes, such as what a policy allows. Our system of justice was actually established to accomplish this very thing: to settle disputes. Punitive damages, on the other hand, are a whole other ball of wax. Pain and suffering? What are the criteria by which such “punishment” or “suffering” is measured?
I wish an attorney could actually answer my question and tell me exactly what element I am overlooking. There are those, and I include myself, who could not afford to hire an attorney if an accident occurred – “accident”, I say – and they were found at fault. Though fully if heavily insured, we run the risk of one day facing such a suit just by driving to the store for a gallon of milk and being powerless even in a system in which it is maintained that justice is blind. What is “fair” about one side getting a licensed attorney for no out-of-pocket cost and the other side either taking chances in one’s own defense or going into debt to hire an attorney just to avoid an outrageous settlement? From my perspective, it seems to me that our Congress – which is probably made up of 75% lawyers – and the Trial Attorney’s Association has this one sewn up and settled themselves.
But what do I know? I was just aggravated that I had to look at the same joker over and over who was trying to convince me that the world is out to get me, and he is the only thing standing between my security and ruination.
Even when discussing the issue of “justice”, is it “just” that a person can hire an attorney who works for percentages (“you don’t pay if we don’t win”) rather than on retainer (cash up front) but would compel a potential defendant to hire an attorney at $150-$200 per hour in defense? What is “just” about that? It seems to me that such an arrangement, an arrangement that seems to be advocated and defended by not only our court system but also by our Congress, presumes a certain level of guilt when the poor “victim” whose contingency-fee attorney seeks only “justice” for his hapless client in the form of a substantial settlement, and the “guilty” party is forced to actually hire and pay for an attorney.
Having once been employed by a trucking company, I’ve been involved in a couple of these suits brought by “victims” who hired these contingency-fee attorneys. Rarely do these cases actually make it to court. The contingency-fee attorneys request this and this and that and that so much so that a company and its insurance carrier finally crunch numbers and realize it to be much cheaper to simply settle and make the suit go away. Funny thing is, they usual take the settlement, making it clear that “justice” was the last thing on their minds. They were, and are, little more than legal pirates protected by a system go awry.
We weep for the poor souls who understand that wealthy people can hire the finest legal minds at anywhere from $500-$800 per hour and usually get deals that some poor sap with a public defender could not expect nor hope to attain. Yet it does not seem to occur to many others that a lawyer who works only on a percentage vs. an attorney who rightfully charges for his or her services by the hour is inherently unfair, especially when the success of the outcome is measured strictly in terms of how much or how little was awarded in damages. Even if the defendant wins, he or she is still stuck with a major lawyer bill for defense.
Actual damage awards that cover what insurance companies refused to cover, those costs that can be substantiated, are understandable. Courts exist to settle such “language” disputes, such as what a policy allows. Our system of justice was actually established to accomplish this very thing: to settle disputes. Punitive damages, on the other hand, are a whole other ball of wax. Pain and suffering? What are the criteria by which such “punishment” or “suffering” is measured?
I wish an attorney could actually answer my question and tell me exactly what element I am overlooking. There are those, and I include myself, who could not afford to hire an attorney if an accident occurred – “accident”, I say – and they were found at fault. Though fully if heavily insured, we run the risk of one day facing such a suit just by driving to the store for a gallon of milk and being powerless even in a system in which it is maintained that justice is blind. What is “fair” about one side getting a licensed attorney for no out-of-pocket cost and the other side either taking chances in one’s own defense or going into debt to hire an attorney just to avoid an outrageous settlement? From my perspective, it seems to me that our Congress – which is probably made up of 75% lawyers – and the Trial Attorney’s Association has this one sewn up and settled themselves.
But what do I know? I was just aggravated that I had to look at the same joker over and over who was trying to convince me that the world is out to get me, and he is the only thing standing between my security and ruination.
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Waiting for a Miracle
Faith is hard, and I don’t think there is a way to make it easier. Truth be told, I’m not sure it is supposed to be easy; nothing worthwhile ever is. People who are in over their heads in debt, for instance, convince themselves that if there was just more money coming in, the financial problems would solve themselves, but we know this is not always true. It’s the same thing with school work and grades. A’s are nice to have, but getting an A without doing the work only dilutes the true value of the A. In either case, what is given (money or A’s) does not solve the real problem.
Everything we do and everything we endure is a journey, a means to an end. There are all kinds of means by which we accomplish certain incremental goals, but the end will not be until “The End”. So until that Day of the Lord comes, we have a journey to endure. And the journey is made more difficult and challenging for us not only because far too many choose to go it alone outside of the Body of Christ, apart from the Church, but also because we are primarily stimulated and guided by our physical senses. Faith issues can arise when we depend too heavily on these physical senses. Obviously we cannot ignore them; in fact, we’ve been given these senses to serve useful Kingdom purposes. But the journey itself often becomes more cumbersome to us when it seems apparent that all we can hear and see and feel is, quite literally, all there seems to be even as it seems equally clear that something much greater is missing.
We serve and worship a God whose ideals, whose principles, whose purposes, whose senses are much higher than our own. And these things of God cannot be attained or even accessed by physical means, which would help to explain why faith can sometimes seem so elusive, perhaps especially because we are so physically inclined.
The Church exists for this very thing, to serve as a sanctuary from the world, where the means of grace must be readily available and eagerly pursued for those who have faith issues as well as for those whose faith may need only a “topping off” after a long week so they can face the coming week. The high purpose of the Church is to “re-juice” those spiritual batteries so that when things get tough and our physical senses become overwhelmed to the point of overload, we have that enduring faith that will carry us long after we’ve reached the point of exhaustion.
That faith, however, that enduring faith, does not come easily, and I think it is because of a lack of higher expectation. And this is because church attendance itself has become more of an end itself rather than a means to an end, a much higher end. Too often folks go to church with little more than a mind toward what songs will be sung, what friends may be seen, and what the preacher may or may not say. These things require little or no spiritual preparation because these things will be primarily directed toward our physical senses.
We come with little, if any, anticipation because our “faith juice” has run dangerously low, but the internal spiritual gauge that warns us does not always work like it should. Maybe because faith is a divine gift, we simply expect it to come to us – on our own terms. We come into the sanctuary of the Lord, His House, but we don’t really expect to “see” Him, certainly not physically but, sadder still, not spiritually, either. We don’t prepare ourselves for worship because our expectations are so low. And our expectations are so low because faith is so lacking.
That very first Christmas so long ago had to have come at such a low point in the expectations of God’s people, in spite of the prophecies. They were overrun by Romans, and their religion was more often geared toward physical lawful obedience rather than spiritual fulfillment. And as it so often is expressed, the Messiah they likely expected was a physical warrior who would ultimately drive out the pagans and reestablish the Lord’s “physical” Kingdom. Everything they expected – actually, perhaps demanded – was geared toward their own immediate physical needs. So the answers to whatever problems they thought they had would have to be physical because that was the level of their expectations.
We gather for worship with every reason to expect a miracle, but do we really expect it? It’s easy to know of a physical healing or surviving a car crash or any number of physical examples and we would attribute such things to divine intervention, but do we really believe that? Or do we hope it to be so? Or do we cast it off as such because we are at a loss for any other rational, physical expectation? And if we do genuinely attribute it to divine intervention, do we evaluate that divine intervention to determine whether perhaps the Lord was speaking directly to us for something much greater than the moment?
We do truly desire an encounter with our Holy Father. We need to be assured not only that He is present but that everything is ok. We need to know that the Kingdom of Heaven is worth the trials and tribulations of this life, the hardships, the doubts, the tears, the sorrow, the pain. And I do truly believe that the people of that blessed day so long ago, epitomized in the Christmas Story by the shepherds, the lowest of the low in that society, got exactly what they needed and right when they needed it most, perhaps when they were near the end of their spiritual “rope”. Or maybe they were the ones most likely to not only see but also appreciate the glorious message announced by the Heavenly Hosts.
And that’s the thing about miracles and the high purposes they serve. But these miracles are not possible to us if we cannot, or will not believe not only in “a” god but THE Living God, the Loving God, OUR Holy Father, being confident in that abiding love by which we understand that He is not going to spoil us by giving us things we cannot possibly appreciate, things we don’t really need and cannot really use. But that which endures to the very end, that which humanity needed most of all then – and now - is that which we must come to expect whenever we enter into the sanctuary of the Lord. To come to worship expecting a miracle – because it is His very nature, the essence of who He is.
It is the very essence and spirit of Christmas.
Everything we do and everything we endure is a journey, a means to an end. There are all kinds of means by which we accomplish certain incremental goals, but the end will not be until “The End”. So until that Day of the Lord comes, we have a journey to endure. And the journey is made more difficult and challenging for us not only because far too many choose to go it alone outside of the Body of Christ, apart from the Church, but also because we are primarily stimulated and guided by our physical senses. Faith issues can arise when we depend too heavily on these physical senses. Obviously we cannot ignore them; in fact, we’ve been given these senses to serve useful Kingdom purposes. But the journey itself often becomes more cumbersome to us when it seems apparent that all we can hear and see and feel is, quite literally, all there seems to be even as it seems equally clear that something much greater is missing.
We serve and worship a God whose ideals, whose principles, whose purposes, whose senses are much higher than our own. And these things of God cannot be attained or even accessed by physical means, which would help to explain why faith can sometimes seem so elusive, perhaps especially because we are so physically inclined.
The Church exists for this very thing, to serve as a sanctuary from the world, where the means of grace must be readily available and eagerly pursued for those who have faith issues as well as for those whose faith may need only a “topping off” after a long week so they can face the coming week. The high purpose of the Church is to “re-juice” those spiritual batteries so that when things get tough and our physical senses become overwhelmed to the point of overload, we have that enduring faith that will carry us long after we’ve reached the point of exhaustion.
That faith, however, that enduring faith, does not come easily, and I think it is because of a lack of higher expectation. And this is because church attendance itself has become more of an end itself rather than a means to an end, a much higher end. Too often folks go to church with little more than a mind toward what songs will be sung, what friends may be seen, and what the preacher may or may not say. These things require little or no spiritual preparation because these things will be primarily directed toward our physical senses.
We come with little, if any, anticipation because our “faith juice” has run dangerously low, but the internal spiritual gauge that warns us does not always work like it should. Maybe because faith is a divine gift, we simply expect it to come to us – on our own terms. We come into the sanctuary of the Lord, His House, but we don’t really expect to “see” Him, certainly not physically but, sadder still, not spiritually, either. We don’t prepare ourselves for worship because our expectations are so low. And our expectations are so low because faith is so lacking.
That very first Christmas so long ago had to have come at such a low point in the expectations of God’s people, in spite of the prophecies. They were overrun by Romans, and their religion was more often geared toward physical lawful obedience rather than spiritual fulfillment. And as it so often is expressed, the Messiah they likely expected was a physical warrior who would ultimately drive out the pagans and reestablish the Lord’s “physical” Kingdom. Everything they expected – actually, perhaps demanded – was geared toward their own immediate physical needs. So the answers to whatever problems they thought they had would have to be physical because that was the level of their expectations.
We gather for worship with every reason to expect a miracle, but do we really expect it? It’s easy to know of a physical healing or surviving a car crash or any number of physical examples and we would attribute such things to divine intervention, but do we really believe that? Or do we hope it to be so? Or do we cast it off as such because we are at a loss for any other rational, physical expectation? And if we do genuinely attribute it to divine intervention, do we evaluate that divine intervention to determine whether perhaps the Lord was speaking directly to us for something much greater than the moment?
We do truly desire an encounter with our Holy Father. We need to be assured not only that He is present but that everything is ok. We need to know that the Kingdom of Heaven is worth the trials and tribulations of this life, the hardships, the doubts, the tears, the sorrow, the pain. And I do truly believe that the people of that blessed day so long ago, epitomized in the Christmas Story by the shepherds, the lowest of the low in that society, got exactly what they needed and right when they needed it most, perhaps when they were near the end of their spiritual “rope”. Or maybe they were the ones most likely to not only see but also appreciate the glorious message announced by the Heavenly Hosts.
And that’s the thing about miracles and the high purposes they serve. But these miracles are not possible to us if we cannot, or will not believe not only in “a” god but THE Living God, the Loving God, OUR Holy Father, being confident in that abiding love by which we understand that He is not going to spoil us by giving us things we cannot possibly appreciate, things we don’t really need and cannot really use. But that which endures to the very end, that which humanity needed most of all then – and now - is that which we must come to expect whenever we enter into the sanctuary of the Lord. To come to worship expecting a miracle – because it is His very nature, the essence of who He is.
It is the very essence and spirit of Christmas.
Monday, December 14, 2009
It's just Christmas
As usual I am contemplating what I preached yesterday and how it may have adversely affected some. I know there are the more mature Christians who can take it, but there are many who are struggling on one level or another and could be pushed one way or the other. And the struggle is often intensified during the Advent season when so many are running in too many different directions, young families struggling to have enough money to buy a lot of crap they don’t need for children who could not possibly appreciate it but will, instead, come to expect it.
All this came crashing down on me the other day as I was watching the US Senate on TV debating the health care bill. One senator called into question the “sustainability” of such massive government spending. Not trying to go off on a political diatribe but as I was listening to what he was saying, it occurred to me that where we are now in this economy and in this country and in this Christmas is “unsustainable”. That is to say, sooner or later limits will be hit; maybe we’ve already hit them. There is only so much money in the entire world without printing a lot of worthless paper, the government can only take so much from American taxpayers without actually cutting into bone and muscle (and they may already be doing so!), and parents can only spend so much on children and grandchildren before a limit is finally reached.
Back when I was growing up, my parents struggled often to make ends meet. At Christmas, though, you would have thought my parents had all the money in the world. My siblings and I got just about everything our little hearts could possibly desire – and yes, I was glad to get it but there was no way I could honestly appreciate any of it because it came to me without cost on my part. It was only years later when I would come to find out my parents likely took several months to pay off the credit card debt incurred from such a lavish Christmas. And each Christmas we expected more of the same. We would look through the giant JCPenney catalogue with eager anticipation AND expectation!
Fast forward a few years later when my wife and I had children and began our own tradition, borrowing from a tradition we once knew as children. We had been conditioned for Christmas to be a certain way, so we continued this lavish and very expensive Christmas. And like me, our children came to expect such extravagance each and every Christmas. Until one Christmas it was just no longer possible. So what happens? Christmas, as it is, is never the same. Someone always feels cheated or disappointed, and the spirit of Christmas is diminished.
And here is the thing. It cannot be that way. There is no such thing as a “bad” Christmas or a “good” Christmas because even though we define such by how much money we have to spend and how many presents are under the tree, it is still Christmas, the Christ Mass, the celebration of the birth of Messiah! How can this be “bad” on any level, and how can man possibly improve on that? Even with the best of intentions, Christians have become the ones who have removed “Christ” from Christmas. Watching us go at it, you might as well rename the holiday “Walmart-mas”. Or “Sears-mas”. Or “K-Mart-mas”. Know what I mean? It’s not the pagans or the agnostics or the atheists or the godless, pinko, liberals who are ruining Christmas … it is the CHRISTIANS who should know better who are ruining Christmas!
What is sadder still is that I get it, but I feel horrible every single year because of what I have allowed this Holy season, this Holy Day, to become to me and my family. Makes it very hard to preach and even harder still to be upbeat. It’s Christmas, a Holy Day in celebration of that incredible moment in human history when the Lord came to us in the flesh, in a way we could comprehend. The story of our rejection, of course, comes much later.
It’s just Christmas, and it’s all good all on its own merit. It is a Holy Day. You and I cannot make it better nor can we, thank God, make it worse except, of course, for ourselves and those we love by losing sight of what really matters. And whether one is in Baghdad, Kabul, or Magnolia, it will still be Christmas. And the Promise that came to all of mankind is the same Promise which today.
All this came crashing down on me the other day as I was watching the US Senate on TV debating the health care bill. One senator called into question the “sustainability” of such massive government spending. Not trying to go off on a political diatribe but as I was listening to what he was saying, it occurred to me that where we are now in this economy and in this country and in this Christmas is “unsustainable”. That is to say, sooner or later limits will be hit; maybe we’ve already hit them. There is only so much money in the entire world without printing a lot of worthless paper, the government can only take so much from American taxpayers without actually cutting into bone and muscle (and they may already be doing so!), and parents can only spend so much on children and grandchildren before a limit is finally reached.
Back when I was growing up, my parents struggled often to make ends meet. At Christmas, though, you would have thought my parents had all the money in the world. My siblings and I got just about everything our little hearts could possibly desire – and yes, I was glad to get it but there was no way I could honestly appreciate any of it because it came to me without cost on my part. It was only years later when I would come to find out my parents likely took several months to pay off the credit card debt incurred from such a lavish Christmas. And each Christmas we expected more of the same. We would look through the giant JCPenney catalogue with eager anticipation AND expectation!
Fast forward a few years later when my wife and I had children and began our own tradition, borrowing from a tradition we once knew as children. We had been conditioned for Christmas to be a certain way, so we continued this lavish and very expensive Christmas. And like me, our children came to expect such extravagance each and every Christmas. Until one Christmas it was just no longer possible. So what happens? Christmas, as it is, is never the same. Someone always feels cheated or disappointed, and the spirit of Christmas is diminished.
And here is the thing. It cannot be that way. There is no such thing as a “bad” Christmas or a “good” Christmas because even though we define such by how much money we have to spend and how many presents are under the tree, it is still Christmas, the Christ Mass, the celebration of the birth of Messiah! How can this be “bad” on any level, and how can man possibly improve on that? Even with the best of intentions, Christians have become the ones who have removed “Christ” from Christmas. Watching us go at it, you might as well rename the holiday “Walmart-mas”. Or “Sears-mas”. Or “K-Mart-mas”. Know what I mean? It’s not the pagans or the agnostics or the atheists or the godless, pinko, liberals who are ruining Christmas … it is the CHRISTIANS who should know better who are ruining Christmas!
What is sadder still is that I get it, but I feel horrible every single year because of what I have allowed this Holy season, this Holy Day, to become to me and my family. Makes it very hard to preach and even harder still to be upbeat. It’s Christmas, a Holy Day in celebration of that incredible moment in human history when the Lord came to us in the flesh, in a way we could comprehend. The story of our rejection, of course, comes much later.
It’s just Christmas, and it’s all good all on its own merit. It is a Holy Day. You and I cannot make it better nor can we, thank God, make it worse except, of course, for ourselves and those we love by losing sight of what really matters. And whether one is in Baghdad, Kabul, or Magnolia, it will still be Christmas. And the Promise that came to all of mankind is the same Promise which today.
Wednesday, December 09, 2009
Rachel's Tears
“Then Herod, when he saw that he was deceived by the wise men, was exceedingly angry, and he sent forth and put to death all the male children who were in Bethlehem and in all its districts, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had determined from the wise men. Then was fulfilled what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying: ‘A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation, weeping, and great mourning. Rachel weeping for her children, refusing to be comforted, because they are no more.’” Matthew 2:16-18 NKJV
US Senator Blanche Lincoln, D-AR, true to form, ignored the voice of Arkansas and the “tears of Rachel” by voting with her beloved party to kill an amendment to the Senate health care bill that would have further restricted any federal funds to be used to finance, or provide insurance coverage with federal funds for, abortions (Arkansas’ other senator, Mark Pryor, D-AR, voted to allow the amendment). Oddly, the amendment was sponsored by US Senator Ben Nelson, D-NEB, who has vowed now to filibuster the entire Democratic bill because the possibility still exists that in the Democrats’ efforts to overhaul health “care”, destruction of unborn children is strangely considered “care”.
It is still argued by the Democrats that the Hyde Amendment is still in force, which does restrict federal funding for abortion and seems to negate the need for additional legislation, but the whole health care debate seems to be going a little too far in providing for the poor more than they need and far more than many American Christians are willing to provide. And while we cannot argue as a “Christian nation”, we are no less a nation of Christians with a collective conscience.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-NV, recently likened those who oppose his health care overhaul proposal – all 2000 pages of it! - namely Republicans and especially those opposed to the so-called public option, with the obstructionists from yesteryear who opposed “free states”. By such a lame proclamation, Mr. Reid has made it abundantly clear that he is all out of genuine, workable ideas or valid arguments and has now resorted to name-calling and baseless accusations. One cannot help but to wonder if Mr. Reid might like to have himself and his cohorts likened to the lynch mobs of yesteryear who destroyed innocent lives and were, if not legally sanctioned, certainly overlooked by the law enforcers of the Jim Crow era. Truth be told, such an accusation would hit a little too close to home in light of King Herod’s slaughter of the innocents as recorded in the Gospel according to St. Matthew.
Civil rights and abortion advocates are already up in arms because of the Stupak Amendment which was attached to the House version of health care “reform”, which severely restricts federal funds not only from direct payment to abortion providers but also prohibits subsidized payments for insurance coverage for abortion. Such pro-life moves are seen as threats to one’s “right” to destroy unborn children, going so far as to argue that even the poor have rights even if they cannot afford the procedure. And heaven help those who argue about which is “cheaper” or more humane: destroying the unborn child, or bringing an unwanted child into the world. Pity the nation that actually debates such unconscionable premises.
The tabling of this amendment (to “table”, which essentially kills the measure, is to require only a simple majority vote rather than the 60 votes required to pass or fail an amendment) will be called by those senators up for reelection a simple “procedural” vote rather than a straight vote for or against. It will be the Democrats’ argument, as seems to be usually the case, that we peasants are simply too ignorant or misinformed to understand the complexities of parliamentarian procedure and that their experience will be our only saving grace. Especially in rural farm country, Arkansas, having Sen. Lincoln as chair of the Agriculture Committee, might be too great a risk to lose, but this is pretty much the essence of what politics has become. The blessings of true liberty have become our curse. The reign of incumbency has created a nation our founders would not recognize.
Politics aside, we must stand for a national moral conscience. It is “a poverty”, says the late Mother Teresa, that any nation would kill its own young ostensibly for the good of another. Let the churches fight the true battle from the pulpit, but demand that the government stay absolutely neutral. This means that if women want to have abortions, they better have the means to pay for one. There is no “right” to expect me or other like-minded taxpayers to foot the bill. And no, I am not morally obligated to adopt the children you produce but do not want or cannot support.
Shame on you, Blanche Lincoln. Shame on you, US Senate. On the positive side, however, you all may have finally awakened an otherwise complacent electorate, and you are about to get bitten by the hands that have, quite literally, fed you for so long.
US Senator Blanche Lincoln, D-AR, true to form, ignored the voice of Arkansas and the “tears of Rachel” by voting with her beloved party to kill an amendment to the Senate health care bill that would have further restricted any federal funds to be used to finance, or provide insurance coverage with federal funds for, abortions (Arkansas’ other senator, Mark Pryor, D-AR, voted to allow the amendment). Oddly, the amendment was sponsored by US Senator Ben Nelson, D-NEB, who has vowed now to filibuster the entire Democratic bill because the possibility still exists that in the Democrats’ efforts to overhaul health “care”, destruction of unborn children is strangely considered “care”.
It is still argued by the Democrats that the Hyde Amendment is still in force, which does restrict federal funding for abortion and seems to negate the need for additional legislation, but the whole health care debate seems to be going a little too far in providing for the poor more than they need and far more than many American Christians are willing to provide. And while we cannot argue as a “Christian nation”, we are no less a nation of Christians with a collective conscience.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-NV, recently likened those who oppose his health care overhaul proposal – all 2000 pages of it! - namely Republicans and especially those opposed to the so-called public option, with the obstructionists from yesteryear who opposed “free states”. By such a lame proclamation, Mr. Reid has made it abundantly clear that he is all out of genuine, workable ideas or valid arguments and has now resorted to name-calling and baseless accusations. One cannot help but to wonder if Mr. Reid might like to have himself and his cohorts likened to the lynch mobs of yesteryear who destroyed innocent lives and were, if not legally sanctioned, certainly overlooked by the law enforcers of the Jim Crow era. Truth be told, such an accusation would hit a little too close to home in light of King Herod’s slaughter of the innocents as recorded in the Gospel according to St. Matthew.
Civil rights and abortion advocates are already up in arms because of the Stupak Amendment which was attached to the House version of health care “reform”, which severely restricts federal funds not only from direct payment to abortion providers but also prohibits subsidized payments for insurance coverage for abortion. Such pro-life moves are seen as threats to one’s “right” to destroy unborn children, going so far as to argue that even the poor have rights even if they cannot afford the procedure. And heaven help those who argue about which is “cheaper” or more humane: destroying the unborn child, or bringing an unwanted child into the world. Pity the nation that actually debates such unconscionable premises.
The tabling of this amendment (to “table”, which essentially kills the measure, is to require only a simple majority vote rather than the 60 votes required to pass or fail an amendment) will be called by those senators up for reelection a simple “procedural” vote rather than a straight vote for or against. It will be the Democrats’ argument, as seems to be usually the case, that we peasants are simply too ignorant or misinformed to understand the complexities of parliamentarian procedure and that their experience will be our only saving grace. Especially in rural farm country, Arkansas, having Sen. Lincoln as chair of the Agriculture Committee, might be too great a risk to lose, but this is pretty much the essence of what politics has become. The blessings of true liberty have become our curse. The reign of incumbency has created a nation our founders would not recognize.
Politics aside, we must stand for a national moral conscience. It is “a poverty”, says the late Mother Teresa, that any nation would kill its own young ostensibly for the good of another. Let the churches fight the true battle from the pulpit, but demand that the government stay absolutely neutral. This means that if women want to have abortions, they better have the means to pay for one. There is no “right” to expect me or other like-minded taxpayers to foot the bill. And no, I am not morally obligated to adopt the children you produce but do not want or cannot support.
Shame on you, Blanche Lincoln. Shame on you, US Senate. On the positive side, however, you all may have finally awakened an otherwise complacent electorate, and you are about to get bitten by the hands that have, quite literally, fed you for so long.
Monday, November 23, 2009
Ups and Downs
Sarah Palin’s national book tour appears to be at least a qualified success. Lots of crowds, lots of enthusiasm, lots of books sold. How long it may last remains to be seen. When Palin first came onto the national stage as John McCain’s VP pick in the 2008 presidential election, I freely admit I was caught up in the enthusiasm. Gov. Palin has something to offer, is exciting to hear, and is pretty easy on the eyes. In the end, though, she was found (in my humble opinion) to be of little more substance than the man this nation elected president. The difference between Gov. Palin and President Obama is ideology; neither has (or had) the experience or the background sufficient to prepare either for the presidency. Mr. Obama is exposed in such a light very nearly every time he opens his mouth. Gov. Palin is spending as much time speaking in platitudes grossly lacking in substance. Let us not make the same mistake twice by electing someone who looks good on camera and talks a good show. Been there, doin’ that, not likin’ it much – you betcha.
Just 38% of voters now favor the health care plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats. So says the latest Rasmussen poll. Just so we’re clear, though: President Obama never “proposed” anything. He left it to the Congress (his words) and has been excited or enthusiastic about every Democratic proposal that has been put forth (strangely silent or vaguely objecting to, if not downright dismissive of, Republican proposals. Each proposal from the House and the Senate comes with a $1 trillion (+ or – a few billion among friends) price tag. Not long ago President Obama made like he was ready to get serious about the nation’s colossal debt but has yet to propose anything there. So if he’s all about a $1 trillion health care bill and the government entities that will be required to administer it AND if he is equally all about debt reduction, this can mean only one thing: that which he will have the temerity to propose will be massive tax increases the likes of which we will not have seen to date. Thank you, Democrats. That’s your albatross to carry into 2010.
On that same note of appropriate congressional priorities, do you suppose the 62% who do not favor the health care plan (whichever plan they don’t like) are a part of the 17% who are out of work and have all but given up the search as futile or have settled for part-time jobs just to make ends meet? One might be inclined to think that those out of work would never stop looking, but reading labor reports in which hundreds of thousands of jobs are still being shed by the US economy each month give little hope that things are much better now than they were when the jobs were lost. Maybe these and their supporters believe the Congress has it completely backward. FIRST revamp the US tax code for corporations and small businesses so that they can afford to hire so that workers can afford to spend money AND pay taxes AND help deal with this outrageous deficit THEN start thinking again later about government spending money it does not have and, in the grand scheme, will not have in the foreseeable future.
US Rep. Patrick Kennedy, D-RI, is in a public spitting match with his Catholic bishop over Kennedy’s support for abortion and the bishop’s insistence that Mr. Kennedy has effectively severed his Catholic ties and cannot receive Holy Communion in the Church. Each has made public comments and each has expressed “disappointment” or “surprise” that the other has gone public with the matter. Almost laughable except that Mr. Kennedy just does not get it. There are some things that are fundamental to religion and faith, particularly in Christianity. Supporting abortion in the first place just does not fit neatly into the Christian basket, no matter the emotion, and supporting federal measures by which we who are diametrically opposed to abortion would be forced to help finance abortion is just plain unfair and immoral. It is one thing to acknowledge the very ugly reality of abortion; it is another thing altogether to actively support it. It is unfortunate that the bishop and Mr. Kennedy cannot sit down behind a closed door, but why can’t the congressman just sit down with his own parish priest? Why does a Kennedy think a bishop must somehow give him a free pass? In the end, if Mr. Kennedy thinks he is somehow morally or biblically justified in his support of abortion, he needs to know that he’s just making it up as he goes to suit his personal beliefs. He must not get these personal beliefs, however, confused with the tenets of his religion which expressly support and defend the sanctity of human life.
Christmas is coming. Already there are expressions of regret and dread as well as eager anticipation. It is sad to know that a truly Holy Day has been reduced to a secular holiday of grief, pain, loss, depression, anxiety, and financial pressure. Season of Hope? More like “I hope I don’t go to the poorhouse this Christmas”. Why can we not simply allow Christmas to be Christmas and call Solstice what it is: a pagan ritual of self-indulgence that has nothing to do with the birth of the Christ? I wonder sometimes, however, if we were ever able to tell the difference. On this one, at least, the Jehovah’s Witnesses have the right idea.
We are still a nation at war. Let us not forget the men and women who have voluntarily stepped up to the front line of defense of this nation to fight for those who cannot fight for themselves. Let us especially not forget that each of these brave souls have families back home who do not know if they will ever see their loved ones alive again. As we are a nation at war, may we soon become a nation at prayer in supporting all of them.
Just 38% of voters now favor the health care plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats. So says the latest Rasmussen poll. Just so we’re clear, though: President Obama never “proposed” anything. He left it to the Congress (his words) and has been excited or enthusiastic about every Democratic proposal that has been put forth (strangely silent or vaguely objecting to, if not downright dismissive of, Republican proposals. Each proposal from the House and the Senate comes with a $1 trillion (+ or – a few billion among friends) price tag. Not long ago President Obama made like he was ready to get serious about the nation’s colossal debt but has yet to propose anything there. So if he’s all about a $1 trillion health care bill and the government entities that will be required to administer it AND if he is equally all about debt reduction, this can mean only one thing: that which he will have the temerity to propose will be massive tax increases the likes of which we will not have seen to date. Thank you, Democrats. That’s your albatross to carry into 2010.
On that same note of appropriate congressional priorities, do you suppose the 62% who do not favor the health care plan (whichever plan they don’t like) are a part of the 17% who are out of work and have all but given up the search as futile or have settled for part-time jobs just to make ends meet? One might be inclined to think that those out of work would never stop looking, but reading labor reports in which hundreds of thousands of jobs are still being shed by the US economy each month give little hope that things are much better now than they were when the jobs were lost. Maybe these and their supporters believe the Congress has it completely backward. FIRST revamp the US tax code for corporations and small businesses so that they can afford to hire so that workers can afford to spend money AND pay taxes AND help deal with this outrageous deficit THEN start thinking again later about government spending money it does not have and, in the grand scheme, will not have in the foreseeable future.
US Rep. Patrick Kennedy, D-RI, is in a public spitting match with his Catholic bishop over Kennedy’s support for abortion and the bishop’s insistence that Mr. Kennedy has effectively severed his Catholic ties and cannot receive Holy Communion in the Church. Each has made public comments and each has expressed “disappointment” or “surprise” that the other has gone public with the matter. Almost laughable except that Mr. Kennedy just does not get it. There are some things that are fundamental to religion and faith, particularly in Christianity. Supporting abortion in the first place just does not fit neatly into the Christian basket, no matter the emotion, and supporting federal measures by which we who are diametrically opposed to abortion would be forced to help finance abortion is just plain unfair and immoral. It is one thing to acknowledge the very ugly reality of abortion; it is another thing altogether to actively support it. It is unfortunate that the bishop and Mr. Kennedy cannot sit down behind a closed door, but why can’t the congressman just sit down with his own parish priest? Why does a Kennedy think a bishop must somehow give him a free pass? In the end, if Mr. Kennedy thinks he is somehow morally or biblically justified in his support of abortion, he needs to know that he’s just making it up as he goes to suit his personal beliefs. He must not get these personal beliefs, however, confused with the tenets of his religion which expressly support and defend the sanctity of human life.
Christmas is coming. Already there are expressions of regret and dread as well as eager anticipation. It is sad to know that a truly Holy Day has been reduced to a secular holiday of grief, pain, loss, depression, anxiety, and financial pressure. Season of Hope? More like “I hope I don’t go to the poorhouse this Christmas”. Why can we not simply allow Christmas to be Christmas and call Solstice what it is: a pagan ritual of self-indulgence that has nothing to do with the birth of the Christ? I wonder sometimes, however, if we were ever able to tell the difference. On this one, at least, the Jehovah’s Witnesses have the right idea.
We are still a nation at war. Let us not forget the men and women who have voluntarily stepped up to the front line of defense of this nation to fight for those who cannot fight for themselves. Let us especially not forget that each of these brave souls have families back home who do not know if they will ever see their loved ones alive again. As we are a nation at war, may we soon become a nation at prayer in supporting all of them.
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Finding the Right Place
John 18:33-37
What kind of world would we be living in if we could know with absolute certainty when time will stand still? There has been a lot of buzz lately about the Mayan “long count” calendar that marks the end of an era on December 21, 2012. Discovery Channel and History Channel have both been busy broadcasting nearly everything they think they know about this alleged “count-down”, and there is a movie out called “2012” that is supposedly based on this Mayan calendar. But to know what kind of world we might envision with such certain knowledge, recall the actions of a few during the advent of Y2K, when food and other supplies – including ammunition - were stockpiled as a means of survival.
I don’t know whether or if “global warming” factors into any of this but to hear some “warm earth” theorists tell it, if we would pay more attention to global warming we could actually stop or at least slow this apocalyptic clock from ticking (my sincere apologies to those who earnestly take global warming more seriously than I). I am obviously oversimplifying what many consider to be a very serious problem, of course, but lacking academic or scientific credentials, I can do little else.
This is not to say that I take lightly our duty to responsible stewardship of the Lord’s created world, but there is something much more important that must first take place before we can think about adding yet another item to our plate of “things to worry about today”.
Imagine, then, an idealized world, a world in which the late Mother Teresa used to say so often that it is not the work itself that gives life and hope to the poor; it is the love that comes from the worker. She believed that the work was little more than work and a misguided expenditure of time and energy if we could not do such work with grateful hearts and love toward our fellow man. And she believed this because she believed the greatest poverty man can know – and I would suggest she probably knew this better than most – is that genuine poverty, which is the absence of companionship and love, the absence of knowing, not merely hoping, that someone actually cares, is what man lacks most because even many wealthy people lack this.
So if this lack of genuine, heartfelt love is what is truly lacking in the world, it is a deficiency we have created for ourselves because, while we may worry about global warming or a nuclear Iran or the state of the world or US economy and taxes and all those other things that have little to do with the Kingdom of Heaven, we may have been negligent in worrying about whether our neighbors know that we really care. And it would be in offering that “calling card” by which we would discover that even we are perhaps loved more than we know by people we don’t even know ... yet.
The prayer of the psalmist was: “I will not enter my house or get into my bed; I will not give sleep to my eyes or slumber to my eyelids, until I find a place for the Lord …” (132:3-5). And as Jesus faced His final hours on this earth in the presence of Pilate, He declared: “As it is, My kingdom is not from [this world] (John 18:36c). Is Jesus making a proclamation about the state of the world or the state of faith and religion by saying something as simple, and yet as profound, as “as it is”? Is He saying, “Well, considering how things are now, My kingdom is not here. Otherwise, Pilate, you would have your hands full”?
I think a kingdom without royal subjects (that is, people) over which to rule is not much of a kingdom. So what Jesus may be expressing is not so much a denunciation of what His current reality is more than He may be lamenting about all that has gone wrong so much so that there is no one willing to stand with Him where He is. It is not a question of whether Jesus is right where He was prophesied to be; it is, rather, a matter of His utter loneliness at this very dark hour in His earthly life. The Bible is very clear that even though this Earth is the handiwork of the Lord Himself, it seems equally clear by the persecution of Jesus that His royal subjects (His Kingdom) have all but abandoned Him. The only “faithful” left for Him to rule over are those who are not of this world - because this world made a clear choice.
That’s pretty harsh and may not be altogether accurate, but it goes more toward the state of our existing world as well as the state of the Church as to whether or not the Lord has any sort of claim over what is currently before Him. Or it could be as simple as a rejection of the world as it is although that makes no sense considering what He is willfully preparing to endure and what will come of it in the end. Man seems intent on destroying the very Best Thing that has ever been offered and though Jesus’ enemies may have thought themselves to have been successful at the time, the only ones who discovered what ultimately took place three days later were those whom Jesus believed to be trustworthy, capable of handling, and willing to endure what lay ahead.
“Finding the Right Place” must be much more than a mere sermon title. Such a concept involves not only spiritual “forward motion” but also discovery along the path to righteousness. Sanctification itself is much more than a simple state of being or self-declaration. It is a state of perpetual spiritual growth, a state of conscious awareness in which we become more and more like Christ Himself. The “right place” means understanding where the Lord fits into our lives and where we fit into His calling, His creation, and His plan of salvation for all of humanity and not just a handful of self-righteous individuals.
Searching for that “right place” will not be comfortable nor will it necessarily be pleasing to our flesh by neatly fitting in with our other chosen priorities – unless, of course, we finally find that state of spiritual perfection by and through which we serve one another not with a sense of duty or obligation but out of a genuine sense of what it means to love and to be loved. And I say all this because the “right place” to be is at the Cross – not being grateful that Jesus is bleeding to death after having been beaten to within an inch of His life, but being actively and consciously aware of the indescribable Love that exists in that incredible moment in human history.
It seems to me that if we can find ourselves at that “Right Place” at the foot of the Cross, that place where the King’s “royal subjects” must necessarily gather, we can hear the declaration and prayer from Jesus Himself asking the Father to forgive us in spite of, or perhaps because of, what we have done and what we have become. There is an element of guilt associated with the Crucifixion of the Christ, of course, but we must resist the temptation to wallow in that guilt and shame, understanding that what is most evident in that moment and at that place is not guilt but Grace. Were it to be understood as only guilt, we might reasonably believe time would have stood still at that moment and judgment rendered for that unspeakable act of humanity.
That place, that state of being, that “kingdom” is yours and mine for the taking, but we must be willing not only to go there but also to offer not what we have taken but what we are willing to give as freely and as liberally as it was given.
What kind of world would we be living in if we could know with absolute certainty when time will stand still? There has been a lot of buzz lately about the Mayan “long count” calendar that marks the end of an era on December 21, 2012. Discovery Channel and History Channel have both been busy broadcasting nearly everything they think they know about this alleged “count-down”, and there is a movie out called “2012” that is supposedly based on this Mayan calendar. But to know what kind of world we might envision with such certain knowledge, recall the actions of a few during the advent of Y2K, when food and other supplies – including ammunition - were stockpiled as a means of survival.
I don’t know whether or if “global warming” factors into any of this but to hear some “warm earth” theorists tell it, if we would pay more attention to global warming we could actually stop or at least slow this apocalyptic clock from ticking (my sincere apologies to those who earnestly take global warming more seriously than I). I am obviously oversimplifying what many consider to be a very serious problem, of course, but lacking academic or scientific credentials, I can do little else.
This is not to say that I take lightly our duty to responsible stewardship of the Lord’s created world, but there is something much more important that must first take place before we can think about adding yet another item to our plate of “things to worry about today”.
Imagine, then, an idealized world, a world in which the late Mother Teresa used to say so often that it is not the work itself that gives life and hope to the poor; it is the love that comes from the worker. She believed that the work was little more than work and a misguided expenditure of time and energy if we could not do such work with grateful hearts and love toward our fellow man. And she believed this because she believed the greatest poverty man can know – and I would suggest she probably knew this better than most – is that genuine poverty, which is the absence of companionship and love, the absence of knowing, not merely hoping, that someone actually cares, is what man lacks most because even many wealthy people lack this.
So if this lack of genuine, heartfelt love is what is truly lacking in the world, it is a deficiency we have created for ourselves because, while we may worry about global warming or a nuclear Iran or the state of the world or US economy and taxes and all those other things that have little to do with the Kingdom of Heaven, we may have been negligent in worrying about whether our neighbors know that we really care. And it would be in offering that “calling card” by which we would discover that even we are perhaps loved more than we know by people we don’t even know ... yet.
The prayer of the psalmist was: “I will not enter my house or get into my bed; I will not give sleep to my eyes or slumber to my eyelids, until I find a place for the Lord …” (132:3-5). And as Jesus faced His final hours on this earth in the presence of Pilate, He declared: “As it is, My kingdom is not from [this world] (John 18:36c). Is Jesus making a proclamation about the state of the world or the state of faith and religion by saying something as simple, and yet as profound, as “as it is”? Is He saying, “Well, considering how things are now, My kingdom is not here. Otherwise, Pilate, you would have your hands full”?
I think a kingdom without royal subjects (that is, people) over which to rule is not much of a kingdom. So what Jesus may be expressing is not so much a denunciation of what His current reality is more than He may be lamenting about all that has gone wrong so much so that there is no one willing to stand with Him where He is. It is not a question of whether Jesus is right where He was prophesied to be; it is, rather, a matter of His utter loneliness at this very dark hour in His earthly life. The Bible is very clear that even though this Earth is the handiwork of the Lord Himself, it seems equally clear by the persecution of Jesus that His royal subjects (His Kingdom) have all but abandoned Him. The only “faithful” left for Him to rule over are those who are not of this world - because this world made a clear choice.
That’s pretty harsh and may not be altogether accurate, but it goes more toward the state of our existing world as well as the state of the Church as to whether or not the Lord has any sort of claim over what is currently before Him. Or it could be as simple as a rejection of the world as it is although that makes no sense considering what He is willfully preparing to endure and what will come of it in the end. Man seems intent on destroying the very Best Thing that has ever been offered and though Jesus’ enemies may have thought themselves to have been successful at the time, the only ones who discovered what ultimately took place three days later were those whom Jesus believed to be trustworthy, capable of handling, and willing to endure what lay ahead.
“Finding the Right Place” must be much more than a mere sermon title. Such a concept involves not only spiritual “forward motion” but also discovery along the path to righteousness. Sanctification itself is much more than a simple state of being or self-declaration. It is a state of perpetual spiritual growth, a state of conscious awareness in which we become more and more like Christ Himself. The “right place” means understanding where the Lord fits into our lives and where we fit into His calling, His creation, and His plan of salvation for all of humanity and not just a handful of self-righteous individuals.
Searching for that “right place” will not be comfortable nor will it necessarily be pleasing to our flesh by neatly fitting in with our other chosen priorities – unless, of course, we finally find that state of spiritual perfection by and through which we serve one another not with a sense of duty or obligation but out of a genuine sense of what it means to love and to be loved. And I say all this because the “right place” to be is at the Cross – not being grateful that Jesus is bleeding to death after having been beaten to within an inch of His life, but being actively and consciously aware of the indescribable Love that exists in that incredible moment in human history.
It seems to me that if we can find ourselves at that “Right Place” at the foot of the Cross, that place where the King’s “royal subjects” must necessarily gather, we can hear the declaration and prayer from Jesus Himself asking the Father to forgive us in spite of, or perhaps because of, what we have done and what we have become. There is an element of guilt associated with the Crucifixion of the Christ, of course, but we must resist the temptation to wallow in that guilt and shame, understanding that what is most evident in that moment and at that place is not guilt but Grace. Were it to be understood as only guilt, we might reasonably believe time would have stood still at that moment and judgment rendered for that unspeakable act of humanity.
That place, that state of being, that “kingdom” is yours and mine for the taking, but we must be willing not only to go there but also to offer not what we have taken but what we are willing to give as freely and as liberally as it was given.
Sunday, November 15, 2009
A Matter of Endurance
Mark 13:1-13
Imagining the size of the Great Temple of Jerusalem, the size of the stones it took to build and then rebuild the Temple and the sheer number of men it took to put it all together would surely have made for an awesome sight. And given that the majesty of YHWH was likely manifest in this huge complex and the Temple itself, at least in the eyes of the observers, it is easy to imagine the disciples being awestruck and conceiving that such a structure would be virtually indestructible as the Lord Himself is indestructible. When the people of the day looked upon the Temple, they may well have imagined they were gazing upon YHWH Himself. And because the sanctuary of the Holy of Holies was deep within the walls and access strictly limited to only the high priest and only once a year during the Day of Atonement, it surely must have added a mysterious and even mystical flavor to the whole thing. What great stones! What great buildings! What a great God!
Yet it’ll never last. According to Jesus, the begotten Son of this very God, all these things will fall. Jesus seems to suggest in an almost cavalier fashion that these walls, these buildings, these very stones (each estimated to weigh tons!) will not only fall but will be “thrown” down … and much more easily than they were built up. What took years to build up was completely and utterly destroyed, maybe in a matter of hours but more likely over the course of days; but days down rather than decades up. So man has a lot invested in the Temple. Whether the destruction of the Temple and the city was the will of the Lord or the determination of man is a matter of perspective, I suppose, but I also think what Jesus is talking about goes far beyond “these buildings” they were looking at.
Chapter 13 of Mark has a very dark and apocalyptic tone because Jesus seems to be talking about The End; the end of the Temple, the end of the apostles and perhaps the apostolic age, the end of time as man can conceive of it. All that will take place leading up to The End will be ugly and likely more a test of faith and intestinal fortitude than anything the disciples could possibly imagine. “Wars and rumors of wars” is a favorite among contemporary doomsday prophets, as well as natural disasters, because we cannot pick up a newspaper or turn on the TV news without hearing about the current War on Terror, Iraq, Afghanistan, or threats of war from North Korea, Iran, and Venezuela.
Then there are tsunamis and earthquakes, cyclones, hurricanes, and tornadoes. Genocide is a weapon of choice in some countries in which innocent men, women and children are slaughtered because they are the wrong color, the wrong religion, or of the wrong tribe. How can one read an entire newspaper and not come away with the idea that it must all end soon? Indeed, how can we possibly, under the circumstances, endure one more day?
Well, here’s the thing. Man-made institutions and structures come and go just as surely as the tide and the seasons, and this is precisely what Jesus is talking about. While Jesus seems to make direct reference to the physical structure of the Temple itself, we would be cheating ourselves if we failed to listen a little more purposefully and consider more carefully all of Jesus’ words because it would then be impossible to come away believing Jesus is exclusively referring to The End of The World or merely the destruction of that great Temple.
In the midst of all this chaos, we also have to be mindful of this simple and yet profound statement Jesus makes in verse 8 (“the beginning of birth pangs”) as He moves more directly and deliberately into what will begin to take place and what will come as the result of this seeming madness. And lest we forget, we are 2000 years removed from this particular conversation, but since that time and up through today apparently no one took Jesus’ words very seriously. This seems to suggest that what Jesus is talking about is something not necessarily of the will of the Father but, in perpetuity, what we bring upon ourselves in what must surely be the results of the ongoing and constant struggle between good and evil which is inherent in a world in which both exist. And struggle we must, struggle we will – IF we belong to Him. And IF we take seriously the PROMISE that is manifest in the “birth pangs”.
The Methodist (& United Methodist) Church has been in a downward spiral since the 30’s – along with the American Church in general – and the reasons given for such decline are as varied as the people who offer their reasons and/or excuses. In the end, however, it must be acknowledged that there can only be ONE reason for decline just as surely as there can be only ONE Church and ONE Lord. The excuses for decline and the subsequent “trendy solutions” are man-made and destined to fail as they vainly try to outlast their given “seasons”. There is no endurance; these trends cannot last any longer than the human persons who conceive of them.
All these that amount to little more than “social experiments” will eventually and absolutely fail for one reason: there is no universal element. That is to say, a trendy solution that is geared toward and appeals exclusively to women or to men or to children or to youth or to divorced, gay, transgendered, bi, African-American, Native American, Italian American, Chinese American, the intellectual, the not-so-intellectual, the blue collar, the white collar … all these categories and their sub-categories lack a cohesive commonality; they are inherently at odds with one another because they all seek after their own “thing”. And we continually offer all these things to all these groups with a warm-and-fuzzy, feel-good notion of “progress” in attempting to reach out to the marginalized or the disenfranchised.
We would reasonably ask: How can it be that programs and efforts to reach the marginalized or the disenfranchised in the name of the Lord can be “bad” in any way? These are, after all, the ones we need to be reaching out to as well as those who do not know the Lord at all. But there is one major difference I see between “saving souls”, which was the thrust of the early Methodist movement as it was the early Church, and worrying about the “marginalized” or the “disenfranchised”. It is a matter of what is offered, what is expected, and whether what is offered comes from man or from the Lord. The very endurance of what is offered will be solely determined by its origin. Nothing more, nothing less.
The difference between the two can be more easily defined in terms of recognition. As earlier stated, there can be only ONE Lord – and He is who He is - even as there are numerous human personalities to deal with, everyone at their own particular places and stations in life – without apology - but some choosing to be where they are and others being where they are through no fault of their own. In other words, there are individuals who do not want to know the Lord. They want to live in their own pride, they want to live in their own pursuit of personal happiness, they want to live in their own prejudices, they want to live in their own hatefulness, they want to live in their own hellish misery they’ve created for themselves. They desire and choose to live in ignorance, darkness, and vindictiveness because they are unwilling to make any sort of personal sacrifice. They desire not the Lord; rather, they desire a “genie in a bottle” who serves them at their whims and on their terms.
The mistake the Church has made, in my humble opinion, over the years is in playing up to these "whims" and "terms", the subtlety of trying to “recreate” the Eternal Lord God of All Creation into an image more pleasing to these individualized sub-categories. The Church has vainly attempted to make it so that “personal sacrifice” is not necessary, that faith not be too “hard”. Karl Barth, the early 20th-century theologian, called it “cheap grace”. The more theological, “clinical” term is “antinomianism”. What each term boils down to is “salvation without sacrifice”. Oh, we’re fine with the notion that Jesus died on a Cross for our sins, but we’re a little timid when it comes to spiritual obedience. We love that we are “saved by grace”, but we often express in our “programs” as well as in our personal lives an utter disdain, if spiritual ignorance, of and for the Mosaic Law. Our “programs” seem to have a tendency to help people to make peace with where they are rather than to encourage them to see and to move into where they could be. It is appeasement and surrender at its very worst.
The Lord can only be Who and What He is and if He is eternal, He can never be “trendy” or “generational”. What He calls “good” is always good, whether we can see this or not. “I am the Lord; I do not change”, says the prophet (Malachi 3:6a), and man is in for a rude awakening. The “birth pangs” to which Jesus refers are those intensely painful things we must endure so that life can be renewed and become evident in the Church once again. We must be focused on “right things” and remain true to our calling as disciples. We must question, evaluate, and if necessary, resist the generational trends that challenge us and attempt to ensnare us into the so-called “rat race”, and we must remain faithful to the One who calls us to faithfulness … not to human ideals, institutions, and structures that are by their very nature temporary at best – but to Him who is, who was, and who is to come.
The Lord Himself will endure throughout the ages because of Who He is. The question from the time of Jesus and through the ages to come is who or what we will choose to follow, for “He who endures to the end shall be saved”.
Amen.
Imagining the size of the Great Temple of Jerusalem, the size of the stones it took to build and then rebuild the Temple and the sheer number of men it took to put it all together would surely have made for an awesome sight. And given that the majesty of YHWH was likely manifest in this huge complex and the Temple itself, at least in the eyes of the observers, it is easy to imagine the disciples being awestruck and conceiving that such a structure would be virtually indestructible as the Lord Himself is indestructible. When the people of the day looked upon the Temple, they may well have imagined they were gazing upon YHWH Himself. And because the sanctuary of the Holy of Holies was deep within the walls and access strictly limited to only the high priest and only once a year during the Day of Atonement, it surely must have added a mysterious and even mystical flavor to the whole thing. What great stones! What great buildings! What a great God!
Yet it’ll never last. According to Jesus, the begotten Son of this very God, all these things will fall. Jesus seems to suggest in an almost cavalier fashion that these walls, these buildings, these very stones (each estimated to weigh tons!) will not only fall but will be “thrown” down … and much more easily than they were built up. What took years to build up was completely and utterly destroyed, maybe in a matter of hours but more likely over the course of days; but days down rather than decades up. So man has a lot invested in the Temple. Whether the destruction of the Temple and the city was the will of the Lord or the determination of man is a matter of perspective, I suppose, but I also think what Jesus is talking about goes far beyond “these buildings” they were looking at.
Chapter 13 of Mark has a very dark and apocalyptic tone because Jesus seems to be talking about The End; the end of the Temple, the end of the apostles and perhaps the apostolic age, the end of time as man can conceive of it. All that will take place leading up to The End will be ugly and likely more a test of faith and intestinal fortitude than anything the disciples could possibly imagine. “Wars and rumors of wars” is a favorite among contemporary doomsday prophets, as well as natural disasters, because we cannot pick up a newspaper or turn on the TV news without hearing about the current War on Terror, Iraq, Afghanistan, or threats of war from North Korea, Iran, and Venezuela.
Then there are tsunamis and earthquakes, cyclones, hurricanes, and tornadoes. Genocide is a weapon of choice in some countries in which innocent men, women and children are slaughtered because they are the wrong color, the wrong religion, or of the wrong tribe. How can one read an entire newspaper and not come away with the idea that it must all end soon? Indeed, how can we possibly, under the circumstances, endure one more day?
Well, here’s the thing. Man-made institutions and structures come and go just as surely as the tide and the seasons, and this is precisely what Jesus is talking about. While Jesus seems to make direct reference to the physical structure of the Temple itself, we would be cheating ourselves if we failed to listen a little more purposefully and consider more carefully all of Jesus’ words because it would then be impossible to come away believing Jesus is exclusively referring to The End of The World or merely the destruction of that great Temple.
In the midst of all this chaos, we also have to be mindful of this simple and yet profound statement Jesus makes in verse 8 (“the beginning of birth pangs”) as He moves more directly and deliberately into what will begin to take place and what will come as the result of this seeming madness. And lest we forget, we are 2000 years removed from this particular conversation, but since that time and up through today apparently no one took Jesus’ words very seriously. This seems to suggest that what Jesus is talking about is something not necessarily of the will of the Father but, in perpetuity, what we bring upon ourselves in what must surely be the results of the ongoing and constant struggle between good and evil which is inherent in a world in which both exist. And struggle we must, struggle we will – IF we belong to Him. And IF we take seriously the PROMISE that is manifest in the “birth pangs”.
The Methodist (& United Methodist) Church has been in a downward spiral since the 30’s – along with the American Church in general – and the reasons given for such decline are as varied as the people who offer their reasons and/or excuses. In the end, however, it must be acknowledged that there can only be ONE reason for decline just as surely as there can be only ONE Church and ONE Lord. The excuses for decline and the subsequent “trendy solutions” are man-made and destined to fail as they vainly try to outlast their given “seasons”. There is no endurance; these trends cannot last any longer than the human persons who conceive of them.
All these that amount to little more than “social experiments” will eventually and absolutely fail for one reason: there is no universal element. That is to say, a trendy solution that is geared toward and appeals exclusively to women or to men or to children or to youth or to divorced, gay, transgendered, bi, African-American, Native American, Italian American, Chinese American, the intellectual, the not-so-intellectual, the blue collar, the white collar … all these categories and their sub-categories lack a cohesive commonality; they are inherently at odds with one another because they all seek after their own “thing”. And we continually offer all these things to all these groups with a warm-and-fuzzy, feel-good notion of “progress” in attempting to reach out to the marginalized or the disenfranchised.
We would reasonably ask: How can it be that programs and efforts to reach the marginalized or the disenfranchised in the name of the Lord can be “bad” in any way? These are, after all, the ones we need to be reaching out to as well as those who do not know the Lord at all. But there is one major difference I see between “saving souls”, which was the thrust of the early Methodist movement as it was the early Church, and worrying about the “marginalized” or the “disenfranchised”. It is a matter of what is offered, what is expected, and whether what is offered comes from man or from the Lord. The very endurance of what is offered will be solely determined by its origin. Nothing more, nothing less.
The difference between the two can be more easily defined in terms of recognition. As earlier stated, there can be only ONE Lord – and He is who He is - even as there are numerous human personalities to deal with, everyone at their own particular places and stations in life – without apology - but some choosing to be where they are and others being where they are through no fault of their own. In other words, there are individuals who do not want to know the Lord. They want to live in their own pride, they want to live in their own pursuit of personal happiness, they want to live in their own prejudices, they want to live in their own hatefulness, they want to live in their own hellish misery they’ve created for themselves. They desire and choose to live in ignorance, darkness, and vindictiveness because they are unwilling to make any sort of personal sacrifice. They desire not the Lord; rather, they desire a “genie in a bottle” who serves them at their whims and on their terms.
The mistake the Church has made, in my humble opinion, over the years is in playing up to these "whims" and "terms", the subtlety of trying to “recreate” the Eternal Lord God of All Creation into an image more pleasing to these individualized sub-categories. The Church has vainly attempted to make it so that “personal sacrifice” is not necessary, that faith not be too “hard”. Karl Barth, the early 20th-century theologian, called it “cheap grace”. The more theological, “clinical” term is “antinomianism”. What each term boils down to is “salvation without sacrifice”. Oh, we’re fine with the notion that Jesus died on a Cross for our sins, but we’re a little timid when it comes to spiritual obedience. We love that we are “saved by grace”, but we often express in our “programs” as well as in our personal lives an utter disdain, if spiritual ignorance, of and for the Mosaic Law. Our “programs” seem to have a tendency to help people to make peace with where they are rather than to encourage them to see and to move into where they could be. It is appeasement and surrender at its very worst.
The Lord can only be Who and What He is and if He is eternal, He can never be “trendy” or “generational”. What He calls “good” is always good, whether we can see this or not. “I am the Lord; I do not change”, says the prophet (Malachi 3:6a), and man is in for a rude awakening. The “birth pangs” to which Jesus refers are those intensely painful things we must endure so that life can be renewed and become evident in the Church once again. We must be focused on “right things” and remain true to our calling as disciples. We must question, evaluate, and if necessary, resist the generational trends that challenge us and attempt to ensnare us into the so-called “rat race”, and we must remain faithful to the One who calls us to faithfulness … not to human ideals, institutions, and structures that are by their very nature temporary at best – but to Him who is, who was, and who is to come.
The Lord Himself will endure throughout the ages because of Who He is. The question from the time of Jesus and through the ages to come is who or what we will choose to follow, for “He who endures to the end shall be saved”.
Amen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)