What is Required of Us?

Since I don't preach any more, I don't usually look at the Sunday lessons. But I thought this week would be a good one to do so. There are many things that have happened in this first week of the Trump era, I wondered what wisdom and guidance might be found in Sunday's lectionary. I wasn't surprised or disappointed.

The Hebrew Bible Lesson: Micah 6: 6-8

“With what shall I come before the Lord, and bow myself before God on high? Shall I come before him with burnt offerings, with calves a year old? Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams, with ten thousands of rivers of oil? Shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?”
He has told you, O mortal, what is good;
and what does the Lord require of you but to

• do justice, and
• to love kindness, and
• to walk humbly with your God?

The Gospel Lesson: Matthew 5: 1-12

When Jesus saw the crowds, he went up the mountain; and after he sat down, his disciples came to him. Then he began to speak, and taught them, saying:

• “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
• “Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted.
• “Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.
• “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled.
• “Blessed are the merciful, for they will receive mercy.
• “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
• “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God.
• “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
• “Blessed are you when people revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you."

May we hear and then heed.

Calendar of Saints: John Wyclif (2)

Twice a week I post a quote from saints from the Episcopal Calendar of Saints that week. They are to be meditative and mindful, playful and thought inducing. I hope they are helpful in your spiritual journeys.

John Wyclif (1330 - 1384)
Translator and Reformer
October 30

Wyclif is chiefly remembered and honored for his role in Bible translating. In the early 1380's he led the movement for a translation of the Bible into English, and two complete translations (one much more idiomatic than the other) were made at his instigation. (How much of the translating he did himself, if any, remains uncertain.) He proposed the creation of a new religious order of Poor Preachers who would preach to the people from the English Bible.

-Link

Calendar of Saints: John Wyclif (1)

Twice a week I post a quote from saints from the Episcopal Calendar of Saints that week. They are to be meditative and mindful, playful and thought inducing. I hope they are helpful in your spiritual journeys.

John Wyclif (1330 - 1384)
Translator and Reformer
October 30

John Wyclif (also spelled Wycliffe, Wycliff, Wicliffe, or Wiclif) was born in Yorkshire around 1330, and was educated at Oxford, becoming a doctor of divinity in 1372.

In 1374, King Edward III appointed him rector of Lutterworth, and later made him part of a deputation to meet at Brussels with a papal deputation to negotiate difference between King and Pope. About this time Wyclif began to argue for "dominion founded on grace." By "dominion" he meant both the right to exercise authority in church or state and the right to own property. He maintained that these rights were given to men directly from God, and that they were not given or continued apart from sanctifying grace. Thus, a man in a state of mortal sin could not lawfully function as an official of church or state, nor could he lawfully own property. He argued that the Church had fallen into sin and that it ought therefore to give up all its property and that the clergy should live in complete poverty. This disendowment was to be carried out by the king. Later generations saw him as a precursor of the Protestant Reformation of the 1500's, but his direct influence on the beginnings of that movement appear to be surprisingly slight. (Only John Hus seems to have read any of his work.)

-Link

Not Obeying Jesus?

A phrase from the Gospel of Mark 7:36 has always intrigued me. Jesus has just finished some of his miracles and, as he often does in Mark's Gospel, informs those around him that they shouldn't tell anyone about what they have seen. But Mark lets us know that this isn't as easy as it sounds. Mark's line is a simple statement:

Then Jesus ordered them to tell no one; but the more he ordered them, the more zealously they proclaimed it.

I point this out for two reasons. For one- how could he hope to get people to follow him if he kept it a secret? Second- and the one that strikes me this week- is how well people obeyed him.
They didn't.

The more he urged them to be quiet, the more they talked. The more miracles he did, the more he asked them to be quiet, and the more they spread the news.

That of course makes sense- if you have just met a miracle worker of the stature of Jesus you would want others to know about it. If this miracle worker had just done something amazing for you, one of your family members or one of your neighbors, everyone in town would know about it with a few days if not a few hours. Even before social media got those things posted before the hour passed.

Maybe I'm in a particular cynical mood today, but my reaction to the quote was as simple and straightforward as Mark:

The more Jesus wants us to do something, the less likely we are to do it!

Take the example of Matthew 25 where Jesus says we should feed the hungry, visit the prisoner and the sick as if we were doing these acts to Jesus. Then there's the call to treat the poor and stranger with compassion and care. When was the last time that either of us gave someone the shirt off our back when they only asked for our coat?

Me neither.

But then I got downright radical.

If Jesus didn't mention something, maybe that is what we should be taking care of!

Now I'm really meddling in things that I shouldn't. Many of you will probably guess what I'm thinking about. The great religious fervor and willingness to stand up against sin- esp. that of same-sex marriage. It is obviously something of incredibly great importance - since Jesus never mentions it. It is obviously something that we need to make sure we stand up against.

If it were something so-so, or a common every day thing- Jesus would have talked about it and told us not to talk about it. But since there is nothing anywhere in the Gospels about homosexuality, we better correct Jesus error- or really obey what he wants us to really do- condemn them.

So remember, if Jesus tells us to do something, it is okay to disobey him like they did 2000 years ago when he told them not to tell anyone.

Be bold- disobey Jesus. He's obviously forgiving to us when we do that.

And be very diligent about disobeying.

Especially when he makes such statements as:

Whoever is without sin, cast the first stone.

An Observation

Well, isn't that what most writers and bloggers do, make observations? This one occurred in one of my favorite writing locations, a Christian-based coffee shop. They have one of those chalk boards that they post a question on and then get responses.

The question one day was

What is your favorite verse this week?

At the point I was there it had only 14 responses, The observation I made was that of the 14, 10 were from the Hebrew Bible and only 4 from the New Testament. That is just barely over a quarter (28%) of the responses were from the Christian Scriptures.

No, I'm not saying there is anything wrong with quotes from the Hebrew Bible being the favorites. In my own Moravian tradition in our devotional history of "The Daily Texts", the "Watchword for the Day" is to be from the Hebrew Scriptures. The New Testament text is a "doctrinal" text that in some way expands on or enhances the watchword. That's why the "Watchword for 2015" over there on the right sidebar is from the Hebrew Bible. (By the way, the watchwords are chosen by lot. I basically looked at my birthday in the Daily Text for 2015 for my watchword for this year.)

But I found it interesting that the favorite verses were not from the New Testament. A couple of thoughts on that.

• First, 14 responses is not a large number. Low responses are often not representative of the overall response rate.
• Second, if the first few verses were from the HB then the thought is placed in the next person's mind and they also pick from the same Testament.
• Third, it is the same kind of reflection that has, over the years, elevated the Ten Commandments above what the NT strives for. You know, Jesus saying, "You have heard... but now I tell you." Things like thinking evil of someone is as bad as killing them or lusting in your heart is the same as actually doing it.

In any case, That's what I noticed.

Capturing Earthiness

Hebrew is, of course, a very ancient language. Before it was revived in modern-day Israel, it had a relatively limited vocabulary from a time when things were a lot more down to earth. When we read the Hebrew Bible we don't really catch that sense of the language. We "sanctify" it to make it more acceptable to our modern ears. Fortunately we do have more words that we can use.

Last Sunday I was sitting listening to the Hebrew Bible text being read. I don't usually read along; I like the sense of listening to the word. Suddenly a word went skimming by. Did I hear that, as thought? Did it really say what I think I heard? I pulled out the bulletin and double checked it. Yep. That's what I heard.

Here's the passage from the Common English Bible which we use:

Isaiah 64: 5b-6-- But you were angry when we sinned;
you hid yourself when we did wrong.
We have all become like the unclean;
all our righteous deeds are like a menstrual rag. [Emphasis added.]

What an excellent example of the earthiness (and not mincing words) that one can find in the Bible!

Other translations use "filthy" or "greasy" to describe the rag in question- our deeds. Fitting and descriptive, but not with the overwhelming power of this translation. In fact, knowing the importance of "clean" vs. "unclean" in the ancient Hebrew lifestyle, the use of the word "menstrual" adds an extreme of "uncleanness" that filthy and greasy don't.

I later dug into a concordance and found that the Hebrew word is only used once in the Bible- right there in Isaiah 64. To get its translation. scholars had to look at other similar words and other ancient languages. The root and words really do have to do with the menstrual cycle- a time of uncleanness for a woman. The phrase "menstrual rag" really is a descriptive, powerful, down-to-earth, and appropriate translation.

The End of the Church Year: The Servant King

Today was the last Sunday of the Christian liturgical year. Next week the cycle of the church year starts over with Advent. But first, on this last Sunday, our ceremonial "New Year's Eve", we remembered that Jesus is in charge. Period. End of discussion. Well, sort of. Especially on the years in the cycle when we read the assigned Matthew scripture:

Matthew 25:31 - 46 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on the throne of his glory. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats, and he will put the sheep at his right hand and the goats at the left. Then the king will say to those at his right hand, ‘Come, you that are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me.’ Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry and gave you food, or thirsty and gave you something to drink? And when was it that we saw you a stranger and welcomed you, or naked and gave you clothing? And when was it that we saw you sick or in prison and visited you?’ And the king will answer them, ‘Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it to me.’ Then he will say to those at his left hand, ‘You that are accursed, depart from me into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels; for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not give me clothing, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’ Then they also will answer, ‘Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not take care of you?’ Then he will answer them, ‘Truly I tell you, just as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

This happens to be the Scripture passage that has been my watchword practically since I first heard it well over 50 years ago. I find it the perfect ending for the church year because it reminds me again of what it means to be a Christian. In this remarkable parable Jesus doesn't ask what you believe, whether you have been "born again" or have accepted him as your savior. Rather he simply tells them what he has seen. That's it. Forget the words. Forget the preaching.

Here, Jesus says, let me tell you when you served me.

And they were all surprised because they never noticed they were (or weren't) doing these things. They just went about their business each day doing what they felt was the next right thing. It turns out that in so doing some were actually serving Jesus- and some were outright ignoring him.

Jesus is rarely this clear in his proclamations. Most of them can be open for interpretation. This one leaves very little wiggle room. (I know there is some, but it is built on very shifty sand!) When I get this kind of message from God, I really do try to follow it, though very imperfectly, I must admit. I am sure I have passed Jesus by often this past week when I didn't stop for the homeless guy at the highway ramp. That's one I am still working on.

There I sat this morning feeling pretty damn good about what I was hearing. I started thinking about some of the stuff in the news over the past weeks- the guy arrested in Florida for violating the law that forbids feeding the homeless, for example. But the one that kept running through my mind was the big explosion over the immigration issues. I wanted to do something like the following:

When you don't take care of the least of these, you are not caring for me.
--Jesus


My mind then went to all those politicians who have been using this issue- and these children- as a political football. Many of these have professed to be real Christians (as opposed to us "liberal" Christians who really aren't.) They even found it disgusting that Obama would stoop so low as to quote the Bible about this issue. After all, doesn't the Bible only care about abortion and condemning gays?

In short I was feeling quite smug and secure. (Okay, self-righteous might apply.)

But one thing I do try to do is prepare myself when I go to church to be made uncomfortable. I really believe that "comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable" is a basic standard of Jesus. Even so, I wasn't prepared for it when it happened. Why would I be? All I was doing was praying the liturgy. When along comes the Lord's prayer:

...forgive us our trespasses,
as we forgive those who have trespassed against us.
And lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from evil.

Who me? You talking to me again?

Of course Jesus was. I suddenly realized I was treating those "other politicians" in a way that I wouldn't treat Jesus. What might Jesus say when he came upon this part of my story?

Ouch. That hurts!

But it is not in comfort that I learn how to be a better person. It's when the shoe pinches, the message gets too close to home and the metaphorical 2x4 connects with the metaphorical side of my head.

I need to do something differently. I need to stop doing what I am "accusing" those others of doing- judgement, self-righteousness, and treating others less than I would like to be treated. In that sense it doesn't matter what they are doing (or not doing). What matters is what I am doing since I am the only one who can change me.

Therefore I'm going to use an old recovery meme. I am going to take two weeks to pray for those I am judging as being on the "wrong side" of the issue. I am going to ask that they be blessed and supported. No, I will not pray that they change their mind or heart. That's not mine to decide. But I am going to spend the time simply asking that the grace and spirit of God bless them. Period. Nothing more and nothing less.

After all, when the King comes in all his glory I already know what he's going to say. He told me this morning.

As usual I was brought up short and reminded that humility is something I should think about practicing more often.

Here's One To Make You Think

Looking for another quote I remembered from Frank Schaeffer, I came across this one. It struck me as on target, so I wanted to share it.

“Jesus certainly was not a “Bible believer,” as we use that term in the post Billy Graham era of American fundamentalist religiosity that’s used as a trade-marked product to sell religion. Jesus didn’t take the Jewish scriptures at face value. In fundamentalist terms, Jesus was a rule-breaking relativist who wasn’t even “saved,” according to evangelical standards. Evangelicals insist that you have to believe very specific interpretations of the Bible to be saved. Jesus didn’t. He undercut the scriptures.”
― Frank Schaeffer, Why I am an Atheist Who Believes in God: How to give love, create beauty and find peace

Why I Still Use "Jesus Language"

This thought came to mind while I sat in worship the other week:

Why does the "Jesus language" of the Church still move me like it does?

It may sound like a strange question to raise while sitting in a Christian worship service, especially a highly liturgical Episcopal Church, many light-years distant from my original Christian home of an independent fundamentalist-type Baptist Church. But I am no longer that almost 16-year old who was baptized 50 years ago. I no longer have the narrow vision of "getting to heaven" as the goal of the Christian life nor the understanding that only people like "me" will get in. My understanding of the love and GRACE of God has brought me to a whole different place as to what I think church and God and faith are all about.

I could go even further and ask:

Why does Christian iconography, Eucharistic liturgy and many hymns still make chills run up my spine and even tears form gently at the edge of my eyes?

I have over the years discovered depth of spirituality in many ways, times and places far beyond the Christian "way." Yoga, Tai Chi, Buddhist meditation, the presence of the Spirit in many places (and people.) Saying the great Jewish affirmation in Hebrew:

Shema Yisrael, Adonai elohenu, Adonai echad

moves me as much as the Lord's Prayer though in different ways. Singing a "Kyrie" in Latin touches places in my soul that the the English (which connects with my cognitive brain) cannot. The Doxology or the Gloria in English come forth with a sense of transcendence that words don't convey.

Today I believe more firmly in the existence of an eternal and infinite God, Creator of all, who I believe is named in many more ways than we humans are even capable of imagining. Hence every time I think I have come to a good understanding of God- that all is figured out- I catch myself and step back. If little old me in the 21st Century can understand God's infinite ways, that is not God. Time to move on- and keep it simple. God is God- I am not. Nothing else says it nearly as clearly as that.

So I ask the above questions. They come to mind because the Jesus language of the church has so often been used as exclusiveness instead of openness. It has been used to badger, harass and even kill people "in Jesus' Name." Some might ask, if I am not as narrow in my understanding, why do I keep using the language?

Well, the first answer to my questions is relatively easy. It's a hard-wired part of my brain and soul. After 50 years as a practicing Christian, it touches my life and soul and spirit because it accesses deep portions of my unconscious. These places were planted in those formative years of middle-adolescence and young adulthood. The neurochemicals of my brain respond when these external rituals and actions occur. I also know that these "Christian" ceremonies and endeavors on my part connect with something beyond me- a power greater than myself.

Even as I know that these are not the only ways to make those same connections, they have been part of my spiritual life for 50 years. Yes, then, they DO provide a foundation that in many ways still works, doing what I have needed it to do all these years.

There are, of course things that don't work in the same ways. They were important, but today aren't as effective. I think that comes simply from changes in time, place and age. I have learned to go deeper. For me that has been essential. For that I am also grateful.

The second answer to my question builds on the first. Being secure in the foundation allows me to continue to grow and explore the infinite ways God works. That means some of the words I use today have a different meaning to me today than they used to. Call it "syncretism" but the other ways to God have changed the idea behind the words. Some of that is made more real by seeing the similarities as well as the differences between the paths to, from, and with God. Which ones work for me and my personality? Which don't- but certainly can for others?

This has been one of the more difficult areas. Having originally become Christian in a more exclusive, narrow understanding of Christianity's place in the world (the ONLY way!) I still wrestle from time to time with the inevitable "What if it IS the only way?" question. As I have delved more deeply into spirituality, though, I have found that many spiritual practices are universal. Others are more culturally-based. Others are even based on political/ideological understandings. Therefore, I listen to the spirit as the Spirit has been mediated to humanity in the infinite ways throughout history. I find I am in good company.

The third answer to my questions is, believe it or not, the Church itself. Not any particular church but the Church Historic, the Church Universal, and the Church Triumphant. The Church today is in no way shape or form anything like the Church of my youth, let alone of the 16th or 1st Centuries. Much of what we now believe is THE way to interpret Scripture and History, has not been so for most of Church history. The Church, as a human institution, is continuing to evolve and grow- mature.

In fact over the past few years the "progressive" side of Christianity has certainly moved many ways away from what would even have been "liberal" those 50 years ago. Questions are being asked in new ways, theology is being worked on from new perspectives.  Churches are taking healthier stances on issues, being more inclusive and compassionate in new ways.

Continuing to be part of that movement is exciting. As I have gotten older, I have found comfort in things old AND new. It would be very sad if the church (or The Church) of 2014 was just the same as the one of 1948 or 1727, Luther or Hus, Augustine or Paul. If it were, I am not sure I would be able to be there. Sure, some of the rituals and language are similar to other periods. But in these familiar words and actions is where we, the Church, and the Holy Spirit together see the Scripture come alive:

Behold, I am making all things new.

What Will We Tell the Kids?

This is what's known as a "Kiss Cam" shot. It is a common entertainment at sporting events around the country.The camera picks out a couple, places them in the center of the heart and everyone expects them to kiss.

In public.

Before God and tens of thousands in the stadium.

No one thinks anything of it. It's cute. Kissing is good.



Unless you're Michael Sam and his boyfriend.

Then people go crazy over a public kiss between two people who love each other.

What in the world will we tell the kids? How can we explain this? What can we say?

Simple- tell them two people who love each other were overwhelmed by the honest emotions of the moment.

I hope Michael Sam makes it as a pro football player. Like many pioneers before him, breaking boundaries and prejudices can be tough.

Back in the mid-1970s when women were first being "allowed" to be clergy in the church they were often expected to be perfect, no blemishes, no problems that men were regularly excused from. One little misstep and they "boo-birds" were there to gloat in their obviously true and proper position that women can't do that- and shouldn't. Because "the Bible said so!"

Or go back to # 42 for the Dodgers in the mid-1940s. The crap that Jackie Robinson had to put up with is inexcusable. Yet it was often supported by "the Bible tells us so!"

Is Michael Sam as important as Robinson or the women clergy pioneers of the 70s?

In his own way, I would say "Yes!" I wish him the best. He has a long road ahead of him.

May he stay on track and not allow the craziness that is sure to swirl around him to de-focus him from what he wants to do.

Membership Has It's Privileges.. Doesn't It?

Our pastor posted this as the theme for an adult forum the other week. It was to get people in our church thinking about what it means to be a member of the church. Needless to say it got me thinking and wandering around my thoughts and feelings about this probably controversial topic.

I didn't get to the forum that Sunday so what I am about to say is entirely of my insight- or lack thereof. It is what has been running through my brain since then.

It was a good starting place. We assume that when we are members of an organization or group that there is some benefit we can get for it. If I join a local theater I get the privilege of cheaper tickets or perhaps backstage tours. If I join the library (get a library card) I can borrow books. To join may or may not cost money, but there is definitely an advantage. That's why we join.

Hence the gist of the question on church membership. What ARE the advantages of joining the church.

Reaction #1: None. I get nothing for it that I couldn't get just by attending the church. Worship is free and open in most churches. Plenty of non-members attend most of the mega-churches. Sure, I might not be able to take communion in some churches, but is that enough reason to join?

Reaction #2: Control of some type. For example, I get to vote for church officers and perhaps have a say in the way the church is run.

Reaction #3: (According to some people)- Salvation. That is not my opinion. I don't believe that being a church member has anything to do with our eternal life in heaven or wherever. I have known plenty of people who do believe that. I have met more than my share of individuals who kept their names on church rolls as an eternal life insurance policy- and would admit to that publicly anytime they were called and asked if they wanted to remain on the church rolls having not attended in years- or even decades.

Reaction #4: Privilege? Wait. Hold on. Privilege. Privilege? What does that mean?

Privilege- honor, treat, pleasure, joy, freedom, license, opportunity, restricted right or benefit, advantage, special treatment.

That's where the trouble comes in, I think. When we believe that membership is about what we get, the advantages, special rights or treatment. I am a member, you owe me this or I deserve that kind of treatment. Hence one of the great complaints about the modern 20th Century Church (where most of us are still living?!) is that it has become more like a country club or just passive entertainment.

Here is where I can begin to get in trouble, hot water, and start all kind of arguments. Perhaps I am too much a follower of the Dietrich Bonhoeffer theological school. There is no greater exposition on the heart of church "membership" than his classic The Cost of Discipleship. From Wikipedia:

Bonhoeffer argues that as Christianity spread, the Church became more "secularised", accommodating the demands of obedience to Jesus to the requirements of society. In this way, "the world was Christianised, and grace became its common property." But the hazard of this was that the gospel was cheapened, and obedience to the living Christ was gradually lost beneath formula and ritual, so that in the end, grace could literally be sold for monetary gain.

"Hold on," some might say. "When did we get into discipleship? We're talking about membership in an institution, an organization, that functions within the society."

All of this really muddies the waters, doesn't it? It depends on which side of the theological discussion you start- with an organization in the society or with following Jesus. Is the church to be a foundational institution in our society as some might argue, or is it something different, something unique, something spiritual?

How is the church different from other organizations in society?

I realize that we have strayed a little from the original question.  But the relevance of the original question depends entirely, completely, totally on where and how we define the church. I would argue as a starting point for discussion that there are no benefits gained from being a church member, unless you are interested in
having a say in the running of the church
aligning yourself publicly with a religious/spiritual position
want the church to continue to be alive in your community.

Beyond that, as a starting point, the membership in the church is a human-devised institution, and a secular one at that.

To be a member of the church in a spiritual sense is anything but that. The language of the New Testament took a Greek word that was used to indicate a part of the human body and applied it to those who joined with Christ. It is a mystical joining, something beyond institution, something beyond privilege. No part of the human body can exist without the body. No part of the human body is any more- or less important, each having it's own place.

Somewhere along the line, though, the word member has come to mean a special relationship, a privilege. Membership has its privilege, right?

Except the only privilege my left arm has for being a member of my body is two-fold
1) to live and
2) to do it's job of being my left arm.

How did we get to this? Aren't we playing word games and a philosophical/theological scrabble?

No, I don't think so. I think we are at the foundation of the problems of the modern church.

Membership in The Church brings along with it no privilege, no special advantage, no promise of anything other than the life-giving body and blood of our Lord, spiritually, mystically flowing through us. To serve Christ is not to clean floors, shovel snow, or provide for the survival of a human institution. (Those may be important in their own ways, but they are not, I believe, in the service of God. More at some other time on that!) That's about the church, not The Church.

The two are not the same; they are no co-equal in spite of what theological discussions have tried to tell us. They may (MAY) overlap at times when the church lives out the call of The Church, but they are not the same. One is a human institution based in and through society; the other is a spiritual union of the followers of Jesus, those who would be humble enough to be willing to call themselves Christian- Christ-followers.

What privilege do I get by being a member of the church? Put most simply, I get the privilege of giving myself to the benefit of others. It is the benefit of sacrifice and discipleship, of being part of The Word alive in the world.

That is downright scary!

No wonder we have made it into a country club.

With that in mind I call you attention to the post right below this. It is a story I have posted before and will post again. It is one of only two non-Biblical stories that I have preached more than once at the same church. It is the Parable of the Lifesaving Station. Read it and you will understand my theology in a nutshell.

Sure, there are nuances and digressions we could take with this discussion, but in keeping it simple, I don't think we could get must more basic than that.

A Daily Reprieve

In Alcoholics Anonymous they report that the recovering alcoholic is always in danger of using again. What they have, it says, is "a daily reprieve" based on how we maintain our spiritual life.

I thought of that the other day when the Hebrew Bible lesson was read on Sunday in Church. It is the passage in the wilderness where the people are getting bored with an unchanging menu of manna. Morning and night, no variation, manna. Each day like the one before. And on weekends, enough for the Sabbath so no one has to work to gather any. Hoard it- and it goes bad. Take all you need, but don't try and store it.

There is nothing but manna in front of us.

Only manna.

Only manna?

Enough to eat. Sure it isn't the "gourmet" food of a slave in Egypt. No meat and veggies. Just manna. Just a daily miracle.

All they have is a daily miracle. A daily reprieve from starving in a desert wilderness. A daily gift, right there. No questions asked.

How narrow and selfish we humans can be. We even get bored with miracles. We even get tired of the same old miracle day in and day out.

Like a sunrise or sunset.

Like a newborn child.

Like the possibility of love and hope and relationship with family and friends.

Like growing closer and closer to God.

Auntie Mame: Oh, Agnes! Here you've been taking my dictations for weeks and you haven't gotten the message of my book: live!
Agnes Gooch: Live?
Auntie Mame: Yes! Live! Life's a banquet and most poor suckers are starving to death!

Life is a spiritual banquet. Yet so often we starve in our boredom. Our spirits wilt and shrink because we can't see the miracle of the everyday all around us.

Resistance and Ignoring Jesus

Matt, at the blog, The Church of No People, had a challenging post the other day. As usual, it started with his title: Sometimes, It's Best to Ignore Jesus. From there he only gets more challenging by posting a number of quotes from Jesus that we often choose to ignore. Like:

• “Turn the Other Cheek” and
• “Do Not Judge”

I am sure we all have our pet quotations that we will quickly ignore, re-translate, allegorize, or just plain forget. That's the real problem with Jesus. He never does what we expect.

This fit well with an earlier post on Internet Monk titled Evangelical Resistance to the Gospels: How & Why by Timothy Gombis, 4/26/2012. Gombis said at one point:

We strip away the “husk” of Jesus’ clear words to find the spiritual “kernel” that we apply to our hearts and motives.

This is a reading strategy whereby we keep Jesus safely tucked away in our hearts, self-satisfied with our piety. But we intentionally avoid doing what he says with our bodies, social practices, and community dynamics.

It’s too threatening. If we actually did the things Jesus says to do, we’d have to change, and we just don’t want to.

It isn't just evangelicals who do that, It's every one of us. We don't allow the depth and power of this life-changing God to truly enter into our lives. We don't allow the incredibly radical, revolutionary, and grace-filled direction of Jesus to become our direction. We are scared of that kind of life. If we are given grace, might we have to do the same?

But more so, Jesus did not preach a Gospel of prosperity or material comfort or the priority of the nation-state as our central tenet. He did not offer a feel-good piety. Which is what we want. At least those of us who are the comfortable who need to be afflicted.

Now, if I can only apply that to my own comfort zone of faith.

Agree? or Not?

Mad Priest is one of those blogs that is worth following for gems like this one:

MADPRIEST'S THOUGHT FOR THE DAY
Scripture is a living being which,
whilst it still breathes,
has been embalmed by the Church.

One year I worked on and off on reading the Bible in Spanish which I was working on learning. It was a parallel English-Spanish version (NIV). It brought a number of interesting insights to my reading of the English. I have worked a little on the more traditional Spanish version, Reina-Valera, equivalent to our English King James Version. When you read a passage you thought you knew so well, the nuances and changes of view from a non-English perspective can sure make a difference.

It is difficult, but worth the challenge, to seek the living, breathing Spirit of the Scriptures. You may be surprised that it doesn't say what you thought it said- or want it to say.

What About These Don't We Understand

Yesterday's Moravian Daily Texts jumped off the page at me when I read them last evening:

Isaiah 10:1-2 New International Version (NIV)

1 Woe to those who make unjust laws,
to those who issue oppressive decrees,
2 to deprive the poor of their rights
and withhold justice from the oppressed of my people,
making widows their prey
and robbing the fatherless.

Philippians 2:3-4 New International Version (NIV)

3 Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves, 4 not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others.

Doesn't leave much doubt on where God might stand on some of the more controversial issues of the day or about how God's definition of "justice" might be a whole lot different than what we may say.

The Beginning and the End?

It just could be coming. Starting tomorrow:

ROME (Reuters) – If tourists find Rome unusually quiet next Wednesday, the reason will probably be that thousands of locals have left town in fear of a devastating earthquake allegedly forecast for that day by a long-dead seismologist.

For months Italian internet sites, blogs and social networks have been debating the work of Raffaele Bendandi, who claimed to have forecast numerous earthquakes and, according to internet rumours, predicted a "big one" in Rome on May 11.

It could very well be the beginning of the end....

Which I am told is now scheduled for May 21.

Harold Camping, 88, has scrutinized the Bible for almost 70 years and says he has developed a mathematical system to interpret prophecies hidden within the Good Book. One night a few years ago, Camping, a civil engineer by trade, crunched the numbers and was stunned at what he'd found: The world will end May 21, 2011.
--Link

To celebrate a pastor friend of mine has scheduled a service for Sunday May 22 with the theme: "Why the Rapture Didn't Happen Yesterday."

Of course if it does (did??) won't that be a surprise.

Of course I wonder what the big deal is. If you aren't ready, you won't be and no amount of hype will get you ready. Oh, wait a minute, I think I get it. If you believe it IS going to happen, then you are ready. If you DON'T, then you are not.

So, did anyone tell Jesus about all this?

This, then, made me wonder about a previous date-setter in the "prophecy" field- Hal Lindsey. He was the author of the wildly popular 1970s-80s book- The Late Great Planet Earth- in which he said it would all come to an end in 1988- the 40th anniversary of the establishment of Israel. Which of course was an incorrect prediction. So I went looking for about 5 seconds on Google and found his website where he promotes his TV show:

“The Hal Lindsey Report” is a weekly half-hour news and commentary series. It is hosted by popular Bible prophecy teacher Hal Lindsey, author of The Late Great Planet Earth. This informative program covers current events and national and international issues from a Biblical and prophecy-based perspective.

I wonder if he's doing any better with his predictions. (Sorry but I don't think what he does fits under any interpretation of "prophecy" from a biblical perspective.)

After tomorrow we will know whether Rome has been felled by a quake. If it happens, maybe there's something to this.

Just thought I would post this for this Sunday morning....

It's a big book, full of big stories with big characters. They have big ideas (not least about themselves) and make big mistakes. It's about God and greed and grace; about life, lust, laughter and loneliness. It's about birth, beginnings, and betrayal; about siblings, squabbles, and sex; about power and prayer and prison and passion....And that's only Genesis.

~N.T. Wright on the Bible,
From

Simply Christian

So, Back to Latin?

From LiveScience:

The translation of the Bible into English marked the birth of religious fundamentalism in medieval times, as well as the persecution that often comes with radical adherence in any era, according to a new book.

The 16th-century English Reformation, the historic period during which the Scriptures first became widely available in a common tongue, is often hailed by scholars as a moment of liberation for the general public, as it no longer needed to rely solely on the clergy to interpret the verses.

But being able to read the sometimes frightening set of moral codes spelled out in the Bible scared many literate Englishmen into following it to the letter, said James Simpson, a professor of English at Harvard University.