Friday, June 27, 2014

SERMON: "Radical Hospitality"

Being Radically Hospitable​​​​​​​
Matthew 10:40-42

Let me set the scene for these thought-provoking words from the lips of Jesus. He had just called the twelve and given them their marching orders: who they were to go to, and what they were to do while they were among them - what they were to do if people were receptive to what they said and did, and what they were to do if they weren’t. He cautioned them about the dangers that were probably going to come their way as a result of their saying “yes” to becoming one of his followers. He warned them that they possibly would be ridiculed and rejected - be betrayed by loved ones - they might even have to face death as a result of living out their faith.

Then Jesus offered some words of comfort to his followers - some words of assurance: that God would be with them no matter what circumstances they found themselves in and that they should not, as a result of God’s promise to be with them, go forth in fear. But, that’s only the beginning of this open-air workshop, this mini-course in discipleship summarized in the 10th chapter of Matthew. There’s more - much more - for those not yet scared off.

In the portion of the 10th chapter of Matthew just prior to the portion of the scriptures I wish to reflect on in this post are perhaps some of the most disturbing words in all the scriptures. They are so disturbing we want to avoid them and pretend they don’t exist. Phrases like: “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.” “Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me.” “Anyone who does not take up his cross and follow me is not worthy of me.” “Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.”

It is with those words ringing in our ears that we read again these words at the end of the 10th chapter of Matthew. This time according to the new revised standard version: “Whoever welcomes you welcomes me, and whoever welcomes me welcomes the one who sent me. Whoever welcomes a prophet in the name of a prophet will receive a prophet’s reward; and whoever welcomes a righteous person in the name of a righteous person will receive the reward of the righteous; and whoever gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones in the name of a disciple - truly I tell you, none of these will lose their reward.” (1)

Jesus was using a commonly understood rule of hospitality etiquette among the Jews of that day to make his point. If someone was a messenger for someone else, it was understood that the host should greet and treat the messenger the same as if it was the sender visiting. (2)  Jesus’ words to his followers simply meant: “Those who open their homes to you - their tables to you - are basically opening their homes and tables to me and to God. Those who offer you hospitality are offering it to me as well. When you visit others in my name, your presence is as good as my being present.”

Now, we know from some of the other things it is recorded that Jesus said in other places in the scriptures that Jesus was saying much more here than simply that his followers were going to be taken care of because of their relationship with him. This instructive word from Jesus wasn’t just to reassure those who follow him that the future’s secure - that social security and health insurance and retirement benefits are part and parcel - part of the package that accompanies responding to the “call” to follow Jesus.
Nor, was Jesus’ primary point to say that those his followers went to who welcomed them welcomed him. Rather, it was in addition to say that they, the followers, were ministering to those to whom they went, as Jesus. A paraphrase of Matthew 25:40 probably states it as clearly as it can be stated: “Whatever you did for the hungry, the thirsty, the stranger, you did for me.”
The one of the characteristics of the people of God who make up the church is to be a radically hospitable people. As the church we are to create an atmosphere of hospitality.

Perhaps my all-time favorite book by Henri Nouwen is his book Reaching Out. The fourth chapter in the book is titled “Creating Space for Strangers” and is without a doubt the most referenced chapter in all the books I’ve ever read except perhaps some of the passages in the bible. His point in this chapter is that the world is full of strangers in search of community. We’re strangers because we’ve lost touch with our past, our culture, our country, our neighbors, our friends, our family, even from ourselves and God. And so, we desperately seek to find a hospitable place where we can live life without fear, let down our hair and be ourselves, be accepted for who we are. We crave, we search for, community. Despite the fact that most strangers probably become victims of hostility, we must, as human beings, especially as Christians, must be about trying to create hospitable space where we might connect with one another. Despite the increasing tendency to be fearful or suspicious of one another and to protect what is our own, it is our calling, it is our vocation, as Christians to convert the hostility we experience in this world into experiences of hospitality - to make the enemy into the guest and to provide space for brotherhood and sisterhood to be explored and experienced. (3)

In Nouwen’s own words: “The Old and New Testament stories not only show how serious our obligation is to welcome the stranger in our home but they also tell us that guests are carrying precious gifts with them, which they are eager to reveal to a receptive host.” “When hostility is converted into hospitality then fearful strangers can become guests revealing to their hosts the promise they are carrying with them . . . thus the biblical stories help us to realize not just that hospitality is an important virtue, but even more that in the context of hospitality guest and host can reveal their most precious gifts and thus bring new life to each other.” (4)

According to the teaching of our master and friend, Jesus Christ, whenever we welcome the greatest or the least of those among us, we welcome him - to entertain the stranger is to entertain the savior. The rule of Saint Benedict is based on this understanding: “All guests who present themselves are to be welcomed as Christ.” Hopefully, when we hear the rule we don’t hear it as a burdensome rule but rather as a rule which creates for us a privilege. Think of it: the opportunity to entertain Jesus - to offer him a drink of water, a ride, a place to stay? Do you sense the privilege that would be?

Jim Wallis, of the Sojourners community in Washington, D.C., tells of how on Saturdays they open a food line to the hungry and homeless who live within sight of the White House. Before they open the doors, they gather around the food, hold hands, and are led in prayer by Mary Glover, the best pray-er of the community - someone whom herself stood in that food line a few years earlier. Wallis says, “She prays as if she knows the person with whom she’s talking,” and this is what she prays: “Lord, we know you’ll be coming through this line today. So, help us to treat you well.” (5) The last few times I had the opportunity to pray before a rummage sale or a dinner where guests were expected I tried to include this concept for those whose role it was to create a hospitable space and atmosphere.

The United Methodist Church’s mission is to make disciples of Jesus Christ. Several years ago our West Ohio Conference of the United Methodist Church with the leadership of Bishop Bruce Ough determined that there's a process for disciple-making and it involves paying attention to four key elements: Radical Hospitality, Passionate Worship, Faith-forming Experiences and Risk-taking Service and Mission. Bishop Ough noted in his 2001 West Ohio Annual Conference address: “If a local congregation is not intentionally addressing all four of these elements of the disciple-making process, it is most likely not fulfilling its mission.” (6)

While we need to reflect together on the meaning of each of these important elements so vital to being all the church can be, the Gospel reading hits us right between the eyes with the message of radical hospitality. Radical hospitality, according to the way our conference vision team expounded on it, involves “. . . reaching across economic, racial, age and gender lines and focuses on the stranger and those outside the community of faith.” (7)

While, to be sure, the challenge to be radically hospitable involves making sure the community is aware we exist (advertising); making sure our brochures, newsletters, etc. use language newcomers understand; making sure the outside of the building invites people to come in; making sure there’s adequate parking and is accessible; making sure people are greeted and made to feel welcome when they come into the church; making sure our worship is passionate and alive; making sure our morning message speaks to real needs; making sure we are all friendly and welcoming to newcomers before and after worship and making sure we do some intentional follow-up on visitors and newcomers - while these things are vital and important we also need to remember that “hospitality is about listening to those who hunger and thirst for love, acceptance, justice, bread, salvation, and new life.” (8) Radical Hospitality has to do with offering cups of cold water to the little ones, those who are outside the fellowship, those who act, live, dress, smell different than we do. What that cup of cold water is depends only on our imaginations, creativeness and sensitivity to what is going on around us and who is around us.

Dr. Michael Cordle was assigned to St. Mark’s United Methodist Church in downtown Atlanta a few years back. When he arrived he discovered a struggling inner-city congregation with a shrinking average attendance of just under 100. After one of the Sunday services early in his ministry as Pastor Mike’s family was leaving the church they were stunned to find themselves face to face with Atlanta’s “Pride Parade” - a steady stream of exuberant marchers. I assume similar to the one held in Columbus and many other communities throughout our country. As the participants paraded by his family, Cordle was struck with the thought that these were people from St. Mark’s neighborhood - St. Mark’s parish.

A year later, when the Pride Parade participants paraded by St. Mark’s they were greeted with an unexpected surprise. And I read now from the source of the story: “On that hot and steamy June afternoon, the church had set up a small oasis  - - offering cups of cold water to all the marchers who felt hot and thirsty and tired. In no time, the water was gratefully guzzled down, and St. Mark’s United Methodist Church had transformed its image in the face of that neighborhood.” (9)

Still reading from the source of the story: “What a difference from the other nearby church that bordered the parade route! That church sent out its message loud and clear (as well) - - as it erected barricades, strung up temporary fencing, hired mounted policemen to ride their perimeters, and posted “no trespassing” signs across church property.
“The ‘cups of cold water’ St. Mark’s offers on parade day have brought all sorts of thirsty neighbors inside the doors of the church once more. Membership has climbed to over 400 in the last two years, and the neighborhood feels like it has a spiritual presence in its midst again.” (10)

How indeed shall we go about offering cups of cold water as local churches and individual Christians to those thirsty around us? How is it we need to be about being radically hospitable?  To whom will you offer a cup of cold water these coming days?


1 Matthew 10:40-42, NRSV.
2 William Barclay, The Daily Study Bible: The Gospel of Matthew, Volume 1 (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1958) p. 410.
3 Henri J.M. Nouwen, Reaching Out (Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1975), p. 46.
4 Ibid., p. 47.
5 Jim Wallis, Sojourners.
6 West Ohio News, June 29, 2001,  “‘Make Disciples’ is West Ohio Vision, Ough Says”, pg. 3.
7 Ibid. p. 3.
8 West Ohio News, August 31, 2001, pg. 2, “What Do They Really Need?”
9 HomileticsOnLine
10 HomileticsOnLine

Sunday, June 22, 2014

"United Methodist Schism or 'Amicable Separation'?"

"United Methodist Schism or 'Amicable Separation'?"

"Do I dare lend my voice, thoughts, experiences, understanding of scripture to the clouding dialogue taking up space on the internet and behind closed doors about the possibility of a split within the United Methodist Church denomination?" "Do I dare not to?" The two questions are a fairly accurate summary of the turmoil I've been going through recently, like many of the rest of you.

There are few things I detest more than the thought of the further breaking apart of the physical Body of Christ (yes, I mean the individual and corporate that make up the institutional community of faith). Most have to do with the ministry we are neglecting because of the energy we are expending fighting/arguing/debating/chastising/condemning and annoying one another over this supposedly one issue. To be sure, I believe it's really a much broader issue than our views on homosexuality that divides us, but it is the one that has brought that broader issue we have never quite been able to see eye-to-eye with each other about into clearer and pronounced focus. The poor and disadvantaged are crying in our streets and around the world for us to get our act together! Children are abused and neglected and wonder where our voices and bodies are! People are being left out and bullied and we are too much in strife to notice and in fact are partially to blame because of some of our voices and actions!

The real issue that faces us is not an unfamiliar one. It's been with us throughout the whole of church history. How is it we are going to regard the scriptures? Are we going to accept  them literally? Are they infallible? Do we understand them as the inspired word of God? Are they a guide for our living as Christians? What do we do with the work that our biblical scholars have accomplished and the biblical criticism tools they have used and refined to help us understand much that we have better? When are we going to be honest/truthful with the whole body of believers about how the Bible came to be and the people leaders of the early church killed, had excommunicated, branded heretics, because they believed and taught something different than the world rulers our bishops went to bed with wanted to be the accepted and taught interpretation? What are we going to do with the secular Western Civilization writings and studies and the religious History of the Church interpretations of what has brought us to where we are? Are we really in favor of not allowing scientific inquiry and discovery to have any influence on our beliefs, our understanding of the world and God, our interpretation and understanding and study of the holy texts?

O. K., before I succumb to the temptation to become overly academic in this post, I want to focus now on the thoughts I've been having these last few weeks about my journey with the schism issue. To be honest, it's not the first time in my life I've wrestled with this concern and the range of times is the story that's been having a field day in my head and heart.

I was born and lived most of the first 18 years of my life in Ottawa, Ohio - the small (5,000+) county seat of Putnam County in the northwestern part of the state. Ft. Jennings, Ottoville, Kalida, and Glandorf were almost 100% Catholic. Pandora was mostly Mennonite. Leipsic, Columbus Grove, Vaughnsville, Continental, Dupont, Cloverdale, and Gilboa were generally regarded as having a fair number of Catholics but also had a sizeable number of protestants. Ottawa was about 90% Catholic. (This may not be statistically 100% accurate but it's my memory of the make-up of the communities and county.) I remember early in my life wondering about all these churches acknowledging Jesus as the Christ but not having much to do with one another.

Now, because of the public school I attended, the scouting program, Little League baseball and the opening of the local swimming pool I became acquainted with others who did not attend the Methodist Sunday School and worship service. Hmmm...., they seemed to dress the same as me and have feelings like mine and we even talked comfortably with one another, sometimes even about God and other religious stuff. There were some things we believed differently but they hardly seemed enough to be meeting in separate buildings. Oh, how naive I was I finally was informed - they as well, probably. We learned a little surface church history and the worst about each other from our own denomination's bias. Mine came from Sunday School, confirmation class, and working on the God and Country award. We were advised against dating teens of a different denomination - (oh, let's be honest) if you were a Protestant, it was don't date a Catholic; and if you were a Catholic, it was don't date a Protestant. We still dated one another you understand, it was just we weren't supposed to and the longer it went on the more fearful/concerned adults in the community became. My high school girlfriend was Catholic and I dated her off and on for almost 5 years, mostly because of parental pressure - er, the pressure was for us not to date.

Admittedly, that was a minor bigoted education compared to the indoctrination I later received from a popular para-church youth organization after a "born-again" experience at the Defiance District Senior High Youth Institute at Lakeside, Ohio. Now, while I still reference the experience as a significant one on my journey of faith, today it's one of many confirming moments and not even the most important one. I reference it here because of the organization I joined as a result.

The organization trained us to be evangelists in our communities. We were to target our Catholic friends because they weren't born again and didn't believe in the Bible. They probably filled our minds with other falsehoods and bigotry but those are the ones that seem relevant to this discussion. (Notice that I am not naming the organization or a specific leader. That's because they also helped me deal with a lot of stuff in a good way and the leader was a good guy despite some of his teaching that I find so distasteful today.)

I can't thank my friends enough for putting up with my armed attacks to make them "real" Christians. I also owe a lot to Rev. John Brown for his calmness and sensitivity while I was dealing with the narrow Biblical interpretation that was being fed me. And I continue to appreciate my parents for encouraging me to question as well as to grow in my faith.

Then came college. The para-church group encouraged me to consider a Bible college, which I did. I finally decided on Ohio Northern University though. While there were numerous reasons I've shared over the years, the ones relevant to this reflection were there was no dancing or card playing at the Bible college or while at home and, more importantly, I sensed that ONU was going to allow me more opportunity to think for myself. That doesn't mean I did, but I could. After switching my major from math to religion, I spent most of my religion, Bible, and philosophy classroom time being paranoid and defensive. Because though of Dr. James Udy, a visit by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. to ONU, Dr. Thomas Hoffman, the Student Religious Council, Rev. Ford Hoff, a Western Civilization course, The License to Preach course of study, several friends, especially Dorothy, some of the rougher edges of my narrow view of Christianity and the world were filed down.

Shortly after I left for ONU, my high school girlfriend broke up with me. It took me several months to recover but I began to date different female friends that helped me through the transition. Dorothy and I ran in the same circle at ONU and were both math majors but we didn't start dating until we returned to our Putnam County homes the summer after our freshman year. (I'll not rehearse here that whole story as it is in an earlier blog post.) Dorothy was Catholic and I was United Methodist. We became serious fairly quickly. We were attracted to each other physically, emotionally, intellectually, culturally, and spiritually. In fact, it is our common belief that it was our similar depth of spiritual commitments that created our strong bond. We spent hours together talking about our beliefs, our wants and needs, our hopes and dreams. We went to at least two worship services a week off-campus - one United Methodist and one Catholic. And we struggled with our differences and argued with our denominational loyalties and what kept denominations from coming together with one voice.

I remember at least one ecumenical service on campus where we were able to commune together - one received from the priest and the other from the UM pastor, but it was a sign of hope. Shortly after our engagement I was interviewed by the District Committee on Ordained Ministry. I was asked about my engagement to a Catholic woman and how I would handle it in the local church when it came up or was an issue with some members. I don't remember all I said but I know I replied that I would be upfront and share in the introduction meeting so it was out in the open because there was nothing to hide. Well, they must have bought it because they passed me on to the conference.

When I shared with Dorothy the details of the interview, she cried. Then, she took her engagement ring off and tried to hand it to me. She didn't want to stand in the way of my being able to pursue being a UM pastor. While I was a bit offended and defensive by the line of questioning of the committee, there was no way I had anticipated Dorothy's reaction! Despite my shock I had enough presence of mind to immediately refuse her offer to return the ring. I tried to assure her that I loved her and we were getting married and if it impacted my being able to be a minister, well that was too bad! (Now, I later realized that every candidate had to go through the interview process - that I hadn't been singled out because of our situation! Pretty naive, huh!) The confusion in my head for why denominations had to be continued to grow despite what I learned in college, the local church and the License to Preach up to that point.

So, we continued to make our wedding plans. We went to see the priest of the Catholic Church Dorothy had been active in growing up and shared our story. We expressed our concern about not being able to receive the elements of communion together on our wedding day. He seemed to understand and expressed a willingness to send a letter to the Bishop of the Diocese for special permission for me to receive the sacrament along with her.

Another issue we raised was that because of my working at a YMCA camp near Akron, Ohio it would be impossible for me to attend the Pre-Cana meetings. We worked out an arrangement where the priest would send me the tapes of the sessions and he would meet with Dorothy. I would write a short piece reflecting on the input. It wasn't bad material - more helpful and insightful than I thought it would be.

Sometime before the wedding Dorothy's beloved priest was assigned to a different parish and Continental received a new priest. (That's right, the itinerant system is at least one of the things we have in common!) Guess what? He'd never heard of such a thing as a letter from a bishop giving permission for a non-Catholic to receive the sacraments. Dorothy decided not to receive the elements so that we wouldn't be doing something different during the mass to highlight our reality. Despite the uncomfortableness while half our family and friends remained seated as the rest came forward to receive the eucharist, it was a beautiful and holy service. But, for the purpose of this post it's another of those times when we wanted to cry out "Why?" "Why do we treat each other this way?" "Why can't we just get along?" "Why can't we believe and let believe?" (Don't misunderstand. We know the historical and theological reasons but it seems like such an embarrassing reality/result/way to solve differences of opinion/deal with the secular rulers.)

Well, then followed our honeymoon at Lake Hope, the return to Ada for our senior year at ONU, the move into our first home (a trailer in Brown's Trailer Court), some part-time work as a janitor in the Science building and as a youth minister at Lima Grace, the finishing touches on my football and track careers, and much growth in our relationship as we continued to learn more and more about one another - the good, the bad and the ugly. We continued to attend together both of our denominational worship services and grow in our understanding and appreciation of each other's faith journeys. It still bewildered us that there was a need for multiple denominations of Christianity, despite our knowledge of the history that had caused it to be a reality.

By this time I had become increasingly disillusioned with the concept that as a Christian all I had to do was to pray about something and God would direct my steps - lay an obvious path out for me - speak to me. One of the young people at Grace was helpful in my contemplating what God's will was and how one heard it when she painfully challenged me one day as to how exactly one "hears" God since she never had. That probably was the beginning of my considering more carefully the words I used when I spoke of and thought about God, etc.

So, the big question I had been considering for several years was whether God was calling me into the full-time ordained ministry. I knew I felt called to work with young people, but my early thoughts were as a basketball coach, math teacher, and Youth Fellowship volunteer. The decision to go on and attend seminary was basically about simply opening the next door and see what happened. That became my modus operandi - pray (converse with God the best I knew how), take stock of urgings or desires, and open a door. I never heard the clear voice of God via my ears - it was more a sensing in my heart and mind - still is.

After we decided that I would attend United Theological Seminary in Dayton, Ohio, Dorothy was hired to teach business and math at West Carrollton Junior High School. We found an apartment in Miamisburg and started the next phase of our lives. The next three years were a time of tremendous growth for us both faith and marriage wise. After a couple short-term field education positions I was hired as the first Director of the Burg Center which several downtown Miamisburg churches started to meet the needs of that area - a unique combination of a suburban inner-city and an appalachian neighborhood.      

During the last two years of seminary I was the student associate minister at Miamisburg Parkview UMC. The church owned a duplex next to the church and that's where we lived. They were both directly across the street from Library Park. The Catholic Church was one block west, across the tracks and closer yet to downtown. I experienced one of the more intimate clergy monthly fellowships in that community.

We visited the church several times before I became a member of the staff. On one of those Sunday visits, when it was time to recite the Apostles Creed together, we opened a hymnal like we always did despite our both knowing it by heart, and lo and behold the word catholic was crossed out! We looked at each other in shock. During one of my sermons near the end of my time there I mentioned that experience, but assured the congregation that it didn't reflect how they treated us at all. The church had a picnic at the end of my ministry there to celebrate our time together. One of our friends presented us a framed copy of that page from the hymnal! They included a note in the gift box informing us that they had removed the hymnal from the sanctuary! It was one of our most memorable moments in ministry. Everyone had a good laugh.

We endured several of the more traumatic situations of our lives during those seminary days. We suffered two miscarriages and my brother's mental health issues began. The seminary, local church, and district communities of faith were all very supportive. Now, some of the meant to be helpfulness soon lost its appeal and became further fuel for the continuing shift of where I fell on the biblical and theological spectrum. My narrow, judgmental, literal take on the scriptures, and understanding of God changed drastically during that time. Great strides toward being a more open, accepting, encouraging, and inclusive pastor were taken as I experienced life those three years. I began to appreciate and intentionally utilize biblical scholarship/criticism. It happened for a variety of reasons, one of them being the faith of others that allowed them to say such intended to be comforting words as: "God doesn't make mistakes." "Miscarriages are God's / nature's way of saying things aren't quite right." "Mental illness can be cured if your brother believed more in God." "God's trying to teach you something by doing these things." "It's all a part of God's wonderful plan and God will bring good out of it." These weren't all, but you get the picture. Oh, did I mention that both the supportive actions and the meant to be supportive comments came from family and friends. Hmmm...possible to believe differently, see things differently despite being raised in the same family and same denomination?! Imagine that!

You might wonder how we remained believers during those days. We were blessed with family, friends and a seminary community who listened rather than spoke, and who helped us to say "No, that's not how we sense God in our lives." We also continued attending together worship services at both United Methodist and Catholic churches every week, even though some of those not so helpful comments came from people in each.

After seminary I was appointed as the associate pastor of the Urbana United Methodist Church. Both of our children were born while we lived in Urbana. Both of our children were also baptized while we lived in Urbana - in two different churches. I was again a member of a particularly active and open clergy fellowship there, and we were as involved and known in the Catholic Church there as anywhere we lived. Dorothy and I had often talked of having a baptism where both denominations were represented. We had agreed to raise our children Christian. Our idea was that we would hold the baptismal ceremony in a Catholic Church and I would do the actual baptism.

When Jeremy was born we made our proposal to our friend, Fr. Bob Schutte. He was very kind and understanding. His thought was that he would send a letter to the diocesan office to get the Bishop's thoughts. (Truthfully, I don't think he wanted to be the one to burst our bubble.) We received a very kind and supportive response from the Bishop's office. Basically, the letter expressed regret that what we proposed couldn't be done because in the Catholic Church when one is baptized they become a member of the denomination and thus it needed to be by a Catholic priest.

Bob Schutte received the same letter and called us to invite us to come and see him again. He said he had an idea he wanted to run by us. During our visit he suggested that he attend a morning worship service at the UM Church and use the Catholic liturgy during the service. Since our primary desire was to express our oneness in Christ rather than my actually doing the baptism, we felt it was a generous suggestion on his part.

I shared the idea with the Sr. Pastor, Carl Robinson, and he recommended we seek the Staff-Parish Relations Committee's thoughts. They were enthusiastic and thus it happened! It was a wonderful day. The story was reported in both UM and Catholic news blurbs - "an encouraging sign of ecumenism," the reporters observed! It sure sparked hope in us! Since then, a few other small baby-like steps, but not much has changed in our relationship at the institutional level.

Our second child was a daughter, Megan. We decided that we wanted Carl, who had been my mentor and close friend while we were in Urbana, to baptize her. It was just as big a celebration in our hearts and minds as Jeremy's baptism and the congregation and family felt the same. For awhile we were referred to as the family with a baptized UM Christian and a baptized Catholic Christian. We soon decided to start correcting people and provide our perspective. We had two baptized Christian children!

Our intent was still to raise them as much as possible in both denominations. We planned on having them go through confirmation and then let them decide if and where they wanted to join. We continued to attend both churches together taking with us both children. It got more and more difficult because of the amount of time I was involved in ministry at the UM Churches, weddings, behavior of children, etc. I know we had a mixture of emotions when we attended masses where other children were receiving their first communion and when the kids decided to be confirmed in the UM Church, but we weren't surprised either. After all, most of our time was spent in the UM Church. The kids were more familiar with what was going on and comfortable.

I could go on and on, but I think this makes the point I want to make about our "mixed" marriage - Dorothy and I have long been committed to the ecumenical movement. We wanted everyone to get along - in the church and in the community. Oh, we've lost some of our naivety. We realize that people were killed, died, declared heretics, and excommunicated because of some of the differences. We know also that not all of the decisions made by the early councils were the result of good theology but because of the desire and pressure of some secular rulers who wanted uniformity of belief. It's been difficult but we've also come to the place where we realize that everyone does not belong under the same roof - that there are some people we would really rather not be around because of how differently we believe and/or come to belief or faith. Mostly, it's around one's ability to be tolerant and civil rather than particular beliefs. Although even differences of beliefs can be extreme enough to make me accept that it would be best if we not get into a theological discussion with one another. (Westboro Baptist church flashes through my mind. So does the Left-foot Baptist Church in Kentucky. It named itself that because it split off from the main Baptist Church in town because they believed that a person hadn't been baptized correctly unless they entered the water with the left foot first! I don't even care to be near people who believe like that, let alone try to talk theology or about the Bible with them.)  
 
Until the closing days of the last three General Conferences I wouldn't allow the thought of going through a split in the United Methodist Church - amicable or nasty! What caused me to begin to entertain the possibility is the reality, from my point of view, that the line in the sand has been drawn by most of us and we are destroying our ability to witness of the unconditional love of God and God's grace. People have left our denomination and others continue to contemplate it in this day as well because of a variety of positions on the homosexuality issue and the overriding concern about how we're going to regard the holy scriptures. Are they the inspired Word of God that provide us a guide for thought and behavior, or do we perceive them as the inerrant and infallible Word of God?

Frankly, I think the larger issue is the one that is more likely the true litmus test despite how we've made the homosexuality issue central to determining whether we are faithful or not. I just cannot fathom how an "amicable separation" or "local choice" option will ever work in the local church! (And, believe me when I say I have the utmost respect for Mike Slaughter and Adam Hamilton and their attempt to help us see a third way! If I'm still alive when and if separation happens and nothing new has been proposed, I will stand beside them even in this incapacity leave reality.) I know some of us (pastors and lay leaders) believe that all of the people who belong to our local church think just like us, but I know that's not been the reality in any local church I've ever served! Nor, would I want it that way. "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely." I suppose some do have that kind of power and related authority. But I think it's dangerous. I think if people end up having to choose between being a member of a denomination that believes homosexuality is incompatible with the scriptures or one that is accepting and willing to ordain persons or marry them based on the couple's faith perspective and sexuality, we're going to have to start at least three churches to handle the different positions. There are people of all persuasions in most of our local churches. If that becomes the dividing line, we are going to have a mess on our hands.

If the dividing line, however, is how we regard the scriptures, I think it's past time to resolve that one! I believe most congregations could have a majority position about how the scriptures are regarded - literally & infallible, or inspired and able to use all of the biblical scholarships tools available to us in our day as well as science and history and our own experiences to come to a deeper understanding of faith and related biblical themes. I'm just having trouble with the idea that the denomination that raised me to be open, accepting, gracious, kind, compassionate, inclusive, and generous - that taught me to love and learn the inspired Word of God and encouraged me to question and challenge utilizing a variety of disciplines - that lifted up concepts like unconditional love and prevenient, justifying and sanctifying grace - that lived out that the scriptures were supremely important as an avenue to understand and experience God, but not something to be worshipped more than God, would potentially morph into something else.

Well, I think I've written enough. I'd like to write more but this one took me a full two weeks. It probably is more appropriate in a book than a blog, but I'm not writing a book.

Peace to all!





   

 







Friday, June 6, 2014

SERMON: "Pentecost: What Really Happened?"

"Pentecost: What Really Happened?"
Acts 2:1-21​

It's that Sunday when it's time to reflect on another one of the remarkable days remembered by the church and provided a special day on the Christian calendar. A few years ago I began one such sermons with a brief synopsis about that particular local church's history because it had been some time since it was brought to the minds and hearts of the congregation. It's something every local church should do once in awhile - to remember, not to worship the past.

​Some people were concerned that there wasn’t any church between the northern limits of Columbus (then Glenmont Avenue) and the southern boundary of the village of Worthington. Because of this, they contacted the heirs of Roswell Cooke and convinced them to deed the old school property to the trustees of Como Avenue Methodist Episcopal Church (the current North Broadway UMC when they still ministered out of the Como Avenue UMC site). On December 31, 1920 the Como Avenue Methodist Episcopal Church’s Board of Trustees deeded the property to the trustees of the newly organized Maple Grove Methodist Episcopal Church. "The rest is history,” as they say. (1)

​Now, there’s really much more to the story than this thumbnail sketch; but, it’s not a particular local church’s birth I want to consider. Rather, it’s the events around a certain Jewish holiday, Pentecost, almost 2,000 years ago on which I want to focus. For, it's what happened that day that has caused it to be referred to on the Christian calendar as “the birthday of the church.”

​The first part of the book of Acts has Jesus instructing his disciples to stay put – to stay in Jerusalem – to wait for the gift of the Holy Spirit. The disciples asked Jesus if he was going to give the Kingdom back to Israel when he left and he told them to quit worrying about that.                                                                                                    He told them that only God knew when that would happen. He also told them that when the Holy Spirit came upon them, they would be full of power and would be witnesses for him throughout the world.

​The rest of the 1st chapter described Jesus’ ascension, the disciples journey back to Jerusalem, their persevering in prayer along with certain women followers, and the selection of Matthias as Judas’ replacement. That brings us to the account of the Day of Pentecost.

​Because Pentecost was one of the three Jewish holy days when all male Jews living within twenty miles of Jerusalem were legally bound to make a pilgrimage to Jerusalem and that it was late in the spring, a very large international crowd was present that day in Jerusalem. The streets were especially crowded.

​The faithful followers of Jesus were staying in the same house together waiting as Jesus had told them to. Suddenly, there was this loud noise – a noise similar to that made when a strong wind passes by. Not a corner of the house in which they were staying missed hearing it. And then they noticed what appeared to be “tongues of fire” landing on everyone. And then, what Jesus had told them would happen, happened – they were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other languages as the Spirit enabled them to.

​The sound was heard by people on the outside of the house as well. As a result, a crowd of curiosity seekers gathered around the house in which the followers were staying. When the disciples went out, everyone got excited because they could understand what the disciples were saying in their own languages.

​They began to talk about their experience. They were astonished – they questioned – they wondered what was going on – what to make of it. Some thought the disciples were drunk and mocked them. Most knew that something unusual was taking place and they gathered around hoping that someone would explain it.

Not surprisingly, Peter got up and began to address the crowd. Yes, this is the same Peter who just a few days before had denied even knowing Jesus - the same Peter who had hid behind locked doors after Jesus’ death, afraid for his very life. Peter was a new man – a new person.  No longer was he afraid for his life. No longer did he have any doubts about who he was to follow. It no longer mattered who heard him say it – who saw him acknowledge his being a follower of Christ. Peter was being led by a new spirit – a new attitude – a new confidence – a new power.

​What happened at Pentecost was much more than a mighty windstorm or some strange vision of some things that looked like tongues of fire. What really happened was that the disciples finally got it – finally understood – that what Jesus had been saying and doing was now, theirs to share and do. They got it – that God desires what Jesus had been saying and doing to be shared – to be communicated – to be understood – to be made intelligible.

The disciples were given the power, the ability, to speak in other languages so that everyone could understand it. The gift of communication wasn’t given to impress fellow Christians – it wasn’t given in order for us to measure who is the most committed and most devoted – it wasn’t intended to be used to determine in whom the spirit was. One of the primary results of Pentecost is the burning desire on the part of followers of Jesus Christ to communicate the story of God’s activity to others. It’s what makes us look at ourselves in the local church and who is around us and seek to discover how we can better live out – communicate – the gospel to those around us.

Another thing that happened as a result of the events on that Day of Pentecost is somewhat related to this first idea. Do you remember that Jesus chose all Jews as his first disciples and that he told them not to go to anyone other than fellow Israelites? Basically, this implies that prior to Pentecost, discipleship was racially exclusive. Mission and evangelism were narrowly understood, defined and carried out.

​At Pentecost the message and mission field got a whole lot bigger. Prior to Pentecost the disciples saw Jesus as a Jewish political messiah who had come to restore the kingdom of Israel. That’s why they were disappointed at the crucifixion. After Pentecost people began to understand that his message was something available to everyone. Now, it was a slow evolution to be sure – one that’s still evolving - but it's roots were planted in the soil of that Pentecost almost 2,000 years ago.

​One of the ways they began to discover this was that when they went outside and began to talk to passers-by they detected that persons were stopping and listening and understanding. They discovered that the Christian gospel was a message for which all people were waiting and that it was a message which made sense to people no matter where they came from or what language they spoke or the color of their skin. There are no barriers of race or language or color or culture over which the Good News of God’s grace and forgiveness cannot leap.

​There’s one more thing that happened on that first Christian Pentecost I’d like to mention. It changed the disciples’ concept of themselves. They were no longer frightened, pessimistic, jobless individuals; but, rather a community - a community infused with the living presence of their Lord – the Holy Spirit. Thus, the new era began.

​In becoming universal, Christianity was set free from those things which confined it. Religion was loosed from the temple and the synagogues and unleashed onto the streets and into homes. Believers went from house to house breaking bread and establishing a new and viable community – a kind of modern day progressive dinner. Religion was loosed from special social classes and found its place with ordinary folk. Religion broke loose from male domination and became the common experience of all people – male and female – bond and free – Jew and Gentile – old and young – conservative and radical – zealot and tax collector. The miracle of inclusion had occurred – gone was exclusion (sadly it took a long time for some of us to wake up to all this means and some denominations and individual Christians continue to try and box it  in, but its roots were planted on the day of Pentecost).

​The Christian faith is a communal faith. “Wherever two or three are gathered together in my name, there I am also.” The purpose of the Pentecost event was not simply the saving of the individual souls, but the creation of a new community. The significance of Pentecost was not simply its rushing wind – its tongues of fire – its emotionalism. If that’s what we are looking for when we pray for another Pentecost, then we’re going to be grossly disappointed. The significance of Pentecost is that it transformed what was exclusively Jewish into the all-inclusive and universal and placed within Christ’s followers a burning desire to communicate it – to share the good news.

​So, what’s the message of Pentecost for us in our day? Are we so on fire with the desire to communicate the story of God’s love that we’re willing to come clean about the barriers we’ve built around our religious experience and seek out ways to tear down the barriers to make the message accessible to those around us in need of hearing and experiencing it? Do we care for others enough not to let our prejudices stop us from helping them?

​What really happened at Pentecost? Lots of things – 3,000 people were baptized – the Holy Spirit was recognized – the disciples spoke in other languages – everyone understood in their own language – the disciples gained new hope – a new community of faith was established – participants were given a mission to witness – the message became available to everyone. A new consciousness of our partnership with God was ushered in – barriers of sacred languages, cultures and races were broken – it ushered in a new understanding of compassion, nobodies became somebodies – a lot more, you see, than just a loud wind, tongues of fire and speaking in tongues.

​Communication – inclusiveness – compassion – that’s what really happened at Pentecost and it needs to continue to happen through the people that make up the church today.

CLOSING PRAYER: O God, break through the images we have built up about the Holy Spirit and allow us to experience the new life possible through its activity in our lives.  Free us from the temptation to share the Good News only with those “like us.”  fill us with such compassion that the awareness that others are your children is all we can use to measure whether we should help. And so thank you, O God, for your living presence in that which we label and know as the Holy Spirit.  In Christ’s name.  Amen.

1 Richard C. Knopf, Maple Grove United Methodist Church: A Study in Faith, (Columbus, Ohio, 1980) p. 1.
1

Tuesday, June 3, 2014

"Being Remembered"

"Being Remembered"

Does anyone else ever ponder how they're going to be remembered? I don't think about it all the time - but, it's crossed my mind a few times over the years. Yea, I'll admit more often these last few. I suppose, would hope, that in some ways the reflecting on it has guided decisions I've made about how I've lived my life.

So, as I began to contemplate putting something down on paper, the first thoughts that crowded into my mind and heart were some things for which I hope I'm not remembered. I really don't want to be remembered as a complainer. Sometimes it seems like most of my posts, especially when commenting on the ALS, is negative, pessimistic, lamenting. While I know I have a right and it's OK to be upset for the situation I am enduring, I just hope it doesn't cloud out the rest of my life and the experience others have had with me.

I also do not want to be remembered as someone who hurt with his tongue by being short and rude to others. I'm painfully aware that has become more and more of an issue, especially to those I love the most. I watched my dad do it to my mom the last few years of his life and never thought I could be capable of such a thing. I can rationalize it as my long-attempted controlling of my lack of patience and anger and the challenge of trying to be heard as my voice continues to weaken, but still the reality is I am failing on this score.

The final one I'll be public with in this post is my hope that I'll not be remembered as a one-issue person. Despite how much time I spend on raising awareness about ALS and raising funds for the fighting of it and research (and I greatly appreciate your generous and kind support in this endeavors!), I hope people remember other issues I addressed and concerns I had. I recognize I'm going through these days with blinders on which allows little distraction and is all-consuming as all of my energy is focused on this living and trying to make a difference while facing death's more imminent reality.

I'm not sure these are things I want people to remember about me, but I hope I created space for people to examine their life/faith/goals and allowed them the freedom to come to their own beliefs or non-belief. I hope I paid attention to the lonely, disheartened, disadvantaged, and used the strengths/skills/aptitudes/gifts/time/finances for the improvement of the space around me. I hope those I've offended have seen me change from a person who tended to be quick to judge and exclude those who were different from me to a person committed to inclusiveness, acceptance, tolerance, unconditional love, grace, and a reconciler.

Now, I haven't written this blog post to get a bunch of pats on the back or words of encouragement. I think what I would propose is an invitation for readers to consider their own reflections on how you want to be remembered or not. Post those if you want or feel free to personal message me if you prefer.

Peace!