This Blog Has Moved

I've been posting on this Blog for 11 years.  Thought it was time for a change.  So, I've got my own personal URL now.  www.awmangum.com come visit me there.

Concerning the Angry Email You Forwarded to Me

We live in the sort of mediated age that no one could have imagined 2000  years ago. Today, we have access to the thoughts and feelings of people around the world.This has opened up a market of angry rants that often make their way to my in-box in the form of a forwarded email from you.  Though Jesus did not function in a world where this free-flow of ideas was possible, I am called to be seek to embody his vision in this age. So,  I feel the need to offer a pastoral word in response to the email you forwarded to me.

One caveat. I have political opinions.  If you've interacted with me often, you likely know what they are.  I'm pretty transparent. My general political opinions are NOT the opinions of a qualified policy, diplomacy, or legal expert.  They are just my opinions.  If I have ever given you the impression that I believe my general political opinions were somehow holier than yours because I am ordained, please accept my apology.  This is not what I believe. 

I also do not believe that my work is politically neutral.  Sometimes people dismiss the political opinions of pastors believing that we should keep the realms of governing and God separate. I would like to gently challenge that perception. There are issues that I as a pastor do feel obligated--in my pastoral role--to speak out about.  There does need to be a distinction between my general political opinions and my more qualified professional opinions that derive from my faithful, pastoral discernment.

I went to a family practice physician several years.  He let me know that he was "to the right of Attila the Hun."  I knew he was exaggerating.  I've listened to Attila's podcast and there's no one to the right of him.  I had been going to this doctor for over a decade when he retired.  He was a nice guy and we were making friendly conversation when he told me what he thought.  I did not confuse my physician's  political opinions with his opinions about my health.  His diagnoses of my bronchitis were qualified opinions.  His attitudes toward liberals were not.  He is entitled to them.  They just don't persuade me.  I did ask him a question regarding a church's sharing prayer concerns and HIPA (Health Information Protection Act) rules.  He shared with me his judgment.  It was a "political" opinion as it had to do with policy and law.  It was a political opinion he was qualified to give.  I would ask for the same understanding. There are legal and political issues that I am qualified to address as a pastor.  There are laws and practices of every government that are so opposed to the will of God that I feel the need to speak out.  We probably need clearer signals to clarify the difference between the moments when I'm just giving my opinion  as a citizen and my opinions as a professional.  Still it's not as simple as keeping the two separate.

Now back to the email you forwarded me.   You know  the one where the really insightful but angry person gave the speech, wrote the blog, or had the conversation that put the people you find frustrating in their place. 

I have tried to engage the content of these before.  I have spent time trying to do some fact-checking.  I once reached out to a Country radio station-manager to seek clarification about song that was supposedly being shut out from the airwaves because it was too patriotic.  Turns out, the station-manager explained, that wasn't the reason.  The country band's own management chooses which songs to release for radio play and the song that everyone loved wasn't the song they chose to push. I have tried providing counter-evidence.  I recently saw pie chart that purported show the difference between the federal government's welfare spending relative to our military spending.  I went looking for better evidence and did my best to wade through the explanations given about how the federal budget actually works and why the graphic was wrong.  I have tried revealing the accuracy of the source.  So much of what comes through as forwarded emails are not correctly attributed.  I have tried interrogating the logic beneath the emails and other content. I have decided that I must stop doing this. 

I must stop not because I am unqualified. At times, I'm very qualified. I must stop this form of argumentation because you know me as a pastor.  I am either your pastor or I am a pastor you've come in contact with.  So, I need to treat your email within the context of that pastoral relationship. In that regard, I have two questions.

First, have you felt that I have pushed my political opinions on you or the church in a heavy-handed and irresponsible way?  If so, please be specific with me about where I've done that. If it's just been a matter of my general opinions leaking out--Please accept my apology.  I recognize that I can be guilty of that, but I also don't think that it's appropriate for me to present my opinions as though they were truth from on-high.

If it's been a situation where I feel I have expressed a qualified opinions as a pastor about a political issue, please let's have an open conversation about this.  My professional opinions can still be wrong, troublesome, and unsettling, but I would hope we could have healthy conversation about that.  In short, if you forwarded me the email in order to indirectly address something between the two of us, I'd ask you to simply find a way to have a direct conversation. 

Second, are you as angry as the forwarded email makes you seem?  Anger is a serious spiritual issue.  Jesus said, "If you are angry with a brother or sister, you will be liable to judgment and if you insult a brother or sister you will be liable to the counsel, and if you say, 'you fool,' you will be liable to the hell of fire"  Matthew 5:22-23.  These are challenging words that have convicted me over and over again.  This particular section the Sermon on the Mount has several practically impossible commands about anger, lust, divorce, oaths, tolerance and forgiveness.  I believe these teachings have to be counter-balanced with what Jesus also said about God's grace and forgiveness.  Still, Jesus recognized the destructive potential of anger and harsh words.  The book of Ephesians says, "Be angry but do not sin; do not let the sun go down on your anger and do not make room for the devil" (Ephesians 4:26-27).  Anger is a serious pastoral issue.  I have yet to see an email reduce people's anger.  In fact, I have sent emails where I hoped to reduce people's anger.  In my head, they were carefully worded and soft-spoken but they were heard the opposite way.

If the anger reflected in the email you forwarded is an anger you feel, let's talk. If you sense a common theme, you're right.  It is: let's talk.  You willingly share with me what's going on with you physically.  We recognize that I have no medical qualifications that permit me to respond to your symptoms or their causes. We talk about your physical health because it impacts your spiritual state.  I see political anger in much the same way.   Just as I cannot change your physical health and am not qualified to give my opinions about your physical health, I am usually not qualified to try to persuade you to think differently about government.  Like my response to your physical health challenges, I hold your political frustrations in prayer, I will seek to better understand what you feel is being threatened and I will join you in seeking ways to act redemptively in the face of what is happening politically.

Part of that means maintaining a healthy relationship to your church family.  One of the reasons I find your forwarded email troubling is that I see the other church members with whom you shared it.  Undoubtedly you sent it to some people you know agree with you.  Still, it has the potential to foster divisiveness as it creates a collective understanding about those who are politically different than your tribe.  It creates an "other" within the church.    You may not be aware that when you characterize people who disagree with you as idiots (or other name-calling), or as you imply that the outspoken adherents to the views with which you disagree should sit down and shut up, as you circulate the very humorous caricature of politicians, and as you vicariously vent your frustration through the words of another, you are putting distance between yourself and others in the congregation. I am aware of the people in the congregation who hold the views ridiculed, voted for the politicians caricatured, and feel the heat from this person's venting.  I am aware because I read the emails they've forwarded to me, spoken to them about what they're seeing on the news, and heard them talk about their political opinions.  Let me be clear, the church should be a place of dialogue and discourse.  It should model how people can disagree while remaining in covenant relationship to one another.  Again, it means forwarding (or posting, tweeting, clipping) less and talking more.  I gladly read things sent to me by members as they are frequently insightful and informative.  It's because I take the emails you send me seriously that I am concerned by some of what you've sent to me.  Some of these emails contain more heat than light, and more derision than information.  I want what you are reading and share with me to elevate my understanding and perspective.  Too often, it makes me concerned about how positions in the world are creating camps within the church.  Divisiveness in the church is deadly (see Matthew 18:1-20; 1 Corinthians 1:10-17;   11:17-22; Philippians 2:1-11; 4:2-8).

Let me make some suggestions: 

1. Let people clarify their positions for themselves.  Many of the angry, ranting forwards are quite simply inaccurate.  They summarize their opponents' positions in ways that their opponents would not recognize.  Use the Internet to its full potential by engaging in some independent fact-checking and follow-up especially with regard to those items with which you agree.  A bad argument made for the sake of a good cause does more harm than good. 
2. Assess what's connecting with you.  Do you find yourself learning something new or is what you're reading simply confirming what you already believe?  There's nothing wrong with finding someone who gives you a vocabulary to express what you believe, but we should remember that there' still a counter-perspective that deserves to be heard.  If it touches your mind, great; if it raises your blood-pressure, ask questions.  Lots of questions. 
3. Look for angles.  Anger is profitable.  There's an old saying that goes, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend."  There is a class of media professionals who have turned that into a marketing strategy.  They know that if they can creatively attack the people you find frustrating, you'll regard them as "friends" meaning you'll listen, you'll tune in, maybe you'll buy a book, listen to a radio show or podcast or visit a website.  At the end of the line, they aren't interested in participating with you in creating a better world, they want you to be their customer.  If the problem they're ranting about improves, they lose a source of income.  Somehow the story of Paul and Silas in Philippi seems relevant here (Acts 16:16-40). 
4. Look for hope.  Hope is not wishful thinking.  Hope is the spiritual discipline of keeping our eyes open to the ways we can participate in God's kingdom-work in this world.  Does what you're reading offer you a sense that  you can do something different to improve things and join God in redeeming work?  If not, let it go.   

In the end, our relationship is not defined by your politics or mine.  It is defined by our shared faith in Jesus Christ and the extent to which we can mutually encourage each other to greater faithfulness to his call to serve, bless, and bear witness in the world.   

Pokemon Go Gym

Social experiment today. Our church--First Christian Church 910 S. Collins, Arlington, TX--is a "Pokemon Go gym". I know that a lot of people are concerned about safety, but people are going to keep playing so we need to offer safe, hospitable places. So, I've got water and Gatorade in my car. By 9 am our gym will have people fuel. You can help me by 1.  Getting the word out. 2.  Come sit in the shade and greet people. I'll be out there as much as I can but have a meeting at 11 and need to go to the hospitals at some point. And 3. Bring some cookies or granola bars or other easily eaten foods. 

Sunday, July 10, 2016

Message of Peace

2 Corinthians 1:3-11

July 10, 2016 (the Sunday following the deadly shooting of 5 officers in Dallas, Texas)

Through all that has taken place I keep having a bizarre recurring memory of drinking from a water hose.  I grew up in the days when we would spend a lot of time outside and when we got hot and thirsty, we’d drink out of the water hose.  I wasn’t supposed to do that.  My mother would get on to me—she was a public health nurse.  She’d insist that if I was thirsty, I could come inside and get a drink.  That's when my other problem developed. If I came inside just to get a drink and then when immediately back outside, my Dad would get on to me for coming in and out too much.  He’d say, “come in and stay in or go out and stay out but enough of this in/out, in/out.”  More than once, I determined it was safer to take my chances drinking from the water hose.  Only you couldn’t turn it on too high or the parents inside would hear, bang on the window and tell me to stop.  So, I’d turn it one just a little and suck what little water I could from the trickling quiet stream.  It was never very satisfying.  Not when you were as dehydrated as I was.  But then there were those times when Mom and Dad weren’t home.  Or I grew up just old enough not to worry about.  OR, you know, last week when it was my hose and my house and I could do whatever I wanted.  And I could turn on the hose full blast the pressure the water coming out of the hose would push its way  into the mouth, down into the stomach, out to the cells in what seemed like a split second reaction.  

The Apostle Paul spoke of God as the Father of mercy or compassion and the God of all comfort.  Yet, for me the comfort and consolation that I feel scripture so often speaks of has been a bit of a trickle.  It feels like a trickle.  And it’s a trickle for the very same reason I was drinking from a trickling hose to begin with—because if you turn it on too high someone will be angry.  If you go inside for a real drink and someone will get mad.  Speak up about a racist system and cultural divides between whites and blacks and Hispanics and Asians and gays and straights and you’ll hear that bang on the window.  Dare to suggest that the systems currently in place favor me and people like me and other people like me may just get their feelings hurt.  There’s nothing wrong with the system the voice inside the house yells.  The problem is, the voice is inside the house. Problems never seem that large from the inside.  There’s no reason to confront any prejudices or bigotry.  In fact don’t even use that word—racism.  Racism is a word that sits outside coiled up like a snake in the dirt and grime.  You don’t know what kinds of bugs and germs have climbed up in that word since it was last turned on.  You put your mouth to that word and God only knows what might be spewing back into you with that water.  –God. Only. Knows.   On the flip side, speak up too forcefully for the police officers and you’ll get pelted theories and elaborations. You know they work for the government don’t you.  Who, the police?  No, I must have slept through civics 101.   You mean our government, our government?  The one of the people, by the people, for the people?  You mean that government?  Yeah, they do what we’ve asked them to do.  We should show a level of grace when they do it.  And then finally seek to express some sense of empathy with the whole of humanity—those who pull to the left and those who pull to the right—and suddenly that cranky old man rears his head again—come in and stay in or go out and stay out but enough of this in/out, in/out.  

I long for the full stream of water.  I long for discourse to be factual and sane and filled with more light and less heat.  I long for a community of trust—not just one where I trust that you won’t shoot me.  I long for a community where we trust what each other says at face value.  A community where

 we aren’t so willing to believe every conspiracy theory about how and why things happen when and where they do.  The first duty we have as Christians is to pray and the second duty of the Christian is to listen.  I long for that--prayers of praise, confession, thanksgiving, and supplication.  We are called to pray for more than ourselves and more than the family members whose illnesses cause us pain.  We are called to pray for those we do not know indeed for those we would rather hate.  Pray for your enemies, those are Jesus’s words not mine.  Part of the reason I made changes to our order of worship this morning to include more prayer is because it feels like we needed to turn that hose on a little stronger.  That our prayers have trickled and they needed to flow.   May our prayers quiet our hearts long enough to listen to each other.    That we may all help one another by our prayers so that many will give thanks for the blessings granted us through the prayers of many. Let this word of God flow like an ever rushing stream.  Let it cleanse my mouth, pour down my dry throat and reach every cell of my body all at once.  

The comfort Paul identifies is not some vague comforting mysticism.  Rather for Paul the comfort for Christians comes in this most unlikely location—the cross of Jesus Christ.  Open up the spigot a few more turns and you’ll see what I mean.  “For just as the sufferings of Christ are abundant for us, so also our consolation is abundant through Christ.”  Abundant—that’s Paul’s word for turning on the hose full blast.  The crucifixion of Jesus Christ is the cornerstone of Paul’s theology.  The crucifixion of Jesus affirms a few core truths for us.  One:  it assures us that there are indeed mean, brutal and violent people in the world determined to do wrong.  Sometimes they are represented in the criminal class hanging on either side of Christ  and sometimes they are manifest in the powerful system that put Jesus on the cross.  Christ is other than both—he is not like the lawless criminals who taunt him though they themselves are under the same sentence or like government officials who crucify him. Christ is not like the crowd that stands and gawks.  Christ is other. Other  than all who surround his cross he is other than each of them, yet for each of them.  Christ is there singularly and alone.  Yet, he bids us to come, take up our cross and follow him.  And from the cross he demolishes the naïve belief that life is going to be fair just because it’s supposed to be. 

Two:  The cross assures us that innocent people die in the face of the cruelty of others.  And Paul somehow sees comfort in that.  He speaks over and over and over again of being conformed to the Cross.  “That I may know Christ” Paul wrote elsewhere, “becoming like him in death so that somehow I may receive the resurrection.”  “Let this mind be in you that was also in Christ Jesus, who took on the form of a servant and became obedient unto death.  Even death on the cross.” “We carry around the death of Christ in our mortal bodies.”  Yet, the comfort there comes in knowing that crucifixion is not conclusion.  It precedes resurrection which is our hope also.   

 And three:  Here is the kicker—those who crucify do not get to interpret the meaning of the crucifixion.   Those who crucify do not get to interpret the meaning of the crucifixion. The word martyr means witness.  It has come to mean for many of us someone who dies because of what they believe in.  But originally the word means witness.  The martyr proclaims for themselves the meaning of their life and their death.  What Pilate meant to be an appeasement of the crowd, turned out to be the most world changing upheaval imaginable.  What Herod meant to be the protection of his kingdom and crown, turned out to be the dawning of a new day and the Kingdom of God.  What the Sanhedrin meant to be a silencing maneuver to keep down this rabble-rousing crowd was in fact a loud and long cry.  And we as Christians have to learn to say that more faithfully and thoughtfully.  The problem is we’ll say the name Jesus like it’s a blunt object.  We’ll use it to pummel people who don’t believe like we do.  That’s not how Jesus intended for us to use his name.  It is to be spoken, yes, but spoken as an invitation in not a door slammed shut.  And it’s not being politically incorrect to speak of Jesus Christ.  We have to stop acting like victims.  The Bible does not imagine the role of victim as a vocational place for anyone.  God has called some to be prophets and some to be apostles and some teachers and some to be healers and God has called all of us to be people of faith, hope and love.  We must be witnesses not whiners.  The dividing line between a martyr and a victim is this:  the martyr leaves behind a witness to what their life and death means.  And the crucifiers do not get to give that interpretation—they will try.  They placed a placard above the head of Jesus on the cross it declared what in their estimation he had claimed that deserved his execution.  They thought it would be the last word on Jesus’s life.   That would-be permanent record did not last.  We know what it said only because the evangelists chose to include it in the witness—an ironic detail slipped in between the verses that said—Unto us is born and He is Risen, He is Risen, Indeed.  I think they kept it there so that for 2000 years we would be able to say—wow, did they ever underestimate Jesus’s significance.  The crucifiers were wrong.  They are always wrong.  

Though they are wrong, it feels as though the crucifiers have come for people in waves—from Charleston to Orlando, from Istanbul to St. Paul, from Dhaka, Bangladesh to Dallas, Texas.  They unleashed their violence to make statements—statements about people’s faith and skin color and orientation and profession.  Statements through terror, intimidation, the abuse of power, and cavalier attitudes.  They have tried to place their placards above those killed by their deeds.  May their efforts fail.  May they fail because we refuse to let the aggressors be the loudest voice in the room.  We refuse to accept the meanings they have assigned to the death they have unleashed.  And while we are at it can we refuse to let meanings be assigned by those who have pre-existing political or financial agenda.  As the people of God, we are entrusted with prayerful listening eyes and ears to see and hear the  the unique imprint of God’s image emblazoned on each life.  Each person is more than a hashtag more than facebook post.   And we are the ones who bear responsibility to listen and reflect and say: this is how God’s Grace has been manifest in our world through their lives.  And the crucifiers interpretation can be relegated to a footnote if we as evangelists permit their voices to be heard at all.  But the Gospel manifest in each person's life will be the main text--the placards can go into the garbage.  

Brent Thompson was a family man dedicated to his children and his grandchildren.  Patrick Zamarripa did three tours in Iraq as a Navy petty officer.  He had a toddler and school-age child.  Next month he would be 33 years old—the same age Jesus was when he died.  Lorne Ahrens was described by a co-worker as a “big guy with an even bigger heart."  Michael Krol was an 8-year veteran of the police department.  An uncle said of his work as a police officer, “He was all in, he was all in.”  Michael Smith had already given 26 years to the protection of Dallas citizens.  These five officers were not victims.  They are martyrs.  They are martyrs in defense of democracy and people’s right to speak out.  They are martyrs in defense of tolerant community and mutual protection.  Let the word victim never be used to sum up beautiful lives.  Let us say rather, “Greater love has no one than this that they lay down their life for their friends.”  This is, for me, what it means to turn on the full stream of water and drink deeply from the living water of Jesus Christ. It is to join with sisters and brother and loudly declare--“My hope is built on nothing less than Jesus’s blood and righteousness.  I dare not trust the sweetest frame but wholly lean on Jesus name.  ON Christ the solid rock I stand all other ground is sinking sand.”  If we offer that testimony with humility and grace no one will be surprised.  Yet if we keep silent they too many may  be left dry and desperate for water.  

 

Never Offend Anyone Ever Again

There’s a formula I have seen used in one too many blog posts.  It goes something like this:  “I have a friend who was going through [Insert difficult life experience.  Could also be chronic challenge].  Someone tried to reach out with them, but made the following mistakes [insert list of clichés which ought not have been used but were].  I’m sure that the person was trying to be helpful, but they weren’t.  And I know because I’m so much better at this kind of thing than everyone else.  You shouldn’t do these things.  They aren’t helpful.”  There are variations on the theme, but you get the idea.  I have a few hunches about these kinds of blog posts.  First hunch: they’re amount to a public scolding of a specific person.  Second hunch:  it’s not what the person said that bugs the blogger as much as the person themselves.  I have found that different people can say the exact same thing to someone and it’s received differently.  One person can say, “How are you really doing?” and it feels like emotional voyeurism.  Another person can ask, “How are you really doing?” and it feels like a welcome opportunity to be vulnerable.  I think it has less to with the question and more to do with how the questioned feels about the questioner.
My problem with these kings of blog post, however, is that they feed disconnection more than they feed connection.  Many people avoid those who are hurting because they’ve heard too many stories about people who tried and failed.  I see a parallel behavior in people who don’t introduce themselves to others at church because they did and were embarrassed to find out that the person they were introducing themselves to had actually been members of the church for some 20 years or something like that.  The complaints about someone trying to help and making mistakes don’t help people avoid making mistakes they simply help people avoid helping.
  There’s one very simple, sure-fire way to never make a mistake when trying to talk to people who are hurting:  don’t talk to people who are hurting.  If you choose to care and choose to act out of caring, you will make mistakes.  You will make yourself the target of a hurting persons misplaced anger.  You will over-reach.  You’ll stick your foot in your mouth.  If you give a damn sometimes you’ll hit a dam sometimes.  Show yourself the same grace you’re trying to show someone else.  Show the same grace to everyone else that you desire for yourself.

Picking the Lock on Heaven's Door

In the late 16^th and early 17^th Century, William Camden wrote significant historical and antiquities works about Great Britain.  His book Remains Concerning Britain contains essays and shorter works related to his larger Britania.  It contains poems, poem fragments, and proverbs that he had collected from his study of British history.  It includes this epitaph of a Locksmith, “A zealous locksmith died of late/And did arrive at heaven’s gate,/He stood without and would not knock,/Because he meant to pick the lock.” 

            I read things like that and have to wonder about the character of the person they were talking about.  Was this something he said frequently—“I’m not knocking on heaven’s door; I’m picking the lock”?  Did people think he was just that good of a locksmith?  Or that arrogant?  Or did they think that the only way he was getting in is by making his own way in?  There’s no way to know now. 

            I do wonder how many people think they will have to pick the lock on heaven’s gate.  Many people believe that salvation is a product of one’s goodness, capacity to follow the rules, record of good works, or capacity for breaking and entering (undetected of course).  The biblical witness to salvation recognizes that salvation comes by God’s grace and God’s grace alone.  It is not the result of our report card, citizenship record, credit report, or permanent file.  God chooses to forgive and grant access to God to all people because God has designed us for relationship with God’s self.

            One way to understand worship is that it’s a dress rehearsal for eternity.  The people of God gathered around the throne of God praising and worshiping God.  If we imagine worship in this way, are there people who believe that they must pick the lock to get in?  When we come to worship with the conscious awareness that we are there by God’s grace alone the sense that some people have a place of honor on the basis of their service, generosity, or purity dies away.  All of us come to worship because God has thrown open the doors and allows us to come.  The only place of honor in worship belongs to God. 

Thanks for Whoever

            Thanks to whoever . . . someone left a bunch of goodies for a movie night we had in the summer of 2015.  They labeled it “movie night” but didn’t sign it.  Handwriting analysis has proved inconclusive. It got me thinking about all the many people who do things for us around church that we do not thank often enough.

            Thanks to whoever . . . goes around and checks the Sunday School roles each week.  I know who you are but I grateful you do what you do. 

            Thanks to whoever . . . makes the prayer shawls.  I also know who you are and know you don’t do it for the recognition.  They meant a lot to the people who receive them.

            Thanks to whoever . . . gets the communion ready each Sunday morning and clean up communion at the end of the day.  Communion is the most important part of our worship service.  It does not materialize out of thin air.

            Thanks to whoever . . . labels, folds and prepares the newsletters for mailing.  “The Friend Bunch” really are a bunch of friends who brighten our week in more ways than one.

            Thanks to whoever . . . runs the TV ministries, posts the recording to Vimeo and gets it out on our website, prepares the DVDs and sends them to the Beloveds.  It stretch the reach of God’s good news.

            Thanks to whoever . . . sharpens the pencils and refills the offering envelopes. 

            Thanks to whoever . . . sorts and puts back up the library books.  We have the best maintained church library anywhere.

            Thanks to whoever . . . assembles the children’s packets for Sunday morning.

            Thanks to whoever . . . greets people on Sunday morning making sure that people feel welcome here. 

            It’s always a risk when you start thanking people because invariably you leave someone out.  There are many, many more people to thank.  Lots of people serve in big and small ways.  But, please know that your church family is grateful for all that you do.  We are the church, together. 

Would you Pray for Me

            As a young pastor in Irving, I wen tot see one of my members in the hospital.  She was suffering from dementia and other physical problems.  The visit was short.  She couldn’t say much.  I asked her if I could do anything for her.  She asked for prayer.  I took hold of her hand and said things that I had said several times before (I was young but visiting hospitals had already become somewhat routine).  After we said Amen, I asked if there was anything else I could do for her.  She asked for water and I helped her take a few sips of water.  And one last time I asked if she needed anything, she asked for prayer.  My initial instinct was to blame her dementia.  She had forgotten that we had prayed just a couple of minutes earlier, but as I bowed my head, I felt something tap my spiritual shoulder and say, “really pray this time.”  I had “prayed” with her but had not prayed with her.  And there is a difference.

            I think about that often when I find myself or others simply going through the motions of worship.  It’s easy thing to do.  Still, there’s a difference between “going to worship” and actually worshipping.  We can be physically presence and mentally or spiritually somewhere else.  Yet, God continues to call us into worship.  Here I have some suggestions about ways to enter into worship.

           

1.      Read the biblical texts that are the focus for worship before you arrive.  Make notes or thoughts about what the texts mean to you. 

2.       When you sit down, find a way to sit quietly and pray.  You may want to take time to pray the Lord’s prayer and take time between each line to think and reflect on it’s meaning.

3.      As you sing, contemplate the words of the lyrics.

4.      As you wait for communion to be served, think about your favorite story from the Gospels.  Imagine what draws you to Jesus. 

Once a year, I think all Christians should visit a worship service that is different than their own.  Rather than thinking about what you like or dislike or even how you are greeted and seated.  Simply go with your heart open to God’s presence.  Sometimes this can be enough to draw us out of familiar patterns.  Every now and again, each of us needs a tap on the spiritual shoulder that says, “Really pray this time” Or “Really worship this time.”  Indeed, let’s really worship this Sunday. 

Debts and Debtors

People often ask if I think we should say, “debts/debtors,” “sins/sinned against us,” or “trespasses/those who’ve trespassed against us” whenever we pray the Lord’s Prayer.  Short answer—debts/debtors.  Longer answer—debts and debtors is the language actually used in the earliest Greek manuscripts we have.  For Jesus it wasn’t just a metaphor.  He understood the crushing load of debt could mean time in prison (debtors prison) or some form of enslavement.  Jesus prayed for real release from actual debt.  More importantly, we are indebted to God for more than our forgiveness of sins.  God certainly does forgive our sins, but we owe God so much more.  We are indebted to God for the air we breathe, every heart beat, the gravity that keeps us on the ground, the food we eat.  In short, we owe God everything. 

       So, I believe in praying “debts” and “debtors.”  I say this with one really large caveat:  When we pray for God to forgive our debts we need to be thinking more broadly about what we mean.  If we say “debts” but mean “sins” the Jesus’s meaning gets truncated. 

      When we say, “forgive us our debts” and mean “forgive us our sins” we turn our “sins” into “debts.”  This creates a transactional view of Christ’s death on the cross.  It goes something like this:  the righteousness of God demanded a payment for our sins; God’s love provided that payment in the form of Jesus’s death on the cross. There was a hymn I sang growing up that said, “I had a debt I could not pay, He paid the debt He did not owe, I needed someone to wash my sins away.”   Or another one much more familiar, “Jesus paid it all, all to him I owe.  Sin had left as crimson stain.  He washed it white as snow.”  The belief is Jesus made a payment to secure my forgiveness.   This is a popular understanding of atonement. 

      When the New Testament uses the word “debts” it means debts—money or obligation owed.  When the New Testament speaks of debtors it does so in financial terms.  The sin=debts equation portrays God as a somewhat ruthless loan shark demanding blood as payment.  When we think of Jesus’s death on the cross as payment for our sin we portray God in an ugly way.  Not really “ the Lord, the Lord gracious and merciful, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love . . . forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin” (Exodus 34:6-7).  This description of God—which is the most often repeated description of God in the Hebrew Bible—was made before the death of Christ on the cross.  

Religion and Violence

      There were a couple of weeks in the early part of 2015 that I found both confusing and heartbreaking. On February 14-15 a series of shootings took place in Copenhagen.  An attack at a Free Speech rally at café injuring three police officers and killing one person, the shooting of a Jewish man and a guard at a synagogue and then the shooting of the suspect on the morning of the 15^th left many grieving and anxious.  The suspected shooter’s religious ideology seems to be part though not all of the cause.  Also on Sunday, Jihadists cruelly beheaded 21 Coptic Christians abducted from Libya last month.  On Monday, a grand jury in North Carolina indicted Craig Hicks with murder charges.  Deah Barakat, Yusor Abu-Salha, and Razan Abu-Salah, young students in the Chapel Hill area, were shot and killed last Tuesday.  The immediate cause of the shootings appears to have been a parking dispute.  However, Hicks had expressed anti-religious sentiment and the victims were Muslim. 

      In each of these cases religion plays a role, but does not account for the whole of people’s motivations.  As people of faith, how do we respond?  Are we so far removed from the places effected that we have no business inserting ourselves?  Is it acceptable for us to be more concerned with the plight of fellow Christians than we are with people of other faiths?  These questions and so many other haunt me.  I don’t pretend to understand the complexity of violence and religion.  But, as I read the news reports and praying for the situations, I tried to keep these things in mind:         

      We are talking about real human beings.  The people who have been killed and the people who killed them have names, personalities, families, and histories.  I believe we must be careful not to turn victims into pawns in our favorite arguments. I have searched for years for ways to talk about the issues that affect people’s lives without diminishing people’s lives into issues.  I have failed more often than I have succeeded.  I continue to believe that people’s lives have integrity and we need to protect that integrity with our speech as much as we protect the lives with our actions.

      Motives are more complicated than we can sort out.  Religion or anti-religious ideologies are rarely the sole cause for violence.  The experiences of scarcity, powerlessness, victimization, and geo-political realities are just a few of the other contributing factors that lead to violent actions.

      Apathy is not an option nor is misguided, partially informed action.  We have learned the lesson time and again that that “Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing” (John Stuart Mill in an Address before Students at St. Andrews).  The fuller context of that quotation emphasizes that actions need to follow careful assessment of the situations before us.  History is also full of tragic examples where good people did the wrong thing because they acted without adequate understanding. 

      For now, I pray for the strength to stay engaged and not turn away.  I pray that God will form me into a person who seeks reconciliation.  Christ died in order to tear down the dividing wall of hostility may we live in such a way that Christ’s purposes are manifest in us. 

Passages Relevant Today

2Speak unto the children of Tejas, and say unto them, If any man or women possessing the license of concealed handgun of you bring a weapon carry in the open, ye shall bring your offering of weapons of the carry in the open to the priest upon crossing the threshold. 3 If his offering be of  automatic of the full or of the semite tribe, let him offer it without blemish: he shall offer it of his own voluntary will at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation before the Lord. 4 And he shall immerse it fully in the basin of water thrice;. 5 And he shall remove the ammunition  before the Lord: and the priests, Aaron’s sons, shall bring the powder of black, and sprinkle the powder of black  round about upon the altar that is by the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. 6 And he shall disassemble the carry in the open weapon. 7 And the sons of Aaron the priest shall put a basin with water upon the altar,  8 And the priests, Aaron’s sons, shall lay the parts in order in the water in the basin  which is upon the altar: 9 But his inwards and barrel shall he wash in water: and the priest shall wash all on the altar, to be a soaked  sacrifice, an offering made by water, of a sweet savour unto the Lord. (Hesitations 9:2-9)

15 And thou shalt make the breast-vest of caution with cunning work for the bearer of carry in the open weapons; of magenta, of lavender, and of purple, and of scarlet, and of fine twined linen, shalt thou make it. 16 Foursquare it shall be being doubled; a span shall be the length thereof, and a span shall be the breadth thereof. 17 And thou shalt set in it settings of blossoms, even four rows of blossoms: the first row shall be a cherry, a rose, and an iris: this shall be the first row. 18 And the second row shall be a lilly, a daisy, and a pansy. 19 And the third row a sunflower, a gardenia, and a violet. 20 And the fourth row a chrysanthemum, and a poppy, and a carnation: they shall be set in webbing in their inclosings. 21 And the blossoms shall be with the names of the children of the bunch of Brady, six, according to their names, like the engravings of a signet; every one with his name shall they be according to the six children. 22 And thou shalt make upon the breastplate chains at the ends of wreathen work of pure silk. And the bearer of the weapons to carry in the open shall where the breast-vest during all the time that they are in the tabernacle.  (Hesitations 9:15-21)

 

Speeches Address Audiences Not Topics

Lloyd Bitzer in his journal article, "The Rhetorical Situation" (Philosophy & Rhetoric, 1.1 1963, p. 3) outlined . . . well he outlined exactly what the title says: what makes a sitiuation rhetorical.  He explained that it takes three things:

1.  Exiegence--a situation in the world that needs to change.

2.  Audience--a group of people who are able to make change happen.

3.  Constraints--Resources and limitations available with regard to the means of persuading the audience.  

The point being that speeches--which are the original rhetorical act--come into being because of a situation in the world of people and events.  Speeches are meant to create change.  Speeches do not change topics . . . unless, of course, you've done ground breaking research and that's what the speech is about.  People have the will and capacity to change and people make up the audience of the rhetorical situation.  Yet, so often speakers begin preparing speeches thinking about what they are going to say (topic) rather than who they are talking to and what the needs of the situation are.

Some Questions Speakers Should Ask Before Preparing Speech Content

1.  Demographic questions:  Who are they? What's their age and age range?  What's their ethnicity or ethicities?  What is their educational background?  MOST IMPORTANTLY:  What do they have in common with each other?  What makes them an audience?  In the process of answering that question, you may discover you have more than one audience in the same room.

2.  Who are you to them?  Do you have a certain built-in authority that the audience acknowledges?  Are you practically unknown to them and will have to do some work to introduce yourself to them?  (BTW, never underestimate the value of a good introduction of the speaker).  

3.  What language and understanding resources are and are not available to the audience?  Frequently speakers speak past audiences by using technical language, abbreviations, and verbal shortcuts that they understand but the audience may not.  Fred Craddock, who taught generations of preachers how to preach, once said, "Your congregation is willing to run with you, but you have to remember that you have a 10-hour head start."  Applying that to speeches in general, I would say you better know how big your head start is on the audience. In many cases, the speaker has a head-start of a few years, a degree or two, and professional competence. There will be things you have to explain in order to help an audience run with you.  A lot of misunderstanding can be avoided if speakers begin by defining their terms.  

  

4.  How do they feel emotionally about the situation that they're in?  Just as people come from their own frame of reference intellectually they also come from their own frame of reference emotionally.  Are they happy?  Nervous? Grieving? Confused? Frustrated? Angry?  Some speeches miss their audience because the speaker misunderstands or responds poorly or completely ignores the emotional front of the audience.

There are other questions to consider and these questions are preliminary.  However, speech preparation that begins by addressing the topic rather than the audience has a greater potential to miss the mark than a speech that begins by assessing the situation into which a speech is spoken.  As speakers begin preparing their speech they should remember--speeches address audiences not topics.  

Mercy Me makes Spiritual Pizza

I love pizza, even bad pizza.  That's neither a confession nor a badge of honor.  That's because pizza isn't really junk food and it isn't really health food.  Many of the things that come on a pizza are good for you.  I suspect that most things that come on a pizza are good for you in moderation.  The problems with pizza--and I'm saying this as someone who is definitely not a nutritionist--are proportion and portion.  Meat and cheese and fat are good for us in small amounts.  Tomatoes, peppers, artichokes, mushrooms and olives are good for us, but we probably need to eat larger amounts of the vegetables than the meats and cheeses.  I suspect that the meat/cheese to vegetable ratio on most of the pizzas I eat are reversed from where they should be to truly be healthy.  I don't know what to do with the crust at this point, but since bread has become such a bad thing in pop-diets, I'm guessing it falls into the "too much of a good thing" category.  It's a proportion issue.  The other problem with pizza--and it's more my problem than the pizza's--is portion.  I can and have put down a lot of pizza at one time.  I start eating and I can't stop.  

I think some things in American popular Christianity are spiritual pizzas--some imbalances in the ratios and real problems if consumed to excess.  I think that MercyMe's song "Flawless" is a good example. https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/9b/5c/11/9b5c1127287783ef30b8c016e60720bf.jpg

The theology of the song lyrics is typical of a particular approach to grace and salvation.  It says that people are incapable of saving themselves through their own efforts no matter how hard we try.  The singer refers to himself as a "wretch."  The theology quite self-consciously evokes John Newton's "Amazing Grace" and the song quotes both the lyrics and melodyJulia Johnston's "Marvelous Grace of Our Loving Lord." (BTW, in the old 1976 Baptist Hymnal I sang from growing up, these songs were right next to each other and often sung as a medley).  God's grace is understood as God's willingness to forgive us though we do not deserve it.  Grace is unearned favor.  This is meat and cheese theological interpretation of the cross: because Jesus died on the cross for our sins God no longer counts our sins against us.  We are flawless.  

I believe this to be true.  Indeed, when it comes time for me to leave this earth, I believe I will step out into eternity on this promise.  Lately I've been using the benediction from the end of Jude where it declares that Christ is able to "keep you from falling and present you before God's glorious presence without fault and with great joy." Yet, like the pizza analogy I believe we disproportionately emphasize the cross as the locus of our forgiveness and neglect the "vegetables."  The cross is also our model for how to live.  Those who receive Christ must take up their cross and follow Christ.  We are called to have the mind of Christ who was "obedient unto death, even death on the cross." This interpretation of the cross is often missing or insufficiently expressed in popular Christian spirituality--Contemporary Christian music, literature and preaching.  Like the vegetables on a pizza, it's there, but there needs to be a lot more of it to be considered healthy.  

I believe the video to this song--which I enjoyed--has a theological "flaw." In the video, various people who have aspects of their lives that some might regard as flaws are shown--a child with autism, two children with down syndrome, a woman who has been unable to grow hair since she was a child, a woman born without a right arm.  Along with these people some of the other characters are identified with things we might more readily consider sin--an out of balance worklife, failing to be a spiritual leader in the home, a past full of regrets.  And the song's lyrics are quite explictly about our status as sinners saved by grace. I have made the mistake of viewing personal sins/spiritual shortcomings and physical/biological characteristics in the same light.  But, we should not do that.  As Christians we cannot imply that illnesses or physical characteristics that create challenges are on par with sin.  It's too easy to go from that to suggesting that they result from sin.  I get where MercyMe is going.  In the eyes of God, the child with down syndrome is flawless and our own perspective needs to adjust to see others with the eyes of God.  That's a good message, but I think it's a message for a different song and a different video.  

Even though I think "Flawless" is spiritual pizza, I really like pizza--and I really like that pizza.  So, maybe I'll have a slice, eat in moderation, and be sure to have a healthier salad along with it.  

Sermon Sunday, June 21, 2015

Illusion of Invincibility
Genesis 6:9-22
These are the descendants of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, blameless in his generation; Noah walked with God. 10 And Noah had three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

11 Now the earth was corrupt in God’s sight, and the earth was filled with violence. 12 And God saw that the earth was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted its ways upon the earth. 13 And God said to Noah, “I have determined to make an end of all flesh, for the earth is filled with violence because of them; now I am going to destroy them along with the earth. 14 Make yourself an ark of cypressb wood; make rooms in the ark, and cover it inside and out with pitch. 15 This is how you are to make it: the length of the ark three hundred cubits, its width fifty cubits, and its height thirty cubits. 16 Make a roofc for the ark, and finish it to a cubit above; and put the door of the ark in its side; make it with lower, second, and third decks. 17 For my part, I am going to bring a flood of waters on the earth, to destroy from under heaven all flesh in which is the breath of life; everything that is on the earth shall die. 18 But I will establish my covenant with you; and you shall come into the ark, you, your sons, your wife, and your sons’ wives with you. 19 And of every living thing, of all flesh, you shall bring two of every kind into the ark, to keep them alive with you; they shall be male and female. 20 Of the birds according to their kinds, and of the animals according to their kinds, of every creeping thing of the ground according to its kind, two of every kind shall come in to you, to keep them alive. 21 Also take with you every kind of food that is eaten, and store it up; and it shall serve as food for you and for them.” 22 Noah did this; he did all that God commanded him.

When I was in Elementary School, my principal was Mr. Jack Herring.  He had been at Johnston Elementary for years and he was loved.  Well I was a part of a group of boys that was threatening to scuffle with another group of boys.  It was pre-teen posturing.  And, I’ll be quick to add, “They started it.”  Needless to say a teacher intercepted the mounting tensions after school and directed us to visit Mr. Herring in his office . . . immediately . . . and we went.  Mr. Herring sat behind his large wooden desk, he heard the indictment of our broo-haha.  He reached down and slid open one of the wooden draws of his wooden desk, and he pulled out a paddle.  It was large and decorated and it looked to unwieldy to be taken seriously.  He said this is one of my paddles.  You know, I don’t like using this paddle.  It was a gift.  But it’s too heavy to really swing.  Kind of hurts my hand.  Then he reached down into his drawer and pulled  out a thin paddle, worn smooth with age, it had athletic taped wrapped around one end, “No,” he said holding the paddle in his hand, “This is the one I prefer.  It’s light enough to swing but solid enough to sting.”   He laid that paddle down on the desk.  He reached down and pulled out another and said, “I used to use this one but it cracked.”  He pulled out a couple more, holding each one, surveying its size, weight, velocity, grip.  He laid each one side-by-side on his desk and said finally, “Boys, I don’t want to use any of these paddles.  But I will if I have to.  Do you think I have to use one of these paddles today?”  Silently we shook our heads, “No.” “Good, don’t make me use them then.”  Then he told us to leave his office.  That was the end of the scuffling. 

Whenever I have to deal with a story like God sending a flood to wipe out the majority of humanity in order to start over again, or ordering certain people executed because they didn’t take worship seriously, or casting people in the lake of fire, I struggle with how to make sense of it.  How do we reconcile our message that God loved the world (the whole world) so much that God gave his only son for the world?  How do we square these stories with the affirmation that The Lord, the Lord, is gracious and merciful, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love?  How do we make it make sense alongside the proclamation that God is love and those who abide in love abide in God?  Yesterday during Bible and Brunch we talked about a second century Christian leader who was eventually denounced as a heretic named Marcion.  Marcion believed, at least according to the press clippings, that the God of the Old Testament was a totally different God than the God proclaimed in Jesus Christ.  The God of the Old Testament was judgmental and angry but that God had been defeated by this other God—the God of love and mercy.  And that’s one way to do it, I suppose, but I don’t believe it’s true and neither did Jesus by the way.  The early church rejected his heresy. It seems that anytime anyone created a completely coherent system to explain God, the main church dismissed it as heresy.  God is free and at times in predictable. We do not have permission, I don't think, to edit out the parts simply because they don't jive with the version of God we've created in our minds. And at least one way of seeing these judgment stories for me is to remember that perhaps God is like Mr. Jack Herring.  Laying out the paddles—there’s destruction by flood (but I promised never to use that), there’s an earthquake to that opens us and destroys the offenders, there’s striking people with diseases if they are dishonest, or taking their life suddenly because they withhold their gift intended for me.  Perhaps the judgmental texts are like that are God’s way of saying, “I have these paddles, but I don’t want to use them.  Children, don’t make me have to use them.” 

We set the scripture readings months ago and chose to use the story of Noah’s Ark long before we knew what this week would hold.  We are in a series called the “I illusions.”  All the texts are taken from Genesis.  We started with the illusion of innocence—with Adam and Eve.  Then with the illusion of isolation-with Cain and Abel.  And today we move to the illusion of invincibility.  It begins with a man not like Adam or Cain but one described as righteous, blameless, and pious.  The opening verse contains it’s own three point sermon.  Noah was righteous—he had integrity with himself; he was blameless—he had faithful dealings with his peers; he walked with God.  The description  evokes the words of Micah—God has shown you what is good and what the Lord requires—do justice, love mercy, walk humbly with God.  

We imagined then that we would emphasize the nature of humanity’s sin at the time of God’s grievance with humanity.  Noah’s neighbors were guilty of violence.  It’s mentioned more than once.  Contrary to the Puritanical judgment that sin is limited to  gluttony, debauchery, bad habits and bad hygiene, the story is clear that what grieved the heart of God most was humanity’s destruction of humanity.  In contrast with the “good” God saw in creation in chapter 1,  here God sees all of creation—and not just humanity—as corrupt, prone to  decay, not worth keeping around.  The earth itself, and not just the people on it, have stopped acting the way they should.  Clarence Jordan sees in this as the first stage in human development.  It is a stage of unlimited aggression. When the law is given in Exodus, a rule is created that says and eye for an eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot—in Latin its called lex talionis the law of talion, the law of retaliation.  Which says that the punishment corresponds in kind and degree to the injury.  With the introduction of lex talionis we move from unlimited aggression to limited aggression.  Then there develops a moral principle that says, “you shall love your neighbor but hate your enemy.”  The third stage is from limited aggression to limited love.  But finally with Jesus Christ we hear—love your enemy, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you and pray for those who despitefully use you and persecute you.  The movement is complete from unlimited aggression in Noah, to limited aggression in the law, to limited love in the commands, to unlimited love in Christ.  But it is still hard to believe that God’s ultimate plan is unlimited love, even of one’s enemies when God’s answer to humanity’s violence is their complete destruction—with the exception of Noah and his wife, and their three sons and their wives.

We  planned on saying all of that before this week.  Before a young man, radicalized by racist white supremacy, entered Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, SC, sat through an hour’s worth of Bible study and then opened fire killing, Rev. Clementa Pickney, Rev. Daniel Simmons Sr., Myra Thompson, Cynthia Hurd, Rev. Sharonda Singleton, Tywanza Sanders, Rev. DePayne Middleton-Doctor, Susie Jackson, and Ethel Lance.  That was before the flood of rhetoric filled what should have been quiet spaces of lament into stormy corners of advocacy.  We planned on saying that before another group was victimized.  Some of us wanting to distance this shooter’s actions from the racism prevalent in our culture have claimed he was mentally ill.  That kind of language displays the worst sort of use of the phrase  “mental illness.”  Mental illness is a broad category that contains many complex and difficult disorders like anxiety, depression, identity disorders like schizophrenia, and eating disorders just to name a few.  The mentally ill have a hard enough time being treated with the dignity they deserve and getting the treatment they need.  We should resist throwing around the term mental illness as a way of explaining away the inexplicable.  The mentally ill are not evil. Let's not burden them with this. 

We had planned on talking about the illusion of invincibility before the events of this week would so thoroughly and painfully reveal our vulnerability.  My heart hurts and I despair.  I am too weary to  speak of humanity’s violence toward humanity right now—not the ancient violence of Noah’s day nor the senseless violence of our own.  I do not wish to speak of God’s justice or rightness or capacity to judge because the implications frighten me.  We have not advanced so far beyond unlimited aggression; there’s no way to practice an eye for an eye with someone who has destroyed so much; I’m not sure I can trust my neighbor much less love him; and as for loving my enemy . . . . In the midst of the storm we want an escape hatch that takes us to the rainbow instantly. Get me to some place where I can assure myself that God doesn’t really act this way.  NO, cannot act this way.  But the escape hatch isn’t there and if it was, I’m afraid we’d find that it’s not a rainbow that awaits us—not a promise that everything will be alright.  I am not certain as to how we reconcile all of this with the overarching view that God is love. I do think That stories like Noah need to be in front of us because we risk putting God in a kind of box defined by our own conception of love.  We want to insist that God never does anything that we do not like and by that we say that’s what it means to claim God is love.  But God is free and God is just and the God of love is still a God of holiness with high expectations for how we are to live and treat one another.  We cannot harbor the illusion of our invincibility and live as people defined by violence and pretend that before God there is no reckoning. 

It shouldn’t have taken an aggressive act against a church to arouse my consciousness but it has. God’s authority stretches beyond the walls of any religious building.  The violence in Charleston, SC is the latest chapter in a horrific narrative that includes  McKinney, Garland, Baltimore, Ferguson, Boston, Newtown, Aurora . . . the list goes on. In my lifetime, I’ve not seen a season as volatile and frightening as the last few years.  This includes the difficult years of 1992 (the LA riots), 1993 (Waco compound burning), and 1994 (Oklahoma City Bombings).  Evil people acting in evil ways will be with us. We know that.  What we do not know is whether good people will counteract and mitigate the evil or simply acquiesce.  My sisters and brothers, we cannot simply hope to simply tread water.  There is an ark to be built and lives to be saved.  We build that ark through forging relationships with people in our community.  We cannot let the fear of who our neighbor might be overwhelm what our response to our neighbor must be.  I have reached out to some neighboring churches and tomorrow night at 7 pm, we will be at the College Park Center to hold a prayer vigil for Emanuel AME and for the nation and for ourselves.  We’ve also been invited to attend a Men’s day gathering at Greater Community Missionary Baptist Church next Sunday and I hope we will nurture that developing relationship. Today, I do not feel that God has cast the rainbow quite yet.  Nor do I believe God is pulling out paddles and placing them in front of us.  I believe God is giving us the materials and dimensions of an Ark and is beckoning us to build--build connections, build relationships, throw open the doors that others may enter and together we may sail the choppy seas of reconciliation. 

In Defense of Annoying People

1.  We overuse a metaphor we still find helpful.  "Journey" may be overused and feel self-helpish or new agey or just flakey, but how else do we offer a positive frame for a period of time that has been filled with ups and downs and remains unpredictable?  The metaphor offered clarity at some point and that's why it gets repeated.

2.  We inadequately express ideas that cannot be adequately expressed.  For example, I believe God acted to reconcile the division between us and God's self.  You may disagree with the assumption that a division existed (exists).  You may disagree with the conviction that God had to act to reconcile.  However, we offer ideas in hopes that people will collaborate with us as we seek truth.  

3.  We insert our own human failings into difficult situations.  We hug when we're supposed to shake hands.  We refrain from touching when we're supposed to offer affection. We say the wrong thing trying to console.  We process our own insecurities when trying to relate to someone else's.  Appropriate responses differ from person to person and we have not been given the mind-reading gifft.  Good intentions do not excuse bad actions, but we chose being present and making a mistake instead of leaving someone to suffer in isolation.   

4.  We ask honest questions.  Not every question is a rhetorical question, a loaded question, or a trap.  Sometimes, we are asking a genuine question.  Instead of filling in the blanks with your judgment of what you think we're thinking, could you simply fill in the blanks with what you're thinking?

  

Hall of Fame Induction Puzzles (and Pleases) Me

This past weekend, I was inducted into the WTAMU Communication Department Hall of Fame.  Someone asked me what a person does to be inducted into the Communication Hall of Fame at their alma mater. I did not have a good answer then and I am not sure I have one now. I am not a huge financial contributor to my school—I should be but I’m not. Other schools seem to use this kind of honor as a fundraising event. It became clear to me as the event unfolded that it was directly aimed at their present majors. Student teams from Mass Com had been sent to each of the inductees. They produced videos featuring us. Their work was excellent. They focused a lot of attention on advice we might give to communication students. They scheduled a reception that mainly featured inductees and students. It was meant to help them talk to professionals in various industries. The whole event seemed designed to communicate the message that a person can do a lot of different things with a communication degree and to dramatize that message with the inductees. Along with me, we inducted a man who serves the elderly as a social worker in Portland, OR, a print journalist and a local TV news anchor.

My induction into WTAMU’s Communication Hall of Fame comes at a time when I do not feel a great deal of professional success. I am not despairing; I am perplexed. But, I want to say two things about my induction. The first is that I am proud of my department for selecting a minister.  I hope I would feel this way had the minister not been me. We live in a world that still makes movies like “God’s Not Dead” and perpetuates stereotypes about the tension between the religiously observant and educated elites. This tension is as old as Christianity itself going back at least to the point that Tertullian asked, “What has Athens to do with Jerusalem?” So, I think it is significant that my state-supported university recognizes ministry as a laudable enterprise for its graduates. Admittedly, per capita worship attendance among the faculty probably rivals anything you’d find at any explicitly religious school. Students more readily identify their social circle by naming the student ministry they participate in than sorority and fraternity membership. Still, I find it significant for a school to say ministry matters, faith is legitimate, and humble service to communities is worthy of “fame.”

The second thing that my induction gave me was the chance to do is to say thank you to the people who invested in me. I tried to get everyone named in my acceptance speech (Vartabedian, Seabourn, Coons, Smith, Yates). But, two people stand out in my experience—James Hallmark and Trudy Hanson. I had the opportunity of co-writing papers with both of them, took both of them for multiple classes and learned a great deal about their thought process and their work ethic. In many ways the two played contrasting roles in my education. Hallmark was my “burden of proof” professor. In academic debate, the side with burden of proof is the one with the responsibility to make their case. I always felt as though Hallmark’s stance toward students was, “I’m not yet persuaded but I am persuadable.” My abilities had burden of proof. Hanson was my “presumption” professor. With Hanson my abilities had presumption. She was endlessly encouraging. She still is. One might think that the presumption professor is easier. Hardly. The presumption professor is the one who doesn’t accept excuses for why we think we can’t do something. She’d calmly listen as I lamented my feelings of inadequacy, smile and say, “Well, I think you can do it."  I needed those two messages then . . . I still do.

Hope Springs

You Coulda Had Yer Pick
Hope Springs at MOVIECLIPS.com

Feeling Called Out On-Line

Social media has given us a unprecedented avenue to complain about other people's behavior.  Don't like the way a person dresses in the supermarket? Post about it on Facebook.  Think a person's parenting isn't up to snuff?  Post about it on Facebook.  Think another has faulty theology?  Post about it on Facebook. I've posted this sort of thing and thought about posting a lot more.

Then last week a friend posted a comment that seemed particularly aimed at me.  It was presented in a general way.  You know the formula, "No one should ever do X.  In the 21st Century decent human beings should know that X is wrong.  Especially ministers.  Of all people, Ministers should avoid X.  You should know better!"  (Where X = an offensive behavior).  Normally I agree with the ranter and I'm glad to join them in feeling morally superior but, not this time.  This time, I recognized that I was guilty of the very thing this person was condemning.

I had thought about responding but, I couldn't come up with anything to say.  I didn't necessarily want to defend the behavior.  The person did have a point.  It just felt like a public shaming more than "provoking one another to love and good deeds" (Hebrews 10:24).  It just made me think of the need for a social media Miranda rights.  "Anything you say, do or wear can be used against you in the court of social media."

Last night I was talking with some friends around a dinner table about experiences in church.  One of them mentioned a story about a woman, a devote Christian, who just happened to be wearing earrings in a church that strictly denounced the use of jewelry.  Rather than speaking gently to her in private, the preacher preached directly at her during the sermon.  The public humiliation wounded her.  In a less direct way, that's what these social media complaints feel like.  Certainly not as damaging as being singled out in a sermon but, still a public chastisement.  I wonder if we might not succeed in truly making the world a better place if we learned to speak directly and privately to people who act in ways we think are inappropriate.  My sense is that we would be more likely to change people than blanket posts directed anyone and everyone.