December 27, 2020 St. John, Apostle 1 John 1:1-2:2

            My kids have pointed out that almost all Christmas programs and movies have similar themes.  Someone is trying to save Christmas or Santa Claus.  Or someone is trying to save the true meaning of Christmas because it is threatened; perhaps by a bad guy or by commercialism or something else.  Christmas, this culture wide multi-billion dollar annual event – the biggest annual celebration of our society – is presented as weak or fragile, seriously threatened.  Ironically none of the Christmas movies give any serious coverage to the birth of Jesus story, which perhaps is truly threatened.  And yet, when we turn our attention to our Bible readings for today we realize that there is nothing that can actually threaten Christmas. 

            December 27 is the day to celebrate St. John, our church’s namesake.  Even though it is not a specifically Christmas theme, we discover that there is a powerful message for Christmas too.  But first, we have to ask ourselves a question.  Who wrote the things in the Bible attributed to St. John?

            John the disciple of Jesus is the obvious answer, and it’s the one suggested by church history as well.  A first century Christian by the name of Polycarp appears to have been an acquaintance and disciple of the apostle John.  He is our closest link connecting the gospel of John and the three letters of John to the disciple John.  However, while legends abound, we know almost nothing certain about Polycarp.  As early as the year 130 we have people questioning whether these writings do actually come from John.

            There’s something ironic about questioning who wrote these works.  Because not only do they not say who wrote them, they are actually written for the purpose of keeping the author unknown!  In 2^nd John and 3^rd John the writer only refers to himself as “the elder”.  The Gospel of John only refers to the author as the “disciple whom Jesus loved”.  And while 1^st John is deliberately written from a first person perspective that person remains anonymous – only to be known as we read in our second reading (1 John 1:1-2:2), a reliable witness.

            You could argue that this anonymity is for safety sake – Christians are being persecuted by both Romans and Jews.  The author doesn’t want his words to be traced back to him.  But I don’t believe that is the case.  In those days the justice systems didn’t get too worked up about things like evidence and proof before torturing and executing someone. 

            No, the anonymity of the author is part of the author’s writing strategy.  He wants us –readers far far away and centuries later- to learn something about God through him, an eyewitness.  He insists on being part of the background, so that through him we can be in the story too.  Ultimately he wants to feel close to us the reader

and us feel close to him

and also close to God.

            Hear again the beginning of our second lesson, “We declare to you what was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the word of life – this life was revealed, and we have seen it and testify to it, and declare to you the eternal life that was with the Father and was revealed to us – we declare to you what we have seen and heard so that you also may have fellowship with us; and truly our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ.”  (1 John 1:1-3)

            I said before that this day to commemorate John actually speaks to Christmas.  It speaks to Christmas far more powerfully and profoundly than the birth story of Jesus with angels, shepherds and wise men.  Because all of that, while significant, is surface detail.  What does Christmas mean?  What is its purpose?  Why is it important?  Those are answered by John. 

            Jesus, the Word of God, according to the Gospel of John, was made flesh.  Why?  So that real living people like you and me could see and touch and hear God in our own form and in our own world.

            The birth story of Jesus that we read on Christmas Eve has almost reached fairy tale status.  There’s the supernatural angels and lowly shepherds, a virgin mother and stars in the sky.  All of which makes a great story, but a story no different from a fairy tale.  A fragile fairy tale no more stable in most people’s minds than many other cultural Christmas traditions like Santa Claus.

            John’s not interested in validating or defending that.  He really doesn’t care about Jesus’ birth story.  He cares that you know this: 

You cannot reach God. 

You cannot understand God. 

You cannot be in relationship with God. 

And God knows all of those limitations you have. 

Therefore God came to you. 

And therefore you can now fully know God. 

You can now be in an actual relationship with God.

            In our second reading John no sooner makes this point than he makes a sudden shift.  He talks about sin.  “If we say we have no sin we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.  If we confess our sins, he who is faithful and just will forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” (1:8-9)  You may know those words well from when they were regularly used in the confession and forgiveness. 

            Why take such a turn?  Why link the coming of Christ in one breath and then talk about sin in the next? 

Because John wants you to fully know Jesus and be in relationship with him.  But as I mentioned before, can you by your own power be in relationship with Jesus?

Can you reach God on your own?

            No.  You can’t. 

It is only by recognizing our limits, our brokenness, our separation that the door stays open for God to reach us.  The moment we think we’ve got it we close the door and the relationship starts to suffer.  And remember, in John’s writings sin is not so much actions that you do that are naughty or bad, sin is a state of being that wants to exist without God.  Sin is wanting to be your own savior by your own power.  If you don’t see that tendency that is constant and common to all of us then you really are trapped in your sins.

            Have you ever had someone sin against you but not realize it; or perhaps refuse to realize it?  Perhaps it’s a co-worker whose part of the project is over budget and past due.  The whole team is taking the hit and suffering but this person always manages to have excuses.  It’s never his or her fault but someone else’s.  You may even be the target; and while blame may not stick to the other person it does somehow end up sticking to you.

            Are you ever going to be able to have a good relationship with that person?  Can you be that person’s friend?  No.  No matter how much you forgive that person, and no matter how much you work to have a good relationship, until that person recognizes his or her destructive behavior you can’t do anything.  That person needs to recognize his or her sin.  Then and only then can a healthy relationship develop.

            Perhaps sometimes it is we who blame others for our failings.  Woe to us when that happens.  We are in a self-created downward spiral. 

            I find that people who willingly forgive others are often willing to recognize their own sins and effectively accept forgiveness.  And those who do not forgive are also not willing to accept their own sinfulness.

            John, our church’s namesake, would have us been in a full and healthy relationship with God our creator and savior – who comes to us in a form we can understand, and who forgives us endlessly.  But the relationship can only form when we accept our limitedness. 

Here’s a strange Christmas gift for ourselves.  Stop trying to be perfect and do it all right on our own.  Instead, give up.  Accept our imperfections, accept the imperfections of others, and in so doing discover true fellowship with each other and our God.  Amen

December 13, 2020 Love 1 Corinthians 13

 (Accompanies the story “The Hornbill” from The Manger is Empty by Walter Wangerin Jr.)

            The story of the Hornbill opens us to an understanding of love that goes deeper than words and intellectual concepts.  Love is word that is used often but I think misunderstood and often misused.

            People usually use love to refer to an intense feeling.  But love as the Bible describes it is something much deeper.  You may have heard that while we have one word for love in the English language the Greek language has three: eros, agape, and philia.  That is true.  You may have heard people make a big deal about the three.  And indeed, it is helpful to be able to separate out erotic love, or eros, from other understandings of love.  Some may a distinction between agape and philia.  Perhaps there is, but for the sake of the New Testament authors, they use them interchangeably.  In today’s gospel reading from John 21 both are used when Jesus asks Peter, “Do you love me?”  It is for stylistic variation and not to make a subtle point.

            What then is love?  You can define it many ways.  I like to define it as doing whatever is in your power for the benefit of another person.  Love then can have very little to do with feelings and very little to do with actually liking someone.  It is quite possible to love someone you strongly dislike.  And I think that is the sense of love St. Paul is using in 1 Corinthians 13, which often wrongfully ends up being used as a sappy Bible text at weddings.

            Love is doing whatever is in your power for the benefit of another person.  There is no strategy and no selfishness in love.  Truly loving is very hard.  And I think it is actually impossible for us. 

In Luke 6:32 we find Jesus saying, “If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you?  For even sinners love those who love them.  If you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you?  For even sinners do the same.  If you lend to those from whom you hope to receive, what credit is that to you?  Even sinners lend to sinners, to receive as much again.  But, love your enemies, do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return.” (Luke 6:32-35)

That’s really challenging.  But then Jesus goes on with something very true but something we immediately start to use as a strategy - and thus mess up love.  Jesus says, “… and lend, expecting nothing in return.  Your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High; for he is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked.  Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.”  (Luke 6:35-37)

Us being the clever people we are instantly start to strategize.  “Ah,” we say to ourselves, “if I love other people and work to build them up that will please God.  If I please God then God will look favorably upon me and like me.  God may make my life easy and certainly give me eternal life.”  If that is true then loving is just a strategy to please God for the ultimate purpose of personal gain. 

I don’t care what grades you got in school, you’re smart enough to think you can exploit God.  You’re smart enough to know that if it’s really about eternal life then better to suffer a little now and be rewarded later.  St. Paul even said in the text we read from Romans last week, “I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory about to be revealed to us.” 

Is that then even scriptural endorsement of: please God now and be rewarded later?  …love then is a powerful strategy ultimately employed for personal gain.  Seeing love that way (while one can certainly get there through scripture) is completely missing the point. 

In the video the adult Sunday school class watched just before worship the presenter, Luke Johnson, wrapped up his remarks by making a distinction between “religion” and “magic”.  By magic he does not mean the visual tricks and illusions some people can invent.  He is talking about living in a strategic way that will bring upon your life the power and blessing of a supernatural force; a deity, or “God” if you like.  Indeed, look at the ancient Greek religions and their stories; although I think Luke Johnson wouldn’t call them “religions” so much as he’d call them “magic”.  Those stories are all about people doing things to please the gods and get their divine favor for life.  But is that really loving?  No!  Of course not!
            We are going to begin reading through Mark’s gospel in January.  We should be all the way through it during worship by Easter.  Mark’s gospel is among the most tightly and brilliantly constructed pieces of literature ever written.  Details down to the absolutely minute carry incredible meaning.  If you know Mark’s gospel well, or if you remember from three years ago when we read through it, there is one and only one time in the entire gospel that a human character recognizes Jesus as the Son of God.  Who is it and when does that recognition happen? 

It wasn’t the disciples that’s for sure! 

It was the Roman pagan centurion overseeing the crucifixion, and he says it at the moment of Jesus’ death.  For Mark, the ONLY way to understand Jesus’ identity is as the crucified one.  Mark does not have any resurrection appearances in his original writing.  Other later authors added some to his writing. 

From very early on in the gospel Jesus is predicting his death.  Close to half the gospel is focused on Jesus journey to Jerusalem for Passover.  Jesus starts getting in trouble with the religious leaders all the way back in Chapter 2!

You may remember me asking this before.  What is the most important holiday of the year?  It certainly isn’t Christmas!  Easter might come to mind but that’s missing it too.  It is Good Friday.  Good Friday is about love in its purest and most powerful form.  Good Friday is about the work of salvation being accomplished.  Mark’s gospel focuses there because he knows that’s what Jesus is all about.

Theologian Tom Long points out that Jesus shows what it is to be most fully human, and ironically most fully alive, when he is innocently executed.

I don’t say this as a downer at all.  I am pointing out where our scripture takes us, because it shows us the real power of love.

None of us loves perfectly – at least I can’t.  I think all of us, to at least some degree, have a bit of strategy in mind when we love.  Fortunately God is forgiving and does not require perfect love from us before being loving towards us.  However, the truly find the overwhelming and eternal power of love, one lives by it with no expectation of return or reward whatsoever.

To truly love one must first realize that one is good and capable and powerful.  It is to realize that you have good and important things within yourself that can be a blessing to others.  You have them because God gave them to you and they cannot be exhausted.  Your ability to love, your God-given value, is a renewable energy source – not a fossil fuel which will eventually run out.  And so you can give of that inexhaustible goodness from God.  In so doing you discover your truest self.

Ironic, counterintuitive, maybe even crazy – yep.  But that is love.  That is how God runs the universe and how God is acting to save it.

December 6, 2020 Hope Romans 8:18-30

            If you are like me as soon as you see a sign on a door that says, “Employees Only,” or “Do Not Enter,” the first thing you want to do is find out what’s inside.  When I’m at a store I want to know what goes on behind the scenes; see the storeroom behind the façade of the sales floor. 

Strong Hospital used to issue clergy ID badges similar to that of their employees.  They don’t anymore but I wish they still did.  It was a great way to be able to go in after visiting hours and not have to go through the whole ID process.  I’m told that the clergy ID’s were only for that purpose and for parking privileges.  However, mine was like a universal key to the whole hospital.  It unlocked any and every door I ever tried it on.  The front doors – they opened.  The intensive care units, they opened.  Surgical areas, they opened.  I never tried it too widely though.  I thought it was a way to give pastors access without having to bother staff.  But apparently mine was a mistake.  Still though, it made me all the more curious about those locked doors that said: “Operating Room” or “Radioactive” or “Biohazard”.

Anyway, theologian Karl Donfried, Professor of Religion and Biblical Literature at Smith College in Massachusetts suggests that a Christian living in hope has obtained in this life is “access” – not complete entrance – but access to God’s grace.  And then rejoices in the hope of sharing the full glory of God in the ultimate future.  I see it as access into what non-believers think are locked doors.  You get access but perhaps not yet full use of the rooms.  Sometimes we describe hope as being “already but not yet” life in God’s kingdom.  It is living in the limits of the here and now but knowing that by God’s grace fullness of life is surely coming.  Therefore that future has a major effect on the reality we live now.

In the passage from Romans 8 we read, “For in hope we were saved.  Now hope that is seen is not hope.  For who hopes for what is seen?  But if we hope for what we do not see, we wait for it with patience.”  (Romans 8:24-25)

I think when many people say they hope for something they are really filled with doubts.  They find their desired outcome for the future to be doubtful but they are hoping for otherwise.  When I was in college and I found myself hoping to get a good grade on an exam paper I just turned in it meant that I felt I had not done a good job but I hoped for a good grade anyway.

That may be a common way to understand hope, but I do not think that is how St. Paul uses it in his letters.  In our children’s sermon we talked about a child looking to a parent for the fulfillment of basic needs: clothing, food, shelter, stability, physical and emotional safety.  The child hopes for these things and (presuming the parents are good) lives in reasonable certainty that they will be received from the parents on an ongoing basis.  I said then that I think that is how Paul understands hope.  It is the reasonable certainty that God is – and will continue to – provide for our basic needs.

Keep that in mind and hear vs. 26-27 again, “Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we ought, but that very Spirit intercedes with sighs too deep for words.  And God, who searches the heart, knows what is the mind of the Spirit, because it intercedes for the saints according to the will of God.”

I think in the context of hope being the confident expectation of future care we can understand those verses fully.  That is not about being weak.  It is not about knowing how to pray properly.  It is in the context of a child being safe in a parent’s providence.

Also verse 28, which is so often misinterpreted, “We know that all things work together for good for those who love God…”  People read that and with completely good intentions think it means that if you have faith everything will always turn out to be okay.  If things aren’t okay then just keep trusting and praying and working; and if you do so with patience things will eventually come out good.

That attitude is very commendable.  I’d recommend it highly.  However, that thinking is actually too limited. 

To be honest, Romans 8:28 is a problematic verse.  Ancient manuscripts differ in significant ways and no one is perfectly sure what Paul actually meant.  There are some hard core commentaries in the church library that dive into the difficulties, but one thing is for certain.  These verses are not about overcoming personal hardships.

When Paul says, “We know that all things work together for good for those who love God…” he is not talking about the small stuff of any one person’s life.  Remember the previous verses and realize the cosmic scale Paul is using.  Remember he said, “For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the children of God; for the creation was subjected to futility, not of its own will but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope,” there’s our word for today, “that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay and will obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God.” (8:21-22)

He goes on with a powerful image, “We know that the whole creation has been groaning in labor pains until now…”  As a man who has never, and can never, have a child I can only understand that verse distantly.  However I suspect that verse has incredible meaning to any woman who has ever birthed a child.

“All things work together…”  Yes, all things, ALL THINGS – the cosmic reality – is in labor to birth God’s intended fulfillment.  It is intense.  It is universal.  It is God’s work.  It is not ours.  We live in the sure and certain hope of God’s promised fulfillment.  And in a small way, we are invited into that work.

All things work together for good, yes.  But don’t think small.  Instead realize big – cosmic scale!  The whole universe is in travail for whose benefit?  God’s?  No.  Paul does not say that.  He says ours.

While we are part and parcel of the universe humanity plays a deeply important role in the heart of God.  God loves the entire creation but there is something unique and special to God’s love and delight in humanity.

That is the truth and the hope that we live in.

I never want to minimize individual suffering.  Lives can be broken.  Physical pain can be severe.  Sometimes that pain is from a body being abused, and sometimes it because a body just doesn’t grow right or there’s an accident or a disease or cancer or what have you.  There is emotional distress, broken relationships, people being used and exploited and psychiatric damage.  Yes, individual suffering can be real.  God sees it.  God knows it.  God cares about it.  And I wish God would solve it more often than God does.  Yet in the midst of it, I think it is helpful to realize that it is part of the pangs of the whole creation.  It is good to remember that God is up to something big – much bigger than ourselves.

I’ve said this before, and I know it can be guilt inducing, but I don’t mean it that way.

I encourage you to live day to day making decisions based on the hope of what God is up to.  Ask yourself before you buy something, “Will this help me or equip me to be more effective in bringing about God’s kingdom?  Will this help me be who God has created and called me to be?”  I know almost no one does this, but when you buy a house ask, “How will this equip me to be a child of God?  How can I accomplish God’s purposes through this purchase?”

I know that would throw the world of real estate on its head!  The same goes for buying a car.  Ask yourself, “Will this car equip me to be a better Christian and help me carry out God’s work?”  If you ever want to see a puzzled expression on a car salesperson’s face go into the dealership and don’t ask what car is the most dependable, or gets the best gas mileage, or is the most luxurious, or has the best safety record, or any of that kind of stuff.  Ask what car has the features that will best help a Christian live out their faith most effectively.  Since our topic today is hope, maybe we would be asking for a “hopemobile” instead of the “popemobile”.

Silly as this all is, I think it does show how far our culture is from actually living in the real hope that Paul encourages his readers to have.

God is indeed doing big things.  We can count on it.  Like a child knowing good nourishment will be provided by a parent so we also know is providing for us.  Live in that hope and let that hope inspire everything you do.

November 29, 2020 Faith Romans 3:21-27

            A certain preacher was preaching mightily about the need to trust the Lord.  “The good Lord is going to take care of us,” he said.  As he lifted his arms, however, his coat parted and the congregation noticed a pistol tucked into his pants.  After the service one of his members said, “Preacher, I thought you told us we could trust the Lord.”  “Yes, brother,” he said, “you sure can.”  The member retorted, “Then why are you carrying that pistol around?”  Without missing a beat, the pastor said, “That’s to hold off the enemy until the Lord gets here.”

            I use that silly story to introduce this sermon on faith.  Faith is a word with many meanings and how you define it can have real world consequences.

            You may have heard me say before that faith is not the same as believing the historical factuality of biblical stories or intellectually accepting church doctrines.  No, faith is a relationship of trust; especially a relationship of trust with God.

That definition of faith is very much a Lutheran definition of faith.  Many major protestant denominations will define faith similarly.  However the Roman Catholic Church will tend to define faith as intellectually accepting church doctrines and biblical stories.  Neither way of defining faith is categorically right or wrong, but they are different.

A theological dictionary will say faith has two definitions.  One is the belief or mental assent to some truth, whether it be the nature of God or about the past.  The second definition is the basic orientation of the total person, which may include belief but is also about trust, confidence and loyalty.   Again, this first definition is more in line with Roman Catholic use.  The second more in line with the protestant use.

The Roman Catholic use goes back to the period of the early church in the 2^nd century.  We seldom study that time and thus we know little about it.  However, it was a time when Christianity was growing rapidly despite being a technically illegal religion.  There were many religious movements afoot at the time.  Christianity was too young, too new, to have thoroughly developed ideas of orthodoxy.  The Bible was not standardized.  There weren’t widely accepted formal creeds.  There weren’t organized gatherings of church leaders to hash out what was orthodox, and there were many outright nutty beliefs floating around.  Faith came to be strongly understood as intellectual acceptance of certain truths about God.  These early believers looked at Paul’s trio of faith, hope, and love and said that faith was a first step but as it matures it is supplemented by hope and love.

I don’t want to get lost in the technical weeds of it all.  A Roman Catholic scholar could do it all justice.  But the definition of faith depending highly on intellectual acceptance of stories and doctrines runs into very serious real-world problems.  That problem is scientific thought.

Centuries of scientific discoveries, along with critical Bible study methods, have brought into question literal biblical accuracy and the understandings of the universe held by its authors.  Very simply, the biblical authors believed the sun and moon and stars revolved around the earth and things like that.  What then do we do with biblical teachings when human intellect has since called into question their understanding of things.  The stage is set for a faith vs. science conflict; which of course, has played out many times and continues to do so.  In the midst of that conflict far too many people simply abandon faith and biblical teachings as relics left over from the ignorant past.

However, let’s not outright reject this definition of faith and say Luther and some of the other reformers got it right and the Roman Catholics have some catching up to do.  Instead let’s look at how the Bible’s own authors understand faith.

First, we have to realize that the word faith is not used consistently across the Bible.  Different writers define it differently.  I think we learn a lot by using the understanding of faith we find early in the Old Testament as our foundation. 

In the oldest Old Testament writings faith is trust or reliance upon God; God who is himself trustworthy.  This understanding of faith is cosmic and especially for its age, profound.  God stands at the center.  It is God’s initiative and God’s design that is understood to be at work in the act of creation.  God’s initiative and design then continue to be at work in the Exodus story, the covenant, and the establishment of the chosen people. 

The Hebrew word we translate as faith is, for the most part, ‘to be true,’ or solid, or firm.  Think trustworthy, reliable.

In the oldest Old Testament writings faith is not applied to humans so much as it is applied to God.  The question then is: if God is trustworthy, reliable, and true what is the correct human response to it?  In the Old Testament the answer is to live correctly according to the law revealed by God.  The end goal is the restoration of God’s purposes for creation.

For the New Testament understanding of faith we want to use Habakkuk 2:4 as a bridge.  There we have the famous verse we read earlier today, ‘the righteous shall live by faith.’  Faith, here again means trust or fidelity.  Fidelity to God is the sign of a righteous person.  God alone can be the object of trust for God alone is the creator and organizer of the universe.  It is God who creates a person, gives that person value, and who keeps that person safe and whole.

Perhaps to take this out of just theory, let’s use this example.  We may say to ourselves that we accept that God made us and gave us value.  However, how valuable would you feel (how worthwhile would you feel) if you had to live in a broken down Winnebago parked out in the woods somewhere?  Perhaps you’d do it for the deer hunting season and think it’s cool.  But how would you feel if it was your permanent residence?  Would you not feel ashamed?  Would you not feel like a failure, unable to attain success, unable to care for yourself properly?

Faithfulness – trusting in God – means that you know your value lies with God alone; God’s capacity to create value.

Faithfulness also means trusting in God’s ability to bring about your salvation.  It means to use that as a sure and certain hope for the future.  But “hope” is the word for next week.  We’ll leave that one sit for now.

Habakkuk 2:4 is a passage quoted by St. Paul in Romans 1:17 and the foundation of his understanding of faith.  Pulling various pieces of Paul’s letters together to form a cohesive understanding of faith we find that for Paul faith is not an intellectual exercise in accepting doctrines but a dynamic one.  Faith is active.  It is expressed in love.  It involves striving and increases and is an energy that is at work. 

For Paul, faith is a strength that can overcome all things and makes all sorts of hardships not only bearable, but something that can be engaged with confidence.

We’re going to come back to Paul in a minute but another definition of faith in the Bible, especially in Matthew’s gospel, must be noted.  There we have something very similar to what I started by calling a Roman Catholic understanding of faith.  At the conclusion of the story of the centurion’s slave Jesus says, “Go, be it done for you as you have believed.”  Similarly when Jesus heals two blind men he asks, “Do you believe that I am able to do this?”  Also the story of the Canaanite woman who bugs Jesus about healing her daughter give us this line, “O woman, great is your faith!  Be it done for you as you desire.”  There are other examples as well.

Muddying the water though, Matthew does conclude with the story of Jesus resurrection and ascension.  There the disciples see Jesus in person face to face.  Matthew tells us that they worshipped but also doubted.  So, while faith for Matthew does involve belief he also includes wrestling with doubt as an authentic part of faith.  In other words, in Matthew’s gospel faith is not synonymous with unquestioning belief in the supernatural.

Finally though and landing very much were the Old Testament and St. Paul do, faith is a disposition in life that trusts God and is concerned first and foremost living within the idea that God is in the center,

God has things under control,

God can be trusted,

and that God’s salvation will ultimately come about. 

Faith like this is a long-term thing.  Paul does not say faith will give you supernatural protection from calamities or hardships.  Paul does not say faith will help you to conquer all things.  Faith is living in reliance on God’s promises, using them to establish priorities and guide your actions.  Sometimes you may find yourself succeeding.  Sometimes you may feel you are failing.  Always though, faith knows God is faithful and true, and live in that powerful trust.

November 22, 2020 Pseudepigrapha 1 Cor. 10:29-11:16

            Once in a while I come across one of those bumper stickers that say, “If it ain’t King James it ain’t Bible.”  I roll my eyes and think how well intended but misguided the thought it.  It must be said though that the King James translation of the Bible in 1611 is a remarkably good piece of scholarship.  Given the limited number of manuscripts they had available to them at the time, they did very well.  However, the real problem is that people tend to worship the King James translation as divine and unfixed, when in fact it is a translation.  And more there have been any number of inaccuracies discovered since then.

            People get this notion that the Bible fell from the sky as a divine truth for all eternity.  In truth the Bible comes to us from many sources and written over many centuries.  The name itself – Bible – means library, or literary collection.  We do not interpret the Bible evenly.  We give more authority to some parts than to others.  We also recognize that some parts are just plain dated.  In Deuteronomy there are building codes for how to build a house.  That’s perfectly fine, but in those days people used the roofs as living spaces.  We don’t anymore so things like make sure you put a railing around the roof just doesn’t make sense.

            The other thing is that while the biblical text is pretty much firmly set today – using 1^st century Greek, not 16^th century English – that was not always the case.  In confirmation class we’ve looked at how texts were often merged and edited over time.  Also, some things claim to be written by people who most certainly did not write them.

            There is pretty much a scholarly consensus that everything in the Bible claiming to have been written by St. Paul was not written by St. Paul.  Yes, books like Romans, Philippians, Galatians 1^st and 2^nd Corinthians, and others were written by Paul.  Some, like 1^st and 2^nd Timothy and Titus were not, despite claiming that they were.

            It appears that as St. Paul’s writing became authoritative others also began to write in his name.  Some of it was done in good faith.  Some was not.  The point is that it happened.

            St. Paul is often considered to be a very sexist writer.  I disagree.  In Galatians 3:28 Paul writes that in faith, “there is no longer Jew nor Greek, there is no longer slave nor free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.”  That attitude stays pretty consistent across all of the writings firmly believed to have been written by Paul.  However, that is not the case in some of those claiming to be written by Paul, but not.

            And then there are cases like 1 Corinthians 10-11.  These are cases where it appears as if someone has added something into the text.  This one is kind of funny which is why I chose it to get at the topic.  Let me read to you from Chapter 10 into 11:

            “²³“All things are lawful,” but not all things are beneficial. “All things are lawful,” but not all things build up. ²⁴Do not seek your own advantage, but that of the other. ²⁵Eat whatever is sold in the meat market without raising any question on the ground of conscience, ²⁶for “the earth and its fullness are the Lord’s.” ²⁷If an unbeliever invites you to a meal and you are disposed to go, eat whatever is set before you without raising any question on the ground of conscience. ²⁸But if someone says to you, “This has been offered in sacrifice,” then do not eat it, out of consideration for the one who informed you, and for the sake of conscience— ²⁹I mean the other’s conscience, not your own. For why should my liberty be subject to the judgment of someone else’s conscience? ³⁰If I partake with thankfulness, why should I be denounced because of that for which I give thanks? ³¹So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do everything for the glory of God. ³²Give no offense to Jews or to Greeks or to the church of God, ³³just as I try to please everyone in everything I do, not seeking my own advantage, but that of many, so that they may be saved.

11Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ.

¹⁷Now in the following instructions I do not commend you, because when you come together it is not for the better but for the worse. ¹⁸For, to begin with, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you; and to some extent I believe it. ¹⁹Indeed, there have to be factions among you, for only so will it become clear who among you are genuine. ²⁰When you come together, it is not really to eat the Lord’s supper….  “  (1 Corinthians 10:29-11:1, 11:17-20)

 

…and that may start to sound familiar because we read that last week. 

I’m guessing that made sense to you, or as much sense as Paul’s writings ever make.  The arguments tend to flow along.  Paul is talking about the freedom of a Christian, especially in eating, and not being bound by social conventions.  Then he goes on to talk about abuses and problems when they meet for their community meals.  That’s what we read last week.

The thing is, I skipped 15 verses in what I read!  Right in the midst of a conversation about the freedom of a Christian and an ongoing conversation about food is a 15 verse digression about women’s hairstyles in 1^st century Corinth.  Those 15 verses are considered by many to be a “textual corruption.”  That is something dropped in by a different author some time after the original text was written.  Let me read it again, and I don’t think you have to be an expert to feel the change in tone that takes place, and then a return again. 

²³“All things are lawful,” but not all things are beneficial. “All things are lawful,” but not all things build up. ²⁴Do not seek your own advantage, but that of the other. ²⁵Eat whatever is sold in the meat market without raising any question on the ground of conscience, ²⁶for “the earth and its fullness are the Lord’s.” ²⁷If an unbeliever invites you to a meal and you are disposed to go, eat whatever is set before you without raising any question on the ground of conscience. ²⁸But if someone says to you, “This has been offered in sacrifice,” then do not eat it, out of consideration for the one who informed you, and for the sake of conscience— ²⁹I mean the other’s conscience, not your own. For why should my liberty be subject to the judgment of someone else’s conscience? ³⁰If I partake with thankfulness, why should I be denounced because of that for which I give thanks? ³¹So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do everything for the glory of God. ³²Give no offense to Jews or to Greeks or to the church of God, ³³just as I try to please everyone in everything I do, not seeking my own advantage, but that of many, so that they may be saved.

11Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ. 

 

²I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions just as I handed them on to you. ³But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the husband is the head of his wife, and God is the head of Christ. ⁴Any man who prays or prophesies with something on his head disgraces his head, ⁵but any woman who prays or prophesies with her head unveiled disgraces her head—it is one and the same thing as having her head shaved. ⁶For if a woman will not veil herself, then she should cut off her hair; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or to be shaved, she should wear a veil. ⁷For a man ought not to have his head veiled, since he is the image and reflection of God; but woman is the reflection of man. ⁸Indeed, man was not made from woman, but woman from man. ⁹Neither was man created for the sake of woman, but woman for the sake of man. ¹⁰For this reason a woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. ¹¹Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man or man independent of woman. ¹²For just as woman came from man, so man comes through woman; but all things come from God. ¹³Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head unveiled? ¹⁴Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears long hair, it is degrading to him, ¹⁵but if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her for a covering. ¹⁶But if anyone is disposed to be contentious—we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God.

 

¹⁷Now in the following instructions I do not commend you, because when you come together it is not for the better but for the worse. ¹⁸For, to begin with, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you; and to some extent I believe it. ¹⁹Indeed, there have to be factions among you, for only so will it become clear who among you are genuine. ²⁰When you come together, it is not really to eat the Lord’s supper.

 

            I hope that sounded absurd to you.  Again, right in the midst of a conversation about the freedom of a Christian and a conversation about food, there is an aside about hair styles!  And there’s something about men praying with hats on that is disgraceful but women must have something on their heads.  And there is the bit about women having something of authority on her head because of the angels.

            It is an outright absurd argument.

            It must be said that many scholars do think these verses are authentic to Paul and original to the letter.  Obviously I am among those who do not think so.

            For some reason, who knows why, I believe these verses were added.  Some textual corruptions throughout history – and there are many of them, not just in the Bible – are done with good intent.  Some are done in ways that go against the intent of the author.

            My whole point is that the text of scripture is not as simple and straightforward as many assume.  The Bible as we have it did not come into the form we recognize until centuries after Jesus.  Different churches had different books in their Bibles – some more, some less.

            The Bible as we have it today emerged as a consensus of Christians over several centuries. 

            Those who explore ancient copies of scriptural writings find them to be fragmentary and varied.  It is a mistake to think that the Bible in any form ever just fell from the sky.

            Now, the Bible is considered the rule and norm for faith.  Almost all Christians across the world acknowledge it to be the highest authority.  And so whether we like what the texts say, or find them offensive, or if we find them relevant or dated, or whether we believe they are authentic to their original authors or insertions by others, they are all still authoritative.

            One of my seminary professors liked to say that it is all authoritative and we have to deal with it whether we like it or not.

            No church, no matter how much they claim to follow the Bible to the letter, does so.  The Bible is a huge collection of writings.  It contradicts itself numerous times.  The newest parts of it are still over 1800 years of age, and some appear to reach back 3000 years.  All of it was written in a time and place and language vastly different from our own. 

            Most people, whether they will admit it or not, accept some parts of the Bible and reject others. 

            A different seminary professor used to say it was best to see the Bible as a target with a bullseye.  The question was what is the bullseye?  For Lutherans and many protestant churches it is the book of Romans.  For Catholics it is Matthew’s gospel.  For many evangelicals looking for the end of the world it is Revelation.

            For me, I find the Bible to be centuries of writings inspired by God that show the struggle of humanity to grasp the ungraspable.  Context and structure are highly important in interpretation.  And even those parts we don’t like we can’t chuck out.  I’ve often said that if the Bible doesn’t offend you every time you read it you aren’t reading it carefully enough.

            The Bible is not a book to cozy up to.  It is a book that will challenge and inspire and teach and shape you.

            Complex and messy as it is, it will authentically and undeniably reveal God’s love for the world and God’s grace to humanity.  It is a holy book.  It will not give you simple answers to complex problems.  It will invite you into a journey for wholeness.

            Regardless of whether you have long hair or short hair, or are bald, or have bedhead because you haven’t combed your hair this morning, or if you’re wearing a hat - or not, you are God’s beloved creation.  May God speak to you in the Bible, and through prayer and through others around you; in order to love you and shape you every day. 

November 15, 2020 Orderly Worship 1 Corinthians 11:17-26, 14:26-33, 37-40

            Why do we worship the way we do?  Where do we get the idea that worship should be something that is done all together on a Sunday morning, in a special room, in a special building called a church?  (Of course with Zoom and this pandemic we are proving those don’t have to be limits!)  Why do we set up seating the way we do?  Why do we have a sermon and music and Bible reading and prayer and sometimes communion and all that sort of stuff?

            The truthful answers to most of these things -for us- is because that’s just what we’re used to.  It’s what we’ve grown up doing, or it’s just what every other church does.  We just assume that’s the way worship should be done.

            Perhaps another question isn’t why do we worship the way we do, but why do we worship at all?  What is the purpose?

            When I was a kid I remember comparing worship services with other church-going friends.  It seemed like all Lutherans worshipped basically the same way.  And all United Methodists worshipped the same way.  And all Roman Catholics worshipped the same way.  And all UCC worshipped the same way, and so on.  It seemed like what made church denominations distinct was the way they worshipped. 

There was also comparing of worship furnishings.  Why did some churches have simple things and other churches had all sorts of elaborate worship stuff around?  Of course of great importance to kids (and adults too if they admit it) is how long does the preacher talk each week?

            Kids will also have deeper questions that adults have too, but are too shy to ask.  Things like, what kind of worship does God like the most?  Or, perhaps they think that God is happy with you if you go to worship and maybe upset with you if you don’t.  For those people going to worship means finding the church whose worship is the most lively or engaging; or perhaps what church has the best music, the most entertaining sermons; or the shortest service.

             Anyway, what is the purpose of worship?  Is it to make God happy with us?  Is your plan on judgment day to hold up a worship attendance chart and show you’ve attending the requisite percentage of services? 

And again, why do we do what we do?

            The answer to why worship is simple.  It is God’s gift to us, for our building up, for our nourishment.  It is not our gift to God.  Participating in worship should be like sitting down to a nourishing meal.  Avoiding worship then is starving yourself of nourishment.   

The answer to why we do what we do is very complicated.  Christian worship has developed over centuries.  What we do here on a Sunday morning is based on worship in the 4^th century.  That’s when Christianity went from being an illegal religion in the Roman Empire to being not only legal, but the official religion of the Roman Empire.  If you’re interested in learning how worship developed you can borrow the book Christian Liturgy by Frank Senn. 

The real question of why do we do what we do is something we should ask ourselves over and over again.  The Bible gives no real guidance for worship outside of what we read in 1^st Corinthians today.  And we can sum up that guidance easily in two questions.  Does it nurture faith?  And, is it orderly?  Orderly not meaning strict and formal, but orderly as opposed to complete chaos.

The Christians in Corinth had nothing to go on to build their worship experiences.  They were Christians who had converted from what we would call paganism.  Contrast them with Christians who had converted from Judaism – or perhaps we should call them Jews who accepted Jesus as the Son of God.  For them worship was pretty easy.  They just kept doing what they were already doing.  Many of them even worshipped in the same synagogues.  There is a second century writing called The Didache which is a manual for church order.  It is Jewish/Christian in origin and it is basically practical advice on tweaking Jewish practices to teach Christian beliefs.

Churches like the Corinthians, with non-Jewish roots, had no such blueprints.  We have no way of getting a clear picture of what their worship was like.  The Bible doesn’t say.  But looking across the New Testament we do get some hints.  Biblical scholars suggest they were gathering for these things called “love feasts”.  They were basically potluck dinners.  Wealthier people would bring more and so in a very real way help provide food for the poor.  These dinners would include communion but it wasn’t a wafer of bread and a thimble sized glass of wine.  It was significant quantities of shared bread and wine. 

They also appear to have had time for singing, teaching, and maybe more charismatic things like speaking in tongues and prophesying. 

People being people, there were all sorts of problems.  From what Paul writes to the Corinthians it appears as if some people are bringing food but not sharing.  It would be like coming to a potluck supper at church but only bringing food for your family and close friends – or having delectable that you only share with choice people while excluding others.  It also appears as if wealthy people were able to arrive earlier than poorer people.  They’d eat their fill and not leave much for those who needed it most.  And of course, with large quantities of wine around, people were getting drunk.  (The only excuse I can come up with for that is that the sermons were really long and really boring!  Actually they probably didn’t have sermons.)

There also appears to have been chaos.  With no real plan in place some people overwhelmed others with their talking, or they interrupted.  Instead of imagining people sitting in rows facing forward imagine rows of tables with food – again, like a potluck supper with no real plan or MC.  We find Paul’s overarching advice in the final verse we read, “…all things should be done decently and in order.”

God has not placed rules, regulations, and expectations upon worship.  No one form of worship is more pleasing to God than another.  The only rule is that it be done to nurture faith and help people grow.  Just as there are a variety of people we should expect there to be a variety of worship.

I think it is our loss when the only way we worship is to have a preplanned service printed in a bulletin, sit in rows facing forward, politely listen during a sermon, and then in a very solemn way receive a scrap of bread and trace of wine.  Yes, there is much to be said for that.  But it should not be our only way.

You may remember that we have experimented with many things over the years.  Our Maundy Thursday service these last several years has been more like the early Christian love feasts.  We’ve also experimented with the dinner church model during Lent.  There cooking is a part of the worship experience too.  Plus there is clean-up!  The whole point is to move worship beyond just an orderly intellectual exercise and into something truly interactive and tangible. 

What happens many Sunday mornings when there are visitors?  We try to be friendly.  We welcome them, offer any help, hope they feel at home; but for the most part there is no real interaction until coffee hour.  Contrast that with what it is to cook with someone and share a meal.  These are also valid and important ways of building Christian community through worship.

As the dean of our conference I am working with several churches on the verge of closure.  Congregations think that in order to be a viable community of faith they need to own and operate a building, have a weekly formal worship service on a Sunday morning, have a pastor there to give a decent sermon, and have everything else that goes along with it.

Again, all of these things have their place, but we are missing the richness of ways God will nurture our faith when we limit it to a formal event once a week on a Sunday morning.

It is a real struggle, but I am trying to convince congregations that they can be very vital and valid churches if they do what their faith ancestors did in the love feasts.  They could be any day of the week or time.  They wouldn’t need a pastor at each and every one.

But old ways of finding meaning are deeply entrenched.  That is simply reality.  But again, whether our church is flourishing or dying, it is our loss when we only worship in the way we do on Sunday mornings.

My prayer is that we can embrace the fulness of worship opportunities that can be made, that we be creative, experiment, and explore.  Ultimately our faith is not buildings and rituals it is the faith of Christ alive and growing in our hearts making a real impact in this world.