WAKING UP - A Homily

As we are at the advent of a New Year, I want to share the last homily I gave in 2019.  It was written as a New Year's homily for the  new Church Year, but it applies to any new year.  This homily was delivered at Christ Episcopal Church, Yankton, South Dakota on December 1, 2019

WAKING UP

+ In the Name of our loving and life-giving God +

“Wachet auf, ruft uns die stimme…” is the clarion call of our first hymn in its original German language.

Waking up is the perennial theme associated with the first Sunday of Advent, the beginning of a new Church Year. Equally perennial is that the scripture readings at the end of a church year and the beginning of a church year focus on the continuum of end times as beginning times, as an eschatological bridge completing the old in the new.

Although the end times are the focus of these readings, they ride on a rail of the present.  When Jesus talks about the end times, it is usually in response to someone’s question about knowing when such things will happen or when he sees his disciple being distracted by the wonders of the Temple, the context in which this morning’s second lesson from the Gospel of Matthew is set.

When the Gospels were written, the early Christians were expecting the Second Coming of Christ to happen in their lifetimes.  Before today’s reading from Matthew, Jesus says, “Truly, I tell you.  This generation shall not pass, till all things are fulfilled.” [1]  Jesus goes on to say, however, “But about that day and hour no one knows, neither the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.”[2]  When reading all the accounts of Jesus talking about the end times in the Gospels, it becomes clear that Jesus uses the end times to awaken us to what we’re doing right now, today.

Two thousand years have passed since these scriptures were written and for two thousand years the call to awaken has not diminished in the context of the times of each and every successive generation.  While some today continue to focus on getting ready to jump this planet at the first sign of Christ’s Second Coming, Paul pulls us back from that theological cliff.

In our first reading, the apostle Paul picks up this theme of paying attention to the here and now: “…it is now the moment for you to wake from sleep …the night is far gone, the day is near.”[3]  We are always living in this cusp of completion, “…the night (the time for sleep) is far gone, the day is near.  Now (the present) is the moment to wake from sleep.”

One might ask, “What is this wakeup call all about?  Do we really need one?” 

Perhaps the best way to answer those questions is to personally and sincerely ask ourselves what we find difficult to open our eyes to.  Jesus addresses such questions by causing us to take a deeper look at our daily lives in the dawning light of the nearing day.

Jesus literally goes on a two chapter tirade about the end times in the Gospel of Matthew when his disciples go dreamy eyed on him about all the glittering, man-made wonders of the Temple. Within Jesus’s non-stop discourse is included not only today’s reading, but also the parable of the “Wise and Foolish Virgins,” about staying awake because the Son of Man, the Bridegroom comes when least expected, in the dead of night.[4]   It includes the parable of the “Talents,” the coins the head of a household gives his servants while he’s away and returns to find two of the three servants used them to make a profit for the head of the household, but one buried the one coin he was given; doing nothing with it, leading him to cursed and cast out;[5] a reminder that there is never a time for apathy, as there will be work to be done until the very end.

Jesus’s discourse ends by bringing his disciples back to the present time and how we treat one another.  He does this by ending with the Day of Judgment; with the story how the Son of Man as the King of Glory will divide the sheep from the goats.  He ends by telling that those considered the sheep are the ones who fed the King when he was hungry, clothed him when he was naked, visited him when he was in prison and because of such deeds, they will inherit his kingdom.  He ends by telling that, in their sheepish state of surprise at inheriting the kingdom, the sheep ask the King, “But when did we do these things,” to which the King replies, “When you did these things to least of my brothers and sisters, you did it to me.”[6]

What really demonstrates how asleep we are, is the consistent dismissing the needs of others as their problem, not ours.  What really can bore us into a coma-like slumber are the judgmental and polarizing efforts that plague us today; where we are being led to perceive some as clear winners and others as clear losers. 

Advent, this new Church Year [this New Year 2020], begins with its perennial wake-up call; a call to becoming what God has always intended us to be, his children; to live into being just that, as Jesus did with eyes wide open to the present. 

Advent is a prophetic season.  It is a season to get us to look at today and see things for what they are and what they are not.  It is a season to let go of the past, the darkness of the night long gone. It is a season to awaken to the hope of a dawning day. It is a season to watch faithfully for the light of the nearing day.  Above all, Advent is a season to allow the ever present love of God to embrace us in the soon to be born in us.[7]

Let us pray:

Most gracious and loving Father, awaken us to the light of the nearing day, and grant us the courage to let go of the day long past, that in this time of becoming we may serve you faithfully in service towards others through Jesus Christ our Lord.  Amen

* * * * * * * * * *

Until next time, stay faithful.

Norm

---

[1] Matthew 24:34

[2] Matthew 24:36

[3] Romans 13:11b&12b

[4] See Matthew 25:1-13

[5] See Matthew 25:14-30

[6] See Matthew 25:31-40

[7] The concept inspired by the hymn, “O Little Town of Bethlehem” by Phillip Brooks and the line “…cast out our sin and enter in, be born in us today.”

LIVING GRATEFULLY - A Homily

At the end of 2019, I am posting two homilies I gave during the close of the Church Year that centered around the theme of thanksgiving. This homily was presented at Christ Episcopal Church, Yankton, South Dakota on November 10, 2019.

LIVING GRATEFULLY

+ In the Name of our gracious and loving God +

One of the legacies Fr. Jim Pearson established for our church family was to use the short period between All Saints Day and the First Sunday of Advent as a season of Thanksgiving.  In keeping with that legacy I invite us to reflect on what it means to live a life of gratitude as the deepest expression of our faith, hope, and love in God.

Like so many things in life, developing a life of gratitude begins at home.  So this morning I give thanks to God for my wife, Kathy; for the love that binds us together, for her love that sustains me, that keeps me in check, and in so many ways has shaped me to be the person I am.  I am grateful for our children, our daughters Andrea and Elizabeth, who bring us much joy.

Gratitude is an essential feature of a healthy home environment, and it is also an essential feature of a healthy church environment.  And like a family, we don’t get to choose who becomes a member of it.  As Paul wrote to the church at Thessalonica, “We must always give thanks to God for you brothers and sister beloved by the Lord, because God chose you…”[1]    God has chosen all of us because God has created all of us.  Like Paul, we are to be grateful to God for those who come through our church doors and into our lives; seeing them and treating them as a gift from God.

It is easy for me to be grateful for this congregation and grateful to it; for the opportunity to serve as your organist and to be able to stand here this morning and deliver this homily.  I thank God for all of you, who by your very presence here today is a service to all who are here because all of you, in your own and various ways, are gifted by God to contribute to the overall ministry of spreading the Gospel of Christ in your daily lives.  

Living life in gratitude readily dismisses the attitude of taking anyone or anything for granted.  Living life in gratitude requires a dogged determination to seek and to find the goodness inherent in all of God’s creation; including those who would treat us badly and those who might be considered an enemy, as we heard in last’s week’s Gospel.[2]  That type of gratitude and grateful living always seems to be in short supply.

When we think about giving thanks, it is helpful to keep in mind that throughout our nation’s history this practice; this dogged type of giving thanks has been woven into our nation’s fabric through various proclamations from the time of the pilgrims to during and after the Revolutionary War until Thanksgiving was proclaimed a Federal holiday by President Lincoln in 1863; a time when our nation faced its greatest existential threat, the Civil war; a time when there seemed so little to be thankful for.

It is against the backdrop of uncertain times that giving thanks as a nation has always been juxtaposed.  It is against the backdrop of uncertain times that our forefathers and foremothers remind us that we are completely reliant on the blessings of a benevolent and loving God; that gratitude is to be woven into all our endeavors to help create a better world for ourselves and our posterity.

  

It is against such backdrops that giving thanks becomes more than a momentary nod of appreciation; that living thankfully is to be a persistent attitude that we, as individuals, as a community of faith, and as a nation aspire to carry with us at all times; for it is in thankful living that we are enabled to see and to seize the opportunities in which to exercise gratitude as kindness and to pay forward the benevolence of God without exception or expectation of a return in kind.

And grateful living begins with me, it begins with you, it begins in our homes, and it begins in our church home because gratefulness cannot be mandated by proclamation or law but must come from the truly grateful hearts of each and every one of us.  So this morning I ask that we express our gratitude for each other as we share the peace of Christ with one another (something you’re good at doing very well) because there is no peace without gratitude.

In closing, I want to share a prayer with you that I have used at family gatherings on Thanksgiving.  I found this handwritten prayer in the back of a book of poetry belonging to Kathy’s great aunt, Esther Taskerud. 

Aunt Esther was a remarkable woman born and raised in this state, ahead of her time, a trailblazer, and a pioneer in establishing 4-H programs in her adopted state of Oregon and serving for a time as a trustee for the National 4-H foundation.  Esther eventually became the Director of the Home Economics Extension Program at Oregon State University; a person I was blessed with getting to know and a person who knew the value of living a life in gratitude.

This is her handwritten prayer.  Let us pray:

Eternal and ever loving Father, we remember before Thee, the weaknesses and sins which so easily betray us in the relationships of the home; but we remember also in gratitude the depth of Thy mercy and the renewing power of the forgiveness which is born of love.

We would be strengthened by Thee that Thy desires for our homes may have fulfillment, that the richness of Thy love may find expression in us and in our children.

We dedicate to Thee the homes which Thou hast blessed us:

                Our daily life in those homes;

                Our words and deeds;

                Our hopes and aspirations;

                Our hearts and wills;

Beseeching Thee to transform them with the touch of Thy divine power, and to bring them into harmony with Thy will. Amen.

               

* * * * * * * * * * 

 Until next time, stay faithful.  

Norm

---

[1] 2 Thessalonians 2:13

[2] See Luke 6:27

THE CONSERVATION OF SOUL

In my previous post, I reflected on spirit being an essential element of life from a theological perspective. In this post, I want to reflect on spirit from a more scientific perspective.  To be upfront, I am no scientist in any sense of the word, but science in all its various disciplines intrigues me because in my opinion they validate the wisdom found in so many of our ancient scriptures.

I think any difficulty in the discourse between science and theism resides in the focus of what science and theism are trying to explain and the language used to explain it.  Science is detailed orientated, using the language of math and scientific symbol to seek specific answers to the what, where, and how of things and establishing rational formulas (laws) based on fact to render them applicable.  On the other hand, various forms of theism are primarily geared to answer one question, the why of human existence and human experience; the answers to which are expressed in various forms of sacred scriptures which are then distilled into religions doctrines or teachings.

Where religion and science meet, in my opinion, is in the rare speculative fields of science known as theoretical math and physics.  Speculation is the junction where theory and theology meet; the gray area of uncertainty, the realm of possibility that borders probability.  The fact that theory and theology share the same Greek word for God as their root is serendipitous if not by design.  Both explore the fundamental ontological questions regarding our existence and both find themselves wrapped in an enigma.

Where science seems to have the advantage in this exploration of said enigma is in its acceptance that it does not know everything; that it is okay in dealing with uncertainty because obtaining certainty is a perennial challenge; a sought after but unattainable goal, because for every question answered, new questions arise.  Christian theology, on the other hand and in particular, has been slow in accepting the importance of uncertainty, but it is changing and even though Paul was there long before others started pouring concrete on their theologies, Christian theologians are starting to embrace the idea that uncertainty provides greater flexibility to our understanding of existence and human experience than an unquestionable certainty.  [See 1 Corinthians 13:12]

In my last post, I identified spirit as the essential element of life as we know it; that spirit bonds with  necessary physical elements to create a living being, as in a human being.  Accordingly, I speculated when a person dies, the physical breaks down to its chemical elements and the spirit/animating element returns to its source, the Being-in-which-we-live-move-and-have-our-being, God which I described in other posts as a nominal/pronominal verb. [See Acts 17:28]

In my last post, I suggested that in the resurrection story of Jesus there occurred an inverse of the incarnation; that the resurrection was not a physical resuscitation of the incarnated Word, but rather the creation of a new spiritual being that enveloped (carried with it) the human experience of Jesus as the resurrected Christ. [See 1 Corinthians 15:42-49]  Given this speculative view, the question becomes how does this relate to theoretical physics.

At a very fundamental level if we were to take the language of theism and science and find equivalent terms applicable to both, one might better understand the link that exists between the two. The language of theism divides the components of being as we experience it into two general categories, the physical and the spirited.  Science divides the components of being into two general categories also, matter and energy which roughly correlate to the notion of the physical and spirit. What fascinates me with these equivalencies is that science has two laws governing matter and energy; namely, the Conservation of Matter and the Conservation of Energy, which roughly states that matter cannot be created or destroyed in an isolated environment and, likewise, energy cannot be created or destroyed. Theisms also support this concept in terms of the physical and spirit.

When researching these laws, a word associated with both when combined in a "happening" was referred to as "soul" as the durable part of such a happening.  I'm not clear on what "happening" and "durable" mean in a strictly scientific context, but that the term soul appeared in the context of a discussion of these laws resonates with where I was headed in this post.  Although I found nothing to explain the term "soul" as it relates to the Conservation of Matter, it serves as the juncture in which science and theism meet; the durable part of being that comes from these two uncreated and indestructible sources in an act of creation, scientifically understood as a happening in which something becomes existent.

I believe it was the 18th century chemist, Antoine Lavoisier who concluded that given the Conservation of Matter, the universe, being a macro-isolated environment unto itself, must have a constant weight; that whatever is happening in the universe does not change the weight of the universe no matter how much it expands or contracts; as such, its incalculable weight necessarily was present in the singularity that gave way to the universe before its realization.  The same rationale also be applies to energy; that energy is a constant that never diminishes, that it too was present the moment the universe exploded into being.

What we experience as something new emerging is, theoretically speaking, something constantly being recreated from uncreated and indestructible sources; a view consistent with an understanding of God in Abrahamic theisms, as a God who does not slumber or sleep but is constantly recreating all things because all things are not in essence changed on an elemental level, but are being  recreated by an uncreated and indestructible constant expressed as God. [See Psalm 121;3 and Isaiah 65:17-18]

In common usage, soul and spirit are treated as synonymous terms, but used here, they are not.[See 1Thessalonians 5;23]  Soul is what happens when matter is infused with energy to become an entity in the universe or, theistically speaking, when physical elements are infused with spirit to become a living soul.  Both science and theism see the soul as the durable part of an existent being.  This is demonstrable in the macrocosmic universe.  Stars and galaxies are made up of light and matter of various types.  When stars die and galaxies are sucked into dark holes, their presence endures as an energy that can be seen by the naked human eye (with the help of telescopes), centuries and millennia after their real time disappearance.

Light and energy travels with the imprint of the matter it infused. It's ending is only comprehended in our time when, over time, this energy completely passes us by.  The imprint will continue as long as the universe exists and will collapse into a singularity when it doesn't, but the weight and energy of its presence never goes away.

On the microcosmic level, one can speculate that the creative happening of The Big Bang continues to resonate at the most fundamental subatomic levels; a view indicated in what is known at Chaos Theory. This broad theory suggests the existence of an extremely fluid, nonlinear cause and effect relationship between things and events that has no distinct pattern, but when applied in particle physics suggests that at an infinitesimal small level, discernable only as theory, the fluid state of the universe's origins continues to reside in everything that exists in the macrocosmic universe.  This is a speculative hypothesis that can be distilled from theory and to some extent from theology [See Genesis 1:1-2].

Bringing all of this back to a theological application, the human being is a result of an ongoing creative process at the most fundamental level which is not discernible without the aid of speculative  theory and, in this case, speculative theology.  Once again, the difference between these two disciplines is in how they work and what they work with.

Science is fact based.  It's laws are based on facts that can prove how things occur and its theories are based on formulae that is derived on factual knowledge that allows one to speculate on the possibility how things work. Theology is more ancient than science and less concerned with fact and more concerned with truth as it relates to the human experience.  Theology is a rational approach to knowledge largely obtained through intuition and speculation garnered from experience.

This intuitive approach, however, is not dismissed or displaced by a pure scientific approach to what it means to be human.  This being said does not dismiss the fact that science is far superior in identifying and addressing many of the current problems we humans face, but rather there are other things at play in the human experience that are better viewed from a sense of faith and intuition.

What we do and what happens to us has a durable effect on ourselves and the universe. That this durability of experience, the soul, will continue after our this current existence ends is within the realm of possibilities that border probability.  The physical returns to its elemental nature, and the spirit to the source of all being. Death is nothing more than the cessation of the current. Time has no meaning to God. Time is only an intuitive device derived from human experience to measure the decay of the things we experience. The soul, theologically and theoretically, becomes recreated as a new spiritual creation imprinted with the experience of the current and is ever-present in that Being-in-which-we-live-move-and-have-our-being. [See Luke 20:38]

Admittedly, all of this is highly speculative, but such speculation sparks the imagination as to its possible applications.

Until next time, stay faithful.

Norm

COMMENDING ONE'S SPIRIT

Then Jesus, crying with a loud voice, said, ‘Father, into your hands I commend my spirit.’ Having said this, he breathed his last.  Luke 23:46

* * * * * * * * * *

I find the most intriguing story about Jesus is the passion story, the final days of Jesus' physical life on this planet. Of all the other things in the New Testament that are said about Jesus, the story of his suffering and death affirms Jesus being one of us, a human being.  Human beings die and so did Jesus.  

Jesus saying, "Father, into your hands I commend my spirit" is only found in the Gospel of Luke.   The Gospels of Matthew and Mark merely say that the at end of Jesus life he cried with a loud voice and gave up his spirit. This final crying out is given meaning in Luke, and Luke's account is what has stuck with me because it offers a possible explanation to what occurs at the moment of one's death.

THE EXPERIENCE OF SPIRIT

As a faith-based agnostic, I make no presumptions about will happen when we die.  I can only speculate, at best.  My faith in God (that Being in which we live and move and have our being) is not based on what will happen when I die, my faith in God is based on the experience of God in the present. 

Any thoughts I entertain about an afterlife is simply based on this present life which, in my opinion,  suggests the probability of there being more to existence than the physical life I am currently experiencing.  What also suggests this probability comes from my personal observation of people who have just died prior to any cosmetic make-over by a mortician.  

The one thing that strikes me about someone who has just died is the overwhelming sense of absence; as in, the lights are out and nobody is home.  It's this absence of being that brings into question what happened to the life, the energy, that animated this person's physical body at the moment of death.

We tend to treat life as a purely physical phenomenon, that begins at conception and ends at death, but is that accurate?  On a purely observational level it would appear to be, but the human experience lends itself to understand there is more to being alive than merely being an animated physical presence.  Spirit is the driving force, the energy, the marker that identifies all living matter, including the entire universe.

We do not see spirit; however, we experience its presence and it's absence.  It is experience that suggests there is more to the universe, more to the animated physical world than the physical eye can observe.  The concept of spirit is frequently related to the personal experience of an acquired feeling.

Feeling, as used here, is the inner experience we obtain through our physical senses; in that, what we see, touch, smell, taste and hear result in forming an immediate inner feeling (good, bad, pleasant, unpleasant, etc.) about those sensations, and I would also add that our inner thoughts and inner conversations result in acquiring feelings.  It is those feelings that result in and define our experiences, and it is our experiences that stick with us and shape who we are. It is experience that gives credence to the concept of spirit.

It is the moment of both conception and death that the rational mind struggles with the notion of one's ability to experience as a necessary component of existence.   Is conception and death, strictly speaking, experiential on the part of the person conceived or dead or are they merely experiential on the part of an observer; as in the case of conception, the woman who becomes impregnated or in the case of the deceased, the deceased's family and friends?

Was there a me before the me I am?  Will there be a me after I die?  Is there something that is essentially me or does my existence present a current expression of a fundamental, over-arching existential essence?

To such questions, I can provide no answers beyond the speculative. Instead, I will turn to theology which will not answer these questions, but may give clarity and definition in asking them.

THE SPIRITUAL ESSENCE OF CREATION

The theological proposition presented in the Gospel of John as the Word, the creative utterance, that brought the universe as the essential nature of Jesus is suggestive.  Because if this is true about Jesus, then it must be true of us also, because according to the biblical scriptures, we are necessarily the result of this same creative utterance.

The first chapter of John is a summary rewrite of the creation story found in the first chapters of Genesis in which all creation comes into being through the Word.  The difficulty with the Gospel of John is that it attempts to make Jesus the one and only incarnated being, a view that is inconsistent with the creation of humankind described in Genesis and with Luke 3:38, "... Adam which was the son of God."

Genesis presents a broader view of the spirit or wind of God as the creative force that brought about the universe.  In another post, I suggested and described this spiritual force as the desire to be; that in essence the singularity that became the universe was spirited, activated, animated, released with spirit to take shape; to experience and be experienced.

I defined creation as a kenotic act in which that "Being-in-which-we-live-move-and-have-our-being," commonly known as God,  is constantly expending "being" in order to expand "being."  It seems to me that this expanding while expending trait of God is imprinted on all that God creates, including us.

As such, when Jesus cried out with his last breath it was his final kenotic act on earth; a complete emptying of his binary self as God incarnate.   In Luke's account of this moment, Jesus commends his spirit, his essential self to that Self we all embody; the creative breath, wind, and spirit of the living and life-giving God.  If this is true, then the resurrection seems possible, if not probable.

THE PROBABILITY OF RESURRECTION

The apostle Paul, in his first letter to the Church at Corinth writes:

"There are celestial (spiritual) bodies and bodies terrestrial (physical); but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.  So also is the resurrection...  It (the physical body) is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body, and there is a spiritual body.  And so it is written, the first man Adam was made a living soul (incarnated spirit); the last Adam was made a quickening (life -giving) spirit.  [1Corintians 15: 40, 42a, and 45 - KJV]

Paul presents a dichotomous understanding of creation; as there being two separate types of created beings; one physical (by nature thoroughly corrupt) and one spiritual (by nature incorruptible).  In this sense, Paul seemingly dismisses, as being dichotomous, the binary elements of the "natural" human as being.  A view that is in contrast with the first and second chapters of  Genesis and the first chapter of the Gospel of John:

In the first and second chapters of Genesis we find:

" So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. [Genesis 1:27 KJV] And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul (an incarnate spirit). [Genesis 2:7 KJV]

In the first chapter of the Gospel of John we find:

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.  The same was in the beginning with God.  And the Word was made flesh... . [John 1:1-2, 14a KJV]

The point is that Genesis and the Gospel of John present creation as being a paradox that one can identify as binary unification; the combination of a necessary (physical) and essential (spiritual) element in order to bring about the living creatures we currently are, the present us.

What these various scriptures suggest to me is that at the moment death is realized, the physical element remains in the present to be absorbed back (decay) to its original elemental states, while the essential element of one's being, the breath, the wind, the spirit that animates the entirety of the universe returns to its essential form, God.

One can deduce from this theological premise that the resurrection of Jesus is the prototype of a new creation; the "last Adam, is the converse of the first Adam, but instead of bearing the incarnated image (the essence) of God, the resurrected Jesus is a new spiritual creation; the essence of God bearing the experience of humanity.

At best, I can only present this as pure theological speculation, but I am intrigued by its implications.
As a person in the present and a person of faith, I can only hope that at the end of this terrestrial journey I will say with Jesus, "Father, into your hands I commend my spirit."

* * * * * * * * * * 

Until next time, stay faithful.

Norm

LEX ORANDI, LEX CREDENDI - Inwardly Digesting Holy Scriptures - A Homily

This homily was delivered by this blogger on Sunday, October 20, 2019 at Christ Episcopal Church in Yankton, South Dakota.

* * * * * * * * * *

Let us pray:  Blessed Lord, who caused all holy Scriptures to be written for our learning: Grant us so to hear them, read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest them, that we may embrace and ever hold fast the blessed hope of everlasting life, which you have given us in our Savior Jesus Christ; who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen."
("The Book of Common Prayer," The Church Hymnal Corporation, New York. Pg. 236)

This collect (prayer) will be the Collect of the Day on Sunday, November 17th.  It immediately came to mind while I was reading through the lessons for today; in particular, Paul's second letter to Timothy:

All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, so that everyone who belongs to God may be proficient, equipped for every good work." [2 Timothy3:16]  

Why this collect came to mind is that it is something I remember from my late childhood when, as a Lutheran, I found it fascinating that you could digest Scripture.  Being taught at that time that the Bible had to be taken literally word for word, my imagination went wild thinking about tearing pages from the bible and literally eating them, as God instructed some of the prophets to do. [See Ezekiel 3:1-3].  Fortunately, since that time, I have gained a deeper appreciation for metaphor, and this morning I invite us to briefly consider what it means, metaphorically, to inwardly digest "all holy Scriptures."

What makes the Holy Bible unique amongst the religious literature found in the world is that it is a collection of very diverse writing and literary styles that roughly spans nine centuries; from the late eighth century BCE to the beginning of the second century CE.

For me, the bible is a study, in itself, of the ever-evolving relationship between humankind and God.  Inwardly digesting holy Scriptures becomes vital to a healthy spiritual life, and our understanding who we are and whose we are; regardless of one's race, gender and gender identity, or where one is coming from culturally, economically, and ideologically.  Furthermore, these scriptures teach us that in the God who created the diversity we see in all creation, the diversity we represent, all are one.  As the psalmist reminds us, "The river clap their hands with us, and mountains shout for joy with us." [See Psalm 98]

This collect teaches us how to approach these scriptures and get to the point of inwardly digesting them; that we need to hear them, read them, mark them, and learn them.

HEAR

At the time when this collect was written, most people could not read.  They had to listen to the scriptures being read to them by a priest or lector.  The advantage of having to hear something being read is that it forces one to pay attention to what is being spoken.  Today we use inserts of the lessons to help those of us who can't hear well in following along, but if you can, try setting them aside and just listen to the lector read the lessons for the day.  Hearing them read can make them feel current and fresh.

READ

Reading scripture as a personal endeavor takes hearing the scriptures to a deeper level of apprehension.  Reading allows one to pause, to think about what one is reading and ponder its meanings.  Holy scriptures are not meant to be an exercise in speed-reading.  We need to remember that those who wrote these scriptures were deliberate and economic in what the wrote and how they wrote; often choosing words that created layers of meaning.  As such, one cannot grasp the richness of these scriptures by taking them literally; in the sense that every printed word comes from the mouth of God, but rather understanding that God speaks to the reader and listener through these scriptures in the context in which live - in the present.

I find the best approach to reading any scripture is to read it literarily and critically, as literature, in order to understand the type of literature one is reading and get into its flow.  Reading scripture as any other form of literature frees the mind to question what is being read.  Questions are an important part of the digestive process, as they result in a hunger for fulfillment and resolution.

MARK

As one chews one's way through the scriptures, one's taste for it will expand.  One will find much that is appealing; much that make one feel full of assurance, comfort, peace, joy hope, faith and love.  Those are the things one needs to mark; to take note of and keep filed in one's heart because they will come in handy in times of need and in times of healing.

One will undoubtedly run into things that are hard to chew; things that can make one feel uncomfortable, question one's self, and one's motives, or Paul said to Timothy that serve as a reproof or a correction to set one straight.  These are things one also needs to mark and take to heart.

You don't have to agree with or like everything you hear or read in these scriptures.  In fact, Jesus didn't agree with everything that was written in the scriptures.  One of the lines Jesus used which establishes this fact is "You have heard it said... but I say..."; such as, "You have heard it said, 'An eye for an eye...  but I say turn the other cheek" or "You have heard it said, 'Love your neighbors and hate your enemies,' but I say love your enemies." [See Matthew 5:38-43, Exodus 21:23-24, and Deuteronomy 19:21]  Jesus isn't talking about hearsay or gossip, he's talking about something that is found in the Holy Bible or that can be derived four it.  Jesus was taking issue with what is found in our scriptures.

LEARN

All scripture is written for our learning, and by learning is meant that we are to take what we hear, take what we read, take what we find nourishing and instructive and apply it.  The greatest way to to learn is to utilize what we have been taught.  As the saying goes, "If you don't use it, you lose it."

If one wants to know how to build something or bake a cake, one can read every instruction manual and every recipe book there is, memorize the instruction, the right material an, the right ingredients, the right measurements, and the right baking time, but unless one actually puts that knowledge to use, one will not have learned anything except a bunch of word about to put something together or how to bake a cake, but you won't end up with something useful or end up having a cake to eat. Holy scriptures serve as a guide to living a righteous life, and being proficient in all good works.

DIGEST

If we hear, read, mark, and learn from the scriptures we read, we will digest them.  They will become part of who are just as the food we eat becomes a part of who we are.

How can we tell if we've digested scripture?

Again, metaphorically speaking, we will find ourselves belching it up from time to time; that it bubbles up and comes to mind when something triggers its emergence.  If one is not belching scripture from time to time, one may be spiritually malnourished and need to take more of it in.

Holy scriptures are not only inspired and inspiring, they're refreshingly honest about the relationship we have with each other in the light of our relationship with a loving and faithful God.  When I read scripture, I study it, I struggle with it, and at times I spend a good amount of time arguing with it; trying to figure it out, and I come away with a sense of gratitude, joy, and being loved.

One of the purposes of a church is to afford the members of its congregation and the members of the community which that church resides the opportunity to dig into the scriptures beyond a short Sunday morning homily.  There is joy to be found in sharing a mutual feast on the smorgasbord of the holy scriptures together.

If you haven't spent time with our Bible, I encourage you to find some time with it and then take your time because it will feed you spiritually and embrace you everlastingly.

Amen.

* * * * * * * * * *

Until next time, stay faithful.

JEREMIAH - A Homily

This homily was delivered by this blogger on Sunday, September 29, 2019 at Christ Episcopal Church in Yankton, South Dakota.

If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be convinced is some one should rise from the dead.”  Luke 16: 31

+In the Name of our loving God+

For the past several Sundays we have been reading selections from the Book of Jeremiah.  It would do us well to spend a little time getting to know him better because his prophecies are relevant in every age and seem particularly relevant in our own.

To understand the Book of Jeremiah, one has to understand what led God to call him to be a prophet.  In particular, it is important to understand the time of King Manasseh[1] who, by worldly standards, might be considered the most successful king of Judah, reigning some fifty-five years in what would be considered a relatively peaceful and prosperous time in Judah’s history. 

In the Hebrew Scripture, however, Manasseh is vilified as being the most corrupt king of Judah , who promoted the worship of the Canaanite Baals, the goddess Asherah, and the god Molech; a god who required human sacrifice in the form of throwing living children into the fiery belly of Molech’s idol. 

The Kingdom of Judah stood at the crossroad of powerful empires; Egypt to the south and Assyria and Babylonia to the north.  Keeping the Kingdom of Judah intact required forming alliances with other kingdoms in the area which led kings, like Manasseh to adopt or permit the religious practices of these Canaanite kingdoms that became popular with the inhabitants of Judah, forsaking the God of Abraham who their ancestors were in a covenantal relationship with.[2]

As a result, Jeremiah was compelled by God to deliver a very troubling message to the kings of Judah and the people of Jerusalem about the imminent destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians who would take a large portion of its inhabitants back to Babylonia; a captivity which would last for seventy years.

I think of Jeremiah as “the reluctant prophet” – a person burdened with a message he did not want to deliver but had no choice but to deliver it.

If you want to know what it feels like to be a prophet, study Jeremiah.  For example, in Jeremiah 4, he says, ‘My anguish, my anguish!  I writhe in pain! Oh, the walls of my heart! My heart is beating wildly, I cannot keep silent, for I hear the sound of the trumpet, the alarm of war!”[3]  In Jeremiah 20 he says, “For the word of the Lord has become for me a reproach and derision all day long.  If I say, ‘I will not mention him (the Lord), or speak any more in his name,” there is in my heart as it were a burning fire shut up in my bones, and I am weary with holding it in, and I cannot.”[4]

The Book of Jeremiah is also a study in the proclivity of us humans to hold on to our concretized, ideological beliefs no matter what reality is starring us in the face.  Studying Jeremiah taught me that prophesy basically boils down to seeing thing for what they are and stating the ignored obvious; especially, to those who are in positions of authority and power. 

To add to Jeremiahs’ troubles is the fact there were other prophet living in Jerusalem at the time who told its kings and those in authority what they wanted to hear.  While Jeremiah was saying, “The city will be laid to waste, your people killed; your inhabitants and the king taken captive by the Babylonians,” they were saying, “Jeremiah is a liar.  Peace will reign.”  Which is easier to believe, a group of people who tell you peace is around the corner or a person who says you’re going to war and will lose that war and will be taken captive?

There is good news in Jeremiah, but it is not the type of good news the people at the time wanted or were willing to hear.  Jeremiah said that their captivity would come to an end; that they would return home as renewed people of God.  In fact, the religion we know as Judaism today was created during the Babylonian Captivity; that much of the Hebrew Scripture, what we call the Old Testament, was written during that time and in the years following their captivity.

It is hard to listen to those voices who deliver uncomfortable messages about our behavior and the effect it is having on our world, our nation, and ourselves even as we are experiencing the truth of those messages.  It is hard for any of us to override, in our minds, what we want to believe as truth, even when faced with undeniable facts that challenge its veracity. It is so much easier to listen to those who tell us what we want to hear; especially, if their message is, “There’s nothing wrong.  Everything is fine. No need to worry.” 

We attempt to mitigate our anxieties over what is happening today by referencing the past, saying “Things like this has happened before.  We’ll get through it.  You think this is bad?  You should have lived at such and such time.”  There is truth and fact in making such statement, but there is little comfort in them and no incentive to address current difficulties; to turn things around and cause us to repent of our contributions to what is wrong with the world we live in.

This is even more pressing in a democracy; in a democratic nation like ours where there is no king to blame, where what is done by its elected leaders is a reflection of and on its electorate.  This is the reason why some Episcopal churches, during the confession of Sins, confess the sins of our nation; the sins committed on our behalf through the actions or the inactions by the leaders we elected.  

Jeremiah was never killed as other prophets were, but he was publicly humiliated and beat up, placed in stocks by the chief priest of the Temple; threatened with death by those in high places and, at one point, lowered into a cistern becoming stuck in the deep, thick mud at its base; rendering him motionless and left to die only to be saved by an Ethiopian eunuch at the king’s request.

As in the days of Jeremiah; as in every age, there are prophets telling us differing things, and the question becomes, “Who should we pay attention to?

If the story of Jeremiah offers any indication who to listen to, it is those who have no power of their own, who are compelled to tell us things they don’t want to say and we don’t want to hear, warning us that our actions or lack of action is resulting in harm done to ourselves and others.  More to the point listen to the voices of the persecuted, the vulnerable, the ridiculed, the intimidated, the scorned, and the threatened; especially, when such things are done by those who have authority and weal political power.  For in the consistency of their messages, we can discern the voice of God speaking things we need to listen to over the voices of those who would have us turn a deaf ear to such messages and a blind eye to what they are exposing.

It is hard for some in this world to hear such messages because they imply a need for dependence on a power that is not divided, that cannot be manipulated, which favors no one in particular, but rather loves all.  How hard the world must seem for those who see no need for a God who watches over the sparrow, the lilies of the field, the alien immigrant, the poor, and the homeless in our midst; who see themselves reliant solely on their own power, who have no time to listen to the prophetic voices of the day, who turn a blind eye to what the risen Christ can bring to their lives and the lives of all living beings.

Why we read and listen to the voices of the Old Testament, the Hebrew Scriptures, is because they are relevant.  They wake us up by their accusations to who we are and whose we are.  They awaken us to the only hope there is found in a loving God.  They expose us to the closeness of God, who works with what we present; who lets us be who we are and loves us no matter what we do or don’t do, who remains faithful in spite of our lack of faith, who has promised to redeem, restore, and renew all creation.

They tell us that we are in a sympathetic and synchronized relationship with a God[5] who is always near, always ready to forgive, always ready to treat with compassion; attributes that are readily transmitted throughout the world when we are forgiving, when we are compassionate, and when we engage in doing the redemptive and restorative work of the resurrected Christ.

God has no desire to keep us captive by our sinful inclinations.  As he said to Jeremiah, “I will put my law within them, and I will write it upon their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.  And no longer shall each man teach his neighbor and each man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord’ for they shall know me, from the least of them to the greatest, say the Lord; for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sins no more.”[6]

* * * * * * * * * *

Until next time, stay faithful.

---

[1] Manasseh reigned for 55 years and died approximately ten years before Jeremiah was born in the 7^th century BCE.

[2] See Joshua 24:16-24.

[3] Jeremiah 4:20

[4] Jeremiah 20:8b-9.

[5] See Jeremiah 17:10

[6] Jeremiah 31:34

FAMILIA SANCTI - A Homily

This homily was delivered by this blogger on September 22, 2019 at Christ Episcopal Church in Yankton, South Dakota.

+ In the Name of our loving God+

One of the shortest homilies I ever heard was one given in our neighboring church, to the east of us, at Sacred Heart, some 40 years ago by the priest who, after the Gospel reading, presented his homily saying something on the order of, “Some of the Gospel readings and the things Jesus says are not always easy to understand today and we may find them confusing.  This is one of them,” and then he sat down, ending his homily.  I can understand his thinking after today’s Gospel lesson. 

The Episcopal priest and theologian, Robert Capon wrote a series of books on the Parables of Jesus in which he called this parable, about the dishonest manager, “The Hardest Parable.[1]”

Capon wrote that because of the difficulty in understanding its meaning and purpose, some priests, pastors, ministers, and theologians question its authenticity; as in, questioning whether it was something Jesus actually said. 

Others simply cherry pick their way around the parable and go to Jesus’ interpretive explanation of it; sticking with topics like “those who are faithful in a little are likely to be faithful in much” or “those who are dishonest in little will be dishonest in much.”  Another popular topic is about serving two masters; that you will either love the one or hate the other, that you cannot love worldly wealth and God.[2] All are all good topics to preach on and are also very effective ways to avoid talking about this parable.

What makes this parable difficult to understand is what Jesus says at the end of his telling it:

“And (the household manger’s) master commended the dishonest manager because he had acted shrewdly; for the children of this age are more shrewd in dealing with their own generation than are the children of light. And I tell you, make friends for yourselves by means of dishonest wealth so that when it is gone, they may welcome you into the eternal homes.”[3]

“Make friends by means of dishonest wealth so that when it is gone, they may welcome you into the eternal homes?”  What does Jesus mean by that statement?

To answer that question, we need to back up and put this parable in context both with regard to the time in which Jesus is telling it and with regard to its placement within the Gospel of Luke. 

It’s placement within Luke is significant.  This parable immediately follows the Jesus’ parable of the Prodigal Son, a parable Jesus addresses to a crowd of scribes, Pharisees, and those who Luke identifies as sinners. In today’s Gospel lesson, Jesus is telling this parable to his disciples – his inner circle of friends – his adopted family. 

Both parables share a common theme; squandering wealth, wasting it foolishly, expending it selfishly until they find themselves entrapped by their behavior and awakened to the fact that the only thing they have left to spend is themselves.  What might be lost on us is the terminology of a household manager or a steward.  We might think of such individuals in terms of modern day employees, but in Jesus’s day a household manager or steward was considered part of the household – part of the family.  They lived in the same house as their master, and they were trusted; treated as extended family like the ancient Roman concept of pater familia, which gave the head of household, the eldest male member of a family, complete authority over every member of the household as he saw fit; including immediate family members, family clients, freedmen, and slaves. 

Then there is the topic of wealth or money; something that Jesus, at times, addresses directly as there being a right or wrong way of using it and sometimes, metaphorically, as an example of the unearned grace of God given to all.  In this parable, Jesus addresses wealth directly; identifying it as dishonest wealth or as unrighteous mammon in other translations; which is to say that worldly wealth has no intrinsic spiritual value.

Whether worldly wealth is considered a bane or blessing is solely dependent on how it is used; that loving or being obsessed with money, for instance, ultimately leads to unrighteous behavior and immoral conduct.  According to Jesus’ parables, wealth (whatever form it takes) is best expended in order to expand the Kingdom of God. 

In this parable, Jesus draws a fine line between selfish interest (an unrighteousness sense of self-absorption) and true self-interest (a righteous sense of knowing who we are and whose we are). 

At first sight, there doesn’t appear to be much difference between the manager squandering his master’s wealth and reducing the debts owed his master by others.

What defines this parable as a parable of grace is that the squandering manager is considered shrewd (demonstrates good judgement) by the Lord of the household because when awakened to the fact that his personal wellbeing is directly linked to how well he is perceived and received by others, he was able to turn things around in his favor. Specifically, the awakened manager turns his habit of squandering his master’s wealth into a practice of reducing the debt owed by others to his master in the hope of their seeing him in a favorable light. 

Implicit in the master’s praise of awakened manager is the master’s realization that by reducing the debt of others, perhaps what they rightfully owe, the manager’s doing so ultimately reflects the generosity of his master, who will be looked upon with favor by those indebted to him.  His actions demonstrated true self interest by awakening to who he truly was; a member of his master’s household, dependent on the favor of his master, that he understood his actions reflected the actions of his master.

Jesus also observed that “The children of this age are more shrewd in dealing with their own generation than are the children of light.”  In other words, those outside the religious circles frequently demonstrate astuteness in their dealings with others; that they are not afraid of taking calculated risks in fostering lasting friendships unlike those in religious circles, who frequently become complacent and lack the ability to think outside the box they find themselves in.

That Jesus is addressing his disciple with this parable should give us pause to review how we, as a congregation, as disciples of Jesus, should use the unrighteous mammon, the money that has been entrusted to us. 

Are we spending it appropriately?  

Are we expending it in order to expand the Kingdom of God?

Are we awake to who we truly are; the familia Christi, the family of Christ; the very Body of Christ in the world.

Are we awakened to the reality that what we do as a congregation reflects on how others outside these walls perceive God, whether God is generous, whether God is forgiving, and whether God values them for who they are because we value them for who they are?

What is in our best self-interest as a congregation moving forward?  

Is it to preserve the things that will ultimately fade away, or is it as members of the familia Christi to be stewards of God’s grace; carrying out the redemptive work of Christ by using the unrighteous mammon we are entrusted with to make friends for ourselves in Christ so that when it fades away we will be welcomed by them into the eternal dwellings?

* * * * * * * * * *

Until next time, stay faithful.

---

[1] “The Parables of Grace,” Robert Farrar Capon; William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, Michigan ©1988, Chapter Fourteen, pg. 145

[2] Luke 16: 10 & 13

[3] Luke 16: 8-9