The Collapse Of The Church - My Reflections On The Wente Article

     There has been much comment on a recent article in the Globe and Mail about the collapse of the “liberal” church. (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/the-collapse-of-the-liberal-church/article4443228/.) In the article, columnist Margaret Wente especially calls the United Church to task. Our Moderator, Mardi Tindal, has offered a response to the letter (http://www.united-church.ca/communications/news/moderator/120730.) I offer here not a formal response, but some thoughts (actually a lot of thoughts; maybe even too many!) about the current situation we find ourselves in. I've cobbled and edited this together from a number of different forums in which I've discussed the article: Facebook, Wonder Cafe and in replying to some e-mails I've received from parishioners about it. This is my way of organizing all my thoughts together.

     I should say first that I no longer use the terms "liberal" and "conservative" (or at least I avoid using them to the best of my ability) because they don't really mean anything - or, more to the point, they mean different things to different people. In this post I will use the terms now and then for the sake of convenience, but basically I think of myself as a follower of Christ. That's generally how I describe myself. On some issues I'd be considered "liberal" and on others I'd be considered "conservative." I think getting caught up in that liberal/conservative debate has been a bad thing for the church because basically all we've done is given ourselves licence to demonize "the other side" - not that everyone does that, but in general terms. It's hardly the ministry of reconciliation that Paul speaks of. So the title of Wente's article is problematic to me, because it strikes me as an attempt by a conservative commentator (which Wente is) to demonize the liberal church. Not that she doesn't have some good points. I can also make a critique of the “liberal” church.

     Too often, the "liberal" church has a tendency to become obsessed with social or political causes. There's nothing wrong with that in a sense - many of these issues do have a spiritual dimension to them, but the real problem is that the gospel is meant to be relational, not political. Rarely do you see Jesus (or even the prophets) get strictly political, and when they do say things that touch on the political or social situation in society, it's usually still in a relational sense. The real issue seems to be to build relationship; to reconcile people; to stand with the outcast or oppressed or marginalized in a hands on practical way, rather than an abstract, policy way. That's best done on a one to one, local community basis. When we try to do more than that it seems to me that the church is trying to hang on to the last vestiges of christendom by pretending that we have the power, influence or even the right to insert ourselves into bigger political issues - in spite of the fact that Jesus insisted that his Kingdom was not of this world (ie, it was spiritual and not political.)

     In any event, the title of the article aside, Wente does note that the decline is also beginning in the more conservative and evangelical churches as well, although it may not have reached the point of a “collapse” in those denominations yet. I would suggest (as I inferred above) that it's not really the church (liberal or conservative) that's collapsing - it's christendom that's collapsing. Some will see that as splitting hairs, but it's not. The church was around before christendom, and the church will be around after christendom. The church was expanded unnaturally by the rise of christendom, which saw people come into the church for a variety of social, political, cultural and even materialistic reasons; reasons which had little or nothing to do with God or faith. And in many other ways, the christendom that's existed for about 1500 years (and that's now rapidly collapsing before our very eyes) has done us great harm. Basically, "christendom" refers to the period in history in which the church functioned as a temporal, secular power as well as a spiritual community. The problems that brought about are too numerous to mention, but one of the most basic is that by becoming a temporal, secular power we stopped standing with the outcast and became insiders. By gaining power we also succumbed too often and too easily to the danger of abusing power; the temptation to claim and even demand privileges. It was in our vested interest to support the status quo because we became a part of the status quo. Ultimately it means that Marx was absolutely correct when he said that religion had become the opiate of the masses. The job of the church (protecting its own interests) had become simply keeping the people happy in their misery.

     Christendom has been collapsing for a while now. Most would see the collapse beginning in the mid-60's. It certainly started collapsing before that, but that's when it became clearly visible. Why then? Think about the 60's. It was the era of rebellion against all authority figures: the government, the police, the military - and the church. We got lumped in with the authority figures, because that's what we had become. Here was the origin of the “spiritual but not religious” movement. “We want God, but not the church.” The “Jesus movement” sprang up – because people (especially younger people) no longer saw the established, institutional church as having much to do with Jesus, who regularly criticized the religious authorities.

     There are still a few vestiges of christendom left in the world. Most obvious would be that the Roman Catholic Church still functions as a temporal power, with the Vatican treated as an independent country which engages in diplomatic activities with other nation states as an equal partner rather than as merely the headquarters for an international church. Here in Canada, we have things like property tax exemptions, charitable status, etc. Another problem with christendom is that as the church became and functioned as a  temporal power it also became tamed by and dependent on the temporal powers. How would the church be affected by loss of the property tax exemption, for example? And yet, given that Jesus said that his Kingdom was not of this world, by what right do we claim and expect the support of the temporal power?

     Times are very tough for the church in general right now. The church will survive, of course, but probably less influential and much smaller as things evolve. One thing Wente commented on that was bang on is the problem of too many buildings. This is especially problematic in the United Church. One reason we have way too many buildings is because in some cases Methodist and Presbyterian churches that were literally a stone's throw from each other agreed to union, but wouldn't unite their congregations. Now they sit a third or half full, a block or two away from each other in some communities (I've seen such cases) but they still won't merge.

     Another problem is that we've forgotten how to evangelize, because we didn't have to evangelize. The reality of christendom meant that we always had a steady "supply" of people in the church without really having to work at it. Today, liberal and progressive churches think that jumping on board with “causes” is evangelism, conservatives and fundamentalists think that banging people over the head with threats of hell is evangelism. The truth is that neither stategy works very well. We have to rediscover that evangelism is done face to face, person to person, in loving relationship - often with those whom we don't perceive as especially lovable, because those are the people Jesus reached out to most often. That relational aspect of the gospel has been largely lost. The church stands for either "justice" or "salvation" but too often forgets the real people behind either concept. We think that we're going to "save" the church through one or the other of those emphases. But we won't. The church's salvation, it seems to me, is to be found - yes - only in God, and only by discerning God's call to us - which is neither "justice" nor "salvation" but is rather the building of relationship with real people - especially with the outcast, the marginalized, the oppressed (whom we often tend to see as causes rather than people.) I'm not saying that the church shouldn't stand for either "justice" or "salvation." Neither am I suggesting that it's an either/or proposition between “justice” and “salvation.” I think we need to stand for both justice AND salvation, but I am saying that our greatest work is the offering of community and relationship - especially in a society which has huge challenges to confront in trying to build meaningful community and relationship.

     Another of our problems is that we fear death (as a church, I mean.) We see that displayed all the time. Primarily it's demonstrated by the solution to every challenge the church faces - "cut the budget!" Cutting the budget is a short term solution that really only ensures a long, slow and increasingly painful death for a congregation. Maybe we should willingly risk death by using the resources we have left to do glorious ministry. Then if we did die, we'd go out with a bang rather than a whimper, or, who knows, maybe by doing that we'd actually discover real life; maybe even resurrection. But most churches are afraid to die in spite of the fact that they profess to follow a Lord who willingly died without fighting for his life, and so they choose to drag out their death throes as long as they possibly can - so they cut their budgets over and over again and become a shell of what they should be; they become little more than fund-raising organizations dedicated mostly to keeping the doors open. I've seen such churches. They have little life; they merely exist for the sake of existing. Or, sometimes, we seem to be full of life. We set out to save the church on our own – with new programming, with innovative worship styles, with contemporary music, with meaningful mission projects, with thoughtful stewardship campaigns, etc., etc. Well, as good as those things might be, it seems to me that we must learn to trust God. As long as we insist that we are going to save the church then the church will not be saved, because we cannot save the church. Only God can do that. And as long as we put so much of our effort into trying to save the church rather than into doing the ministry of building real relationships with those around us, we're demonstrating that we don't trust God to save the church. And in any event, trying to save the church won't work, because - as I said - the collapse is not really the collapse of the church, it's the collapse of christendom, which we're largely powerless to stop.

     If we can't stop the collapse of christendom, then, what can we do? I'll speak specifically about my own context in the United Church. With a meeting of the General Council of the United Church coming up very soon, let me lay it on the table: many in the United Church don't care much about the General Council; they don't even care much about the local Presbytery. I think the United Church is marching steadily toward a much more congregational form of church governance. That may be good or it may be bad (it will probably be a combination of both.) But it's inevitable. I think the vast majority of people in the pews are already there. Presbyteries are imploding under the workload they have to do to keep the bureaucracy functioning; as they become less and less able to do so more responsibility is being put on Conference staff, but congregations are reaching the point where they won't be able to continue to afford the assessments required to pay the Conference staff. Congregationalism (at least effective congregationalism, which will eventually have to be reflected in our polity) is on the way, whether we like that or not. This encroaching congregationalism itself will exacerbate a challenge that already exists. There really is no homogeneous United Church. United Church congregations are already all over the map in terms of theology, liturgy, worship styles, etc. I often think that it must be incredibly frustrating for United Church people to move to a new community and begin attending the United Church in their new community, only to discover that it's not the United Church they know. Some United Churches don't even identify themselves as a “United Church.” I know more than one United Church congregation that's chosen the name “Community Church.” The thinking seems to be that people are no longer attached to denominations and may be turned off by denominational labels because they represent the “organized religion” that so many are indifferent toward, so the "name brand" doesn't matter. People will simply try out local churches and choose the one they like. I'm unconvinced about that. I think more and more people are just more likely not to bother with the church at all if they have to try too hard to choose between 5 or 6 different churches in the community. On the other hand, it's true that - especially among the more "evangelical" Christian community - there is an increasingly hostile and even visceral attitude (and increasingly a very public one) toward the United Church. Many no longer consider us a "real" church. That, of course, is tremendously judgmental and does no credit to those denominations, but one can't deny that the attitude is out there. So, to a certain constituency, the very name “United Church” may be a reason for not just indifference but contempt.

     Having said that, I'm not convinced that our salvation is to be found in becoming more like the evangelical churches, either in style or theology. Once again - our salvation, it seems to me, is to be found - yes - only in God, and only by discerning God's call to us. More and more in recent years, I have found my call to ministry being guided by these words from Paul, in 2 Corinthians 5:17-19: “So if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has passed away; see, everything has become new! All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation; that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting the message of reconciliation to us.”

A Thought For The Week Of July 30

"And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit." (Ephesians 2:22) We are being "built together," of course, by Jesus Christ, who should be the source of our unity. In this verse, Paul isn't speaking about a particular congregation or denomination. He's speaking about the Body of Christ - the church universal - the community of believers. We should set aside the things that divide us and focus on that which unites us - Jesus Christ. Then God dwells in us and works in us and lives in us by the Holy Spirit. One of the things that makes me happy to be in the United Church is that our founding was the result of Presbyterians, Methodists and Congregationalists setting aside the things that divided them into those groups and deciding that what united them - faith in Jesus - was more important. As followers of Christ (in whatever denomination) we need to stop talking about unity and start living it - working together, setting aside suspicion and mistrust and rivalry, sharing mission (and maybe even worship!) and simply being the one body of Christ, without judgment on each other. May it be so! Have a great week!

July 29, 2012 sermon: The Works # 3: Speaking Words Of Witness

Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly. We all stumble in many ways. If anyone is never at fault in what he says, he is a perfect man, able to keep his whole body in check. When we put bits into the mouths of horses to make them obey us, we can turn the whole animal. Or take ships as an example. Although they are so large and are driven by strong winds, they are steered by a very small rudder wherever the pilot wants to go. Likewise the tongue is a small part of the body, but it makes great boasts. Consider what a great forest is set on fire by a small spark. The tongue also is a fire, a world of evil among the parts of the body. It corrupts the whole person, sets the whole course of his life on fire, and is itself set on fire by hell. All kinds of animals, birds, reptiles and creatures of the sea are being tamed and have been tamed by man, but no man can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison. With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in God’s likeness. Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing. My brothers, this should not be. Can both fresh water and salt water flow from the same spring? My brothers, can a fig tree bear olives, or a grapevine bear figs? Neither can a salt spring produce fresh water. (James 3:1-12)

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

    In 1969, John Lennon and The Beatles recorded the song “Let It Be,” which included the words “speaking words of wisdom.” The song dwelt largely on the many challenges and uncertainties in the world: “When I find myself in times of trouble,” “when the broken-hearted people,” “when the night is cloudy.” These were all circumstances in which the “words of wisdom” seemed to offer relief, if not a full solution. Today, I want to reflect on the need for Christians to be "Speaking Words Of Witness" to a world in which there are now a lot of doubts about the Christian faith, about the church and even about Jesus.

    I realize that the word “witness” might be a barrier to some people. I think a lot of people are intimidated by the prospect of offering witness, because it requires us to speak, and speaking in public is terrifying to a lot of people. It’s called "glossophobia" - the fear of speaking in public. It's estimated that 75% of people experience some type of fear when speaking in public. Jerry Seinfeld once said that: "according to most studies, people's number-one fear is public speaking. Death is number two! Now, this means to the average person, if you have to go to a funeral, you're better off in the casket than doing the eulogy." But offering witness to faith shouldn’t be hard or frightening. It really just means to speak from the heart about God; to speak the truth about God as we understand it and have experienced it. It has nothing to do with the Bible-thumping, judgmental Christians that often spring to mind, and it has nothing to do with being well-educated or knowing the Scriptures from start to finish. It’s all about what’s in your heart, and translating that into proper and appropriate speech.  Maybe what makes us afraid to speak up is the fear that we'll get it wrong. The truth is that you can't get it wrong as long as you're speaking from the heart. Having said that, the truth is that we're all going to blow it from time to time. The goal is to keep maturing in our faith until our beliefs, our thoughts, our actions and our words all match. But James does remind us that “if anyone is never at fault in what he says, he is a perfect man, able to keep his whole body in check.”

    This verse is basically the great equalizer. It reminds us that none of us are perfect. At some point in our lives we've all said something that we wished we could take back; something thoughtless that has unintentionally hurt someone; we've gossiped about things that needn't be discussed; we've spoken in unwholesome language; in very traditional language, we've taken the name of the Lord in vain. As James says, if anyone is never at fault in what they say, then they’re perfect. Well, we’re not perfect. We’re imperfect people who depend on the grace of God to see us through when we slip up. That’s pretty common; everyone slips up. But even though we’re forgiven we shouldn’t just shrug off our mistakes, because even tiny slips of the tongue can have great consequences.

    “The tongue is a small part of the body, but it makes great boasts,” James says.  “Consider what a great forest is set on fire by a small spark.” We should be just as concerned with not using words carelessly in our relationships as we are with not using matches carelessly in a forest. I don’t know if there’s a spiritual equivalent to Smokey the Bear, but there should be! James is obviously using “the tongue” as an analogy for the way we speak and the words we use. It's so easy to cause hurt with a careless and ill thought out word. Our words can cause great harm to people. As I was saying with the children, the old ditty "sticks and stones can break my bones, but names can never hurt me" just isn’t true. They all hurt, and at least broken bones heal, but the emotional torment caused by verbal abuse can last for a lifetime. It doesn't take much to do a great deal of damage. James asks us to “Consider what a great forest is set on fire by a small spark.” We should also consider what a large church can be set on fire by an ill-chosen word. That’s probably why teachers are said to be held more accountable. Teachers - and preachers - teach and preach with words, and an ill chosen word from the pulpit can cause a great deal of harm, but it doesn’t have to be from the pulpit. Careless words spoken within the church community can cause a lot of damage to the church community.

    James compares “the tongue” to bits and rudders. Sometimes we think that because something is small, it's also unimportant, and since the tongue is very small, perhaps we think that the words we speak are of no lasting importance. Even Abraham Lincoln could say (apparently in all sincerity) during the now famous Gettysburg Address that "the world will little note nor long remember what we say here ..." And yet, Lincoln's words are now a part of history. Small things control what happens.  James refers to bits and rudders. Both are small and both are useful. What he’s saying is that a tongue under control is a very useful witness to God and faith. If we can learn to control our words, we can control our whole being and truly live for God. But if we can’t learn to control our words, then we become inconsistent and our witness is blurred. “With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in God’s likeness. Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing.”

    This is the problem of inconsistency. To go back to something I said last week, we have to live as if we believe what we say we believe. We also have to speak as if we believe what we say we believe. If we mouth pious words at church on Sunday and then spend the rest of the week gossiping and criticizing and complaining and attacking - then we're being inconsistent, and if we're not denying our faith, at the very least we’re showing that it doesn’t mean much to us. If  unwholesome and ungodly talk becomes a habit, it's a problem. Our habits of speech say a lot about our inner character and identity. So James pleads for consistency.

    “Can both fresh water and salt water flow from the same spring? My brothers, can a fig tree bear olives, or a grapevine bear figs? Neither can a salt spring produce fresh water.” James isn’t talking here about good things vs. bad things. Olives and figs; salt water and fresh water - they're all good and productive things. But they're also different things. The point applied to us is that to praise God and to curse others (in whatever way we curse them) is a contradiction that makes no sense and that can cause great damage.

    It's probably not by accident that most of the contemporary world's figures of speech about speech are negative: “Mind your tongue!” “Keep your mouth shut!” “Button your lip!” (David Hulme, Word & World 6/3 (1986) page 249) We distrust words, because so often they’re used so indiscriminately and so dishonestly. The era of the 30 second sound bite makes us impatient with words, too - as if words are meaningless; a waste of time. And yet words, properly chosen and used, can inspire us and move us to great things. Hundreds of years ago, the Japanese poet Moritake Arakida wrote: "The origin of all trouble within this world is a single word spoken in haste." The challenge for us as followers of Jesus is to never speak in haste, but rather to take care with our words, to use them to speak words of witness for God and words of inspiration to others. A recent CBS special on bullying was entitled “Words Can Kill.”  That’s true about careless or abusive words - but real words of witness can bring life and hope and peace and grace. It’s our responsibility to make sure that our words do that.

Thought for the Week of July 23

"When I am afraid, I will trust in You." (Psalm 56:3) Events of the last several days - which have included major shootings in Toronto and in Aurora, Colorado, have made me realize how difficult it is for many people to confront and overcome fear. I noted particularly after the Aurora shooting (in a movie theatre during the showing of the most recent Batman movies) that theatres across the US and Canada announced they would be taking added security measures. I suppose security is a good thing, and I know that sometimes such incidents spark "copycat" incidents, but it still seemed to me that adding security at movie theatres across North America was playing in to the culture of fear that already exists, and that I often believe our leaders try to instill in us to justify so-called"security" measures that do little but restrict our freedoms. The Bible reminds us that "perfect love casts out fear." Where do we find "perfect love"? We find it from and in God. And so Psalm 56 gives us good advice - "when I am afraid, I will trust in You." Whatever causes fear, turn to God, and let God drive it away and fill you with grace and peace. Have a great week!

July 22, 2012 sermon: The Works # 2 - A Living Faith Is A Working Faith

What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him? Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, “Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead. But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.” Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do. You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that - and shudder. You foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless? Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,” and he was called God’s friend. You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone. In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the spies and sent them off in a different direction? As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead. (James 2:14-26)

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

     “What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds.” That’s a fantastic question! What good would that be, indeed? I was doing some reading a few days ago as I prepared today’s message, and I came across one person who thought it would be fascinating if James were an interviewer for someone going into any kind of Christian ministry. I’ve been in the position of doing that from time to time for the United Church. We have very serious questions about a candidate’s doctrine, and we examine a person’s psychological fitness for ministry (yes - I passed that one!) and we make sure that they’re willing to be subject to - as the Manual says - “the authority and discipline of Presbytery.” These interviews go on for a while. None of those issues are unimportant, but I would imagine that James, if he were sitting in on such an event as an interviewer, would have one basic question he would ask any interviewee: “how has your faith affected the way you live your life.” He would ask that question, because a person can show doctrinal and psychological and ecclesiastical fitness without actually having any sort of living faith. That’s sad but true, and I suspect that the last thing James would want to do would be to bring someone into a Christian ministry who has shown no concrete evidence of having a living faith.

     This week’s topic brings me back inevitably to Martin Luther. I had a great conversation after church last week with a couple of people about Martin Luther. They didn’t know that Luther had such a negative view of the Letter of James. But he did. He didn’t like the Letter of James and he didn’t feel it belonged in the New Testament, basically because he felt it was too works oriented, and not centred enough on grace. Luther referred to the Letter of James as “the epistle of straw” because he felt that it had no firm foundation and that it would easily collapse. Obviously he was wrong about that. 450 years after Luther’s death the Letter of James is still very much a part of the New Testament, and I find it a fascinating piece of writing. As much as you may wonder (and I wonder it too!) what right I have to claim that Martin Luther was wrong, I guess that my right to do it stems from the fact that he and are are mere mortals, we both put our pants on one leg at a time, and I have the last 450 years of church history on my side, after all! Luther’s mistake - probably because of the “temper” of the times he lived in - was to draw too strong a distinction between “works” (as understood by James - or “deeds” as the NIV that I’m using translates the word) and “faith.” Luther thought James was being legalistic. He thought James was saying that to earn your salvation you have to do certain things. I don’t believe that’s what James was saying at all. James would not have differentiated between works and faith. James’ argument is that a person is moved to a certain way of living by the mere presence of faith. In other words, faith changes us and leads us to more “godly” actions, not because the more godly actions are required of us but because acting in such ways should become a part of our nature by virtue of having faith. Mere belief or mere faith is a proposition, so to simply say “I believe in God” or “I believe in Christ” is pointless. As he explains it, even the demons can say those things, which is to say that even those things that are totally opposed to God and to God’s ways can say those things. They prove nothing if they’re only words. But words have to be put into action. We have to practice what we preach. Otherwise our words are empty, and we dishonour God by claiming faith if our faith results in words that lead to no actions.

     James is not saying that “faith alone” isn’t correct. He would, of course, have agreed that faith is essential, but like Paul who said in Galatians that faith has to produce the “fruit of the Spirit,” James is saying that faith has to be demonstrated in some way for it to be living faith, and if it isn’t living then it’s of no use to anyone. “Faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.” A faith that doesn’t show itself in action isn’t living faith. True faith will always lead to doing good works. I wonder, though: if James believed that faith without works is dead, what would James have thought about the reverse: works without faith? There are good works done without faith. Some of the most loving, kind and Christ-like souls you’ll ever meet aren’t Christians and don’t claim to be. Some are outright hostile to faith, while still doing as many or more good works as any Christian. What would James make of that?

     That’s actually very interesting. He believes that faith without works is an inauthentic faith. To put it another way, real faith leads to real works that are done for the glory of God. Inauthentic faith leads either to no works or to works done for self-benefit (either to get glory from others, or to feel good about ourselves.) I suspect James would say the same thing about works done in the absence of any faith at all. He would see those works done in the absence of faith to be self-centred or even selfish, probably because they don’t enhance relationship with the person or persons benefitting from the works. At most, they perhaps assuage guilt at the condition the brother or sister is in. “Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, ‘Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed,’ but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it?” The good in such cases is making ourselves feel good about having done “something” even though we’ve accomplished nothing. And we can't claim not to be guilty from time to time. How many of us have said to a person "I'll pray for you" and then two hours later we've forgotten about it? That might even apply if we were to give clothing or food to the needy person - unless our faith is also moving us to confront the conditions causing the person to be in need, rather than just giving something to the person in need to help them along. Jesus Himself was making basically the same point in His famous parable of the Good Samaritan. The people who passed by the beaten and bloodied man in the ditch weren’t faithless, but their faith was worthless because it moved them to no action. And if the Samaritan himself had simply bandaged the man up and left him there the Samaritan wouldn’t have been much better. But the Samaritan took responsibility for the man. Jesus said, “Then,” (after bandaging the man up) “he put the man on his own donkey, took him to an inn and took care of him. The next day he took out two silver coins and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’” That’s what a working and living faith looks like. It not only does things - it cares about people; it builds relationships with those in need and it confronts the conditions that puts them in need. That’s what the church is called to - we not just meet the needs of individual people, we are supposed to enter relationship with them and to confront the powers and the systems that create the conditions that put them in need in the first place.

     A living faith is a working faith - it means means living as if what you say you believe is actually true. It means trying to make a difference - not just to people, but to society as a whole. With a living faith, we become examples to the world of the difference God makes in a life and of the type of society God desires us to create, where selfishness, self-centredness and greed are all things of the past. Let me ask you: If you were sitting in on that interview, and James asked “how has your faith affected the way you live your life?” how would you answer? I hope you would say that it’s made you try to change people’s lives for the better and to try to change society for the better. Nelson Mandela - who, in my opinion, is the only person alive today who can be called a “great” person - turned 94 last Wednesday. He was baptized and raised as a Methodist. He never really said very much about his religious faith, and yet, his witness to Christ was not what he said but what he did. He had both the opportunity and the power to take great and bloody revenge on whites in South Africa for the oppression he and his people suffered, but instead he chose to devote himself to reconciliation between blacks and whites. James would have said that was a living faith - one that spoke loudly by how it was lived, and that wasn’t merely empty words. That’s proof that a living and working faith can make a difference. None of us are Mandela. Maybe we won’t change the world. But we can still live our faith and make a difference to those around us! If we do that, we don’t just claim good news for ourselves, we become good news for the world!

Mandela and Reconciliation

The United Nations in 2009 declared July 18 (Nelson Mandela's birthday) to be Nelson Mandela International Day (or just Mandela Day.) I wish I could say that I did more to mark this "Mandela Day." I respect Nelson Mandela deeply for his example of peaceful reconciliation. I did have the opportunity to preach at a nursing home service this afternoon, and I spoke on 2 Corinthians 5:18 ("All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation ...") using Mandela as the greatest example of reconciliation that the world may ever have seen. Mandela was born and raised a Methodist, educated in Methodist schools and as far as I know is still a Methodist. I know that in November of 2006 he and his wife (also a Methodist) spoke to a group of Methodist bishops in Mozambique. He speaks little about his faith, but his actions have witnessed impressively to what Christian faith at its best should be.

I noted on the website for Mandela Day a list of 67 ways to change the world. I regret to say that I did none of them today. Perhaps my sermon at the nursing home (where there is probably as much need for reconciliation as there is anywhere there are humans beings) qualifies as something at least. Here's the list, though. I think it's worth thinking about.

67 WAYS TO CHANGE THE WORLD

Think of others

1. Make a new friend. Get to know someone from a different cultural background. Only through mutual understanding can we rid our communities of intolerance and xenophobia.

2. Read to someone who can’t. Visit a local home for the blind and open up a new world for someone else.

3. Fix the potholes in your street or neighbourhood.

4. Help out at the local animal shelter. Dogs without homes still need a walk and a bit of love.

5. Find out from your local library if it has a story hour and offer to read during it.

6. Offer to take an elderly neighbour who can’t drive to do their shopping/chores.

7. Organise a litter cleanup day in your area.

8. Get a group of people to each knit a square and make a blanket for someone in need.

9. Volunteer at your police station or local faith-based organisation.

10. Donate your skills!

11. If you’re a builder, help build or improve someone’s home.

12. Help someone to get his/her business off the ground.

13. Build a website for someone who needs one, or for a cause you think needs the support.

14. Help someone get a job. Put together and print a CV for them, or help them with their interview skills.

15. If you’re a lawyer, do some pro bono work for a worthwhile cause or person.

16. Write to your area councillor about a problem in the area that requires attention, which you, in your personal capacity, are unable to attend to.

17. Sponsor a group of learners to go to the theatre/zoo.

Help out for good health

18. Get in touch with your local HIV organisations and find out how you can help.

19. Help out at your local hospice, as staff members often need as much support as the patients.

20. Many terminally ill people have no one to speak to. Take a little time to have a chat and bring some sunshine into their lives.

21. Talk to your friends and family about HIV.

22. Get tested for HIV and encourage your partner to do so too.

23. Take a bag full of toys to a local hospital that has a children’s ward.

24. Take younger members of your family for a walk in the park.

25. Donate some medical supplies to a local community clinic.

26. Take someone you know, who can’t afford it, to get their eyes tested or their teeth checked.

27. Bake something for a support group of your choice.

28. Start a community garden to encourage healthy eating in your community.

29. Donate a wheelchair or guide dog, to someone in need.

30. Create a food parcel and give it to someone in need.

Become an educator

31. Offer to help out at your local school.

32. Mentor a school leaver or student in your field of expertise.

33. Coach one of the extramural activities the school offers. You can also volunteer to coach an extramural activity the school doesn’t offer.

34. Offer to provide tutoring in a school subject you are good at.

35. Donate your old computer.

36. Help maintain the sports fields.

37. Fix up a classroom by replacing broken windows, doors and light bulbs.

38. Donate a bag of art supplies.

39. Teach an adult literacy class.

40. Paint classrooms and school buildings.

41. Donate your old textbooks, or any other good books, to a school library.

Help those living in poverty

42. Buy a few blankets, or grab the ones you no longer need from home and give them to someone in need.

43. Clean out your cupboard and donate the clothes you no longer wear to someone who needs them.

44. Put together food parcels for a needy family.

45. Organise a bake sale, car wash or garage sale for charity and donate the proceeds.

46. To the poorest of the poor, shoes can be a luxury. Don’t hoard them if you don’t wear them. Pass them on!

47. Volunteer at your local soup kitchen.

Care for the youth

48. Help at a local children’s home or orphanage.

49. Help the kids with their studies.

50. Organise a friendly game of soccer, or sponsor the kids to watch a game at the local stadium.

51. Coach a sports team and make new friends.

52. Donate sporting equipment to a children’s shelter.

53. Donate educational toys and books to a children’s home.

54. Paint, or repair, infrastructure at an orphanage or youth centre.

55. Mentor someone. Make time to listen to what the kids have to say and give them good advice.

Treasure the elderly

56. If you play an instrument, visit your local old-age home and spend an hour playing for the residents and staff.

57. Learn the story of someone older than you. Too often people forget that the elderly have a wealth of experience and wisdom and, more often than not, an interesting story to tell.

58. Take an elderly person grocery shopping; they will appreciate your company and assistance.

59. Take someone’s dog for a walk if they are too frail to do so themselves.

60. Mow someone’s lawn and help them to fix things around their house.

Look after your environment

61. If there are no recycling centres in your area, petition your area councillor to provide one.

62. Donate indigenous trees to beautify neighbourhoods in poorer areas.

63. Collect old newspapers from a school/community centre/hospital and take them to a recycling centre.

64. Identify open manhole covers or drains in your area and report them to the local authorities.

65. Organise the company/school/organisation that you work with to switch off all unnecessary lights and power supplies at night and on weekends.

66. Engage with people who litter and see if you can convince them of the value of clean surroundings.

67. Organise to clean up your local park, river, beach, street, town square or sports grounds with a few friends. Our children deserve to grow up in a clean and healthy environment.

A Thought For The Week Of July 16

"So from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of view. Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer." (2 Corinthians 5:16) Paul (in the days when he was known as Saul) once looked on Jesus as he would look on any man. From a worldly point of view, Jesus failed - He was crucified; He was killed; He was rejected by His own people. It doesn't sound very promising. And so Saul, observing the situation from a worldly perspective, turned on those who followed Jesus, becoming one of the great persecutors of the early church. But then, in a dramatic conversion experience, Saul was changed. He became Paul, and he confronted reality: it was Jesus' seeming defeat that was actually His victory; it was Jesus' apparent weakness that gave His disciples strength; it was Jesus' death that ultimately offered a new way of living. Jesus was like no one else, and He couldn't be judged by the same standards  that the world normally uses. Jesus turns the world and all its expectations upside down - and thank goodness. If Jesus were just a reflection of the world, what would be the point of faith in Him? Jesus asks us to live by the standards God has clearly revealed (love, mercy, compassion and justice for all) and not by the standards the world expects of us (the pursuit of wealth, ambition, a "me-first" attitude, putting profit ahead of people.) Now is as good a time as any to start doing that. Have a great week!

July 15, 2012 Sermon - The Works # 1: Role Reversal

The brother in humble circumstances ought to take pride in his high position.  But the one who is rich should take pride in his low position, because he will pass away like a wild flower.  For the sun rises with scorching heat and withers the plant; its blossom falls and its beauty is destroyed. In the same way, the rich man will fade away even while he goes about his business. (James 1:9-11)

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

     Having read through the Letter of James last week, we’re now going to take the next few weeks to reflect on some of the content we found in it. Since James is essentially an "ethical" letter - stressing how we should respond to God's grace and not God's grace itself (although, with apologies to Martin Luther, I don't believe grace is absent from the letter!) - I'm going to be focusing on the ethics of Christian living (or, as in the words James actually uses, the "deeds" or "works" that are ideally called forth in our lives by the gospel of grace as it touches our hearts and transforms our lives.) One of the things we have to come to terms with is that we are not called to live as the world lives. Our faith is supposed to change us. The way we live is supposed to be almost unrecognizable to the world. People are supposed to look at us and shake their heads because we think and act and respond so differently than the world expects. People are supposed to wonder how it is that Christ can make such a difference in our lives. Jesus is supposed to turn the world and how we view it upside down. Both the Old Testament and the New Testament make this abundantly clear and repeatedly tell us that people of faith are supposed to approach each day with an outlook that defies worldly standards and that makes people stand up and take notice. But, unfortunately, it doesn’t always work that way.

     I have a friend who I’ll call John (that’s not his real name) who I’ve come to know over the last few years who is a Baptist pastor in South India. Since I’ve known him, he’s shared a fair bit with me about what being both a pastor and a Christian in South India is like, and I now have a standing invitation to visit and worship with him at his church if I’m ever in South India - and I’ve extended the reciprocal invitation to him to worship with us should he ever find himself in this part of the world. John was born and raised as a Christian in an overwhelmingly Hindu culture in which only 5% of the people are Christians. His father was also a Baptist pastor, but he was a convert in his early adulthood from Hinduism to Christianity. The family made a lot of sacrifices to become Christians. Persecution of Christians in the region isn’t uncommon. I found this report about the situation of Christians in South India: “There has been an increase in anti-Christian violence in recent years … . The acts of violence include arson of churches, re-conversion of Christians to Hinduism by force and threats of physical violence, distribution of threatening literature, burning of Bibles, raping of nuns, murder of Christian priests and destruction of Christian schools, colleges, and cemeteries.” I share this not to demonize Hinduism (because God knows Christians have done a lot of ugly things over the years too, so we have no room for feelings of pride or superiority) but just to give you a taste of what my friend John faces on a regular basis. One of his challenges is that almost all the people who attend his church are converts from Hinduism to Christianity in a culture that doesn’t take very kindly to such conversions. Another challenge - especially for him as a Baptist - is that many of his parishioners absolutely refuse to be baptized. He doesn’t doubt their Christian faith, but they believe that if they accept baptism that will be the final sign for their enemies to begin persecuting them. So they gather quietly to worship, but because baptism by law has to be registered, they decline baptism. Dr. David Scott, a Methodist who teaches at the Union Theological Seminary in Bangalore, India, writes that “ the Indian Christian convert has been described as “an outcaste, no longer recognizable as a functioning member of his or her former community. ... numerous Indians consider Christian conversion and baptism to be effective denationalization. For many conversion to Christianity is offensive, a betrayal of India's national heritage, an alienation harmful to the life of the nation, a disturbance having undesirable political and economic implications.” My friend John tells me that, to avoid these consequences, many in his congregation insist on holding on to the Hindu caste system - the system that establishes a “social pecking order,” with those on the bottom (known as the “untouchables”) being truly cast out. They can be educated, make money and even rise to positions of prominence in government, but those of higher castes still won’t associate with them. So John’s congregation is hopelessly divided into Hindu castes, in spite of the fact that they’re professing Christians, and many of his parishioners won’t even speak to each other.

     That is not just a South Indian phenomenon, although in South India it’s taken to something of an extreme. There are many Christian congregations in North America that find themselves quietly (or sometimes not so quietly) divided between the “ins” and the “outs,” and woe to anyone who chooses to challenge the unspoken power structure. And this is not just a modern phenomenon. It’s witnessed to in Scripture. There are repeated warnings in Scripture about the dangers of discriminating within the community of faith, and repeated calls for that not to happen, for all to be treated as equal in the eyes not just of God but also of the people of God. In Matthew 20:16, Jesus says “So the last will be first and the first will be last.” There is no sense to that, is there? But Jesus is saying that God will bring about a radical re-ordering of society in which those who are often the last to be thought of and the last to be taken care of will be placed at the front of the line. Jesus was the one who promised blessing - and not as a future promise but as a present condition - to the most unlikely of people: the poor, the meek, those who mourn. Our world is more likely to see those in such conditions as cursed, not as blessed. Even before Jesus was born, Mary saw that His birth would re-order society. As she reflected upon God’s work, she said: “He has brought down rulers from their thrones but has lifted up the humble. He has filled the hungry with good things but has sent the rich away empty.” And even centuries before that, the prophet Isaiah in speaking of the work of the Messiah, wrote that “Every valley shall be raised up, every mountain and hill made low; the rough ground shall become level, the rugged places a plain.” The fact that these things needed to be said suggests that Jesus, Mary, Isaiah - and James, who wrote that “The brother in humble circumstances ought to take pride in his high position.  But the one who is rich should take pride in his low position” - all saw various forms of inequality in the community of faith as a problem to be addressed. And it is a problem to be addressed. Most congregations have a power structure - those who, for one reason or another, can influence every decision that gets made if they want to. If that’s because they’re the spiritually mature people, that’s all right - and appropriate. But that isn’t always the case. Sometimes it’s those with money vs. those without. Sometimes it’s those who are educated vs. those who aren’t. In some contexts it’s those who speak in tongues vs. those who don’t. Sometimes it’s those who commit what they think of as “lesser” sins vs. those who commit what are thought of as “bigger” sins. In some churches it’s men vs. women, or clergy vs. lay. We’re not supposed to (and maybe we don’t even mean to) - but we try to make the church look like the world by dividing it in some way into those who “have” vs. those who “don’t,” or those who “are” vs. those who “aren’t.” Ultimately, that destroys Christian community. It becomes far too easy for those who “have” or who “are” to look down upon those who “don’t have” or who “aren’t” and it becomes equally easy for those who “don’t have” and who “aren’t” to start to believe they’re unworthy.

     That’s why I like to speak about the "paradox" of the gospel - the fact that what Jesus gives us is not what we expect by worldly standards. From Jesus we get the God who humbled himself and became a man; from Jesus we get the crucified God; from Jesus we get the Son of God who eats with sinners; from Jesus we get unmerited grace apart from obedience to law. The world doesn’t understand this. Neither should they really understand we who follow Jesus. Instead, the world should be fascinated by both Him and us; they should wonder what makes such a difference. Back to those words of James: “The brother in humble circumstances ought to take pride in his high position.  But the one who is rich should take pride in his low position, because he will pass away like a wild flower.” This isn’t normal. It’s a complete reversal. It’s not “the law” that demands obedience but it’s part of “The Works” that should simply flow from faith - to establish a community where there are no rich and no poor, no mighty and no weak, no important and no unimportant; to establish a community where we all just treat each others as equals - which is what we are in the eyes of God anyway. The things of the world don't count to God. Having a lot doesn't make us more worthy in God’s eyes; having little doesn't make us less worthy in God’s eyes. We are equal in the sight of God. God promises a radical re-ordering of society; and God desires that it begin in the church, among His people, as an example to the world of what real community and real relationship look like.

A Thought For The Week Of July 9

A thought for the week (a day late, but better late than never!): "If anyone says, 'I love God,' yet hates his brother, he is a liar. For anyone who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen." (1 John 4:20) You can't claim to love a God who is love and then not be moved to love in return. That seems pretty basic to me. And yet it astonishes me that a lot of Christian often seem to try. Some are pretty open about it. You have, for example, Westboro Baptist Church, who seem to express hatred for everything and everyone. But they're the extreme exception, I agree. Usually it's a far more subtle thing: we gossip, we criticize, we judge. Christians cast aspersions on other Christians because of what they believe or what church they belong to. We act in unloving ways toward our brothers and sisters and neighbours all the time. And when we do that we bring both ourselves and God into disrepute. People who aren't Christians are pretty smart, after all, and they often know how Christians should act better than we Christians do. 1 John 4:20 is more than just a call for us to love - it's a reminder that we dishonour God by failing to love. This isn't talking about a romantic, emotional love - it's love in action; love that gives for the sake of others; sometimes love that costs pretty heavily. If we love God, that's the kind of love our lives should display. Have a great week!

A Thought For The Week Of July 2

"But you must never eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil because when you eat from it, you will certainly die.” (Genesis 2:7) Back in the 70's the musical group Queen wrote a song that included these lyrics: "I want it all, and I want it now!" In a lot of ways that's the attitude of so many people today. We can't wait for anything and we want everything. The end result is that so many people are never satisfied with their lives. They can never rest and enjoy what they have, because it's never enough. They need to be moving on to the next thing; striving after the next possession. To be satisfied is a sign of weakness. To be content is to start falling behind. There's a lot of unhappy and unsatisfied people because of that - because we can't have it all. That was true from the very beginning. God gave Adam (humanity) everything - except for one tree. The implicit message: "you can't have it all." But Adam wasn't satisfied. Adam wanted it all. Adam (& Eve) were tempted and went after that tree - and the result was disaster. As individuals and as a society we too often want it all and we'll do whatever we need to do to get it. That might be on a personal level as we run over whoever gets in our way on the climb up the ladder, or it might be on a societal level - "who cares about the earth, we want the oil!" God wants us to understand that we can't have it all. We need to learn contentment for ourselves, and direct our attention to helping others in need. If our thoughts are always and only on us, we can't do that. Be content. Look around. Find someone who isn't as well off as you - and they're always around. Then give them a helping hand. You might as well. After all, you can't have it all! Have a great week!