localpastor

READINGS: 04/28/2024 ~ Fifth Sunday of Easter ~ *Acts 8:26-40; Psalm 22:25-31; 1 John 4:7-21; John 15:1-8 ~ VIDEO OF THE FULL SERVICE: https://vimeo.com/showcase/7960701/video/941327927

God at Work in the World

“Then Philip proceeded to explain and, starting with this scripture, proclaimed to the Ethiopian the good news about Jesus.” — Acts 8:35.

This is a given: cultural context is important. Unless we pay attention to and understand cultural context, it’s hard to comprehend what’s being said, communicated.

I was reminded of this recently because I was talking with a friend about the musical Cabaret. I saw the original Broadway production.

There is a relatively obscure song in the stage production, not in the movie, with the title It Couldn’t Please Me More. It’s more often called The Pineapple Song.

In the play two older people are courting. Herr Schultz gives Fräulein Schneider a brown paper bag. She looks in the bag and smiles and sings.

“If you brought me diamonds, / If you brought me pearls, / If you brought me roses / Like some other gents / Might bring to other girls, / It couldn’t please me more / Than the gift I see; / A pineapple for me.” And of course, she pulls a pineapple out of the bag.

I’m sure many of us have seen or have something with a picture of a pineapple and the word “welcome” hanging on a wall. When I was young I asked my mother who grew up in poverty during the teeth of Depression, what was the meaning of all these pineapples on walls.

She said in her youth transporting this tropical fruit cost a lot of money. So pineapples became known as a generous gift and a sign of hospitality. Pineapples still adorn walls, still hold a cultural aura of welcome but some of us may have forgotten why— the cost. (Slight pause.)

That original production of Cabaret opened on Broadway in 1966. The staging of it spoke to the culture of that time, so I’d like to briefly describe it because of the culture of that time.

As the audience arrived they saw a bare stage. A large mirror was at center stage and people could see their own reflection as they took their seats. There was no overture. The house lights went down, there was a drum roll, a cymbal crash and a flash of light which temporally blinded the audience. Suddenly the MC of the cabaret stood downstage and sang words of welcome.

“Willkommen! Bienvenue! Welcome! / Fremder, étranger, stranger / Glücklich zu sehen / Je suis enchanté / Happy to see you / Bleibe, reste, stay.”

But the implication of the mirror, the dissonant chords of the song, the sudden blinding light and the vaguely threatening character of the MC said ‘you, the audience, are a part of, a participant in what’s happening on this stage.’ That brings me back to the pineapple song.

Herr Schultz is Jewish. Fräulein Schneider is not. Cabaret is set in Weimar Germany in the early 1930s. The Nazis will soon take over. Indeed, throughout the play people dressed in Nazis attire populate the stage.

Fräulein Schneider, knowing the relationship has no future sings this: “For the sun will rise / And the moon will set / And we learn how to settle / For what you get. / It will all go on if we’re here or not / So who cares? So what? / So who cares? So what?”

As I indicated, the message to the audience was you are participants. Not only that but you, the audience, don’t even notice the slow motion disaster being depicted in front of you. This message resonated as true in 1966 in part because this country was slowly becoming enmeshed in the disaster which was happening in Southeast Asia.

And why was I talking with a friend about Cabaret? This week a revival opened on Broadway. (Slight pause.)

I closely studied Cabaret in my theater work so I saw it a number of times. After one performance I was walking down the street behind two older women when one said to the other, “Wasn’t the show wonderful? The music, the acting, the singing, the dancing— great— just great!”

The other woman said, “Didn’t you notice there were Nazis on that stage too?”

The first woman said, “Nazis? There were Nazis?” Yes, that really happened.

To reiterate, unless we understand and pay attention to cultural context, it’s hard to comprehend what’s being said. Context has meaning. (Slight pause.)

This is in the work known as Luke/Acts in the section commonly called Acts: “Then Philip proceeded to explain and, starting with this scripture, proclaimed to the Ethiopian the good news about Jesus.” (Slight pause.)

Cultural context is important but it speaks to us but only if we see it. And there are gobs of cultural context we need to see in this reading from Acts.

The context is that of the First Century of the Common Era. But our tendency is to look at how the story entertains rather than the context. Philip appears and disappears. The court official is a eunuch. The ruler of Ethiopia is Candace— a woman.

These facts entertain us. But the cultural signals in this story are not about entertainment. Here are a few.

An angel speaks to Philip. Hence, God is present to Philip, a Jew. The Apostle is called to a road in the wilderness— in the wilderness— that’s telling. Who does Philip find there? A court official from Ethiopia, a person of wealth, with an influential, high station. But we also need to realize this is a gentile.

Philip joins the gentile in a chariot, the means by which upper class gentiles traveled. This says something about both the Word being heard by the ruling class and about the Word being heard among the gentiles.

This gentile is reading from the Scroll of the Prophet Isaiah. Another signal— Isaiah is the most significant of the prophets.

The Scroll is unquestionably in Greek, the Septuagint, since gentiles read Greek. But we should also realize when the Hebrew Scriptures are quoted in the New Testament— and they are quoted many times— the quotes are from the Septuagint.

Next, the passage from Isaiah is a “suffering servant” passage. Acts says Philip proclaims the good news and starts with this Scripture. You see, the cross would have been folly to the Greeks, the gentiles. There is no choice but to start there.

Something I think we miss because of our Twenty-First Century context is this is only the starting place. Philip then proclaims the good news.

What is the good news? The good news is the covenant in the Hebrew Scriptures does not find fulfillment simply with the cross. The good news is the covenant in the Hebrew Scriptures finds fulfillment in the resurrected Christ.

Then in the wilderness they come to a place where there is water— a place with water in the wilderness. I could spend my next three sermons unpacking that.

The official asks if Baptism is possible— Baptism, a Jewish ritual. Philip says ‘yes’ so it’s also clear this gentile does not need to conform to Jewish law: circumcision.

Last, Philip winds up in Caesarea, the Roman provincial capital of the area named to honor Caesar, built under Herod the Great before Christ was born. In short, Caesarea was a gentile city and Philip winds up there. (Slight pause.)

I hope I have pointed out just some of the cultural signals which applied in the First Century. I want to suggest unless we see, comprehend, get the context, we will have a hard time understanding what the story might mean for us.

Our tendency is to be a little like that woman who did not notice the Nazis on stage. We are entertained so we become oblivious to… the obvious. (Slight pause.)

The sermon title this week is God at Work in the World. I think this passage is clear when we understand the context. The message of Scripture being explained to the gentiles of the First Century is that in Jesus God is at work in the world.

And the good news is the covenant found in the Hebrew Scriptures does not find fulfillment just because of the cross. That would be folly.

The good news is the covenant in the Hebrew Scriptures finds fulfillment in the resurrected Christ. God intervened in the world with a message of hope embodied in the Messiah, the resurrected Christ. That is the good news.

But to hear it, to get it, to see it, to understand the good news and how it is presented in this passage from Acts we need to know the cultural context. Perhaps of equal importance is the fact that we need to know our own cultural context.

The danger of our cultural context is we tend to pay too much attention to being entertained. We don’t pay enough attention to the reality of God Who intervened in the world and even now intervenes in the world with a message of hope, peace, justice, freedom, joy, wisdom and love embodied in and by Jesus. Amen.

04/28/2024
Elijah Kellogg Church, Harpswell, Maine

ENDPIECE: It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Choral Response and Benediction. This is a précis of what was said: “Two things: first, if a revival of Cabaret opened last week, what is that telling us about our own cultural context? Next, the late Rev. Dr. James Cone said this (quote:) ‘Without concrete signs of divine presence in the lives of the poor, the Gospel becomes simply an opiate. Rather than liberating the powerless from humiliation and suffering, the Gospel becomes a drug that helps them adjust to this world by looking for pie in the sky’ (unquote). I think we need to pay attention to the cultural context, both our context and the context of the Gospel to see how they interact, because the Gospel is not an opiate. The Gospel addresses both the reality of the world and the reality of God’s covenant.”

BENEDICTION: Live for God in every moment of the day. Seek to know the places to which God calls us. Because we are loved we may dare to love others. And may the peace of God which surpasses all understanding keep our hearts and minds in the knowledge of God, the love of Jesus, the Christ, and the companionship of the Holy Spirit, this day and forevermore. Amen.

04/21/2024 ~ Fourth Sunday of Easter ~ *Acts 4:5-12; Psalm 23; 1 John 3:16-24; John 10:11-18 ~ VIDEO OF FULL SERVICE: https://vimeo.com/showcase/7960701/video/939559887

Action

“My children, our love must not simply be words or pure talk. It must be true love, which shows itself to be true in action.” — 1 John 3:18.

A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away— or at least at a considerable distance from Harpswell— I worked in an imaginary place called Wall Street. Of course, there really is a street which bears the moniker “Wall Street.”

I’ve labeled “Wall Street” imaginary because we should realize when a reference is made to (quote:) “Wall Street” this is the nationwide investment industry. People who work in the investment industry live and work everywhere from Maine to California and beyond. Which means “Wall Street” is not a reference to just a place.

So saying Wall Street is just like saying “the White House.” Often White House does not literally mean the place the President lives. It can mean anything from those who work closely with the President to the entire Executive Branch, nationwide.

It twists my knickers when I hear a reporter— and they do say this repeat the words, “The White House says….” My reaction is I did not know we could teach houses to speak.

“Wall Street” and “White House” are not locations but are constructs of language not meant to be taken literally. Now, this next thought is a little more difficult to catch.

While the “Wall Street” might be a linguistic construct, since I was on the inside I know several things about the so called investment industry most people don’t. Let me illustrate that with a couple of stories. (Slight pause.)

I had a supervisor who said an illusion people have about Wall Street is, since this business trades billions of shares a day, people think the industry needs to be and is super organized. How do you keep track of billions of items except by being organized?

The executive then spoke this truth: “The reality is this business is it’s nothing more than chaos— organized chaos— but chaos is still chaos.” Think about that: Wall Street, where the investments of Americans rests, described as chaos.

Yet another executive at the same firm once pointed to a large room filled with clerks and said the job of every person there relied on one thing. Mistakes will be made and will be made often! Take mistakes out of the system and thousands and thousands of people become unemployed, he said. Mistakes? Chaos? On Wall Street? Oh, no!

That Wall Street talk takes me to something, believe it or not, which happened in Seminary. My Senior class, filled as it was with destitute seminarians, needed to raise money so we could give a gift to the Seminary.

Many of us went to businesses and stores around town, Bangor being the town, and asked for donations of goods or services. We, in turn, set up a raffle and sold tickets for these goods and services in order to raise money for that gift to the Seminary.

When we first talked about setting up a raffle, the Methodists in the class were dead set against it. After all— a raffle— that’s gambling.

They said the Methodist Book of Discipline— yes, the methodical Methodists have a book filled with rules— the Methodist Book of Discipline does not allow for gambling, especially among the clergy. And, they claimed, a raffle is gambling. We cannot participate, so said they.

I responded to that, and could respond in part because of my Wall Street background. “Do Methodists have a pension fund?” I asked.

They looked at me as if I had landed from another planet. One of them said, “Why, of course we do.”

“And is a good amount of that money invested on Wall Street?” I asked.

“Why, yes,” was the answer.

“So,” I said, “please explain to me how putting United Methodist Pension Fund money in the hands of Wall Street firms is not gambling?”

There is, of course, no answer to that. It is gambling. And there is nothing (with the possible exceptions of death, taxes and Lucy pulling the football away from Charlie Brown) which is more of a given than Wall Street is a place gambling happens.

No matter how safe or sound things feel in the stock market, there is always a risk. You do not invest money in Wall Street. You place it there, as in ‘place your bets,’ in the hope the risk involved produces reasonable return. But it’s a risk, a bet, a gamble. (Slight pause.)

These are the words in First John: “My children, our love must not simply be words or pure talk. It must be true love, which shows itself to be true in action.” (Slight pause.)

Any competent professional investment manager will tell you there is no such thing as a foolproof investment but their goal to reduce risk. The problem is while you can never reduce risk to zero, you can reduce it so much that any gain, any benefit, becomes close to impossible. Indeed, a competent professional investment manager will tell you if you want to get anything out of your investment, some risk is necessary.

I think for we moderns risk presents a particular challenge. Why? We like to reduce risk. And reducing risk makes for the possibility of smaller returns. Or so it’s said. Increasing risk makes for the possibility of larger returns. Or so it’s said.

I therefore want to suggest the smallest risk comes when we do… nothing. A larger risk comes when we do… something. Action involves risk.

Which brings me to the season of Easter. Easter is not simply about some kind of euphoric joy. And Easter is not about some reward in the sweet by and by. Easter is about action. Easter is about risk.

Easter is a season which aims at being a guide to a transformed life, a transformed life of shared caring, a transformed life of action among people. And notice, this ethic of caring, this ethic of action, is grounded in God’s action, God’s risk.

God’s action of loving us is found in the truth of the resurrection, God’s risk of love for us in Jesus. Hence, Easter not only assures us with the idea that risk can be taken; Easter authorizes and empowers us for risk. Easter issues not some new knowledge about life, but empowerment for that life, empowerment for life lived out in fullness.

For me this means Easter celebrates the idea that we are invited by God to action. But therefore, a logical question would be to what action does God invite us? (Slight pause.)

Here’s what I think about the kind of action to which God invites us. Unconditional love is the greatest risk we can take. And it’s obvious to me that God invites us to love unconditionally.

Unconditional love, you see, means a risk of 100%. When unconditional love is offered, at that very moment, when we take that step to love unconditionally, there is a 100% risk in place since at that point, the point when unconditional love is offered, there is absolutely no possibility of return. To restate this, while we may get a return on the investment of unconditional love— we might get that return— there is no guarantee. We are just called on to give. (Slight pause.)

It confuses me that we often miss or don’t understand this simple idea about love: love is an action, not a feeling. And unconditional love is the most amazingly supportive action we can take, in part because when we offer it the risk factor is 100%. (Slight pause.)

As you know, I am ordained in the United Church of Christ. One of our slogans is in the denomination is (quote:) “Be the church.” (Slight pause.)

Be the church? That’s a tall order. Why? To be is an action. Being takes risk. Or as is says in First John (quote): “…our love must not simply be words or pure talk. It must be true love, which shows itself to be true in action.” Amen.

04/21/2024
Elijah Kellogg Church, Harpswell, Maine

ENDPIECE: It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Choral Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “Here’s another slogan, another saying, this one from the Catholic theologian Richard Rhor: ‘We will never change the world by going to church. We will change the world by being church.’ Again, be the church— I think that defines risk, doesn’t it?”

BENEDICTION: We are equipped by the grace of God to help others on their journeys. God leads us beside still waters and restores our soul. God’s love in Jesus, the Christ, has blessed us and we shall dwell in the house of the true shepherd. Amen.

04/14/2024 ~ Third Sunday of Easter ~ *Acts 3:12-19; Psalm 4; 1 John 3:1-7; Luke 24:36b-48 ~ VIDEO OF FULL SERVICE: https://vimeo.com/showcase/7960701/video/935985925

Panic and Fright

“…Jesus stood among them, stood in their midst and said: ‘Peace be with you.’ They were startled and terrified, in panic and fright;….” — Luke 24:36b-37a.

I think I have said this before. On occasion people accuse me of being a scholar. Perhaps I get accused of that because I sport a well trimmed beard.

You see, stereotype held onto by many in our society says if you have a well trimmed beard you look like a professor, a scholar. Have a beard? You must be a scholar. Not! There’s a difference between looking like a scholar and being a scholar.

One way I deny scholar status is I point out the first time I had a sit down, behind a desk, 9 to 5 job… I was 35. Of course, at 35 I probably needed to sit down. And yes, I was a writer and songwriter in theater and theatrically related projects before that. And yes, generally, one writes at a desk.

But I need to note my involvement in theater was not confined only to writing. My theater life spread out over a multitude of areas.

To list just a few, I worked as a director. So I worked with actors, set designers and lighting designers. I worked as a stage manager Off-off Broadway. One rarely sits down doing that. I was the business manager for a children’s theater, often standing backstage as the show played.

I worked for the theatrical charity, the Actors’ Fund of America. That had me constantly running all over Times Square. What I am really saying is I was not stationed behind a desk very often. I was a body in motion.

I present this list of evidence in an effort to refute the idea that I’m a scholar. On the other hand, one aspect of my personality to which I admit is that I constantly ask about the inner workings of things, constantly ask how things work.

I think asking “How did they do that?” is what drew me to theater. For me a key to theater is asking, “How did they do that?” I do admit to asking that kind of question sometimes also makes someone look like a scholar (when you ask how did they do that?) when that person really are is… is curious— curious— me.

So… let me share where some of my curiosity has taken me in the study of Scripture. These days it feels like there are a multitude of translations of Scripture from the original languages into English. But there is a place to which the people who do these translations go to find out precisely what words they are or should be translating.

They seek guidance from a book which has a fancy Latin name, Textus Receptus. The title means ‘received text.’ What’s in that book?

Well, there are about 5,700 copies of ancient manuscripts of various sections of Scripture which scholars say are authoritative. There are more manuscripts than that but the others are not thought of as authoritative. The authoritative ones are given great credence, deference.

I do need to be clear about one thing concerning the content in that multitude of documents. If you compare two of the same section of Scripture, none of them, not a single one, contains exactly the same words.

That is where this Textus Receptus, the ‘received text,’ comes in. It contains the what scholars have agreed, after much study, after much debate, after serious collaboration should be the words which do get translated. By the way, please mentioned the Textus Receptus to anyone who thinks Scripture should be taken literally. That destroys the argument. (Slight pause.)

Well, let’s look at today’s reading and also look at the whole last Chapter of Luke, the 24th. At most services you usually hear only a small section of Scripture. Therefore, unless you are familiar with the rest of the story you don’t hear the context.

In Chapter 24 of Luke we get post-resurrection stories— plural, stories. As that chapter starts women go to the tomb and find it empty. Next we get the famous Road to Emmaus story with its vision of Christ.

The two disciples in that story rush back to the place where other disciples have gathered to tell the disciples the story of their encounter with the Risen Christ. They are, in turn, told the Risen Christ has appeared to Simon but in the text we don’t hear about that appearance.

As the story unfolds in today’s reading it says (quote:) “…Jesus stood among them, stood in their midst and said: ‘Peace be with you.’ They were startled and terrified, in panic and fright;….” (unquote).

For a moment I’d like to draw your attention to the words “startled and frightened, in panic and fright.” You remember that book to which I just referred, the Textus Receptus, the work which contains the words which get translated?

You will find “startled, terrified, panic and fright” in nearly every translation. Why? Scholars agree these words are in the underlying text, agree those who recorded Scripture used these words. Scholars are telling us Scripture insists the reaction of the disciples to the Risen Christ is to be startled, terrified, panicked, frightened.

In fact, when you look at all the post Resurrection stories this is a common theme. In that last chapter of Luke the women are at the tomb, see two figures dressed in dazzling garments and are described as being terrified.

The Emmaus travelers are not described as terrified. On the other hand, it says they did not recognized Jesus but when the Messiah spoke and explained the Scripture, their hearts were burning. Wow! There’s a reaction— hearts burning.

The Gospel called John famously has Thomas who doubted. Mark describes the women at the tomb as bewildered, trembling. Equally, the Gospel we know as Matthew just before Jesus ascends to heaven, the story says with the Risen Christ there in front of all the disciples some of them doubted. Wow! Just wow!

There are two other common threads in the post Resurrection stories. Jesus seems to appear and disappear. In today’s reading it even says the disciples think they are seeing a ghost. This frightens everyone.

The other common thread is, when Jesus is in their midst, these are the first words said by the Messiah. “Peace be with you.”

Contrary to populist belief, the words “Peace be with you” are not about there being a lack of conflict. “Peace be with you” is an invocation which proclaims the presence of God is there, the Spirit of God is with them. (Slight pause.)

All that once again brings us back to the Textus Receptus, the received text. Given that scholars say these words are and should be in the post Resurrection stories because these manuscripts carry authority, I think we can draw two conclusions.

First, fear and doubt are an important part of faith. After all, these are the words in the received text.

Again something contrary to populist belief, fear or doubt, these two, do not mean a lack of faith. We often fear what we can not fully explain or understand. And having doubt does mean we do need to trust what cannot be explained or understood.

Also, the very thing we need to trust, the thing expressed by the words “Peace be with you,” is that God is with us. God walks with us. God is present to us. Indeed, the proclamation of Easter says Christ is risen. God is in our midst. (Slight pause.)

So yes, the disciples were frightened by the presence of God. Yes, the disciples doubted the presence of the Risen Christ, even though Christ stood in their midst.

However, even when they doubted the presence of God, the presence of Christ, it still means they trusted. You see, the reality of the presence of God and the reality of the presence of Christ— this reality— is what wound up in the received text.

I think therefore we, today, are called to the same place. We are called to trust Christ is risen. We are called to trust God is present to us. Christ is risen; God is present— that— that— is our claim as Christians. Amen.

04/14/2024
Elijah Kellogg Church, Harpswell, Maine

ENDPIECE: It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Choral Response and Benediction. This is a précis of what was said: “Today I surveyed the 24th and last Chapter of Luke. The work known as Acts is actually the second book of Luke. Scholars tell us the two were written by the same author or authors at the same time. We break Acts down into 28 chapters. I know a church that called its newsletter Chapter 29. Why? Well, we are, after all, called to a continue the work of God, the work of the Messiah. And our work is that which happens next. Our work happens after the 28th chapter of Acts. We are the 29th chapter.”

BENEDICTION: Let us place our trust in God. Let us go from this place to share the Good News as we are witnesses. And this is, indeed, the Good News: by God we are blessed; in Jesus, the Christ, the beloved of God, we are made whole. Let us depart in confidence and joy that the Spirit of God is with us and let us carry Christ in our hearts. Amen.

04/07/2024 ~ Second Sunday of Easter ~ *Acts 4:32-35; Psalm 133; 1 John 1:1-2:2; John 20:19-31 ~ Communion Sunday ~ VIDEO OF FULL SERVICE: https://vimeo.com/showcase/7960701/video/933003275

The Presence of Jesus

“Then to Thomas, Jesus said this: ‘Put your finger here and examine my hands. Reach out your hand and put it in my side. Do not persist in your unbelief but believe.’ Thomas answered, ‘My Savior and my God!’” — John 20:27-28.

I want to set up a trick question. Now that I’ve said it’s a trick question, the answer will likely be obvious.

Here’s the set up. Cleopatra, commonly identified as the Queen of Egypt, lived from approximately the year 69 Before the Common Era to the year 30 Before the Common Era. She therefore lived less than 100 years before New Testament Times.

Now, in the year 2,670 Before the Common Era— 4,700 years ago— construction started on the Great Pyramids of Egypt. I will not mention when the last of those Great Pyramids was built. That information defines the trick. The question: did Cleopatra live closer to the building of the last of the Great Pyramids or did the Queen of Egypt live closer to our time today?

The obvious answer since this is a trick question, is Cleopatra lived closer to our times then to the time the last Great Pyramid was constructed. The minor detail of how I set that question up, the trick, is I used a specific limiting factor.

I specified the Great Pyramids. The last of the Great Pyramids was constructed about 4,200 years ago. There were, in fact, some pyramids built after that but they are not considered to be among those Egyptologists label as Great Pyramids.

Even among these lesser pyramids, that later construction ended a long time ago, about 3,900 years ago. And there are still other even more minor structures which date to about 2,800 years ago, still a long time in the past. [1]

To be clear about the math, construction of the Great Pyramids ended about 2,300 Before the Common Era. [2] Since Cleopatra lived less than 100 years before the Common Era, her lifetime was closer to our time by about 200 years.

That leads us to a simple thought. That math says Great Pyramids were built so long ago in terms of human history, the very presence of the pyramids is how we know the individuals, the people, who held the title of Pharaoh back then, even existed.

The pyramids, after all, mark their graves sites. The pyramids are physical markers which attest to their reality, attest to their life. Amazing, isn’t it? (Slight pause.)

We find these words in the Gospel according to the School of John: “Then to Thomas, Jesus said this: ‘Put your finger here and examine my hands. Reach out your hand and put it in my side. Do not persist in your unbelief but believe.’ Thomas answered, ‘My Savior and my God!’” (Slight pause.)

I know I keep stressing we have to glean what Scripture means as opposed to what Scripture says. But there are times I think we pay attention to neither what Scripture means nor to what Scripture says.

Too often our prime source of information about Scripture comes from novels, hymns, movies and Renaissance art rather than what the text actually says. Here are two examples of that reliance for factual data on the popular culture.

The first one: people will often say the Apostle Paul got knocked off a horse. And Paul falling off said horse is an image used in hundreds of paintings which address that episode— mostly the bad Renaissance art not the good Renaissance art. But check out the story in Acts. There is no horse— not there.

Equally the movie The Ten Commandments taught us enslaved Hebrews helped build the pyramids. But the facts tell us when the Hebrews arrived in what we today call Egypt the construction of the pyramids was already complete.

Equally I suspect our cultural image of the interaction of Thomas and the Risen Christ has the Apostle placing a finger in the wounds made by nails and a spear. You’ve probably seen many paintings which picture the event that way— some more bad Renaissance art I’m sure. But there is no mention of any such action by Thomas.

The response of Thomas to the invitation of Jesus to touch the wounds is only a verbal response. Thomas says, “My Savior and my God!” (Slight pause.)

When I introduce the Gospel reading on Easter Sunday I always say this. (Quote:) “There are no Resurrection stories in Scripture, no stories about the Christ coming out of the tomb. There are only post Resurrection stories.”

In many of these post Resurrection stories Jesus seems to do physical things, like eat. Even appearing and disappearing as we heard in this reading would in some sense would be physical. And yet in these stories no one ever physically touches the Risen Christ. Indeed, when Mary of Magdala interacts with Jesus, the Risen Christ says these words (quote:) “Do not hold on to me, because I have not yet ascended to Abba, ascended to God.” (Slight pause.)

Unlike the Pharaohs, we have no physical marker, no grave of Jesus in the region called Roman Palestine in New Testament times. Yes, there are some sites which lay claim to being the exact places certain things happened.

But those claims lack any proof, any veracity. They are simply claims. Jesus was buried here, right in this place or Jesus was born here, right in this place. I can, after all, claim I won the Masters Golf Tournament. That does not mean it’s true. It’s simply a claim. So what is this claim about the presence of Jesus? (Slight pause.)

I want to suggest all the post Resurrection stories in Scripture try to do two things. First and rumor to the contrary, these writings are not primarily trying to tell a story. The post Resurrection tales are there to express theology, to say something about God.

And yes, the writing in the Bible uses story to do that. Take it from this Pastor who had been a professional writer. Telling stories is an effective way to communicate.

Therefore and second, the real question is ‘what is the theological statement being made?’ I think the theological statement being made says the presence of Jesus can be felt.

If that claim is true— that the presence of Jesus can be felt— the question for us here, today, becomes how can the presence of Jesus be felt today? What does the reality of presence Jesus feel like today? (Slight pause.)

Let me make a suggestion on that count. The presence of Christ can be felt here when the Kellogg Church gathers for worship. The presence of Christ can be felt here when the Kellogg Church has a community dinner, a barn sale, a holiday fair.

I do not mean to disappoint the Board of Finance but the reason we have those last three events I listed, dinners, fairs, barn sales, is not to raise money. The reason we have them is or should be to affirm the presence of the Christ in the world.

Perhaps more to the point, the presence of Jesus, the reality of that presence, is a more than feeling, more than a sense. It is a spiritual experience.

Physical markers are a fine statement about a presence if you are the Pharaoh of Egypt. But our claim as Christians is there is more to the reality of Christ than can be signified by a mere physical marker. I, thereby, am suggesting the presence of Jesus can be felt.

After all, the response of the Apostle who doubted was humble. In humility Thomas said, “My Savior and my God!” rather than reaching out to touch, to look for a physical marker. (Slight pause.)

Indeed, the presence of Christ can be felt in how we treat one another. Do we treat one another with love, respect, kindness, patience? Do we treat one another as God would have us treat one another?

I think we, in humility, need to treat one another as God would have us treat one another— with that love, respect, kindness, patience. When we treat one another that way we can feel and even see that the Christ is present to us all.

When we treat one another with love, respect, kindness, patience is when we are empowered to acknowledge, in humility, the presence of the risen Christ is real. Last, when we treat one another with love, respect, kindness, patience we act as a physical presence, we act as the markers of risen Christ. Amen.

04/07/2023
Elijah Kellogg Church, Harpswell, Maine

ENDPIECE: It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Choral Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “First things first: remember, nothing eclipses the light of Christ. And the Thought for Meditation today is a quote from Marcel Proust: ‘The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes but in having new eyes.’ The theological statement. Therefore, the theological claim made is, because Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus is with us and that God walks with us. Perhaps the new eyes that Proust suggests need to be theological eyes— eyes constantly aware of the presence of God.”

BENEDICTION: Hear now this blessing: we go into the world carrying forth God’s love. Let us go from this place and offer the peace of God which surpasses all understanding to all we meet, and may the Peace of Christ keep our hearts and minds in the knowledge and companionship of the Creator, the Redeemer and the Sanctifier, this day and forever more. Amen.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_pyramids

[2] https://www.history.com/topics/ancient-history/the-egyptian-pyramids

03/31/2024 ~ Resurrection of the Christ ~ A.K.A. Easter Day ~ *Acts 10:34-43 or Isaiah 25:6-9; Psalm 118:1-2, 14-24; 1 Corinthians 15:1-11 or Acts 10:34-43; John 20:1-18 or
Mark 16:1-8 ~ VIDEO OF FULL SERVICE: https://vimeo.com/showcase/7960701/video/929891619

Resurrections

“…Mary ran and went to Simon Peter and the other disciple— the one whom Jesus loved— and said, ‘The Rabbi has been taken from of the tomb! We do not know where they have put Jesus.’” — John 20:2.

The sky was the first to know about the approaching sun and seemed to sense what was happening as it happened. The sky knew this identifiable shade of brightness which was just slightly brighter than the dense core of night.

Winter is tenacious but it does slowly pass into Spring— Spring, when the sky does become empowered to paint new pictures on the face of the earth. Perhaps because she had a sense of that moment when this new light happens, the eyes of Mary of Magdala, who had been sleeping, were suddenly open.

As incredible as it sounds just as the sky knew morning was approaching, so did she. But today seemed strangely different to her. She did not know what it was about but somehow this dawning day felt distinct, separate.

This cycle of sensing a new day started right after her friend, the Rabbi, Jesus, had been executed by the State. That was, of course, now some thirty years ago.

As she rested in her bed, a little unsure that it had been that long ago she stared at the ceiling and suddenly she realized— yes!— it had been nearly thirty years to the day. Yes! It was in the Spring, around the feast of Pesach, Passover.

Of course, what happened— her involvement— did not end with the execution. And she had seen the execution with her own eyes. Then just three days later she saw her friend Jesus again… and then again… and then again.

And so every day for those thirty years Mary woke up at this time, when the sky knew the dawn was coming, exactly the same time she had set out to visit the tomb. Even now, all these years later, part of her could not make logical sense of what had happened. The Rabbi was executed. And yet the Rabbi was with them. (Slight pause.)

There was a knock on the door. She put her feet on the floor and stood. Mary could hear two men speaking. “Peter and John,” she thought. “Here already.”

“Come ahead,” she shouted.

Rusty hinges creaked and the heavy door to her house swung open. John and Peter entered. Peter called out, “Good morning Mags!” Her close friends called her Mags because she was from Magdala.

“You’re early,” she said. “The markets will not yet be open. We will not be able get food for Pesach, the Passover meal, at this time of day.”

Peter, the older of the two, smiled knowingly. “Yes, Pesach.” (Slight pause.) “You do know what today is, Mags, do you not?”

“The Day of Passover begins when the sun sets,” she said.

“Yes,” John allowed. “That too.”

“There’s something else?” she asked. “What’s more important than Pesach.”

Peter sighed. “You do know it is thirty years to the day.”

Mags let out a sigh, then responded. “I knew it was around this time. So then, it’s thirty years since the execution.”

John reached out and touched her shoulder. “No, Mags. It’s thirty years since the third day, thirty years since we saw Jesus.”

“Oh, I should have known. I often wake up when the sky begins to brighten, exactly at the same time I woke up and went to the tomb. But today, when my eyes opened, today seemed different. I should have known.”

“Well,” said Peter, “we need to remember Jesus is still with us. Jesus walks with us every day.”

Then John spoke. “I think a piece of the covenant promise is it’s not just that the Rabbi lives. It’s that we also live. God is with us. God walks with us. God surrounds us with love each day of our lives.” (Slight pause.)

There was a long silence, as if they were taking in the reality, the feelings, the truth John had just turned into words. Finally Mags spoke. “I’ll never forget that first time I knew Jesus was standing there, with me.”

“I had gone to the tomb. You both followed but then left. I suddenly realized the Rabbi stood right in front of me and very clearly said, ‘Do not hold on to me,…’”

“I also remember after that after Jesus returned none of us ever did reach out to touch the Rabbi. But Jesus was there, with us, present. The fact of that presence, that reality— that Jesus was with us— was overwhelming. And yes, the presence of Jesus was just like it had been, just as real as it had been before the execution.”

Again there was a silence, as if they were all taking in the reality Mags had expressed, the truth Mags had turned into words.

“Perhaps that’s why I wake up when I do,” allowed Mags. “You see, I left for the tomb when light began to glow in the sky.”

Once again there was silence. Then Mags spoke again. “Perhaps because of that presence, the reality of it, I understand the resurrection is a part of the promise of covenant.”

“And yes, I wake up with the light but the light that I now really know about, the light that is in every fibre of my being, is the light of God, the light of the Rabbi, the light of Jesus, the light of the Christ, the light of the promise of God shining out in the deepest night. And that promise, the light of that promise of God shining out in the deepest night, is a promise of new light, new life, of resurrection.” (Slight pause.)

Peter and John stood there silently and simply nodded. Then Peter said, “Yes, the promise of new light, new life, resurrection is for all of us.” (Slight pause.)

There was again a long silence. Then John said, “Yes, the promise of new light, new life, a promise of resurrection is for all of us… not just now but always.” Mags nodded. “Resurrection is for all of us.” (Pause.) Amen.

03/31/2024 ~ Easter Sunday
Elijah Kellogg Church, Harpswell, Maine

ENDPIECE: It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, before the Benediction. This is a précis of what was said: “I need to say three things: first, please join come Coffee Hour right down the hall. Greet your friends and neighbors this morning. Next, in Aramaic, the language which would have been spoken in Roman Palestine in New Testament times, to be saved meant to be made alive. Nextd, I am sure the well known American composer Irving Berlin was a nice fellow. He wrote Easter Parade and also a lesser know Easter Song, It’s a Lovely Day, Happy Easter. I want to suggest, however, that to merely say, ‘Happy Easter’ is not a Christian sentiment. So, let me make this suggestion: if someone walks up to you and says, ‘Happy Easter’ shake their hand and say, ‘Christ is risen.’ ‘Christ is risen’ is the Christian sentiment.”

BENEDICTION: Hear now this blessing and then please join with me in the responsive Easter acclamation found in the bulletin. May the peace of God, which passes all understanding, keep your hearts and minds in the love of Christ, Jesus, and in the knowledge of the Holy Spirit this day and forever. And now please join with me in the Easter Acclamation.

ONE: Rejoice, people of God! Christ is risen from the dead! Go in peace to love and serve God. Christ is with you always. Alleluia! Christ is Risen!
MANY: Christ is risen, indeed. Alleluia.

03/24/2024 ~ Liturgy of the Palms ~ Sixth Sunday in Lent ~ Psalm 118:1-2, 19-29; Mark 11:1-11 or John 12:12-16 ~ Liturgy of the Passion ~ Sixth Sunday in Lent ~ Isaiah 50:4-9a; Psalm 31:9-16; Philippians 2:5-11; Mark 14:1-15:47 or Mark 15:1-39, (40-47) ~ NOTE: DUE TO AN ICE STORM AND POWER LOSS THE SERVICE HAD TO BE CANCELED. THERE IS NO VIDEO FOR THIS SERVICE.

The Name

“Therefore, God highly exalted Christ / and gave to Jesus the name / above every other name, / so that at the name of Jesus / every knee should bend, / in heaven, on earth and under the earth, / and every tongue should proclaim / to the glory of God / that Jesus is the Christ and reigns supreme.” — Philippians 2:9-11.

Here’s something out of my theater background. In Act II, Scene 2 of Romeo and Juliet, Juliet famously asks: “…wherefore art thou Romeo?” Needless to say, one reason Juliet even asks the question is she knows her love of Romeo is forbidden.

Why? This love is forbidden simply because Romeo has the wrong name. Romeo is of the House of Montague. Juliet is a member of the House of Capulet.

Therefore Juliet, in a speech shortly after her famous question concerning the whereabouts of Romeo, argues the names of things do not matter. What matters is only what things are— their reality as opposed to their name.

And so Juliet says, “What’s in a name? / That which we call a rose / By any other name would smell as sweet;…” Or as Gertrude Stein would put it in a much later century: “A rose is a rose is a rose is a rose.”

Indeed, what is in a name? I think it’s a fascinating question, especially since we live in a time when, generally at least, names don’t usually have other meanings. For instance these days, most of the time, we tend to name newborns for someone in the family rather than attaching an alternative meaning, some significance beyond familial sensibilities.

Well, what is a name? How do they come about? While I am occasionally accused of relating everything to baseball— and I am often guilty as charged— let me try to relate this name stuff to baseball. You may have heard me say the only Baseball team I ever really rooted for was the Brooklyn Dodgers.

The predecessors of the team eventually known as the Dodgers were in existence and playing baseball in Brooklyn when the National League was organized in 1876. The franchise joined the National League at that point of origin, 1876.

In the early years the franchise was known by several different names— the Grays, the Grooms, the Bridegrooms the Robins— before settling on the name Dodgers. And from where did name Dodgers come?’ Is there a meaning of which we’ve lost track?

Well, yes. New Yorkers— meaning Manhattanites— routinely called anyone from the other side of the East River a “trolley dodger” Why? A vast network of street car lines crisscrossed Brooklyn. People had to dodge trolleys just to cross the streets. So Brooklynites were nicknamed dodgers by the Manhattanites.

Eventually the nickname Dodgers was bestowed on the team and it stuck. The actual, legal name of the team was the Brooklyn Base Ball Club. The name was not legally changed to the Dodgers until 1932. So all this asks the question ‘what’s in a name?’ ‘Do names sometimes have other meanings?’ (Slight pause.)

These words are from the work known as Philippians: “Therefore, God highly exalted Christ / and gave to Jesus the name / above every other name, / so that at the name of Jesus / every knee should bend, / in heaven, on earth and under the earth, / and every tongue should proclaim / to the glory of God / that Jesus is the Christ and reigns supreme.” (Slight pause.)

You have heard me discuss this before. Often names in Scripture do have meanings of which we moderns are blissfully unaware. Some examples: the name Adam, modern mis-reading to the contrary, has no gender connection. It’s neither masculine nor feminine. Why?

The word Adam is not meant to be a name. It is meant to be a play on words. The Hebrew word for ground is adama. Adam— pronounced Adam in Hebrew— means the one made from the ground. The name thereby means earth being or earth creature.

Equally the name Eve— Ish in the Hebrew— is not gender specific, neither masculine nor feminine and is also a play on words. Ish means giver of life.

Israel— pronounced Ishrael in Hebrew— means one who wrestles with God. Abraham— pronounced Abraham in Hebrew— means “progenitor of many nations.”

And, as you may have heard me say at other times, there is another way to understand the name Jesus. That name, pronounced Yeshuah in Hebrew, means God saves or God offers salvation.

In fact, the Gospels actually give Jesus, this Yeshuah, a second name. The other name is Emmanuel. And the meaning of that name is even spelled out for us in the text. Emmanuel means “God is with us.”

To be clear, salvation offered by God and God being with us is a concept found throughout the Hebrew Scriptures. So to state the obvious, that the name Jesus means God saves, God offers salvation or God is with us would have been evident to those who first read or heard this text. I think these meanings are much less evident for us today.

Indeed (and I have also said this here before), today when we hear “Jesus Christ” many in our culture think of that as being a first name and a last name. However, in the Greek word Christ is not a name. It is a title. The word Christ is a translation from Hebrew to Greek and means Messiah or the anointed one.

The point is when we read or listen to passages like this one, we need to read it or listen to it with First Century ears. We need to strive to understand what the words might have meant to those who first read it or first heard it.

Indeed, that brings me back to the reading from Philippians. I am going to read those verses which I quoted again. But this time I am going to recite these words in the way a listener from the First Century might have understood meanings which are not obvious to us today. So I am going to read it in a way which delineates what the words mean. (Slight pause.)

“Therefore, God highly exalted the One Who is the Messiah, the One Who is sent by God to be the Messiah, the One Who is sent to be the Anointed One / and gave to this One Whose Name is Jehoshua— this One Whose Name means God offers salvation— gave this One a name / above every other name, / so that at the name of Jehoshua, at the Name God saves, at the Name God offers salvation / every knee should bend, / in heaven, on earth and under the earth, / and every tongue should proclaim / to the glory of God / that Jehoshua— this One Who offers salvation— is the Messiah, is the Anointed One and reigns supreme.”

I need to note what I’ve just recited is in no way outrageous. In fact, it affirms what we Christians have understood and proclaimed about Jesus.

It is my hope that hearing these words in this way allows us to better understand the meanings behind the words. I say that because we live in a time when we tend to ask what does Scripture say as if we are playing back a recording of some kind. The thing we need to ask and the thing with which we need to grapple is not what Scripture says. We need to ask and to grapple with what the Scripture means. (Slight pause.)

Last, let me offer a true story. One day when I was in Seminary I once had a discussion with a classmate who said you need to go to Scripture for all the answers. I said, no, no, no. You need to go to Scripture to find out what questions to ask.

The very next day— and that is the amazing part— it was the very next day— in a New Testament class the late Rev. Dr. Burt Throckmorton, who I deeply loved and respected, was (frankly) droning on and on from behind a lectern. Suddenly Burt danced out from behind the lectern— if you knew Burt you knew wherever he moved he never just moved, he danced— suddenly Burt danced out from behind that lectern.

He then said something totally unrelated to what he had been lecturing about, and this is a quote: “You know some people say they go to Scripture for answers. Some people say they go to Scripture for questions. They are both wrong. When you go Scripture you need to be in dialogue with the text.”

I think it is very hard to be in dialogue with the text unless you know what the words in the text might have meant to those who first heard or read them. So we do need to remember Scripture was written when names often did have meaning beyond mere naming.

And in that era naming sought to reenforce the meanings of the story being told and, therefore, sought to uncover something about the textured reality found therein. So we do need to ask what Scripture means rather than ask what Scripture says. Amen.

Elijah Kellogg Church, Harpswell, Maine
03/24/2024

ENDPIECE: It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Choral Response and Benediction. This is a précis of what was said: “Some pastors advertise and do what’s called a sermon series. I generally don’t. But I confess. If you’ve been following what I’ve said since Transfiguration Sunday, February 11, the week before the start of Lent, I have been doing a sermon series. The key messages in the series have been twofold: God loves us and wants to be in covenant with us. And in order to understand the love of God we are called to wrestle with, grapple with, come to an understanding of what Scripture tells us, what Scripture means. In an effort to do that we need to read with First Century eyes and listen with First Century ears. Is that hard work? Yes, but it is necessary work.”

BENEDICTION: God has written the law of love within us. We are this empowered as we experience God’s presence together. Where Christ leads, let us follow. Where God calls us to service, let us go. And may the peace of God which surpasses all understanding keep our hearts and minds in the knowledge of God, the love of Jesus, the Christ and the companionship of the Holy Spirit, this day and forevermore. Amen.

03/17/2024 ~ Fifth Sunday in Lent ~ Jeremiah 31:31-34; Psalm 51:1-12 or Psalm 119:9-16; Hebrews 5:5-10; John 12:20-33 ~ VIDEO OF FULL SERVICE: https://vimeo.com/showcase/7960701/video/925119542

Tu Es Sacerdos

“Christ, even the Christ, did not presume to take on the office of high priest. No, Christ was appointed by the One Who said, / ‘You are my Own, / today I have begotten you;’ / and in another place that One said, / ‘You are a priest forever, / according to / the order of Melchizedek.’” — Hebrews 5:5-6.

This happens. When it happens it takes me by surprise and makes me feel a little strange. It’s when someone addresses me as “Father,” refers to me as a priest.

Of course, for most folks the titles “priest” and “Father,” are interchangeable. But as I just said two weeks ago, I am ordained in the United Church of Christ and the title bestowed with that ordination in the U.C.C. is Pastor and Teacher.

This raises a question, but not a question about faith traditions. It’s a question about the English language. What does the word “priest” mean? (Slight pause.)

A strict definition says a “priest” is someone who handles blood. Now, if you are unfamiliar with Catholic theology an important concept is transubstantiation. There’s a $64 word, right?

Transubstantiation holds that in celebrating Communion the elements— bread and wine— maintain the outward appearances of bread and wine— taste, smell— but really become the body and blood of Christ. Hence, Catholic clergy are called priests since a priest handles blood.

But Joe (I can hear you ask), don’t Lutherans and Episcopalians often call their clergy priests? Yes, they do. The theological claim often espoused in those traditions is called consubstantiation. This says in celebrating the sacrament the bread and wine does not become the body and blood of Christ but coexists with the body and blood of Christ.

Indeed, in the three aforementioned traditions the place at which the sacrament is celebrated is usually called an altar. Again a definition: an altar is a place at which blood sacrifice happens.

Now, if all those definitions don’t make your head spin I don’t know what will. It certainly makes my head spin! And yes, there is yet another way to think about what happens when Communion is celebrated.

That concept says in the Sacrament we find the real presence of Christ. No matter which of these definitions is used, real presence applies to all of them. Since in our tradition we tend to rely on real presence we call the place the sacrament is celebrated a table.

I would suggest the real presence of Christ is tangible around an altar and around a table in Communion. After all, where two or three are gathered…. I maintain the real presence of Christ is tangible because in the sacrament we are called to recognize our mutuality, our commonality, our community in Christ. (Slight pause.)

This is said in the work known as Hebrews: “Christ, even the Christ, did not presume to take on the office of high priest. No, Christ was appointed by the One who said, / ‘You are my Own, / today I have begotten you;’ / and in another place that One said, / ‘You are a priest forever, / according to / the order of Melchizedek.’” (Slight pause.)

The observant among you will have noticed the sermon title this week is in Latin— Tu Es Sacerdos. The longer Latin saying is, “Tu es sacerdos in aeternum secundum ordinem Melchisedech.” This translates as “You are a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek.”

When a priest is ordained Tu Es Sacerdos is an anthem often sung by a choir. Indeed, my friend and collaborator Paul Johnson and I wrote an anthem with that title, Tu Es Sacerdos, for the ordination of an Episcopal priest.

Well, who is this Melchizedek? (Slight pause.) When the reading from Hebrews was introduced it was said the New Testament contains a myriad of references to the Old Testament. There is, hence, a necessity to understand the Old Testament. And we find Melchizedek in the Hebrew Scriptures, in Genesis, in the story of Abram and Sari.

So to unpack some of this, the name Melchizedek means “sovereign of righteousness.” Righteousness means being in right relationship with God. In the Genesis passage it says Melchizedek was a priest of (quote:) “God Most High.”

The underlying Hebrew we translate as “God Most High” is El-Shaddai, one of several nameings of God used in the Hebrew Scriptures. This Melchizedek brings out bread and wine, blesses them and then sends Abram and Sari, later Abraham and Sarah on their way as they seek the land which God promises. (Slight pause.)

Given that brief description my guess is you can start making the myriad of connections this text lays out. The story of Abram and Sari, as I said later Abraham and Sarah, with whom God makes covenant, initiates the story of the Jewish people.

Melchizedek is a priest, a reference to the ancient practice of blood sacrifice. In New Testament times blood sacrifice was still practiced in the temple in Jerusalem. Coming full circle, Jesus at the table with the disciples, as did Melchizedek, blesses bread, the cup, and shares it. Then Jesus is crucified and resurrected.

Our Christian claim is that Jesus is resurrected. Why? Certainly one aspect of our proclamation about the resurrection is that in Jesus the covenant established with Abraham and Sarah continues. Further, just as Melchizedek was righteous, in right relationship with God, our claim as Christians says Jesus is the sovereign of righteousness, the One Who is in perfect relationship with God.

Of course, this Epistle is to the Hebrews who probably understood each of these connections. And so the author names Jesus as a high priest of God, like Melchizedek, and thereby calls to mind all the covenant connections in the Hebrew Scriptures. But the writer also makes a claim beyond righteousness: Jesus is the only begotten of God.

That, of course, leaves us with a question. If Jesus is a priest in the order of Melchizedek what does that mean? Or perhaps more directly, if the covenant initiated by God with Abraham and Sarah and embodied by Jesus is alive, present now, what does that mean for us today? (Slight pause.)

I think the answer was voiced by Martin Luther. We are a priesthood of believers. From what place might that idea come? It is in this Epistle to the Hebrews, two chapters before today’s reading. (Quote:) “Therefore, my holy brothers and sisters, partners in the heavenly call, fix your thoughts on Jesus, the apostle and high priest of our calling.”

That leaves a final question. What does it meant that our calling is to be a priesthood of believers? (Slight pause.)

Well, this is my read. The covenant lives today and we are called to live in right relationship with God, right relationship with one another, called to acts of kindness, called to practicing grace, civility, patience, wisdom, called to the seeking of hope, peace, called to the spreading love, joy.

And yes, in our tradition we are all pastors. But in our tradition we are also called to be a priesthood of believers. And our prayer is that God might empower us to act in ways of kindness, practicing grace, civility, patience, wisdom, the seeking of hope, peace, the spreading joy. (Slight pause.)

By the way, here’s another way to say what priests and pastors need to do: priests and pastors— that would be us— need to practice the difficult discipline called love. After all, we are descendants of, inheritors of the order, called to be in the order of Melchizedek. Tu Es Sacerdos. You, we, are in the tradition which calls us to be a priesthood. Amen.

Elijah Kellogg Church, Harpswell, Maine
03/17/2024

ENDPIECE: It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Choral Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “The Bible (the pastor holds one up) it is one book with many parts, sections, divisions. But perhaps it is also one singular entity and maybe one of our issues with Scripture is we are unwilling to delve deep enough into it to find what ties everything together. And what really ties everything together is the covenant of love with which God reaches out to us. Or as I like to say, God loves us and wants to covenant with us. I hope this does not sound too judgmental, but if the love of God does not jump off every page, we’ve just read it wrong. Try again.”

BENEDICTION: God has written the law of love within us. We are empowered to live according to that law, through the Redeemer, Jesus. In Christ, we experience God’s presence together. Where Christ leads, let us follow. Where God calls us to service, let us go. And may the peace of God which surpasses all understanding keep our hearts and minds in the knowledge of God, the love of Jesus, the Christ and the companionship of the Holy Spirit, this day and forevermore. Amen.

03/10/2024 ~ Fourth Sunday in Lent ~ Numbers 21:4-9; Psalm 107:1-3, 17-22; Ephesians 2:1-10; John 3:14-21 ~ VIDEO OF SERVICE— NOTE: DUE TO A POWER OUTAGE THE FIRST TEN MINUTES OF THE SERVICE WERE NOT RECORDED: https://vimeo.com/showcase/7960701/video/922532027

Not of Your Own Doing

“For we are what God has made us, God’s work of art, created in Christ Jesus to do the good things, which God prepared for us to do beforehand, from the beginning, to be our way of life.” — Ephesians 2:10.

I admit it. I am a planner. In 2015 I had a sabbatical and planned an eleven week cross country trip by car. Bonnie and I crossed the nation. Planing that was challenging. But as we used to say right after we got married when we went on a trip somewhere— “adventures with Bonnie and Joe.” And an adventure it was.

Of course, each Sunday I do some planning— prepare prayers, introductions to scripture, stuff not in the bulletin. And, oh, yes— there’s that sermon thing also. Do I ad-lib? Yes.

But a colleague once said I did more preparation for a service than anyone else he knew. My response? “The only way you can ad-lib readily is to be well prepared.”

Indeed, you may have seen a TV show whose premise is comedians are given a situation. They then seem to respond spontaneously, appear to ad-lib in a humorous way. Show Business people know calling this exercise ad-lib is a stretch.

These performers have a prodigious comedic, situational memory. For the most part they simply pull out a bit, a routine from their memory bank, perhaps string two or three together, and apply it to the situation.

Does it seem like it’s done totally off the cuff. Yes. Is it? Only sometimes. How do they make it seem like it’s off the cuff? They are prepared. It’s that simple.

To put planning in a different light, translated from the light Scot dialect, poet Robert Burns wrote “The best laid schemes of mice and men / Go often askew.” Steinbeck named the famous novella Of Mice and Men after that line in the poem.

A mouse is involved because the poem is about how planning can be reduced to meaningless futility by the shear folly of the unforseen. The whole poem says a mouse has survived in a frozen field through the depth of winter in a borrow only to have it ripped apart in the Spring by a plough. “The best laid plans…” And if the weather today doesn’t say something about the best laid plans I don’t know what does. (Slight pause.)

So, what are plans? What is organization? What do plans and organization mean, really? After all, isn’t full fledged disaster lurking around the corner most of the time? Ask the mouse. (Slight pause.)

This is what is recorded in Ephesians: “For we are what God has made us, God’s work of art, created in Christ Jesus to do the good things, which God prepared for us to do beforehand, from the beginning, to be our way of life.” (Slight pause.)

When we look at Ephesians, the passage from today and also when we take this writing as a whole, it is clear the writer insists God, the artist, is active in the life of the world. That might lead us, especially those of us to like to plan, to say, ‘Yes, God may be active in the world but what kind of plans does God have?’

You see, I think generally most of us want to know where things stand. We want to plan but we also want predictable results. Tell me, is that the reality of life, predictable results? (Slight pause.)

To address planning in another way, my opinion is despite all the polarized divisiveness we hear about today we humans have more in common than we realize. Yes, those on opposite poles generally see themselves as adversaries.

Why? Both ends of the poles tend to picture things in a deterministic, inevitable way, even see the world in apocalyptic terms. For example one side will say life as we know it will end unless we do x, y, z. No other cause/result is available. The other side says, no! Life as we know it will end because of a, b, c. No other cause/result is available.

I think unwavering attitudes— x, y, z verses a, b, c— these my way or the highway attitudes— diminish the reality of human complexity, diminish the complex reality of life. Perhaps our real failing— pardon the expression, our original sin— is reductionism. We try to make things more simple than they really are.

At least in part, I think polarization is a symptom of reductionism, simplification. Polarization— and it is real— is a symptom of trying to simplify the world, simplify reality. Perhaps people do this also. They even try to simplify Scripture.

One side, for instance, says Scripture can only be taken literally. The other side claims if it’s in Scripture it doesn’t matter at all. Either way, it’s simplification.

But simplification, reductionism is not the reality of what we find in Scripture or the reality of our experience of life. In truth I think complexity and mystery describes both Scripture and life.

The very fabric of the Biblical text is complex. Complexity, mystery are descriptions of things difficult to fully know and/or things beyond our knowing. Complexity and mystery describes real life. Complexity and mystery describes God.

And God is the One with Whom Scripture calls us to grapple. We are called to grapple with God Who is both complex and mysterious. I think grappling with complexity or mystery is something we do not like to do. Why? We like things kept simple.

Unfortunately an option too often employed is to insist the world is not complex, reality is not complex. But insisting that reality is not complex, not, mysterious, will not change it. The world will remain complex and mysterious. (Slight pause.)

And so… the writer of Ephesians tells us things are not of our own doing. And the very idea— that things are not of our doing— that is complex. Or we at least perceive that which is not of our own doing as complex.

Why? If God’s gifts to us— if God’s gifts to us are not of our own doing, we have to grapple with the complexity of the concept that we are not in control. And guess what? We like things kept simple. We like control. (Slight pause.)

This passage states we are (quote:) “God’s work of art,”— God’s work of art— an amazing phrase. So I suggest we all think about a basic premise of Christianity: God is a mystery. I think this passage reflects God as a mystery, complex beyond our understanding. And thereby the passage also tells us life is mysterious and complex.

Paradoxically, that presents us with a very simple challenge. We need to realize God is there, God with us, in all the complexity of real life. Another simple challenge is for us to realize God loves us. God loves not just each of us but all of us. And God loves each of us and all of us— that seems simple but I think it is really, really complex, really, really hard to understand.

Indeed, the idea that God loves each of us and all of us simultaneously— that tells us life is mysterious and complex. After all, if we follow the instruction of Jesus that we humans should love everyone, even our enemies, it presents us with a tall hill to climb, especially in a polarized world. (Slight pause.)

I think we all need to realize the concept that God loves everyone is a simple idea and, yes, tells us life is complex. Further, I think we need to realize it’s possible some people are not comfortable with a God Who loves everyone— hence polarization.

And complexity? I know I’m not always comfortable with complexity. After all, I like to plan. I like to be in control.

So perhaps the real key here is I need to have a true sense of humility, need to remember I am God’s work of art. Perhaps we all need to have a true sense of humility, need to remember, we are all God’s work of art. Amen.

03/10/2024
Elijah Kellogg Church, Harpswell, Maine

ENDPIECE: It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Choral Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “The opening sentence in one of my commentaries on this passage says, ‘The Bible is a cloth of many colors and textures…’ I think that’s what I was attempting to say today. And I’ve said this next thing here a number of times. It bears repeating. Theologian Walter Brueggemann says the picture of God painted in Scripture is drawn with intentional artistic illusiveness. Another way to put that is the Bible and life, they’re both complex. Life is a mystery. Life, itself, is or should be a work of art. At least that’s what I think”

BENEDICTION: There is but one message in Scripture: God loves us. Let us endeavor to let God’s love shine forth in our lives. For with God’s love and goodness, there is power to redeem, power to revive, power to renew, power to resurrect. So, may the love of God the Creator which is real, the Peace of the Christ which surpasses all understanding and companionship of the Holy Spirit which is ever present, keep our hearts and minds in God’s knowledge and care this day and forever more. Amen.

03/03/2024 ~ Third Sunday in Lent ~ Exodus 20:1-17; Psalm 19; 1 Corinthians 1:18-25; John 2:13-22 ~ Communion Sunday ~ Used Lent Communion ~ VIDEO OF FULL SERVICE: https://vimeo.com/showcase/7960701/video/921473543

What Really Counts

“Then God spoke these words and said, / ‘I am Yahweh, God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage; / do not worship any gods except me.’” — Exodus 20:1-3.

I have no doubt about this. My late father was very smart, brilliant really. The editor of his class High School Year Book, he graduated first in his class.

He then entered Manhattan College and received a 4.0 GPA, all A’s, in his first semester. I don’t know if this is true but family legend has it he was the first Manhattan College student to ever have a 4.0 GPA in the first semester.

Dad graduated from college— again first in his class, again editor of his class year book, and became an English Teacher at Regis High School on the Upper East Side of Manhattan, a school run by the Jesuits. He was thought of by his colleagues as a master teacher and spent entire working career at that school. (Slight pause.)

I am ordained in the United Church of Christ. The title bestowed with ordination in the U.C.C. is Pastor and Teacher. People sometimes tell me I’m a good teacher.

If that’s right, I say I simply inherited the teaching gene; I got it from my Father. But I did not enter the teaching field. Aside from many other things, I was a writer in theater. Of course, I still write something each week. It’s called a sermon.

Now, as I said, my Dad was the editor of his High School and College yearbooks. In fact, he wanted to be a writer, not a teacher. But the truth is not many people earn a living exclusively as a writer, except perhaps writers who work for a corporation, newspaper reporters, television writers, and the stability of those positions can be quite precarious.

Another truth: many writers do freelance work, so they are in business for themselves, by themselves. Freelance writing is a hard, dangerous, risk taking way to make a living, often a hand to mouth existence. I know; I’ve done it.

A final truth— for my Father, married and in fairly short order with three children to feed, that situation did not line up well with the often perilous life of a writer. My parents never said this straight out but I think they were happy and proud when I embarked on my writing career. They supported me in any way they could.

I think they were even happier, more proud and maybe even a little surprised when I had some success. You see, I was fulfilling my Father’s dreams— dreams which he knew were less than practical given the circumstances of his life. (Slight pause.)

My father, the teacher, once said to me, “I never gave any student a grade. They gave it to themselves.”

Good grades have a cause, said he. If a student does the work, participates, success will happen. If they do not, the result will be obvious. Dad said all he ever did when it came to grades was record the result. (Slight pause.)

This what we hear in the work known as Exodus: “Then God spoke these words and said, / ‘I am Yahweh, God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage; / do not worship any gods except me.’” (Slight pause.)

In the Jewish tradition these words from Exodus are not known as the “Ten Commandments.” These are known as the Ten Words.

Also, in the Hebrew language the command tense does not exist. Given these two statements about Jewish tradition and the Jewish language, these words can, in no way, be thought of as commandments.

And there is also a societal tendency to think of this passage as a monolith— sacred, immovable. That is a totally secular, even irreligious, concept. (Slight pause.)

You have some inserts at the end of the bulletin today which refer to this passage. I invite you to turn to them. (Slight pause.) They are the long sheets.

There’s one insert listed with four traditions. The four traditions are Jewish; Anglican/Reformed; Orthodox; Roman Catholic/Lutheran. Where a number skips indicating a commandment, that tradition combines two of the commandments. As you can see on that chart, different traditions cannot even agree on how to number the so called “Ten Commandments.” [1]

Another chart has the three different versions of the Commandments” found in the Hebrew Scriptures. They are from Exodus, Deuteronomy and yet a second set from Exodus. [2]

I certainly wonder why people put up monuments with ten numbers— which ten, whose ten? Whose version, which tradition should take precedence? I would wonder why people put up these monuments, depictions with tablets and numbers, except I realize this is a totally secular, even irreligious concept. (Slight pause.)

Someone who tells you a translation can be taken literally does not know the first thing about either translating or language. And there is one more page in that bulletin.

That remaining page has six translations of this passage on it. [3] Please take it home and compare them. Each translation is different. Each has its own validity.

Society treats these words as immutable, etched in stone. They are not. There are even many ways to translate them. [4] (Slight pause.)

That leads to an obvious question. If our cultural image of the so called “Ten Commandments” is both monolithic but at the same time inaccurate, what are these words really about? (Slight pause.)

First things first: this passage makes a claim about God Who is the One Who loves us. God loved the Israelites. God guided their rescue from bondage, led them to freedom.

So these words start with God’s love. Given that these words begin with and stem from love, the rest of them should not be thought of commands but as the result of God’s love. They are or should be simply a result of our participation in the love of God, the work of God, the result of a relationship with God.

Hence and especially when we get to phrases like “No murdering! No giving false testimony…!” — this is about our relationship with one another, about loving one another. God loves us and we participate in that love by practicing the love of God with each other. (Slight pause.)

A short time ago we shared bread and cup at the table. The symbolism embodied by the tactile, real experience of sharing the bread and cup says something about how we are to love one another. We are to love one another through sharing, respect and love.

If we share, respect and love then we will be enabled to live out the words of this passage in ways which will amaze us, transcend this passage, guide us to places we did not know possible, empower us to see the world as God sees the world. If we share, respect and love we will live out the result these words talk about.

You see, I think too often both we and the world sees these words as commands. If they are conceptualized as commands we will see them as the cause for our behavior. But I think God, the great teacher, sees these words not as a cause for our behavior but as a result, the result of participating in the love of God, the work of God.

I think God sees these words as an assignment, a homework assignment if you would, from the great teacher. Our assignment is to participate in the Realm of God. And if we participate in the Realm of God, sharing, respect and love are sure to result. Amen.

03/03/2024
Elijah Kellogg Church, Harpswell, Maine

ENDPIECE: It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Choral Response and Benediction. This is a précis of what was said: “We often take the word Torah, the Pentateuch, to mean the Law. But the deeper meaning of the word Torah is “the Teachings.” Let me suggest the elevation of the so called ‘Ten Commandments’ to an exalted status is about the culture, not about faith, not about a relationship with God. After all, when asked what are the great commandments the answer the Christ gave referenced Deuteronomy and Leviticus, [5] love God, love neighbor, not the ‘The Commandments.’ So the question for us is simple. When will we stop worshiping the culture as a god and worship the One Triune God, the God of relationship?”

BENEDICTION: This is the message of Scripture: God loves us. Let us endeavor to let God’s love shine forth in our lives. For with God’s love and goodness, there is power to redeem, power to revive, power to renew, power to resurrect. So, may the love of God the Creator which is real, the Peace of Christ which surpasses all understanding and companionship of the Holy Spirit which is ever present, keep our hearts and minds in the knowledge and care of God this day and forever more. Amen.

ENDNOTES:
[1] These 4 traditions do, indeed, use different numbers for different phrases. The four were listed on this chart with numbers assigned to specific “commands.” using abbreviated phrases for each.

[2] This sheet had Exodus 20:2-17, Deuteronomy 5:6-21 and Exodus 34:6-26 listed side by side to allow for comparison.

[3] The six translations lined up side by side are: The New Revised Standard Version; The Inclusive Language Version; The King James Version; The English Standard Version (British); The Message; The New International Version.

[4] When the passage was read the Inclusive Language Translation of Exodus 20:1-17 was read. This is it:

[1] Then God spoke these words and said, [2] “I am Yahweh, God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage;

[3] “do not worship any gods except me.

[4] “Do not make for yourselves any carved images or likenesses or anything in heaven above or on earth beneath, or in the waters under the earth [5] and do not bow down or serve them! For I, Yahweh, am a jealous God, and for the parents fault I punish the children, the grandchildren and the great grandchildren of those who turn from me; [6] but I show kindness to the thousandth generation of those who love me and heed my commandments.

[7] “Do not utter the name Yahweh or misuse it, for Yahweh will not acquit anyone who utters God’s Name to misuse it.

[8] “Remember the Sabbath day and keep it holy! [9] Six days you will labor and do all your work. [10] But the seventh day is a Sabbath for Yahweh. Do not work on that day— neither you, nor your son nor your daughter, nor your workers women or men, nor you animals, nor the foreigner who lives among you. [11] For in six days Yahweh made heaven and earth and the sea and all that they hold, but rested the seventh day; that is why Yahweh has blessed the Sabbath day and made it sacred.

[12] “Honor your mother and your father, so that you may have a long life in the land that Yahweh, your God, has given to you.

[13] “No murdering!

[14] “No adultery!

[15] “No stealing!

[16] “No giving false testimony against your neighbor!

[17] “No desiring your neighbor’s house! No desiring your neighbor’s spouse or worker— female or male— or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor!”

[5] Deuteronomy 6:4-5 and Leviticus 19:18.

02/25/2024 ~ Second Sunday in Lent ~ Genesis 17:1-7, 15-16; Psalm 22:23-31; Romans 4:13-25; Mark 8:31-38 or Mark 9:2-9 ~ VIDEO OF FULL SERVICE: https://vimeo.com/showcase/7960701/video/917164464

An Invitation to Change

“No longer shall your name be Avram or the exalted ancestor, but your name shall be Avraham or Hamon Goyyim. [And that is the Hebrew for the progenitor of a multitude of Nations.]” — Genesis 17:5a.

People often take the word myth to mean a widely held but false belief or idea. That is one of the dictionary definitions but not the first one.

The first definition: a myth is ‘a traditional story, especially one concerning the early history of a people or which explains some natural or social phenomenon.’ So, a myth is a story which uncovers deep truth, a reality which supersedes mere fact.

To elaborate, myths give people a vision of their place in the world, a way to help make sense of their existence. Myths offer a narrative which helps people understand their lives. That type of myth is called a functional or establishing narrative which influences people to see the world in a certain way.

Establishing narratives are not an outdated idea. For example, Americans see the Revolutionary War as a part of our establishing myth, see that conflict as being about freedom, as well we should. However, we also need to be aware of the realities behind the myth, some of them at least.

John Hancock, famous in part because of a very large signature on the Declaration of Independence, happened to be one of most wealthy people in America at that time. A guy named George Washington owned more land than anyone else, wealth in terms of land ownership. And of course wealth in the South relied on enslavement.

But British bankers constantly cut off the credit lines of people in the colonies, credit being the life blood of wealth. So in part at least, the Revolution was about the economy— wealth and credit and debt and control of assets.

Hence, in order to really understand our own American establishing myth, one should also understand and acknowledge the realities involved. The facts do not diminish that the establishing myth of America is about freedom. But to ignore the underlying realities as if they do not exist is less than healthy.

I need to say one thing on a more individual level. Each of us maintains our own, personal, establishing myth, an establishing story, whether or not we know we do that.

To reiterate what I said last week, my story address my youth in the Roman Catholic tradition and my early childhood in a tough section of Brooklyn— in the vernacular a ghetto. That is the reality, fact. But my establishing myth, my deep truth, says I did not become trapped by my history, my circumstances.

You see, both fact and myth need to work together. Therefore, the reality, the facts of my story informs my establishing myth, informs a deeper truth found therein. My establishing myth brings new light and truth to that reality, enables me to see the underlying facts of where I have been in a helpful way.

I believe fully understanding my myth empowers me to think about where I might go next, who I might become. And who might I become? I am convinced God is not yet finished shaping and reshaping me. I believe God beckons me to walk in new ways, in new light, in new hope. (Slight pause.)

These words are the words we find in the work known as Genesis: “No longer shall your name be Avram or the exalted ancestor, but your name shall be Avraham or Hamon Goyyim. [And that is the Hebrew for the progenitor of a multitude of Nations.]” (Slight pause.)

Last week I talked about stories, my story, your story. This is part two. It’s about the larger story. All the stories in Genesis are founding stories, establishing myths of the people of Israel. And again, myth does not mean false.

Myths convey deep truth, visceral truth, truth about the reality of feelings. The Genesis stories convey truth about the reality of relationship with God.

That brings us to the story of Avram, who becomes known as Avraham or Hamon Goyyim. This Genesis story directly addresses covenant.

It is clearly an establishing myth for the Israelites since God promises make Avram (quote:) “…exceedingly, exceedingly many.” But it is also an establishing myth for a relationship with God. And I think it is the relationship with God which may give us moderns reason to pause.

Why? This is clear: we like to be in charge of relationships but God, the Prime Mover, is in charge of this relationship. (Quote:) “I am God, Almighty.”

God then says (quote:) “Be blameless.” Avram is here called to be perfect, complete. But this is not moral purity. This is about unqualified devotion to God.

Also (quote:) “As for me, here— my covenant is with you:…”— God, the Prime Mover, takes a unilateral action. Next, there is an obvious and in some ways a key point. God unilaterally changes the names of Avram and Sari to Avraham and Sarah.

For me, this name change poses the pertinent question. To what does God call us? (Slight pause.)

I want to suggest God calls us to change. And the change to which God calls us is to see the world the way God sees the world. How might God see the world?

I think God sees the world as a place where the possibilities God names astound us in a profound way. Avraham says (quote:) “I am a hundred years old. How can children be born to me? Can Sarah, who is ninety years old, bear a child?”

Is this about bearing children at a late age? No. I think the claim, the establishing myth, is that God sees the world as a place where the impossible possibility of the realm of God is possible.

And the realm of God is possible not just among the Israelites but among all people. Hence, not Avram but Avraham is a (quote:) “progenitor of a multitude of Nations.

Avraham will be a progenitor of all people, all nations, not just the Israelites. And therefore the story is both an establishing myth for Israel but also an establishing myth for humanity in its relationship with God. (Slight pause.)

Earlier I spoke about establishing myths for nations and individuals. In fact, most groups have establishing myths. (Slight pause.)

Question: what is the establishing myth of this congregation, this church. Or put another way, if someone asked you what is the reputation of your church, this church in this community, what would you say? What would your claim be?

While I have not been here a long time I would suggest at least a part of your reputation is this church honors its history. This church was founded in the 1700s and is now named for a pastor in the 1800s. Also this church is known for its community outreach. This church is known for its music. So my take is, at least in part, the establishing myths here are threefold: history, mission and music.

My hope is if you name your establishing myths it might bring new light to the reality of who and what this church is. It might enable members to see the underlying facts of both where you have been and where you might be going. To be clear, when I name the myths of this congregation it means nothing.

You, the members of the congregation, need to name those myths. And at least in part, that is what the transition process we are now experiencing is about.

You need to name who this church is. The very naming will inform this congregation where it is going. And yes, that is easier said than done.

Why do I think this naming is important? I am convinced God is not yet finished shaping and reshaping. I am convinced God beckons you, the people of God, to walk in new ways, in new light, in new hope.

I also believe, just as God called Avram and Sari to change, God calls you, this congregation, to change. Now, you might ask ‘change to what?’ I don’t know.

But God knows. And this congregation, each and every person, needs to be aware of that, the fact that God knows and to work with that and, perhaps most important, to let God lead. Amen.

02/25/2024
Elijah Kellogg Church, Harpswell, Maine

ENDPIECE: It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Choral Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “An overarching theme of the Bible is covenant. And covenant is explained in the stories of establishing myths because covenant is the theology of Genesis. But we, humans, are often not quite comfortable with covenant because covenant starts with God. God leads. So, are we comfortable enough with the leadership God provides to let that happen?

BENEDICTION: Do not be ashamed to question all that denies God’s reign. The promises of God are for all. Let us trust in the promises of God. Let us understand, believe in and hold to God’s covenant. Let us depart in confidence and joy knowing that God is with us and let us carry Christ in our hearts. Amen.