localpastor

06/02/2024 ~ Proper 4 ~ Ninth Sunday in Ordinary Time ~ Second Sunday after Pentecost ~ 1 Samuel 3:1-10, (11-20); Psalm 139:1-6, 13-18; Deuteronomy 5:12-15; Psalm 81:1-10; 2 Corinthians 4:5-12; Mark 2:23-3:6 ~ Communion Sunday ~ VIDEO OF THE FULL SERVICE: https://vimeo.com/showcase/7960701/video/954371538

Observing the Sabbath

“But the seventh day is a Sabbath to Yahweh, your God. You shall not do any work…” — Deuteronomy 5:14.

One of my Seminary professors, the late Rev. Mr. Clifton Davis, grew up in Massachusetts in the 1940s and 50s. He got an Associate’s Degree from Paul Smith’s College in upstate New York when all they offered was an Associate’s Degree. He then went off to the University of Colorado in Denver and picked up a Bachelor’s Degree in Business Management.

Only at that point did Cliff hear a call to ministry and wound up at Bangor Theological Seminary more than thirty years before I wound up there. And of course, for most Mainline denominations a seminary education consists of 90 credit Master of Divinity degree from state accredited school.

Once ordained, he served churches in New Hampshire. But Cliff, a bookish kind of fellow, felt his real calling within ministry was to be a seminary librarian. And so he returned to Bangor having acquired the academic credential necessary to fill that slot at the graduate level— yet another degree— a Master’s Degree in Library Science.

Cliff had an interesting hobby for a member of the clergy. He brewed beer in the basement of his house. I know about this because I not only worked for Cliff at the library, I used my computer to pint labels for the pints he produced.

One thing about Cliff’s story should be obvious. Having become a seminary professor, a librarian, there was something Cliff no longer did: serve a local church.

People sometimes asked Cliff why he no longer served a local church. With a twinkle in his eye he would say, “Why would I serve a local church? After all, it’s against my religion to work on the Sabbath.” (Slight pause.)

These are words from the Torah in the work commonly called Deuteronomy: “But the seventh day is a Sabbath to Yahweh, your God. You shall not do any work…” (Slight pause.)

I have said this here before: the first five books of the Bible are called the Torah. In English that word is often rendered as the Law. At best that rendering gives a poor understanding of what the word Torah means. The word Torah means “the Teachings.”

Indeed, as was noted when the passage from Deuteronomy was introduced and contrary to populist belief, the words of the Decalogue are not commands with the same sense one might assign in English. There is, after all, no command tense in Hebrew.

It also needs to be said when the commandments are referenced in Scripture, especially the Christian Scripture, the New Testament, most of the time the Ten are not being addressed. What is most often being referenced are the mitzvah. There are 613 mitzvah, 613 teachings in the Hebrew Scriptures.

Further, when examined with care, it should be evident the specific words we heard today are teachings about how relationships are acted out, about how relationship with God, with one another, with the environment in which we live, with self. Here’s another way to put it: these words are about covenant— covenant with God, covenant with one another, covenant with the environment in which we live, covenant even with self.

And yes, these specific words concern observing Sabbath. However, in a real sense a Sabbath is not about a specific day. A Sabbath is about our relationship with God, with one another, with the environment in which we live, with self.

Let me put that yet another way yet again. These words are about being empowered to do the ministry to which God calls us because we honor our relationship with God, with one another, with the environment in which we live, with self. (Slight pause.)

That leaves three questions open: what is the covenant about, really? What is ministry about, really? And how are these reflected in keeping Sabbath? (Slight pause.)

I can assure you of this: covenant is about growth. In order to be in covenant, in order to maintain covenant growth— dare I say this?— change, even constant change, is necessary.

In order to be in relationship with God, with one another, with the environment in which we live, with self, we need to grow. We need to change. In order to do ministry we need to be in relationship with God, with one another, with the environment in which we live, with self… and that all means grappling with change.

I hope something is, therefore, evident. A hallmark of the ministry to which we are all called by God is full engagement in growth. You’ve heard me say this already— growth in relationship with God, with one another, with the environment in which we live, with self.

So, how is covenant growth nurtured by Sabbath? These are the words Mark uses describe the position of Jesus concerning Sabbath: “The Sabbath was made for people, not people for the Sabbath.”

Hence, I hope this is also evident. Growth needs to start with self. Therefore, each of us needs to first take care of self in order to empower growth.

And taking care of self is what Sabbath is really about— about people fully realizing themselves— who they are, who they have been, who they might become, how they might grow. This can be and is done by taking time— Sabbath being the label used here to address time— time taken to understand relationship with God and with self.

Paradoxically and hence, Sabbath is work. It is work on self so one can nurture growth in self and thereby in the context of community growth for and with others nurture that growth.

You see, once someone understands their relationship with God, one becomes more aware of self— self meaning who they are, who they have been, who they might become, their place in their own environment— only then can they begin to reach out to others in covenant love. And that work of reaching out is called ministry.

There is a danger here which is always lurking in the shadows. It’s that one will become quite satisfied with self or become tired or give up and hence, stop growing, and thereby stop engaging in ministry. So let me direct your attention back to that word— covenant— covenant— that word which is so central to Congregationalism— covenant means growth— covenant means growth. (Slight pause.)

And this brings us to a key point. If covenant, if ministry is about growth— growth of the individual which nurtures growth of community, then by definition ministry happens because of who you are, because of who we are as a community of faith, as an individual. Please note: ministry happens because of who you are and who we are, not because of what you do or what we do. What you do and what we do is only a result of who you are and who we are, a result of being engaged in covenant growth.

That, of course, has implications for who we are, the community of faith together. I believe that we are a people— both individuals and a community— called by God to growth, to change. So what do you think? Are we called to growth and to change? There is no doubt about this: we are called to ministry. So do you think growth and change is a requirement of that? Amen.

06/02/2024
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: “The fixation of our society on the Ten Commandments borders on and probably is anti-Christian. There is no question about that. Interestingly, our society borders on and probably is in about the same place as society in Roman Palestine in New Testament times— engaged in Empire, the Roman empire. When asked about the mitzvah, the commandments, Jesus said they no longer applied. Empire and fear no longer applied. Rather, we need to love God and love neighbor, said Jesus. And on loving God and loving neighbor hangs on all teachings and the prophets. And how are these teachings acted out? They are acted out in growth and relationships.”

BENEDICTION: Hear now this blessing: the work and the will of God is placed before us. Further, we are called to be faithful and seek to do God’s will and work. In so doing, may we love God so much, that we love nothing else too much. May we be so in awe of God, that we are in awe of no one else and nothing else. Amen.

05/26/2024 ~ Trinity Sunday ~ The First Sunday after Pentecost ~ Eighth Sunday in Ordinary Time ~ Isaiah 6:1-8; Psalm 29; Romans 8:12-17; John 3:1-17 ~ VIDEO OF FULL SERVICE: https://vimeo.com/showcase/7960701/video/952299369

Subtext: in Praise of Actors

“They (that is the Seraphs) cried out to one another and said: / ‘Holy, holy, holy is Yahweh, God, the omnipotent; / the whole earth is full with the glory of God.’” — Isaiah 6:3.

I have, perhaps too often for some, mentioned my involvement with professional theater. But if memory serves I have not mentioned this particular involvement from the pulpit.

While still in my very early twenties I attended acting classes at the American Academy of Dramatic Arts, a well known training ground for professional actors. In no particular order, among those who attended the Academy over the course of many years are Lauren Bacall, Anne Hathaway, Anne Bancroft, Danny DeVito , Robert Redford.

But since I was and am a writer, not an actor, why did I take classes at the American Academy? I wanted to know what actors know about doing their job. My premise was, if I knew how actors went about their work I, therefore, would know how to better work with, communicate with, and write for actors.

So, how do actors work? I suppose this next statement is flattering to we who are writers. Actors learn they first have to work with the text, work with what is written.

But there’s something beyond the text. And this next statement is not particularly flattering to writers. No matter how good the writing is, the text still just sits on the page. Anyone’s words from Shakespeare to Shaw to Connolly— sit on a page. The truth is words are somewhat dry, dead.

An actor breathes life into the words, makes words leap off the page, fully vibrant, finds the emotions which lie therein, enables the text to resonate with the audience. So the next and obvious question is, ‘how do actors do that?’

Actors work with what theater people call subtext. Subtext is content not announced explicitly by the words, the characters, the author. In short, what the actors need to do is to discover, communicate and help an audience understand is the meanings implicit in the text.

Now, I personally think it’s nearly impossible to plumb the depth of human emotions with mere words. Therefore, an actor’s job is to convey what is not explicit, what is not spelled out, to convey what’s hidden there in the words.

Here is simply a truth. There are many levels to an emotion and a word is simply that: a word; it does not tell anyone about the levels of emotion in its possession. In fact, you can use all kinds of words to try to express emotion— joy or anger or hope, for example. But think of how many levels of emotion can be found in each of those words. The writer can only imply the levels of emotional life in each word.

The actor helps an audience grasp the various levels, the heights and depths of the emotions, trapped in the words. In attempting to convey those emotions an actor tries to communicate through tone, attitude, tempo, posture, facial expression— tries to convey something about the underlying thoughts, the motives that the actor has found, the desirers of character.

We need to realize subtext is not exactly hidden but it also must be discovered. Emotion exists inside the words. An actor tries to transmit the meanings discovered therein. (Slight pause.)

This is recorded in the Scroll of the Prophet Isaiah: “They (that is the Seraphs) cried out to one another and said: / ‘Holy, holy, holy is Yahweh, God, the omnipotent; / the whole earth is full with the glory of God.’” (Slight pause.)

Here is another piece of my personal story you’ve heard, perhaps too often for some. I grew up in the Roman Catholic tradition. I, thereby, know these words from Isaiah— holy, holy, holy— are quoted in the prayer known as the Sanctus in the Roman Mass. But what’s the subtext here? What’s underneath, hidden in the words?

That’s a question we need to ask every passage in Scripture: what’s the subtext? As I have said here before, only rarely should we ask what the text says. We should ask ‘what does the text mean?’ Therefore, the corollary question is ‘What’s the subtext telling us?’

I think when it comes to Scripture just like an actor works with subtext to discover emotional content, we need to do the same kind of work with subtext in Scripture. Why? We need to try to uncover the depth of the emotional content in the text.

So, what is the subtext here in these words from Isaiah? Let’s start where actors start: with the words, with the text, with what is written.

What does the word “holy” mean? Holy means worthy of respect, devotion, inspiring awe, reverence. That makes sense. After all, this is about God.

That brings us to the next word to be considered, perhaps the pivotal word in this passage: glory. The underlying Hebrew word is kabod. As is true with many Hebrew words, kabod has multiple meanings. And often meaning depends on the context.

In this context kabod— glory— means the overwhelming presence of God and within that reality of presence, the extent of the goodness of God, the depth of the love of God. In short, kabod informs us about the profound emotional presence of God.

Well, how about what the seraph, an angel, does in touching the mouth of the Prophet with an ember? This is an action of purification, an eradication of guilt, corruption. But taken literally an ember on the lips sounds painful, does it not? How can that be taken in a literal way?

It can’t. And that’s rather the point. What’s the subtext? The subtext comes back to the word kabod which informs us about the reality of the emotional presence of God.

It is not the ember which purifies. No mere action purifies. It is God— the reality of the emotional presence of God— it is God Who purifies. (Slight pause.)

Please let the emotional content of that statement sink in for a minute. The subtext says God purifies. Yes, a writer might tell the story and say an ember touched to lips brings purification. But that’s just an illustration, a way to tell the story.

What’s really happening? The reality of the story, the subtext of the story says God alone, God Who is holy, purifies. (Slight pause.)

That leads us back to the Sanctus, holy, this use of the words from Isaiah in the Roman Mass as the Sacrament of Communion is celebrated. Why use Isaiah there, at the sacred ritual of Communion?

The church connects the words of Isaiah to Communion because of what the subtext says. God purifies all things, so around the table we are all purified and we are all welcome. (Slight pause.)

You see, unless we grapple with the subtext we do not and will not know that these words are about emotions. This is about emotional attachment, the emotional attachment of God to humanity and, thereby, our emotional attachment to God.

I need to add one more item. The passage offered this morning ends with the words “Here am I; send me!” Why? That is the emotional result of the subtext. God loves us so much that we respond to this God who loves. (Slight pause.)

I believe life, especially emotional life, lives in and through the subtext. Mere words cannot fully describe our emotions. Actions, reactions, interactions happen but the subtext is where our emotional life is lived out. (Slight pause.)

Well, here’s something else you have heard me say, perhaps too often for some. God loves us and wants to covenant with us. God invites us to love one another.

That, my friends, is the subtext of all Scripture, the subtext of life. God loves us and wants to covenant with us. God invites us to love one another. Amen.

05/26/2024
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: “This is something else I’ve said here before. Oscar Hammerstein II who wrote the lyrics, the words to the music of Richard Rodgers for The Sound of Music, Oklahoma, South Pacific and Carousel said music is what happens when the emotional content is too great to be contained by mere words. The God of our faith— creator, redeemer, sanctifier— is a loving God, is a God Who engages our emotions, a God Who engages our emotional life. And emotions cannot be defined with mere words.”

BENEDICTION: We are people of the Spirit. We are children of God bearing witness to God’s love, truth, justice, equity and peace each day. And may the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, and the presence of the Spirit of Christ which is real and available, keep our hearts and minds in the knowledge, love and companionship of the Holy Spirit, this day and forever more. Amen.

05/19/2024 ~ Day of Pentecost ~ *Acts 2:1-21 or Ezekiel 37:1-14; Psalm 104:24-34, 35b; Romans 8:22-27 or Acts 2:1-21; John 15:26-27; 16:4b-15 ~ VIDEO OF THE FULL SERVICE: https://vimeo.com/showcase/7960701/video/948792053

What Does This Mean?

“Many were amazed and perplexed, and asked one another, ‘What does this mean?’ But others mockingly said, ‘They have consumed too much new wine.’” — Acts 2:12-13.

The Pew Research Center in Washington D.C. explores a range of topics from religion to politics and everything in between. And that’s just the range of topics the Pew Center covers.

The Center tries to provide information about social issues in relation to how they interact with public opinion and demographic trends. Their operating thesis says identify trends and then you can see and assess the current shape of the world around us.

To paraphrase Sargent Friday, the Center is about just the facts ma’am, not opinion. As you may know, the facts say that all organized religion— churches right, left and in between is in decline— all organized religion is in decline. Also, the number of Americans who don’t identify with any organized religion is growing. This is seen in all regions and demographic groups in this country. [1]

Church historian Diana Butler Bass has pointed out this current shift is a social movement. It is not about faith. Equally in the 1950s, she says, the opposite social movement happened. People flocked to church.

We don’t usually refer to what happened in the ’50s as a social movement. But it was. Therefore, the basics of the social movement which happened back then was similar to the movement we see today but back then it went in the opposite direction.

In fact, there is one thing which can be said with great certainty about the numbers added to the institutions called churches during 1950s. In all of American history— all of American history— that phenomena was a total anomaly, completely abnormal.

The numbers who flocked to American churches in the ’50s had never been seen before. At the time of the American Revolution, for instance, the percentage of church membership— that’s not attendance; that’s membership— in the population was 17%. Over the years that percentage slowly rose but never was there anything like what like happened in the 1950s, not even close.

Given that, to think of those ’50s numbers as normal would be to ignore the facts. Therefore, when we see the decline in numbers today it can be safely stated this is only a return to what was and now is… normal.

Here’s another, perhaps more theological way to think about this social phenomena: institutions do not make belief. Indeed, the purpose of the institution known as the church is to help you and those around you reflect what you believe both as individuals and as a community. Individual people and people gathered in community make belief.

One more important point: the aforementioned research does not question the faith of those inside or outside the churches. What’s being recorded is the location of people of faith, both inside and outside the walls of the institution. (Slight pause.)

These words are from Luke/Acts in the section commonly called Acts: “Many were amazed and perplexed, and asked one another, ‘What does this mean?’ But others mockingly said, ‘They have consumed too much new wine.’” (Slight pause.)

Another fairly well known statistic is the average percentage of people who attend church in America on a regular basis runs in the mid-thirty percent range. On the other hand, in Europe church attendance runs less than ten percent of the population.

Given that lack of attendance across the pond, something amazing is happening in England. The number of women becoming nuns in the Catholic Church is at a 25-year high. The number of women become nuns are also mostly under the age of 30. To paraphrase Acts, ‘What does this mean?’

One reason may be the effort in England made by the Church to demystify what nuns do. Christopher Jamison, the English Catholic Church’s vocations director says this: “Increasingly, young people find Christian faith filling a meaning gap,… because it leads them to the heart of human life today:… working for the impoverished; this helps them lead a balanced life with a conviction that there is more to life.” [2] (Slight pause.)

In a recent article Rev. Erik Parker, a Lutheran cleric, cautions we are wrong about a church in decline. He insists the decline we see is simply the end of the state church. The state church is not what people who are serious about faith want. The state church drives people away.

Christendom can no longer be the church of the empire it was and has often been since Roman times. It’s not the church that’s dying, Parker says. It’s the church of empire that’s dying.

The state supports the status quo, a staid, static way of doing things. That’s not church, he insists, certainly not the church of faith. We need to remember the church did O.K. in its first 300 years before it became entangled with Rome and its descendants. [3] — Rev. Eric Parker. (Slight pause.)

So, what is going on in Acts 2 which was way before the church became a part of the state? Or as this writing poses the question: “What does it mean?” (Slight pause.)

“What does it mean?” may be the most important question asked in all Scripture, a basic question. Scripture never asks ‘what does this say’ or ‘what are the details of a story?’ Scripture always asks us to ponder the question, ‘What does this mean?’

Hence, what happens in the reading we heard— and plenty happens from tongues of fire to speaking in tongues to prophecy— for all that happens the question is never: ‘what happened?’ ‘What does this mean?’ is the question. (Slight pause.)

As I said earlier, Pentecost— the feast we celebrate today— is arguably the second most important feast on the Christian calendar, the first being Easter, and is sometimes referred to as the birthday of the church. [4] I am just enough of a defender of institutional life to say the institution is important. That leads me to ask, ‘what is the institution?’ (Slight pause.)

When you and you and you and come together as a community, belief happens, sometimes even when we’re unaware it’s happening. So as to the reading, the meaning of what happens has to do with people and belief, a belief in the presence and the reality of God. And it happens collectively, among many people.

Given that, there’s another meaning here which is both subtle and obvious. As I said, the institution helps you, you and you make belief happen. In these words what we hear is a description of the collective, the institution coalescing. (Slight pause.)

In 2018 Pope Francis presided over a ceremony to proclaim the sainthood of Salvadoran Archbishop Óscar Romero, who was assassinated for being a defender of the impoverished. In doing that, the first Pope from the Global South was making an effort to place the poor at the center of this papacy.

With this act Francis sought both to recognize those who are impoverished and to position the church closer to the masses. It was an action which said the church needs to be an institution who helps others, especially the impoverished. [5] (Slight pause.)

And no— you and I are not the Pope. We are Congregationalists. Grand gestures are not our thing. But, to repeat what I said earlier, the purpose of the institution known as the church is not to make belief. Belief is personal.

However, this is also true: I can, together with you and you and you and you and you, seek belief and we can believe together. That sounds like a theological definition of Congregationalism to me.

All that leaves us with a question: can we Congregationalists be forthright about the mission of the church? I think so. And if we do, I’ve got good news.

The church of the state may well perish. But the church of faith, the church of belief, will not go away or be in decline. I’ve got better news. If we believe together, if we have faith together, the Spirit will be alive among us for we can and we will show the fruits of the Spirit here, in this place, at this time. Amen.

05/19/2024, Pentecost Sunday
Elijah Kellogg Church, Harpswell, Maine

ENDPIECE: “I suggested Pentecost is important because it’s about the reality of Spirit of God being with and showering many gifts on each of us. But it is also about the Spirit of God being with and showering many gifts on all of us together. The Spirit Who Lives with each of us and all of us together makes this place a place of community. And so we will have our annual Roll Call meeting which celebrates and is about community. We, thereby, strive to affirm the reality of the Spirit in this community among us.”

BENEDICTION: Let us acknowledge our many gifts. Let us seek to use them for the common good. Let us commit ourselves as people of action. God, the creator, is at work in our midst. The Holy Spirit is present to us. Jesus, the Christ, lives among us. Let us go from this worship to continue our worship with work and witness. And may the peace of Christ, which surpasses our understanding keep our hearts, minds and spirits centered on God, this day and forevermore. Amen.

[1] http://www.pewforum.org/2015/05/12/americas-changing-religious-landscape/

[2] http://www.bbc.com/news/world-32777639

[3] http://millennialpastor.net/author/revcowboy/

[4] This was stated at the start of the service.

[5]
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/24/world/europe/popes-focus-on-poor-revives-scorned-theology.html?emc=edit_tnt_20150523&nlid=11820119&tntemail0=y

05/12/2024 ~ Seventh Sunday of Easter and Last Sunday in the Season of Easter— if Ascension not observed ~ *Acts 1:15-17, 21-26; Psalm 1; 1 John 5:9-13; John 17:6-19 ~ Mother’s Day on the Secular Calendar ~ NOTE: 05/09/2024 ~ Ascension of the Christ ~ *Acts 1:1-11; Psalm 47 or Psalm 93; Ephesians 1:15-23; Luke 24:44-53 ~ Mother’s Day on the Secular Calendar ~ VIDEO OF FULL SERVICE: https://vimeo.com/showcase/7960701/video/946642319

Cultural Myths; Cultural Falsehoods

“Also in their company were some of the women who followed Jesus, Mary the mother of Jesus, as well as some of the brothers and sisters of Jesus. With one mind, together, they devoted themselves to constant prayer.” — Acts 1:14.

O.K.: a confession, I know I said something like this last week and what I will say today might sound like I’m repeating myself. Of course, I am sure there are those who say I repeat myself each and every week. It’s possible I’m guilty on the first count, not the second and I am sure later someone will tell me I should have taken the Fifth.

One more thing: in what I will say some will accuse me of relying on the obscure history of the 1950s and 60s. I will have to plead guilty to that.

Why? As most of you know, I grew up in New York City so my youth was spent there in the 50s and 60s. So this comes with another warning: some of the names I’ll rattle off may be meaningless to many but they were celebrities, some minor some well known, in the 50s and 60s.

In that era an important local radio station in New York City was WOR. It began broadcasting in 1922. It’s so old, it has three call letters not four. In the 50s and 60s the station did something people think was invented in the 90s, what we today call talk radio.

The morning talk program on WOR from 1925 to 2000, was Rambling with Gambling. Three generations, a father, son and grandson John B. Gambling, then John A., then John R. hosted that program.

For the rest of the day WOR filled the airwaves with people who talked. Breakfast with Dorothy and Dick followed Gambling. Dorothy Kilgallen, a well known reporter who specialized in covering notorious crime cases, was also a panelist on the TV show What’s My Line? Her husband, Dick Kollmar, was a Broadway producer.

Supposedly over breakfast at their Upper East side home they chatted about a high society event or a theater or movie opening they attended the previous night or chewed the fat with celebrity friends. You now get this on television— Live with Kelly and Mark, Morning Joe, Good Morning America, The View, etc., etc.— people talk about what’s happening— about events, openings, do interviews with celebrity guests or news-makers.

Back to that radio station— another celerity in the WOR lineup was Arlene Francis, also a panelist on What’s My Line. I once heard her interview an author whose name I do not remember unfortunately.

This person’s parents were in the foreign service and tried to place their son at a local school in whatever the country they were stationed so he could be exposed to the culture of that country. He said when the lessons turned to the history of the place he currently resided, it became evident the same singular message got transmitted in every last classroom in every last country.

The message? In whatever country he sat, that country considered itself the center of the world, the center of the universe, the most important country on the planet.

Even at a very young age it did not take him long to figure out this was a cultural myth, perhaps even a cultural truth, but factually false. After all, each one of these countries could not possibly be the most important country on the planet. Could they? (Slight pause.)

These words are from Luke/Acts in the section commonly called Acts: “Also in their company were some of the women who followed Jesus, Mary the mother of Jesus, as well as some of the brothers and sisters of Jesus. With one mind, together, they devoted themselves to constant prayer.” (Slight pause.)

That each of those countries believed it was the center of the universe is an illustration of ‘confirmation bias.’ Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, recall information in a way that confirms one’s own preexisting beliefs.

People display confirmation bias when they gather or remember information selectively or interpret it in a biased way. Here’s the real issue: when confirmation bias sets in, people simply pay no attention to fact, often in an irrational way.

When no attention is paid to fact in an irrational way, bias has taken charge. Thinking the country in which you happen to live is the greatest in the world, the center of the universe, is an example of that.

But how does confirmation bias influence our understandings of the passage from Acts? This is a given: we all have opinions about Scripture. I plead guilty on that count.

It’s also true sometimes those opinions fall prey to confirmation bias, especially cultural bias. It would be foolish of me to not plead guilty on that count also.

However, one of the things I try to do— I’m not always successful but I try— one of the things I try to do is leave any irrational confirmation bias I might bring to the study of Scripture aside. Indeed, I try to do that in the hope my journey into a passage is as free from confirmation bias, cultural bias, as I can possibly make it.

As to our confirmation bias, our cultural bias in how we look at Scripture— tell me how often have you seen a picture depicting Jesus as having blue eyes and blond or light brown hair? Really? I don’t think so.

That brings me to this fact. Today’s passage clearly states Jesus had brothers and sisters. Jesus had brothers and sisters? In fact, other passages clearly state James is a brother of Jesus. I suspect a lot of people simply ignore that. Why? Unless I am mistaken there is a cultural bias which says Jesus was an only child.

Therefore, some people refuse to believe the words about the siblings of Jesus are even in the text. Why? Many have that cultural belief, that confirmation bias that Jesus was an only child. So it’s O.K. to ignore those words, right? (Slight pause.)

This next point should be obvious. The writers of Scripture, themselves, were not immune from cultural bias. Sometimes it’s easy to pick out that cultural bias. For instance, there is a readily identifiable cultural bias in some of the letters attributed to the Apostle Paul.

But the letters not by Paul, only attributed to Paul were written after Paul was dead by disciples of Paul. Much more so than Paul’s writings ever did, those later works written by others clearly enshrine the patriarchal system of Rome as the only appropriate social culture.

However, the true writings of Paul actually name specific women among the leadership of the early church. Women in church leadership just would not have happened in the Roman patriarchal system. But Paul— Paul— approved of women in leadership.

In short, identifiable cultural bias can be found in the texts, themselves. Then we, ourselves, also bring our bias to the texts and impose it. So, given those factors what should our overall take-away from Scripture be? Put another way, can we identify what is said about God and banish any of our own bias and banish the bias of the writers? (Slight pause.)

This has always been what I say in attempting to banish my bias and my answer to the reality of that bias. God loves us. God wants to be in covenant with us.

Put another way, the bias of God is that God love us and wants to covenant with us. God also invites us to walk in ways of faith, strive to share peace, joy, freedom, equity, hope, trust, love with all people. That’s all people, not just the ones in our country, which I hear some see as the center of the universe.

To reiterate, this is the bias of God in Scripture: love all people. And this is what God wants for us: to walk in ways of faith, sharing peace, joy, freedom, equity, hope, trust, love with all people. Amen.

05/12/2024
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: “I need to note today’s reading contained these words: ‘With one mind, together, they,’ that is the disciples, ‘devoted themselves to constant prayer.’ I once had the honor of being with a small group in the presence of Archbishop Desmond Tutu before he won the Nobel Peace Prize. He was asked how much he prayed in a day. He said two to three hours a day unless the authorities imposing apartheid were cracking down on him. Then that prayer time needed to be increased. Praying constantly is an imperative since it is both counter cultural and counters the culture. And here is something else that counters the culture.” (Here the pastor holds up a sign used in the Time for All Ages which lights up with the word ‘LOVE’.)

BENEDICTION: The work and the will of God is placed before us. Further, we are called to be faithful and seek to do God’s will and work. In so doing, may we love God so much, that we love nothing else too much. May we be so in awe of God, that we are in awe of no one else and nothing else. Amen.

05/05/2024 ~ Sixth Sunday of Easter ~ *Acts 10:44-48; Psalm 98; 1 John 5:1-6; John 15:9-17 ~ Communion Sunday ~ VIDEO OF FULL SERVICE: https://vimeo.com/showcase/7960701/video/943824620

Whence the Spirit?

“Then Peter said, ‘Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?’” — Acts 10:46b-47.

What I am about to say may sound I’m repeating something I’ve said already. But this is my very personal take on things. I have lived long enough that I know life is unpredictable. As we live through our time on this blue green orb, life demands we take risks. But very few of us like to take risks. We like control, to be in charge.

As to my own life, it could be argued I’ve taken a lot of risks. But in part that’s a result of my experience in my family of origin. Some of you might not have heard me address the details of my childhood I am about to offer. This is a short version.

When I was about five my father had what was in that era called a nervous breakdown. Today we would have diagnosed it as the onset of a mental illness labeled as passive dependency, sometimes called passive aggression. So when I was young my father figure left the scene.

From a Freudian perspective one of the functions a father figure provides children is an enhanced sense of order and the safety we feel order brings. But sone can get along well without a father figure. I did.

In my case at least and as a result, I developed a degree of comfort with the idea that life might lean more toward the chaotic than the ordered. So I identified absolute safety as, at best, unrealistic and became inclined toward taking risks.

That life is filled with chaos and risk got reinforced for me when I was drafted and sent to Vietnam, where chaos and risk are a given. For 20 years after that army stint on an off I worked in professional theater mostly as a writer— theater where risks are a given.

What is that risk? How do you earn enough to put food on the table while you try to communicate through art? To paraphrase the words of the late artist Al Hirshfield, the products which artists sell no one really needs to buy.

Let’s move the clock ahead a number of years. I meet Bonnie. She lives in Maine. I live in New York City.

I move to Maine to marry Bonnie. I don’t even know how to drive but I move to Maine where the only subways are sandwich shops. Yep— that’s a risk.

Move the clock ahead a little more. At age 44 I hear a call to Seminary. At age 44 Seminary is a risk. I invite Bonnie to take that risk with me.

Praise God, she does. And yes— I, for one, count that as a expression of a true love— a willingness to take a risk with a risk taker. Thank you Bonnie.

Then we took another risk together and go to a place where I was called to be a pastor, a very rural town in upstate New York. We had visited there only once for several days, met with the search committee and looked around town.

We were there for over 23 years. Then we embarked on yet another risk— retirement and moving back to Maine. All kinds of things could have gone wrong but we bought a house and things have gone well. It seems like, since I am standing in this pulpit, the only problem is I have failed at retirement. (Slight pause.)

This is what we find in Luke/Acts in the section of that work known as Acts. “Then Peter said, ‘Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?’” (Slight pause.)

In conversations with other pastors a very specific concern is often brought up. People in congregations seem to be expressing fear of all kinds.

These range from a fear about what’s happening in politics, income, jobs. I probably don’t need to give you a list of the fears. I’m sure you have heard them or have them. And yes— there is a fear about the church— about congregational vitality.

In the course of these conversations I suggest two things. First, whatever you see happening in society outside the walls of a church will be seen inside the walls of a church. The church is not immune to what’s happening in the culture. And right now much of what we see in the culture expresses fear.

Second, I think fear, I tell these pastors, is not the root cause. Fear is a reaction, a symptom, a result, not a cause. I think people become afraid about a broad range of things for one reason and one reason only.

People become afraid when they feel they are not in control. When you are not in control, taking risk is a given and a necessity. But as I just suggested risk taking, not being in control, is something with which we humans have a hard time. (Slight pause.)

Here’s an interesting piece of data. I recently saw polling that says people on the political left and people on the political right both think they are on the losing side in our society. Yes, both sides think they are losing— amazing.

What this data really shows is not that one or the other side is actually losing or even thinks it is losing. It shows people are afraid of losing. I am convinced the possibility of losing turns into fear because we think it means we are not in control. (Slight pause.)

In a recent book, Courageous Faith, the Rev. Dr. Emily Heath states the two human reactions to risk commonly noted are called flight or fight. She points out there is a third response on which behavioral researchers agree: freeze.

So, flight or fight or freeze are three responses to risk. Heath then describes what she calls a Christian response. Christians, she says, need to respond to the world and the reality we see in the world with action— moral action. And moral action is the place to which God invites us.

I’m not sure why the Rev. Dr. Heath fails to use another word to reenforce the alliteration of the ‘flight,’ ‘fight’ and ‘freeze’ trio— so I shall. I call the Christian response forward. That completes the alliteration with this quartet of words— flight, fight, freeze, forward.

In moving forward we need to strive to listen to God, work toward the world God sees. We need to work with the arc of moral justice envisioned by God, cooperate with God, cooperate with the Spirit of God, God Who we, as Christians, believe is present among us.

Put another way yes, we Christians do assess whatever risk is out there. But we need to seek and to find the places to which God calls us despite the risk. And I would suggest God calls us to places where risk is real, risk is tangible. (Slight pause.)

So, what’s happening in this reading from Acts? God is in charge. If you do as I suggested, read Chapter 10, you can see that message repeated throughout the chapter. You can even see the surprise of the people involved.

In the verses quoted today you can detect both uncertainly and surprise at the work of the Spirit when Peter asks, “Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people…?” (Slight pause.)

As to a theological issue here, not only do we humans want to be in control. We humans like to put God in a box, domesticate God, control God. That raises what I think of as a significant question: are we really in control with anything? No. (Slight pause.)

I say we need to be willing to cooperate with God as we go forward, forward toward the freedom God seeks for us, forward toward what God wants for us. If God is who we say God is— a God who seeks peace, loves justice, treasures equity, putting God in a box will not empower us to see the world the way God sees the world. (Slight pause.)

So yes— I guess I, for one, am a risk taker. Why? In the depth of my soul I want to move forward, cooperate with the will of God, be empowered by God to seek freedom, love justice, treasure equity.

We humans need to stop trying to put God in a box. If we just learn to let God out of the box (and we like to keep God in), then we might get to a place where the justice, freedom, equity, peace, joy, hope and love God wants us to have will be a reality. Amen.

Elijah Kellogg Church, Harpswell, Maine
05/05/2024

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: “I think as a community of faith, as a church, we need to let God be God and be aware we are human and finite. Hence, we do need to participate in the work of God here, now since it seems to me the world could use the justice, freedom, equity, peace, joy, hope and love of God which we, the church, claim to be about. Given what God seeks for us, I think being church means taking risks. So, let me ask this: what risks have you, yourself, taken as an individual and what risks does this church take as a community of faith?”

BENEDICTION: May the Holy Spirit inspire our words, and God’s love in Christ empower our deeds, as, in Christ, we are no longer servants, but friends, learning to love as we have been loved. And may the peace of God which surpasses our 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.

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.