localpastor

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.

02/18/2024 ~ First Sunday in Lent ~ Genesis 9:8-17; Psalm 25:1-10; 1 Peter 3:18-22; Mark 1:9-15 ~ Annual Meeting ~ VIDEO OF FULL SERVICE: https://vimeo.com/showcase/7960701/video/915274338

In the Beginning?

“Here begins the Gospel, the good news of Jesus, the Christ, the Child of God. As it is written in the prophet Isaiah:…” — Mark 1:1-2a.

I believe all of us, we, have a story to tell. And I have from this pulpit over my relatively short time here offered bits and pieces of my own personal story.

Hence, I think many of you have heard what I am about to say. I was born during President Harry Truman’s first administration. And yes, I know some of you were born when FDR was President. Others claim a more recent time.

I also have talked about growing up in New York City and what that was like, certainly very different than growing up in Harpswell or anywhere in Maine. I’ve talked my service in Vietnam, that I worked in computer operations, worked on Wall Street and was a writer in professional theater.

I have talked about family, my grandparents, parents, about how I related to them. I, therefore, have talked some about the craziness of my family.

And I’ve talked about my life in the church, how I grew up in the Roman Catholic tradition and where I am today. Of course, this church talk is mostly an attempt to explain how I relate to God and practice my faith because of that relationship.

I have also said at the age of 44 I entered Seminary. Never mind the craziness of family life. Going to Seminary at age 44— that is… crazy. (Slight pause.)

In telling my story I am trying to illustrate three things. First, I hope it illustrates there are many ways to tell a story. Second, I hope it illustrates there are many facets to anyone’s story. Third, I hope by extension it illustrates we all have a story.

When I say we all have a story I am saying we all have roots, come from someplace. I think it is important for each of us to learn how to tell our own story and then tell it. I think telling our stories might help us come to a better self realization of who we are, where we’re at now, where we might be willing to go and perhaps of most importance, where a relationship with God has taken us and might take us.

Indeed I think we, all of us, need to tell other people our own story. I hope you know telling your own story is helpful to those around you since those who you encounter will come to know you better, understand you in a personal way. I also hope you take the time to listen to the stories others tell so you can get to know them better. (Slight pause.)

So what is your story? How do you tell it? Have you recently shared your story with someone? (Slight pause.)

These are words with which the writer of the Gospel we know as Mark begins to tell the story of Jesus, Who we claim is the Christ, the Messiah sent to the Jewish people. “Here begins the Gospel, the good news of Jesus, the Christ, the Child of God. As it is written in the prophet Isaiah:…” (Slight pause.)

I have said this here before. The earliest writings in the New Testament are the true Letters of Paul. But Paul wrote only 7 of the 13 attributed to him.

Scholars tell us these true letters were written between the years 52 and 64 or 65 of the Common Era, 64 or 65 being when scholars are fairly sure Paul died. Equally, scholars agree Mark is the earliest Gospel and place the compiling of this work at the year 70 or slightly later, clearly after Paul was gone.

Now, the letters of Paul have nearly no story about Jesus in them at all. But the Gospels do tell a story. So Mark, the earliest, by definition has the first recorded story of Jesus in the Christian Scriptures, in the New Testament.

That being said, where does the story in Mark start? Does it start with the birth of Jesus? Does it start with the ministry of Jesus? No and no, not the birth, not the ministry.

The writer starts by stating what the story will address. (Quote:) “Here begins the Gospel, the good news of Jesus, the Christ, the Child of God.”— the good news of Jesus— interesting— not good news about Jesus but of Jesus.

Next, the story, itself, starts. And where does it start? (Quote:) “As it is written in the prophet Isaiah:…” (Slight pause.)

The earliest telling of the story of Jesus references the Hebrew Scriptures, starts by quoting Isaiah. (Slight pause.) What does that say to us? (Slight pause.)

Well, the words from Mark reference Isaiah, Chapter 40, Verse 3. “A voice cries out, ‘Clear a path through the wilderness for Yahweh, God.’” And then just after that verse 9 says, “Go up on a high mountain / you who bring good news to Zion!” Well— good news— what does it say to us that in the Hebrew Scriptures there is also good news? (Slight pause.)

For me, this is quite clear. Mark ties the story of Jesus and the Good News to the story the Hebrew Scriptures and the Good News. Let me put that another way. Right off the writer of Mark, the first story of Jesus in Scripture, tells us Jesus is not the beginning, not the start of the story about good news.

Indeed, according to Mark the story of Jesus starts with the God of the Hebrew Scriptures. So, who is the God of the Hebrew Scriptures?

We heard about God of the Hebrew Scriptures when the Noah story from Genesis, the story of the rainbow was read. That story is clear: God is the God of covenant.

And I think Mark is clear. The story of Jesus continues the story of the God of the Hebrew Scriptures, the God of covenant.

In the words of tehe New Testament scholar Nicholas Thomas Wright, Jesus is the ‘climax of the covenant.’ So, if the story of Jesus continues the story of the God of the Hebrew Scriptures, the God of covenant, and Jesus is the climax of that covenant, perhaps the reality of the covenant is the Good News. And the reality of the proclamation of Jesus, the Messiah, is this God of covenant walks with us, is with us. (Slight pause.)

All that leaves this question: why does Paul not tell the story of Jesus? I think it’s because Paul knows the story of the God of the covenant and assumes anyone who receives these Epistles will also know the story of the God of the covenant.

Therefore what the Apostle addresses is not the story of covenant but the theology of covenant. Since the theology explains the reality of the continuing covenant and that explanation ties God and Jesus together, Paul simply never bothers with telling the story.

Written after Paul is gone, Mark starts with the assumption that those who hear the story will not necessarily know those connections unless they are told or reminded about it. And theology is easier to comprehend in the context of story. Given the project of story telling, the writer probably feels compelled to start the story of Jesus with the God of the Hebrew Scriptures, the God of covenant. (Slight pause.)

So what is your story? How do you tell it? Have you recently shared your story with someone? How does your story relate to the story of God we find in Scripture? How does your story relate to God? (Slight pause.)

The story of the God of covenant, God of the Scripture, insists God is a God of freedom, justice, joy, peace, hope and love. And that covenant gets acted out by us through our participation in God’s freedom, justice, joy, peace, hope and love.

That is, I think, why we, all of us, need to tell other people about our story and realize that is helpful to those around us. And I believe the story that each one of us has to tell does connect with the God of covenant, the God of freedom, justice, joy, peace, hope and love, this God of covenant. (Slight pause.)

Let me say it again. What is your story? Have you thought about how your story connects with the story of God and with the story of everyone you meet? And have you shared that story? Amen.

02/18/2024
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: “Langston Hughes was an African-American poet, activist, novelist, playwright who said this. ‘I am so tired of waiting, / Aren’t you, / For the world to become good / And beautiful and kind?’— Langston Hughes. While I will not suggest the world will become beautiful and good and kind if we share our own stories and how these stories relate to the God of covenant, this God of freedom, justice, joy, peace, hope, love, I do think being aware of one another’s stories might help us start down the path of making the world a better place.”

BENEDICTION: We are children of God, beloved and blessed. Let us be renewed in this season which holds the promise of resurrection at its close. And yes, hear and believe the Good News: God reigns now. Let us depart in confidence and joy knowing that God is with us and let us carry Christ in our hearts. Amen.

02/11/2024 ~ Transfiguration Sunday ~ Last Sunday before the Season of Lent; 2 Kings 2:1-12; Psalm 50:1-6; 2 Corinthians 4:3-6; Mark 9:2-9 ~ VIDEO OF FULL SERVICE: https://vimeo.com/showcase/7960701/video/912946761

My Name Is Peter

“…Jesus was transfigured before their eyes. The clothes Jesus wore became dazzling, such as no one on earth could bleach them.” — Mark 9:2b-3 [pause as the pastor changes to a white robe.]

My name is Peter. (Pause.) I saw my friend die today. I do not know what to think. I do not know what to say. I am frightened. That’s because I saw my friend die today. (Pause.)

No. That’s not right. I watched as my friend was executed today. No, that’s not right, either. I saw my friend murdered today.

And it was brutal–– what they did to him. In fact, I could not watch to the end. I ran away. I hid. I was fearful, ashamed, sad, angry. I wanted to lash out, to hit someone, anyone. I did not know how to react. I did not… know what to do.

And I do not know what this means… that he was executed, murdered… by the state, by the government, by Rome. He was… my friend. (Pause.)

His name was Yeshuah, Ioesus in Greek. The name means ‘God saves.’ That is what I thought every time I saw him–– ‘God saves.’ That is what I thought I saw in him–– ‘God saves.’

What I thought I was seeing in Yeshuah was that God’s dominion could be and was present, real. What I thought I was seeing in Yeshuah was that God is with us, God is present to us and that God is in the here. And God is in the now!

And I knew, I was confident, that the things which had been written about, those things which are foretold, things which say the time of God’s dominion is here— those things, that time had arrived.

Did Yeshuah not fulfill the very things about which the prophets speak? Did those who are blind see? It happened! Did it not? Did those who are lame walk? It happened! Did it not? What had been prophesied about the Dominion of God happened!

It happened here, in this time, among us! It was real! (Softly.) It happened in Yeshuah! And now this, this— murdered by the state. (Pause.)

He was kinder and more giving than any one I’ve ever met. He was filled with wisdom. He knew the writings we hold sacred in an intimate way.

He did not just know what they said. Anyone can memorize and recite the sacred writings, even gentiles. But he knew what the writings meant. Yes, he knew what was written. But the Rabbi knew not just the letter of the law but the spirit of the law. The Rabbi knew the Spirit of Yahweh, the Spirit of God. (Pause.)

I remember that day we, my brother Andrew and I, had been trying to catch fish, casting our nets. We were not far out on the water when we noticed someone was on the shore. It was Yeshuah.

The Rabbi called out to us, “Follow me and I will make you fish for people.” I was not sure what that meant— ‘fish for people.’

What I do realized is suddenly I knew what the reality of God was, knew God’s will for my life. That’s when I abandoned the nets. That’s when we abandoned the nets. We followed. (Slight pause.)

There were twelve of us who were very close to him. But there were more than just the twelve. And this group was like no other group I had ever been a part of before.

It did not seem to matter to Yeshuah if those in the group, those who followed, were in many ways different. He treated each of us as individuals and yet seemed to be able to connect with all of us simultaneously, met each of us where we were at and yet met all of us together, as one.

I did not know how he did that. We were young, old, children, adults, men, women, rich, poor, wise, foolish, tax collectors, physicians, farmers— none of us were alike. Yet what seemed to matter to the Rabbi was not our differences but our willingness to know God, to participate in the work of God, to be in relationship with God.

The Rabbi told us that the most important thing we could do was to love God and love our neighbors. We asked who our neighbors were. That’s when we heard our neighbors included everybody— Jews, Samaritans, Gentiles, men, women— everybody.

He told us if we had two cloaks give one away, turn the other cheek, told us to avoid judging others. I have never heard any teacher, any rabbi say these things before.

He said all these things, but he didn’t just say them. He did them. He lived life not just by words, but by choices, by actions. He lived a life centered on God.

He told us to not worry and to trust totally in God. And Yeshuah did that. Yeshuah trusted God totally, called God abba, daddy. (Pause.)

We traveled throughout all of Galilee with him, right by his side. And he taught, befriended the poor, healed the sick.

Then he sent us, the twelve, out, told us to preach, to teach about the good news of the Dominion of God and to cast out demons and cure lepers. And this I still do not believe. We preached, taught, cast out demons and cured those who were leporus! We did it! All of us. (Pause.) It was awesome!

And then… and then there was that day on the mountain. Yeshuah took us up the hill. There were four of us, myself, James, John, Yeshuah. The day was hot, but it was very clear. The sky was as blue as I had ever seen it.

We reached the top and just sat, stared out at the countryside, all of us together. It was beautiful. Then we prayed. But we were tired. The climb was hard. We slept.

Suddenly we were all awake at the same time. Perhaps we had sensed something had happened.

We all experienced it but I’m not sure how to describe it. The face of Yeshuah was as bright as the sun. His clothes were dazzling.

And both Moses and Elijah were standing there with Yeshuah. I don’t even know how I knew they were Moses and Elijah. I just knew.

I said something stupid like, ‘…how wonderful it is for us to be here.’ I was so tongue tied, I didn’t know what else to say.

Then there was a cloud, a voice. We all saw the cloud. We all heard the voice.

The voice rang out loud and clear and strong: “This is my Beloved, my Own… listen!” I fell to the ground, covered my eyes. I did not know what to do. I was very, very frightened. (Pause.)

Suddenly Yeshuah touched me. I had felt that touch before, a touch only the Rabbi seemed to have— warm, friendly, sensitive. I felt that touch on my back.

Yeshuah could touch you with his hand, with his voice, with his eyes. I always seemed to know when he was looking at me. Yeshuah touched me. I looked up.

He was alone. I stood. We all stood. We did not tell anyone about this. We simply did not know what to say. (Pause.)

I do not know what to make of this. I do not understand it. My name is Peter. I saw my friend die today. I watched as my friend was murdered today. I do not know what to think. I… am… frightened. (Sit with one hand held over the face.)

{Note: This is followed by a piano playing Were You There When They Crucified My Lord?}

02/27/2024
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: “Last week I suggested what we need to see in Scripture is our emotional connection with God. Something I say at Bible Study is for me the people and the situations in Scripture are real. As such I try to understand the emotions of the lives therein portrayed. So today I tried to say something about the tumultuous emotional reality of Scripture and maybe even the tumultuous emotional reality of our own lives.”

BENEDICTION: God heals and restores. God grants to us the grace and the talent to witness to the love God has for us. So let us live in the light God offers. And, therefore, let us be ready as we go into the world, for we are baptized in the power of the Spirit. And may the peace of Christ, which surpasses understanding, transform us and keep our minds and hearts in the companionship and will of the Holy Spirit, this day and forever more. Amen.

02/04/2024 ~ Fifth Sunday after the Epiphany ~ Isaiah 40:21-31; Psalm 147:1-11, 20c; 1 Corinthians 9:16-23; Mark 1:29-39 ~ VIDEO OF FULL SERVICE: https://vimeo.com/showcase/7960701/video/912000748

The Everlasting God

“Do you not know? / Have you not heard? / Yahweh is the everlasting God, / the Creator of the ends / of the earth.” — Isaiah 40:28.

As I have said here before, I am a Vietnam veteran. My MOS in the Army— MOS is Army speak for what your job is— my MOS was cook. Hence, I landed at Tonsonuit Airbase and was transported immediately to a mess hall in downtown Saigon.

It was a different kind of mess hall. Only Field Grade officers— Field Grade officer is Army speak for officers who have attained the rank of Major— only Field Grade officers and those of an even higher rank were served in this exclusive mess hall. It was also frequented by high ranking American Embassy personnel.

The mess hall was actually not yet operational when I arrived. That was in process. The Army had taken over a four-star hotel in downtown Saigon which acted as barracks for those Field Grade officers. The mess hall was located, naturally enough, in what had been the hotel restaurant.

The building, just 6 stories high, was one of the tallest structures in the city. The mess hall was on that 6th floor and had an open air patio where meals could be served. It afforded a vista which encompassed downtown Saigon and the Mekong delta.

The target date for opening the mess hall was only five days after I arrived. There was one problem. While the existing restaurant equipment was largely adequate, the old stove housed there was not. So a huge Army issue stove sat in a crate in front of the hotel waiting to be installed 6 floors up.

The only elevator in the building was just big enough to hold three people, barely. No Army stove was going to fit in the elevator. That presented an interesting challenge: how do you get the stove up six flights of stairs.

And that was six flights with three ninety degree turns on each level. So seven GIs, myself included, uncrated that sucker and lugged it up to the kitchen, six floors, 18 turns in the staircase, three for each floor. We did it by dint of brut force.

This is where I could insert a long and harrowing story about getting up those stairs. I will not. Suffice it to say we just got ‘er done.

Here’s another piece of Army speak: nearly every last piece of equipment issued by the Army has a tag or a plate on it. These are called a nomenclature tags or nomenclature plates. Their purpose is to name and describe that piece of equipment to which it is attached.

Only after we got that stove up 6 flights did anyone bother to look at the nomenclature plate. The description included this— weight: 1,000 pounds. Ouch! We had moved that half a ton monster up 6 flights, around 18 turns— whuh! (Slight pause.)

We find these words in the Scroll of the Prophet Isaiah: “Do you not know? / Have you not heard? / Yahweh is the everlasting God, / the Creator of the ends / of the earth.” (Slight pause.)

Nomenclature— it’s an interesting word. As I indicated, for the Army it means name this thing and describe it. It’s a stove— this is the length, width, height, weight…. Some would argue that’s a boring but a very necessary thing to do: naming, describing.

In a very real sense, theology does exactly the same job as a nomenclature plate. Theology does nothing more than name God and try to describe God.

Indeed, the very word theology means the science of the study of God. That science, any science, gets deeply involved in naming and describing.

Now, on occasion people will ask me what my theology is. What they are really trying to ask is am I a liberal or am I a conservative. What is interesting about that is, while everyone, even some very serious theologians, succumb to the temptation of using those terms, those labels— liberal and conservative— they have no theological meaning.

When it comes to describing my theology, this is how I respond. I am a Monotheistic Trinitarian or I am a Trinitarian Monotheist. Please notice, this names, describes and even proclaims God is Three in One.

Also please notice I am not simply a monotheist. I suspect each of us knows this: there are churches all over America who claim only Jesus is God. That is monotheism and only monotheism. Others make a claim only the Spirit is God and only monotheism. That’s monotheism. Still others claim God is some central, unifying, singular force. That is monotheism and only monotheism.

These monotheistic positions are hard to justify in terms of historic Christianity which says God is Three and God is One. The Christian description, the Christian naming, the Christian nomenclature is much more fluid than monotheism.

These three different monotheistic positions— meaning just Creator, Redeemer, Spirit— are easy to describe, to explain. There is only one thing, one aspect of the Triune God to explain and describe if you’re relying on these monotheistic descriptions. The Trinity— that’s hard to describe and hard to explain.

So, given that I say the Trinity is hard to explain let’s look at the reading from Isaiah, and the awesome language found therein. Let’s try to see how these words explain God.

Several things should be obvious. First, reading from Isaiah is a poem. Hence, it does not in any way address a naming, a description, a nomenclature of God except through poetry. And a poem by definition is about emotional understandings, emotional connections with God.

Second, we know this text was written around 2,500 or 2,600 years ago. We can be confident noone knew what it was like to fly back then. And yet… and yet… this poem addresses what God might see from a great height, higher than any structure.

It speaks about God Who is (quote:) “…above the circle of the earth, above the vaulted roof of the world, and its inhabitants look like grasshoppers;…” That language is just amazing, incredible, especially given that it is ancient.

Then on top of that, these words invite the reader, the listener, to see things from God’s perspective. (Quote:) “…those who wait for Yahweh, God, / shall renew their strength, / they shall mount up, soar with / wings like eagles,….” (Slight pause.)

It is said the Hebrews did not have a theology. And if theology is about naming and describing, the Hebrews never bothered to name, to describe. Why? For the Hebrews, God is about emotional understandings, emotional connections with God.

In fact, I think if we look for an exact description of God, a nomenclature, in both the Hebrew Scripture and the Christian Scripture we will not find one. It is only several centuries into the Christian era that naming and describing becomes a thing to do. And so I maintain Scripture is about an emotional understanding of God, an emotional connection with God, not about naming and describing.

As I said already the Hebrews did not have a theology. Rather, the Hebrew did theology. The Hebrews acted. The Hebrews acted out of their emotional understanding of God, out of their emotional connection with God. The Hebrews acted out their faith.

Indeed, after the reference which invites people to soar with wings like eagles, that verse continues and says this about those who wait for God. (Quote:) “…they shall run and not be weary, / they shall walk and never tire.” In short, those who emotionally connect with God— will be empowered by God to act.

All that leaves the obvious question, the one which I think the poem from Isaiah with its language, both fluid and articulate, asks. What is our emotional connection to the reality of God Who clearly seeks to be emotionally connected with us?

Indeed, for me this is a question asked throughout Scripture. Are our hearts open to God? The question is just that simple. Are our hearts open to God? Amen.

02/04/2024
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: “Speaking of emotional connection with God, that’s exactly what Dorsey did with this hymn. [1] I have mentioned this here before. Theologian Walter Brueggemann says the God found in Scripture is portrayed with remarkable, intentional, artistic illusiveness. I would suggest, thereby, the use of poetry and its ability to address emotions is a natural way to listen for God, especially when we are trying to discern anything about the will of God.”

BENEDICTION: Surely God will empower our ministry; surely God will supply for our needs when we are about the work of God; may this God, the God who formed the universe, bless us with the courage, the knowledge, the wisdom and the fortitude to serve the Gospel of Christ, empowered by the Spirit, this day and forever more. Amen.

[1] This was said when the last hymn, Precious Lord, Take My Hand, was introduced this was said: “The closing hymn will be Precious Lord, Take My Hand. It was written by Tom Dorsey. Tom had the nickname “Gospel Tom” because he was one of the pivotal people in the initiation of the Gospel Movement of the 1920s and 30s. Dorsey wrote this hymn when shattered because his wife had died in childbirth and the son who she bore did not survive twenty four hours. He wrote it as a plea to God to walk with him.”

01/28/2024 ~ Fourth Sunday after the Epiphany ~ Deuteronomy 18:15-20; Psalm 111; 1 Corinthians 8:1-13; Mark 1:21-28 ~ VIDEO OF FULL SERVICE: https://vimeo.com/showcase/7960701/video/908731680

The One, True God

“Hence, as to eating food which was sacrificed to idols, we know that idols have no real existence and that there is no God but the One, true God.” — 1 Corinthians 8:4.

I want to tell a story about something which happened when I was in my early teen years. But I need to remind you of a couple of things I’ve said here before about my personal history before I start.

I was raised in the Roman Catholic tradition. My Dad taught at a Jesuit High School. My Mom went into the convent but left before taking final vows. When she left the nunnery my parents met and got hitched. With that brief outline of my parent’s history and given that I wound up as a pastor, I sometimes say I simply went into the family business.

Now, in order to tell this story I also need to presume many of you are not familiar with the practices in Roman Catholicism. So there are two things I need to explain, two practices in which Catholics engage called fasting and abstinence.

Both were often employed during Lent when I was young. They became largely optional for most Catholics in the 1980s. But these were not optional when I was thirteen.

So what are fasting and abstinence? Fasting has an obvious definition— the reduction of one’s intake of food. On a fast day one is not supposed not eat between meals. Also, a person should have a small breakfast, a small lunch but a normal dinner.

Following that regimen is probably not a bad nutritional practice for anyone. And mystics of many traditions say fasting which is even more strict than that simple discipline can even help someone be more aware of one’s own body which might lead to a sharpening of one’s spiritual focus.

Abstinence is different. Abstinence is abstaining, refraining from eating meat or meat by-products. This is not difficult for vegetarians but for us carnivores….

Both fasting and abstinence are pious practices with a long history and are not practiced only in Catholicism. Even today, many people in many traditions still find fasting and abstinence useful.

Here’s the paradox: for reasons beyond my comprehension, no one seemed to notice that making these practices mandatory transformed them into something less than pious. You see, once something becomes mandatory, a rule, it stops being a practice. It becomes nothing more than a demand, a closed box, a cell from which there is no relief.

Back before the rules changed a Catholic was expected to abstain from eating meat on all Fridays of the year. During Lent one would also fast for the entire season, all forty days and forty nights. By the way, Sunday’s do not count as days in Lent— never did. You could eat anything you wanted on Sundays.

Well, all that background leads to the story: I was a student at Saint Ignatius Elementary School in New York City. As the name implies, it operated under the patronage of the Jesuits. By the way it was run by the Sisters of Charity, not the Jesuits. One day in the late Spring I went with a group of guys from school to play soft-ball in Central Park.

When we were done we all said goodbye and split off and headed toward the Subway to go home. It’s what you do in New York City— you get on the Subway to go home, right? O.K.

I was famished the way only a thirteen year old can be famished. I would have eaten anything. Just before I got to the 86th Street Subway station I saw one of those ubiquitous rolling hot dog stands you still can see all over Manhattan.

I pulled out some money and got a hot dog and a Coke. I was about ninety percent done with the hot dog when a classmate who happened to be passing by came up to me, pointed and said, “What are you doing?”

I was not sure what he meant. “I’m hungry, so I’m eating,” said I.

He pointed to the small sliver of hot dog left in my hand and said, “It’s Friday. That’s a hot dog. That’s meat.”

I was totally chagrined and very embarrassed. I don’t know if I was more embarrassed because I had broken an obvious rule or because I had been caught breaking said rule or because I had simply forgotten it was Friday.

And the truth of the matter is I did forget it was Friday. And that’s when I haltingly stammered out to my classmate, “Oh, no! It’s Friday! I forgot it’s Friday! I just forgot!”

He smiled and said, “Don’t worry. I won’t report you to the meat police.” By the meat police I think he might have meant our teacher, the stern faced Sister Catherine Roberta, a person whose temper was even more stern than her countenance.

Perhaps more to the point, I felt awful, upset, even angry with myself. After all, a rule is a rule is a rule, right? And I broke the rule, right? (Slight pause.)

These are the words in First Corinthians: “Hence, as to eating food which was sacrificed to idols, we know that idols have no real existence and that there is no God but the One, true God.” (Slight pause.)

This passage may be one of the most convoluted sections Paul ever wrote. On the other hand, that’s just Paul. But there is a third hand here, another way to look at it. I think is this actually more simple than it sounds.

I also hope I just illustrated how simple it is with that story from my youth. Meat was forbidden. I unknowingly broke the rule. My classmate was kind.

But suppose he decided that my Dad was a teacher in a Jesuit School— and do note, the school in which my Father taught was just across the street from the elementary school and my classmate knew that— so suppose my classmate felt he could break the rule too? His reasoning might be that guy with all those holy connections did it! So how could breaking that rule not be all right?

Or suppose he was not kind and had reported my transgression to the meat police, in this case the stern Sister Catherine Roberta? Would punishment have been (pardon the pun) meted out? (Slight pause.)

I want to and need to point out the obvious. This passage is not about the meat police, Paul’s meat police or the meat police who might have reprimanded me. (Slight pause.)

Now, earlier I said this may be one of the most convoluted sections Paul ever wrote. But as convoluted as the Apostle often tends to be, this passage is merely trying to illustrate a very central truth by telling a story about what was actually happening in Corinth— people eating meat that might have been forbidden. And the message Paul is sending them and by extension sending us is quite simple: meat means nothing. God and God only God is central in our lives.

Not everyone knew that then. Not everyone believed that then. Not everyone knows that now. Not everyone believes that now. And clearly, some people think if one person breaks a rule everyone has a free pass to break any rules they care to break.

Other people actually think the rules, all rules, any rules, are to be followed no matter what and that rules are central to our lives. And never mind rules about things like meat. Some people think rules, all rules, are central and intractable. Put another way, some people think rules are God. Some people make rules greater than God.

And so Paul, as complex as the Apostle is, understands the basic theology here. Idols are a fantasy. Idols do not really exist. Paul says this (quote:) “…we know that idols have no real existence and that there is no God but the One, true God.”

And to close the deal Paul says this (quote:) “…anyone who loves God is known completely by God.” You heard me say this couple times today: Paul can be convoluted.

So, I want to offer the short version of what Paul says— my version, rather than Paul’s: God loves us. We need to recognize God loves us and we need to recognize the love of God for us must be central to our lives. We need to recognize the love of God for us is the only thing that really matters. Case closed. Amen.

01/28/2024
Elijah Kellogg Church, Harpswell, Maine

ENDPIECE— It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Congregational Response and Benediction. This is a précis of what was said: “Tradition has it that a Rabbi whose name was Hillel was both a contemporary of Paul and a teacher of Paul. There is a story which gets told about Hillel and an encounter with a Roman Centurion. The Centurion went to the Rabbi and said if you can teach me everything there is to know about the Hebrew Scriptures while I am balanced on one foot, I will convert and become a Jew. Hillel stood on one foot himself and said, ‘Love God; love neighbor; the rest is commentary.’ And yes, it is not convoluted. It is that simple: Love God; love neighbor.”

BENEDICTION: People of light, turn toward God with joy and be free and open to the empowerment God offers. People of unity, be one in Christ. People of commitment, dare to run the race with courage. May the Spirit dwell with us and may the peace of Christ, which surpasses our understanding keep our hearts, minds and spirits centered on God, this day and forevermore. Amen.

01/21/2024 ~ Third Sunday after the Epiphany ~ Known in Some Traditions as the Third Sunday in Ordinary Time; Jonah 3:1-5, 10; Psalm 62:5-12; 1 Corinthians 7:29-31; Mark 1:14-20 ~ VIDEO OF FULL SERVICE: https://vimeo.com/showcase/7960701/video/906067264

They Followed

“…Jesus said to them, ‘Follow me and I will make you fish for people.’ And immediately they left their nets and followed.” — Mark 1:17-18.

Even if you do not have a computer, know nothing about computers, my bet is you’ve heard of Facebook. And yes, I do have a Facebook account. But generally the only thing I post is a link to my sermon blog. O.K. I confess. I also occasionally post a picture of a cat, Tigger.

However, on occasion I do comment on something someone else has posted. Last week a friend posted a picture of someone in a library plowing through a card catalogue. You do remember card catalogues, don’t you? O.K.

The caption on the picture said, “This is what people did to get information before GOOGLE.” Yes, people searched card catalogues before GOOGLE.

And that is one of the rare posts on which I commented. I said, “I used card catalogues once. But that was so long ago when I went to the library to get there I had to ride my dinosaur.”

Of course, the issue with using card catalogues is you have to know how to use them, how they work. Let me translate that: you need to use the right search criteria as you plow though the cards or you will either not find what you need to find or you will find only bad information.

GOOGLE, which I ‘ve already mentioned and just like Facebook I am assuming even if you know nothing about computers but you’ve heard of GOOGLE— GOOGLE has a problem similar to card catalogues. A recent study said the reason so many people get and believe bad information and false information is that when they do a GOOGLE search they use the wrong criteria to execute the search. Using the wrong criteria for a search leads only to bad and/or false information. (Slight pause.)

We find these words in the work commonly known as Mark. “…Jesus said to them, ‘Follow me and I will make you fish for people.’ And immediately they left their nets and followed.” (Slight pause.)

Rudolf Bultmann was one of the great Biblical scholars of the 20th Century. One of my seminary professors, the Rev. Dr. Burton Throckmorton, studied with Bultmann in Germany. Bultmann said there is a tension in the Gospel we know as Mark to which we do not pay enough attention. (Quote:) “The proclaimer becomes the proclaimed.”

That leads to an obvious question which needs to be asked. What did Jesus proclaim? Jesus proclaimed the Dominion of God is at hand.

However and at the same time, that the Christ, the Messiah is Jesus is what we proclaim. Indeed, in telling the story, both Mark and the early church proclaim Jesus as the Messiah.

And yet… and yet… we still need to grapple with this: what did Jesus, the Messiah, the Christ, proclaim? What did Jesus say? Jesus proclaims that the Dominion of God is at hand.

It seems to me (and perhaps to both Throckmorton and Bultmann) we can grapple with the Messiahship of Jesus more easily, more readily, than what the Messiah, Jesus, actually says, actually proclaims— that this Dominion of God at hand. Hence, we need to be looking for and looking at the right thing or we will not get the information we need.

So perhaps a key to this reading is this: rather than concentrate on that fact that Jesus is the Messiah ask what is the Messiah is proclaiming about the Dominion? What’s being said? (Slight pause.)

First things first: Jesus does not point to self. Jesus points to God. The claim Jesus makes is the Good News comes from God.

Next, this reading clearly presents an immediate, present-tense summons. These words are, hence and therefore, a proclamation about a new era— the presence of God as that presence is and can be experienced by humanity is at hand. The passage insists on the reality of that presence and because of that presence insists that a reorientation of one’s own life to that reality is an imperative. (Slight pause.)

So why do the disciples immediately leave their nets, leave their father, follow without delay? They get it. The Dominion of God, with its new era of the reality of the presence of God, is at hand. They must participate… because they get it. (Slight pause.)

I think the term “at hand” is the least understood phrase in Mark, maybe the least understood phrase in the New Testament. The disciples promptly respond because they understand this new era involves them, involves their participation, involves their reorientation. That is what this message that the Dominion of God is at hand means to them.

Also please notice: in the summons Jesus offers, this new era is constantly unfolding, constantly happening. It’s not in the past tense. Neither is it in the future tense.

The new era of the Dominion of God is always in the present tense and, therefore, there is always something to do right now, today in this new era as this new era constantly unfolds. Indeed, I think that is where the challenge to us and for us lies.

And perhaps we do not understand that this new era existed then and this new era exists right now. The new era of the Dominion of God is, you see, not about something the past, not about something which happened two thousand years ago. The new era of the Dominion of God is not about the future, not about something which will happen, not about an afterlife or a second coming.

This new era of the Dominion of God is about that which is constantly happening, unfolding, present, real, available. And if it is unfolding now, if it is present, real, available, perhaps the call of the Messiah, the call of Jesus, is not simply a call to the disciples who dropped their nets and came. Jesus calls us. Jesus calls us in the present tense, now. And so what is the new era, this unfolding era of the Dominion about? (Slight pause.)

The constantly unfolding Dominion asks us how we respond to God. Just like the disciples, the constantly unfolding Dominion is about our participation. That’s because our participation in the constantly unfolding Dominion of God concerns striving to seek and discern the will of God.

Of course, that still leaves the obvious question: ‘what is the will of God?’ This is what I think: the will of God is about freedom and justice and peace and hope and love. And that is freedom, justice, peace, hope and love as God might see freedom, justice, peace, hope and love, not as we might see freedom, justice, peace, hope and love.

And so, how might this era of freedom, justice, peace, hope and love as God sees them happen? We need to remember two things which are proclaimed by Jesus, Who is the Christ, the Messiah.

First, we need to remember the Dominion is happening right now since the Dominion is the constant presence of the reality of God. Second, we need to participate in that reality. Participation— that is what following Jesus means.

And we, therefore, need to remember that freedom, justice, peace, hope and love are not things to be won. When we think of freedom, justice, peace, hope and love as things to be won we are using them as a cudgel, a weapon. Cudgels only create winners and losers. In God’s economy there are no winners or losers. Everyone is included in God’s economy.

So God’s freedom, justice, peace, hope and love are something to be shared— sharing. When God’s freedom, justice, peace, hope and love are shared that is when we participate in the Dominion of God. (Slight pause.)

Well, I think we need to remember what is at the core of the basic message Jesus offers. God will be with us and God is with us, especially when we participate in the Dominion.

And when we participate in the Dominion of God then… then the Dominion of God is truly at hand, now, present, real, available. And then… and then we… we… become disciples… we become disciples who follow. Amen.

01/21/2024
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 a précis of what was said: “As you know, I’m a musician, myself. This is a singing church. I love it. When it comes to the reality of the presence of God theologian Richard Rohr said this: ‘We cannot attain the presence of God because we are already totally in the presence of God. What is absent is our awareness.’”

BENEDICTION: Through God’s grace, by being attentive to God’s will, our deeds and our words will change our world for we will discover ways to proclaim release from the bondage or narrowness. Let us seek the God of Joy whose wisdom is our God. Let us go in peace to love and serve God. Amen.