Overwhelming Texts

(The picture to the right is the International Mother's Day Shrine located in Grafton, W. Va.)
I listened to two sermons this past weekend. One was on Saturday night at a megachurch that I visited with some friends. The other was at my home congregation where the Associate Pastor preached. In both instances, the subject of the sermon was Mother's Day. Now, with all due respect to mother's and their children, it is hard to find Mother's Day in the bible. As a result, neither one of them were very successful in their sermons. It wasn't that what they said was bad (though the Associate did far better than did the staff member at the megachurch - far better!) but that what they said had more to do with their view of mothers, motherhood, and family than it did with who Jesus is or what the Christian faith is all about. Both of them employed scripture but in a way that made the text(s) ancillary to the real subject of their sermon - Mother's Day.
Now, don't get me wrong, I like Mother's Day. I am married to one and, counter to the rumors out there, I came from one. I think it is culturally important to celebrate Mother's Day. I'm just not sure it is crucial to preach about it each year in May. I say that knowing that the prevailing idea is that you have three times you cannot ignore in the pulpit - Advent, Easter, and Mother's Day. I guess I'm saying that it should be acknowledged, celebrated, and responded to in the service. However, I'm not sure it ought to be preached about each Mother's Day.
One of the problems with what my Associate Pastor called, "Hallmark holidays" is that they tend to overwhelm the text in preaching. Both preachers had great texts for Mother's Day, appropriate for the celebration. The megachurch staff member choose the story of Moses' birth and the Associate Pastor chose the text in Matthew 12 where Jesus does not receive his mother and brothers. Both were rich with possibilities about Mother's Day or some issue related to motherhood or family. Neither were really developed well. Again, the day overwhelmed the text. If there is one rule in preaching that I find violated consistently it is the one where you should pick and text and mine it for preaching material rather than impose on the text what you want to say. Holidays can overwhelm texts and turn potentially rich texts into pretexts for preaching something the preacher wants to say rather than what the Holy Spirit wants to say.

The Sad State of Dissent

Her name is Carrie Prejean and she is the reigning Miss California and the runner up for Miss America. As the judges were making up their ballots, each of the contestants answered a serious question. But, like so many of these situations, the answer they gave came off less than spectacular. Here is part of her reply:

Perez Hilton: “Vermont recently became the 4th state to legalize same-sex marriage. Do you think every state should follow suit. Why or why not?”

Carrie Prejean: “Well I think its great that Americans are able to choose one or the other. We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage. And you know what, in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that’s how I was raised and that’s how I think it should be between a man and a woman. Thank you very much.”

Not a stellar reply. In the heat of the moment; in front of the cameras and the television audience; in front of a live audience; in the moment before what you hope will be the biggest moment of your life; in the excitement of a competition - you try and formulate an answer. You try and give a sense of your own self; a window into your values and beliefs. Maybe not the best, most reasoned argument I've ever heard but a true statement about her values and beliefs. She didn't put anybody down. She didn't ask God to kill all the gays. She didn't call lesbians sinners. No, she stated an opinion in a beauty pageant. They asked her what she believed and she told them. And then the firestorm caught on and the stakes got higher.

The man asking the question is described as a "famous celebrity blogger." He is an outspoken gay man who makes his living as a kind of paparazzi. He posts their pictures and blogs about the lives and loves of celebrities. When he gets to hard news (real news) he gets lost. He announced on his blog one time that Castro had died. He has been sued and reviled. Then he asked this question, got an answer he didn't like, and blogged vile things about Carrie Prejean. Suddenly, he's the hero and she's the villain.

It all sounds like a set up to me. He got the one person he wanted to ask the one question he wanted that would get the one response he wanted so the media could go bonkers about it. And it worked. In part, because of our prejudice against women, in part because of the cultures growing dislike of Christians and Christian beliefs, in part because California voted against gay marriage in November, and in part because the gay and lesbian lobby have boosted their media presence to ram through their agenda for gay rights.

Sadly, the voice of this issue has now become Carrie Prejean. She was unprepared for it on the night she asked the question and she is unprepared to be the spokeswoman for the cause. No one is. If you say you are against gay marriage you are libeled as a hate monger. If you say you are for it you are being tolerant. In this culture there is no room for dissent. If you oppose President Obama you are an obstructionist. If you believe in gun control you are rejecting the Constitution. If you speak out about your faith you are imposing your beliefs on others.

If I have learned anything during these last several years at Fuller it is that the Christian message is rarely popular. The disciples were originally in favor with the people but in short time, after Stephen's stoning, they grew out of favor. The Christian message is counter to the culture. We speak truth and, like Jesus to the Pharisees, we speak truth to power. In an age where everyone wants to be politically correct we have a message that is intended to rock the culture and speak prophetically to the politicians in power. We have joined faith with nationalism. Now, the nation is fighting back through its cultural changes. One rallying cry will be to "take back our nation." Maybe the better cry is "speak what we know to be true."

It's not the Prejean is failing to speak the truth. I believe she is. I would go even further to suggest that, if you take the Bible seriously (and I do) you cannot find a single instance in scripture where homosexuality is seen in a positive light. Not in the prescriptions against it nor in the characters who desire it. The Biblical view seems clear - homosexuality is a choice. If you choose to be gay, you choose against a Biblical injunction. That is your choice. God has given you that freedom. Once you've made the choice, you must also accept the consequences. That is, by the way, the same argument being made against Prejean and her comments. She now has to be responsible for them. So does Perez Hilton (whose real name is Mario Armando Lavandeira). So do I. So do you.

Women in Ministry

The School of Theology in Anderson has created a new link on its website to discuss the idea of Women in Ministry. As part of the web page they have several links to other sites. One is to the Wesleyan Holiness Woman's Website while another is to the Faculty statement in support of Women in Ministry. One of the links is to an ethics paper. The author of that paper is my son, Jonathan. It is quite a feather in his cap to have this posted on the Seminary site. I know it is a good paper because he sent it to me a year ago and I used it to help prepare one of my Comprehensive Exams. It was enormously helpful to me and I think it may be of help to others. Here is the link to the site. Please take a moment to read his paper and think seriously about this most important subject.

http://www.anderson.edu/sot/wim/index.html

Losing Friends

I lost some friends this past week. Don Pickett was a mentor and leader that influenced my life in substantial ways. He taught me how to treat people and delegate responsibility to those around me. I learned to value the input of others and to give them their space in order for them to do ministry. I learned the value of investing in the ministry of others. As I make the move to an academic setting filled with young ministers (either in age or experience) I am reminded of how much Don invested in me and my ministry when I was the age of many seminarians and he was my age. I hope to do the same and keep his memory alive in those in whom I invest.

Rich Meyer has been the senior pastor at Noblesville Church of God where my son, Jonathan, is the Associate. Rich died from cancer while Jonathan was out here visiting Fuller. It was a tragic situation where Rich faced a very aggressive form of cancer. They tried to arrest it by amputating his arm but were unsuccessful. The church in Noblesville is in shock and are without their pastor. Jonathan will have additional responsibilities and tasks facing him as he returns to home. He is there now ministering to Rich's family and the church family. Jonathan, the church, and the Meyer family are front and center in my prayers. I know that Don Pickett would understand that.

Losing friends is never easy. When the church loses leaders it always begs the question, "Who will replace them?" Well, I intend to do my part. My guess is that Jonathan will do his. The only question left is, "What will you do?" Peter was crucified upside down - and the church continued on; John died of old age on Patmos - and the church continued on; Elijah was translated, John the Baptist beheaded, Stephen stoned to death, and Jesus was crucified - and the church moved forward. Joshua replaced Moses, David replaced Saul, Timothy replaced Paul, and Elisha replaced Elijah - and the cause and mission of God moved ahead. Don Pickett and Rich Meyer did their part and now they have moved on to an eternal reward. While the Lord tarries, let us do what the Lord requires of us.

"What does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God." (Micah 6:8)

Preaching Summit

Today (Monday April 20) Fuller is hosting a Preaching Summit. It is part kickoff for the new Lloyd Ogilvie Chair in Preaching and part conversation between some of the most recognizable scholars in preaching. Some of the participants are James Earl Massey (Dean Emeritus of both Anderson School of Theology and the Tuskegee Chapel), Wil Willimon (Former Dean of the Chapel at Duke and now Methodist Bishop for Alabama), Lloyd Ogilvie (Former pastor at Hollywood Presbyterian Church and the retired Chaplain of the U.S. Senate), Jana Childers (Professor of Speech and Preaching at San Franciso Theological Seminary), Ken Fong (Pastor of a large Asian-American Church in L.A.), Peter Story (Methodist Bishop in South Africa and Professor of Preaching at Duke) and Renita Weems (Former O.T. Professor at Vanderbilt and now an AME pastor and one of the top women preacher's in America). It is quite a lineup.
I spent the morning listening in on their conversation about the future of preaching. Two hours of hearing from some of the great teachers of preaching about where they think (in some cases fear) preaching is headed. Then at lunch and in the afternoon I had opportunity to spend some time one on one with some of them. I thought you might be interested in a few snapshots of the things they shared.

1. Peter Story made the comment that he is more convinced than ever that preaching is all about location. If you do not know that location in which you are preaching (this includes the social construction of the audience, the theological tradition of the hearers, the major issues revolving around them) then you can do great harm to the gospel.
   
2. James Earl Massey was deeply concerned about the importance of preaching out of a tradition. Not some dry, historical past but a living, breathing, alive tradition that informs and helps to shape our preaching.
3. Many of those there were convinced that much of today's preaching is therapeutic in nature but not missional. It makes the person feel better but does little to affect the culture with the gospel. Preaching has become too individualistic, concentrating on the needs of the individual rather than the mission of the church to the world around us.
4. Ken Fong feared we were producing "Pharisee Factories" where we are more concerned about how things are done and less concerned with whether the gospel mission is being accomplished.
   
5. Jana Childers, Will Willimon, and Peter Story all lamented the inability of seminaries to get all their staff together in conversation about how to produce better preaching in the church. They also expressed some insightful ideas about building the entirety of the seminary curiculum around the development of preaching so that the church history department and the systematic theology department would be forming the preacher and the preaching rather than creating academicians. Willimon made the comment that he had found few laypeople who were impressed that their pastor could produced a 20 page resource paper. He had suggested at Duke that every class culminate with students preaching a sermon. That way they could come to understand how other disciplines inform preaching.
   

Tonight these folks will all gather together for a Q&A session being led by Andy Crouch. It will give them all a chance to share about the ministry of preaching in the 21st Century. It should be rich. I'll tell you all about it later.

Family Time

Jonathan is here for the week. He is going to be attending a couple of conferences that are taking place in and around Fuller. He will be preaching in two of my preaching practicae and then filling the pulpit at Church of the Foothills on Sunday. All of that is minor. The best news is that he is here. It has been nearly a year since we have been with any of our kids. It feels good. I love my kids.

Grades

I got my grades for the Winter Quarter. I took two directed readings last quarter - one in creativity and imagination and the other in the area of Erasmus and his translation of John 1:1. To meet the requirements of the course I read about 6,000 pages, traveled to both Yale and Princeton to study with professors, and wrote nearly 100 pages of my dissertation. For that work I received an A for each of the courses. My GPA for my work here at Fuller is 3.91 and I have completed 80 hours of classes. I am only two classes short of completing my course work. I will finish one class this quarter (Spring) and the other one during the Summer. By the time Fall comes around I will (God willing) be writing the final chapter of my dissertation. My plan is to complete the writing by December and graduate in June of 2010. If I can keep on that pace I will have completed the PhD in 3 1/2 yrs. The average is 6 years.
I am proud of my grades. I have received nothing under an A- for any class and only received one B+ on any assignment (my first one in my first class). I have worked hard to maintain my grades while being an Interim Pastor at Church of the Foothills, working as a TA in numerous classes, and being an Adjunct Professor at Fuller in preaching. I have also taught an on-line class at Warner University in Florida, been a Research Assistant for my mentor, and taken on a few extra preaching assignments like a Campmeeting in NE Ohio and one coming up in Eastern Washington.
It has been one of the most fulfilling times of my life. I have read more, written more, learned more, and thought more than I have in the last decade of my life. I love to interact with students, share my love of preaching, and pastor some wonderful people. God has been faithful. We don't have much money in the bank and we have some school loans to pay off when this is done, but I wouldn't trade the experience for anything. I appreciate the A in the classes because it is something that I can point to and say to my wife and to my Lord, "I have been faithful to the calling."

Sins By Category

Have you ever noticed that certain sins are more important than others? I'm not talking about the difference between murder and a little white lie, I'm talking about how sins are viewed depending on where you are. For instance, in journalism it's a sin to claim you have sources for your story that you either make-up or get from others without citing the source. However, in preaching, we use sources all the time and rarely cite where they come from. We use made up stories or illustrations and don't bother to find out if the story is true or not. I watched a cooking show on TV, one of those competitive shows ("Top Chef") and one of the chefs used a prepackaged ingredient rather than make it from scratch. Big "no-no." He got criticized for it. I don't know about you, but I use prepackaged ingredients all the time! Apparently, no self respecting chef would do that. Funny, I respect myself just fine. I think I'll still use the prepackaged stuff if I need to.
Lawyers lie to defend their clients (or, at least, present half-truths); actors sleep with their co-stars while married without impunity ("Brangelina"); AIG executives get huge bonus' for performance while their company tanks; Athletes do drugs and get caught using illegal substances and then get millions of dollars in bonus' and new contracts - I wonder which sins are "OK" and which ones are not acceptable? Over the course of teaching some classes this year I have had to flunk some students because they cheated on their work. Most of the time it is technical (like not citing your sources in footnotes) but sometimes it is outright cheating where you submit someone else's work as your own - even whole sermons. These are students either in ministry or preparing for ministry and they are found cheating - cutting corners instead of doing the work.
When are sins, sins? When is it wrong to do something and there are no excuses? When is it wrong to do something as a Methodist and it is still wrong to do it as a Nazarene? Why do Catholics and Lutherans believe that alcohol is OK but the Church of God and Brethren Church don't? Why is OK for a minister to be a homosexual in the Episcopal Church but unacceptable in the newly formed Anglican Church of North America? One of the reasons people are confused about the church and don't see it as speaking with the voice of moral authority is that those in the church cannot figure out what is sin and what is not. If the Cross of Christ is for the forgiveness of sins (I think we all agree on that) can anyone tell me what the church believes is sin and what is not? What do we have to be forgiven of before we can become a full-fledged Christian?
As Good Friday approaches, it is becoming increasingly difficult for the Church to speak with one voice about the Cross of Christ. We have developed a mentality that allows for sins to be placed in one category or another. Then, depending on who we are, we choose the categories that are really sinful and those that really aren't that bad. It is killing the church and negating its message. I have a suggestion. I think there is only one sin. I go back to the Garden and the problems of Adam and Eve. They only sinned once. They broke one sin and that caused all the problems. What was that one sin? They wanted to be God. They wanted to make the rules. They wanted to do what was wrong in order to be the one who could determine what was right and wrong. For me, that's the only sin. Every time we I do something that puts my wants and desires above God's call and command, that is sin. Every time I do something on my own without His help, that's sin. Every time I act without his Word, Spirit, and guidance that is sin. I think there is only one sin. It's the sin of humankind. It's the sin of the Garden. It's the sin that gets us all in trouble. We want to be God and make up our own rules. Well, it doesn't work like that. There is only one God and one Savior. He died on Calvary. I didn't - and neither did you. He gets to make up the rules. We get to follow. He does a better job of making up the rules and providing grace for us when we blow it. My job is to be the best follower I can be. In the end, being a good follower may be better than trying to define all the things we think are sin or not sin.

On the Topic of Prayer

Another senseless tragedy occurred today. A gunman shot and killed a large number of folks in a N.Y. town. Many of them were immigrants. As the tragedy unfurled, the news networks covered the reaction of those involved and those responding to the tragedy. I was struck by how often the topic of prayer came up. It came up at the news conference of political officials from Binghamton and N.Y. state; it was referred to by the Vice President in his remarks; it was noted constantly by Glenn Beck as he reported the situation. When tragedy strikes, prayer is one of the key responses public officials request.
Interestingly, there was no outcry from the ACLU or calls for the "separation of church and state." No one said it was a Democratic ploy or mentioned the Republican fascination with the "religious right." No one quoted President Obama's former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, fallen evangelical pastor Ted Haggard, or the new cultural/political religious figure Rev. Rick Warren. No one suggested the politicians were simply trying to make points in a poll. It was accepted as a genuine expression of concern. We should pray for those most closely affected by the shootings. It was the right thing to do.
It seems ironic that prayer is viewed in our society as a way to respond to crisis but not a way to prevent it or prepare for it. It does not appear to be a source for changing the future, as Jonah feared it would be with Nineveh (and prayer did change the future of that city). Like preventative medicine, prayer is not always practiced in advance of problems. If Vice President Biden suggested that we should pray for changed hearts so that Al Qaeda terrorists would see the foolishness of their ways and stop their warring ways, he would be roundly criticized for meddling religion with politics. But by asking us to pray for those affected by the violence in N.Y. and that these kinds of senseless shootings should cease, he was quoted as saying something comforting to the nation.
For those who know the true meaning of prayer and are prayer warriors the idea that they can pray before something happens is essential to their concept of the meaning of prayer. Prayer is intended to be the first line of defense not the final act of desperation. Remember the model prayer Jesus gave (often called "The Lord's Prayer")? Note how forward looking it is when it uses phrases like "thy will be done" or "give us this day" or "lead us not" or "deliver us from evil." This is the nature of prayer. It looks to change what is coming not merely cry over what has occurred. If we understood that, we would be praying about upcoming things more than praying for what is already set in stone.

Our Father, who art in heaven,
hallowed be thy name.
Thy Kingdom come,
thy will be done,
on earth as it is in heaven
Give us this day our daily bread.
And forgive us our trespasses,
as we forgive those who trespass against us.
And lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from evil.
For thine is the kingdom,

the power and the glory,

for ever and ever.

Amen

Dealing with Disappointment

When Jesus went about doing his public ministry, he disappointed a lot of people. Those that were closest to him were the most disappointed in him. In the most crucial hour they all deserted him or denied him or betrayed him. Jesus went from crowds in the thousands to parades in the hundreds to the isolation of the cross and entombment in a borrowed grave. His path was littered with the disappointment of those who believed he was the answer to their plight under Rome. When he died, Jesus may have been one of the most disappointing characters in human history. Another failed messianic hope.
We don't tend to think of Jesus in these terms - nor do we preach about it. The televangelists continue to spew their health, wealth, and prosperity ramblings, ignoring the poverty of Jesus, the message to the poor against wealth, and the disappointment that Jesus left in his wake. It is a sad truth that, in a time of economic crisis and financial hardship the church has left itself with a gospel of success rather than a gospel based on how to deal with disappointment. We could have prepared the world for the times in which we live. Instead, we threw away the message of the gospel for the gospel of the American Dream. Now, we have nothing to say that people will hear because our gospel of success has left too shallow a message. Woe is us, woe is us.
I just applied for my first position as a full-time professor at a seminary. One of my professors advised me of the position; the job description fit me to a "T"; my references were impeccable. I doubt I got any real consideration. In a pile of PhD's with years of teaching experience, my resume probably looked a little thin, to say the least. Nevertheless, I am disappointed. I thought this might be the answer. Get a position even before I graduate; have some financial security rather than piling up debt; be a success. I told family and friends about it. Now I have to tell them I'm not even going to be considered. I feel like I've disappointed my wife and family. It has been a depressing day. (Can you hear the pity party in my words?)
I have come to believe that helping people deal with disappointment may be the most important skill we help our congregations and leaders to develop. Nothing in this life will ultimately succeed. If it could, there would be no need for a new heaven and a new earth. The flowers fade and everyone dies. Dealing with disappointment would seem to be crucial. It is only in eternity that we find complete fulfillment and utter wealth. Not streets of gold but perfect fellowship and peace. Until then, however, we must learn to deal with disappointment. Especially if we want to live with Jesus as our example.
There will be better days ahead. Not every day is a disappointment. Not every loss is a loss (just like every win is not necessarily a win). God is still on the throne. He is still leading my life. He hasn't brought me this far to abandon me. The cross is not the end of the story and neither is the borrowed grave. No, the resurrection is the foundation of hope. It helps us all deal with disappointments.

Losing

Our attitudes toward winning and losing in our society are quite interesting. We love winners. Who won the World Series last year? The Phillies, of course. Who did they defeat to get to the World Series? Well, now, let me see. I remember the beat the Rays for the Series, but who in the world did they beat to get to the Series? Hmmm. We love our winners but we quickly forget the losers. John McCain was on the news everyday until he lost. Then he fell off the cliff. There's an episode of the West Wing in their final season after the election. Arnie Vinnick (played by Alan Alda) is shown after losing. Nobody even notices him at a coffee shop. A few weeks earlier, he lost the election for President of the U.S. by about 40,000 votes. Millions voted for him - and then forgot him. When is the last time you heard from Michael Dukakis, Bob Dole, or Walter Mondale? We love winners. We forget the ones who lose.
I have lost some wieght recently. The loss is getting noticeable. I have had to change belts and I am wearing clothes I haven't worn since before I got to Pasadena. But my loss has become the stuff of celebration. People are excited about my loss. Instead of forgetting what I have done they have become cheerleaders for losing more. It's an odd paradox. Some losses are quite acceptable and others are forgettable.
When we seek the Lord and ask for his forgiveness we suffer a loss. We lose sin and the effects of the sins that we have committed in our lives. Most of the time we express this in winners terms. Forgiveness is a gain. But, a gain and loss of what? Oddly enough, it is a gain of righteousness. At the same time it is a loss of the nature with which we were born. We lose sin and gain holiness. Maybe that's why we don't express it in those terms. We are far more comfortable with just talking about the loss of sin in the gaining of forgiveness. Why? Because everyone wants to forget sin and sin is what we lose.
However, I'm not sure we should lose everything about sin. Don't misunderstand, I am glad that God "loses" our sins, at least as far as the East is from the West. I ma just not sure we should lose all the things related to sin. I don't think we should lose the feeling we experience when we are wallowing in our sins. I don't' think we should lose our sense of elation when sin was taken away. I don't think we should lose the remembrance of the things we lost when we were in sin. I don't want to wallow in sin any more, but I don't ever want to forget the testimony I have that is based on sin and the forgiveness I received. I don't ever want to forget that Paul said, "When I am weak, then I am strong." My weakness is based on my complete trust in Christ. My strength is that I know am strong only as I recognize what I have lost and on whom I am dependent. Thank God I lost. To be a winner in this "game" is to be the ultimate loser. Amen.

Vision

I've been writing a lot about the idea of creativity in preaching. One of the last sources I used is an older book by Arthur Koestler. It is called, The Act of Creation. In it, he tells the following story: In 1960 they conducted some experiments at McGill University and discovered, much to their surprise, some interesting things about the movement of the eye. Here's the quote:

"… the unconscious movements of the eye are not merely aids to clearer vision, but a sine qua non of vision. When the subject’s gaze remained really fixed on a stationary object (by means of a mechanical device), his vision went haywire, the image of the object disintegrated – then reappeared after a while but in distorted shape or in fragments. Static vision does not exist; there is no seeing without exploring."

Static vision does not exist. In other words, you cannot really stare at something. At least, not for very long. If you are forced to stare, your vision will go "haywire." I was reminded that the eyes are not static during sleep, either. Everyone experiences what is called REM sleep, which stands for Rapid Eye Movement. If you ever watch someone who is in a deep state of sleep you can catch their eyes moving all over the place even though their eyelids are closed and they are deeply sleeping. Static vision does not exist.

I wish we could all understand this principle. We get so stuck in our ways and in our choices. We become static in our lives, our jobs, our routines, our marriages, our worship, our faith. Part of the reason we seek to remain static is tied to our need for security and the ability to count on things. Yet, there is no such thing as static vision. If you want to grow or be productive or be successful or do something important, you can't remain static. The Bible says, "Without a vision the people perish." We should add to that the idea that there is no seeing without exploring. So, break out of your doldrums and live. Throw off the gloom of winter and go exploring. Stop one routine and do something fresh and new. Open your Bible and explore it rather than just read the words. There is no such thing as static vision. Believe me, I've tried.