Ask the Question 3: More to come....

There are still a number of questions to which I have not yet time to  respond.  The responses to the following questions will appear here as I am able to make time:

• Why don't we share prayer concerns in worship?  Would this help with helping people feel connected?    See the post on Worship.
• How often do we change the outside banners and who decides what goes there?
• Beside the doxology, what is the most current change or improvement for "how we do church"?    See the March 8 Post
• What is the church leadership doing to prepare for the transitions of Rev. Carly's retirement in 2024?  --See the Guest Post by the Church Moderator
• The "revival at Asbury College makes me wonder what is the congregational stance on revivals?
• Can we stream/broadcast the coffee hour, or put up a zoom coffee hour for online participants?
• I have my beliefs that have sheltered, encouraged, and nourished me, but seeing how many people so openly "use" God as a weapon.  Are there that many or are they more vocal?
• There are 4 Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. But why isn't there a Gospel written according to Jesus?  Why didn't Jesus leave us something written my him, instead of leaving it to others to write various and at times conflicting versions of the Gospel?   See the post about the Bible.
• What is the difference between Lutheran, Presbyterian, and us regarding theology

  We ran out of time for a number of questions asked in worship on February 19. Here are responses to those questions.  Red questions were submitted on line.  Blue questions were hand written submissions from Sunday.

A quick reminder that these are my opinions. They do not represent any "official" position of First Congregational Church of La Grange, or of the United Church of Christ. 

Ask The Question 3: Worship Questions

  We ran out of time for a number of questions asked in worship on February 19. Here are responses to those questions.  Red questions were submitted on line.  Blue questions were hand written submissions from Sunday.

A quick reminder that these are my opinions. They do not represent any "official" position of First Congregational Church of La Grange, or of the United Church of Christ. 

Will we bring back the [Passing of the] Peace during the service?

The Short answer:  I don't know.  I have two reservations about this. The first is sanitary, the second and more profound question is theological.

Health:  So long as COVID and the Flu persist and continue to evolve, I am uncomfortable asking people to shake hands and give one another hugs.  When worship becomes a super-spreader opportunity, we stop being a safe place for everyone -- particularly those of us with compromised health and/or immune systems. 

Theological:  The passing of the peace entered worship as a direct response to the saying attributed to Jesus in Matthew 5:21-24

“You have heard that it was said to those of ancient times, ‘You shall not murder,’ and ‘whoever murders shall be liable to judgment.’ But I say to you that if you are angry with a brother or sister, you will be liable to judgment, and if you insult a brother or sister, you will be liable to the council, and if you say, ‘You fool,’ you will be liable to the hell of fire. So when you are offering your gift at the altar, if you remember that your brother or sister has something against you,  leave your gift there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother or sister, and then come and offer your gift.

The intention of the passing of the peace is to do exactly this: Following the prayer of confession and as a response to receiving the assurance of your own forgiveness,  we are to approach the person with whom we have a broken relationship and work out reconciliation with them before giving your gifts and before sharing the bread and cup of communion.  This is a difficult and perhaps impossible thing to achieve in 5 minutes of the worship hour. It really requires much more time, effort, and frankly, vulnerability, than most of us are comfortable with.

What has evolved over the course of time, then, is the exact opposite of the original intent. So often this ritual has abandoned goal of community strength to instead being a social moment in the middle of worship where we can greet our old friends, ignore the newcomers (or worse, put them on the spot), and pass on a little bit of gossip. It suffices for social contact for those who lack the time to go to coffee hour, and it interrupts the flow of an otherwise worshipful experience. 

Will we bring it back? I'm not sure we ever had a true passing of the peace. I believe that what we had was a mockery of a sacred part of worship.  Again, this is my opinion, blunt as that may be.

Why did the doxology change?

I responded to this question on Sunday, but I'd like to add a few things to what I said then.  

First, worship is not a static event. It is as dynamic as the wind and weather and changes every week so as to meet the needs of the community.  There is nothing sacred about any one liturgy (in my opinion INCLUDING the Jesus Prayer) that it cannot be adapted with fresh language and more meaningful metaphors and images. This is true of all language based traditions. For example:

• My mother once said aloud the following and no one took any offense: "I have quite the gay life."  I'm quite sure that phrase no longer means today what my mother was expressing nearly 90 years ago.
• In the 1950's in response to the "Red Scare", the words "one nation under God" were added to the pledge of allegiance. 
• The words "In God We Trust" have been added and removed from the US Currency multiple times in our history. 
• Each edition of your favorite cookbook updates methodology and language for the current era.  Compare the language of the original Betty Crocker Cookbook published in 1950 to the last printed edition of 2016 to the electronic version now available on the Betty Crocker webpage, and notice how the language changed over the years, how the pictures have changed, how the very method of delivery has changed. 

Language is a living and dynamic means of expressing ourselves.  It changes with every generation, every culture, and every translation or experience.   

If in worship, our language never changes, we are not only not in touch with the world around us, we become irrelevant.  Language and faith are dynamic. The language of faith cannot be static.

Why don't we share prayer concerns in worship?  Would this help with helping people feel connected?

For some people, knowing what to pray about for others is a means of connection.  For others, it is a violation of their privacy.  Let me explain.

On several occasions, we have asked for prayer concerns before the morning prayers. Other times, we've lifted up the concerns people have brought to me before worship either through a written note, a phone or text message, or by speaking to me.  

Sharing prayer concerns is perfectly fine if the request comes from the person for whom the prayer is being requested. We can be sure that the person feels comfortable with sharing if they've requested that we pray for them.  

However, before we start naming people and their concerns, it is important to remember that our services are broadcast.  So, when naming names and stating concerns we are effectively broadcasting to the world information that the person may not want broadcast far and wide.  

This came home to me when recently a member of the congregation asked that we put their parent on the published prayer list in the bulletin, and that we lift them in prayer on Sunday morning.  We did as that person asked. On Monday morning, I received a call from a very angry member of the congregation who was not comfortable with their name being broadcast let alone that they were concerned about health issues.  To the individual, this was a very private matter. The their adult child, it was a community prayer issue.  The parent was quite hurt by this breach of privacy.  The adult child had no idea their parent felt this way.

As a pastor ordained in the United Church of Christ, I am held to a code of ethics that states that I will not breach the confidentiality of church members.  In this day of hot tempers, identity theft, and litigation, I find myself amazed that I have had to consider asking people to sign a "Prayer Sharing Permission Form."  And yet that is exactly what some clergy are now asking of church members.  I cannot bring myself to that level.  But I do wish there was a way to share without people feeling we've risked their sense of security and privacy. 

Ask the Question 3: The Bible

 

 We ran out of time for a number of questions asked in worship on February 19. Here are responses to those questions.  Red questions were submitted on line.  Blue questions were hand written submissions from Sunday.

A quick reminder that these are my opinions. They do not represent any "official" position of First Congregational Church of La Grange, or of the United Church of Christ. 

Three questions came in about the content and permanence of the content of the Bible. 

• Why haven't new books been added? Dinosaurs, and the Holocaust all existed/happened.
• The Bible has evolved over time. Should the Bible continue to be changed, or is consistency more important?
• The Old Testament is full of the worst aspects of humanity and few mentions of love.  It is superseded by the New Covenant.  I understand the Old Testament's value as a historical record, by why are we taught to revere it? 

What we call "scripture" has indeed evolved over millennia.  As is true of other faith's sacred writings, our Bible is a compilation of many writers representing communities of faith. Most of these writings were oral traditions before they were committed to ink and parchment. And, many of these oral traditions were appropriated from the cultures, religions, mythologies, and narratives of the people with whom the faith community interacted.  These texts, once committed to parchment, were then edited, tweaked, intertwined, and subjected to community scrutiny before being deemed "sacred."

To save time and space, I recommend you see this video about how the Bible came to be.  

I view the Bible as a library of narratives that reflect human experience with God over time.  I don't believe that any portion of the Bible should be "revered." Please save your reverence for God and God alone.  The Bible simply recounts what some in history have experienced.  When these ancient texts were written -- particularly the Old Testament -- there was not a sense of "history" as we understand it today.  The narrative was not written as a history text book. It was not intended to be a fact based or official account of any kind.  It was shared as an old family story is shared.  Picture a conversation a traveling band of wayfarers is having around a campfire at night: 

Kid: Ms Elder, can you tell us again the story of how the world was created? 

or 

Elderly member of the tribe: Children, gather around and let me tell you the story my elders told me about how Job suffered (or Jonah was swallowed by a whale). 

or

Jesus, tell us again about how to pray.

The Bible did indeed evolve over a long period of time.  There was a long debate in the early centuries of Christianity about what should be and what shouldn't be included in this collection.  And like all things involving humans, that debate was more than a little political.  It was influenced by the involvement of the Holy Roman Emperor, Constantine, who used the new division of Judaism as a tool to consolidate the empire.  Read that again.  A political figure -- an imperialist, colonizing, emperor -- played a key part in what became the sacred text for that developing faith.  That text then became the supporting documentation for the crusades, the pogrom's, and the forced conversions of other cultures.  

Is this a book that should remain unchanged? The Bible has been used to justify the holocaust, slavery, the slaughter of Armenians and so many other cultures, the forced removal of indigenous children from their communities, and, frankly, so much other evil. 

Personally, I believe that we have replaced the intent of the narratives -- to express a community's experiences of the holy -- with worship of the narratives. I don't believe we should eliminate any parts of this collection; but it might be wise to ADD to this other writings.  Why not consider the writings of Bonhoeffer, Martin Luther King Jr, Mother Teresa?  What about those writings that were NOT included by the third and seventh century councils such as the Gospel of Thomas, or of Mary, or of Judas? 

As for dinosaurs and the holocaust, yes they did indeed exist and happen.  One happened because someone insisted that their beliefs were right and all others are wrong -- as if the truth is binary. 

The truth is that nothing in any of life is binary; there are as many points of view as there are people witness the experience. Until we accept this diversity, we have missed the point of (name the religions)'s sacred texts. 

There are 4 Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. But why isn't there a Gospel written according to Jesus?  Why didn't Jesus leave us something written my him, instead of leaving it to others to write various and at times conflicting versions of the Gospel?

Well, since we can't ask Jesus why, I can only speculate.  Here are some of my thoughts about this. 

• Jesus did not consider himself to be all that extraordinary.  He was just a local rabbi (like I'm a local pastor) who taught what he had been taught by those who went before him.  Most of what is in the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) and credited to Jesus' teachings originates in the Jewish writings -- the Talmud, Mishnah, and the writings of the rabbis.  Jesus was a conveyor of traditional faith teachings who had the chutzpah to confront the religious leaders with their hypocrisy and name their political motives.  Why write down what is common knowledge?
• Did Jesus know how to write?  While we have one account of him sitting with the teachers in the temple when he was 12, we have no record of him attending any formal education -- and most people did not in that time.  Only the wealthy were educated.  We have a narrative of Jesus reading the passage from Isaiah when he was in the synagogue at Nazareth (ref Luke 4:16ff) but was he reading or reciting what he memorized for his bar mitzvah? Or, since this story is not in the other gospels, is it an account that historically happened, or is Luke making a point about a prophet not being accepted in their hometown?  We don't have a record of him writing words on a page or in the dirt, and we never see a reference to him reading anything outside of that one scripture. 
• Did maybe Jesus write something and it got lost?  Or, the early church fathers rejected it as authentic? 
• It was not until long after Jesus' death that anyone wrote any of his teachings.  Mark wrote the earliest version about 40 years -- a full generation or two -- after Jesus' death.  There were likely other writings that were earlier, but we only know of them what is copied into the Synoptic Gospels. Paul wrote about the movement that became of Jesus' teachings around 65 or 70 AD, but again, Paul never encountered Jesus in the flesh. Even the writings that were not included in the canon were written by people who likely never sat at the feet of Jesus.  You've likely played telephone with a circle of friends.  One starts a short narrative whispered into the ear of the person sitting next to them.  The narrative then gets passed from person to person in the circle until it returns to the one who originated the story. Then it is repeated aloud.  It is rarely the same story that comes back after generations of retelling it.  

Ask the Question 3: Book Study, Forgiveness

 We ran out of time for a number of questions asked in worship on February 19. Here are responses to those questions.  Red questions were submitted on line.  Blue questions were hand written submissions from Sunday.

A quick reminder that these are my opinions. They do not represent any "official" position of First Congregational Church of La Grange, or of the United Church of Christ. 

How do I reserve for the Lent Book Study on Jesus and John Wayne?

Ah, that's easy!  Contact Adrienne in the church office at Mainoffice @ FCCLG . org  (Spaces omitted) and ask for the link to join the class.  

Can you speak on forgiveness? of Ourselves and to others?

(See also this blog post from a lot of years ago, and/or this one from more recently)

We tend to think that we forgive someone for their sake. The opposite is true.  Forgiveness letting go so that the hurt will no longer carry its power over you, releasing the experience from those things that weigh down your very being, changing your relationship with the anger, regret, vengeance, pain, and  even guilt that an experience has dealt you.  

The line in the Jesus Prayer (AKA The Lord's Prayer) says, "Forgive us our debts [sins] as [in proportion to how] we forgive our debtors [sins against us].  The translation of the Greek words as "debts" and "debtors" is unfortunate.  If someone's debt is forgiven, we tend to think they did not rightly keep their promise to pay back what was taken.  (Reference the argument about forgiving Student College Debt.)  This is transactional, measureable, and fact based.  Jesus was not transactional; Jesus was about extravagant grace, unwavering love. He also set firm boundaries around these values.

Humans are not transactional or measureable, and we each have a different concept of what is the truth or fact. We are feeling, emotional, intuitive beings.  When we have been hurt, when we have been wronged, we carry the pain, anger, disappointment, and desire to make right the situation in our hearts -- and in our heads. We rationalize why and how the source of that pain, disappointment, and anger should be treated to make the situation right.  This is the basis of our justice system's use of the death penalty. Yet, killing the convicted murderer does not bring back the dead. The pain, loss, anger, and changed future still remain after the convicted one is dead.

Forgiveness has nothing to do with the repentance of another person even if they are the perpetrator of your pain. Forgiveness is not about the relationship between two people.  Forgiveness is about the role of the power of the shadow of an experience plays in your day to day living.  

So, how do we resolve that pain, loss, anger, and disappointment?  By transforming those feelings so that they do not shade how we function, how we see the world, and how we live our lives. This is hard work and possibly will require reaching out for assistance, especially if the "wrong" was traumatic, physical, or psychological in nature. But it can be -- and must be -- done if we are going to be free of the burden.