There was a poem in my childhood which for some reason was frequently quoted. It was a Mighty Casey and he was at bat in baseball game. It is a story poem and Mighty Case strikes out at the end. "There is no joy in Mudville tonight for Mighty Case has struck out."
I guess I thought of that poem when the Campaign Director for the Elaine Marshall's campaign for Senate from North Carolina suggested that Elaine had a very good chance to beat the current Senator Richard Burr because there is a "very unhappy electorate out there." He said that people are just not happy with what is happening in Washington. Whether it be the "Tea Party people" or the Obama enthusiast, people do not like what is happening in Washington. "There is no joy in the country as politicians have struck out." They have not gone up there and worked to solve the problems. And people know we have some major problems that have to be addressed.
There is not much joy in the country at the moment. Joy has its roots in the fullness of a moment. Joy is that emotion that happens when we have more love, more acceptance, more kindness than we can handle. Joy is alive in those moments when we are feeling more than we can express. Joy is the overflowing emotion. Joy comes in being able to give more than is expected or receiving more than you hoped. But there is no joy in lots of places in our country now because most of our cups are on the low side. The poor and the middle class have seen their cups of dreams and hopes become more and more empty. There is no overflow in the poor and the middle class. And the rich have suddenly found that their unlimited overflow has begun to dry up. There is so little deep and abiding joy in our society because there is so few moments of feeling that overflow of "more than expected, more than deserved, more than one wanted, more than was possible."
Certainly there are personal joys. There are gifts given by loved ones that bring joy to the receiver. There are relationships which constantly give to both more than they deserve, but there is little joy in Mudville at large because nothing is overflowing and in fact what is in the cup is getting less and less.
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Sunday, July 18, 2010
A Unique Place
It was the only place in my forty years of ministry where we took seriously the notion of the communion of saints. His name was H. Louis Patrick and he was pastor of the Trinity Presbyterian Church in Charlotte, N.C. The church tended to be a fairly high liturgical congregation. This Presbyterian Church had an Episcopalian Choir Director who gave Trinity acolytes and a lot of "high church" traditions. But the inclusion of a weekly prayer for the Communion of Saints was the pastor's decision. Every week we prayed for "all those who having lived with Thee on earth, now live with Thee in Heaven." We prayed that we might live in such a faith that we would be united with them in Heaven.
Lots of the congregations with which I worked professed in the Creeds they said that they believe in the Communion of Saints, There was always something about the Saints of the Church on All Saints Sunday in November, but Trinity was the only place I ever worked that included a prayer for the Communion of Saints in every week's worship. There are other Christian traditions which include more prayers and traditions about the Communion of Saints, But at Trinity with Dr. Patrick we prayed for those saints who had lived and died in faith. We prayed for them with the same notion that people in the USA lived and prayed for their citizens in Europe during World War II. The liturgical practice of praying for the Communion of Saints kept alive in our awareness the kind of faith and affirmations that we made in other congregations only at Funerals.
Such liturgical practices do have an impact. Here it is more than 35 years later and I still remember that has been the only congregation I have served that took seriously the whole notion of the church being both those living now and those who are living in the resurrection We are both part of the kingdom of God and the faith is that we will all be reunited in the love and power of God.
Lots of the congregations with which I worked professed in the Creeds they said that they believe in the Communion of Saints, There was always something about the Saints of the Church on All Saints Sunday in November, but Trinity was the only place I ever worked that included a prayer for the Communion of Saints in every week's worship. There are other Christian traditions which include more prayers and traditions about the Communion of Saints, But at Trinity with Dr. Patrick we prayed for those saints who had lived and died in faith. We prayed for them with the same notion that people in the USA lived and prayed for their citizens in Europe during World War II. The liturgical practice of praying for the Communion of Saints kept alive in our awareness the kind of faith and affirmations that we made in other congregations only at Funerals.
Such liturgical practices do have an impact. Here it is more than 35 years later and I still remember that has been the only congregation I have served that took seriously the whole notion of the church being both those living now and those who are living in the resurrection We are both part of the kingdom of God and the faith is that we will all be reunited in the love and power of God.
Friday, July 9, 2010
Round and Round
I watched the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church of the United States of America yesterday on line. By chance I happened to end up watching the debate on changing the requirements of ordination and the debate about civil unions and marriage. I do not know if there are other reports to be presented that deal with sexuality, but these two reports are definitely focused on homosexuality.
I have been told that the wheel of history turns slow but grinds very fine. There is little evidence in the General Assembly debates yesterday that the wheels of history having turned at all. The striking thing to me was that the arguments in the debate sound exactly the same as they did almost forty years ago.
Of course there is the great Scriptural quoting argument. On one side there are those who quote the Biblical verses that declare same sex a sin and that marriage is between a man and a woman. On the other side there are the Biblical passages that talk about Jesus being forgiving of adultery, that Jesus never mentions homosexuality, and the argument that the Old Testament has many harems and concubines.
There continues to be the parry and thrust between defending and holding fast to tradition and the values of our reformed heritage. We must remain faithful to the legacy of the confession of our faith. The other side responds we are and our tradition is Reformed and yet always reforming. We have overcome slavery and opposition to women as clergy and leaders by following the spirit of the reformation. So the argument goes back and forth.
It seems to me that the next level of argument is timing. We need to study the issue at the local level. Now is not the time for the church to be making big decisions. We have just made a lot of other radical reforms and the people cannot handle too many changes. The issue may be important and the proposals maybe good, but now is not the time to bring that to the local church.
The respond to that has always been, if not now when. The argument about timing and need for study has been made for more than thirty years. If we don't do it this year, we will have to wait for two more years and who knows if things we "be better" then. What has been achieved in the time delays of the past? Nothing. So one side says now is not a good time. The other counters with you have delayed these issues every time by that old argument. Now is the time.
Of course, the argument of last resort is the membership issue. Both sides use this one. One says if we give approval to homosexuals to be ordain or for same sex couples to be united in recognized relationships people will leave the church. We are already losing members. This will just drive more away. The other sides says we are losing members because we are so old fashion. One youth claimed that young people are not coming to the Presbyterian Church because it is so old fashion and so hung up on these issues. The young, it was claimed, want to be active in ministry and the church is stuck debating a non-issue for these young people. Either decision will cost the church members according to the debate.
I listened in vain to hear some evidence that the debate had changed, had deepened or had progressed. It sound for all the world like the first debate on these issues I heard in the 80's. I did not even stay up past 11:30 p.m. to hear the final vote because I doubt very much if it would be a "final" vote. One thing I do know for sure is there is no place to go, no place to hide from these issues. Every church, every school, every institution has or will have to face these issues and decide. And these debates suggest that the decision will have to be made without any new arguments.
I have been told that the wheel of history turns slow but grinds very fine. There is little evidence in the General Assembly debates yesterday that the wheels of history having turned at all. The striking thing to me was that the arguments in the debate sound exactly the same as they did almost forty years ago.
Of course there is the great Scriptural quoting argument. On one side there are those who quote the Biblical verses that declare same sex a sin and that marriage is between a man and a woman. On the other side there are the Biblical passages that talk about Jesus being forgiving of adultery, that Jesus never mentions homosexuality, and the argument that the Old Testament has many harems and concubines.
There continues to be the parry and thrust between defending and holding fast to tradition and the values of our reformed heritage. We must remain faithful to the legacy of the confession of our faith. The other side responds we are and our tradition is Reformed and yet always reforming. We have overcome slavery and opposition to women as clergy and leaders by following the spirit of the reformation. So the argument goes back and forth.
It seems to me that the next level of argument is timing. We need to study the issue at the local level. Now is not the time for the church to be making big decisions. We have just made a lot of other radical reforms and the people cannot handle too many changes. The issue may be important and the proposals maybe good, but now is not the time to bring that to the local church.
The respond to that has always been, if not now when. The argument about timing and need for study has been made for more than thirty years. If we don't do it this year, we will have to wait for two more years and who knows if things we "be better" then. What has been achieved in the time delays of the past? Nothing. So one side says now is not a good time. The other counters with you have delayed these issues every time by that old argument. Now is the time.
Of course, the argument of last resort is the membership issue. Both sides use this one. One says if we give approval to homosexuals to be ordain or for same sex couples to be united in recognized relationships people will leave the church. We are already losing members. This will just drive more away. The other sides says we are losing members because we are so old fashion. One youth claimed that young people are not coming to the Presbyterian Church because it is so old fashion and so hung up on these issues. The young, it was claimed, want to be active in ministry and the church is stuck debating a non-issue for these young people. Either decision will cost the church members according to the debate.
I listened in vain to hear some evidence that the debate had changed, had deepened or had progressed. It sound for all the world like the first debate on these issues I heard in the 80's. I did not even stay up past 11:30 p.m. to hear the final vote because I doubt very much if it would be a "final" vote. One thing I do know for sure is there is no place to go, no place to hide from these issues. Every church, every school, every institution has or will have to face these issues and decide. And these debates suggest that the decision will have to be made without any new arguments.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)