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.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
A Fourth of July Mystery
There are a number of fundamental principles that make the United State an amazing place to live. Most of the time we enjoy them and take them for granted without thinking about them very much. There are always debates as to which of the fundamental rights are most important to our nation, but I would suggest that the right of the individual to have his/her day in court when accused of a crime and the right of every person to vote are the two most important privileges citizens have in this country.
I have only served on one jury. I have gladly responded when summoned. The times I have been called to be on a panel the defense lawyers almost always excuse me because ministers are profiled as being harsh, vindictive, and judgmental (something that saddens me greatly). The jury that I served was in Texas and the case was a charge of drunken driving for a construction worker. The crew had topped off a building, brought a barrel of iced beers to celebrate, and then the worker drove home. He claimed he had only a “couple of beers” but the Breathalyzer had a different story. But society paid the jury, the judge, the jailers, the clerks, the prosecutor and a host of other people good salaries so that man could protest his innocence.
That same thing goes on every day all across the country. As a society, we pay an immense amount of money for a legal system that is created to enable each of us to have our day in court. We have invested large amounts of time and energy to try to make a system that begins with the assumption that a person is innocent until proven guilty. Certainly there are all kinds of evidence that the system has flaws; that money has power to distort the process; that race has played a major part in the outcome of too many cases; and that the system is over burdened with too many cases. But as a nation the USA has invested a remarkable amount of resources in creating a system to try to protect the rights of an individual.
The same can be said for the effort made by society to establish the right of everybody to vote. We as a nation have been working very hard over the last two hundred years to create a system of democracy so that all citizens are entitled to vote. It is well known that even with the highest of ideals – “all men are created equally and endowed by their creator with certain rights” – the country did not actually live up to that standard for a long time. It has been a long hard fought journey to the right to vote for all citizens. But as a country we have invested great energy, get resources, get time to making democracy available. The recent run-off election, the total cost to all counties to conduct that election, I am told, was over $3 million dollars. That is an incredible amount to spend so that less than 200,000 people can have a say in selecting a candidate. Not picking the Senator, just voting on picking a candidate.
We have good reason to be proud of our country on the Fourth of July for its commitment to protect the legal rights of individuals and to insure the right to vote of all citizens. The mystery is that most of us as individuals keep trying to figure out how to avoid jury duty and so often fail to show up to vote.
I have only served on one jury. I have gladly responded when summoned. The times I have been called to be on a panel the defense lawyers almost always excuse me because ministers are profiled as being harsh, vindictive, and judgmental (something that saddens me greatly). The jury that I served was in Texas and the case was a charge of drunken driving for a construction worker. The crew had topped off a building, brought a barrel of iced beers to celebrate, and then the worker drove home. He claimed he had only a “couple of beers” but the Breathalyzer had a different story. But society paid the jury, the judge, the jailers, the clerks, the prosecutor and a host of other people good salaries so that man could protest his innocence.
That same thing goes on every day all across the country. As a society, we pay an immense amount of money for a legal system that is created to enable each of us to have our day in court. We have invested large amounts of time and energy to try to make a system that begins with the assumption that a person is innocent until proven guilty. Certainly there are all kinds of evidence that the system has flaws; that money has power to distort the process; that race has played a major part in the outcome of too many cases; and that the system is over burdened with too many cases. But as a nation the USA has invested a remarkable amount of resources in creating a system to try to protect the rights of an individual.
The same can be said for the effort made by society to establish the right of everybody to vote. We as a nation have been working very hard over the last two hundred years to create a system of democracy so that all citizens are entitled to vote. It is well known that even with the highest of ideals – “all men are created equally and endowed by their creator with certain rights” – the country did not actually live up to that standard for a long time. It has been a long hard fought journey to the right to vote for all citizens. But as a country we have invested great energy, get resources, get time to making democracy available. The recent run-off election, the total cost to all counties to conduct that election, I am told, was over $3 million dollars. That is an incredible amount to spend so that less than 200,000 people can have a say in selecting a candidate. Not picking the Senator, just voting on picking a candidate.
We have good reason to be proud of our country on the Fourth of July for its commitment to protect the legal rights of individuals and to insure the right to vote of all citizens. The mystery is that most of us as individuals keep trying to figure out how to avoid jury duty and so often fail to show up to vote.
Saturday, June 26, 2010
Nothing to Read
What a depressing visit to Barnes and Nobles book store. A couple of days ago I went into the Barnes and Noble book store in Raleigh, N.C. I was looking for something to read in the religious dimension of life. I did find a very large section of books, but I could not believe the stuff that was included there. If St. Paul was concerned that disciples who should have been ready for meat were still taking milk and toast, then we are back to formula. The shelves seemed to stocked with only the prosperity gospel, personal achievement, sentimental stories, and the road to happiness. (In 1960 a retiring minister in England told me that the greatest change in people in his ministry was that when he started people wanted to be good. When he retired they wanted to be happy. He was not sure the Gospel was about either.) So the publishing business is not into producing for mass consumption solid religious reflection and study.
That must mean that nobody buys that kind of book. Not in numbers big enough to make it worth the printing. The religious reading public wants what is being produced. The people seem to want easy reading, simple answers, and happy endings. A religious romance novels.
Of course, the other possibility is that there probably are not many religious thinkers and writers who can write for the general public and present the challenges of the religious life, the journey into the mystery with faith, and the high cost of living ethically in a moral confused world. It seems that C.S. Lewis is still the only one who is published who raises some of these questions and tries to answer some of them. I only saw the new book by Harvey Cox in the whole section. Harvey Cox did raise some great questions with his first book.
The search will go on. I know it is not at the seminary in Wake Forest. So the search something to read will continue. But I do pity the faithful disciple in a local congregation who is hungry for meat.
That must mean that nobody buys that kind of book. Not in numbers big enough to make it worth the printing. The religious reading public wants what is being produced. The people seem to want easy reading, simple answers, and happy endings. A religious romance novels.
Of course, the other possibility is that there probably are not many religious thinkers and writers who can write for the general public and present the challenges of the religious life, the journey into the mystery with faith, and the high cost of living ethically in a moral confused world. It seems that C.S. Lewis is still the only one who is published who raises some of these questions and tries to answer some of them. I only saw the new book by Harvey Cox in the whole section. Harvey Cox did raise some great questions with his first book.
The search will go on. I know it is not at the seminary in Wake Forest. So the search something to read will continue. But I do pity the faithful disciple in a local congregation who is hungry for meat.
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Too Late
Hopefully it is one of those moments when a lot of people learn a simple less. Doing it right can save you a whole lot of heartache. Morehead City, N.C. has a fishing tournament called the Big Rock. They go deep sea fishing for Blue Marlins and the biggest fish gets the biggest prize. This year the prize was more than $900,000 dollars, and an extra prize for a fish over 500 pounds on the first day.
The boat came in with an eight hundred and eighty-three pound fish. Everybody was impressed and the tournament was thrilled. No boat came in with a bigger fish all week. Other fish were caught but the next fish was 500 pounds. But the events took a very sourer turn when they began to check the people on the boat for fishing licenses. Rules say that everybody on the boat has to have a fishing license. $15.00 per person per year. Turns out one of the "mates" on the boat did not have one when the fish was caught at 3 o'clock in the afternoon. The mate bought one, on line I guess, because they said he bought it at 5:00 o'clock as the boat was coming in. Because he did not have a license when the fish was caught the boat was disqualified and the people lost more than a million dollars in prize money.
There are a lot of tough lessons in that story. There is the lesson that it is cheaper and better to do it by the rules from the beginning. There is a whole study of the collective punishment for one person's sin the whole boat suffers. Who knows why the mate did not have one when he went out. They obviously knew that he needed it as they got him one as soon as they could. Ah, what a tangled web we weave when we practice to deceive.
The boat came in with an eight hundred and eighty-three pound fish. Everybody was impressed and the tournament was thrilled. No boat came in with a bigger fish all week. Other fish were caught but the next fish was 500 pounds. But the events took a very sourer turn when they began to check the people on the boat for fishing licenses. Rules say that everybody on the boat has to have a fishing license. $15.00 per person per year. Turns out one of the "mates" on the boat did not have one when the fish was caught at 3 o'clock in the afternoon. The mate bought one, on line I guess, because they said he bought it at 5:00 o'clock as the boat was coming in. Because he did not have a license when the fish was caught the boat was disqualified and the people lost more than a million dollars in prize money.
There are a lot of tough lessons in that story. There is the lesson that it is cheaper and better to do it by the rules from the beginning. There is a whole study of the collective punishment for one person's sin the whole boat suffers. Who knows why the mate did not have one when he went out. They obviously knew that he needed it as they got him one as soon as they could. Ah, what a tangled web we weave when we practice to deceive.
Back Where They Started
Another minister friend told me about his congregation. He said it was a good congregation and could be a great congregation with seven or eight good deaths. A couple of years later he said he had had seven or eight funerals but he said the wrong people died That comment is suggestive that most ministers believe that the church they serve would be a whole lot better if the people who oppose them could be removed. There are always some people who are not on board with what any minister wants to do.
If you can't bury those who oppose you, then sometimes you can make them angry with you and they leave. That was the hope I had in my ministries. If you could just encourage them to join another church, then both of us would be happier. Well, sometimes it is not possible to find another church so they just stay home, which works pretty well. But the delightful thing that has come to my ears with the new minister is that they are celebrating at the church that all of the people that I drove away have begun to come back in response to the new minister. Here I thought I was doing him a favor by clearing out the unproductive branches. The joy at the church is that "most of those that had left are now coming back."
That is probably why the most successful ministers are those who stay in one place for a very long time. If you stay in a place like Frank Harrington in Peachtree Presbyterian Church in Atlanta for 25 years, you drive the ones who don't like you away and they don't come back because you never leave.
It is also a great example of what the folk singer Jimmy Buffet has in mind with a song about birthdays and retiring. "The one thing that I've learned in all this living is it would not change a thing if I let go." None of us is irreplaceable and when you pull the stick out of the water, the water just flows back and you would never know the stick had been there. Churches are like that. Ministers go and the old members flow back in and it is just like it was. They are back where they started. But I had a good time while there and hope the new minister has a good time driving away the ones he does not want.
If you can't bury those who oppose you, then sometimes you can make them angry with you and they leave. That was the hope I had in my ministries. If you could just encourage them to join another church, then both of us would be happier. Well, sometimes it is not possible to find another church so they just stay home, which works pretty well. But the delightful thing that has come to my ears with the new minister is that they are celebrating at the church that all of the people that I drove away have begun to come back in response to the new minister. Here I thought I was doing him a favor by clearing out the unproductive branches. The joy at the church is that "most of those that had left are now coming back."
That is probably why the most successful ministers are those who stay in one place for a very long time. If you stay in a place like Frank Harrington in Peachtree Presbyterian Church in Atlanta for 25 years, you drive the ones who don't like you away and they don't come back because you never leave.
It is also a great example of what the folk singer Jimmy Buffet has in mind with a song about birthdays and retiring. "The one thing that I've learned in all this living is it would not change a thing if I let go." None of us is irreplaceable and when you pull the stick out of the water, the water just flows back and you would never know the stick had been there. Churches are like that. Ministers go and the old members flow back in and it is just like it was. They are back where they started. But I had a good time while there and hope the new minister has a good time driving away the ones he does not want.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)