A teachable moment

Most of us can remember all too well a lesson learned from the School of Hard Knocks.  We touched a hot stove or went sliding across an icy parking lot and we came to understand the need for caution in certain situations.  There are some things we don’t learn no matter how much correcting we receive.  Until we have the experience of discomfort the learning does not fully take root.  We may not enjoy it.  We might not like it.  But the barked shins and skinned knees of our lives teach us how to live.  Learning can come even out of a setting of the unpleasant.

Jesus understood that.  Jesus told a lot of parables and many of them have positive and uplifting details.  We read of the Lost Sheep or the Mustard Seed and these parables provide comfort as they proclaim the mercy of God.  But Jesus also looked at the world around him and said that there are Kingdom lessons that we can learn even from less-than-ideal circumstances.  Consider the parable of the Treasure in the Field.  A man is walking through a field that is not his own when he discovers a treasure.  So, he goes and buys the field from its owner, never disclosing the fortune it contains to its owner.  The lesson that we learn, of course, is that we should pursue the Kingdom of God with all the resources that are at our disposal.  All analogies fall apart under scrutiny, so we understand that the Kingdom of God is not something that we can hoard or take away from someone else by deceit.  The purchaser’s behavior may be less than ethical.  But his resolve is something that can teach us.

Recently both in worship and in Pickwick Church’s Men’s Bible Study we considered Luke 16:1-15, the parable of The Dishonest Steward.  In it the principal character is an administrator of a rich man’s estate.  He embezzles money and his master finds him out.  In an effort to recruit allies for himself he has each of his master’s debtors fraudulently alter their accounts so as to reduce their debt and ingratiate himself to the debtors.  In so securing cronies for his post-employment life, he actually receives praise from his defrauded master.  It is not that the rich man is happy that the steward robbed him.  But he has a grudging respect for the cunning of the steward.  It is as if he says, “Well played,” even in defeat. 

Jesus does not recommend the steward as a model for business practices.  But he does observe that the practitioners of worldly business pursue their goals with much more energy than he sees in religious people as they pursue the Kingdom of God.  The people of the world who long for worldly treasure frequently throw the entirety of their being into their pursuit.  Jesus tells disciples that our working for the things of the Kingdom shouldn’t cause us to act timidly or with restraint.  If we find worth in Kingdom stuff then It is appropriate that we throw all of our vigor into the achieving of our goal.

Jesus would never encourage us to be dishonest in any endeavor.  But he teaches that we have a lot of tools at our disposal – righteous, moral tools – and he encourages us to use every single one in order to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

The “new” membership vow

As we have discussed the familiar membership vows of The United Methodist Church, we have noted that much of our congregation came into membership at a time when the vows were “prayer, presence, gifts and service.”  But, in 2004 the church added a fifth component: “witness.” 

The rationale for this was that the church came to regard the historic vows as primarily “inwardly focused and institutional in nature.”  The church included “witness” as being a commitment that more fully reflects the stated mission of the UMC: “to make disciples of Jesus Christ for the transformation of the world.”

I admit to having mixed feelings about this addition, even though it is now seventeen years old.  I admit that I am one who embraces change hesitantly.  It appeared to me that the church not only endured but flourished under the old language.  If the four-fold set of vows were inwardly focused, I could contend that these qualities of praying, attending, supporting and assisting formed the spirits of a church member so that other, more far-reaching expressions of discipleship would grow organically from a solid foundation. 

From a practical, logistical standpoint the alteration of the membership vows made much of our printed material counter-Disciplinary.  For example, the ritual in our United Methodist Hymnal that we employ in receiving new members or membership transfers is no longer in keeping with church law.  The Rite known as Baptismal Covenant III is essentially useless at this point.  This same liturgical material appears in the 1992 United Methodist Book of Worship and it too is outdated.  The church has been slow to provide churches with revised materials for worship and for study.  The United Methodist Church last made a major statement on Baptism (and church membership) in 1996!  That is eight years before it changed the membership language and obviously a quarter-century removed from us today.

But there is another side.  I affirm the change not merely out of resignation, but out of hope.  If a person comes into full membership – what the church actually terms professingmembership” – by vowing to engage in the ministry of witness, I guess I am all for it.  It is easy to see membership (and even discipleship) as being a kind of island existence, where a believer (or member) lives out their faith without relating to other people.  I know that “witness” carries a certain baggage with it.  Those of us who are of a certain age may equate witnessing with standing on a street corner, annoying passers-by by shoving religious tracts in their hands.  But as we consider witness more completely, we see that the disciples of Jesus Christ witness with their mouths, with their hands, with their feet, and with their resistance.  We testify to the Lordship of Jesus Christ in what we say, what we do, how we act, what service we render and, _and_ in what we refrain from doing.  A Christian does live a life under a microscope.  Rather than resenting that, I believe we should embrace it.  If everything we do is an opportunity to glorify God, why not take advantage of the opportunity.

 So, prayers, presence, gifts, service – and witness: it’s not a new idea.  Not anymore.

On the vows of church membership

This past Sunday our church concluded a month-long examination of our church membership vows.  Historically these have been, “As a member of this congregation, will you faithfully participate in its ministries by your prayers, your presence, your gifts, and your service?”  (In 2004, the church added “witness” to the vows.  Those who joined The United Methodist Church prior to that date are familiar with the four listed above.)

I have been thinking of the nature of “a vow.”  In our day-to-day conversations, the place where we employ this word is in speaking of that which is at the core of a marriage ceremony.  We speak of the “wedding vows.”  In the Ritual of our church that we used exclusively until an alternate was introduced in 1992, the service’s charge to the couple included the phrase, “Be well assured that if these solemn vows are kept inviolate, as God’s Word demands, and if steadfastly you endeavor to do the will of your heavenly Father, God will bless your marriage, will grant you fulfillment in it, and will establish your home in peace.”

 Good words.

 But, as I say, outside of the marriage ceremony context, we hardly ever use the term “vow.”  It certainly means “to commit” or “to promise.”  But we can be careless with those things.  To say, “let’s do lunch,” is almost cliché for, “I have good intentions, but I don’t really intend to follow through.”  “A person’s word is their bond,” is a noble sentiment, but we often practice varying degrees of that principle.  I know people who will make certain commitments while face-to-face, only to have a text message or email or some other impersonal communication back down from those obligations.

 So, when we talk about “membership vows,” what is our intent?  Do we affirm those vows merely in order to move along?  Do we understand that to answer in the negative is to disqualify ourselves from proceeding?    Is it like when we are downloading a program or app to our personal computers, and when we get to the licensing agreement we scroll to the bottom and accept without reading, knowing that we can’t take advantage of the program unless we click “yes?”  I would hope that our membership vows had more meaning than to say, “If I don’t respond, ‘I will,’ I can’t move forward with my church affiliation.”

 There are those who interpret our taking of membership vows as a contractual agreement.  They interpret our affirmation as entering into a binding legal agreement.  As a pastor I have a certain degree of attraction to that interpretation.  It would be interesting if the church could enforce prayer and attendance and contribution and volunteerism and testimony.  But it can’t do that.  There has been no point in our lifetimes when The United Methodist Church has acted in such a way.  (In times past, the church dismissed – or “churched” -- people the who committed grievous acts such as crimes, but the church has all but removed those procedures from church law.)

 So, what do we make of “membership vows?”  According to Webster’s dictionary, a vow is “a solemn promise or assertion.”  In looking to illustrate, I turn again to our traditional wedding ritual, that states of marriage, “It is therefore not to be entered into unadvisedly, but reverently, discreetly and in the fear of God.” A vow is something of which we say, “Think this through.  Weigh the consequences.  Study as to whether you will maintain this commitment over the long haul.”  I cannot help but wonder of some people pondered their membership vows as deeply as they considered their marriage obligation.”

 I knew one man at a single time who withdrew his membership from his local church because he felt that he was not living up to his commitment to the church.  Sadly, I am acquainted with many more who just slipped out the back door of the church without comment, 

 All of this is to say that our membership vows are a cause of ongoing solemnity and consideration.  The affect each day we live and every significant decision that we make.  And I say that speaking of the vows collectively.  We may not ask in a given situation, “what is the prayerful, or attending, or contribution, or performing, or testifying thing to do here?”  But we _can_ say, “What is the disciple’s response here?  How does a member of the Body of Christ act in this situation?”  Then, then, our vows take root.

the Means of Grace: Holy Communion

 The Sacrament of the Table goes by many names in the Christian faith.  Various groups call it Holy Communion, the Lord's Supper, The Eucharist (which means "thanksgiving"), or The Mass, among other titles.

 The Lord's Supper plays an extraordinary part in the theology of John Wesley. As a matter of fact, one of his most widely- quoted works is a sermon called "The Duty of Constant Communion."

 Wesley understood Communion to be both a command and a mercy. He recalls the institution of the Lord's Supper, where Jesus says, "Do this, as often as you drink it, as often as you eat it, in remembrance of me." (Luke 22:14-23) At the Lord's Table, we remember so many things: we recollect Jesus' sacrifice as the paschal lamb of the new Passover; we remember that he has said that he will not partake again of the fruit of the vine until he drinks it anew with us in heaven, as he anticipates the fulfillment of God's rule and the gathering of the saints at the Messianic banquet; and we call to mind Jesus' abiding love and ongoing presence - when we hear the words "This is my body, this is my blood," we are reassured of Christ's ongoing accompaniment with us. So pronounced has been the significance of Holy Communion that it is sometimes referred to simply as The Sacrament by some of us.

One of the happenstances in our history that was a great positive force also had its negative impact upon our understanding and practice of Eucharist. When Methodism first came to these shores, it was a movement that was very much dependent upon lay leadership. There were class leaders and society presidents who took the great burden of leadership upon themselves. The church of England was not very quick in ordaining and dispatching priests — and we must remember that Methodism originated as a reform movement within the Anglican Church — who would come to America. It was over this issue that The Methodist Episcopal Church in this country originated. 

Wesley ordained preachers to come to America and to see after the members here. But, those early ordained ministers were few and far between. So, the preaching and care of souls from day to day was carried out by lay ministers. These folks could do almost everything an ordained clergyperson could do, except administer the sacraments. 

To receive Communion, the people had to wait for the ordained minister to come around. That might be once a month, or once a quarter, or it might be just whenever. So, while we are the spiritual descendants of John Wesley, with his emphasis on constant Communion (Wesley himself took the Sacrament several times each week), because of a personnel shortage, we Methodists fell into a pattern of infrequent Communion. This is a tragedy, since the biblical pattern of worship is that Christians should share in the Sacrament of the Table whenever they assemble. Likewise, the Anglican Church out of which we emerge still maintains this practice. Now that we have enough preachers to go around, perhaps we should consider changing our practice, and returning The Eucharist as the centerpiece of our worship.

 Wesley fought throughout his life to clear up two misunderstandings regarding the Lord's Supper. First was the objection that some folks raised, saying, "Oh, but I'm unworthy! And scripture says that whoever takes the elements unworthily eats and drinks damnation upon himself!" (1 Corinthians 11:27- 29) Wesley calls those people to read the whole chapter. It was the practice of the Corinthian Church to have a community meal, and to include the bread and wine of Communion as a part of that meal. The problem in Corinth became when some people had a full banquet in front of them, and some didn't have any.  There would come a time when some people had so gorged themselves on other breads and other wine that they didn't have any idea when the sacramental loaf and cup were being passed. These practices made them unworthy, and it was these behaviors against which Saint Paul warned.

For, in regard to being worthy, who can ever say that they are worthy? If you were worthy, you wouldn't need the Sacrament. Who is it Jesus says needs a physician? The healthy? No, the sick. Who is it that needs the Sacrament? The righteous? No, the sinner.

 The water gets muddied further by some of the earlier English translations of the Bible that used the word “worthy” rather than the more accurate “worthily.”  “Worthy” is a state of morality or entitlement.  “Worthily” is a state of awareness.  That to which Paul calls us is an active discernment regarding the solemnity of the moment. 

 The other difficulty Wesley contended with was the belief of some people that said, "Oh, no, I don’t partake of Communion too often. I surely wouldn't want my church to do it every Sunday. That would take some of the special away from it." Let me ask you this. Those of you who are married or who have a "significant other" in your lives, what if that other person were to say to you, "I'm only going to hold your hand once in a while. I'm only going to embrace you on the first Sunday of every month. I'm only going to kiss you quarterly. I'm going to hold off on saying 'I love you,' because I don't want to wear out the special." How would you feel? When you love someone, you want more and more hugs and kisses and hand-holding.

 Can you ever hear "I love you" too much? The Eucharist, and all the Means of Grace, are some of God's ways of saying "I love you."

 And we never tire of that.

An all-volunteer army

 These thoughts are not what you might expect given the above title.  I am not talking about the military.  I am speaking of the church.  We are a massive organization comprised of mostly volunteers.  Even at the local congregational level, churches have a massive volunteer-to-employee ratio.  A church may have a pastor or pastors on staff.  There is frequently a number of musicians (both instrumental and vocal).  There is usually a custodian or two (or more).  Larger churches may have individuals with dedicated ministries of administration, education, outreach, evangelism, or other forms of service.  But for every compensated worker there are scores, even hundreds of volunteers.

 Some of our offices are high-profile.  We can usually identify the Trustee Chair, the Church Council Chair, or the Lay Leader.  But, do you know who waters the flower beds?  Can you name the person who picks up the stray bulletins after worship?  Are you able to identify who prepares the elements for Holy Communion?  These people don’t do their tasks for the recognition.  They undertake their work in order to make the machine that is the church go.  There are scores of people who do all kinds of labor in service of the church, or in performing outreach in the name of our congregation.  I can’t put a price tag on all the tireless effort expended by our church members.  Their help is a gift.

 We have talked in worship the last several weeks about those vows we all made when we became official members of the church.  These include “upholding the church with our prayers, our presence, our gifts, and our service.”  Let’s not think that because ‘service” is last on the list that it is an inferior endeavor.  Without the faithful service of our congregational members, we fall flat on our collective face in a single week.

 So, consider this a word of appreciation to everyone who gives volunteer effort to our church.  But also consider this as an affirmation of faithfulness to a set of commitments that we make when we join a church.  We are saying, “This is what it means to belong.”  We are also saying, “This thing is important.  It is vital.  It is not to be taken lightly.”

Thank you for your service.

The Means of Grace: Baptism

 I want to say a word about Baptism. We connect Baptism and Communion in our minds because they are both sort of a subset of the Means of Grace. We call this category The Sacraments. These two things, Baptism and The Lord's Supper, are closely connected because of their sacramental nature. As important as all these other things are, the front line is held by Communion and Holy Baptism.

 The Wesleyan approach to Baptism is that it is undeniably a Means of Grace. Without question, the Baptism of Christian believers is instituted by Jesus. Its rank among the means of Grace is unquestioned.

 But I’m not going to spend much time on it for two reasons.

 First, it is my understanding of Baptism that everything else we do as believers is in the context of our baptism. Baptism is our initiation into the church so that we may avail ourselves of all the rest of these means of grace. Prayer, Fasting, Searching the Scriptures, Christian Conference, Communion, and all the Prudential Means of Grace (I’ll say more about this soon) are ours because we have been Baptized.

 Secondly, while all the rest of the Means of Grace are ongoing in terms of our actions, Baptism is a once-in-a-lifetime occurrence. While the result, the grace, of our Baptism stays with us the rest of our lives, we don't get baptized again and again in the same way that we are called to pray without ceasing. As a matter of fact, our church expressly states that re-baptism is not our practice.

 The United Methodist Church practices three modes of Baptism: immersion, affusion (or pouring), and aspersion (or sprinkling).  Some communions practice total immersion exclusively.  This is the practice of completely submerging the candidate in water.  We don’t see examples of affusion very often in our area of the country.  But the practice is to have an adult bend over the baptismal font, or for the presider to hold a child or infant over the font and then pour water in such a way that it flows across the head of the candidate and drops into the font.  Aspersion – sprinkling in the common vocabulary – has the presider put a small amount of water on the head of the candidate.

 The United Methodist Church holds that all of these methods are valid.  Local tradition plays a large part in making the decision of how to administer the waters of Baptism.

 The United Methodist Church baptizes infants and young children as a practice of grace.  Responsible adults receive Baptism upon their profession of faith.

 As an aside, The United Methodist Church does not “christen.”  I have yet to see a bottle of Champaign smashed upon someone.  We christen boats.  We baptize people.  The christening of children is an act of dedication in denominations that do not baptize infants.  It is a way of recognizing the birth of a child but acknowledges their belief that only those who have professed faith are legitimate candidates for baptism.

 We DO have a service for baptismal renewal, and it is a wonderful observance.  But, part of the rubrics (instructions) for that ritual state, “water may be administered in a way that cannot be interpreted as baptism.”  Again, re-baptism (as if there was such a thing) is not our practice.

 So, moving forward, “Remember your baptism, and be thankful.”

On the discipline of prayer

 At most of our Sunday morning services of worship, our opening prayer is The Collect for the Day from The Book of Common Prayer.  This week that prayer is:

Almighty and everlasting God, you are always more ready to

hear than we to pray, and to give more than we either desire
or deserve: Pour upon us the abundance of your mercy,
forgiving us those things of which our conscience is afraid,
and giving us those good things for which we are not worthy
to ask, except through the merits and mediation of Jesus
Christ our Savior; who lives and reigns with you and the
Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.

Some of the opening words of this prayer strike a chord in me: “…You are always more ready to hear than we to pray…”  What a profound insight into the nature of God … and human beings.  God is listening.  God is always prepared to listen.  God patiently waits for our prayers.  And, God actively seeks us out and entreats us to pray.

 People talk to me about their faith.  Sometimes they say, “I wish I read the Bible more.”  Occasionally their topic is, “I feel like I ought to give to the church better than I do.”  But most of the time, most of the time when people talk to me about things spiritual, they say, “I desire a deeper, more fulfilling prayer life.”    I observed in a sermon recently that we best understand prayer as a dialogue, as a conversation between God and us.  When I hear lamentation about the insufficiency of a person’s prayer life, my question (often unspoken) is, “Who has let the conversation lag?”

 Prayer is one of those activities that falls under the umbrella of “spiritual disciplines.”  I am afraid that folks often emphasize the “spiritual” to the neglect of “discipline.”  Of course, I am not using “discipline” to talk about the experience of punishment.  “To discipline” was teacher code for “stand in the corner” or “go the principal’s office to receive a paddling.”  The dictionary definition of “discipline” is “orderly or prescribed conduct or pattern of behavior.”  Prayer is a discipline in that it is an orderly pattern of behavior in our lives.  Regular prayer becomes a part of our lives just as much as eating and sleeping.  A person who regularly practices prayer comes to the point where praying is an indispensable portion of their routine.  It also becomes more and more natural over time, so that the believer no longer thinks of praying as an obligation (or a chore).  Instead, it is a welcome part of the day’s activity.

 Imagine, being just as ready to pray as God is ready to hear.