I receive "Cliff's Notes," emails from Cliff Stewart, a mentor of mine who serves as pastor of First Central Presbyterian Church in Abilene, TX. He has a wonderful sense of humor and often shares remarkable thoughts, quotes, etc. This morning he sent a snippet from a sermon by Dr. Michael Halleen. This is a timely message for many of us today.
The older brother became angry and . . . answered his father, “Look! All these years I've been slaving for you and never disobeyed your orders. . . .But when this son of yours who has squandered your property . . . comes home, you kill the fattened calf for him!” (Luke 15:28-30)
My financial advisor and I agreed on a conservative investment strategy, believing it was not wise at my age to be taking unnecessary risks with my modest retirement portfolio. I took his counsel, played by the rules, did the responsible thing.
But my bucket got a hole in it. In the past eight months I’ve lost more than 40 percent of the value of my investments. And no one seems to be able to fix that hole. Instead, it’s the guys who broke the rules, the scoundrels who made bad decisions and irresponsible choices, who are getting bailed out. Their bucket is under repair, in some cases being filled with bonuses. The fattened calf is trotted out for them!
I’ve found new appreciation for the older brother in Jesus’ parable of the prodigal son. He was the one who stayed home and worked in his father’s fields while his younger brother was squandering everything he had been given. He was the one who had been responsible, steady and loyal. Yet we’re often critical of him for being angry about the party his father throws when the younger brother returns home. He pouts, he complains—just as I do to my financial advisor. He refuses to celebrate—just as I refuse to celebrate the good fortune of those being bailed out. Wait! I say. I’m the one who did what I was supposed to.
But the story of the prodigal and his brother isn’t about right and wrong. It’s about lost and found. Jesus seems to be saying that those of us who do the “right things” in life get just as lost—just as disconnected from God—as those who do the wrong things. The older brother standing stubbornly outside the house was as distant from the father’s love as his brother had been in the far country. Both were lost. Each needed to be found. All are welcome at the party.
Of course being responsible—“being good”—is always the better road. But that’s not what saves us. We’re not loved because we do the “right thing.” The love comes first. We choose to live responsibly because we are valued—infinitely loved—by the Father in whose house we dwell.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Kings on NBC (A Review)
When I first began seeing previews for NBC’s new TV-drama, “Kings,” I was intrigued. I thought the show was going to consider what America would be like if we had a monarchy rather than a democracy. So last week I tuned in to see if the show would catch my interest. It did, but it was not because of a political thought experiment but because of its biblical moorings.
It did not take long before my family and I recognized that the names of people and places in the show are from the Bible, more specifically 1 Samuel. The king and his children have names that are derived from the Hebrew names of the first king of Israel and his family: Silas for Saul (Ian McShane), Jack for Jonathan (Sebastian Stan), and Michelle for Michal (Allison Miller). The surname, Benjamin, is the name of the twelfth tribe of Israel. Reverend Samuels (Eamonn Walker) represents the prophet Samuel, from which the biblical books of 1 and 2 Samuel get their name. David Shepherd (Chris Egan) represents the seventh son of Jesse, a shepherd by trade, and a “man after God’s own heart” (1 Samuel 13:14). David is known for slaying Goliath, a giant in the Bible and a tank in the show. The name for the country Gilboa comes from a range that served as the setting for the battle between Israel and the Philistines. Shiloh, the capitol city in the show, was the name of the religious center of Israel during the time of the Judges. These names are not a coincidence. This show appears to be an adaptation of the biblical stories from 1 and 2 Samuel.
As a Christian, this raises a lot of questions for me. Is it the studio’s intention to retell the biblical story in a modern context? If so, why was it not promoted as such? At the beginning of the show, the king says in a speech that it is not popular to speak of God but he does so because he feels blessed. Is this the motivation behind the show’s production? Are the studio executives trying to talk about God incognito? Are they trying to share the stories of the Bible in a non-threatening way? Or did they choose to retell these stories because they felt like there is “nothing new under the sun” (Ecclesiastes)? How close is the studio planning to stick to the biblical stories? I enjoyed the first two episodes and I am planning to watch the rest of the first season.
I am interested to hear how the public will respond. Will people recognize the biblical story? Will people consult the Bible to see what really happened? Will they shrug their shoulders and change the channel? Would more or less folks watch the show if they knew it was based on the Bible? How do Jews and Christians feel about a TV show adapting stories they consider scripture?
The studio will obviously need some ability to adjust the stories to fit a different context and to maintain interest, but I hope they stay close to the biblical model. I would encourage folks to watch the show, read their bibles, and reflect on how God is speaking to them today. You can watch past episodes on http://www.nbc.com/. If you choose to watch, some things we should remember are: 1) This is not our story, it’s God’s story; 2) We are called to share God’s story; and 3) even if the show becomes a bad adaptation, it can be a great teaching moment. But first things first, we need to know the Bible before we can comment on how other’s portray it. Perhaps it is time to read or re-read 1 and 2 Samuel. If you would like to comment on this review or read more of my comments on the show and other topics, you can do so at http://www.revrigoulot.blogspot.com/ or by finding the link on our church website, http://www.pampapcusa.org/.
Before I conclude this article I would like to point out some images and references to the resurrection found in the first episode. When David fixes Reverend Samuel’s car, the reverend exclaims, “The dead has arisen.” This could be preacher-talk for a car being fixed, but it may also be a subtle attempt to suggest that the dead can come back to life. The butterfly is an important symbol in the show as it is prominently displayed on the Gilboa’s flags and uniforms. When my family and I watched the first episode, my dad suggested that it was silly to have a butterfly on your flag because there is nothing less intimidating than a butterfly. However, the butterfly has served as a symbol of the resurrection for centuries. Caterpillars seem to die when they form their cocoons and they seem to come back to life better than before when they emerge as butterflies. Butterflies may be peaceful, but they are powerful images of the life that overcomes death. It may not make much political or military sense, but God’s foolishness is wiser than our wisdom (1 Corinthians 1:25). I would like to encourage people to watch the show and reflect on these Judeo-Christian stories, images, and themes as they are being presented by NBC.
It did not take long before my family and I recognized that the names of people and places in the show are from the Bible, more specifically 1 Samuel. The king and his children have names that are derived from the Hebrew names of the first king of Israel and his family: Silas for Saul (Ian McShane), Jack for Jonathan (Sebastian Stan), and Michelle for Michal (Allison Miller). The surname, Benjamin, is the name of the twelfth tribe of Israel. Reverend Samuels (Eamonn Walker) represents the prophet Samuel, from which the biblical books of 1 and 2 Samuel get their name. David Shepherd (Chris Egan) represents the seventh son of Jesse, a shepherd by trade, and a “man after God’s own heart” (1 Samuel 13:14). David is known for slaying Goliath, a giant in the Bible and a tank in the show. The name for the country Gilboa comes from a range that served as the setting for the battle between Israel and the Philistines. Shiloh, the capitol city in the show, was the name of the religious center of Israel during the time of the Judges. These names are not a coincidence. This show appears to be an adaptation of the biblical stories from 1 and 2 Samuel.
As a Christian, this raises a lot of questions for me. Is it the studio’s intention to retell the biblical story in a modern context? If so, why was it not promoted as such? At the beginning of the show, the king says in a speech that it is not popular to speak of God but he does so because he feels blessed. Is this the motivation behind the show’s production? Are the studio executives trying to talk about God incognito? Are they trying to share the stories of the Bible in a non-threatening way? Or did they choose to retell these stories because they felt like there is “nothing new under the sun” (Ecclesiastes)? How close is the studio planning to stick to the biblical stories? I enjoyed the first two episodes and I am planning to watch the rest of the first season.
I am interested to hear how the public will respond. Will people recognize the biblical story? Will people consult the Bible to see what really happened? Will they shrug their shoulders and change the channel? Would more or less folks watch the show if they knew it was based on the Bible? How do Jews and Christians feel about a TV show adapting stories they consider scripture?
The studio will obviously need some ability to adjust the stories to fit a different context and to maintain interest, but I hope they stay close to the biblical model. I would encourage folks to watch the show, read their bibles, and reflect on how God is speaking to them today. You can watch past episodes on http://www.nbc.com/. If you choose to watch, some things we should remember are: 1) This is not our story, it’s God’s story; 2) We are called to share God’s story; and 3) even if the show becomes a bad adaptation, it can be a great teaching moment. But first things first, we need to know the Bible before we can comment on how other’s portray it. Perhaps it is time to read or re-read 1 and 2 Samuel. If you would like to comment on this review or read more of my comments on the show and other topics, you can do so at http://www.revrigoulot.blogspot.com/ or by finding the link on our church website, http://www.pampapcusa.org/.
Before I conclude this article I would like to point out some images and references to the resurrection found in the first episode. When David fixes Reverend Samuel’s car, the reverend exclaims, “The dead has arisen.” This could be preacher-talk for a car being fixed, but it may also be a subtle attempt to suggest that the dead can come back to life. The butterfly is an important symbol in the show as it is prominently displayed on the Gilboa’s flags and uniforms. When my family and I watched the first episode, my dad suggested that it was silly to have a butterfly on your flag because there is nothing less intimidating than a butterfly. However, the butterfly has served as a symbol of the resurrection for centuries. Caterpillars seem to die when they form their cocoons and they seem to come back to life better than before when they emerge as butterflies. Butterflies may be peaceful, but they are powerful images of the life that overcomes death. It may not make much political or military sense, but God’s foolishness is wiser than our wisdom (1 Corinthians 1:25). I would like to encourage people to watch the show and reflect on these Judeo-Christian stories, images, and themes as they are being presented by NBC.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
The Moderator Comments on the Loss of Members in PCUSA
The Moderator of the PCUSA recently wrote the following blog entry. I appreciated his thoughts and I am interested to hear what others have to say.
(Bruce's comments are in blue)
At a recent gathering, yet again, someone posed the basic question to be, "What do you think about people leaving the denomination?"
Fully understanding that I may be inviting trouble and the safer - and maybe wiser - option would be to leave it to the ecclesiastical pundits and polity wonks to hash out, I figure what the heck, might as well weigh in on one of the big unspoken questions.
Before I start, let me be very clear in that I am not in any way encouraging folks to leave, stay, return, etc. but trying to provide a space to share what I have heard and to invite respectful discourse. As I have posted before, while I have many reasons to leave the PC(USA) I have at least 10 reasons to remain part of the Presbyterian Church (USA). I am not in any way "loyal to the end" to the PC(USA) nor do I find my worth from the denomination, but in the end the PC(USA) is where I feel God is calling me to most effectively and passionately express my Christian calling to serve.
I know there are many facets and layers to people's relationship with the Presbyterian Church (USA). I have had friends who have left our church because we are either to conservative and closed-minded or because we are too liberal and culture-accommodating. I also have friends who seem to always be just this side of making the leap be it to the Evangelical Presbyterian Church, the United Church of Christ or to independent church-planting; all trying to figure out if the next big decision will finally push them to a commitment one way or another. I grieve for the loss and/or potential loss of denominational colleagues, but I also rejoice when those decisions are made in response to a deep faithfulness to answer God's calling into something new.
To be blunt, and this may seem odd coming from someone in my denominational position, but I actually do not care all that much about where one lands in their denominational affiliation as long as he or she is being fed, nurtured and challenged in their relationship with the risen Christ. As a church planter I long ago gave up the notion that the church I serve is the best church for everyone who walks through our doors on Sunday night.
In fact, one of the first things offer to visitors to MBCC is to acknowledge that we won't be for everyone and that I care more that one lands in a place where they grow spiritually so much so that if they want to have coffee sometime, I would be more that willing to to help them put together their "church shopping list." If MBCC is the place for them, great, but if not I can help them find the right fit. I am very clear that I believe that we offer a unique and compelling Christian experience, but I also acknowledge that God calls each of us in different ways and even to different places.
Shouldn't we want the same thing for one another regardless of theological perspectives; for the other to grow in their relationship with Christ that goes beyond denominational obligation and loyalty? I think that for some of us, somewhere in our experience, we see our salvation being directly tied to our denominational identity. Folks should not be part of our particular denominational tribe because we have some kind of exclusive possession of the truth, but because we offer a unique and compelling reason to live out their faith through the life of our uniquely connectional denomination.
In the end, the institutional location where one chooses to live out one's Christian journey shouldn't be a place where one is always happy, comfortable and gets what one wants or is otherwise fooled into thinking that there will be an absence of struggle or conflict. Instead, it must be a place where one feels called to express their gratitude to God for the blessings in their life so much so that the struggles and conflicts can be seen as opportunities through which one's faith grows. If those struggles cause one to compromise one's theological or ideological values and integrity, that is not the place to be NOR should anyone allow themselves to be bullied or forces into such a reality.
Again, I am not trying to encourage any particular group to engage in any particular action, but merely weighing in on what I think is an important conversation that is being held in our church. For if we are to move forward with any semblance on health and solidarity, then we must do so trusting God enough to be honest about where we stand on some of the crucial issues is vital.
So . . . I laid out what I think, what say you?
What do you think? Are you concerned about the decline in membership within the PCUSA? Can we grow through an approach that centers on becoming and equpping faithful disciples? Should we be focused on growth at all? It is easy to judge how well a church is doing by counting the number of fannies in the pews or names of the role, but is that the best way to determine whether or not a congregation or denomination is being faithful to God? A decline certainly indicates something, so what do you think the decline in numbers is telling us about the denomination? What would you like to see PCUSA do differently? You can see Bruce's original post and other people's comments by going to www.mod-reyes-chow.com.
(Bruce's comments are in blue)
At a recent gathering, yet again, someone posed the basic question to be, "What do you think about people leaving the denomination?"
Fully understanding that I may be inviting trouble and the safer - and maybe wiser - option would be to leave it to the ecclesiastical pundits and polity wonks to hash out, I figure what the heck, might as well weigh in on one of the big unspoken questions.
Before I start, let me be very clear in that I am not in any way encouraging folks to leave, stay, return, etc. but trying to provide a space to share what I have heard and to invite respectful discourse. As I have posted before, while I have many reasons to leave the PC(USA) I have at least 10 reasons to remain part of the Presbyterian Church (USA). I am not in any way "loyal to the end" to the PC(USA) nor do I find my worth from the denomination, but in the end the PC(USA) is where I feel God is calling me to most effectively and passionately express my Christian calling to serve.
I know there are many facets and layers to people's relationship with the Presbyterian Church (USA). I have had friends who have left our church because we are either to conservative and closed-minded or because we are too liberal and culture-accommodating. I also have friends who seem to always be just this side of making the leap be it to the Evangelical Presbyterian Church, the United Church of Christ or to independent church-planting; all trying to figure out if the next big decision will finally push them to a commitment one way or another. I grieve for the loss and/or potential loss of denominational colleagues, but I also rejoice when those decisions are made in response to a deep faithfulness to answer God's calling into something new.
To be blunt, and this may seem odd coming from someone in my denominational position, but I actually do not care all that much about where one lands in their denominational affiliation as long as he or she is being fed, nurtured and challenged in their relationship with the risen Christ. As a church planter I long ago gave up the notion that the church I serve is the best church for everyone who walks through our doors on Sunday night.
In fact, one of the first things offer to visitors to MBCC is to acknowledge that we won't be for everyone and that I care more that one lands in a place where they grow spiritually so much so that if they want to have coffee sometime, I would be more that willing to to help them put together their "church shopping list." If MBCC is the place for them, great, but if not I can help them find the right fit. I am very clear that I believe that we offer a unique and compelling Christian experience, but I also acknowledge that God calls each of us in different ways and even to different places.
Shouldn't we want the same thing for one another regardless of theological perspectives; for the other to grow in their relationship with Christ that goes beyond denominational obligation and loyalty? I think that for some of us, somewhere in our experience, we see our salvation being directly tied to our denominational identity. Folks should not be part of our particular denominational tribe because we have some kind of exclusive possession of the truth, but because we offer a unique and compelling reason to live out their faith through the life of our uniquely connectional denomination.
In the end, the institutional location where one chooses to live out one's Christian journey shouldn't be a place where one is always happy, comfortable and gets what one wants or is otherwise fooled into thinking that there will be an absence of struggle or conflict. Instead, it must be a place where one feels called to express their gratitude to God for the blessings in their life so much so that the struggles and conflicts can be seen as opportunities through which one's faith grows. If those struggles cause one to compromise one's theological or ideological values and integrity, that is not the place to be NOR should anyone allow themselves to be bullied or forces into such a reality.
Again, I am not trying to encourage any particular group to engage in any particular action, but merely weighing in on what I think is an important conversation that is being held in our church. For if we are to move forward with any semblance on health and solidarity, then we must do so trusting God enough to be honest about where we stand on some of the crucial issues is vital.
So . . . I laid out what I think, what say you?
What do you think? Are you concerned about the decline in membership within the PCUSA? Can we grow through an approach that centers on becoming and equpping faithful disciples? Should we be focused on growth at all? It is easy to judge how well a church is doing by counting the number of fannies in the pews or names of the role, but is that the best way to determine whether or not a congregation or denomination is being faithful to God? A decline certainly indicates something, so what do you think the decline in numbers is telling us about the denomination? What would you like to see PCUSA do differently? You can see Bruce's original post and other people's comments by going to www.mod-reyes-chow.com.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Kings on NBC
I watched the 2 hour premiere of "Kings" on Sunday evening and I was fascinated by the biblical imagery that has been adapted from the book of 1 Samuel. I am wondering how close the executives are planning to stay to the biblical model/timeline. As a Presbyterian pastor I love to see and discuss how Christianity impacts culture and how culture interprets and presents Christianity. I should also recognize that the story of David is first and foremost a part of the Hebrew Scriptures. I am interested in how other people of faith are reacting to the show and its scriptural roots. Did you watch the show? What did you think? Do you want the show to stay close to the biblical story or should it be free to go down different avenues?
Sermon Scraps - The Samaritan Woman at the Well
This past Sunday I preached on John 4:4-42. You can read the sermon or watch the service by going to www.pampapcusa.org. I came up with the title sermon scraps because I intended to talk about all the fun things I learned in my research that didn't make it into the sermon. Unfortunately, I have not made the time to follow through on that idea. But this week I learned so much in my studies that I wanted to share some more information with those who might be interested. The sermon was about the different ways that the Samaritan Woman has been interpreted over the past two thousand years of church history. Scholars can't decide if she is a hero or a harlot; a sinner or a saint; humble or haughty; friendly or facetious; slow-minded or scholarly. She may be all of these things and more. When her story is put next to the story of Nicodemus, we see that the gospel is for everyone. These are two very different people on completely opposite ends of the social spectrum. We see that she catches on faster than Nicodemus and perhaps even the disciples. We see her act like an apostle as she tells people to come and see Jesus for themselves. I have two thoughts that didn't make it into the sermon this go around.
1. Why does Jesus have to pass through Samaria? I learned that while this is the shortest route to take, it was not the preferred one. The Jews tended to prefer the scenic route because it helped them stay out of Samaria. It is like taking the loop around the city in order to avoid the wrong neighborhoods – the wrong parts of town that are filled with the wrong sorts of people. Jesus did not have to go through Samaria because there were no other routes to take. I believe Jesus had to go through Samaria because that is where God wanted him to go. I think God planned his conversation with the woman at the well and his two day stay in the city of Sichar. Think of it this way, Jesus had to pass through Samaria because God had already made reservations for his stay.
2. I almost preached a sermon on The Woman as an Example of Being a Witness. In an article titled, "The Witness at the Well," Fred Craddock says the following,
"She is a witness, but not a likely witness and not even a thorough witness. 'A man who told me all that I ever did' is not exactly a recitation of the Apostle's Creed. She is not even a coninced witnss: 'Can this be the Christ?' is literally, 'This cannot be the Christ, can it?' Even so, her witness is enough: it is invitational (come and see), not judgmental; it is within the range permitted by her experience; it is honest with its own uncertainty; it is for everyone who will hear. How refreshing. Her witness avoids triumphalism, hawking someone else's conclusions, packaged answers to unasked questions, thinly veiled ultimatums and threats of hell, and assumptions of certainty on theological matters. She does convey, however, her willingness to let her hearers arrive at their own affirmations about Jesus, and they do: "This indeed is the Savior of the World."
I love the idea that this woman is a faithful witness even though she is not a likely witness or even a witness that is completely convinced that Jesus is the Christ. How many of us feel like we shouldn't talk about our faith because we are embarassed about how much we don't know or how often we question our faith. Should doubts keep us from sharing the faith we do have? Should a lack of knowledge prevent us from sharing the love of God that we have embraced? How wonderful to find a biblical example of someone who was so excited about her encounter with Jesus that she went and told everyone she knew the good news that she had met Jesus. It is my hope and prayer that all Christians will recognize that we are called to be witnesses to the world. We cannot wait until we have everything figured out before we go out and share the love of God with the world. In fact, I believe it is through being a witness that we begin to learn what it means to be a witness. Missional Theology suggests that we learn about God by taking part in God's mission. We learn what it means to be a neighbor by being a neighbor and reflecting on how well our actions reflect the will and love of God. We learn what it is like to be forgiven by forgiving others. We learn to love God more deeply by sharing that love with the world. The Samaritan Woman at the Well is a prime example of being a witness to the world.
1. Why does Jesus have to pass through Samaria? I learned that while this is the shortest route to take, it was not the preferred one. The Jews tended to prefer the scenic route because it helped them stay out of Samaria. It is like taking the loop around the city in order to avoid the wrong neighborhoods – the wrong parts of town that are filled with the wrong sorts of people. Jesus did not have to go through Samaria because there were no other routes to take. I believe Jesus had to go through Samaria because that is where God wanted him to go. I think God planned his conversation with the woman at the well and his two day stay in the city of Sichar. Think of it this way, Jesus had to pass through Samaria because God had already made reservations for his stay.
2. I almost preached a sermon on The Woman as an Example of Being a Witness. In an article titled, "The Witness at the Well," Fred Craddock says the following,
"She is a witness, but not a likely witness and not even a thorough witness. 'A man who told me all that I ever did' is not exactly a recitation of the Apostle's Creed. She is not even a coninced witnss: 'Can this be the Christ?' is literally, 'This cannot be the Christ, can it?' Even so, her witness is enough: it is invitational (come and see), not judgmental; it is within the range permitted by her experience; it is honest with its own uncertainty; it is for everyone who will hear. How refreshing. Her witness avoids triumphalism, hawking someone else's conclusions, packaged answers to unasked questions, thinly veiled ultimatums and threats of hell, and assumptions of certainty on theological matters. She does convey, however, her willingness to let her hearers arrive at their own affirmations about Jesus, and they do: "This indeed is the Savior of the World."
I love the idea that this woman is a faithful witness even though she is not a likely witness or even a witness that is completely convinced that Jesus is the Christ. How many of us feel like we shouldn't talk about our faith because we are embarassed about how much we don't know or how often we question our faith. Should doubts keep us from sharing the faith we do have? Should a lack of knowledge prevent us from sharing the love of God that we have embraced? How wonderful to find a biblical example of someone who was so excited about her encounter with Jesus that she went and told everyone she knew the good news that she had met Jesus. It is my hope and prayer that all Christians will recognize that we are called to be witnesses to the world. We cannot wait until we have everything figured out before we go out and share the love of God with the world. In fact, I believe it is through being a witness that we begin to learn what it means to be a witness. Missional Theology suggests that we learn about God by taking part in God's mission. We learn what it means to be a neighbor by being a neighbor and reflecting on how well our actions reflect the will and love of God. We learn what it is like to be forgiven by forgiving others. We learn to love God more deeply by sharing that love with the world. The Samaritan Woman at the Well is a prime example of being a witness to the world.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
My Ash Wednesday Sermon
This Sermon was originally preached at St. Matthew's Episcopal Church at 12:00 noon on February 25.
My three-year-old son, Kennan, goes to St. Matthew’s Episcopal Day School on Tuesdays and Thursdays. On Monday we told him that the school was having a book fair. Later that evening he was really upset and on the verge of tears. When we asked him what was wrong, he said that he didn’t want to give his books away. Many of us feel the same way about Lent. We feel as if we have to give up something we enjoy – and like my son, many of us don’t have any idea why we are supposed to do it in the first place.
This year is the 500th anniversary of John Calvin’s birth. I recently read an article that claims Calvin was among the Reformers who tried to get rid of Ash Wednesday and other Lenten observances. As a Presbyterian preparing a sermon for Ash Wednesday I was intrigued by the idea that Calvin might not approve of what I was doing. So I dusted off my copy of John Calvin’s “Institutes of the Christian Religion” and flipped to the section on fasting. Calvin claims that fasting is not well understood, so it can easily lapse into superstition. His writing reveals that he does not have a problem with fasting, as long as it is done for the right reasons. Lent is not a time to give something up just for the sake of giving something up. Calvin says, “the matter lies primarily in the motive of the heart.” In fact, Calvin makes reference to our scripture reading from Joel, chapter 2.
Our scripture reading begins with a blast from a trumpet, warning the people that they are facing a great calamity. God has sent an army to destroy the city. There is no escaping this army, but there is hope. God may still relent – if the people return to God with their heart, with fasting, with weeping, and with mourning. We don’t know why God is sending this army, but we do know that the people believe they need to repent. Lent is a time for us to reflect on our relationship with God, a time to repent from our sins, a time to rearrange our priorities in life. Lent is a time for us to turn our hearts to God. Any fasting, weeping, or mourning must be an outward reflection of how one feels on the inside. Joel says you should rend your hearts and not your clothing. The bible has many examples of people who tore their clothing after recognizing their sin. It is a visible sign of inner repentance. Repentance is when we turn away from sin and turn toward God. What Joel is saying is that we cannot put on a religious show. God knows what is in our hearts. We shouldn’t give up something we enjoy without knowing why we are doing it. Psalm 51 says sacrifices are meaningless unless they represent a broken spirit and a broken and contrite heart. Lent is not about appearing religious. It’s not about making a sacrifice that will appease God. There is nothing we can do to earn God’s forgiveness. God has already done the work. Lent is about recognizing what God has done for us. It is about remembering Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem, his journey to the cross on Calvary.
Our reading from Second Corinthians calls us to be reconciled to God. The passage recognizes that Jesus Christ, the only person who never sinned in his entire life, became sin so that we might become the righteousness of God. Lent is a time for us to recognize our sin as well as the sinless one who died for our sin. Lent is about removing the obstacles that prevent us from having a deeper and more meaningful relationship with God. If you don’t think you have time to read scripture or pray daily, yet you have time to watch television, then perhaps you should give up watching television for Lent. But it only makes a difference if you fill that time with God. Giving up television in order to read scripture and pray each day is a fast that John Calvin would be proud of. You shouldn’t give things up in order to be forgiven or earn brownie points with God. God has no delight in sacrifice for the sake of sacrifice. But if you use that time to grow in your knowledge, service, and love of God – then you will receive your heavenly reward.
Our reading from Matthew warns us not to practice piety in order to impress others. We are not supposed to give money, pray, or fast in order to appear religious. God wants us to tear open our hearts, not our clothes. We need to be transformed from within. Calvin says that God does not care about fasting itself, unless an inner emotion of the heart is present. We need God to create in us a new heart, to put a new and right spirit within us. We cannot do this on our own. We cannot turn away from sin and turn toward God without the inward working of the Spirit.
A second trumpet is blown in our scripture reading from the book of Joel. This time the trumpet blast brings the people together for a fast. This fast is an outward sign of their inward repentance. They have returned to the Lord, for God is gracious and merciful, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love. During this season of Lent, let us prepare our hearts to be made new. Some obstacles may need to be removed. It may hurt. But your reward will be great.
My three-year-old son, Kennan, goes to St. Matthew’s Episcopal Day School on Tuesdays and Thursdays. On Monday we told him that the school was having a book fair. Later that evening he was really upset and on the verge of tears. When we asked him what was wrong, he said that he didn’t want to give his books away. Many of us feel the same way about Lent. We feel as if we have to give up something we enjoy – and like my son, many of us don’t have any idea why we are supposed to do it in the first place.
This year is the 500th anniversary of John Calvin’s birth. I recently read an article that claims Calvin was among the Reformers who tried to get rid of Ash Wednesday and other Lenten observances. As a Presbyterian preparing a sermon for Ash Wednesday I was intrigued by the idea that Calvin might not approve of what I was doing. So I dusted off my copy of John Calvin’s “Institutes of the Christian Religion” and flipped to the section on fasting. Calvin claims that fasting is not well understood, so it can easily lapse into superstition. His writing reveals that he does not have a problem with fasting, as long as it is done for the right reasons. Lent is not a time to give something up just for the sake of giving something up. Calvin says, “the matter lies primarily in the motive of the heart.” In fact, Calvin makes reference to our scripture reading from Joel, chapter 2.
Our scripture reading begins with a blast from a trumpet, warning the people that they are facing a great calamity. God has sent an army to destroy the city. There is no escaping this army, but there is hope. God may still relent – if the people return to God with their heart, with fasting, with weeping, and with mourning. We don’t know why God is sending this army, but we do know that the people believe they need to repent. Lent is a time for us to reflect on our relationship with God, a time to repent from our sins, a time to rearrange our priorities in life. Lent is a time for us to turn our hearts to God. Any fasting, weeping, or mourning must be an outward reflection of how one feels on the inside. Joel says you should rend your hearts and not your clothing. The bible has many examples of people who tore their clothing after recognizing their sin. It is a visible sign of inner repentance. Repentance is when we turn away from sin and turn toward God. What Joel is saying is that we cannot put on a religious show. God knows what is in our hearts. We shouldn’t give up something we enjoy without knowing why we are doing it. Psalm 51 says sacrifices are meaningless unless they represent a broken spirit and a broken and contrite heart. Lent is not about appearing religious. It’s not about making a sacrifice that will appease God. There is nothing we can do to earn God’s forgiveness. God has already done the work. Lent is about recognizing what God has done for us. It is about remembering Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem, his journey to the cross on Calvary.
Our reading from Second Corinthians calls us to be reconciled to God. The passage recognizes that Jesus Christ, the only person who never sinned in his entire life, became sin so that we might become the righteousness of God. Lent is a time for us to recognize our sin as well as the sinless one who died for our sin. Lent is about removing the obstacles that prevent us from having a deeper and more meaningful relationship with God. If you don’t think you have time to read scripture or pray daily, yet you have time to watch television, then perhaps you should give up watching television for Lent. But it only makes a difference if you fill that time with God. Giving up television in order to read scripture and pray each day is a fast that John Calvin would be proud of. You shouldn’t give things up in order to be forgiven or earn brownie points with God. God has no delight in sacrifice for the sake of sacrifice. But if you use that time to grow in your knowledge, service, and love of God – then you will receive your heavenly reward.
Our reading from Matthew warns us not to practice piety in order to impress others. We are not supposed to give money, pray, or fast in order to appear religious. God wants us to tear open our hearts, not our clothes. We need to be transformed from within. Calvin says that God does not care about fasting itself, unless an inner emotion of the heart is present. We need God to create in us a new heart, to put a new and right spirit within us. We cannot do this on our own. We cannot turn away from sin and turn toward God without the inward working of the Spirit.
A second trumpet is blown in our scripture reading from the book of Joel. This time the trumpet blast brings the people together for a fast. This fast is an outward sign of their inward repentance. They have returned to the Lord, for God is gracious and merciful, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love. During this season of Lent, let us prepare our hearts to be made new. Some obstacles may need to be removed. It may hurt. But your reward will be great.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)