Music Makes Us presents "Lift Every Voice"

Fragile - Sting HQ

"Wheat and Weeds" given June 17

A sower goes forth to sow. Seed, slung in all directions, leads to a good deal of waste. Some of the seed falls along the path where it is quickly ground into the dirt. There's a great deal of wasted seed in this “Parable of the Sower”

Have you ever met one of those people who just can't stand to see a little waste? You know the type--they save bits of string, paper clips from letters received, rubber bands. Some folks simply have a thing about waste. Remember how President Lyndon Johnson ordered the White House staff to turn off the lights each time they left a room?

This morning's parable suggests that, in God's Realm there is a great deal of waste. When Jesus was born, according to the opening of Matthew's Gospel, cruel King Herod massacred hundreds of innocent Jewish baby boys. Wouldn't it have been better if not so much had been made of Jesus being "king" so that Herod would not have felt so threatened? Perhaps the good news of Jesus' birth could have been toned down a bit.

But caution, toning down a bit is not what the gospel is about. So Matthew's magi show up at the manger with the costliest of gifts -gold, frankincense, and myrrh - and lay these most expensive substances at the feet of Mary and her poor baby.

This Gospel's exuberant extravagance continues. Jesus continually speaks to great crowds, "multitudes." But how many came forward to follow? Only the twelve?

Think of how many of Jesus' parables spoke of waste. There was the shepherd who risked the welfare of the 99 sheep in order to search for one lost sheep until he found it. A man gives an invitation to a banquet, but all of those invited rudely refused. There was the Samaritan who gave all that he had to bandage the wounds of a man lying in the ditch whom he did not even know. What are these parables if not parables of extravagance, recklessness, and waste? And what could be more "wasteful" than for Jesus to lay down his life for people like us?

I'm not by nature the most efficient guy in the world. What feeble skills I have in making my time and energy count for more, I've had to learn-- usually the hard way. My family likes to accuse me of being overly organized, however. That's not efficiency, it's testimony to how many times I've gotten my neck chewed in the past.

Maybe you remember the movie or the book, Cheaper By the Dozen. It's a lively account of the life of a large family that was presided over by Clarence Day, one of America's first professional efficiency experts. Mr. Day even taught his children how to bathe themselves efficiently, taught them a number of foreign languages by pasting words on the walls of the family bathroom (he computed that the average person expends x number hours of a lifetime in the bathroom, so why waste all that precious time?).

I'm not prepared to go that far, but I like to be able to move through my day confident that at least some of my time is being well used, not wasted. Yet it does seem, on the basis of today's parable, that waste is unavoidable in God's Realm. There's much wasted seed, and wasted words, and wasted time and effort.

The poor farmer in today's parable has a great deal working against him - lousy soil, rocks, weeds - and there's a great deal against the gospel. We live in a violent, greedy, anxious world, and the Gospel invites us to join Jesus in peace, self-giving, and grace.

We've got a great deal working against us. On this bright Summer Sunday, more people are at the lake, at the beach, or just taking it easy than are in church. One Summer I recall seeing the sign in front of a church that proclaimed, "God Doesn't Take a Vacation". The Almighty may not, but we sure do. The lures of summer always seem to take their toll on church attendance!

So I work on my sermon for the good of the few, and you faithful show up on Sunday, and we are disappointed by the absence of the many. There's much waste around here.

Our building is bigger than it needs to be. on these summer Sundays. We have an organ that nobody here can play so we make do with a small piano. Waste.

Someone said in the hearing of her pastor, "I only get something out of about one in three sermons." At first the preacher was appalled. Only one sermon in three? Two-thirds of his sermons wasted? But then the pastor reconsidered. When you think about it, .334 might not be too bad an average.

There is so much working against our hearing and receiving the word. We are so easily distracted. Our minds are cluttered with many concerns and cares. The Christian faith is so large, our interests rather small. Is it any great wonder that most sermons don't hit home with us?

How much of the Bible do you know? How much of the Bible have you read or understood? All that Scripture wasted!

But that's not the whole story. Jesus' parable of the seed and the soil speaks not only of wasted, unproductive seed, but also of gracious Harvest. Jesus did say that most of the seed went to waste. But some of the seed, wonder of wonders, took root, grew, and brought forth 30, 60, 100 times over a rich reward.

Jesus says, If you've got ears, listen! The parable ends in joy, celebration of great Harvest. There is waste, yes, much futile effort, ruined seed, disappointing results. But the story ends in astounding success and Harvest. The wastefulness ought not surprise us. There's much bad soil out there. We speak truth in a world of lies. We call people to walk a narrow way when it's easier to wander.

Throughout Matthew's Gospel Jesus has spoken of a "higher righteousness," but most people are content with lower expectations. However, when the story ends, seed - just of the some seed - has taken root and has rendered rather amazing results. The sowing is not efficient, but it is finally effective. There is great Harvest.

I confess that something in me has come to expect the waste, the futility and failure. I've been around the church long enough to become something of a reluctant expert in failure! Maybe there's even a little something in me that's kind of content with the failure. Waste can be reassuring.

Why prepare a sermon if only one in three will truly hear it? Why witness to your faith if most of our witness falls on deaf ears? Why do what's right when nine out of ten average Americans are quite content with "going along to get along"? The waste of it all, the failure in faith, can be almost reassuring--in a perverse sort of way.

Yet Jesus doesn't let us off the hook. He promises (maybe even threatens!) Harvest. Our work, his word, the church's witness are not in vain. The promise of Harvest is enough to keep us uneasy with our accommodation to defeat. There is waste, yes, and defeat. But by the end, some few seeds take root and there is rich Harvest. There is waste. But there is also grace.

One of the joys of this parable is learning that even if much seed is wasted, some seed falls on good soil and a great Harvest is sure. This should help encourage us when nothing seems to be happening.

As a young man, John emigrated from England to America. All predicted the brightest future for him as a brilliant scholar. He died after only one year. When he died, he left a little over 700 pounds and a collection of more than 200 books to a new university being organized. As meager as that bequest might seem to us in our day and age, it was so abundant to this still being organized school, that they named the university after him. The death of John Harvard looked like waste, but it produced an abundant Harvest.

So, in your life and in mine, in your ministry and in mine, in your relationships and in mine, in your hopes and efforts and prayers and in mine-- results, though delayed-- will still come. The Harvest is sure.

Jesus says, If you've got ears, listen.

Curtis Mayfield & The Impressions - People Get Ready (1965)

"Give It to' em" given June 10

It's hard to find a headline during this run up to the midterm elections. in which candidates, politicians, and special interest groups are not demanding "radical" change in the way things are done in America.

Things have got to change, they say--left and right both. What they don't agree upon is what needs change, how to change it, or even who should effect the change.

In the passage from 1 Samuel 8, we hear echoes of a similarly divisive political climate in ancient Israel. Things have got to change, the system is broken, we hear the people telling Samuel, their aging statesman. What's hard for us to imagine, though, living in a 21st century democracy, is the kind of change that elders of Israel were urging. "Give us a king to govern us!" they demand.

. Up until this point, the most significant transition between leaders in the biblical text occurs when Moses dies and Joshua, Moses's assistant, takes over.

After that, Scripture describes a fairly haphazard state of affairs in which charismatic leaders (Judges) rose up from time to time to lead groups of Israelites, generally into battle, culminating in last week's narrative of the calling of the boy Samuel as prophet and Judge of Israel. As the author of Judges records, "In those days there was no king in Israel; all the people did what was right in their own eyes" (17:6). Tribalism? Libertarianism? Small gov'munt? Anarchy?

Monarchy was certainly not a new institution in the Ancient Near East. As these descendants from slavery under the hand of Pharoah, and their peoples' migration from Egypt. would have recalled In fact, of all the nations in their part of the world, Israel was perhaps the most unusual in not having instituted a monarchy.

But the monarchy—in the person of King Saul-- rose to power in a period characterized by unprecedented upheaval among Israel's neighbors. Throughout most of its recorded history, their little strip of territory between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea had been dominated by its larger, more powerful neighbors..Egypt to the south, Babylon and Assyria to the east, Syria to the north, and still farther north, the Hittites. During the reigns of Saul and David, however, most of these nations were distracted by their own internal issues. It's possible that this reprieve gave the tribes of Israel a unique opportunity-- not only to cast off foreign domination but to form a mini-empire of their own.

In addition to the opportunities created by this temporary power vacuum, ancient Israel was experiencing internal turmoil due to competing constituencies within the tribal society—not to mention their on-going conflict with the pagan Canaanites. Scripture hints at this possibility at the beginning of 1 Samuel 8 when it sets the scene by pointing out that Samuel had grown old and that he had appointed his sons as Judges, "yet his sons did not following in his ways, but turned aside for gain; they took bribes and perverted justice" we read in verses 1-3).

This same information is immediately repeated in verses 4-5, when these words are put in the mouths of the so-called elders of Israel who come to Samuel who rudely tell him, "You’re old... appoint for us a king to govern us, like other nations."

We don't exactly know why. For some of those complaining, a monarchy might have meant a more stable system of government that might allow for more equitable rule than seemed probable under the leadership of Samuel's wayward sons. Others of these so called “elders” might have represented an elite segment of society who imagined they would stand to benefit under a monarchy-- “the 1%” if you will. For them, having a king would create the possibility for significant personal gain, a society in which both power and resources were consolidated in the hands of a few.

The story doesn't provide any further clues as to who more precisely was interested in a king or even why, suggesting vagtuely that "the elders of the people of Israel" (8:4), "the people who were asking for a king" (8:10), "the people of Israel" (8:22), or simply "the people" (8:19, 21). In the church we refer to these anonymous gripers as “A lot of them’ or “the congregation” or just “people”, For the record, in 44 years of pastoral ministry, I’ve never identified “a lot of ‘em”. Have you?

The only stated rationale for such dramatic social/political change was that “they” wanted someone to govern them. They wanted to be like the other nations. And they wanted a king to go out before them to fight their battles.

It's quite possible that not everyone was on board with the idea of monarchy. This becomes apparent in the sharp contrast between the seemingly unified position of the people and both Samuel's and God's distinctly negative responses. Upon hearing the people's request, the text reports that "the thing displeased Samuel" and that "Samuel prayed to the Lord," presumably about his concerns.

God comforts Samuel, saying, in effect, 'Don't worry, this is not about you. Look what I've done for them in the past, and look how they've rejected me.' God continues speaking, "Now then, listen to their voice; only -- you shall solemnly warn them, and show them the way of the king..." (8:9). Samuel does--going on at great length, to explain that a king is not necessarily the solution to all their problems. In fact, a king is just the beginning of a completely new set of problems.

It's easy to side with Samuel and God in this passage, from the hindsight of history-- as well as from our vantage point in a democracy. But we may not be giving the people the credit they deserve. If part of the reason the Israelites want a king has to do with justice and good governance, then Samuel misses this altogether. In his response, he doesn't recognize their concern, neither defending his corrupt sons, nor explaining past injustices.

You almost get the feeling that thin-skinned Samuel is deflecting the legitimate concerns of the people by making it about him! Does he feel guilt about not being as attentive to these kinds of problems as he should have been? Or is he so wrapped up in the perceived slight that he ignores the people's legitimate complaints? Does he recall how he himself was chosen by God because of the corruption of the sons of Eli, his mentor and predecessor?

God's response seems a bit strange as well. Like Samuel, God seems at first to regard the request as a slight, yet then turns around and flatly tells Samuel to let them have a king if they want.. All the years of calling, forming, liberating, wandering, feeding, encouraging and giving to these ungrateful, whining and self-loathing people – done! It would appear that God is finished with the whole matter.

“Give 'em what they want” God sighs in weary resignation.

Does God authorize this change in order to punish the people? Or does God sees new potential, some fresh air, in a different form of governance? Maybe God is just as ready for a change as the people, but just wasn't willing to initiate it. Did God need a nudge? Is God giving up? Or subtly nudging Israel to moe on?

The largest part of the story is God’s warning to Israel through Samuel. Over eight times Samuel warns Israel what a king will do. the “He will take”. Hierarchies and systems will be put into place through which people will be bound as slaves to their king. No longer will there be freedom and no longer will they know peace. The kingdom which will be built will not be a reflection of God, but of humanity. And the sacrifices made will not be unto the Lord but unto self-preservation.

Here's the really hard question in the story—if not in light of the human condition. It’s one of the very hardest questions we face in believing. Knowing all this will happen, knowing our human frailties, knowing our need for things like national security or individual shelter from the storms of life, why doesn't God protect Israel from, itself?? And by the way, why doesn't God protect us? In this morning's reading. why does God give up on Israel so quickly?

In a broader sense, we can find ourselves today asking why didn’t God do something to prevent the Holocaust? Why doesn't God protect the people of Hawaii or Maryland today from natural disaster? Why doesn't God protect our country from political turmoil or gun violence, or the world from terror? Why doesn't God protect you and me from personal tragedy? As so many have asked over the centuries, in bewilderment--”How could a good God let such bad things happen?”

According to the Weather Service, hurricane season began this past week. And everybody’s (except FEMA apparently) afraid poor old Puerto Rico’ gonna get it in the neck again. There truly are natural disasters-- due to the unfinished, broken nature of the planet. But the fact is that many, many political and social bad things—not all, but many-- in this world happen as a result of the broken, unfinished nature of humanity. Sin, greed, and ignorance ruling instead of reason and faith. Like the people who wanted a king, somebody, literally ignores the warnings of God—or actually asks for it.

And God sighs and reluctantly agrees, “Give it to’em” And the rest of us find ourselves caught up as innocent bystanders in the backblast of that those somebody else’s sins.

This story is a great example of God’s double edged gift of freewill and the risky consequences that might result through offering such freedom. The risk is even more terrible when innocents suffer because of the sins of others. God told the tribes of Israel if you want to play in the sandbox of the world, go ahead, the problem is everyone else is going to want your toys. The result will be slavery. Why would anyone ever want to bow down (again) to slavery? Is God not good enough? Or, are God’s anointed not good enough?

God doesn’t stand in their way. God gives them what they want. God’s not giving up on them, rather just not robbing them of their freedom to make decisions. It's God’s double edged gift of free will. We have the ability to choose. Heaven or hell? We can choose what is life affirming and “Godly” and choose “heaven”, or we can choose what is life denying and destructive and choose “hell”. Here in 1 Samuel, Israel chose hell.

It's a law of life. Actions—choices, have natural consequences. The natural consequence for choosing a king, in whom all power would be stored, is that the king would use the power against the very people who empowered them. Sometimes you get a benevolent David- and sometimes you get a bipolar Saul or a corrupted Solomon.

Even when Scripture talks about God’s wrath, it is nothing more than the natural consequences of the actions of the people. God is simply stepping aside, choosing not to protect them from the consequences of their actions.

This risky gift of free will exemplifies God’s desire for authentic relationship and also highlights the great risk God is willing to take in order for freedom to exist. That risk is seen clearly in this story. Israel chooses slavery over freedom. It's the risk, the law of consequences.

God did not create humanity to be spiritual and ethical robots who would love and obey their Maker by their very natures . God created angels for that. No., as God freely chose to make us as we are, out of love-- we are free to risk—free to choose to love God—out of wisdom and faithfulness, or not-- out of human selfishness and ignorance.

But where's the justice in this story—in this two-sided gift? What about those innocent Hebrews who knew oppression and persecution for centuries as a direct result of the institution of the monarchy in Israel? What about those of us who know pain and loss and grief as a result of the sinful, ignorant, and downright evil choices of other people in our world today? Why would God give such a risky, dangerous gift as free-will in such a dangerous, risky ,broken world?

I recall once guest preaching on the miracle of Jesus turning the water into wine at the wedding at Cana. As we chatted after the service, a member of that congregation praised Jesus not only for making the wine, but for making it non-alcholic, because obviously Jesus would never give us anything that might harm us.

Sadly, I have to respectfully disagree. The Genesis account of creation makes it clear that all things come from God. Wine is a good gift from God. And God calls all that has been created “good”. Good—but not necessarily finished—not necessarily without risk. And when God banishment of Adam and Eve from Eden-- not necessarily easy—not necessarily finished. And as we ready in the story of Cain and Abel—not necessarily or whole— but broken. Not necessarily without risk, or pain or tears.

Why God, why? To grow us up. To transform humanity into a community—a family of socially and spiritually mature, responsible cooperating—collaborating with one another and their Maker in healing broken humanity. and for this broken planet as well.

“The whole of Creation is standing on tiptoe, to see the wondrous sight of the children of God coming into their own” wrote Paul in Romans 5.

Or as Jesus Himself put it in this morning’s Gospel

. “Those who obey God’s Will are my mother and sisters and brothers.”

But in the meantime, I still find myself asking where’s the recompense—where’s the justice for all the countless innocents who suffer? Honestly, I don’t have an easy or short answer. But I believe—I have to believe that some day, some how, on some unimaginable, indescribable, unknown somewhere there will be Divine Justice. In the meantime, you and I and all who have suffered without deserving it can only affirm with Job-- in the midst of ultimate, earthly loss and suffering “I know that my Redeemer lives—he must live—he has to live!”

"Sovereign of the Sabbath" given June 3

This morning's Gospel is a familiar passage: "People were not made for Sabbath-- but rather the Sabbath was made for people. The Son of Humanity is Sovereign, even over the Sabbath." No doubt we've all heard this text preached on a number of times. We've heard all the stories of those fuddy- duddy old Pharisees and their ludicrous laws carried beyond even the logical extremes and we can't help but feel just a tiny bit better than them-- in a spiritual sense of course.

Deep in our hearts we feel a bit like Dana Carvey's "Church Lady" and we kind of feel like doing her "superior dance". O not in an anti-semitic sense mind you. We're just glad to be liberal main-line enlightened Protestants--people who are reasonable and moderate in their religion. People who are, as the Church Lady herself might observe a little bit pleased with ourselves.

Maybe though, just maybe you and I need to take a closer look at our automatic agreement with Jesus when it comes to this passage. Whenever we encounter any teaching of Jesus' that seems so patently easy for us to agree with, maybe it's a signal that we ought to stop and make sure that we really do understand Jesus' message correctly. There's a lot of rule- breaking going on in our society right now. Legalism has gotten a bad name. When it comes to questions of our inclinations versus the rules--so much for the rules.

Have you ever heard the story of the super-conservative pastor who decided early one beautiful spring Sunday morning that he deserved the day off for golf? He called his assistant pastor and dumped the service on her at the very last minute, loaded his clubs into his car and headed for the course at sunrise, so early he figured none of his parishioners would catch him.

None of them did and he teed up to the first hole, swung his driver, and whap! A hole in one! Up in Heaven, St. Peter turned to Jesus and said, "Master, how could you let that guy get a hole-in-one when he was playing hookey from church-- and on the Sabbath to boot! Aren't you going to punish him?" Jesus replied,

"I did punish him. Who's he gonna tell?"

Nowadays, people at all levels of society blithely brush aside their principles to do what feels right at the moment. That may be okay. In any inclination between Jesus and his narrow, closed-minded, legalistic opponents, we automatically align ourselves with Jesus. We wouldn't have followed those silly laws anyway-- or so we tell ourselves. But the fact is, based on who most of us are, and on how we live our daily lives, we probably ought to be on the side of the Pharisees.

Put yourself in their shoes. As the self-appointed guardians not only of the Law, but of the culture of Israel, the Pharisees believed that their nation's very existence depended directly on their absolute insistence in upholding the entire structure, and all the subsequent interpretations of the Laws of Moses. They were living in an occupied land. They were living under the heel of the mightiest foreign army to invade the Middle East before Desert Storm. If Israel had ever needed religious laws and faithfulness, she needed them at that time.

It would have been easy to compromise-- too easy. One thing that the Pharisees were right about was their understanding of the nature of compromise. The problem with compromising is once you start, where do you end? Just toss a pinch of incense into the sacred flame. Just bow the knee before Caesar's statue. Just try a bit of pork. After all, what's the big deal? Just compromise and compromise, and watch Israel join the list of dead cultures and meaningless faiths and conquered peoples.

In Jesus' day then, strict adherence to the laws of Moses-- including keeping the Sabbath-- had become an act of prophetic resistance. According to Genesis, the Sabbath had been built into the very order of Creation. It provided holy time--time to rest, reflect, pray, study, regroup and renew. The Sabbath was one of the key things that made Israel what she was. No wonder the Pharisees felt that allowing this traveling faith- healer/rabbi from the sticks of Galilee to disregard the Sabbath, would inevitably lead to things beginning to fall apart in Israel.

To us in our enlightened age, to us who have made our peace with the empire, to us who eat freely at Pilate's table, the opposition of these Jewish religious leaders to Jesus might well seem restrictive, tribal, even superstitious. After all, if you're starving, what harm is there in picking an ear of field corn on Saturday? What harm in playing golf at a segregated country club? What harm in lessening anti-pollution standards if it means more jobs?

What harm in drinking too much if you have a designated driver? What harm in making a bet on the lottery if the proceeds go to education? What harm in a casino night at a non-profit agency if it's in a good cause? What harm in letting a racist or sexist joke go by if objecting will just start an argument? What harm in a little fun on the side if your partner never finds out?

It's a lot easier to justify away the rules than it is to insist on living with integrity. We don't even find ourselves shocked when Jesus claims that "The Son of Humanity is Sovereign, even of the Sabbath." We're not really shocked because the truth is, we have made ourselves lord of the Sabbath. We have made ourselves, and our feelings, our impulses, our rationalizations, our personal convenience the supreme test of right and wrong.

When Jesus claims to be Lord, even of the Sabbath, He is not saying that the Torah or the Ten Commandments are irrelevant. When Jesus tells us that the Sabbath was made for people and not the other way around, He is not saying the our need for holy space and holy time and re-creation in the midst of life has been satisfied by the institution of the five day work week. Jesus is not saying that God's righteousness is a moot issue since we live in a world ruled by multi-national corporations rather than Rome. Jesus is not saying that we Christians no longer have to wrestle with what is proper for us to render unto Caesar just because Caesar is elected.

What Jesus is saying is that He is Sovereign, even of the Sabbath. And even though we Christians have substituted the Lord's Day on Sunday for Saturday, the historic Sabbath of Israel, Jesus' claim still lies before us. The righteousness of God--which we previously only could know through keeping the kosher laws and the Sabbath rules and the directives and interpretations of the Torah-- we now know in Christ Jesus.

Our means of resistance against the encroaching power of Caesar; our means of witness against the sins of racism and hate and war is now in Him- - and in the Community He calls. Our empowerment, our nurture, our purpose is found here-- in His Bread and His Cup.

The Jewish people in the time of Jesus couldn't imagine a way of resisting evil, of asserting good, of a source of authority and righteousness aside from strict adherence to the received laws of God. Yet Jesus challenged that method of affirming the right, the good and the holy.

Jesus has nothing against prophetic resistance, or adherence to principles,

or rebuking Caesar by the witness of the community's life together. Jesus had and has nothing against rules, per se.

But Jesus transcends the sovereignty of the rules in order to establish His Sovereignty. There is nothing inherently wrong in keeping the Sabbath-- Sunday, Saturday, or even Friday for a Moslem. In point of fact, it would probably do us good to find some new, less oppressive, and more creative ways to keep the Sabbath in our culture. But in order for our observance to mean anything, we must first understand and acknowledge who is Sovereign of the Sabbath.

Jesus' clash with the religious leaders was not over the rules, it was and it is over who rules. Through Him, the grace of God has freed us from rigid legalism and blind allegiance to authority for its own sake. "The Sabbath was made for men and women." But, the truth is, confronted with the sometimes frightening freedom that grace brings to us, we do sometimes feel lost. Sometimes we even get lost. Like the Disciples, we hunger on our journey. We seek direction. We seek purpose.

We need to find, not a new set of laws, but a guideline, a moral compass for the living of our lives. Hemingway said that was is moral is what you feel good after and what is immoral is what you feel bad after-- that piece of cheap rationalization fell on its face back in Nero's Rome.

A glance at the evening news will reassure us that the law of Caesar will always ultimately fall short, as well. A corporate morality based upon each and every individual being guided solely by the dictates of private self- informed conscience will inevitably lead to disagreement and controversy in society.

As believers, you and I must be able to live, then, guided neither by rigid adherence to rules, nor by the whims of the moment, but by the example of Jesus' life and ministry to the world. There lies the moral center for our living and being in the world. There lies the heart of our resistance to evil. There lies the last, best, hope of the world.

For Christians, the ethical cornerstone of our lives in the world, the moral compass we yearn for is not found anywhere else but in the person of Jesus Christ. For Christians, the strength for righteous living is found in the Cup of Blessing and the Bread of Heaven. "The Son of Humanity is Sovereign, even over the Sabbath." The Son of Humanity is lord, even over our lives. The Sabbath after all, was made for us.

In a few moments we will come to our Lord's Table. Here we will find rest. Here we will find nurture. Here we can be renewed and strengthened and encouraged and empowered. Here at His Table, is our Sabbath meal. Here at His Altar is the heart of our union with Him, and He with us. When you and I rise up, may we rise up ready and eager to return to the living of our lives under the lordship of the Sovereign of the Sabbath. Amen.

"Is God Married?" given May 27

Quite a few years ago now, I found myself engaged in a bit of Platonic dialogue--question and answer with a seven-year old Theologians. Seven-year old Theologians are the best kind, because the always approach the ultimate questions of life with such open honesty and unswerving logic. Her mom and future step-dad were in my office for a pre-nuptial conference, and they hadn’t been able to get a sitter. In the middle of what must have been to her, a rather boring adult conversation, she suddenly asked me:

"Was Jesus married?" A reasonable question in the circumstances, if you think about it, So I explained to her that there is nothing in the Bible about Jesus having a wife, but on the other hand, there is also nothing in the Bible about Jesus' life before he began his ministry.

So, it's possible that Jesus might have been married at one time. Maybe his wife died before he started his career as a traveling preacher. It doesn't really affect our faith one way or the other, as far as I'm concerned. But it is something that's kind of fun to wonder about. More than one author has made a fistful of money writing “what if” novels about that very topic.

Then, I returned to my conversation with her parents. But a couple of minutes later, she tossed me another one. "Is God married?" That one stopped me. It would have been easy to say, "No sweetheart, God isn't married."

After all, who would God marry? God is the Creator of the Universes, the Maker of humanity and the earth and all that is in it. Who is God going to marry?

But as it happened, that very day, I had been doing considerable reading and thinking about the nature of the Holy Trinity--as it happened it was the week before Trinity Sunday and I had been working on my sermon. Frankly, in the light of all that reflection, I just couldn't give her a simple, straightforward answer. So I got cute. I said,

"Tell your folks to come to church this Sunday and I'll answer that question in my sermon." That got me off the hook that evening. But her parents must have seen through my cunning plan, because they didn't show up that Trinity Sunday. (They did eventually join that church, however.)

Here it is Trinity Sunday, umpteen years later. And here I am, back on the spot once again. Trinity Sunday, you see, is the one Sunday in the church year when we preachers are not only allowed, but positively expected to wax theological, without having to even attempt to relate our message to the everyday concerns of you folks in the pews.

Today, you and I are invited to contemplate the Eternal and yet dynamic nature of our God. This is the one Sunday in which the church encourages us in song and liturgy and sermon to stretch our minds, and wrestle with the mystery beyond, the mystery within and the mystery around us.

That imperative raises a point for me. Is the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity then, no more than an intellectual exercise? Is it just a trick question that a bored child idly asks the preacher just to see what he'll say? Or is it one of those tests of orthodoxy that more and more believers are using to weed out those ministers and theologians that are suspected of having humanistic tendencies? Or worse--of being liberals? Is the Doctrine of the Trinity a meaningless intellectual exercise, or is it central to our faith?

As one preacher put it, is the Trinity an intellectual toy for Theologians, or a joy for believers. I want to suggest that the Trinity is important in your and my lives as people of faith. Not because we're going to have to pass a written essay exam on it in order to get through the Pearly Gates. But because, without the Trinity, the life of faith wouldn't make a whole lot of sense.

I remember all the sound and fury a few decades and a half ago over an obscure theological conference in which some women theologians attempted to explore alternative non-patriarchal images of who and what God is-- especially through use of the Biblical metaphor of Sophia--God's Holy Wisdom. Then some other, more conservative folks heard about it and raised quite a ruckus. Ultimately the argument got so heated it was featured on Nightline. (Pushing aside the Iranian Hostage Crisis for one night, at least.) As a result, for one half hour we heard the Doctrine of the Trinity being debated on ABC Network News—with Ted Koppel refereeing. That must have been a first.

The church of Jesus Christ has historically affirmed the Trinity. From our Jewish roots, we know there is but one God. The greatest gift to humanity from the Jewish faith and people—monotheism.

"Hear O Israel, the Lord is One." Is one of the most ancient and profound affirmations of that tradition. But what distinguishes us as Christians is the additional affirmation found in this morning's Gospel Reading. "God so loved the world, that God gave the only begotten Son, that whoever believed in the Son, should not perish, but should have everlasting life." That was the first Bible verse i ever had to memorize. Probably it was the first one many of you had to memorize as well.

And after Jesus, the Son returned to the God who sent Him, Jesus' love remained with his friends and disciples and empowered them to continue His ministry--through the presence in their hearts of God's own Holy Spirit. That's the Christian faith. That's the Doctrine of the Trinity in a nutshell.

Unless you and I can to some degree accept and affirm—or at least continue to wrestle with that, we're worshipping in the wrong place. If we can only affirm that Jesus was another prophet, solidly grounded in the faith of Israel. who lent some light on the traditions, we need to be in attendance at the nearest synagogue. I can't exactly direct you to one, but. I’m sure there must be some around.

On the other hand, if we can only affirm that Jesus, if he really existed was probably a nice man and wise teacher who taught folks some neat ideas and ended up executed for preaching without a permit by the Romans, then we ought to worshipping in a Unitarian-Universalist congregation. I know some very nice people who attend the one located in Racine.

But, if you and I can affirm that Jesus Christ is the Lord of our lives, if we have chosen to follow the sense of His teachings in our relationships with one another, if we seek and/or have experienced an encouraging, empowering presence that we can only call God's Holy Spirit in our prayers and meditations, then we are Trinitarians. Then we are worshipping in the right place.

In the First Letter of John we're reminded that "God is Love". But, on the human level alone, how does one love without a beloved? On any level, love makes a double demand. Lover and beloved must remain two, even as they seek to become one. Love on the Divine level or on the human, demands different persons. Love is we--you and me--I and Thou.

Whether I am loving God, or my friend, or my spouse, or my child, I never cease to be me. No saint, no mystic, no hermit in the desert, no prophet or dreamer caught up in a vision ever ceased to be his or her own self. When Romeo offered to forsake his name for Juliet, he didn't become Juliet. Love demands identity within the context of union. Martin Buber called it “I and Thou”.

But love on the highest plane will forbid "mine" and "yours". The two, remaining two, still seek to be one. Our one-ness with our beloved is bought by sacrificing our own selfishness.

To love is to need to give. To love is to place the ultimate happiness of the other above your own. To love is to share. To love perfectly then, would be to give and to give until there's nothing left--and to rejoice in the giving--because in that emptying, you would find yourself filled. Only in that way, only then, can two remain two and yet become one.

It is in the Trinity, the love that God has for God's own selves that you and I can see this absolute perfection of love. There are three persons-- God the Creator, God the Christ, and God the Holy Spirit. But there is no ego, no separation, no jealousy. The Divine Nature, the perfect love that makes God, God--is present equally in Eternal Parent, Redeeming Son, and Divine Sanctifier. God is an equal exchange of perfect love, reflecting three faces to us.

And that is why the Holy Trinity is the model for all human love. In the Trinity, we can see something of what Jesus was driving at when He told us to "love one another, as I have loved you." Love one another sacrificially, love one another without jealousy or possessiveness, love one another, and in that loving, we will find ourselves coming to know His love.

So you see, when that little girl asked me "Is God married?" she tossed me a hot potato. No, there is no "Mrs. God", who functions as First Lady of Heaven and runs around picking up after all those messy angels. But on the other hand, God does not live or love in solitary splendor.

Our God is community. Our God, though one is also three (and possibly more). God is family, not isolated, nor aloof, haughty or unsociable. Who would want to worship an old grouch of a God like that? No, our God relates, our God loves, our God is One, but also expressed in many ways. Our God is ultimate Unity, in the midst of diversity.

We do not worship that Old Testament man-in-a-white-beard, sitting on a diamond hard throne, blinding as the sun yet cold as ice. Our God is life giving process--not a giant sized middle eastern king. God is Eternal Parent, Faithful Offspring, and their Love--for one another and for us.

If I've been hard on theologians in this sermon, let me give them a word of credit. To be a theologian literally means to be one "who loves knowledge about God." That's not all bad by any means. Theologians have given us a good word as well. They were not content to wrestle with the meaning of the Trinity, with that Divine inter- personal relationship of perfect love. They went a step further and asked the next question. They asked about this Divine life from which we all come, and whose seed and spirit we all carry. "What do these three persons, these three faces of God--what does this three- in-one do?"

And they came up with an answer. As theologians are wont to do, they used a Greek word. But for once it was appropriate. "Epichoresis" --it means "to dance". Isn't that a gorgeous image? The Maker and the Redeemer and the Spirit dancing eternally. Hand-in- hand, three in one, enjoying one another, enjoying their lives together, loving one another. If that image has any truth, any power for us, we their children ought to dance as well.

Not prance around a golden calf. Not boogie at a Rock and Roll concert, nor waltz in a ballroom, or line dance in a honky-tonk. No, the dance that the Trinity calls you and I to is the dance in which men and women, old and young, straight and gay, of all ages, races and cultures enjoy and celebrate their life together. It is a dance of joy and community, a dance without fear or loneliness.

To be able to live our lives in love and joy, to dance to the song of our God we will learn to be like and to be joyful in the Trinity. Though many, we will become one. Though diverse, we will be unified. Though individuals, we yearn for, strive for, pray for, dance for community, without fear or hesitation or judgment or pain of one another.

Only when you and I are engaged in learning to love and live in community does all this make sense. Only after we've begun to love, do we learn how to deepen the love that we have. Only after we see the Trinity as a model for our lives, our love, our growth in community does all this language about persons of the Godhead and faces of the Divine and Mother, Son and Spirit assume a reality in our hearts. Only once we have experience it, will it mean anything.

Once we begin to dance the dance of faith, the Doctrine of the Trinity will become more than an intellectual toy and grow into a well of deep and abiding insight and hope and joy. Then we can answer that little girl's idle question.

"Yes, God is married. God is married eternally to God's own self through the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. God is married to the world, because God loves it so much. God is married to us, because God loves us so much."

In the 1330s Catherine of Sienna, a lay mystic and reformer of the church prayed to the Trinity. Let us pray that prayer now.

"O Eternal Trinity, my sweet love!

You Light, give us light.

You Wisdom, give us wisdom.

You supreme Strength, give us strength.

Today, eternal God, let our cloud be dissipated

so that we may perfectly know and follow your Truth in truth,

with a free and simple heart.” Amen.