Sorrow for Evangelicals Who Oppose Marriage Equality

Watching evangelical pastors condemn Marriage Equality while "quoting" the Bible is very much the same, I think, as those who cited Scripture to justify the persecution of Jews, the enslavement of people of color and the denial of rights to women.

Let's face it - in the conversation of faith we call "the Bible," every kind of voice can be heard, from the sublime to the mean. So, merely quoting the Bible, citing some passage of Scripture, means nothing, any more than picking up a novel, grabbing a piece or two of it, and then claiming to know the mind of the author, or at least the whole of the plot.

I feel a great sorrow for evangelical pastors who cannot cross over into a more enlightened world-view. They fear losing something, when in fact, it's all gain.

But truth be told, "condemnation" works in many a pulpit; it's easy to preach and fun to wallow in.

In all previous chapters of condemnation, from the Inquisition to the fight against civil rights, condemnation has proved wrong, though bolstered by plenty of Bible-thumping, or at least claims to "tradition."

Condemnation doesn't work.

The stance against Marriage Equality is failing, and will continue to fail. Sure, there will always be some who "fight the good fight" in their own skewed mind and world, as there are still those who subscribe to a flat earth and a geocentric view of the solar system.

I pray for evangelical pastors who are making a "brave stand" on their condemnation of Marriage Equality. They are on the wrong side of history with very little on which to base their claims. They know they're on shaky ground but cannot escape the clutches of their own traditions. And their congregations pay them to stay as they are.

It's all very sad.

Good Preaching!

Good preaching - okay, I'll have a go at it.

Preparation, preparation, preparation - and that's many years, and still learning, still preparing.

Writing, writing, writing - nothing hones the mind, the thoughts, the ability to give expression to the inexpressible. 

Humility, humility, humility - give it your best shot, and know that it fell short. Period! It was probably good, but there's always another Sunday.

Trust, trust, trust - when spoken in hope for the wellbeing of another, a changed social condition, the welfare of the world, God does something with such efforts.

Energy, energy, energy - deep and penetrating care for the Word, the world, scholarship, politics and hope. If you care about it, preach about it. If you don't care deeply, find something about which you care deeply, and go from there. At such a point, a little pulpit-pounding might just happen, and that's okay, too.

To this, I'd add: use a text, or something similar there to. Have the notes at hand, and let the congregation know that you produced something requiring labor as well as spirit.

Use a lectern, or pulpit - waltzing around on the chancel, platform, is mostly a preacher-centered look-at-me device.

Anyone with thespian proclivities can dazzle an audience, but preaching isn't about dazzle, it's about grace and justice, and those are both amazing things and hard things, requiring a lot of emotional and intellectual effort well-harnessed by training, by sermon-text and by humility.

Nothing wrong with flair - let the Spirit lead, but like a horse, if the preacher is going to pull the wagon, some serious equipment/equipping is needed. Dashing off here and there across the field may be pretty to watch, but in the end, to be of value, the horse is harnessed for the day's work.

Well, that's enough for this morning ... a Sunday morning in Amsterdam.

Healing, Humiliation and Prayer

The life of faith, always ambiguous in its results ... frustrating at times, since there is no guarantee that prayer, or anything else we might call upon, will consistently "work."

In Mark 6.13, the disciples are hugely "successful" in their efforts to cast our demons and, by oil-anointing, to heal the sick.

What a spiritual high for them it must have been.

Yet, in Mark 9, the disciples have a "mountain-bottom" experience - they can't heal a boy with convulsions. After Jesus heals the child, the disciples inquire as to why they failed. Cryptically, Jesus replies that some "demons" respond only to prayer (NRSV; other texts add fasting), leaving the disciples scratching their heads, I'm quite sure, as this leaves us wondering, too.

But Mark has a point - at no point in time can the disciples "patent" a process of healing ... sometimes it happens, and sometimes it doesn't, and there's no clear explanation of it.

How humiliated the disciples must have been when they failed, and worse, when the scribes went after them. Had the disciples perhaps been earlier boasting, after their earlier success? Heck who doesn't engage in "spiritual boasting" now and again, if not with others, at least within our own spirit?

Mark addresses the simple reality: sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn't, and there's no pattern to be claimed by the disciples, no method that "guarantees" anything.

Perhaps to keep in check the church's inclination to boast: "my god can beat up on your god," and so on.

Sort of like preaching: that one Sunday when it all came together and the angels sang ... and the preacher goes home to write a book about "successful preaching."

And then the following Sunday, with the preacher in full control of the method, full of confidence and self, and the sermon lands like a cow pie in the field - kerplop! And the preacher goes home humiliated and sad. And later in the afternoon, Jesus stops by and says something about prayer.

Oh well, there's another Sunday coming ... and another chance, and maybe it'll work ... and maybe it won't. Jesus my LORD!

Preaching Schlock?

Excerpt from last (9/13/09) Sunday's message:

I’ve been paying attention to sermons for a long time.

In seminary, I worked in the library – I reshelved books returned by students and pastors … I decided to look at what pastors were reading, and even as a first-year student, I was shocked and disturbed – so much of it was just plain schlock … syrupy spirituality, mediocre moralisms, simpleton ideas and shallow commitments.

(to read the message, click HERE)

I'm still concerned about the character of preaching. Reading Calvin this year, and now into the fourth book of the Institutes wherein Calvin examines the nature of the ordained office and its high calling to instruction, I am saddened by what passes as "preaching" these days.

Many of us have been influenced by the megachurch style - three powerpoints, colorfully illustrated with flowers and crashing waves, along with a few scriptures and a tearful-story or two. The "sermon" outline may be included as a handout, and folks can "follow along" by filing in the blanks, such as "Esther really ________ God."

And, of course, all of this delivered "extemporaneously" ... and listening to a lot of stuff posted to the internet, much of this extemp preaching strikes me as inarticulate as it is loud. Sort of like the preacher of old who noted in the margin of his text, "strike pulpit."

Is this preaching?

Is this teaching?

I don't know.

I've done a lot of extemp preaching over the years, and looking back, I don't think any of it could ever hold a candle to the value of a carefully prepared manuscript filled with carefully prepared thoughts on a text that has been carefully exegeted and prayerfully pondered (sure, no style or method inherently posses the power of God - that's up to God alone, and God will bless what God blesses, and we cannot control or manage that).

I've done the slide-show routine, and there's value there, but like TV, how effective is eye-candy?

Millions have been spent for the latest in tech tools, and I've been there, too, but at this stage of the game, I wonder just how effective it's been in creating disciples and feeding the hungry.

The self-study undertaken by Willow Creek a few years back rocked the megachurch world by its startling honesty, revealing that they had been no more or less successful in creating disciples, spiritually mature followers of Jesus, than anyone else.

I think we've all been cowed by the secular - that glitz, tech and high-powered stunts, will bring folks to Christ, and, the "numbers" of the megachurch prove it ... or do they?

I thank God for the megachurches and how they impacted us, but they're learning, as did the "megachurches" of an earlier time, that numbers are deceptive.

Or in the flow of Isaiah or Gideon's army, it's the faithful remnant who carries the torch, and the remnant is always small in number, so that God's folks never get the impression that it's their might and main that wins the day.

As for preaching?

It's an age-old task - from Jeremiah before the temple to Jesus on the Mount, from Calvin in Geneva to any of us today - and only God will give the blessing!