As I mentioned regarding the sermon on Job posted earlier, I look forward to this particular section of year B of the lectionary. The last couple of weeks, we have had selections from the book of Ruth - the only time it shows up in the lectionary cycle. As with Job, we read several selections from Ruth during worship today in order to walk through the story as a whole. It was also our annual stewardship Sunday, in which we invited congregation members to come forward and make commitments of the time, talent and treasure for the coming year in our ministry.
“Faithful or Successful?”
Selections from the Book of Ruth
November 8, 2009
As we work our way through the three year lectionary cycle, which offers us a game plan for reading scripture in worship which results in hearing at least selected portions from the entire Bible over the course of the cycle, we come across moments that can’t be passed up. Last month we had readings from Job, and since Job shows up but one time in the three year cycle, I made sure to spend some time with that book. It is the same today – we get a couple of selected portions from the book of Ruth just once every three years, so I can’t let it go by without dealing with it. It’s not only a wonderful, inspiring story, but it may well offer a word or two that will be helpful as we prepare to make our commitments to the congregation for 2010.
Ruth begins in utter disaster. Naomi, Ruth and Orpah have all three lost their husbands. Well, they didn’t lose them … they were widowed. Because the place of women in our society in America in 2009 is quite different than in ancient Palestine, it may be difficult to understand what a disaster this is, beyond the obvious grief and loss present in the situation. According to the law, the only way that women had any standing in society was through their husbands; the only way they had any material possessions was through their husbands; the only way they had food and shelter was through their husbands; the only way they had any legal protection or legal recourse was through their husbands. It’s hard for us to imagine what it must have felt like for these three women to have lost, literally, everything. They suddenly found themselves without means of support, without food and shelter, without legal protection.
Naomi had moved to Moab with her husband and sons when a famine had struck Israel. While there, the sons had each married women from Moab – Ruth and Orpah. So when they found themselves bereft of all means of support, Naomi made the best decision she could – it’s time to go home to Israel. Surely there would be distant family members to connect with and rebuild life. There’s one problem. Her daughters-in-law are foreigners. Now, it might have been a bit easier if they were foreigners, but not from Moab.
Moabites – Oh! Those people! Here’s what was woven into the fabric of the people of God -- from the book of Deuteronomy:
“No Ammonite or Moabite shall be admitted to the assembly of the LORD. Even to the tenth generation, none of their descendants shall be admitted to the assembly of the LORD, because they did not meet you with food and water on your journey out of Egypt, and because they hired against you Balaam son of Beor, from Pethor of Mesopotamia, to curse you.” (Dt. 23:3-4).
There was already an ethos that heavily prejudiced the people against intimate relations with foreigners, but here Ruth and Orpah are from a clan specifically named in the Torah as off limits and unacceptable. A prejudice that had been ingrained in the people for ages.
They prepare to leave, and as they do Naomi tells her daughters-in-law what the score will be in her homeland. She suggests strongly to them that they should stay behind in their own home. She urges them, telling them they have nothing waiting for them in her homeland. They would be better off staying behind. Ruth and Orpah both refuse at first … they had been sharing a household for a decade; they shared a love for Naomi’s sons with her; they had built a life together.
But Naomi insists again. Finally, in tears, Orpah agrees. She bids her mother in law farewell and goes her own way. But Ruth refuses to leave, uttering the words that are perhaps the most well-known from this book:
"Don't force me to leave you; don't make me go home. Where you go, I go; and where you live, I'll live. Your people are my people, your God is my God; where you die, I'll die, and that's where I'll be buried, so help me God—not even death itself is going to come between us!" (Ruth 1:16-17).
It is an example of undying, unfailing, steadfast love. In the Hebrew, the word is chesed, translated as “loving kindness” or “steadfast love” when chesed is used to describe God. Here, we see it in Ruth. No matter what happens, Naomi; no matter where you go; no matter what the consequences; no matter what other people think; no matter where we are – I … will … be … with … you. The promise of the ages from God to God’s people here made from Ruth to Naomi. The same promise made between friends and family members as they move through the trials of life. The same promise made between those who are committed to living their lives together in partnership. The same words that Ruth Woodward and Bernie McDonald – both in their eighties – said to each other on their wedding day 8 days ago.
Where you go, I will go; your people will be my people; your God will be my God; where you die I will die; nothing can separate us.
Ruth returns with Naomi to her homeland – Israel. They arrive at the beginning of harvest season and find their way to the fringes of the field of Boaz. The Torah makes specific provision for this … that which grows around the edges of the fields is to be left for the poor. Those who were in need were free to glean what they could around the edges. As it turns out Boaz is related, distantly, to Naomi’s late husband. Ruth offers to go to the field and glean so they would have food.
When she does so, she quickly is noticed by the workers and by Boaz – she worked steadily, conversed easily, made sure not to be in the way. Soon she and Boaz strike up a friendship. One gathers in reading chapter two that there may be some flirtation going on here. Boaz makes arrangements for his workers to leave some of the best of the harvest behind for Ruth; invites her to hang out with the young women from his household, thereby offering her some protection. And he’s making that offer to someone from a clan that was systematically excluded in the Torah.
Where you go, I will go, she promised her mother in law; where you live, I will live; your people will be my people. It was extraordinary faithfulness which was now paying off. Naomi begins to get the feeling that perhaps there was an opportunity here for her to find a way to provide and protect her daughter in law. She coaches Ruth … at the end of the day, when everyone is exhausted, when Boaz has had a little too much to drink and passes out on the threshing floor, go to him. Lie down beside him; spread his cloak over you; make yourself ‘available’ to him. (Wink, wink; nudge, nudge) Boaz awakes and quickly makes arrangements to take Ruth, the Moabite, the excluded one, into his household. He goes through the provisions of tradition, checks with the next closest relative to Naomi and then agrees to marry Ruth, thus providing security, protection and standing in society to both women.
It’s a nicely written story. The faithfulness shown to Naomi by Ruth is inspiring. Even further, many scholars suggest that the story of Ruth became scripture at a time when God’s people were struggling with the whole idea of who can and should be included and who should be excluded; who was worthy of having access to the holiest parts of the tradition and who was not. And here is a clever and powerful story which suggests that if God’s people could not manage to find a way to include those who had been excluded, then perhaps it would be that the outsider would find non-traditional ways to find their way in … even if it meant taking an upstanding citizen for a roll in the hay.
But it doesn’t stop there! The end of the book of Ruth gives us a genealogy … the writers in the Bible love to throw those in … and wouldn’t you know Ruth, the outsider, the excluded, now accepted into God’s family gives birth to a son, Obed; Obed grows up and has a son named Jesse; Jesse grows up and has a son named David … yes, THAT David. The one who became King David. The one who is the ancestor of Jesus. And so it turns out that the royal line for the Israelites, which continues into the line which brings us Jesus, includes someone who is expressly excluded. If you take the mainstream of the tradition of the time seriously, then Ruth is not qualified. She shouldn’t count.
That radical faithfulness which results in the excluded outsider becoming part of the family of God … well, it’s still an issue today. As I did some advance study for this sermon, one of the longest articles offering commentary on the Book of Ruth spent the whole time explaining how it couldn’t possibly be that someone who was expressly disqualified from entrance into the family of God could end up being the great-grandmother of David, the ancestor of Jesus. In fact, this scholar spent 10 pages winding his way toward drawing the conclusion that in fact, Ruth was not from Moab, but was an Israelite after all. It seemed to be a stretch to me. I have a general rule for biblical interpretation that says that if our attempt to understand the meaning of a passage leads us to a conclusion that happens to coincide with an idea that’s a lot easier for us to live with than the alternative, then there’s a chance we may be remaking the Bible to suit our own needs. So, if it seems easier and more acceptable to find a way to understand Ruth which suggests that such an outsider couldn’t possibly be a part of God’s intent, then it may be we are avoiding an issue.
God makes a habit of including the excluded … at least in the Bible that I read. Rahab the prostitute helps the Israelites crossing into the Promised Land and is thereafter included (she shows up in the genealogy that leads to Jesus too, by the way!). Naaman the Syrian general … a man completely outside the faith tradition … finds a way to connect to God through a servant in his household (2 Kings). Then there’s Ruth. Then there’s Jesus having dinner with people he’s not supposed to break bread with; talking to people he’s not supposed to talk to; touching people he’s not supposed to touch.
A couple of weeks ago, I went to a continuing education event hosted by Ginghamsburg UMC – a congregation just north of Dayton that began as a group of 75 people in 1990 and is now the largest congregation in the West Ohio Conference – by far – worshipping more than 4,000 each weekend. Those of you who’ve gotten to know me know that I usually avoid events like that. I think continually holding up mega-churches as models for everyone isn’t really helpful in the long run. Not every congregation is called to go in that direction, and not every congregation should. Plus it reinforces the notion that congregations like Good Shepherd – which is averaging between 125 and 130 in worship this year – are small, when in fact with that worship attendance we are actually larger that 85% of UM congregations. And that results in many very healthy and vital congregations feeling down about themselves because they don’t have 4,000 in worship.
BUT – I went this year because the speakers, preachers and teachers were to be focusing on urban ministry and poverty – topics relevant to our ministry here at Good Shepherd. And I got some good stuff by going. I’m glad I went. But I also heard a whole lot of talk among my colleagues – “well, I don’t know how we can do any of this, we’re not big enough” (from a pastor whose congregation worships 450 or so); “we’re trying to grow and grow and we can’t seem to get started” (from a pastor whose congregation worships 300 or so). And so on. We can easily get sucked into a mentality that forces us to focus on numbers and “success” rather than on being “faithful” to who God is and what God is calling us to do.
To be fair, Mike Slaughter, the lead pastor at Ginghamsburg, said exactly that during his teaching time – let’s stop focusing on numbers and instead focus on faithfulness to the mission God gives us. Of course many dismissed him with the words, “well sure, when you have 4,000 in worship you can afford to not worry about success.”
Why bring that up? In a few minutes, we’ll all have a chance to lay our estimate of giving cards and our gifts and talents surveys on the altar. There is significant pressure within mainline churches for pastors like me to push the people they serve to challenge themselves to grow significantly in what they commit to giving the church of their time or their treasure. I’m not going to do that. In fact, I’ll go so far as to say that I don’t care what you put on the card or on the survey.
But I will say this – before you fill it out and come forward, I want you to consider taking the same risk that Ruth took with Naomi. She had no guarantee of success. In fact, the deck was probably stacked against her. She had no connection to the people in the place Naomi was taking her. In fact, she might have ended up an outcast. Instead, she said: Where you go, I go; and where you live, I'll live. Your people are my people; your God is my God.
When you fill out the card and the survey and when you come forward to lay them on the altar, all I want you to think about is the faithfulness God has shown to all of us here at Good Shepherd for the last 40 years. All I want you to think about is what our new mission and vision statement says – that we will live out the presence of Jesus in this diverse urban neighborhood. Don’t think about what living out that mission would look like if we were “successful.” Instead, consider what it will look like around here if we are simply “faithful” to what God has called us to do. Faithful – the way Ruth was faithful to Naomi; faithful – the way God has been faithful to us.
Think about that … THEN fill out the card and bring it up. Put on it whatever you will, but put something on it, throw your lot in with this group of travelers, commit to going together wherever it is that God will take us, promise to be faithful to our vision for ministry. Then bring up your envelope. And join me at the prayer rail to ask for the courage, strength, and faithfulness to live this mission we have been given.
Join me at the prayer rail because as we go forward into an uncertain and challenging future … I will go with you … where you live, I live … your people are my people … your God is my God.
No matter what God has in store for us – we will do it together. I will be with you. Just as surely as God is with us. And we will listen for God’s call to all of us and seek to answer it faithfully. And - together.
Amen.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Considering Job
As we move through the 3-year lectionary cycle, there are parts of it that I look forward to more than others. The readings this fall are among those. In October, we had the good fortune of reading through the book of Job sequentially. I chose to focus on other lectionary readings until October 25, when we read representative portions of the whole book and I spent the sermon walking through the story.
I've edited what you see below to shorten it a bit (though it's still on the long side) and to remove a couple of stories that deal with a couple of friends' personal events. There is also an audio version similar to this text from three years ago on the Church of the Good Shepherd website - http://www.goodshepherdum.org/.
“The Impatience of Job”
Job 1:1, 2:1-13; Job 23:1-9, 16-17;
Job 38: 1-7, 24-42; Job 42:1-17
October 25, 2009
Yes, you saw the title right. Yes, I know that’s not what we usually say about Job. Usually it’s something like, “that Linda Wallick must have the patience of Job dealing with Don” – just as an example. But frankly, Job is not patient at all. At least not in the usual way we think of patience. Here’s what the dictionary says:
1. The quality of being patient, as the bearing of provocation, annoyance, misfortune, or pain, without complaint, loss of temper, irritation, or the like.
2. An ability or willingness to suppress restlessness or annoyance when confronted with delay.
3. Quiet, steady perseverance; even-tempered care.
These qualities do not, in any way, shape or form characterize Job. So, why we talk about the “patience of Job” is beyond me. But I’m getting ahead of myself. Let’s walk through the story a bit.
“In the land of Uz there lived a man whose name was Job. This man was blameless and upright; he feared God and shunned evil.” (Job 1:1) It is critical that from the beginning we understand that Job is supposed to represent the best of who people of faith can be. He is “blameless and upright.” If the writer of Proverbs is correct, and the fear of God (that is, respect) is the beginning of wisdom, then Job is wise, too. He “feared God and shunned evil.”
The rest of the first chapter of Job tells us more about this man. He was wealthy and happy. He had many sons and daughters; daughters-in-law and sons-in-law. He had much livestock. His sons would host feast days to which the whole family was invited. After each feast day, just in case any of his children had done anything inappropriate during the celebration, he made an offering to God on their behalf to cover any potential sins. What a good dad!
Then the story takes a turn. “One day the divine beings presented themselves to God, and Satan came along with them.” Be careful – this is not the same character that developed in later years and the being that is red and has pointy ears and a tail and pitchfork and rules over hell. A better translation of this word, “Satan,” as it is used in Job, is “accuser” or “adversary.” The other ideas about this character come much later. Here, in this story, this adversary is one of the divine beings who are acting with God’s permission. The adversary says to God: “Sure, Job is a terrific person of faith, but I can guarantee you he will desert you the moment he doesn’t have all that stuff anymore.” God says, “You’re on! Do whatever you like, just spare his life. I am confident he will still be a person of faith.”
Job then loses his land, his livestock, his sons and daughters and their families and his home. Yet he maintains his integrity with God and continues to revere the Lord.
****
The Adversary returns to God and God says, “See … I told you! Job is still faithful.” The Adversary says, “Yes, but what if he were afflicted personally? It’s easy to let go of things, but not so easy to come to terms with one’s body falling to pieces.” God again sends The Adversary out but with the caution to spare Job’s life.
Now Job is afflicted with painful sores from the top of his head to the bottoms of his feet. Now, he goes to sit on a heap of ashes and scrape at his sores with a shard of pottery. Even his wife loses confidence in God: “Job – just curse God and die!” Job refuses.
For no discernable reason, a good man – a righteous man – loses everything. A man who had every reason to believe he had been blessed by God; a man who held to the traditions of the faith; a man who was a caring father and husband; this man loses everything: Land, possessions, children, wealth, and health. Murphy’s Law to the extreme – everything that could go wrong does and goes wrong to the greatest degree that it can. Job begins to mourn his situation. He tears his robes, covers himself in dust and ashes (a traditional symbol for repentance or mourning), sits down on the ash heap and starts scraping his sores.
His friends hear of his troubles and they come to be with him. They sat on the ground, covered them themselves with ash, tore their robes and sat with him in silence for seven days. How nice it feels sometimes for a friend to be present but not try to fix everything – especially when there’s nothing that friend can do to change anything at all.
But then Job’s lament begins. Clear evidence that while he may be many things, patient is not really one of them. Chapter 3 begins and the author of Job slips into poetry. And while Job does not curse God, he does curse the day he was born. “Perish the day on which I was born, and the night it was announced.” (3:3) Wipe that day off the calendar; let no one make a happy noise on that day; may the sun not rise on that day (3:4-10, paraphrased). Then he goes a step further: “Why didn’t I just die at birth; expire as I came forth from the womb?” It would have been better if I could just have been buried. (3:11)
These are not the words of a patient man. No, these are the words of a man who has taken all he can take; who has lost everything; who can’t understand why it has all happened; who has no recourse; who needs to let loose on someone or something. (Have you been there?)
Then Job’s friends, they who had been sitting with him in silence, begin to speak. In turn, they each offer Job timeless pieces of faithful advice which do not help him, not one little bit. Eliphaz is first. He suggests to Job that since he is such a wise and faithful person he should know that it is only those who’ve gone astray who are so afflicted, so what he needs to do is get right with God again. Lay himself down, set aside his self-concern and seek a renewed relationship with God.
***
Now, there is some truth here. Many faithful people, including me, and perhaps including some of you, have found new and deeper connections to our Creator in the midst of crisis. But the notion such crises can be explained by a lack of connection with God or that they can be resolved by a renewed connection with God … well, this leaves a little something to be desired. Having a relationship with God is not like having a magic wand so that if you just remember to use it everything will be OK in life. Thanks, but no thanks, Eliphaz. Your advice is not helpful.
Job’s next friend to speak is Bildad. Oh, dear we all know a Bildad. You know, one of those deeply religious folks who just have everything all figured out. Oy, they drive me crazy! Bildad suggests that since Job is a righteous man, it must be that his children sinned and he was being punished for it. After all, God would not rain down such calamity on someone for no reason, right? The Bildads of the world can make you crazy. It’s all so simple, so clearly laid out. There’s no room for mystery or uncertainty. Job doesn’t fall for it and neither should we.
Then Zophar speaks up. For Zophar, wisdom is the issue. He suggests to Job that he just doesn’t understand exactly in what way he’s a sinner. If he were to look closely enough, he could see what he’s done and make amends for it with God. It’s a bit of an insult really … sorry to rain on your parade even more Job, but you’re not very smart, either! Job doesn’t buy into that either.
Finally we get Job’s lengthy reply to his friends – a reply that becomes a tirade against God. “Today my complaint is bitter … if only I knew where to find [God]; if only I could go to [God’s] dwelling! Then I could state my case and argue. Would [God] oppose me then? No, [God] wouldn’t even press charges! …. But if I look to the east … or to the west … or to the north … or to the south … I cannot find [God]. [God] has made me faint-hearted and terrified me. But I will not be silenced by the darkness.” (Ch. 23, NIV and paraphrase)
Finally, we get to the core of Job’s complaint. It’s not so much “why is this happening?” and it’s not so much “what did I do to deserve this?” and it’s not so much “help me find my way out.” The core of Job’s complaint to God is: Where are you? Would you just speak up? Can you make your presence known? Job just wants an answer; he just wants to know God is still there. It’s not so much the injustice of it all; it’s not being able to hash it out with God in the midst of it – that’s the issue. Oh, how I have been at the bedside of so many who wonder in the midst of their crisis – not so much why is this happening or how do I get out of it, but “where are you, God?”
After a long section of railing at God, just wanting God to show up and say something – anything – God shows up and gives Job the answer to all the questions he didn’t ask. My, God has a habit of doing that. Jesus did it too. It must be a divine trait. Job has been railing on about this injustice and asking where God is, but God replies:
“Who is this that darkens my counsel with words without knowledge? Brace yourself like a man; I will question you, and you shall answer me.” (38:2-3) Where were you when the foundations of the earth were laid? Who marked off the dimensions of the earth? Surely you know, Job! Who spread the stars in the sky and makes the constellations come out in their season? Who sends the rain? Who controls the thunder and lightning? Do they report to you? Can you count the clouds? What about the animal kingdom? Do you help the lions? The ravens? Did you figure out how the mountain goats and the deer should give birth? Did you put the feathers on the ostrich? Can you make the hawk soar? Did you design the fleet leg muscles of the horse? And then my personal favorite, “Job, did you set the wild ass free?”
Job replies, “I think I’ve spoken enough here.” But God isn’t finished. Now God moves into the mythic and the fantastical by naming legendary monsters from Job’s time. “Take behemoth, which I made, like I made you.” Can you romp around in the wilderness playing with legendary monsters like I can? And then, “Can you draw Leviathan out with a fishhook?” Can you swim around in the oceans with mythic sea monsters, too?
It’s very interesting, this book. The suggestion is that God is the Creator of all that is good and right and just AND the Creator of that which is chaotic and even scary. God produces rain on both the righteous and the unrighteous. God is seen in the fluffy bunny rabbit playing in the meadow and is seen romping around with sea monsters.
Maybe it’s a good suggestion. Maybe one of the points is that God is present in both. Maybe it’s a good reminder that God is a whole lot bigger and more complicated than we could ever figure out for ourselves. Perhaps it’s more helpful to understand that God may be there romping around in the midst of the chaos just as much as we know God is present when all is right with the world.
Job had been asking where God was and why all this had happened to him; what he got was a dramatic lesson in who created the universe. Job simply replies, “I spoke of things I did not understand, things too wonderful for me to know. My ears had heard of you but now my eyes have seen you.” (42:3b, 5)
Sometimes one of the things we need in the midst of the chaos is simply a glimpse of the big picture. A reminder that in the midst of delight and in the depths of misery; in the process of celebrating life and in those moments we grieve over what we have lost; in the moments of great health and vitality and through the times of ill health and suffering – in the midst of all of it God is present and God is still God, no matter what.
But the story isn’t over yet. There is just a bit more. Scholars make a strong case that perhaps this ending of the book of Job wasn’t originally there. And it does seem out of character, doesn’t it? We’ve spent 41 ½ chapters as witness to abject suffering, Job railing and yelling and stomping his feet at God, a majestic Holy response from the midst of a whirlwind, and then we get this ending – “Oh, by the way Job got everything back times two and lived to a ripe old age.”
That’s too easy! It doesn’t fit! And we know it doesn’t really work out that way in life, does it?
Even those of us who move through incredible suffering in life, who have deep questions about the identity and presence of God and do so with our souls and spirits intact, know that that doesn’t make things easy in life. It’s just that now you have deeper and better perspective on it. In fact, if you’ve ever spent any time in Job’s shoes, it feels good to journey with him through all that anger and frustration with God. Finally, someone who understands real life! Then there’s this all-too-easy ending tacked on and you feel hijacked.
But you know what? I’m glad it’s there. After having lost everything in the most dramatic way possible; after suffering immeasurably from a physical affliction that must have been a nightmare to deal with; after finding out his dear friends were full of platitudes and wrong answers; after spewing all of his impatience and frustration and anger at God, it would take an incredible act of faith for Job to decide that he could take a crack at living life again. I mean, he was doing everything right in life and had all the marks of success before losing everything and suffering so. What a leap of faith it would take to take a stab at life again, knowing that all he had to go on, really, was that God was there in the midst of life somewhere, even when the obvious clues around him in life might argue against that. Apparently, simply knowing the Almighty Creator of the Universe was right in the middle of every sticky piece of life was enough. And so Job could go on and rebuild life.
Friends, I don’t know what life may be throwing you at this very moment. Well, I DO know about what life is throwing at some of you. And I don’t know what the future holds for any of you. None of us knows that. But let us hold tight to the sure and certain knowledge that God is present in the midst of all the seasons of life, even the icky seasons of life, and that if we look and we listen and we open our hearts and minds, we will understand that. And then we can take the next step in life, knowing God is right there with us. And that will be enough.
Amen.
I've edited what you see below to shorten it a bit (though it's still on the long side) and to remove a couple of stories that deal with a couple of friends' personal events. There is also an audio version similar to this text from three years ago on the Church of the Good Shepherd website - http://www.goodshepherdum.org/.
“The Impatience of Job”
Job 1:1, 2:1-13; Job 23:1-9, 16-17;
Job 38: 1-7, 24-42; Job 42:1-17
October 25, 2009
Yes, you saw the title right. Yes, I know that’s not what we usually say about Job. Usually it’s something like, “that Linda Wallick must have the patience of Job dealing with Don” – just as an example. But frankly, Job is not patient at all. At least not in the usual way we think of patience. Here’s what the dictionary says:
1. The quality of being patient, as the bearing of provocation, annoyance, misfortune, or pain, without complaint, loss of temper, irritation, or the like.
2. An ability or willingness to suppress restlessness or annoyance when confronted with delay.
3. Quiet, steady perseverance; even-tempered care.
These qualities do not, in any way, shape or form characterize Job. So, why we talk about the “patience of Job” is beyond me. But I’m getting ahead of myself. Let’s walk through the story a bit.
“In the land of Uz there lived a man whose name was Job. This man was blameless and upright; he feared God and shunned evil.” (Job 1:1) It is critical that from the beginning we understand that Job is supposed to represent the best of who people of faith can be. He is “blameless and upright.” If the writer of Proverbs is correct, and the fear of God (that is, respect) is the beginning of wisdom, then Job is wise, too. He “feared God and shunned evil.”
The rest of the first chapter of Job tells us more about this man. He was wealthy and happy. He had many sons and daughters; daughters-in-law and sons-in-law. He had much livestock. His sons would host feast days to which the whole family was invited. After each feast day, just in case any of his children had done anything inappropriate during the celebration, he made an offering to God on their behalf to cover any potential sins. What a good dad!
Then the story takes a turn. “One day the divine beings presented themselves to God, and Satan came along with them.” Be careful – this is not the same character that developed in later years and the being that is red and has pointy ears and a tail and pitchfork and rules over hell. A better translation of this word, “Satan,” as it is used in Job, is “accuser” or “adversary.” The other ideas about this character come much later. Here, in this story, this adversary is one of the divine beings who are acting with God’s permission. The adversary says to God: “Sure, Job is a terrific person of faith, but I can guarantee you he will desert you the moment he doesn’t have all that stuff anymore.” God says, “You’re on! Do whatever you like, just spare his life. I am confident he will still be a person of faith.”
Job then loses his land, his livestock, his sons and daughters and their families and his home. Yet he maintains his integrity with God and continues to revere the Lord.
****
The Adversary returns to God and God says, “See … I told you! Job is still faithful.” The Adversary says, “Yes, but what if he were afflicted personally? It’s easy to let go of things, but not so easy to come to terms with one’s body falling to pieces.” God again sends The Adversary out but with the caution to spare Job’s life.
Now Job is afflicted with painful sores from the top of his head to the bottoms of his feet. Now, he goes to sit on a heap of ashes and scrape at his sores with a shard of pottery. Even his wife loses confidence in God: “Job – just curse God and die!” Job refuses.
For no discernable reason, a good man – a righteous man – loses everything. A man who had every reason to believe he had been blessed by God; a man who held to the traditions of the faith; a man who was a caring father and husband; this man loses everything: Land, possessions, children, wealth, and health. Murphy’s Law to the extreme – everything that could go wrong does and goes wrong to the greatest degree that it can. Job begins to mourn his situation. He tears his robes, covers himself in dust and ashes (a traditional symbol for repentance or mourning), sits down on the ash heap and starts scraping his sores.
His friends hear of his troubles and they come to be with him. They sat on the ground, covered them themselves with ash, tore their robes and sat with him in silence for seven days. How nice it feels sometimes for a friend to be present but not try to fix everything – especially when there’s nothing that friend can do to change anything at all.
But then Job’s lament begins. Clear evidence that while he may be many things, patient is not really one of them. Chapter 3 begins and the author of Job slips into poetry. And while Job does not curse God, he does curse the day he was born. “Perish the day on which I was born, and the night it was announced.” (3:3) Wipe that day off the calendar; let no one make a happy noise on that day; may the sun not rise on that day (3:4-10, paraphrased). Then he goes a step further: “Why didn’t I just die at birth; expire as I came forth from the womb?” It would have been better if I could just have been buried. (3:11)
These are not the words of a patient man. No, these are the words of a man who has taken all he can take; who has lost everything; who can’t understand why it has all happened; who has no recourse; who needs to let loose on someone or something. (Have you been there?)
Then Job’s friends, they who had been sitting with him in silence, begin to speak. In turn, they each offer Job timeless pieces of faithful advice which do not help him, not one little bit. Eliphaz is first. He suggests to Job that since he is such a wise and faithful person he should know that it is only those who’ve gone astray who are so afflicted, so what he needs to do is get right with God again. Lay himself down, set aside his self-concern and seek a renewed relationship with God.
***
Now, there is some truth here. Many faithful people, including me, and perhaps including some of you, have found new and deeper connections to our Creator in the midst of crisis. But the notion such crises can be explained by a lack of connection with God or that they can be resolved by a renewed connection with God … well, this leaves a little something to be desired. Having a relationship with God is not like having a magic wand so that if you just remember to use it everything will be OK in life. Thanks, but no thanks, Eliphaz. Your advice is not helpful.
Job’s next friend to speak is Bildad. Oh, dear we all know a Bildad. You know, one of those deeply religious folks who just have everything all figured out. Oy, they drive me crazy! Bildad suggests that since Job is a righteous man, it must be that his children sinned and he was being punished for it. After all, God would not rain down such calamity on someone for no reason, right? The Bildads of the world can make you crazy. It’s all so simple, so clearly laid out. There’s no room for mystery or uncertainty. Job doesn’t fall for it and neither should we.
Then Zophar speaks up. For Zophar, wisdom is the issue. He suggests to Job that he just doesn’t understand exactly in what way he’s a sinner. If he were to look closely enough, he could see what he’s done and make amends for it with God. It’s a bit of an insult really … sorry to rain on your parade even more Job, but you’re not very smart, either! Job doesn’t buy into that either.
Finally we get Job’s lengthy reply to his friends – a reply that becomes a tirade against God. “Today my complaint is bitter … if only I knew where to find [God]; if only I could go to [God’s] dwelling! Then I could state my case and argue. Would [God] oppose me then? No, [God] wouldn’t even press charges! …. But if I look to the east … or to the west … or to the north … or to the south … I cannot find [God]. [God] has made me faint-hearted and terrified me. But I will not be silenced by the darkness.” (Ch. 23, NIV and paraphrase)
Finally, we get to the core of Job’s complaint. It’s not so much “why is this happening?” and it’s not so much “what did I do to deserve this?” and it’s not so much “help me find my way out.” The core of Job’s complaint to God is: Where are you? Would you just speak up? Can you make your presence known? Job just wants an answer; he just wants to know God is still there. It’s not so much the injustice of it all; it’s not being able to hash it out with God in the midst of it – that’s the issue. Oh, how I have been at the bedside of so many who wonder in the midst of their crisis – not so much why is this happening or how do I get out of it, but “where are you, God?”
After a long section of railing at God, just wanting God to show up and say something – anything – God shows up and gives Job the answer to all the questions he didn’t ask. My, God has a habit of doing that. Jesus did it too. It must be a divine trait. Job has been railing on about this injustice and asking where God is, but God replies:
“Who is this that darkens my counsel with words without knowledge? Brace yourself like a man; I will question you, and you shall answer me.” (38:2-3) Where were you when the foundations of the earth were laid? Who marked off the dimensions of the earth? Surely you know, Job! Who spread the stars in the sky and makes the constellations come out in their season? Who sends the rain? Who controls the thunder and lightning? Do they report to you? Can you count the clouds? What about the animal kingdom? Do you help the lions? The ravens? Did you figure out how the mountain goats and the deer should give birth? Did you put the feathers on the ostrich? Can you make the hawk soar? Did you design the fleet leg muscles of the horse? And then my personal favorite, “Job, did you set the wild ass free?”
Job replies, “I think I’ve spoken enough here.” But God isn’t finished. Now God moves into the mythic and the fantastical by naming legendary monsters from Job’s time. “Take behemoth, which I made, like I made you.” Can you romp around in the wilderness playing with legendary monsters like I can? And then, “Can you draw Leviathan out with a fishhook?” Can you swim around in the oceans with mythic sea monsters, too?
It’s very interesting, this book. The suggestion is that God is the Creator of all that is good and right and just AND the Creator of that which is chaotic and even scary. God produces rain on both the righteous and the unrighteous. God is seen in the fluffy bunny rabbit playing in the meadow and is seen romping around with sea monsters.
Maybe it’s a good suggestion. Maybe one of the points is that God is present in both. Maybe it’s a good reminder that God is a whole lot bigger and more complicated than we could ever figure out for ourselves. Perhaps it’s more helpful to understand that God may be there romping around in the midst of the chaos just as much as we know God is present when all is right with the world.
Job had been asking where God was and why all this had happened to him; what he got was a dramatic lesson in who created the universe. Job simply replies, “I spoke of things I did not understand, things too wonderful for me to know. My ears had heard of you but now my eyes have seen you.” (42:3b, 5)
Sometimes one of the things we need in the midst of the chaos is simply a glimpse of the big picture. A reminder that in the midst of delight and in the depths of misery; in the process of celebrating life and in those moments we grieve over what we have lost; in the moments of great health and vitality and through the times of ill health and suffering – in the midst of all of it God is present and God is still God, no matter what.
But the story isn’t over yet. There is just a bit more. Scholars make a strong case that perhaps this ending of the book of Job wasn’t originally there. And it does seem out of character, doesn’t it? We’ve spent 41 ½ chapters as witness to abject suffering, Job railing and yelling and stomping his feet at God, a majestic Holy response from the midst of a whirlwind, and then we get this ending – “Oh, by the way Job got everything back times two and lived to a ripe old age.”
That’s too easy! It doesn’t fit! And we know it doesn’t really work out that way in life, does it?
Even those of us who move through incredible suffering in life, who have deep questions about the identity and presence of God and do so with our souls and spirits intact, know that that doesn’t make things easy in life. It’s just that now you have deeper and better perspective on it. In fact, if you’ve ever spent any time in Job’s shoes, it feels good to journey with him through all that anger and frustration with God. Finally, someone who understands real life! Then there’s this all-too-easy ending tacked on and you feel hijacked.
But you know what? I’m glad it’s there. After having lost everything in the most dramatic way possible; after suffering immeasurably from a physical affliction that must have been a nightmare to deal with; after finding out his dear friends were full of platitudes and wrong answers; after spewing all of his impatience and frustration and anger at God, it would take an incredible act of faith for Job to decide that he could take a crack at living life again. I mean, he was doing everything right in life and had all the marks of success before losing everything and suffering so. What a leap of faith it would take to take a stab at life again, knowing that all he had to go on, really, was that God was there in the midst of life somewhere, even when the obvious clues around him in life might argue against that. Apparently, simply knowing the Almighty Creator of the Universe was right in the middle of every sticky piece of life was enough. And so Job could go on and rebuild life.
Friends, I don’t know what life may be throwing you at this very moment. Well, I DO know about what life is throwing at some of you. And I don’t know what the future holds for any of you. None of us knows that. But let us hold tight to the sure and certain knowledge that God is present in the midst of all the seasons of life, even the icky seasons of life, and that if we look and we listen and we open our hearts and minds, we will understand that. And then we can take the next step in life, knowing God is right there with us. And that will be enough.
Amen.
An Octogenarian Wedding
On October 31, I had the high honor of officiating the wedding ceremony of two 84-year old members of Church of the Good Shepherd. That's unusual enough, but there's more: I had also officiated the funerals for the couples' first spouses. I had walked with each of them as they cared for ill spouses, as they grieved the loss of their marital relationships as their spouses declined, as they grieved the actual loss when their spouses died, as they mourned and rebuilt life, as they met one another and began to keep company and finally when their relationship turned to romance.
I had wrestled for weeks with what to say to these two - they've been through so much, they have so much to share. Finally, I decided to play my indecision into a rhetorical device and the wedding homily was born:
“When there is Nothing Left to Say”
Wedding Homily for Ruth Woodward and Bernie McDonald
October 31, 2009
(ref. Colossians 3:12-17)
I put on my Facebook status earlier this week that I was working on the wedding ceremony for two octogenarians – which was a first for me. I got many responses: “Very cool;” “How sweet! This gives me hope” “An inspiration to us all!” And of course there was the one joker who replied: “Octogenarians? Are those like vegetarians?”
Bernie and Ruth – you are, well, unusual! This doesn’t happen every day. As I gathered the words I wanted to share with you on this occasion, I scanned about for other stories on the internet about folks in their eighties or nineties who got married. I did find one article about a couple in Miami who got married a few years ago – he was 93 and she was 86. And that’s it. I did find a number of online senior citizen dating websites. Oh, yes: www.datingforseniors.com; www.seniorfriendfinder.com; and the list goes on. And I found a lot of jokes about what it’s like to get married when you’re old.
One good one goes like this: A widower and widow who had known one another for a long time saw their relationship blossom into a romance. One night at a community dinner, the widower got up the nerve to ask the widow, “Will you marry me?” After about six seconds’ hesitation, she answered “Yes. Yes, I will.”
The meal ended and they went to their respective apartments. The next morning, the would-be groom was troubled. Did she say “yes” or did she say “no?” Try as he might, he couldn’t remember. Full of anxiety, he went to the phone and called her. He explained that as he’d gotten older he just didn’t remember things like he used to. He reviewed the wonderful meal they had shared the night before. After gathering his courage, he asked: “When I asked if you would marry me, did you say ‘yes’ or did you say ‘no?’”
He was delighted to hear her say, “Oh, I said ‘yes’ and I meant it with all my heart.” Then she continued, “And I am so glad you called, because I couldn’t remember who had asked me!” I saw a few other good ones, too, but they weren’t appropriate to share in church. But that’s all I found – one news story, dating websites, and lots of jokes about getting old.
You are unusual. What does one say to folks in their eighties getting married? I usually tell couples to pay attention, quite literally, to passages like this one from Colossians – especially the exhortation to humility, patience and forgiveness. I tell couples – “you have no idea how much you are going to need those particular characteristics during your married life!” But the two of you already know that. You both have previously lived in long, wonderful marriages in which you learned that lesson and lived humility, patience and forgiveness every day. So I don’t need to tell you that. I’ll just remind you that you’ll need to do that again as you enter this new marriage.
I also usually call the couple’s attention to the “’til death do us part” section of the wedding vows and suggest that the commitment they are about to make is of the life and death variety. I go on to suggest that we never know when the death part will come our way and so they should hold on to this commitment and remember this shining moment when they have to walk through the valley of the shadow of death with their spouse. But I don’t have to remind you two of that – you have already done that. You know the gravity of the commitment you make and you know what it is to so commit your life to another person that you will walk anywhere they need to walk until the end of their days. So I don’t need to talk about that.
I also usually tell couples that they are not alone as they embark on wedded bliss. I remind them that all of these people gathered here have pledged to support you in your vows and help you find your way toward a truly loving and successful life partnership. But you already know that. You both have learned the importance of the loving support of friends, family and faith community. So I don’t need to tell you that. I’ll just remind you that it’s still true – even in your eighties. Maybe even more so!
So in a sense I have nothing to say to you. Nothing, except: Thank you.
Ruth and Bernie, in you, in this moment, you have given us all a chance to see what love and commitment really are. You have reminded us that as the decades pass for all of us, our call from God to live a full, active and vital life does not disappear or fade away – it is renewed with every gray hair and wrinkle that appears. By standing here today, you are striking a blow for courage – the courage to fully live all of life’s passions and emotions – no matter one’s age. By selecting that passage from Colossians, you have reminded us that the clothing that we are exhorted to put on – the clothing of compassion, kindness, humility, meekness, patience and forgiveness never wear out – they are always made new in Christ! By taking this step in this moment, you are reminding us that it is never too late to sing songs of gratitude for the renewal of life and love that can come while living in the light of Christ.
So, having reminded you of things you already know and celebrating this moment which you share with all of us, I say simply: Thank you.
And thanks be to God! Amen.
And to prove my point of what an inspiration they are - they are currently honeymooning at Disney World! :-)
I had wrestled for weeks with what to say to these two - they've been through so much, they have so much to share. Finally, I decided to play my indecision into a rhetorical device and the wedding homily was born:
“When there is Nothing Left to Say”
Wedding Homily for Ruth Woodward and Bernie McDonald
October 31, 2009
(ref. Colossians 3:12-17)
I put on my Facebook status earlier this week that I was working on the wedding ceremony for two octogenarians – which was a first for me. I got many responses: “Very cool;” “How sweet! This gives me hope” “An inspiration to us all!” And of course there was the one joker who replied: “Octogenarians? Are those like vegetarians?”
Bernie and Ruth – you are, well, unusual! This doesn’t happen every day. As I gathered the words I wanted to share with you on this occasion, I scanned about for other stories on the internet about folks in their eighties or nineties who got married. I did find one article about a couple in Miami who got married a few years ago – he was 93 and she was 86. And that’s it. I did find a number of online senior citizen dating websites. Oh, yes: www.datingforseniors.com; www.seniorfriendfinder.com; and the list goes on. And I found a lot of jokes about what it’s like to get married when you’re old.
One good one goes like this: A widower and widow who had known one another for a long time saw their relationship blossom into a romance. One night at a community dinner, the widower got up the nerve to ask the widow, “Will you marry me?” After about six seconds’ hesitation, she answered “Yes. Yes, I will.”
The meal ended and they went to their respective apartments. The next morning, the would-be groom was troubled. Did she say “yes” or did she say “no?” Try as he might, he couldn’t remember. Full of anxiety, he went to the phone and called her. He explained that as he’d gotten older he just didn’t remember things like he used to. He reviewed the wonderful meal they had shared the night before. After gathering his courage, he asked: “When I asked if you would marry me, did you say ‘yes’ or did you say ‘no?’”
He was delighted to hear her say, “Oh, I said ‘yes’ and I meant it with all my heart.” Then she continued, “And I am so glad you called, because I couldn’t remember who had asked me!” I saw a few other good ones, too, but they weren’t appropriate to share in church. But that’s all I found – one news story, dating websites, and lots of jokes about getting old.
You are unusual. What does one say to folks in their eighties getting married? I usually tell couples to pay attention, quite literally, to passages like this one from Colossians – especially the exhortation to humility, patience and forgiveness. I tell couples – “you have no idea how much you are going to need those particular characteristics during your married life!” But the two of you already know that. You both have previously lived in long, wonderful marriages in which you learned that lesson and lived humility, patience and forgiveness every day. So I don’t need to tell you that. I’ll just remind you that you’ll need to do that again as you enter this new marriage.
I also usually call the couple’s attention to the “’til death do us part” section of the wedding vows and suggest that the commitment they are about to make is of the life and death variety. I go on to suggest that we never know when the death part will come our way and so they should hold on to this commitment and remember this shining moment when they have to walk through the valley of the shadow of death with their spouse. But I don’t have to remind you two of that – you have already done that. You know the gravity of the commitment you make and you know what it is to so commit your life to another person that you will walk anywhere they need to walk until the end of their days. So I don’t need to talk about that.
I also usually tell couples that they are not alone as they embark on wedded bliss. I remind them that all of these people gathered here have pledged to support you in your vows and help you find your way toward a truly loving and successful life partnership. But you already know that. You both have learned the importance of the loving support of friends, family and faith community. So I don’t need to tell you that. I’ll just remind you that it’s still true – even in your eighties. Maybe even more so!
So in a sense I have nothing to say to you. Nothing, except: Thank you.
Ruth and Bernie, in you, in this moment, you have given us all a chance to see what love and commitment really are. You have reminded us that as the decades pass for all of us, our call from God to live a full, active and vital life does not disappear or fade away – it is renewed with every gray hair and wrinkle that appears. By standing here today, you are striking a blow for courage – the courage to fully live all of life’s passions and emotions – no matter one’s age. By selecting that passage from Colossians, you have reminded us that the clothing that we are exhorted to put on – the clothing of compassion, kindness, humility, meekness, patience and forgiveness never wear out – they are always made new in Christ! By taking this step in this moment, you are reminding us that it is never too late to sing songs of gratitude for the renewal of life and love that can come while living in the light of Christ.
So, having reminded you of things you already know and celebrating this moment which you share with all of us, I say simply: Thank you.
And thanks be to God! Amen.
And to prove my point of what an inspiration they are - they are currently honeymooning at Disney World! :-)
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
November 2009 Newsletter Article
Below is the article appearing in the Good Shepherd newsletter from me this month.
“What Part of NO Don’t They Understand?”
We are just days away from the 2009 elections. In an off-year such as this, turnout is expected to light. But I hope all of you will get out and vote this year. There are some local officials to elect and there are several issues to vote on – none more important than Issue 3, which proposes an amendment to the state constitution that would allow casino gambling.
I generally refrain from advocating one particular side on an issue, though I am certainly free to do so (unlike the issue of endorsing particular candidates, which U.S. law prohibits clergy and churches from doing if they want to maintain their tax-free status). On issues, members of the clergy as individuals and congregations and denominations as a whole are allowed to advocate for or against whatever they like. Normally, I try to help people think through the possibilities and I ask questions designed to help people zero in on what they believe God may be calling them to do. On Issue 3, however, I am taking a different approach. I will be voting “NO” on this issue and I want you to know why.
Let me say up front that I am sensitive to the fact that thousands upon thousands of Ohioans need steady jobs. I am all for using government to support the development and maintenance of such jobs. This issue, among other failings, will not do that.
Here is why I’m voting “NO” on Issue 3:
1. Even if I were positively disposed toward the development of casinos (which I am not), I am stubborn enough to be fed up with various gambling interests coming back over and over and over again – even though the state has repeatedly voted “no” by large margins – to keep asking. What part of “NO” don’t they understand? Go away and leave us alone.
2. Nearly every full-fledged study I’ve read about that has studied the economic impact of casinos has come to the conclusion that they do not add jobs to the local economy. At best, they are job-neutral. What happens most of the time is that entertainment income that has been used on other things gets diverted to the casino, seriously hurting – or putting out of business entirely – the vendors that had been the recipients of the money before. The economic argument for building casinos is a lie.
3. Another thing most studies agree on: It’s the people who can afford it the least who are the ones who lose the most money at casinos. Why would we ask the poorest among us to subsidize the already giant profits these casino companies enjoy?
4. The notion that gambling profits will help fund our state’s education system is also a lie. This is the same argument put forward back when the lottery was started. What happened? Our state legislature at the time diverted the education money in the budget to other areas and replaced it with the lottery proceeds. Yes, the lottery profits when to education, but they added nothing overall. Do we really think it will be different this time? Much better, I think, would be to hold our state legislators accountable to the Ohio Supreme Court which has ruled our state education funding system unconstitutional several times while the legislature did nothing to fix it.
5. This is a constitutional amendment. Think about it. Constitutional amendments are like tattoos – once you add them they are difficult, if not impossible, to change or remove. It can be done, yes, but it’s difficult and sometimes painful. This amendment enshrines one individual and one company as the sole proprietors of casino gambling, locks in profit sharing terms that are just about the most lenient on the casino owners compared to other states, and allows changes to casino gambling in Ohio based on changes that happen in casinos in surrounding states. In fact, it was written by the folks who would profit the most from the amendment. Why on earth would we carve that into the constitution? Good grief! (I have nothing against tattoos, by the way!)
Gambling is one of the few issues that United Methodists – who are often deeply divided on any number of other issues – can agree on. Our 2008 Book of Discipline states:
“Gambling is a menace to society, deadly to the best interests of moral, social, economic, and spiritual life, destructive of good government and good stewardship …. The Church’s prophetic call is to promote standards of justice and advocacy that would make it unnecessary and undesirable to resort to commercial gambling—including public lotteries, casinos, raffles, Internet gambling, gambling with an emerging wireless technology and other games of chance—as a recreation, as an escape, or as a means of producing public revenue or funds for support of charities or government.” (¶ 163.G)
Don’t let the ads fool you – Issue 3 is a bad deal, a bad policy, a bad change to our state constitution, and will fix nothing in our economy or educational system. I hope to see you at the voting booth on November 3!
Peace always,
Dr. Don Wallick
“What Part of NO Don’t They Understand?”
We are just days away from the 2009 elections. In an off-year such as this, turnout is expected to light. But I hope all of you will get out and vote this year. There are some local officials to elect and there are several issues to vote on – none more important than Issue 3, which proposes an amendment to the state constitution that would allow casino gambling.
I generally refrain from advocating one particular side on an issue, though I am certainly free to do so (unlike the issue of endorsing particular candidates, which U.S. law prohibits clergy and churches from doing if they want to maintain their tax-free status). On issues, members of the clergy as individuals and congregations and denominations as a whole are allowed to advocate for or against whatever they like. Normally, I try to help people think through the possibilities and I ask questions designed to help people zero in on what they believe God may be calling them to do. On Issue 3, however, I am taking a different approach. I will be voting “NO” on this issue and I want you to know why.
Let me say up front that I am sensitive to the fact that thousands upon thousands of Ohioans need steady jobs. I am all for using government to support the development and maintenance of such jobs. This issue, among other failings, will not do that.
Here is why I’m voting “NO” on Issue 3:
1. Even if I were positively disposed toward the development of casinos (which I am not), I am stubborn enough to be fed up with various gambling interests coming back over and over and over again – even though the state has repeatedly voted “no” by large margins – to keep asking. What part of “NO” don’t they understand? Go away and leave us alone.
2. Nearly every full-fledged study I’ve read about that has studied the economic impact of casinos has come to the conclusion that they do not add jobs to the local economy. At best, they are job-neutral. What happens most of the time is that entertainment income that has been used on other things gets diverted to the casino, seriously hurting – or putting out of business entirely – the vendors that had been the recipients of the money before. The economic argument for building casinos is a lie.
3. Another thing most studies agree on: It’s the people who can afford it the least who are the ones who lose the most money at casinos. Why would we ask the poorest among us to subsidize the already giant profits these casino companies enjoy?
4. The notion that gambling profits will help fund our state’s education system is also a lie. This is the same argument put forward back when the lottery was started. What happened? Our state legislature at the time diverted the education money in the budget to other areas and replaced it with the lottery proceeds. Yes, the lottery profits when to education, but they added nothing overall. Do we really think it will be different this time? Much better, I think, would be to hold our state legislators accountable to the Ohio Supreme Court which has ruled our state education funding system unconstitutional several times while the legislature did nothing to fix it.
5. This is a constitutional amendment. Think about it. Constitutional amendments are like tattoos – once you add them they are difficult, if not impossible, to change or remove. It can be done, yes, but it’s difficult and sometimes painful. This amendment enshrines one individual and one company as the sole proprietors of casino gambling, locks in profit sharing terms that are just about the most lenient on the casino owners compared to other states, and allows changes to casino gambling in Ohio based on changes that happen in casinos in surrounding states. In fact, it was written by the folks who would profit the most from the amendment. Why on earth would we carve that into the constitution? Good grief! (I have nothing against tattoos, by the way!)
Gambling is one of the few issues that United Methodists – who are often deeply divided on any number of other issues – can agree on. Our 2008 Book of Discipline states:
“Gambling is a menace to society, deadly to the best interests of moral, social, economic, and spiritual life, destructive of good government and good stewardship …. The Church’s prophetic call is to promote standards of justice and advocacy that would make it unnecessary and undesirable to resort to commercial gambling—including public lotteries, casinos, raffles, Internet gambling, gambling with an emerging wireless technology and other games of chance—as a recreation, as an escape, or as a means of producing public revenue or funds for support of charities or government.” (¶ 163.G)
Don’t let the ads fool you – Issue 3 is a bad deal, a bad policy, a bad change to our state constitution, and will fix nothing in our economy or educational system. I hope to see you at the voting booth on November 3!
Peace always,
Dr. Don Wallick
Thursday, July 30, 2009
On Getting Stuck in an Old Script
Some thoughts on race relations have been percolating for some time. Here is the August newsletter article I wrote for Church of the Good Shepherd, UM:
In the last week one of those national stories that gets blown out of proportion by the relentless 24-hour news cycle caught my eye. You’ve certainly seen or heard it by now – Professor Henry Louis Gates of Harvard University was briefly arrested and charged at his home after exchanging heated words with an officer in the Cambridge, Massachusetts police department. Professor Gates had just returned from a long trip to China and was exhausted, coming down with a bad cold, and generally grumpy, when he arrived at his home to find that his door was jammed. He and the driver who was helping him with his bags worked to dislodge the door. A concerned citizen noticed the activity and thought there might be a break in occurring. The police responded to investigate.
What’s the big deal? Professor Gates is one of the foremost black scholars in the country. The police officer is white. Even after the professor showed identification to prove that he lived in that home, the officer asked him to step outside. Professor Gates lost his temper. The officer lost his temper back. The result was a black man was arrested on his own front porch by a white police officer. The story hit the airwaves; the president weighed in on the matter (using words that were, at the very least, ill-chosen); and now it’s everywhere. Perhaps by the time you receive this newsletter it will all have died down; perhaps not.
The whole episode has resulted in lots of discussion in the black community, in the white community, and in those few communities where both black and white folks live. One commentator suggested that it’s like we all get stuck in an old script when things like this come up – all of the usual arguments get shouted back and forth and there is little understanding shared between people.
Here is what I’ve observed: many white folks don’t understand that in fact, racial profiling does indeed occur on a regular basis and that many black folks have had experiences with the police where it seems the only thing wrong was that they happened to be black that day (I could relay to you story after story told to me by black friends who have been stopped by the police for no good reason. My favorite line said to a black friend by a police officer is: “You don’t look like you belong in this neighborhood.” My friend was driving to his house in his subdivision.)
Likewise, many black folks don’t understand that in fact most white folks are brought up to see police officers as friends and allies and can’t figure it out when others don’t see law enforcement officers the same way.
We get so stuck in that script that it is rare for anyone on either side to take a step back, take a deep breath and ask the other: “Would you help me understand why you feel that way?” But that would take us off script into new territory – which can be scary.
We have surely entered a new era by virtue of electing a black president. The ramifications of that will echo into the future. But that most certainly has not washed away all the old scripts that we cling to. We can’t know for sure who, if anyone, was at fault on that front porch in Cambridge, Mass. But we can ask ourselves: Have we bothered to examine the scripts we use when we talk about issues of race?
As we at Good Shepherd continue to reach into our neighborhood – into what is now a decidedly multiracial neighborhood – I give thanks that we have a different script to use with our neighbors: No matter who you are and what you look like, God loves you and we are determined to live out that love in the midst of this community. No earthly category can take away the one definition given to all of us by our Creator: We are ALL precious children of God.
As always, I am thankful to be serving among you in this place and in this time. We are called forward into a new future. We will respond together. And if we need to write a new script on race relations to do it, then by golly that’s what we’ll do.
In the last week one of those national stories that gets blown out of proportion by the relentless 24-hour news cycle caught my eye. You’ve certainly seen or heard it by now – Professor Henry Louis Gates of Harvard University was briefly arrested and charged at his home after exchanging heated words with an officer in the Cambridge, Massachusetts police department. Professor Gates had just returned from a long trip to China and was exhausted, coming down with a bad cold, and generally grumpy, when he arrived at his home to find that his door was jammed. He and the driver who was helping him with his bags worked to dislodge the door. A concerned citizen noticed the activity and thought there might be a break in occurring. The police responded to investigate.
What’s the big deal? Professor Gates is one of the foremost black scholars in the country. The police officer is white. Even after the professor showed identification to prove that he lived in that home, the officer asked him to step outside. Professor Gates lost his temper. The officer lost his temper back. The result was a black man was arrested on his own front porch by a white police officer. The story hit the airwaves; the president weighed in on the matter (using words that were, at the very least, ill-chosen); and now it’s everywhere. Perhaps by the time you receive this newsletter it will all have died down; perhaps not.
The whole episode has resulted in lots of discussion in the black community, in the white community, and in those few communities where both black and white folks live. One commentator suggested that it’s like we all get stuck in an old script when things like this come up – all of the usual arguments get shouted back and forth and there is little understanding shared between people.
Here is what I’ve observed: many white folks don’t understand that in fact, racial profiling does indeed occur on a regular basis and that many black folks have had experiences with the police where it seems the only thing wrong was that they happened to be black that day (I could relay to you story after story told to me by black friends who have been stopped by the police for no good reason. My favorite line said to a black friend by a police officer is: “You don’t look like you belong in this neighborhood.” My friend was driving to his house in his subdivision.)
Likewise, many black folks don’t understand that in fact most white folks are brought up to see police officers as friends and allies and can’t figure it out when others don’t see law enforcement officers the same way.
We get so stuck in that script that it is rare for anyone on either side to take a step back, take a deep breath and ask the other: “Would you help me understand why you feel that way?” But that would take us off script into new territory – which can be scary.
We have surely entered a new era by virtue of electing a black president. The ramifications of that will echo into the future. But that most certainly has not washed away all the old scripts that we cling to. We can’t know for sure who, if anyone, was at fault on that front porch in Cambridge, Mass. But we can ask ourselves: Have we bothered to examine the scripts we use when we talk about issues of race?
As we at Good Shepherd continue to reach into our neighborhood – into what is now a decidedly multiracial neighborhood – I give thanks that we have a different script to use with our neighbors: No matter who you are and what you look like, God loves you and we are determined to live out that love in the midst of this community. No earthly category can take away the one definition given to all of us by our Creator: We are ALL precious children of God.
As always, I am thankful to be serving among you in this place and in this time. We are called forward into a new future. We will respond together. And if we need to write a new script on race relations to do it, then by golly that’s what we’ll do.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
A Few Thoughts about Swine Flu
This is the text of an e-mail I sent to the congregation today.
We’ve been inundated the last few days with constant media reports about a new strain of influenza – the H1N1 strain, which has been dubbed the “Swine Flu” because the original virus was one that infected pigs. I know that many of you are concerned; I’ve certainly been paying attention, too. I want to say several things:
1. Keep in mind that the lifeblood of modern media is the continuous update and the usual mode of operation of modern media is to be as flashy and attention-getting as possible. This can turn what may be an important event into a cause for hysteria. You should check in with the world on your news channel of preference each day to see what the latest is – but then turn the channel to something different or turn the TV off. The constant flash and glitter only feeds the panic. The move toward this way of doing business is one of the reasons I left broadcast journalism 20 years ago. It does no one any good. Everyone take a deep breath.
2. That being said, we certainly need to take appropriate precautions. There is no need to panic. But as with any outbreak of the flu, we are well advised to wash our hands frequently, cover our coughs and sneezes (preferably with a tissue which we then throw away), and stay away from other folks if we are feeling sick (so that we don’t infect others). It’s a little more urgent since this influenza strain is new (and so there’s no vaccine yet), but doing those things will greatly assist as public officials try to slow the spread of it. Also keep in mind that two of the most common antiviral drugs – Tamiflu and Relenza – have already proven themselves to be quite effective in wiping out that virus. They will be used as needed to fight this outbreak. (As an aside: We will have antibacterial wipes and hand sanitizer available for our greeters the next few Sundays so that we can reduce the chances that we will spread germs around here at church. I suppose it might even be a good idea to do that during the regular flu season too.)
3. I have begun hearing and reading things being said about this flu outbreak that distress me greatly. I’ve heard folks referring to “those dirty Mexicans” as a cause of the flu. I’ve seen folks write things like “that’s what we get for having an open border and being lenient on illegal immigration.” Come on, really? The various influenza strains that currently exist have originated on nearly all of the various continents around the globe. It’s no one country’s fault. It’s certainly not caused by one’s race or nationality. Do not allow bigotry and hate to overshadow appropriate discussion about health and hygiene. If there is any blame to be placed, it’s on nature: the random mutation of a virus is one part of the natural order. Since we live in a global society, anyone anywhere could pick up a new virus and it could spread.
We’ve been inundated the last few days with constant media reports about a new strain of influenza – the H1N1 strain, which has been dubbed the “Swine Flu” because the original virus was one that infected pigs. I know that many of you are concerned; I’ve certainly been paying attention, too. I want to say several things:
1. Keep in mind that the lifeblood of modern media is the continuous update and the usual mode of operation of modern media is to be as flashy and attention-getting as possible. This can turn what may be an important event into a cause for hysteria. You should check in with the world on your news channel of preference each day to see what the latest is – but then turn the channel to something different or turn the TV off. The constant flash and glitter only feeds the panic. The move toward this way of doing business is one of the reasons I left broadcast journalism 20 years ago. It does no one any good. Everyone take a deep breath.
2. That being said, we certainly need to take appropriate precautions. There is no need to panic. But as with any outbreak of the flu, we are well advised to wash our hands frequently, cover our coughs and sneezes (preferably with a tissue which we then throw away), and stay away from other folks if we are feeling sick (so that we don’t infect others). It’s a little more urgent since this influenza strain is new (and so there’s no vaccine yet), but doing those things will greatly assist as public officials try to slow the spread of it. Also keep in mind that two of the most common antiviral drugs – Tamiflu and Relenza – have already proven themselves to be quite effective in wiping out that virus. They will be used as needed to fight this outbreak. (As an aside: We will have antibacterial wipes and hand sanitizer available for our greeters the next few Sundays so that we can reduce the chances that we will spread germs around here at church. I suppose it might even be a good idea to do that during the regular flu season too.)
3. I have begun hearing and reading things being said about this flu outbreak that distress me greatly. I’ve heard folks referring to “those dirty Mexicans” as a cause of the flu. I’ve seen folks write things like “that’s what we get for having an open border and being lenient on illegal immigration.” Come on, really? The various influenza strains that currently exist have originated on nearly all of the various continents around the globe. It’s no one country’s fault. It’s certainly not caused by one’s race or nationality. Do not allow bigotry and hate to overshadow appropriate discussion about health and hygiene. If there is any blame to be placed, it’s on nature: the random mutation of a virus is one part of the natural order. Since we live in a global society, anyone anywhere could pick up a new virus and it could spread.
Monday, April 20, 2009
A Blog Entry to Ponder
Friends,
I can't believe it's been so long since I posted. I have two what I guess one would call "essays" running around in my head that I'll transmit into the keyboard soon. In the meantime, I ran across this interesting Blog entry regarding multicultural ministry - enjoy: http://blog.sojo.net/2009/04/20/three-encouragements-toward-making-your-churches-more-multicultural/
Don
I can't believe it's been so long since I posted. I have two what I guess one would call "essays" running around in my head that I'll transmit into the keyboard soon. In the meantime, I ran across this interesting Blog entry regarding multicultural ministry - enjoy: http://blog.sojo.net/2009/04/20/three-encouragements-toward-making-your-churches-more-multicultural/
Don
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
