All posts by revolsen

Unknown's avatar

About revolsen

I am a retired Lutheran Pastor currently residing in Wellfleet, Massachusetts. I am married .and have three grown children.

Is Love Enough?

SUNDAY OF CHRIST THE KING

Jeremiah 23:1-6

Psalm 46

Colossians 1:11-20

Luke 23:33-43

Prayer of the Day: O God, our true life, to serve you is freedom, and to know you is unending joy. We worship you, we glorify you, we give thanks to you for your great glory. Abide with us, reign in us, and make this world into a fit habitation for your divine majesty, through Jesus Christ, our Savior and Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and forever.

“…in [Christ Jesus] all things hold together.” Colossians 1:17.

This is a bold statement to make in these days when everything seems to be falling apart. Legal, political and religious norms for civil behavior have all but disintegrated in our own nation. A fierce climate of polarization has rendered our government unable to perform basic leadership tasks. The alliances, agreements and treaties that grew out of the post World War II generation are coming unraveled fast as the United States gravitates away from its historic role of world leadership. As our climate continues to turn once habitable areas inhospitable to human and non-human creatures, we might reasonably ask ourselves whether there is anyone holding things together.

There is a bumper sticker I have noticed from time to time that reads simply, “God is in Control.” The first time I saw that sticker was on the back of a pickup that was weaving precariously in front of me. My guess is that the driver was inebriated. I had to chuckle to myself as I finally managed to get out in front of that truck. “Glad someone is in control, because its obvious the driver isn’t,” I thought to myself. Yet on further reflection, I realize that this occurrence was not so funny. Over twelve thousand people were killed last year in alcohol related crashes. It seems that if God or anyone else is really in control, then they are either asleep at the switch or deeply sadistic. Objectively speaking, there seems to be no rhyme or reason for deaths and injuries to people caught in the crossfire of somebody else’s feud, injured or killed in devastating accidents or rendered homeless by natural disasters. It is simply luck of the draw.

People I have known who maintain that, despite appearances, God is in control tell me I must accept that God’s sovereignty is absolute. God’s goodness is a matter of faith. Though it may appear to our finite and limited minds that tragic events are random and meaningless, God has a higher purpose in bringing about or allowing them to occur. It is not for us to question the higher wisdom of God. We are to trust in God’s goodness notwithstanding evidence that much of what happens in this world is not consistent with what we understand to be the will of a loving and merciful God. But I find it hard to imagine what higher purpose could possibly be served by allowing a child to starve to death in Gaza or permitting a young mother with small children to be taken by cancer. If God objects to my asking such questions, God should not have made me so curious. Moreover, I wonder how far proponents of the “control” theory push their insistence on divine management. Does it extend into my personal life? Did I really decide to propose to my now wife? Or were we “destined to be”? Did I respond to God’s call to ministry? Or was I preordained? Does God determine which tie I wear on Sunday? Are all our choices illusory? Perhaps I am carrying this argument to ridiculous extremes, but if we are not to reduce ourselves to cogs in a relentlessly mechanized and deterministic universe, we need to acknowledge that, at some point, God’s control ends and our freedom begins. Where is the line drawn?

There is, however, a greater issue involved here. I have encountered enough controlling spouses, controlling parents and controlling pastors to know that “control” is not something you should be doing to people you love. If we believe, as the Bible asserts in numerous places, that “God is gracious and merciful, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love,” then I do not see how we can assert that God controls the world God made or the people living in it. It seems to me that control is the last thing God desires to do to us. In the opening line of Scripture, the first words God speaks are “Let there be…” Genesis 1:2. God makes space for something that is not God, something that exists which, though not independent of God, is nonetheless separate from God. The human creatures that inhabit God’s world have freedom and agency within their created limits. God gives them commandments and direction, but that only further illustrates their freedom. Human beings can break the commandments and resist God’s good and gracious desire for their wellbeing.

So in what sense do “all things hold together” in Christ Jesus? How does Christ exercise his reign over creation? The key, I believe, is in our gospel lesson in which Jesus prays for his tormenters, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.” Luke 23:34. Jesus’ prayer reflects God’s expressed sentiments throughout Scripture. Though death was the consequence of Adam and Eve’s transgression, God did not inflict that upon them as a penalty. Instead, God clothed Adam and Eve in sending them out into the world. God would not take vengeance on Cain for Able’s murder, but instead put a protective mark on him to ensure no one else did. By contrast, human society became increasingly vengeful and violent. The first love song in biblical history celebrates the singer’s murderous vengeance upon one who assaulted him. Genesis 4:23-24. The world became so consumed with violence that God resolved to make an end of it. Genesis 6:5-7. Yet in the midst of dismantling creation, God reversed course. Genesis 8:1-5. After the waters receded and life on earth began anew, God solemnly promised, “I will never again curse the ground because of humans, for the inclination of the human heart is evil from youth; nor will I ever again destroy every living creature as I have done.

As long as the earth endures,
    seedtime and harvest, cold and heat,
summer and winter, day and night
    shall not cease.” Genesis 8:21-22.

However much evil the human race might do, God will not respond in kind. As the centuries pass, God’s patience is repeatedly tried by a violent world and God’s people Israel who are all too prone to adopt the ways of that world rather than to “choose life” by living faithfully under their covenant with God. Yet God’s mercy always prevails in the end. The ultimate test comes with the world’s response to the best God had to give-the only begotten Son, God’s very self. Rather than avenge the murder of Jesus-God raised him up and offered him back to the people who rejected him, the world that killed him and the disciples who abandoned him. God’s power is God’s patience, God’s mercy, God’s love. God’s compassion cannot be extinguished by the worst of human conduct. Regardless of what we do, God will be God and God is love.

Is love enough to hold our planet together against all the forces of human greed, violence and exploitation? Yes, it is according to Saint Paul who tells us that love is eternal. I Corinthians 13:13. To be clear, this love is not emotional affection. It is an undying commitment to the wellbeing of another. Love is the glue that holds the Trinity in unity. Love is what molds the church, however imperfectly, into the Body of Christ. Because I believe all this, I believe that, yes, the love of God in Christ Jesus is strong enough heal the wounds inflicted upon this planet and its inhabitants by God’s human creatures. I believe that the patience of God is persistent enough to continue working toward redeeming, restoring and perfecting creation for as long as that might take. I believe that hatred, greed and violence, as destructive as these surely are, cannot outlast God’s love.

Control seems like a simple solution to the chaos of evil. I think that is why we are so susceptible to the promises of “strong men” who insist that they are “the one,” the person capable of imposing law and order, increasing wealth and prosperity, returning the world to a “golden age.” We are tempted to believe it takes a powerful, “take charge” individual who isn’t afraid to take severe measures to make things right. But we have learned, or should have learned by now, that leaders who exercise their leadership by asserting control always end up inflicting more grief than they remedy. The world does not need more leaders like that. It does not need a god like that. Thankfully, the God we worship does not rule the world by controlling it. We worship a God that loves the hell out of it.

Here is a very simple poem by Mechtild of Magdeburg expressing the nature of God’s love in Christ that holds all things together.

How God Answers the Soul

It is my nature that makes me love you often,

For I am love itself.

It is my longing that makes me love you intensely,

For I yearn to be loved from the heart.

It is my eternity that makes me love you long,

For I have no end.

Source: Beguine Spirituality, (c 1989 by The Crossroad Publishing Company, Inc.) Mechtild of Magdeburg was a Christian medieval mystic, whose book Das fließende Licht der Gottheit (The Flowing Light of Divinity) is a compendium of visions, prayers, dialogues and mystical accounts. She was the first mystic to write in Low German. Biographical information about Mechthild is scarce. We know that she was born into a noble Saxon family. She had her first vision of the Holy Spirit at the age of twelve. In 1230 she left her home to become a Beguine at Magdeburg.  There she became acquainted with the Dominicans. Her criticism of church dignitaries and her claims to theological insight aroused so much opposition that some called for the burning of her writings. With advancing age she became blind. Sometime  around 1272 she joined the Cistercian nunnery at Helfta which offered her protection and support in the final years of her life. You can read more about Mechtild of Magdeburg and sample more of her poetry at the Poetry Foundation website.

Of Patriarchy and Resurrection

TWENTY-SECOND SUNDAY AFTER PENTECOST

Job 19:23-27a

Psalm 17:1-9

2 Thessalonians 2:1-5, 13-17

Luke 20:27-38

Prayer of the Day: O God, our eternal redeemer, by the presence of your Spirit you renew and direct our hearts. Keep always in our mind the end of all things and the day of judgment. Inspire us for a holy life here, and bring us to the joy of the resurrection, through Jesus Christ, our Savior and Lord.

 “Those who belong to this age marry and are given in marriage,but those who are considered worthy of a place in that age and in the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage.” Luke 20:34-35.

The Sadducees’ question is a man’s question posed by men, to men in a man’s world. A woman has been passed on like a piece of furniture from brother to brother as each died. Now at the resurrection, we have a legal problem. To whom does this woman belong? Who has “rights” to her body and soul? Nowhere is there any consideration about what the woman might prefer or who, if any, of these brothers she might want to be with. This dispute is over the conflicting claims between men. The Sadducees cannot imagine a future in which a man’s legal claim on a woman cannot be fairly adjudicated; hence, their skepticism over the resurrection. Jesus responds that their unbelief in the resurrection of the dead is a result of their failure to grasp the power of God. The radical equity among all people under God’s reign supersedes every human claim of ownership or dominion. There is no room in God’s kingdom for hierarchy or patriarchy, even when clothed in the sanctified dress of institutional marriage.    

Marriage is, after all, a human institution that is very much of this world. Its shape and meaning have varied over time and between cultures. The Bible does not say otherwise. The often miscited passage from the second chapter of Genesis does not say that God instituted marriage. Rather, it tells us God, having determined that “it is not good” for the human creature to be alone, created a partner for this first human being. Thus, God is the author of human intimacy. The phenomenon of marriage, in all of its manifestations, is a human response to God’s creative act. Like all human institutions, marriage is as flawed as is human nature. Like government, church and family more generally, it can be a protective structure in which human intimacy, growth and development are nurtured. But it is also true that marriage, like these other institutions, can become a theater of oppression, exploitation and abuse. The practice of treating a woman as a mere piece of property represents the latter.

Neither marriage nor any other human institution is ever an end in itself. Even the Sabbath, a practice which truly is biblically grounded in a command of God, exists to further human wellbeing. When used in ways that diminish human thriving, the sabbath too, becomes an instrument of human oppression, defeating its own purpose. Jesus’ response to the Sadducees therefore goes beyond the scope of their hypothetical. He calls into question the premise of their inquiry. Claims of ownership, dominion or dominance by any individual or group over other individuals or groups have no standing under the reign of God. There, people “neither marry nor are given in marriage.” This is not to disparage marriage per se. It is only to say that marriage is not to be an instrument of hierarchy, patriarchy or any other species of domination. Under the reign of God, marriage must serve the objective of mutuality if it is to exist at all. To that point, Saint Paul likens marriage to the relationship between Christ and his church. Jesus reigns over his disciples by washing their feet and laying down his life for them. His disciples are led by the one most ready to serve.[1] It is because the Sadducees cannot conceive of such a radically equitable existence that they are unable to believe in the resurrection.

All that being said, there are numerous questions about resurrection and eternal life that are troubling for many of us. What about the broken relationships, unhealed wounds and regrets one inevitably carries to the grave? How can eternal life be blessed if we bring all that baggage with us? What happens to painful memories? Are they simply erased? Is it not the case that our greatest hardships, griefs and failures turn out to be the events that shape us into who we are? Who and what are we if all of that is washed away? And what about the character flaws, irritating habits and biases that are, however regrettably, part of our identity? If all of that were simply sheared away, would we be the same persons? Would we be recognizable to others we have known or even ourselves? Will questions like this even matter in the new creation?

Jesus does not give us a definitive answer. He only tells us that the resurrected are “like angels in heaven.” Given what little the Bible tells us about angels, that is not particularly helpful. Saint Paul tells the church in Corinth that such questions about post-resurrection life are stupid-and then goes on to answer them after a fashion:

“But someone will ask, “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body do they come?” Fool! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. And as for what you sow, you do not sow the body that is to be but a bare seed, perhaps of wheat or of some other grain. But God gives it a body as he has chosen and to each kind of seed its own body.” I Corinthians 15:35-38.

The analogy makes clear that the “spiritual body”[2] to be raised up from the “physical body” is as qualitatively different as is the full grown plant from the “bare seed.” While there is surely continuity of identity, there is exponential growth and development that cannot yet be seen in the seed upon planting. As the Apostle John puts it, “Beloved, we are God’s children now; what we will be has not yet been revealed. What we do know is this: when he is revealed, we will be like him, for we will see him as he is.” I John 3:2. The final word belongs to Jesus: “[God] is God not of the dead but of the living, for to him all of them are alive.” Luke 20:38. In some way too marvelous to be contained within our wildest imaginings, God weaves the lives of the saints into the fabric of God’s new creation, preserving the wealth of our relationships, works of kindness and acts of faithfulness and courage, assuring us that what we know of God’s reign only in part will become clear at the Resurrection of the dead and in the life of the world to come. That might not be all we would like to know. But it is enough.

Here is a poem by May Swenson reflecting the often suffocating environment of patriarchy experienced by women today and which Jesus roundly rejected as inconsistent with God’s reign in his own time.

Women

Women                                 Or they

   should be                              should be

      pedestals                              little horses

         moving                                 those wooden

            pedestals                              sweet

               moving                                 oldfashioned

                  to the                                    painted

                     motions                                 rocking

                        of men                                  horses

                        the gladdest things in the toyroom

                           The                                       feelingly

                        pegs                                     and then

                     of their                                 unfeelingly

                  ears                                     To be

               so familiar                            joyfully

            and dear                               ridden

         to the trusting                      rockingly

      fists                                    ridden until

   To be chafed                        the restored

egos dismount and the legs stride away

Immobile                            willing

   sweetlipped                         to be set

      sturdy                                 into motion

         and smiling                         Women

            women                                 should be

               should always                        pedestals

                  be waiting                              to men

Source: New and Selected Things Taking Place (Pub. by Boston: Atlantic/Little Brown, 1978; c. 1978 by May Swenson.) Anna Thilda May Swenson (1913 –1989) was an American poet and playwright. Born to Margaret and Dan Arthur Swenson, she was the eldest of ten children in a Mormon household where Swedish was spoken regularly and English was a second language. Although her family struggled to accept that she was a lesbian, they remained close throughout her life. Much of her later poetry was devoted to children. She also translated the work of contemporary Swedish poets, including the selected poems of Nobel laureate Tomas Tranströmer.

Swenson attended Utah State University in Logan, Utah, graduating in 1934 with a bachelor’s degree. She taught poetry as poet-in-residence at Bryn Mawr College, the University of North Carolina at Greensboro, the University of California, Riverside, Purdue University, and Utah State University. From 1959 to 1966 she worked as a manuscript reviewer at New Directions Publishing. Swenson left New Directions Press in 1966 to focus more on her writing. She served as a chancellor of the Academy of American Poets from 1980 until her death. You can read more about May Swenson and sample more of her poems at the Poetry Foundation website.  


[1] The most explicit portrayal of this image is in Paul’s letter to the church to the Ephesians. Some have been critical of Paul’s reference to the man as the “head” of the wife and his admonition for her to “submit” to him. While understandable, I think we need to look beyond these stereotypical gender roles that influenced Paul’s writing to the larger point. Jesus leads by persuasion and example, never domination. One could therefore switch the roles such that the text reads, “husbands, submit to your wives” and “wives, love your husbands” without doing any violence to its meaning. Paul is simply stating a variation of Jesus’ admonition that, as he has washed his disciples’ feet, so they should wash one another’s feet. John 13:12-14.  

[2] The term “spiritual body” seems contradictory only if one subscribes to the dualistic assumption that “spirit” and “matter” are separable and distinct. No such binary thinking is native to Hebrew thought. To be “spiritual” is not to transcend the material world, but to be oriented toward God and the work of God’s Spirit in the world. The new creation is therefore not a realm of “pure spirit,” as though such a thing could even exist. It is rather a material world wholly oriented toward its Creator. It is God’s will done “on earth as it is in heaven.”

Sainthood in a Violent World

ALL SAINTS SUNDAY

Daniel 7:1-3, 15-18

Psalm 149

Ephesians 1:11-23

Luke 6:20-31

Prayer of the Day: Almighty God, you have knit your people together in one communion in the mystical body of your Son, Jesus Christ our Lord. Grant us grace to follow your blessed saints in lives of faith and commitment, and to know the inexpressible joys you have prepared for those who love you, through Jesus Christ, our Savior and Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and forever.

God put this power to work in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the age to come. And he has put all things under his feet and has made him the head over all things for the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all.” Ephesians 1:20-23.

The “power” of which Saint Paul speaks, the power that raised Jesus from death is love. God’s power is God’s refusal to be drawn into the vortex of retribution that has drawn humanity into orgies of bloodshed since the dawn of time. God loves the world, even when it goes off the rails. God loves the world, all of it. God loves the arctic regions newly opened to the fossil fuel industry crying, “Drill, baby, drill” with the rapist’s grin on their faces. God loves rivers choked with industrial sludge, lakes dead from acid rains and oceans plagued with floating islands of plastic. God loves animals and plants on the brink of extinction whose preservation is deemed economically unfeasible. And God loves God’s human creatures responsible for so much of this planet’s misery, creatures who, when offered the most precious gift God had to give, nailed him to a cross. In response to the crucifixion of Jesus, God did not retaliate. Instead, God raised up the crucified and rejected Son and offered him back to the same creatures that rejected him. Vengeance, wrath and retaliation are not God’s way. Neither are they the way of Jesus’ disciples.

Our gospel lesson for All Saints Sunday spells out with unmistakable clarity what sainthood looks like. Jesus calls upon his disciples to exercise the same love for their enemies God exercises toward the world that rejected the Son. “But I say to you who are listening: Love your enemies; do good to those who hate you; bless those who curse you; pray for those who mistreat you. If anyone strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also, and from anyone who takes away your coat do not withhold even your shirt.” Luke 6:27-29. The way of Jesus reflecting the power of God does not look anything like power as we understand it. Mao Tse Tung once said that “All political power comes from the barrel of a gun.” That is not far from the American Marvel Comic book mythology animating so much of our thinking about conflict and the way it must be resolved. It underlies the uniquely American gun fetish and a growing conviction on the part of so many that our fellow citizens are all potentially hostile, our neighbors cannot be trusted and our government and laws are incapable of protecting us.  

In their recent book, The Myth of the American Superhero,[1] John Shelton Lawrence and Robert Jewett argue that, in a culture that doubts the integrity and ability of its government and institutions to achieve justice, people are naturally drawn to the uniquely American “monomyth.” This “monomyth” supplies the underlying plot for stories about heroes who must take the law into their own hands in order to rid a community of evil. The world of entertainment is laced with such monomythic tales. We find them in the oldest black and white westerns that feature a virtuous gunslinger riding into town to rid the populace of a criminal gang neither the law nor the courts can handle. The same basic plot can be found in such productions as the Star Wars movies in which “jedi knights” with superhuman powers and a code of law all their own rise up to destroy an evil empire that has usurped the powers of the old republic. The most insidious element of this myth is the unspoken and unquestioned assumption that, when all is said and done, evil can only be eliminated by violence.

That assumption shapes the prevailing understanding of God in much of American religion. The god we meet in much of white evangelical religion is an angry, controlling and violent tyrant with an anal preoccupation with sex. This is a god who damns to hell a loving same sex couple while blessing a politician who works to deprive millions of needed healthcare. This is a god who cares more about his picayune rules than about the people he supposedly created. Because this god is toxically male, it comes as no surprise that he wants men to be in charge and women to submit. For the god of American evangelicalism, the cross is not sufficient. This god must come back at the end of time with military like fire power to beat the world into submission in a final cosmic battle. This is a violent god that appeals to violent people. As the poet remarks, “Give us burly gods to pummel the world and us.” I do not know whether people become mean, bigoted and hard hearted because they worship such a god or whether the god they worship is merely a reflection of their own hateful souls. Either way, this god is not the God and Father of Jesus Christ we meet in our lessons for this Sunday.  

In a culture with such a distorted understanding of who God is and that is spiraling ever deeper into violence, in a culture where mass shootings are weekly occurrences, civil war rhetoric is becoming mainstream and law enforcement increasingly unrestrained by legal limits, I believe sainthood must take the shape of radical pacifism. Our bishops need to be saying with clarity that no disciple of Jesus has any business owning or carrying a weapon, the one exception being those serving in the military or law enforcement.[2] We need to ensure that our sanctuaries, offices and events are weapon free zones. Our churches need to be challenging police violence, use of the military against our citizens and using the “war on drugs” as a pretext for military attacks on unarmed foreign ships in international waters. More than this, we need to be prepared to practice hospitality and offer sanctuary to victims of our government’s violent and ruthless immigration policies. That might place us in legal jeopardy-or worse. But love that is grounded in the love of our God who put the life of the Son on the line requires nothing less.  

Here is a poem by Father Daniel Berrigan with an expression of such faith and the difficulty of hanging onto it.

Astonishment

Wonder

          why illness

an odious plague dispersed

settles again after deep knives made

of the loved face a tragic mask.

Wonder

          why after one

tentative promise

raised like a green denial of death,

life resumes

its old mortician method after all.

Wonder

        why men break

in the kiln, on the wheel; men made of the sun,

men sprung from the world’s cry; the only men,

literal bread and wine, the crucial ones

poured out, wasted among dogs. Wonder,

And the lees of men, the stale men, there

in the fair vessels, a mock feast;

take it or leave-nothing else in the house.

Wonder

          at omnipresence of grey minds,

the shade of that made

O years ago, ash of the rowdy world.

Wonder

          at incapacity of love;

a stern pagan ethic, set against Christ at the door

(the discomfiting beggar, the undemanding poor).

Wonder

          woman and man, son and father

priest and sacrifice-to all right reason

one web of the world, one delicate

membrane of life. Ruptured.

Wonder

Transcendent God does nothing.

The Child plays

among the stocs and stones

A country almanac

moon phase, sun phase

hours

records and elements, grey dawn and red;

He sleeps and stands again,

moony, at loss, a beginner in the world.

History makes much of little, bet He

of clay and Caesars, nothing.

There is no god in Him. Give us burly gods

to pummel the world and us, to shake its tree

quail and manna at morning!

Wonder, wonder,

                           across his eyes

the cancerous pass unhealed, evil

takes heat monstrously. What use

the tarrying savior, the gentle breath of time

that in beggars is continuous and unruly,

that in dumb minds comes and chimes and goes

that in veins and caves of earth

sleeps like a tranced corpse, the abandoned body

of violated hope?

Wonder

given such a God, how resolve the poem?

Source: Selected & New Poems, (c. 1973 by Daniel Berrigan, pub. by Doubleday & Company, Inc.) pp. 133-134. Daniel Berrigan was born May 9, 1921, in Virginia, Minnesota. He entered the Jesuit novitiate at St. Andrew-on-the-Hudson, New York in August 1939 and graduated in 1946. Thereafter, he entered the Jesuit’s Woodstock College in Baltimore graduating in 1952. He was ordained the same year and appointed professor of New Testament studies at Le Moyne College in Syracuse in 1957. Berrigan is remembered by most people for his anti-war activities during the Vietnam era. He spent two years in prison for destroying draft records, damaging nuclear warheads and leading other acts of civil disobedience. He also joined with other prominent religious figures like Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel, the Rev. Richard John Neuhaus and the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. to found Clergy and Laity Against the War in Vietnam. In February of 1968 he traveled to North Vietnam and returned with three American prisoners of war he convinced the North Vietnamese to release. Berrigan died on April 30, 2016 of natural causes at a Jesuit health care facility in the Bronx. He was 94 years old.


[1] Lawrence, John Shelton and Jewett, Robert, The Myth of the American Superhero (c. 2002 Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.)

[2] This is in accordance with the “Just War” doctrine held by most orthodox churches. I have long expressed my doubts about this particular teaching which I believe to be contrary to the gospel. I would welcome serious dialogue within the church concerning its legitimacy. That being said, the church would do well in standing by the doctrine’s insistence that pacifism is the default position of Christians in face of the American assumption that gun ownership and the use of guns for self defense is a sacred right.   

Hope from a History of Failure?

TWENTIETH SUNDAY AFTER PENTECOST

Jeremiah 14:7-10, 19-22

Psalm 84:1-7

2 Timothy 4:6-8, 16-18

Luke 18:9-14

Prayer of the Day: Holy God, our righteous judge, daily your mercy surprises us with everlasting forgiveness. Strengthen our hope in you, and grant that all the peoples of the earth may find their glory in you, through Jesus Christ, our Savior and Lord.

“Have you completely rejected Judah?
    Does your heart loathe Zion?” Jeremiah 14:19.

Jeremiah has good reason to wonder whether God might finally have given up on Judah and Israel. He witnessed the demise of the brief revival of his nation under King Josiah following the monarch’s untimely death. He witnessed the destruction of Jerusalem, the burning of its temple and the exile of so many of his fellow Judeans. Jeremiah was also acutely aware of his nation’s unfaithfulness to God’s covenants with it. He saw its kings routinely disregard protections for the poor written into the Torah. He saw Judah and its leaders repeatedly put their hope for survival on alliances with imperial powers and their gods at the price of crushing tribute falling chiefly on the backs of those least able to bear its weight. Jeremiah had every reason to suspect that, by now, God had had enough. He had every reason to believe that the people of Israel would henceforth be on their own.

But Jeremiah could not give in to this terrible fear, however plausible it might have been. Note well that his words are not those of a despondent cynic sitting alone on a park bench muttering to the wind. Neither is he speaking to some nameless, faceless deity on grounds of divine justice-as though it were self evident that God, if such a being really exists, owes him an ordered, just and predictable universe. Jeremiah’s words are addressed to the God of his people Israel, the God of the covenant. Under the terms of that covenant, God made specific promises to Israel. Though Israel may have been less than faithful in its own covenant responsibilities, God is not thereby excused from God’s obligations. Jeremiah knows that his God cannot renege on the covenant promises. That is not because of any limitation on God’s divine power. God cannot abandon Israel because God’s essential nature is faithfulness. If God were to break God’s promises to Israel, God would not be the God that God has always revealed God’s self to be. God must honor the covenant promises in order to be true to God’s self. Therefore, Jeremiah can pray with confidence,

“Do not spurn us, for your name’s sake;
    do not dishonor your glorious throne;
    remember and do not break your covenant with us.” Jeremiah 14:21.

I find that immensely comforting. As much as I love the church, I have been deeply wounded by it, disappointed in it, frustrated with its shortsightedness, enraged at its timidity in the face of evil, its blindness to the suffering on its doorstep and its indifference to the cries for justice, mercy and peace from the world around it. There are times that I, too, wonder whether God is ready to give up on a church that often looks little like Jesus, whose Body it is supposed to be. As I have witnessed the decline of the church in this country over the decades of my life, I have wondered at times whether we are experiencing God’s judgment on our many failures. Perhaps God is washing God’s hands of the whole ecclesiastical project.

Still, however tempted I might be to give up on the church, I find it impossible to give up on my baptismal covenant which, whether I like it or not, binds me to the church. During those times in my life when the covenant seemed most frayed and likely to break, there has always been some saint whose witness convinced me to remain. At times when church life seemed most petty, mean and shallow, there was always some event, some small expression of kindness, courage and faith that caused me to doubt my doubts about the presence of Jesus in his church. So, like Jeremiah, I cling to the covenant for dear life, because I know deep down that there is no life for me outside of it.

This month, the Spirit gave me one of those rare faith saving assurances. It came in the form of a letter from the bishops of my Evangelical Lutheran Church in America to the church:

Beloved in Christ,

Grace and peace to you in the name of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

As bishops of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA), we write to you in this moment of national and global tension with clarity and conviction. Our faith compels us to stand where Jesus stands—with and for those whom society often seeks to exclude, erase, or diminish.

Our shared confession that every person is created in the image of God (Genesis 1:27) grounds us in the conviction that all people possess inherent dignity. The incarnation of Jesus Christ reveals God’s profound solidarity with humanity—especially with those who are marginalized or oppressed. The gospel we proclaim insists that our neighbor’s need is the occasion for our love and that our public life is shaped by justice, mercy, and a commitment to the common good.

Further, we have a shared tradition in our social teachings which grounds us. The ELCA’s Social Message on Immigration reminds us:

“We are to respond to newcomers as we would to Christ—welcoming them, meeting their immediate needs, and advocating for justice in our laws and policies.”

Likewise, our recently adopted Social Statement, Faith and Civic Life, affirms that Christians are called to be “a public witness, holding leaders accountable when they fail to protect the vulnerable.”

We are living through a time when vulnerable communities are being scapegoated and attacked. Immigrants and refugees are vilified, though Scripture commands us to welcome the stranger. People of color continue to bear the devastating weight of racism woven into the fabric of our society. Transgender people, beloved by God, are being targeted with laws and rhetoric that deny their dignity and even their right to exist. These assaults on our siblings are not political abstractions—they are deep wounds in the body of Christ.

In this time of division and fear, we, as people grounded in our faith, insist on love. This commitment flows from our faith in Christ crucified and risen—the One whose love breaks down barriers, confronts hatred, and transforms hearts.

Love insists on the dignity of every human being.

Love insists on justice for the marginalized and oppressed.

Love insists that the church must reflect God’s diverse, life-giving community. Love insists that we listen, speak, and act with respect, even in disagreement. Love insists on hope, trusting that God’s kingdom of justice and peace will prevail.

This love also compels us to speak clearly against Christian Nationalism, which our Churchwide Assembly named as a distortion of the Christian faith and an unhealthy form of patriotism. Christian Nationalism confuses the Gospel with political power, turns God into a mascot for the state, and privileges some people over others based on race, religion, or birthplace. This is not the way of Jesus. The kingdom of God is not a nation, not a culture, not a political ideology—it is God’s reign of love, justice, and mercy for all people.

Therefore, as bishops of this church, we declare that the ELCA cannot be silent. Our call is clear:

  • To proclaim the God-given dignity of every human being.
  • To resist systems and ideologies, including Christian Nationalism, that oppress, dehumanize, or erase.
  • To stand shoulder to shoulder with those who are targeted or harmed.
  • To bear public witness that the love of Christ is stronger than fear, stronger than hatred, and stronger than death.

We call on all members of the ELCA to join us in prayer, advocacy, and action:

  • Pray for those who are vulnerable and for all who work for justice.
  • Advocate in your communities, legislatures, and Congress for laws that protect migrants, advance racial justice, and safeguard LGBTQIA+ people.
  • Engage in the holy work of hospitality, creating spaces of safety, affirmation, and belonging for all God’s children.
  • Model respectful dialogue in a polarized world, seeking understanding rooted in love.
  • Hold fast to hope, trusting that the Spirit is still at work renewing creation and reconciling the world to God.

In baptism, we are marked with the cross of Christ forever. That cross is not only a sign of our hope—it is also a summons to follow Jesus into solidarity with those who suffer.

In the power of the Spirit, let us be bold. Let us be faithful. Let us insist on Love—in our words, our actions, our public witness, and our life together.

I have long hoped for just such a bold statement of faith for these dark times. See, e.g., A Barmen Declaration for our time? This letter gives me reason for hope. I hope that this letter will be more than just another social statement. I hope that what we read in the text of this letter will make its way into the preaching within our congregations. I hope that our members will carry it into their family gatherings, into the barbershops, bowling alleys, hair salons, book clubs, back yard barbeques, classroom discussions, chat groups and everywhere else people gather. I hope that my church will not have to issue yet another statement of apology a generation from now for its failure to stand up for immigrants ruthlessly deported for lack of “documentation,” for people of color brutalized by our government’s ruthless efforts to rebuild the structures of Jim Crow, for the persecution, slander and violence committed against transgender persons and whatever other victims the present American regime consigns to the netherworld of “the least” among us. I hope that enough of us have learned the lessons of our failed past to avoid repeating it in this present moment God has given us for witness and service.

No, God has not rejected the church and never will. The question always is whether the church will, for the sake of peace in the ecclesiastical household, reject the peace God desires for the world that comes only through the doing of justice. History does not paint a hopeful picture. But the good news of the gospel is that history is not the final word. The past need not bind the future.   

Here is a poem by  CAConrad on the forward direction of hope.

Slaves of Hope Live Only For Tomorrow

photo of United States from

                                                                             outer space in trash

                                                                             green fire held to

                                                                             everything as

                                                                             everyone

                                                               whirls into abs-

                                                               tr-

                                                               action

                                                               a moment with the

                                           crystal and the weight of the house is released

                                                we hold fast

                                                we hold one another

                                                we hold to the vigor of the street

                                                     pain of picked flower our frame

reckless but never monochrome

                                                     everything the speed and

                                                     tension of eloping

                                                               saunter past

                                                                 barricades

                                                                 waking not

                                                                 sleeping to

                                                                        dream

Source: PoetryNow, 2015, (c. 2015 by CAConrad) CAConrad (b. 1966) is an American poet, professor and author. Conrad identifies as Queer and uses the pronouns they/their. They were born in Topeka, Kansas and grew up in Boyertown, Pennsylvania. Their mother was a fourteen-year-old runaway and their father was a Vietnam War veteran. They were bullied as a child and stated in the feature film documentary, The Book of Conrad (2015), “People called me ‘faggot’ more than they called me my name.”

Conrad was a 2014 Lannan Fellow, a 2013 MacDowell Fellow, and a 2011 Pew Fellow, they also conduct workshops on (Soma)tic poetry and Ecopoetics. Their book While Standing in Line for Death won a 2018 Lambda Book Award; their Amanda Paradise: Resurrect Extinct Vibration received a 2022 PEN Oakland – Josephine Miles Literary Award. In 2022, they were awarded a Ruth Lilly Poetry Prize for lifetime achievement in poetry. Conrad currently teaches poetry at Columbia University and the Sandberg Art Institute in Amsterdam. You can read more about CAConrad and sample more of their poetry at the Poetry Foundation website.

The Hazards of Prayer

NINETEENTH SUNDAY AFTER PENTECOST

Genesis 32:22-31

Psalm 121

2 Timothy 3:14-4:5

Luke 18:1-8

Prayer of the Day: O Lord God, tireless guardian of your people, you are always ready to hear our cries. Teach us to rely day and night on your care. Inspire us to seek your enduring justice for all this suffering world, through Jesus Christ, our Savior and Lord.

“Jacob was left alone, and a man wrestled with him until daybreak.” Genesis 32:24.

Few biblical stories are as mystifying as that of Jacob’s wrestling match at the Jabbok. There is a back story here. Jacob is on the run, as he has been for all of his life. After cheating brother Esau out of his rightful birthright and blessing as the eldest son, Jacob had to flee his brother’s lethal wrath. He found sanctuary, welcome and wives, four to be precise, with the family of his uncle Laban. But Jacob’s relationship with is uncle turned sour, forcing Jacob to flee once again. Now he is headed back home. This time he is not a lone fugitive, but a man with a family, flocks of animals and a degree of wealth. What he lacks is the shelter of community which make such blessings secure. Jacob is vulnerable, a sitting duck in the wilderness with an angry uncle behind him and a brother before him who has every reason to feel deep hostility toward him. That brother, Jacob learns, is coming to meet him in the company of four hundred men. Jacob the con man, the trickster, the guy who always has an angle knows as he settles down for the night that he has finally painted himself into a corner. It is at this point that Jacob encounters….what exactly? The bible refers to Jacob’s wrestling opponent as a man. Only when the sun is rising and the match is over does Jacob recognize that he has been wrestling with the God of his ancestors.     

A nocturnal being unable to overcome Jacob’s superior strength is hard to reconcile with the God of Israel whose almighty power is set over all other forces of nature by the prophets and throughout the psalms. Resorting to “source criticism,” commentators point out that this passage comes to us from the “Yahwist,” the oldest of the four literary sources constituting the first five books of the Bible known as the “Pentateuch.” They further suggest that elements of this story are drawn from even more ancient Canaanite myths about human encounters with spirits inhabiting rivers and lakes. These spirits, though powerful and dangerous at night, are driven back into their watery abode by the light of day. That would explain Jacob’s victory over his supernatural opponent as well as the opponent’s request that Jacob release him as dawn drew near.

I am not sure what to do with all of these helpful little noetic perjinkerties. I suppose we could use them to dismiss this text as an unhelpful throwback to Israel’s more primitive and unenlightened past and turn our attention instead to the clear expressions of monotheism found in other parts of the Pentateuch. That would surely comport with our 19th Century progressivist prejudices. But our prejudices are just that. Unless one accepts uncritically the doubtful proposition that “later” equates with “more advanced” and that each successive generation is necessarily wiser than the last, there is no basis for supposing that an older and more “primitive” expression of faith is any less true, profound or insightful than later expressions. Indeed, judged from the standpoint of John’s gospel in which the “Word became flesh and dwelt among us,” this gripping tale of an intense, sweaty, bone crunching wrestling match between Jacob and his God comes closer than anything else in the Hebrew Scriptures to the miracle of Incarnation lying at the heart of our faith.

The physicality of God has always been the scandal of Judeo-Christian faith. Greek and Mesopotamian religion generally viewed spirit and matter as binary opposites. The notion that a god could have a body was an alien concept. For this reason, some early Christian preachers seeking to make the good news of Jesus intelligible to the greco-roman world were tempted either to deny Jesus’ humanity or argue that the human Jesus was merely a disguise for the God who is pure spirit. The miracle of the Incarnation is equally problematic for post enlightenment folk like us who are skeptical of miracles in general. A great deal of liberal theology of the 19th and early 20th centuries was geared toward “demythologizing” the scriptures and accommodating Christian faith to a largely secular worldview. The result has been a kind of neo gnostic view of Jesus as a man with an unusually well developed “God consciousness.” This theological construct allowed for faith in Jesus while keeping God safely ensconced in the realm of spirit and thus beyond the reach of modern skepticism.

The liberal approach has been justified as a means for enabling rational moderns unable to believe in the virgin birth, the miracles of Jesus and his Resurrection to connect with and believe in Jesus. But I have a feeling this demythologized approach to interpreting Jesus has far more to do with avoiding the radical implications of the Incarnation than with the need for intellectual honesty. The Incarnation itself demythologizes our notions of a Supreme Being ensconced “way beyond the blue,” beyond the reach of human sight, hearing, touch, scent and taste. When asked by his disciple, Philip, to “show us the Father,” Jesus replies that in seeing and knowing him, they have already encountered the Father. John 14:8-11. The God who reigns over the universe from afar, pulling the levers and pushing the buttons that make things happen does not exist. The only God that exists is the one who is made of human flesh, the one who suffers. The only God that is real resides in refugee camps, sleeps on city streets, languishes in detention centers and starves to death in war zones. This God who hangs on the cross is the only One there is. To worship and serve this God is to care for these most vulnerable among us. To despise those regarded as “least” among us is to blaspheme the only God who truly is. All others are, as pastor and teacher Karl Barth once observed, “man talking in a loud voice.”

Praying to such a God is not a matter of submitting requests for favors. Prayer is entering into the redemptive struggle of the God whose “skin is in the game” of human existence. It is to align one’s heart, mind and life with the promised reign of God over a diverse, equitable and inclusive new creation. There is no better example of what such prayer looks like than the Psalms. These raw expressions of ecstasy, horror, thankfulness, praise, angry cries for vengeance are the stuff of Israel’s struggle to live faithfully under its covenants with the God of its matriarchs, patriarchs, prophets, judges and kings. The Psalms are prayers that formed the faith of Jesus and shaped his understanding of his messianic vocation. As Dietrich Bonhoeffer observed, from the Psalms “we learn…the word which God wants to hear from us.”[1]

“I cannot relate to the Psalms,” said a participant in a Bible Study I once led. “All this anger and hatred of enemies just doesn’t square with Jesus’ command to love and forgive our enemies.” Though I can understand this person’s sentiments, I think the comment reflects a high degree of privilege. If you have never seen your wife and daughters raped in front of you, if you have never seen your homeland bombed into rubble, if you have never suffered sexual assault and been dismissed, if you have never been beaten by the police that are supposed to protect you or imprisoned for no good reason, then you have no business piously dismissing the anguished prayers of those who have. Prayer is not a private, individual matter. To pray is to join with the whole people of God praying first and foremost that God’s kingdom will come and that God’s will be done on earth as in heaven. To that end, our prayers must be united with those of our siblings for whom the reign of God seems altogether absent. We must learn to cry out with their sorrow, longing and rage against the engines of their oppression and the violence they experience, all of which oppose God’s just and gentle reign.

None of this negates Jesus’ command to love our enemies and pray for our persecutors. But the love of which Jesus speaks is not personal sentiment. It is a desire for the wellbeing of those who harm us, regardless how we may feel about them and without tolerating or enabling their abusive behavior. The kindest thing we can do for the enemies who oppresses us is to work tirelessly for the liberation of the oppressed, thereby freeing our enemies from their pathological addiction to wealth, their deep seated insecurity leading to ever greater abuse of their power and their misguided and unsustainable belief in their entitlements. The rich must be “sent away empty” because only empty hands are capable of receiving the gifts of God. Luke 1:53. There is no thought of taking vengeance on our enemies. Although the psalmists call out for vengeance and sometimes tell God precisely what shape they believe vengeance should take, they always leave the business of executing retribution in God’s hands. As the prophet Jonah had to learn, God’s view of who deserves punishment for which sins, when it is administered and the shape it should take frequently differs from our own myopic views of what constitutes justice.

Praying the psalms gives us language to express ourselves. Often, they teach us prayers we do not seem to need just now, but will become a refuge and source of heartfelt expression as life unfolds. The psalms put us in touch with our siblings who experience oppression and opens our eyes to the price they must pay for the privileges so many of us claim as entitlements. Most importantly, praying the psalms engages us in the redemptive work of God for all of creation. This is prayer fused with action, a call to wrestle with God for a blessed future. But be warned, there is risk involved with praying so deeply. Jacob came away lame and broken after his night of wrestling with God. Serious prayer draws us into a confrontation with the truth about ourselves and our world. It breaks down our rationalizations, justifications and excuses for our self destructive and hurtful behavior. Jacob’s night of intense prayer broke more than his hip, even as it won him a blessing. Yet the new day into which Jacob limps holds for him reconciliation, peace and the promise of a new beginning.

Here is a poem by Emily Dickinson inspired by our Hebrew Scripture lesson from Genesis.

A Little East of Jordan

A little East of Jordan,

Evangelists record,

A Gymnast and an Angel

Did wrestle long and hard

Till morning touching mountain

And Jacob, waxing strong,

The Angel begged permission

To Breakfast to return

Not so, said cunning Jacob!

I will not let thee go

Except thou bless me Stranger!

The which acceded to

Light swung the silver fleeces

 Peniel Hills beyond,

And the bewildered Gymnast

Found he had worsted God!

Source: The Poems of Emily Dickinson: Reading Edition, (c. 1999 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College; edited by Ralph W. Franklin, ed., Cambridge, Mass.) Emily Dickinson (1830-1866) is indisputably one of America’s greatest and most original poets. Born in Amherst, Massachusetts, she attended a one-room primary school in that town and went on to Amherst Academy, the school out of which Amherst College grew. In the fall of 1847 Dickinson entered Mount Holyoke Female Seminary where students were divided into three categories: those who were “established Christians,” those who “expressed hope,” and those who were “without hope.” Emily, along with thirty other classmates, found herself in the latter category. Though often characterized a “recluse,” Dickinson kept up with numerous correspondents, family members and teachers throughout her lifetime. You can find out more about Emily Dickinson and sample more of her poetry at the Poetry Foundation website.


[1] Bonhoeffer, Dietrich, Life Together and Prayerbook of the Bible, ed. Gerhard Ludwig Müller, Albrecht Schönherr, and Geffrey B. Kelly, trans. Daniel W. Bloesch and James H. Burtness, vol. 5, Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1996), pp. 155–177.

Have I been Censored by FB?

Here is what I know. About a week ago, I noticed a decrease in volume on my website. Wondering whether I had neglected or failed in my efforts to post my weekly articles to the Facebook pages on which I have participated for many years, I discovered that my posts for the last five weeks have been marked “pending.” I clicked on the link marked Learn more and found the following message:

“To help keep this group safe, admins review some posts before they’re visible to others. You’ll be notified when your post is published in the group.”

I found this highly suspect for two Facebook pages to which I belong captioned “ELCA Rostered Ministers” and “ELCA Uncensored.” ELCA Rostered Ministers states under its “About” heading, “Posts are not moderated in any way, shape or form after complaints over removal of sexist and racist posts. So just work it out amongst yourselves or just scroll past that which you don’t like.” ELCA uncensored gives notice to its members, “This is a group open to all current or former ELCA Clergy and seminarians. Canadians are welcome, too. Other countries as well. The idea is that you will not be censored here. Talk about what you want. You’re CLERGY, for Pete’s sake. Not small children who have to be supervised in a ‘sandbox.’” Thus, I find it highly unlikely that the administrators of these pages have been holding my posts hostage over a month reviewing them for dangerous content. Stranger still was the block placed on a photography page of which I am a member. All we ever do on this page is share photographs. I have shared pictures of birds, bugs and other such nature shots infrequently on this page, but I noticed that the one I shared about two weeks ago was “pending.” Again, the notice stated: “This review is for group safety and so admins can get to know participants. You can create up to 5 posts and comments while admin review is pending. We’ll let you know when admins complete their review and your content is published in the group.” To date, I have received neither notice nor freedom to post.

I paid a visit to Facebook’s info page from which I learned the following:

“Temporary blocks from sharing posts on Facebook can happen if you’ve:

  • Posted a lot in a short amount of time
  • Shared posts that were marked as unwelcome
  • Shared something that goes against our Community Standards

Though we can’t lift the block early, you can still view posts in your Feed at any time. We realize that most people who get temporary blocks just didn’t know about our sharing policies. To avoid blocks like this in the future, the best thing you can do is review our Community Standards.”

Accordingly, I checked out the community standards in an effort to discover which of these I might have violated. I will not try to summarize the exhaustive list of behaviors that might earn blockage or removal of content from Facebook. Suffice to say that I was unable to identify any of Facebook’s community standards remotely applicable to anything I have ever posted. So I am left wondering why I have been blocked from sharing my posts on other pages.

As those of you who follow me regularly know, I have been openly critical of our government’s inhumane treatment of refugees under both Democratic and Republican administrations. I have been critical of our government’s support of the Israeli killing machine at work in Gaza and on the West Bank under both Democratic and Republican administrations. I have been particularly critical of the racist, misogynist, homophobic and xenophobic policies and actions of the current Trump administration. I have gone so far as to say that the GOP ought to be classified as a hate group under the standards of the Southern Poverty Law Center criteria. What I have never done and never will do is incite, advocate or defend violence against any person or group. Again, those who follow me regularly know that, as a Christological pacifist, I refuse to condone or justify even violence that my church would justify under the “just war” doctrine. So, once again, I wonder why Facebook has chosen to block sharing of my posts.  

In ordinary times, I might have ascribed all of this to some hiccup in Facebook’s algorithm. But these are no ordinary times. These are times in which masked thugs are “disappearing” our neighbors from off the street, raiding schools, hospitals and courthouses. These are times in which the FCC is bullying media networks into silencing people it deems offensive to the regime. These are times when the armed forces of the United States created to defend us against foreign enemies are being deployed against our cities and their people. These are times in which those of us who have the temerity to hold political convictions contrary to the Republican administration are characterized as “vermin,” “enemies from within” and “radicals.” So I am led to wonder if I am being censored.

To be clear, I am not so paranoid or so possessed by delusions of grandeur to imagine that I am being monitored by Homeland Security. I am sure Kristi Noem has bigger fish to fry (or puppies to shoot) than a minor league blogger with a following of three hundred fifty and a thousand or so folks who drop by his webpage every so often. I doubt this runs any deeper than Facebook. Nonetheless, Facebook is owned by Meta Platforms, Inc., a publicly traded company. Like all publicly traded companies, its objective is to make money for its shareholders. Meta’s chairman and CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, like the business leaders that ultimately supported and enabled the rise of Adolph Hitler, knows on which side his bread is buttered. To avoid being regulated or litigated out of existence, a good CEO will do whatever it takes to placate, ingratiate himself to and avoid conflict with the government whose actions could easily endanger the company’s profits and thereby enrage its shareholders. Is it so far fetched to imagine that Facebook might have an algorithm detecting persons who consistently post articles critical of Trump? Or articles that address in less than favorable terms the life and legacy of Charly Kirk as I recently did? Or any other content that might provoke the MAGA faithful? I do not believe that Zuckerberg or, for that matter, the business leaders that enabled Hitler in the 1930s necessarily supported their government’s oppressive aims. Nothing personal against the Jews-or women, people of color, or LGBTQ+ folk or immigrants. It’s just business.

My suspicions may very well be unfounded. In fact, I hope they are. I hope that I was merely caught up in some well meaning, but defective filter designed by Facebook to screen out genuinely dangerous content. Yet, since there seems to be no way to appeal Facebook’s action or even question it, my suspicions remain. Perhaps it is time to question whether our newspapers, news networks and media platforms belong in the hands of corporate ownership. Perhaps it is time for all of us to wonder who besides Alexa and Siri might be listening to us on those very convenient smart speakers in our homes. Maybe we should be a little more suspicious of all the apps that come with the smart phones and laptops we buy. Regardless whether my being blocked is intentional or inadvertent, it uncovers a frightening reality, namely, that the guarantees protecting our right to privacy, the integrity of our sources of information and our freedom of expression are extremely fragile right now. It would not take much to obliterate them altogether.   

Learning the Language of Lament

SEVENTEENTH SUNDAY AFTER PENTECOST

Habakkuk 1:1-4; 2:1-4

Psalm 37:1-9

2 Timothy 1:1-14

Luke 17:5-10

Prayer of the Day: Benevolent, merciful God: When we are empty, fill us. When we are weak in faith, strengthen us. When we are cold in love, warm us, that with fervor we may love our neighbors and serve them for the sake of your Son, Jesus Christ, our Savior and Lord.

“O Lord, how long shall I cry for help,
    and you will not listen?
Or cry to you “Violence!”
    and you will not save?
Why do you make me see wrongdoing
    and look at trouble?
Destruction and violence are before me;
    strife and contention arise.
So the law becomes slack,
    and justice never prevails.
The wicked surround the righteous;
    therefore judgment comes forth perverted.” Habakkuk 1:2-4.

These are words of lament directed at God. I must say, the prophet expresses succinctly the way I feel these days when I read the news. However, given my American protestant ever white, ever polite and ever sunny and bright upbringing, I find it difficult to fit these thoughts into a prayer. Since I was knee high to a duck I have been taught that God’s ways are not to be questioned, that “Man proposes, God disposes,” that “all things work together for good to those who love God and are called according to his purpose.” So rather than complain, we ought to accept cheerfully whatever life dishes out confident that the all knowing God behind it has our best interests at heart.

Israel’s faith in God is nothing like that. Habakkuk addresses a God who made covenant promises to Sarah and Abraham assuring them a nation, a land and a blessing to share with the world. He speaks to a God who made a covenant with Israel at Sinai, promising to be Israel’s God and that Israel would be God’s people. The Babylonian conquest of Judah, the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem and the exile of God’s people seems to the prophet a wholesale abandonment of those covenant promises. While God frequently calls out the people of Israel for their failures to uphold their covenant responsibilities throughout the Hebrew Scriptures, the people of Israel are frequently heard calling God to account as well and insisting that God uphold God’s end of the covenants. A Rabbi and teacher of mine once explained that Israel’s relationship with God is something like a tug of war. “God may be mad at us and we may be mad at God, but we’re still talking. We know that there is One on the other end of this rope we are tugging on.” That dialogical relationship generated the body of literature we know as scripture.

Lament is an integral part of the dialogical relationship between Israel and its God. To be clear, lament is more than just grousing and complaining. It is a dialect of prayer, language employed by faithful people who hold a clear vision of the world God intends and promises while at the same time see the world as it is in all of its pain, cruelty and injustice. Lament is a cry that strives to bridge the gaping chasm between what is and what should be. Without faith struggling to grasp the covenant promises there can be no lament, only anger, fear and bitter tears.

Americans, including those of us who identify as Christians, lack the language of lament.[1] We have been indoctrinated with an optimism that has become increasingly difficult to maintain these days. It is an optimism based on denial, a refusal to see the world as it is because that sight would be too painful to bear. Optimism was easier decades ago when we still believed that we were living in a uniquely civil society governed by the rule of law. Our fragile optimism held for as long as violent insurrections, masked goons “disappearing” people from the streets, armed troops supplanting civilian policing, corrupt judicial bodies and politically driven prosecutions were all things that took place in other countries. In the not too distant past, we could point to the first Black president and convince ourselves that racism was a relic of the past. But then came the election of Donald Trump and the killings of Travon Martin, George Floyd and Briana Taylor. We used to believe that propaganda was the tool of dictators ruling over backwards and uneducated people. Today the fictional Ministry of Truth in George Orwell’s 1984, whose job it was to re-write history to comport with the ideology of the regime, has been enacted by executive order in the United States of America. Our belief in an America moving progressively toward a more equitable, prosperous and just society has been dashed.

Destruction and violence are before me;
    strife and contention arise.
So the law becomes slack,
    and justice never prevails.
The wicked surround the righteous;
    therefore judgment comes forth perverted.” Habakkuk 1:3-4.

The prophet Habakkuk receives a response to his lament. The Lord responds, “….there is still a vision for the appointed time; it speaks of the end and does not lie. If it seems to tarry, wait for it; it will surely come; it will not delay.” Habakkuk 2:3. Waiting is not something we Americans do particularly well. Patience is not a dominant gene in our DNA. We expect instant solutions to complex problems and fall for anyone who promises to deliver them. That is why we keep voting for leaders who make such promises and wind up kicking them off their pedestals in the next round of elections when they invariably disappoint us. We live in a world of fast food, fast internet and fast cars. We do not like being told that our problems are deep seated and require work, sacrifice and time to solve. Moreover, their resolution requires not merely a change in our circumstances, but a change in ourselves. Yet if the vision of which the Lord speaks is powerful enough, beautiful enough and compelling enough to be worth waiting for, it overcomes our impatience. Furthermore, it transforms our perceptions of the world around us and exposes sources of hope and potential that we might otherwise overlook in the darkness of our despair.

For disciples of Jesus, that vision is one in which God is “all in all.” I Corinthians 15:28. The vision is a commonwealth of peoples “from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and tongues.” Revelation 7:9. We look forward to the day when “the home of God is among mortals. He will dwell with them; they will be his peoples, and God himself will be with them and be their God; he will wipe every tear from their eyes. Death will be no more; mourning and crying and pain will be no more, for the first things have passed away.” Revelation 21:3-4. What we Americans and moderns in general lack is imagination capable of grasping such a marvelous vision.

In his book, The Prophetic Imagination, Professor of Old Testament, Walter Brueggemann, describes what he calls the phenomenon of “static religion” in the context of the Hebrew Scriptural narrative. Static religion is religion in which God and God’s temple are a part of the royal/imperial landscape. The sovereignty of God becomes synonymous with the agenda of the state such that religion is fused with patriotism, righteousness with conventional morality and justice with the prevailing class and power hierarchies. Static religion serves to legitimate the status quo. To question the status quo is to question the sovereignty of God. For those who benefit from the status quo, static religion is a source of comfort and security. But it is also a conceptual prison in which the capacity for imagination languishes. When, as I believe to be the case for our nation today, the status quo no longer seems to work for a substantial number of people, static religion can provide no relief. It is designed not to generate visions of alternative possibilities for human existence, but rather to suppress any such notion. So instead of affording comfort and peace, static religion suffocates and oppresses.  

The challenge, I believe, for American Christians is to reignite and reorientate our imagination. We need, like John of Patmos, both a clear eyed understanding of the power, cruelty and destructiveness of the present regime as well as the capacity to imagine with the eye of faith an alternative reality, a diverse, equitable and inclusive vision of a new humanity.  In doing so, “We need to ask not whether it is realistic or practical or viable but whether it is imaginable.[2] Imagination has preceded most human achievements once thought impractical or even impossible. The break through to the day of the Lord comes when “old men dream dreams” and “young men see visions.” Joel 2:28. I have witnessed in my own time how much seismic movement can be unleashed when a person of faith declares, “I have a dream.” The church does not need new strategies for “sustainability.” It needs to learn to dream again. The world does not need a static church more concerned with propping up the American empire than proclaiming and living the reign of God. It needs a church capable of articulating and demonstrating an alternative way of being human.

To return to where we began, it is quite impossible to imagine an alternative to what is without recognizing and acknowledging the full degree to which our world has been subjected to bondage under human tyranny, oppression and ecological rape. Most of our siblings on this planet have lived that reality. They know well the language of lament. By contrast, most of us mainline Christians in the United States see our world’s immense suffering only through the lens of news bites, video clips and photographs. Rather than weep and lament the cruelties and injustices inflicted upon our fellow human beings, we are all too apt simply to change the channel. We need for our hearts of stone to be replaced with hearts of flesh. Ezekiel 36:26.

Until the publication of our most recent hymnal in 2006, Lutheran hymns did not include songs of lament. While many of our hymns give expression to sorrow, grief and loss, they typically end on a high note. We are content to skirt the edges around the valley of shadow, but we do not travel into its depths, nor do we spend much time there. To do so would be morbid. Our preference is for music that is uplifting, hymns that send us out of the sanctuary door with a spring in our step and a joyful song in our hearts. There is a place for joyful hymnody, of course. Joy in the face of oppression can be an expression of resistance and hope. But I fear that for our American churches such hymns, without anything to counterbalance them, operate rather as a kind of lidocaine patch that numbs our pain without healing our wounds. They deliver an emotionally induced high that allows us to rise above the agony of our dying planet and the woes of the real world. The problem is that, once outside the sanctuary, the real world is still there. Inclusion of laments in our current hymnal is, I believe, a much needed corrective.

Here is a poem/hymn of Ralph F. Smith incorporated into Evangelical Lutheran Worship, the hymnal of the Evangelical Church in America.

How Long, O God?

“How long, O God?” the psalmist cries,
a cry we make our own,
for we are lost, alone, afraid,
and far away from home.

The evil lurks within, without,
it threatens to destroy
the fragile cords that make us one,
that bind our hearts in joy.

Your grace, O God, seems far away;
will healing ever come?
Our broken lives lie broken still;
will night give way to dawn?

How can we hope? How can we sing?
O God, set free our voice
to name the sorrows, name the pain,
that we might yet rejoice.

“How long, O God” the psalmist cries,
a cry we make our own.
Though we are lost, alone, afraid,
our God will lead us home.

Source: Evangelical Lutheran Worship,(c. 2006 Evangelical Lutheran Church in America) Hymn # 698; text byRalph F. Smith (1950-1994).


[1] Actually, America does have a language of lament, though it exists and thrives as a cultural undercurrent. The music genre known as “the blues” originated among African Americans in the Deep South of the United States around the 1860s. It incorporated spirituals, work songs, field hollers, shouts, chants and rhymed simple narrative ballads from the African-American culture. The blues is one of the many cultural contributions made by Americans who experience and understand America quite differently from most the rest of us. The current administration and its allies are making a concerted effort to erase this and other African American contributions to our national narrative in an effort to spare white people from getting their feelings hurt. See, e.g., Florida bill to shield people from feeling ‘discomfort’ over historic actions by their race, nationality or gender.

[2] Brueggemann, Walter, The Prophetic Imagination (Second Edition) (c. 2001, Fortress Press) p. 39.

Random Thoughts on The Memorial Service of Charlie Kirk

My Grandfather used to tell a joke about a young woman sitting with her little boy at the funeral of her husband. The pastor began his sermon by pointing out what a faithful husband, loving parent and fine Christian the deceased husband had been for all his life. As he praised her late husband’s kindness, generosity and faithfulness, the woman turned to her son and whispered, “Honey, slip up there to the front of the church and take a peek into the casket. I just want to be sure it’s really your dad in there. I think we might be at the wrong funeral.”

There is an old Latin adage, De mortuis nil nisi bonum. Roughly translated, it means “about the dead nothing but good is said.” I concur generally with that sentiment. I have presided over more than a few funerals for people whose lives have been-let’s just say complicated. Though a funeral sermon is not a eulogy, it should be a word of grace for those who grieve. The good news is not good news if it does not intersect with the pain of those who loved the departed, in spite of whatever faults and injuries they may have inflicted. So I tend to lift up whatever positive aspects of a life that I can and speak to the power of God to redeem even lives that have gone off the rails. It does no good to dredge up the wrongs of one who is dead and no longer able to answer or make amends for the past.

The memorial service of Charlie Kirk, however, was more than a funeral. It was a televised canonization of Charlie Kirk as a martyr for and champion of conservative values and free speech. Because Kirk was a public figure, because his memorial service was a public event and because the truth matters, we need to set the record straight. First, Charlie Kirk was not a victim of “the radical left,” whatever the hell that means. He was the victim of an angry, maladjusted young man in a culture that celebrates the ease with which anyone can obtain military grade weapons. To date, he has not been connected with any political, religious or ideologically defined group. As I have made clear elsewhere, Kirk’s death was a tragic event-as are the thousands of other needless gun deaths that are hardly thought newsworthy these days. But that does not make him a martyr any more than anyone else shot to death for no good reason.

Second, while we should fully support Charlie Kirk’s right of free speech, we need to condemn in no uncertain terms the irresponsible and malicious use he made of it. Kirk mocked, ridiculed and threatened LGBTQ+ folk with slurs. He claimed that it was the right of the American people to live free of such “freaks” and even suggested, citing a biblical reference from the book of Leviticus, that gay men should be stoned to death. He held Martin Luther King, Jr. in contempt and argued that the Civil Rights Act was a mistake. Moreover, he said on several occasions that Black people were lacking in intelligence and competency. I have documented these and other remarks in my article of September 15, 2025.  If we didn’t know better, the parade of speakers portraying Kirk as a model of civility, open minded dialogue and respect for opposing views might convince us that he was indeed the mythical hero they are trying to make him. But we do know better. Those of us not entirely detached from reality remember all too well his toxic comments and recognize the memorial service as a masterful work of gaslighting.

That brings me to the third observation. I don’t know when the last time was that I saw such a great ocean of white skin under one roof. True, there were some well chosen exceptions on display, Dr. Ben Carson being one. I am sure if you turned over enough rocks in that stadium you might find a few in the audience as well, though why any person of color would want to honor the life of one who thought and spoke of them as unintelligent, incompetent and successful only through the evil mechanics of “DEI” is beyond me. Nobody used the “N” word that night, but it is hardly unknown within Charlie Kirk’s Turning Point USA. For example, in 2022, after three Black college football players were killed, Meg Miller, then president of Turning Point’s chapter at the University of Missouri, joked in a social media message, “If they would have killed 4 more n-ggers we would have had the whole week off.” In 2017 Turning Point’s national field director, Crystal Canton, sent a text message to her colleague stating: ‘I HATE BLACK PEOPLE. Like f— them all … I hate blacks. End of story.'” So let us stop pretending that “race has nothing to do with it.” Racial hate is a dominant gene in Turning Point USA’s DNA.  

Finally, and most importantly, I am sorry the name of Jesus had to be dragged into this carnival of fanatic hatred. References to Jesus punctuated the proceedings from beginning to end. The most absurd came from the lips of HHS Secretary Robert F, Kennedy Jr. who compared Kirk to Jesus. Tucker Carlson took the stage to give Jesus a decidedly antisemitic spin-not inconsistent with Kirk’s own slurs against Jews but at odds with New Testament witness. The Jesus extoled on the stage hated liberals, LGBTQ+ folk, migrants and every other perceived enemy of that crazed MAGA audience. The one and only Christ like word spoken that night came from the lips of Kirk’s widow, Erika who declared that she had forgiven her husband’s killer.  Strikingly discordant to this small island of grace was the speech of Stephen Miller shrieking that “leftists,” “are nothing.” More perplexing still was Donald Trump’s full throated defense of his hatred for the “radical left” that drew nary a protest from all these Jesus loving folks. I don’t know who this Jesus was who the crowd gathered in the State Farm Stadium kept invoking that day, but he clearly was not the one we meet in the gospels.

We can all agree, I hope, that the murder of Charlie Kirk was an inexcusable act. We should all feel sympathy and compassion for his family and loved ones. Had Kirk’s organization and his supporters been content to leave it there, I would as well. But I will not remain silent, and I hope others will not remain silent as the Republican party elevates to sainthood an apostle of racist, misogynist and homophobic hate. I will not remain silent, and I hope my church will not remain silent as the name of Jesus is dragged through the cesspool of Turning Point’s repulsive caricature of our faith. In this age of book banning, alternative facts, baseless conspiracy theories about everything from dog eating migrants to Tylenol, the truth matters more than ever.