Holy Listeners

 

I was reading this morning and the author, Joan Chittister, used a remarkable phrase: holy listener.

We live in a chatty, speaking culture more than we do a listening culture. People on TALK radio, talk. That sounds obvious, doesn’t it? They talk. Being on the radio there is nothing to see so someone has to be doing something and other than singing or playing an instrument, one would expect them to talk.

Some of them take some phone calls but most of the phone calls they take are from fans who largely agree with them. This gives the talker the opportunity to expand on their own point of view and they do it over and over again. Rarely do they take time to listen.

On television it’s much the same way. Even interviewers now seem to think that a good interview comes as the result of the interviewer talking more than the interviewee. The hope, I would imagine, is if you, as the interviewer talk long enough in trying to pose a question to really stump the interviewee, you’ll get a great interview. Of course, one of the best interviews of late was Anderson Cooper interviewing Donald Sterling. Cooper BRILLIANTLY sat quietly and let Sterling talk and talk and talk and before you knew it, Sterling had dug himself into a far, far deeper hole than he began with. Anderson Cooper did something unusual. He listened.

Then there is holy listening. Often people define prayer as talking to God. We place ourselves in a spot of attempting to acknowledge God’s presence around us and we talk and talk and talk. Whether we actually felt God’s presence is often not part of the equation. We talked. We often talk about what we need to God.

We sometimes use the Bible to ‘listen’ with a sense that we will read something and that will enable us to listen to God. This is a great opportunity but all too often instead of reading the Bible to listen, we talk right through it. We find passages we like and we preach to ourselves on how we were right about something the entire time. We read the Bible to affirm our position; which means we probably didn’t bother to listen.

Holy listening is taking the time to be quiet and listen to other people. They may have something to say we had not thought of. Holy listening is reading Scripture and discovering what is there and allowing the Word to speak to us and, Heaven forbid, challenge us. It invites us to learn and discover more about God, not just we thought we knew.

Holy listening is taking the time to listen to other people. To REALLY listen to other people. To listen to their words instead of composing our response. To take the time to digest what someone else is saying instead of assuring our point is made.

I’d like to say I’m good at this. I wish I was. To me, this holy listening is something I need to work on. The phrase provoked my own thinking because it challenged me.

Take the time to quiet down and listen and allow that listening to become holy. Let’s try to become holy listeners.

Audio of Sermon from Sunday, April 27th

 

The Apostle Called Us

Texts: Acts 4:32-35, John 20:19-31

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

April 27, 2014

 

Easter Sunday Audio Sermon

 

He Came Back

Texts: Mark 16:1-8

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

April 20, 2014

 

There Has to be More to Life Than This

 

Recently David Letterman announced that he is going to retire. David Letterman has had a very long and successful career on CBS late at night. Previous to that he followed the Tonight Show that chose Jay Leno over him. Both Mr. Leno and Mr. Letterman had great careers. David Letterman is in his late 60’s and his ratings are beginning to drop. After a great career he is stepping down. Good for him.

CBS has named Stephen Colbert of the Comedy Channel’s “The Colbert Report” as his replacement. Mr. Colbert’s show is done, with him in character, as a addled right-winged commentator. The show is, of course, a complete satire and has been based on Mr. Colbert playing a role. He has since announced that he will not do “Late Night” in character as, obviously, the show would not work.

This shall be interesting. His competition is Jimmy Kimmel and Jimmy Fallon, both of whom are excellent. For Stephen Colbert this is an opportunity of a lifetime and, frankly a high risk moment for his career. Will this work out?

I find it a high risk move by CBS because Colbert has built a career on being in character. We shall see if he has the range and the appeal to be himself and conduct interviews and actually be funny and entertaining as himself. I, for one, would have chosen Tina Fey who, I think, is one of the most brilliant comedic minds out there. I also think a woman in that time slot would have changed the dynamics of late night television. Additionally, I find Ms. Fey to be hilarious whereas I have never found Mr. Colbert to be all that entertaining. That’s just my opinion. CBS has been the number one network in terms of entertainment and they have never asked me my opinion so, obviously, they are smarter at this than I am.

Lately Rush Limbaugh indicated this seemed to be the end of civilization as we know it and Bill O’Reilly is also incensed that this is a left-winged political move by CBS to influence the country. Etc. Etc. Etc.

I feel badly for them. I am not joking and I am not saying this satirically or in any sense of being mean spirited toward these two men. I feel badly for them. The Late Show is a late night comedy show and Stephen Colbert is a comedian. These late night shows have a relatively small demographic because of the time they are on. Some people probably record them, but many fall asleep with these folks playing in the background. People watch these shows to laugh or to see their favorite actors and actresses appear on them.

My thought is that there has to be more to life than worrying about politics and what influences people. When we are worrying about the political influence of late night shows geared toward comedy we are worrying about politics too much. I strongly suspect that of Stephen Colbert made his show mostly about political satire it would fail miserably. It would have little to do with how people thought or felt, but mostly about people not really being interested in the subject. People watch these shows to laugh and see popular entertainers and to help them fall asleep.

So I feel badly for these guys. They are looking for conspiracies behind every corner and worrying about, frankly, very minute issues. Colbert will succeed or fail based on his ability to by funny and interview guests. He has major competition. Jimmy Kimmel is great and, frankly, Jimmy Fallon is a genius. His range of talent astonishes me.

As for me, I’m tired of all the political infighting in the nation. Anyone who can give us a few good laughs, especially at ourselves, is refreshing. In terms of political intrigue and infighting, there has to be more to life than this.

Good Friday: A Day We NEED to Acknowledge

 

So, here it is. I’ve been offended beyond words this year. It’s been taking place every year but this year it’s gotten to me. Churches are having Easter Worship Services on Good Friday. On the day when Christianity commemorates the crucifixion and death of Jesus, some churches are going to sing “Alleluia” and celebrate Jesus’ resurrection. While we wait until Sunday to celebrate Jesus’ triumph over death and the grace, they’re skipping the death and the grave part and going to celebrate Easter on the day Jesus died.

This should not be confused with churches that have Saturday Night Easter Vigils. Easter Vigils are a long tradition and take place after sundown on Saturday night which makes sense. In Jewish tradition Sunday started at sundown on Saturday night and so celebrating Easter after dark is not inconsistent with Christianity. But celebrating Easter on Good Friday is a whole other story.

My favorite poet of all time was a 17^th century Anglican priest named John Donne. Donne’s poetry was a mixture of profound religious poetry which as being an Anglican priest, was not inconsistent with his being. His secular poetry was actually often a bit risqué and funny. I loved his cleverness and his plays on words. Anyone who knows me well knows I LOVE to play with words.

His greatest poem, to me, was Good Friday, 1613, Riding Westward. I’m including it at the end lest you want to read it. He writes of riding westward when he should be looking to the east. His word:

This day, when my soul's form bends to the East.
There I should see a Sun by rising set,
And by that setting endless day beget.
But that Christ on His cross did rise and fall,
Sin had eternally benighted all.
Yet dare I almost be glad, I do not see
That spectacle of too much weight for me

His soul’s form was bending toward the east, but the rest of him was riding to the west.

Good Friday inspires this. Most of us, if we are honest, want to turn west and not look. The cross is horrible.

The cross is horrible. Crucifying someone was dreadful and awful. Jesus’ death was a horrible death. We cannot make light of this.

Over the centuries we have attempted to soften the blow as much as we can.

Pontius Pilate has often been portrayed as a decent man who was caught in God’s great cosmic drama. He, the only person in Jerusalem who could actually order this kind of execution, washes his hands in a bogus attempt to say he had no responsibility. Pilate, who was historically brutal and bloodthirsty, was guilty of executing an innocent man. No amount of water was going to clear him of this.

Judas betrayed Jesus for money. We often like to say that he too was an innocent pawn in God’s great cosmic plan. The reality is that Jesus was not difficult to find. The Romans did not need Judas but they found great pleasure in turning one of Jesus’ own. Judas recognizing his own treachery hanged himself.

Many people to not attend Worship on Good Friday. We love Easter and there is much to love about Easter. It speaks of Jesus’ triumph over death and the grave. Easter teaches us that Good Friday can be overcome. The horror of Good Friday brings us to the joy of Easter. Only death can bring about resurrection. To live forever we must die. For Jesus to come back, he had to depart. For Jesus to live again, he had to die and the day of his death was Good Friday.

Good Friday reminds us that Jesus was betrayed. It reminds us that Jesus was arrested and that he was denied. It reminds us that "God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life,” and the world killed Him. Is this harsh? Yes, it is very harsh but it is also very real. Jesus came into our midst and we killed him. Most of us, if we are brutally honest with ourselves, would have either been outside in the mob screaming for blood or staying home and pretending the events were not taking place. Like Donne, we’d have our faces pointing westward.

In one of the four Suffering Servant Songs in Isaiah 50, the suffering servant says, “I gave my back to those who struck me, and my cheeks to those who pulled out the beard; I did not hide my face from insult and spitting. ⁷ The Lord God helps me; therefore I have not been disgraced; therefore I have set my face like flint, and I know that I shall not be put to shame; ⁸ he who vindicates me is near. Who will contend with me? Let us stand up together.” Who will contend with me? Let us stand up together!

Take note, in the Gospels, who contents with Jesus, who stands with him. There is nary a soul…

One of the roles of the Christian Church is to tell the story and retell the story over and over again. It’s is our job to invite people to turn and look eastward. It is our job to at least make sure we acknowledge that Easter does not come without Good Friday. Most of us would love to ignore this day, it is a dreadful day. It is a day when the guilt of what humanity did to God’s Son is exposed for the world to see.

Tragically, and obscenely, some churches are choosing to celebrate Easter that day. To me, it’s downright obscene. It crushes my spirit, it crushes my soul. Has Christianity turned so much into ‘feel good’ that we can no longer recognize that to walk in the light requires a journey into the darkness. Has Christianity become so much about feeling good that we should not take time to acknowledge our failures and our faults as a collective people?

May God forgive us.

GOOD-FRIDAY, 1613, RIDING WESTWARD.
by John Donne

LET man's soul be a sphere, and then, in this,
Th' intelligence that moves, devotion is ;
And as the other spheres, by being grown
Subject to foreign motion, lose their own,
And being by others hurried every day,
Scarce in a year their natural form obey ;
Pleasure or business, so, our souls admit
For their first mover, and are whirl'd by it.
Hence is't, that I am carried towards the west,
This day, when my soul's form bends to the East.
There I should see a Sun by rising set,
And by that setting endless day beget.
But that Christ on His cross did rise and fall,
Sin had eternally benighted all.
Yet dare I almost be glad, I do not see
That spectacle of too much weight for me.
Who sees Gods face, that is self-life, must die ;
What a death were it then to see God die ?
It made His own lieutenant, Nature, shrink,
It made His footstool crack, and the sun wink.
Could I behold those hands, which span the poles
And tune all spheres at once, pierced with those holes ?
Could I behold that endless height, which is
Zenith to us and our antipodes,
Humbled below us ? or that blood, which is
The seat of all our soul's, if not of His,
Made dirt of dust, or that flesh which was worn
By God for His apparel, ragg'd and torn ?
If on these things I durst not look, durst I
On His distressed Mother cast mine eye,
Who was God's partner here, and furnish'd thus
Half of that sacrifice which ransom'd us ?
Though these things as I ride be from mine eye,
They're present yet unto my memory,
For that looks towards them ; and Thou look'st towards me,
O Saviour, as Thou hang'st upon the tree.
I turn my back to thee but to receive
Corrections till Thy mercies bid Thee leave.
O think me worth Thine anger, punish me,
Burn off my rust, and my deformity ;
Restore Thine image, so much, by Thy grace,
That Thou mayst know me, and I'll turn my face.

Audio Sermon Palm Sunday, 2014

So, Who is This Guy?

Texts Isaiah 50:4-9; Matthew 2:1-11

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

April 13, 2014

(While the sermon appears to cut off, it really doesn’t.  The editing was a bit tight at the end but this is a complete sermon.)

Jesus’ Wife?

 

News reports are out and a looming question this year is: Did Jesus have a wife?

A controversial papyrus scrap making that suggestion dates to the fourth through eighth century A.D., seems to have been verified that it dates back that long, thus making this a fragment of a document that existed in early Christianity.

This fragment is not new but the scientific verification does appear to be new. There are screams of forgery but I’m thinking that the document can easily date back to that time period----which actually doesn’t make it that big a deal in the realm of theological thought.

We know that there were numerous ‘gospels’ written in early Christianity. The Gnostics wrote gospels and people who attempted to discredit Jesus wrote gospels. It was not until around the 4^th century when early Christianity determined the Canon of the New Testament and chose four Gospels to have been humanly written and inspired by God. Those Gospels, Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John are part of the modern New Testament and considered to be Gospel by all of Christianity. We know next to nothing about the authors, but the early church determined these four, and only these four, were inspired. Other gospels were either destroyed or not reproduced. Most of what we have of the Bible came to us from monks carefully inscribing manuscripts. They would not have used precious time to replicate non-canonical books and so most of these manuscripts just rotted away in the sands of time.

Every so often remnants of one shows up and a lot of fuss is made. While scientifically and theologically interesting, these really do not impact the faith and history of Christianity.

Interestingly enough, speculation on the marital status of Jesus isn’t that big a deal. Some say that because the Gospels never mention a spouse it means he was not married. However, a 30 Jewish man who was not married would have been very atypical and scholars suggest that Jesus NOT been married it would have been a major thing to report. The end result? We have no idea.

Many have suggested over the centuries that Mary Magdalene may have been Jesus’ spouse. While there has often been speculation that she was a prostitute, one thing we can say for sure is that she was not a prostitute. All serious religious scholars agree on this point as does the hierarchy of the Catholic Church. If Mary Magdalene was not a prostitute, nor were her sins identified as 'sins of the flesh,’ why do so many people view Mary Magdalene as the sexy, 'fallen woman?'

It began as a shameful lie, invented by Pope Gregory I in 597 C.E., in which he combined three separate women from the New Testament into one. He combined Mary Magdalene with Mary of Bethany and a woman who is not named but is referred to as a 'sinner.' It has been suggested that Gregory may have been trying to demean her memory so has to keep women down. Others speculate he might have been theologically ignorant----which I doubt. In any case, his bogus assertion has remained a part of Christian lore, though in absolute fairness the Roman Catholic Church and the vast majority of viable Christian scholars do not say this any longer.

What was she to Jesus? A close friend? A great disciple? Spouse?

The answer is we really cannot say for sure. The Gospels do not tell us she and Jesus were married and we have to live with the fact that this is an eternal mystery. We can speculate all we want but we need to realize that no matter what we conclude, it’s speculation.

So, this fragment was found. Big deal? Historically sure, but it doesn’t tell us anything we didn’t know. There exist fragments that say all sorts of things and they will be found. They are interesting but they are not going to rock Christianity. If they do rock our faith, perhaps we need to developing thicker skin.

A Marvelously Insidious Word

 

I always marvel at language. Anyone who knows me knows that I love to play with words. I’m a notorious punster who delights in hearing groans from a particularly juicy and cheesy pun. A great pun brings about not so much a laugh, but a huge groan.

Words matter and some words are actually pretty insidious in scope. We think of words like ‘hate’ and can see it is insidious. We can use ‘bad’ words and refer to them as insidious. There’s also the word ‘phlegm’ which is just about the weirdest words in the English language. I’m not referring to any of these words, however. A marvelously insidious word people often use is the word ‘but.’

Recently in a Facebook forum made up of alumni from my college, a very small, now defunct Roman Catholic Seminary College in upstate New York, there was a conversation about a church organist who was fired when it was learned that he was married to a same sex partner. I indicated that I loved my denomination, the United Church of Christ. I wrote about us welcoming everyone, etc. One person in the forum responded, “And that is what (his denomination) does, as well………….But……..” There it was, the word ‘but.’ “Everyone is welcome in my church……………but.” The translation for the people on the receiving end of that ‘but’ is that they are not welcome.

It really doesn’t matter how large we place the letters, how well we sing welcoming songs, and announce that people are welcome. If we use the word ‘but’ in the sentence, they are not welcome.

“We welcome the role of women in leadership……………………..but.” The translation is that women are not really in leadership positions. In churches this is especially maddening. On Easter we will all read from the Gospels telling us that the first real message of Christianity, “I have seen the Lord,” pronounced by women, doesn’t count as ‘preaching.’ Because St. Paul once referred to an obscure group of women in an obscure place who were creating problems and he wrote to the church’s leadership to silence these women in the church, people have proclaimed women cannot speak in church. They, of course, ignore the reality that the first people to proclaim the Christian Gospel, “I have seen the Lord,” were, in fact women. Women are welcome in leadership……but.

We welcome children in our church and what them to participate………but, not yet.

It goes further than church, however.

If someone says, “I love you……..but,” it’s pretty ominous. It either means they don’t really love you or they are going to place some major conditions on that love.

If someone says, “I’m sorry……but,” they are not really sorry. They are now rationalizing.

What makes the word ‘but’ so insidious is that it comes at the end of a wonderful statement. It’s the ultimate bait and switch. “You are wonderful………but.’ “You are my dearest friend……but.”

I was struck by this yesterday. In the middle of a heartfelt conversation one person decided to drop his bit ‘but’ in the middle of a caring discussion. He used a lot of good words of really respecting everyone…..but.

It’s a good reminder to me. When I say something, if I’m adding the word ‘but’ to my statement, I’m not really saying what I set out to say. For me, I’m going to watch my language and try and rid myself of using this marvelously insidious word in such a manner.

Audio Sermon for April 6, 2014

 

Come and See: Jesus

Texts John 11:1-45

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

April 6, 2014

 

Audio Sermon March 23

 

Come and See: Hospitality as Spirituality

Texts Genesis 18:1-18; Acts 16:13-15

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

March 16, 2014

Fred Phelps is Near Death

 

Fred Phelps is near death. In case you never heard of Fred Phelps, he’s the pastor of Westboro Baptist Church. The church is located in Topeka, Kansas and is an independent Baptist Church that sees itself as part of the primitive Baptist tradition. Most people who are Baptist separate themselves greatly from the activities of Westboro even if there are elements they agree with. The website of the church says it all: www.godhatesfags.com.

Westboro has become famous, or, perhaps better said, infamous, for picketing funerals of high profile people and picketing the funerals of soldiers who died in combat. They see these deaths as proof that God has come to hate the United States. They are anti-gay, anti-Jewish, etc. Whereas many churches, or hopefully most churches peak about God’s love, they are the only church website I’ve ever encountered that has a list called: Bible Verses About The Hatred Of God.

Mr. Phelps is now near death.

My one thought on this subject is this. Let’s be charitable. Mr. Phelps was not a man of great charity. I do not say that to be judgmental, it’s merely stating a pretty obvious fact. The name of his church’s website does not speak of charity. The ‘hatred’ list does not speak of charity. His sermons did not speak of charity. The picketing of funerals did not speak of charity. Frankly, the word ‘hate,’ over and over again did not speak of charity. I suspect that Fred Phelps would not welcome people speaking his name and using ‘charity’ in the same sentence. It was not who he was or what he was about.

He, in so many ways, mortified those of us who attempt to live in the way of Christ. When we speak of a God of love, what Mr. Phelps said about God, seemed to contradict that. So many people were hurt and personally devastated by how he chose to go about life and how the mission of Westboro Baptist Church was lived out.

It is not a time for mocking or even pious platitudes. I have one prayer for Fred Phelps. My prayer is a simple one. I want him to be in God’s presence and I want Mr. Phelps to be loved by God and to see, learn, and understand that God loves all of us, no matter what. To me, love always wins out and my prayer for Mr. Phelps is that, in death and in God’s presence, he sees, feels, embraces, and delights in God’s love. One day, I hope we all do.

Audio Sermon March 16, 2014

 

Come and See: How to Invite People

Texts: Exodus 17:1-7; Romans 4:1-5

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

March 16, 2014

 

Audio Sermon Plus Moment of Concern March 9, 2014

 

Come and See: From Welcoming to Inviting

Texts: Genesis 2:15-19 ; John 1:35-42

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

March 9, 2014

 

 

Moment of Concern shared by J. R. Stuart

Link to the video mentioned in the sermon

Audio Sermon March 2, 2014

 

 

Just One Thing

Text: Matthew 17:1-9

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

March 2, 2014

Click the graphic to listen to the sermon;   Link to video clip is HERE.

Praying for our Nation and the World

 

In watching the news I'm distressed over the wars and conflicts around the world. The Ukraine is in a dangerous spot. I think there exists a great potential for Russia to step in and seize control. There is rioting in Venezuela. North Korea has been exposed as possibly the cruelest nation on the planet. Syria is in the midst of a horrible civil war. Iraq is unraveling and Afghanistan is largely unraveled and our troops are supposed to vacate the country by the end of the year. While I understood the first Iraq war, I never understood the second one. I understood the initial incursion into Afghanistan but I never did understand why we have stayed for so long. This has now been played out with two very different Presidents.

People often look to the United States, and we look at ourselves as the great super power that is supposed to do something. Tragically, we have lost a significant number of amazing young men and women who died in the service of our nation and have seen thousands of others devastated by wounds. As we watch Iraq devolve and recognize that Afghanistan will never not devolve, I grieve over this loss of life.

I do not believe President Obama has any desire to go to war and even if he did, the Congress would never support him. Both houses of the Congress have become a place of "Whoop, whoop, whoop! Nyuk, nyuk nyuk nyuk nyuk," more than anything else. For me, I'm praying that the peace of God which passes all understanding impacts the hearts and minds of people around the world. This killing must come to an end sometime. Far, far, far too many people in the world have died----and ultimately I'm wondering what exactly so many people have actually died for.

Audio Sermon February 23, 2014

Finding Joy in a Discordant Fashion

Texts: Leviticus 19:1-2; 9-18; Matthew 5:38-48

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

February 23, 2014

 

 

Full Communion Discussions

 

The United Church of Christ and the United Church of Canada are in discussions to enter full communion with one another. At present, The United Church of Christ has a full communion with the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), a Formula of Agreement with the Presbyterian Church (USA), the Reformed Church in America and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, and a "Kirchengemeinshaft" with the Union of Evangelical Churches in Germany (UEK).

The partnership with the United Church of Christ would be a first for United Church of Canada. The Rev. Michael Blair, executive minister of Church Mission for the United Church of Canada, said after the resolution was approved in July that it was "a first for us because we work in partnership with many denominations, but no formal relationships like this resolution would produce."

Since entering into the full communion agreement with the Christian Church, Disciples of Christ, there has been a rich partnership between the two denominations. At my own church my colleague in ministry is an ordained minister in the Disciples of Christ and has been a joy to work with. It is a reminder of Jesus’ great prayer for all to be one, as it is the foundational motto of the United Church of Christ in 1957, “That they may all be one.”

The United Church of Christ is a denomination that came as the result of the merger between the Evangelical and Reformed Church and the Congregational Christian Churches in 1957. The two predecessor denominations came as the result of mergers as well. The idea of ecumenism is well ingrained within the United Church of Christ and this border crossing venture into full communion with the United Church of Canada furthers this mission.

I wish we didn’t need to have these kind of discussions. We are all the Body of Christ, or, perhaps better said, we are all supposed to be the Body of Christ. We are, after 2000 years of Christianity a church divided. Sadly, we are a church badly divided.

Who is to fault? In a way we all lay claim to this.

For example, when I see a group from Westboro Baptist Church picketing military funerals or having a website entitled, www.godhatesfags.com, I want no part of them. Frankly, I am embarrassed they use the word ‘church’ to state what they are.

When I see many megachurches preaching the prosperity Gospel, if you believe in Jesus you will be blessed with great riches, I recoil. That is not and has never been the teaching of Jesus Christ. No matter how many random scripture passages you string together to proof text, that is not the Gospel of Christ and it never will be.

When I see churches prevent people from receiving Holy Communion I recoil at this as well. It’s the Lord’s Supper, not ours to pick and choose who we want to participate or not.

We divide over some things we see as really big things. What age should a person be Baptized and how should we do it? Do we use wine or grape juice at Holy Communion? What exactly is it when we are taking Holy Communion? Is it really Jesus? It is a symbol? When all is said and done, does any of it really matter? There is a part of me that God may actually be rather amused by the fact that our theological opinions actually matter this much. Maybe the problem is that we think more of God’s church than we actually do about God.

Do all of these things matter? They do. As I said, there are things that matter to me greatly.

Ultimately it makes me feel really good that the United Church of Christ and the United Church of Canada are talking about entering into full communion with one another. I have been a United Church of Christ minister for over 30 years and I’m proud to be a part of a denomination that takes Jesus’ prayer of all being one seriously. I’m proud to be a part of a denomination that says, ‘no matter who you are or where you are on life’s journey, you are welcome here,’ and really means it. I’m proud that when we invite everyone to God’s Table, we really mean everyone, not just the people who agree with us. I’m happy we are doing this with the United Church of Canada.

I look forward to the day, however, when we really all are one and these kinds of conversations are no longer necessary.

Spare Me the Apologetics

 

Sometimes, it seems for personal torture, I read blogs of people of a variety of theological perspectives. Many are good and many are awful. It strikes me that the ones that are ‘apologetics’ are among the worse. Christian apologetics is a field of Christian theology which aims to present a rational basis for the Christian faith, defending the faith against objections. Most of them are done poorly and are essentially making arguments as to why that person and his or her tradition is right and the others are wrong.

I was just reading one the other day. I will leave the writer’s tradition out of this as its pretty irrelevant. He is well educated and a seminary student who has mastered the fine art of pious platitude sharing and a belief that his tradition is right and the other traditions are wrong. His essential instrument is to pick and choose portions of other traditions and make them caricatures for him to pick apart. It’s the class ‘straw man’ argument. The student is studying theology and philosophy and just seems to delight in using some of the newly learned concepts and applying them, rather poorly I might add, to make his point.

I say this recognizing that many people do this. Like many people who delve into apologetics so gleefully, straw men and paper tigers are mandatory.

He most recently decided to delve into the ever delightful topic of trying to rationally determine if people outside of his tradition can go to Heaven. He makes a long argument using some theological terms that aren’t really part of the discussion until he makes them a part of his conversation. Ultimately he comes to the conclusion that his tradition and Jesus are pretty much interchangeable and that ultimately there are people who go to Heaven even though they weren’t a part of his tradition. Except, in a brilliant stroke of logic, he determines they actually WERE a part of his tradition but didn’t know it.

Let me exhale here and suggest that I really need to stop reading people who take a stab at apologetics. I mean, seriously….

Okay, back to my post.

This blog post is actually 14 double spaced pages and in those 14 double spaced pages he wanders from hither to yon and never once uses the word ‘grace.’ Not once. A central word, a central theme of the New Testament is never mentioned. Not once. Lost in the pious platitudes and philosophical and theological terms aptly misapplied was the word ‘grace.’

This is what happens when we decide to dance with apologetics. Classically Christianity has dealt nicely with ‘didache’ (teaching) and ‘kerygma’ (proclamation). Those two things are adequate. We really do not need to defend ourselves from people who disagree with us. Christian and how we practice it is a choice people make. It is not an argument to be defended, it is a choice to walk on a faith journey. Instead of intellectually or philosophically trying to defend our choice, we need to simply teach what we believe (learning it first helps!) and proclaim what we believe. No more is really necessary.

And for those who believe they have to assert why people need to belong to their particular tradition or denomination to go to Heaven I have a request. Please get over yourselves. You are doing no one a favor with this silliness.

Thank you.

Sermon Audio 2/16/14

 

 

Choosing Life

Texts: Deuteronomy 30:15-20 Matthew 5:21-26

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

February 16, 2014

(Click picture for sermon)

Why I Didn’t Watch the Debate

 

I chose not to watch the debate between Bill Nye the Science Guy and Ken Ham of the Creation Museum. Why? There really wasn’t a debate. Ken Ham is arguing that the universe we live in is 6000 years old. It isn’t. We know the earth we live on is billions of years old. We have overwhelming fossil evidence. The age of our planet is not really subject to debate at this level. Maybe a 100 million here or a billion there, but going from billions to 6000? No.

Bill Ham is bringing us to the world of Fred, Wilma, and Dino. Dinosaurs and people did not inhabit the earth together. I was a small child at the Natural History Museum in New York City seeing the fossils of ancient dinosaurs. I knew that people and these creatures did not inhabit the earth simultaneously. That is not an opinion. It’s well documented science that Mr. Ham denies.

I can be incredibly cynical and say that Mr. Ham has $35,000,000 reasons to deny this. He has invested a large amount of money in a museum that is dedicated to his perspective that the universe is 6000 years old. He claims that he is advocating his Christian faith and belief in the Bible. Sadly, very sadly, he’s actually doing great damage to Christianity and to people approaching the Bible.

The universe is at least billions of years old. Scientists have demonstrated why this is true and when I encounter facts I accept them. They have also demonstrated things like gravity and personal experience has told me, when I drop something and it hits my foot, that gravity exists. I have tripped far too many times in my life to be happy about it and I have never once, tripped UP. I always fall down. Always. When people drop trash out the window it never hangs there in the air or goes up. Gravity is a fact in the same way the dating of the universe is a fact.

Mr. Ham made this debate seem like it was a debate between the Christian faith and science and that he, Ken Ham, had to defend Christianity. In fact, I dare so, he did more to discredit Christianity than he did to defend it. He made it appear that Christianity does not believe in science and that all Christians, all REAL Christians, agree with him.

I believe I am a real Christian. I am very imperfect at my faith. I question things. I sin. I wrestle with all sorts of things with my faith, but, at the end of the day, I am a Christian. I also read the Bible, find God’s Word in the Bible, and even preach from it. I actually really love the Bible. I love it enough to not take everything in it literally.

In Genesis between the first and second chapter, there is an obvious change of authors and two quite different creation stories. The two authors tell different stories and actually have different names for God. For people who read Hebrew, the difference is very pronounced. If you don’t, I’d recommend the New Jerusalem Bible translation as it uses the Hebrew names for God. The change of authors is quite pronounced and visible. I love both authors and both of them are trying, theologically, to explain the world around them.

The first author speaks of creation rolling out over seven days and the second author speaks about human imperfection. They were theological narratives that attempted to explain what the people of the era had no way of explaining. They were written in a response to other ancient writings by a people who had a faith in a God they were trying to understand. Whereas everyone else saw creation and the universe as something flawed and ugly, and coming from ugly things, these writers saw beauty and goodness. They shared with faith and they wrote about it.

It was not science. It was never suggested to be science and the people of Judaism have always known that and through most of Christianity people knew that. In the 13^th century, Thomas Aquinas articulated that quite well. He knew the creation narrative as not a story of science, but a theological narrative.

Do I believe God created the universe? Yes.

6000 years ago in seven 24 hour days? No.

Do I believe in evolution? I sure do, as I believe God is a creating God who created and set things in motion and things remain in motion. To me, Ken Ham’s view of creation is static and I do not believe in a static God!

I do not believe in a static God….

Those words, to me, help define my view of creation. I see God as one who created and is creating and who is not static. I love the passage from the United Church of Christ Statement of Faith that reads, “God calls the worlds into being, creates humankind in the divine image, and sets before us the ways of life and death.” I love the premise of “God calls.” It is active. It is present.

Ken Ham, to me, is anti-science but he believes in a God who is static and limited. God did it and it’s done. To me, it’s not done. God lives. God breathes. God creates. God speaks. God is alive and well.

For me, there was no reason to watch the debate. One person advocated science and I have no problem seeing God in science. One person advocated a static God and I do not believe in a static God. Period.

Audio Sermon February 9, 2014

 

The Law of Christ

Texts: 1 Corinthians 2:1-12

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

February 9, 2014

Click graphic for sermon

Audio Sermon February 2, 2014

 

What is Good?

Texts: Micah 6:6-8; Matthew 5:1-12

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

February 2, 2014

 

(Click graphic for the sermon)

Audio Sermon January 26, 2014

 

Paul’s Church Primer

Texts: 1 Corinthians 1:10-18

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

January 26, 2014

 

Audio Sermon January 19, 2014

 

Come and See

Texts: 1 Corinthians 1:1-9; John 1:29-41

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

January 19, 2014

 

Audio Sermon for January 12, 2014

 

Why Baptism is Such a Big Deal

Texts: Isaiah 42:1-9, Matthew 3:13-17

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

January 12, 2014

 

Audio Sermon January 5, 2014

 

A Bit of Sarx; a Bit of Logos

Text: John 1:1-14

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

January 5, 2014

 

https://app.box.com/shared/static/t8yqg6x0veffuzvrcvb9.mp3

Audio Sermon 12/29/13

 

Of Bullies and Saviors

Text: Matthew 2:13-23

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

December 29, 2013

 

Why I, as a Christian, Found Phil Robertson’s Comments to be Offensive

 

I have to confess. I was a fan of Duck Dynasty. I watched it and found it funny. To me, it’s sort of a cross between The Beverly Hillbillies and The Three Stooges. I also saw Willie as something of a Jacob trying to run a major business with the rest of the family being a bunch of Esaus. And, yes, I liked the family coming together and having grace before the meal. I appreciated the fact that they were obviously people of faith but did not use the show as a harsh bully pulpit in reference to people they would disagree.

I know that Phil Robertson wanted the show to be more overtly religious. A&E was being cautious. It seemed that they believed that for the show to maintain its appeal to a wide span of people, people like me, for example, they had to keep it toned down. Mr. Robertson said a lot of harsh things about A&E but he remained with the show. Between the Robertson family and A&E this was a $500,000,000.00 dollar adventure. Mr. Robertson, is struck me, enjoyed the money and so he remained on the show. I’m fine with that.

I don’t know enough about Phil Robertson to say what kind of a person he is. He is something of a curmudgeon on the show but it’s a show and he’s playing a character that may or may not be based very much in reality. In reference to his wife, Kay, on the show, he makes a lot of references to getting some good loving from her and that she’s a good cook. In real life they’ve had some trials and tribulations but are together and appear to be strong in their commitment to one another.

There was a lot to like, for me, about Duck Dynasty. While my world is very different from their world, they seemed to be a very decent group of people who loved each other, had a sense of humor, and were a people of great faith. Best of all, in a day and age when so many people have demonstrated a type of mean spirited with their faith, they were not.

People who know Phi Robertson well say he’s not a bigot and he is very honest when he says he really doesn’t judge people and that he loves everyone. Perhaps this is so. Mr. Robertson may, in fact, be a wonderful man.

His recent interview offended me as a Christian.

There were a bunch of people who began to talk about his 1^st Amendment right. Please.

The 1^st Amendment to the Constitution reads thus:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

For this to have been an issue, Congress would have had to create a law prohibiting the statements that Phil Robertson made and the President would have had to sign the bill. The law would then be appealed and the Supreme Court would have to uphold the law. If you believe that either branch of the Congress would pass this, the President would sign it, and the Supreme Court would uphold it, you are sadly and tragically mistaken. Phil Robertson was free to say what he said without worry of arrest.

Was he free to say it in terms of being a character on an A&E show? Television networks do have a right to oust people who say offensive things. Martin Bashir stated something dreadfully offensive about Sarah Palin and lost his job for it. Did he have a right to say what he said? Legally, yes. Professionally, what he said was repulsive and unprofessional and losing his job was a natural consequence of what he said. I am not a fan of Sarah Palin but what he said was beyond offensive and he paid the price for it.

What Phil Robertson said was legal. A&E’s response was legal. They chose to suspend him for, it seems, two hours or so. There was $500,000,000.00 on the table between the Robertson family and A&E. With that much money on the table it should surprise no one that a speedy resolution was sure to follow. A&E reinstated him. The Robertson family is going to stay. A& E is willing to overlook statements; the Robertson family is willing to overlook the A&E reaction. The decisions were made and the resolution was created because of love. They all love the almighty dollar enough to overlook everything.

Many people in Christianity have stepped forward to defend Phil Robertson for defending traditional Christian values. I am offended because he did not do so.

Here are a couple of things he said:

"It seems like, to me, a vagina -- as a man -- would be more desirable than a man's anus. That's just me. I'm just thinking: There's more there! She's got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes! You know what I'm saying?"

Human sexuality is complex. Sexual orientation is complex. People making lifelong commitments to one another is complex. Boiling everything down, as a man, to the choice of where one wants to place one’s self is not the central point of life and relationships and even of sexuality.

He is basing his statement, in part, based on a premise that sexual orientation is not an orientation but a preference. Whenever I hear people use the phrase ‘sexual preference’ in lieu of sexual orientation, I know we are having a problem. Whenever I hear the phrase ‘gay lifestyle,’ I know we are having a problem. People do not choose sexual orientation any more than they choose their own gender or eye color.

Secondly, Robertson said this:

"Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men."

Mr. Robertson is giving, what appears to be a glancing, personal, paraphrase of a passage in 1 Corinthians 6. His reference is wildly out of context and even more wildly a personal paraphrase.

Again, he shows a remarkable indifference to sexual orientation and goes further. He seems to be indicating that homosexual behavior can lead to things such as bestiality. A consensual sexual relationship between two adults who are loving and have made a lifetime commitment to one another is equated to bestiality. It’s okay because he’s merely stating traditional Christian values. Seriously? We have to defend him because he’s a good Christian and takes the Bible as inspired. Seriously? It’s Biblical and if you don’t believe this you are picking and choosing what you believe. Seriously?

Funny thing is that I see a lot of churches that say other churches pick and choose, pick and choose. I’ll give a very simple example. Many churches deny women the right to preach because it is Biblical and they are not going to deny the Bible. (They actually DO deny the Bible because the first Christian message was that Jesus had been raised from the dead and this message was preached by, ahem, women….)

But going back to my point. Many churches do not allow women to preach because it says women are not supposed to preach in the writings of St. Paul. I’ve sat in churches where this is so and I’ve sat next to women listening to sermons and bowing their heads in prayer and their heads were uncovered. Most churches ignore that one, even the churches that choose to not allow women to preach.

So, taking Paul out of context, paraphrasing him, and stating this is traditional Christian doctrine is a good thing?

Here is why I’m offended by Phil Robertson’s comments. People are taking him seriously. People, Christians, are defending him saying he is promoting traditional Christian values. In doing so, we are turning our back on people and, frankly, spitting on them and treating them like they are children of a lesser deity.

Phil Robertson equated the loving relationship two gay people have with one another to bestiality. He delved into theological ‘truth’ by talking about how much more vaginas have to offer than anuses and assured us all this is what traditional Christianity is.

He demeaned people because of their sexual orientation. I know straight people, gay people, and bisexual people. They are friends who I love. They Worship God with me. They share blood with me. Their lives and my life is intertwined and I am greatly blessed by them. It is not because they are gay. It is not in spite of the fact they are gay. They are people I love. Period. End of story. He demeaned people I know and love and he demeaned really, really fine people who have demonstrated the love of Christ to other people over and over again.

Phil Robertson has told us that he has baptized a large number of people and brought a lot of people to Christ. That’s nice. I’ve baptized a lot of people as well. It’s a pretty easy thing to do.

The great challenge as Christians isn’t always bringing people to Christ, but bringing Christ to people. Did his comments bring the peace of God which passes all understanding to anyone? Did his comments bring the words of Paul that tell us that nothing can separate us from the love of Christ to anyone?

What offended me, as a Christian about Phil Robertson’s words were that he demeaned people and frankly, attempted to take Christ away from people. He did so for good reasons, however. He thinks vaginas have a lot more to offer him than an anus does.

Phil Robertson, in my opinion, has just devastated the efforts of so many people trying to preach, teach, and promote the love of God to people’s lives. Instead of promoting Christianity, he just invited people to stay in bed on Sunday morning or read the paper or watch television. He did nothing to promote the goodness of Jesus to anyone.

Ultimately this will do him no harm. The show is popular and so A&E wants to keep it on the air because it is making them a lot of money. The Robertson family will remain on the air because it is making them a lot of money.

Off to the side of the road are people who were told, once again, they are children of a lesser deity.

Off to the side of the road are so many Christians diligently and faithfully attempting to bring the love of Christ to people who just watched their efforts shattered.

Off to the side of the road are so many good things so many Christians have done, their efforts overshadowed by a man who sees vaginas having more to offer him than anuses.

Phil Robertson is being promoted as a great Christian these days. Many Christians have lined up behind him to celebrate his upholding of what they call their traditional values. He got their backing and he’s making a lot of money. Meanwhile, people will see all Christians like Phil Robertson and say, “I’m done with church.”

As for me, I’m going to try and continue to bring Christ to people.

And I’m no longer going to watch Duck Dynasty.

Audio Sermon December 22, 2013

 

God with Us

Texts: Romans 1:1-7; Matthew 1:18-25

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

December 22, 2013

 

Audio Sermon December 8, 2013

 

The Day of the Lord

Texts: Isaiah 11:1-10; Matthew 3:1-12

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

December 8, 2013

Click here for the sermon.

Sermon Audio December 1; First Sunday of Advent

War on Christmas? Good! We Need One!

Text: Matthew 24:36-44

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

December 1, 2013

 

Thanksgiving Proclamation of 1789

 

This is a marvelous proclamation for a day of thanks made by our first President in 1789.  In it is a nobility of purpose, of faith, of a common cause that has been mostly lost to us.

Thanksgiving Proclamation

Issued by President George Washington, at the request of Congress, on October 3, 1789

By the President of the United States of America, a Proclamation.

Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor; and—Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me “to recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness:”

Now, therefore, I do recommend and assign Thursday, the 26th day of November next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the signal and manifold mercies and the favor, able interpositions of His providence in the course and conclusion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquillity, union, and plenty which we have since enjoyed; for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enabled to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national one now lately instituted; for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and, in general, for all the great and various favors which He has been pleased to confer upon us.

And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations, and beseech Him to pardon our national and other trangressions; to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a blessing to all the people by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all sovereigns and nations (especially such as have shown kindness to us), and to bless them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among them and us; and, generally, to grant unto all mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as He alone knows to be best.

Given under my hand at the City of New York the third day of October in the year of our Lord 1789.

Go. Washington

Sermon for Sunday November 24th

Untitled Sermon About our Pilgrim Worship

Text:  John 6:25-35

 

Audio Sermon November 10, 2013

Surprising Gifts

Text: Thessalonians 2:13-17

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

November 10, 2013

 

Audio Sermon, October 27, 2013

 

One Score and Ten Years Ago

Texts: Micah 6:7-8; Luke 18:9-14

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

October 27, 2013

 

Audio Sermon for 10/20/13

 

 

 

How Can We Ever Sing God's Song in This Wasteland?

Texts: Jeremiah 31:27‑34; 2 Timothy 3:14‑4:‑5

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

October 20, 2012

Audio Sermon for Sunday

 

What Does God Owe Us?

Texts: 2 Timothy 2:8-15, Luke 17:11-19

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

October 13, 2012

 

A Place at the Table for EVERYONE (10/06/13) Sermon

 

A Place at the Table for EVERYONE

Text: Luke 17:5-10

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

October 6, 2012

One day a minister was driving home from church with his wife. He felt really good about the sermon he preached that morning and was gloating a bit. He asked his wife, “How many great sermons do you think were preached this morning?”

His wife looked over at him and said, “One less than you think.”

And for those who are wondering, no, this is not autobiographical.

It does remind me of something Jesus is saying. Jesus, without ever actually saying the word, humility, is telling people to practice humility.

Jesus, first tells the disciples a little thing about faith. Faith is faith. It’s not something you have a little of or a lot of. You either have faith or you don’t. This is not a slam, by the way. The apostles, like most of us, didn’t believe they had enough faith----Jesus is telling them that you either have faith or you don’t. But then, in a major challenge, tells them if they really had faith, they could toss a tree into the lake. There is a bit of encouragement and challenge all rolled into one.

Then Jesus goes on to make a point about humility. He speaks of doing what we are supposed to do----and not expecting great accolades for doing it.

There is something interesting about all of this. God doesn’t call us to be heroes or expect great rewards for having faith. God, instead, calls us to be saints----and to share God’s holiness with the world.

Which brings us to today, World Communion Sunday, and a sermon title, “A Place at the Table for EVERYONE.” If you have ever chatted on the Internet you know that when you put something all in caps, it’s shouting. I’m shouting EVERYONE today.

We often, in our discussions about God talk about faith and prayer is an act of faith. So is coming around God’s Table. It is an amazing act of faith. How we approach it, I believe, is with faith and humility.

It is, first and foremost, God’s Table.

If you remember anything today please remember this. Merideth and I may be the pastors of this church but it is not our table. It is not owned by the Elders or the Church Council of this church. It is not even owned by St. Marks. This is God’s Table.

Because it’s God’s Table no one ever has the right to deny anyone a place at the table. It is God’s Table. Only God can deny us a place at the table and God never denies anyone. All are invited to the feast.

And we do this. We don’t deny people a place at the table. It’s part of our tradition.

Last weekend I heard a man in rural Missouri, a member of the local United Church of Christ congregation say about his church that they have picked up all the people none of the other churches wanted any longer. I laughed. I’ve said it before that many of our members have been thrown out of the finest churches in town and we do not deny anyone a place at the table----ever. We seem, on some level to get it. It’s not our table. It’s God’s table.

But something haunts me about this. Everyone who comes through our doors is welcome and invited to the table but I often wonder how we deal with a group of people who are already here, many who don’t come to the Table. I’m talking about our children.

We say that children are welcome but we don’t really invite them. We leave it up to the parents and we don’t talk about it very much. Until right now.

About 15 or 20 years ago the United Church of Christ General Synod recommended to churches to begin welcoming children for Holy Communion. For many people it was a shocking development because, they said, it defied tradition. That’s not necessarily so, however.

The thing is paedocommunion, the theological term for children and Holy Communion is not something that is new. We know from the writings of Cyprian in the year 250 that the early church offered children Holy Communion. We also know that in the 13^th century many churches in the west began to deny children Holy Communion while the churches in the east continued, and still continue, to offer children Holy Communion.

The churches in the west stopped for a variety of factors such as superstition regarding the sacramental elements and, frankly, a lack of preaching. Local church pastors were banned from preaching for a long stretch and most people were told not to take Holy Communion. It was not a good time.

Another objection people often have with paedocommunion is that they say that children do not understand. There’s some validity to this----except I have to admit. I really don’t understand Holy Communion either. My thoughts and feelings about Holy Communion from when I was in seminary and until now are drastically different. I no longer really try to define what happens----I just know something happens----and I really don’t understand it.

Holy Communion is not really about understanding as much as experiencing something special. I figure if I don’t really understand what’s happening, I’m not that worried about other people really understanding it either.

There is also something else about this. Why would we deny children something good and wonderful? Whenever we gather around the Table of God something good and wonderful and holy happens. I love for children to have the opportunity to be part of that and I not only invite them, but I invite them and their parents to avail themselves of opportunities to talk to Merideth and me about this.

We cannot honestly say we welcome everyone to God’s Table if we do not invite our children to God’s Table. They are welcome, but they have not been invited. Today, I’m inviting. If not today, I invite parents to talk to us so we may invite and welcome all.

I say all of this in the context of today’s Scripture.

We can easily pat ourselves on the back. A lot of churches don’t invite everyone and many don’t welcome everyone. We do. Great. Hooray for us.

But let’s be reminded that Jesus wouldn’t be patting us on the back and saying ‘hooray!’ Jesus’ response would be more to the point that we are doing what is expected.

Let us be reminded today, as we gather around God’s Table that it is indeed God’s Table and we are invited and very welcome guests. All of us. No exceptions. It is God’s Table there is a place for EVERYONE.

Rachel Held Evans---A Woman of Valor

Last night my wife and I had the opportunity to hear Rachel Held Evans speak about her book A Year of Biblical Womanhood. Her lecture, like her book, was both very serious and yet very humorous at times. As a minister in the last decade of active ministry hearing this remarkable young woman speak was a sign that Christianity will live on. She is certainly an amazing witness to the power of Christ in the world.

Biblical womanhood is a hot button issue. It coincides with Biblical manhood and Biblical marriage. Behind her observations, of course, is the burning question as to what exactly ‘Biblical’ really happens to be? As she pointed out, the term Biblical is often used as an adjective and, frankly often used cheaply as an adjective. It tends to be a word used to end discussions rather than facilitate discussions.

The Bible is full of stories of women, many who are unnamed. Many of the women in the Bible change the course of history and they either get little to no credit and many of them remain unnamed. Being a woman in Bible times was difficult, to say the least.

Ms. Held Evans was raised in an Evangelical worldview and much of her terminology and heart obviously come from that world. The difficulty she encountered was that she began to ask questions----very good questions----and in her research came to understand that the worldview she was living in was too limited. God was greater and more expansive and human life was far too complicated to fit into any sort of blueprint. In her research for her book she spent a year living out portions of the Bible in very literal ways to see what, exactly, was possible, or, perhaps, reasonable.

Her lecture last night was excellent and well received at St. Matthew’s Episcopal Church in Louisville. The applause she received was well deserved and very affirming to her. I had a sense, however, that she was a bit taken aback from all the applause she was receiving and thanked everyone for the affirmation. I had the impression that affirmation for her work is something she has struggled with.

Last night I ordered her book on my Kindle. Amazon has a sweet deal on the book and I could not pass it up. I decided to read the reviews of A Year of Biblical Womanhood. Wow.

Please let me preface this by saying the overwhelming number of reviews were very, very positive. She is averaging 4 ½ stars and that is a remarkably high percentage. I have not yet read the book as I just purchased it last evening. However, based on the premises she laid out in the lecture, I have no doubt the book is every bit as good as the reviewers.

However, being the fatalist that I am, I decided I needed to read the 1 star reviews. Frankly, I could not imagine how people could have critiqued her slow low.

Here is what I discovered. The critiques were less ‘critiques’ but personal attacks. It became obvious that Rachel Held Evans had decided to look at the idea of Biblical womanhood from a more objective and even critical perspective. The fact that she interjected humor into the equation made people go downright mean.

What I read were not theologically sound assaults on her theological perspective. Many of those who chose to do so did so from far shakier ground than Ms. Held Evans ever trod. Her research was obviously extensive and very coherent. Their research was either painfully shallow or non-existent. Whereas Ms. Held Evans attempted to analyze and understand the Scripture, they were busily using clichés in reference to faith.

What was most, obviously, however, was that these ‘reviews’ were not so much reviews but personal attacks. In a twist of the famous Michael Corleone line, she ought not to take these professionally, this was personal. Much of it surrounds, I suspect, the words of Proverbs 31:

Proverbs 31:10-31

¹⁰ A capable wife who can find? She is far more precious than jewels. ¹¹ The heart of her husband trusts in her, and he will have no lack of gain. ¹² She does him good, and not harm, all the days of her life. ¹³ She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands. ¹⁴ She is like the ships of the merchant, she brings her food from far away. ¹⁵ She rises while it is still night and provides food for her household and tasks for her servant-girls. ¹⁶ She considers a field and buys it; with the fruit of her hands she plants a vineyard. ¹⁷ She girds herself with strength, and makes her arms strong. ¹⁸ She perceives that her merchandise is profitable. Her lamp does not go out at night. ¹⁹ She puts her hands to the distaff, and her hands hold the spindle. ²⁰ She opens her hand to the poor, and reaches out her hands to the needy. ²¹ She is not afraid for her household when it snows, for all her household are clothed in crimson. ²² She makes herself coverings; her clothing is fine linen and purple. ²³ Her husband is known in the city gates, taking his seat among the elders of the land. ²⁴ She makes linen garments and sells them; she supplies the merchant with sashes. ²⁵ Strength and dignity are her clothing, and she laughs at the time to come. ²⁶ She opens her mouth with wisdom, and the teaching of kindness is on her tongue. ²⁷ She looks well to the ways of her household, and does not eat the bread of idleness. ²⁸ Her children rise up and call her happy; her husband too, and he praises her: ²⁹ "Many women have done excellently, but you surpass them all." ³⁰ Charm is deceitful, and beauty is vain, but a woman who fears the LORD is to be praised. ³¹ Give her a share in the fruit of her hands, and let her works praise her in the city gates.

Many women have used this as a job description and often feel guilty about it. Often it has been interpreted as the commands to women on how they ought to be wives to their husbands. It is, they believe, a command from God unto them, and most fall short.

To make matters worse many men have also used this as a blueprint for their wives. Talk about a set up for abuse!

However, the only command in this comes at the end when it speaks to the men: Give her a share in the fruit of her hands, and let her works praise her in the city gates.

It is a poem and often used as a song from the men singing praises to the women in their lives. It is not about the work the women SHOULD be doing, but a song of gratitude for the life and commitment she has made to her husband.

Furthermore, as Ms. Held Evans points our very well, the opening words are not translated very well. This is not all that uncommon in the Bible, especially in the Hebrew Scriptures. Translations are often toned down or adjusted to our sensibilities. But the opening words, as here in the New Revised Standard Translation are ‘a capable wife.’

I decided to do a little research myself to see how other translations rendered Proverbs 31:10:

Proverbs 31:10
^31:10 A wife of noble character who can find? She is worth far more than rubies. (NIV)

Proverbs 31:10
^31:10 A good wife who can find? She is far more precious than jewels. (RSV)

Proverbs 31:10
^31:10 Who can find a virtuous wife? For her worth is far above rubies. (NKJV)

Proverbs 31:10
^31:10 A good woman is hard to find, and worth far more than diamonds. (Message)

Proverbs 31:10
^31:10 Who can find a virtuous woman? for her price is far above rubies. (KJV)

Proverbs 31:10
^31:10 A worthy woman who can find? For her price is far above rubies. (ASV)

Proverbs 31:10

The truly capable woman -- who can find her? She is far beyond the price of pearls. (NJB)

I was most struck by the last one from the New Jerusalem Bible. In many ways the NJB is the most accurate English translation of the Hebrew Scriptures and, like the others, it rendered the Hebrew rather inaccurately.

Proverbs 31 begins with the words “Eshet Chayil.” Rachel Held Evans said that in her research she discovered the words literally meant “woman of valor” as opposed to the way it is often rendered. Her critics do not appreciate this rendering very much so I felt I needed to research it myself.

There is a reason Rachel Held Evans got such good reviews on Amazon. Her research was and is right on target. Her critics, bless their little hearts, (A wonderful Southern expression….), are as wet as anyone who stood outside in the Louisville area this weekend as we got 6 inches of rain. Proverbs 31 is not a job description given from God to women, but a song of praise, from men, to the women in their lives, these women of valor.

Interestingly enough, the Bible leads us in some very amazingly wonderful ways to view the women in our lives. Despite the often brutal passages concerning women and the brutality many women have received in Bible times, and now, there are beautiful statements in the Bible for and about women. Rachel Held Evans has found the good, the bad, and the ugly as a disciple of Jesus Christ. She really is a woman of valor.

Audio Sermon 9/22/13

Renewing Ourselves in Faith at St. Marks United Church of Christ: A Conversion That Never Ends

Texts: Jeremiah 8:18-22 1 Timothy 2:1-7

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

September 22, 2013

 

Our Increasingly Divided Nation

 

I am concerned over our increasingly divided nation. In looking at the threats we face as a nation I cannot overcome the thought that our greatest threat is coming from our midst. We have become our own worst enemies.

Several years ago, during the election cycles, the

terms ‘red states’ and ‘blue states’ entered the picture. The red states were the Republican states and the blue states were the Democratic states. Anything that transpires in the state that either corresponds or differs from their assigned color is newsworthy. The colors are marked in terms of the Presidential elections and the colors never waver. Every news network uses them. We have become a divided nation, red and blue.

Churches are divided. There are conservative churches and liberal churches or ‘left wing’ and ‘right wing’ churches. I love Rick Warren’s statement that he’s not really looking to have the left wing or the right wing, but the ‘whole bird.’ I agree with him. I’d like to think people didn’t feel a need to differentiate themselves in church by conservative or liberal-----two words, by the way, that are completely absent from the Bible.

CNN has recently brought back the show Crossfire with four hosts, two from the left and two from the right. I greatly appreciate their effort to assist in making a divided nation a bit more divided. CNN, for the most part, has attempted to be somewhat balanced. For their efforts they are dead last among cable news providers. People on the right watch Fox News and people on the left watch MSNBC. We have to be sure to divide our news watching.

If you are a senior citizen you can now join the AARP which, I guess, is the ‘liberal’ version of being retired or AMAC which I’m guessing is the ‘conservative’ version of being retired.

Scouting has also divided. There are the Girl Scouts and a new version of ‘conservative’ Girl Scouts and a new ‘conservative’ version of the Boy Scouts is coming out.  Those ‘wild’ scouts.  Frankly this offends me beyond words.  I know so many men who grew up in the Boy Scouts who are beyond amazing and wonderful men, and I can talk endlessly on the amazing and wonderful experiences my daughters had in Girl Scouts.  As I said, this offends me beyond words.

I’m wondering if there are going to be ‘right’ and ‘left’ restaurants so that people don’t have to eat in the same room with people who may disagree with them.

The consequences are becoming devastating.

Within Christianity there has been a precipitous drop in Worship attendance in the past decade. Churches from all traditions and backgrounds have expressed concern and bewilderment that people are staying away in droves. Tragically the message of Jesus has often been twisted by political beliefs as opposed to influencing beliefs. Churches are growing smaller---rapidly.

Increasingly people are getting their news from the Internet. The Internet does have a lot of reliable sources but it is a free domain of every possible idea. Social media often drives the information or misinformation that abounds. People with nut allergies are being told to stay away from Twitter as they will come into contact with a lot of nuts on there.

Our two major political parties are no longer interested in governing the nation. They are interested in blocking the other party from governing the nation. That is all they are interested in doing. The consequences of this are inevitably one party taking over everything and, essentially becoming a dictatorship. If we continue to move in the direction we are going, this is not potentially going to happen, it IS going to happen. It is only a matter of time. The direction we are heading has been traveled before many, many times and the results have always been the same.

Historically we have always been able to come together in the past. We did, briefly, after September 11^th, but that togetherness is long over. We were too divided for it to continue.

Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have further divided us. Perhaps the closest we came to a sense of togetherness was an overwhelming opposition to going to war with Syria, albeit for different reasons.

In 2007 there was a massacre at Virginia Tech. Last year small children were gunned down at a grade school in Connecticut. These kinds of events used to bring people together and now they just manage to inflame the division. People no longer just disagree with one another, they have come to hate one another. Everything, no matter how big or how small has become a time to condemn people who are different from us or disagree with us.

We do it, of course, in the name of loving our country and loving our God. I suspect God is not amused at people choosing to hate and blaming their hatred on loving God. Jesus invited us, demanded us even, to love one another. Hating one another in the name of God, and dividing in the name of God strikes me as the ultimate blasphemy. Jesus once said that the only unforgiveable sin was to sin against the Holy Spirit. He didn’t define exactly what that was, but I keep thinking we may be seeing it now.

I keep thinking of two Scripture readings I’m preaching from this coming Sunday. The Message translation is great. In Jeremiah 8 it reads, “I drown in grief. I'm heartsick. Oh, listen! Please listen! It's the cry of my dear people reverberating through the country. Is God no longer in Zion? Has the King gone away?”

The second, the words of St. Paul to Timothy, however, may provide seeds of hope. He writes: “The first thing I want you to do is pray. Pray every way you know how, for everyone you know. Pray especially for rulers and their governments to rule well so we can be quietly about our business of living simply, in humble contemplation.”

My first prayer is this. I pray we stop dividing among ourselves and allowing people to divide us and to remember, first, to love one another.

Audio Sermon September 16, 2013

 

Renewing Ourselves in Faith at St. Marks United Church of Christ: When the Going Gets Tough, the Tough Stick Around

Texts: 1 Timothy 12-17; Luke 15:1-10

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

September 15, 2013

Audio Sermon September 8, 2013

Renewing Ourselves in Faith at Saint Marks United Church of Christ—Living Lives of Faithfulness
Text: Genesis 25:19-34; Luke 14:25-33
Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo
September 8, 2013

Audio Sermon for Sunday August 25

 

Formed by God  to be More Than Indignant Fools
Texts: Jeremiah 1:4-10; Luke 13:10-17
Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo
August 25, 2013

Audio Sermon 8-18-13

 

 

Prince of Peace?  Depends on you Define Peace…
Texts:  Hebrews 12:1-2; Luke 12:49-56
Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo
August 18, 2013

 

Audio Sermon for August 11th

 

A Real Live Treasure Hunt

Texts: Hebrews 11:1-3 Luke 12:32-40

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

August 11, 2013

 

Audio Sermon 8/4/13

Forgotten Graves and Tied Up Cats
Texts: Luke 11:37-46
Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo
August 4, 2013

Prayer Is a Lifestyle; Not an Emergency Exit

Prayer Is a Lifestyle; Not an Emergency Exit

Texts: Colossians 2:6-10; Luke 11:1-13

Rev. Dr. John E. Manzo

July 28, 2013

Do you pray?

In fairness I know I’m asking a group of people sitting in Worship on a Sunday morning which means that everyone hear prays. Worshiping God in a community like this is really the ultimate form of prayer and considering that only 15-20% of the American population attends Worship on Sunday morning, the people who do probably pray a lot more than the average person does.

Prayer is not something we just know how to do. Christian prayer is not an innate thing; it is something we need to learn how to do and it is something that we need to practice. Often people say, “Well, I pray but I get frustrated and don’t feel anything, so I give up.” If that is how you feel, please know you are not alone.

Luke tells us that Jesus was praying and one of the disciples asked him to teach them to pray. Jesus’s response was to give them the words of what we now know as the Lord’s Prayer.

Let’s talk a little bit about this prayer.

A couple of weeks ago when I did the Bible Study at the Logos Snapshot I asked people if they knew the words of Matthew 6:9-15 by heart. No one raised their hands, but when I pushed them, everyone knew those words by heart. The words are the Lord’s Prayer from Matthew’s Gospel. In fact, at Worship every Sunday we pray those words directly from the King James translation of the Bible. We end it with words not in the New Testament, but from an early Christian church document, the Didache, “For thine is the Kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever.”

Luke’s version of this prayer is shorter. Most scholars believe that Luke’s reflected the original words of Jesus more than Matthew’s version as Matthew’s is more defined. Potentially the two versions reflect different ways Jesus himself used it, teaching us HOW to pray more than exactly what words to say. When you look at what Jesus is saying and doing, in the context of what he’s saying and doing, is that it’s not just saying a specific set of words, but making prayer a lifestyle.

My sermon title is: Prayer is a lifestyle, not an emergency exit.

For many of us prayer is an emergency exit. We don’t pray until we have some sort of crisis in our lives and feel an overwhelming need for God’s help. We don’t know what to do so we turn to God.

Now this is a good thing, but we often turn to God without a good sense on how to turn to God. Prayer is learned behavior and praying is developing a lifestyle and until we learn to pray, we struggle.

I had a friend of mine, a wonderful man, who had been married for 50 years and his wife died. She was a wonderful person and had done all the cooking and laundry for them for their entire married life. When she died he was confronted by two painful realities. He had a washer and dryer that he had no clue on how to work, and a refrigerator full of food that he did not know how to cook. He had never, in his entire life, done laundry and had never cooked anything more than toast or steaks on the backyard grill.

Here was a man in his 70’s and many people in his position in life would have felt lost and overwhelmed. He went to the library and took out books. He read about how to use a washer and dryer and did his laundry. He got some basic cookbooks and cooked his way through his refrigerator. He became self-sufficient. What he found out was that it was less the books and research he did, it was actually doing it. Unless we take the time to actually sit and pray, we never really learn.

The second thing is learning to listen at prayer.

Years ago, at my previous church the tradition was that the pastor would turn and face the altar and do the Offertory prayer facing the altar. I did this every Sunday so it was automatic. There, like here, I say the exactly same prayer before the sermon, “My the words of my mouth,” prayer. Like here, I did it every week.

I plead guilty to getting into prayer ruts and I did the same prayer every week for the Offertory. One Sunday I placed the gifts on the altar, turned and face the altar and said, “My the words of my mouth…” One person figured this out listening to a recording of the Worship Service. I didn’t realize I had done it and no one in the congregation had listened to the prayer either.

I went to a workshop in seminary once and the leader gave us a demonstration of a prayer and said that in his opening prayer, which was a tad lengthy, ended with him asking God that we all be struck with malaria and leprosy and our cars turn to rust and our houses burn down, as we pray in the name of Jesus Christ our Lord. And we all said, AMEN. He played it back to us. No one in the seminary had picked up on the ending of the prayer. We had all tuned out.

Part of my daily prayer is praying Psalms. I try, and I’m not always successful, to pay attention to the words with the intention of listening to what the words are saying.

Sometimes I read the words and pray the words and they fill my heart. Psalm 23, The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want, when I listen and pray attention, my heart is filled with comfort and joy. Other times I end up reading Psalm 137 and it ends with the words, O daughter Babylon, you devastator! Happy shall they be who pay you back what you have done to us! Happy shall they be who take your little ones and dash them against the rock!

Really listening to the words of the prayers forces me to confront all my thoughts and all my emotions.

Today we’ll pray the Lord’s Prayer. We do this every Sunday. It’s printed in the bulletin today and it’s Luke’s version. I’m not doing this to say the version we use is bad, or that we have to change. Next week it’ll be back to normal. But today, I’m using a different version from a different part of the Bible to force all of us to slow down and listen to the words.

Prayers is not just about saying words, it’s about listening.

The last thing I want to say is that prayer keeps us focused on God. When we take time to pray every day we have the ability to remain focused on the way of God.

Paul, in his letter to the Colossians references people who are captive through philosophy and empty deceit. Being someone who majored in Philosophy my ears perked up.

Paul is making a reference to what we would call the secular world and the religious world; the realm of humanity and the realm of God. Philosophy can live in both or it can live in just the secular realm. I taught Ethics in a college and I had to focus on Philosophical ethics as opposed to Christian ethics. They often come to the same conclusion and often use the same reasoning to come to those conclusions. One, however, adds the issue of faith and God’s will into the picture.

It is, however, easy to get lost in the world of pure reasoning and pure logic and reason our way away from God. It is easy to put our hope and faith in things that are not related to God. It can be money, power, technology, and other people.

When we pray, we keep our focus on God. It does not mean we can no longer integrate logic into our lives, or technology, or money, or power, and especially other people. We cannot survive in a world without these things and people. But our world and our lives are greatly lacking when we do not make God a central part of our lives.

Do you pray? Everyone here does. To be at Worship in July speaks volumes. But we probably all strive and desire to pray better. The best way to do it, is to do it. It’s important to listen, and it’s important because it keeps us connected with God.

Prayer, after all, is a lifestyle, not an emergency exit.