Advent 2016

During the month of December, we will be having some wonderful opportunities to come together as a community and worship in wonder and joy in the Advent and Christmas seasons.  Despite what the stores and the television commercials would have you believe, it isn’t Christmas yet.  In fact, the Christmas season doesn’t technically begin until December 25^th .  We are, instead, in the season of Advent. 

What is Advent?  Advent is something of an unusual time.  On the one hand it is the time of preparation for Christmas and the stories of the nativity, Joseph, Mary, Jesus’ birth and so forth.  On the other hand, Advent is a time of reflection and hope for the second Advent, or the second coming of Christ.  In that respect it is a time of not merely remembering Christmas, but looking forward in hope for the fully realized Kingdom of God.  In the middle of those two understandings of Advent, there is the tension of seeking to encounter the present reality of Christ.  In other words, we continue to seek the presence of Christ in our own lives, not merely looking back at what was and hoping for the future.  Advent is when we stop to reflect on the reality of the unfolding Advent of Christ in our own lives. 

This year, I am going to be reading specifically from the prophet Isaiah each Sunday in Advent.  Isaiah is the prophet for whom many of the promises and dreams of a messiah originate.  For the early church, Isaiah was of predominant importance and was, even for Jesus, the one who provided the fundamental description of the messiah (see Luke 4:17-19).

Picking up with the idea from November 13^th, where I talked about God’s vision of a new heaven and new earth, we begin our journey into Advent with a vision of God’s dream for the future of humanity.  What is it that God would teach us? 

In the following weeks, we will continue to hear from Isaiah and some other voices both Old and New. These might not be the usual voices  in the season leading up to Christmas, or at least not the primary words we hear.  They are, however, important parts of the larger Advent tradition, and provide different and often strikingly different glimpses to a season we might take for granted.

November 27^th – Isaiah 2:1-5       “Dream Sweet Dreams”

December 4^th  - Isaiah 11:1-10     “And All Shall Be Well”

December 11^th – Isaiah 35:1-10   “The Future in the Past”

December 18^th – Choir Cantata

December 25^th   - Christmas Day – John 1:1-14     “With You”

Come and be with us as we walk this journey towards Christmas.

Grace and Peace,

- Pastor Charles

The Missing Years of the Bible: From the Greeks to the Romans

When we left off, the Greeks had control of pretty much everything and in 200 BC Judea was conquered by the Macedonian kings of Syria (also known as the Seleucids) who were not at all as kind as the Greeks or the Persians.

The King of the Seleucids who controlled Judea was named Antiochus Epiphanies who would go on to desecrate the Temple, persecute Judaism and, by 167 BC, outlaw all Jewish practices.  In defiance, Mattathias the Hasmonean (a Jew) refused to offer a sacrifice to Zeus.  The incident, sparked the beginning of a guerrilla campaign against the Seleucids led by Mattathias' son, Judas.

Judas was also called Judas Maccabeus, or Judas the Maccabee (which means "the hammerer"), and with his brothers Jonathan and Simon, led the revolt.  By 164 BC, Judas had liberated the Temple and had it cleansed (both literally and spiritually) and rededicated.  That re-dedication is celebrated even today by the Jews in the Festival of Lights, or Hanukkah.

This story is relayed in the books of 1st and 2nd Maccabees, which most Protestant Bibles do not have.  Without these accounts, though, there would be virtually nothing written (remaining) conerning Israel's history from the time of Ezra (400 BC) to the time of the New Testament.

The war with the Seleucids would claim the lives of Judas, Jonathan, and Simon, but would achive a total political independence for Israel that would last from 135 to 40 BC.  This was known as the Hasmonean Dynasty.  After Simon, the rulers John Hyrcanus and Alexander Jannaeus led the dynasty, but following the death of Jannaeus, the dynasty began to weaken.

Backing up slightly to the year 63 BC, the Roman Empire ended the empire of the Seleucids.  That same year, Pompey, a Roman general entered Jerusalem and from that point forward, Israel was subordinate to Rome either directly or indirectly.

There were critics to the Hasmonaean Dynasty, mostly because they were not of the line of David yet they held the throne.  They were also not of the line of priests, yet they held the priesthood.  And though they sought Jewish independence, the Jews who were more ‘hard line’ saw the Hasmonaeans as usurpers. 

The Hasmonaean Dynasty came to an end in 40 BC when the Romans appointed Herod as King over the Jews.  He would rule from 40-4 BC.  During Herod’s time, he would rebuild the temple in Jerusalem.  He was hated by Jews, though for the fact that not only was he a puppet king to Rome, he built temples to Caesar while building the temple in Jerusalem. 

While Herod was a successful king, his sons were not.  When he died, the country was split into three sections, each ruled by one of Herod’s sons.  The one that was entrusted with the southern part of the kingdom was Archelaus, who was a total failure in the eyes of Rome and was removed from power.  He was replaced by a Roman procurator named Pontius Pilate. 

That name should sound somewhat familiar to Christians.

And with that we move into the era of the New Testament writings.

I hope this has been beneficial for you, even if it is a brief version of some tremendous events that took place between the Old and New Testaments.

- Pastor Charles

The Voting is Over

I want to take a short break from my series on the Missing Years of the Bible.  I will get back to it later this week.  Right now I want to focus on the fact that the election of the President of the United States of America has been completed.

The voting is over.  The reality of the post-election United States has yet to set in.  There is plenty of analysis to be offered, some of it might even be useful or insightful.  But if anything, what we have seen during this election campaign, besides lies, manipulations of systems, fear, and the worst mud-slinging for any campaign in years (possibly ever), is that we are a divided nation in many, many respects.

So this morning I would offer two prayers with the knowledge that perhaps had I and we all been praying like this over the last 16 years, we might be in a completely different place.  Never too late to start, though.

This is a prayer from Thomas Merton, who was a Trappist monk, a writer, and a mystic.  May we join our voices together in prayer.

O God, we are one with you.
You have made us one with you.
You have taught us that if we are open to one another, you dwell in us.
Help us to preserve this openness and to fight for it with all our hearts.
Help us to realize that there can be no understanding when there is mutual rejection.
O God, in accepting one another wholeheartedly, fully, completely, we accept you, and we thank you and we adore you, and we love you with our whole being, because our being is your being, our spirit is rooted in your spirit.
Fill us then with love, and let us be bound together with love as we go our diverse ways, united in this one spirit which makes you present in the world, and which makes you witness to the ultimate reality that is love.
Love has overcome.  Love is victorious.
Amen.

And the prayer of St. Francis:

Lord, make me an instrument of Your peace.  Where there is hatred, let me sow love;
Where there is injury, pardon;
Where there is doubt, faith;
Where there is despair, hope;
Where there is darkness, light;
Where there is sadness, joy.

O Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled as to console;
to be understood as to understand;
to be loved as to love;
For it is in giving that we receive; it is in pardoning that we are pardoned; it is in dying that we are born again into eternal life.
Amen.

The Missing Years of the Bible: From Babylon to the Greeks

In the Old Testament, one of the great calamities to befall the Jews was the fall of Israel and Judea to the Babylonians.  This occurred in 587 BC.  When the Babylonians conquered them, they hauled the wealthy, the political leaders, and the religious leaders off to Babylon beginning what was often referred to as the "Babylon Captivity."

While this was taking place, the second part of the book of Isaiah was written (Isaiah is comprised of three distinct and separate sections sometimes called 1st Isaiah (1-39), 2nd Isaiah (40-55), and 3rd Isaiah (56-66) which all take place at different times.  1st Isaiah was pre-exile, 2nd Isaiah was during the exile/captivity, and 3rd Isaiah focuses on the return from exile), as well as the prophet Obadiah.

During the conquest by the Babylonians, Solomon's Temple was destroyed and the Kingdom came to an end.  It was a trauma that shaped the theology of the Jews and is found in echoes throughout the Old Testament, not just in the books and passages that were written during the time, but in psalms that reflected on the loss, such as Psalm 137.

But the great empire that was Babylon was conquered by the Persians in 539 BC (and when we are counting in BC, we count backwards.  It can be a little confusing, but that's how it works).  Under the leadership of Cyrus of Persia (mentioned in the Old Testament several times; Isaiah 44:28, Ezra 1:4, and Daniel 6:28 for example).

Cyrus issued an edict that allowed the Jews held captive by the Babylonians to return home should they so desire.  Not all of them did, but those who did return returned in two waves in the 530's and the 520's.  This didn't mean that the Jews were allowed to return to self-rule.  They were still a part of the Persian empire, but Cyrus allowed them to rule locally while the government of the Persians was still in control and would have the final say.  Yet they were positively disposed towards the Jews and Nehemiah (of the book of the same name) was Persian.

During the Persian period, the Temple was rebuilt (eventually - it took a little motivation and time) and life returned to a semblance of normalcy.  This lasted for quite a while, but then came the Greeks.

Under the leadership of Alexander the Great, the Greek empire conquered the known world.  With this came Hellenization, which means 'Greek influence.'  Everything was Greek, especially the language which was the language of trade, commerce, and the general population (that will play a big part in a later aspect of this story).  After Alexander's death, his generals fought for control of the kingdom which ended up dividing the lands into smaller kingdoms.

Ultimately Judea would be conquered in 200 BC by the Macedonian kings of Syria (or the Seleucids) who were far less kind to Judea than the Persians or the Greeks.

So what this short survey details is that the end of the Old Testament tells us that the Persians were in control.  The New Testament has the Romans in power.  We haven't reached them yet, but we have entered the time between the testaments.

We will see how important the Seleucids were to the story of the Jews in the next section.  Come back and read some more!

- Pastor Charles

The Missing Years of the Bible

Good afternoon, everyone!

Last night we started a new Wednesday night study that focuses on the fact that when you turn the page from the Old Testament book of Malachi to the first page of the Gospel of Matthew you are, in fact, jumping a period of about 500 years!  Hard to believe, but there is a huge gap between the testaments that many of us just completely gloss over that answers some questions you may not have even realized were there.

For example:
In the stories of Jesus and during the time of the writings of Paul, Rome was the empire in charge of all things.  Yet at the end of the Old Testament, Persia is in charge.  What transpired that lead to the Romans having sovereignty over Israel?

In the time of Jesus there are groups known as the Sadducees and the Pharisees.  They are not mentioned in the Old Testament, but they have great influence in the New.  Who are they?  What did they teach?

The story of Hanukkah, the festival of lights, is an important one for Jews even today.  However, it is not a story that most Christians know.  Why not?  Because it is a story found in the book of 1st Maccabees (the first book of what?) that is not a part of our Bible, yet is a story that took place in the years between the Testaments.

So what did happen between the Old Testament and the New?  We are looking at that on Wednesday nights, so I invite you to come and be a part of that discussion.  However, since I know not everyone can make it, I am going to post a few articles over the next several weeks to offer some of the material we are covering.  So keep your eyes open this month as I bring to you some of the stories that fill in the gaps between the Testaments.

Grace and Peace,
- Pastor Charles

Theology in the Wesleyan Spirit - Sermon 3

The third in our series is Wesley’s sermon “The Circumcision of the Heart” which was originally preached in 1733. 

In 1732, a derogatory letter appeared in a weekly London publication that spoke about the "Sect called Methodists."  While it was a work designed to defame the group, Wesley utilized the aroused curiosity of the public to offer this sermon that focuses on the doctrine of holiness.

Knowing people might be hearing him for the first time because of the curiosity stemming from the article, Wesley spent over forty hours crafting and refining this sermon.

The sermon, preached in January of 1733, contains one of Wesley's most distinctive doctrines: Christian perfection understood as perfect love of God and neighbor, rooted in a radical faith in Christ's revelation of that love and power.

Wesley's basic understanding of salvation can be heard here: original sin, the redemptive act of God in Christ, and justification by faith which leads to a fundamental change of heart as well as participation in the renewal of self through the power of the Holy Spirit.

It is important to note that while Wesley emphasizes our sin, his emphasis is not to draw attention to our "utter depravity in sin," but rather he wishes to emphasize the grace and mercy of God that overcomes our sin.  As Rev. Kim Goddard once said, the emphasis in Wesley's theology is "not man, oh so bad, but God, oh so good."

- Pastor Charles

Theology in the Wesleyan Spirit - Sermon 2

The second in our series is Wesley’s sermon “A Caution Against Bigotry” which was originally preached in 1750.  During that time in England, there was a fear that the Methodist revival should cause ‘disruptions’ among the people who were still struggling with the peace founded after the Civil War and Restoration.  Part of the price of that peace was a lessening of partisan zeal and bigotry.  Methodism as a movement threatened to be a ‘new’ partisan group that could well threaten the peace.  Part of that fear was the fact that Wesley himself had a tremendous disregard for parish boundaries.  “The world is my parish,” Wesley famously said.  Yet that attitude did not set well with the established Christian churches who saw their parish as a fixed area of turf on which Wesley was often trespassing.  His use of lay pastors (persons not ordained as clergy) was also disturbing in that it threatened to overturn the hierarchical order of church structure the country was so very used to.

Methodist were actually the ones who were seen as the bigots in the sense that they were viewed as ‘irrational’ or ‘excessive’ in their movement.  They were a partisan group of zealous preachers and people.  Wesley could have well taken the movement in that direction, abandoning concern for the precepts and traditions of other denominations across England and claimed to be the “one true faith.”  However, Wesley took the opposite approach and studiously avoided taking such a stance.  To make that point he took the text from Mark 9 to argue that valid ministry should be measured by the fruits of its activity rather than its form (style). He also argued that those of more established traditions might be grateful for the works of the Methodists and that, in turn, Methodists should renounce all bigotry towards those who were not Methodists – even those who might not be Christian.  What he sought to do was to provide a positive plea for a carefully considered religious pluralism in theology and practice or, in other words, an open mind when it comes to the works of God in ourselves and others.

Wesley did not want to be viewed by other Christians as the founder of a zealous bunch of bigots.  Nor did Wesley wish Methodists to feel themselves to be superior to others.  In this sermon, Wesley sought to stress the fact that we all have to learn to work together for the greater good which is the establishment of the Kingdom of God.

- Pastor Charles

Theology in the Wesleyan Spirit - Sermon 1

The first sermon in the series is based on Wesley's sermon, "Catholic Spirit."  Preached several times between 1740 and 1749, this sermon focuses on the idea of finding common ground among Christian denominations.  

During Wesley’s time there was a great division among Christians over the issues of doctrine, creeds, and those who were indifferent or dismissive of creeds altogether.  Some churches insisted on creeds as the ground of belief and others refused to say any creeds at all, considering them too close to the “Roman Church.”  It should be noted that “catholic” means universal and only pertains to the Roman Church when capitalized with the words, Roman Catholic Church.  “Universal” is how Wesley utilized this word in his sermon.

What Wesley was attempting to do in this sermon was to mediate the conflict between clear doctrinal standards (in which he believed) and his conviction that true religion was “heart religion” shaped by Christian love.  It was a difficult middle ground Wesley sought, and many disagreed with his attempt to bridge the gap of what we might call High Church on one side and Independent churches that had no liturgy or creeds.  It was a bold attempt to walk a fine line between polar opinions.  The idea, however, of focusing on a middle way that looks for unity amid diversity took hold and shaped our denomination.

As professor Morris Davis at Drew University wrote, “The United Methodist Church, like the Methodist movement of Wesley’s day, struggles over doctrinal disagreements. How should the Church approach such problems? How did John Wesley deal with such conflicts? While Wesley would have sympathized with calls for doctrinal standards, he would have been more concerned with relationships between believers. Wesley’s suspicion of human ability to fully know truth convinced him that hearts striving in perfecting love were more important than heads unified in doctrinal agreement. This “catholic spirit” might be a helpful stance today.”

As a reminder, as I preach these sermons, I have adapted them for time, changed the language to be a bit more modern, but I haven't changed the tone.  I have condensed them to the critical ideas Wesley sought to convey.  I would encourage you to read the originals as they are the thoughts and writings of the founder of our denominational movement.  There are several books containing Wesley’s sermons or you could go online (such as http://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley) and read them all.  Well worth it.

- Pastor Charles

August Sermon Series - Theology in the Wesleyan Spirit

During the month of August, I am going to be doing something a little different for my sermons.  I am going to be reworking and preaching four of John Wesley's sermons.  The reworking is merely editing for time (these sermons were LOOOOOOONG) and making the language a little more contemporary without sacrificing the point and meaning of the sermons.  I am doing this for a few reasons.  First, these sermons are from John Wesley, the founder of the Methodist Church.  We don't often hear much about him except the historical stuff in confirmation.  We need to be familiar with his thinking, theology, and tone.  Second, these are important messages that went to the foundation of our denomination. These ideas transformed the world and are a part of our rich theological history.  

I am going to be utilizing the following of Wesley's sermons:  The Catholic Spirit, A Caution Against Bigotry, The Circumcision of the Heart, and Christian Perfection.  These sermons can be found in their entirety in print, such as in John Wesley's Sermons: An Anthology or online.  They certainly merit a thoughtful read.  So come and join us in August as we hear from our denominational founder. 

- Pastor Charles

July Sermon Series

During the month of July, I am going to be dealing with the question of sin. 

Sin.

Such a loaded, dangerous, descriptive word.

In her book, Help My Unbelief, Rev. Flemming Rutledge describes sin this way:  “We think of sin as a series of misdeeds, but in Biblical theology it is a condition.”  In that light, sin can be both something we do as individuals, or it can be something done socially, such as opening fire in a school.

The difficulty of the subject is that sin is slippery.  It isn’t always clear-cut or black and white as we might want it to be.  Some are obvious, such as the massacre in Orlando last month.  But sin is slippery to define or to point out, even though we might act like it is easy to see.  And we act like it is, by and large, because of sin in our own hearts.  We can quickly spot a sinner because they often look different, act different, or just seem different than ourselves.  The Torah is full of lists of sins, as are some of Paul’s letters and Jesus’ teachings.  But those lists are not exhaustive. 

The Torah lists particular behaviors that are sinful.  Jesus and Paul make it even more difficult when they proclaim that attitudes are sinful (Paul, for example, mentions enmity, dissention, and selfishness.  Jesus mentions judgmentalism and hypocrisy.  They both mention anger.)

So then, we find that if you do something that, as an action, isn’t listed as a sin, but you do it in malice, then you have sinned.  Likewise, if your intentions were good, some actions are still bad. 

It just gets more difficult from there.

Part of that has to do with how we define that which is sin.  In the literal scriptural view, the word meant “missing the mark.”  In our day and age, we tend to think of it as behavior that is far more evil in the sight of God, even damnable.  Those definitions of sin, though, were not always the ones found in the Bible.  The definitions change as society changes (For example, in our day and age, men don’t uphold the prohibition against shaving their beards and women are allowed to walk around without covering their heads).

Whatever may be the contemporary definition of sin, the real issue, as the theologian Reinhold Niebuhr wrote, “is the universality of the corruption which results from undue self-regard.”  When we focus too much on ourselves, we turn away from our neighbor, we might even judge our neighbor, and we can quickly lose our moorings from God and the community.  As one author described it, the heart of sin is literally and figuratively “I.”

I won’t try to provide a systematic discussion of sin.  That would take far too much time.  And I’m not going to spend Sunday morning as a time to yell at you about it.  What I am setting out to do is to provide insight into the insidious nature of sin, but also the fact that in the face of sin and sinfulness, there is still Good News to be heard.

I hope that you will come and join us.

Grace and Peace,

Pastor Charles

Visitation Program

Our district has invited each church to focus on a particular area of ministry in which we can improve.  This began with the Shift Workshop at First Centenary UMC back in February.  The focus of the workshop was to enable church to do better in all areas of ministry by understanding our church and community more completely.  The point wasn’t to make us feel bad or to point out our faults, but to enable us to work to be better.  Out of that workshop came an invitation for each church in the district to focus on a particular area of ministry in which they would focus to make it a strength instead of something that might be a bit more mediocre. 

In a discussion in our Church Council, we decided that we needed to spend this year working deliberately to focus on communication and connection within our congregation.  We don’t always do our best in keeping in touch with one another and we sometimes don’t pay attention to attendance to the degree we should.

In particular, we need to make sure we are checking in on those who can’t make it to church.  To that end, we are beginning a monthly visitation program where I and a member of the congregation will drop by with those who cannot make it to church to visit and bring communion.  We will begin this program on May 24^th at 2:00.

But I need your help.

First, I need people to go with me.   I know the time will knock some of you out of the running, but there are several others of you who can make the afternoon time, and I need your help.  If you would call the office to sign up for a month, that would be great (we are going on the 4^th Tuesday of each month).

Second, I need the names of people we need to visit.  Help us to reach out by providing us with names and contact information, because we will contact them the day before to make sure that they are going to be able to receive visitors. 

This is just a start for us.  We are going to be doing more to make sure that we are taking care of our congregation and reaching out to those who have been a part of our community for a long time and now need us to be there for them.  I hope that you will consider being a part of this ministry and join with me as we set up our new visitation program.

Thanks and I appreciate your help!

Grace and Peace,

Pastor Charles