Potluck Supper

 

Potluck Supper

 

John 6:1-21

Jesus feeds 5000

 

6:1 After this Jesus went to the other side of the Sea of Galilee, also called the Sea of Tiberias.

 

6:2 A large crowd kept following him because they saw the signs that he was doing for the sick.

 

6:3 Jesus went up the mountain and sat down there with his disciples.

 

6:4 Now the Passover, the festival of the Jews, was near.

 

6:5 When he looked up and saw a large crowd coming toward him, Jesus said to Philip, "Where are we to buy bread for these people to eat?"

 

6:6 He said this to test him, for he himself knew what he was going to do.

 

6:7 Philip answered him, "Two hundred denarii would not buy enough bread for each of them to get a little."

 

6:8 One of his disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter's brother, said to him,

 

6:9 "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves and two fish. But what are they among so many people?"

 

6:10 Jesus said, "Make the people sit down." Now there was a great deal of grass in the place, so they sat down, about five thousand in all.

 

6:11 Then Jesus took the loaves, and when he had given thanks he distributed them to those who were seated; so also the fish, as much as they wanted.

 

6:12 When they were satisfied, he told his disciples, "Gather up the fragments left over, so that nothing may be lost."

 

6:13 So they gathered them up, and from the fragments of the five barley loaves, left by those who had eaten, they filled twelve baskets.

 

6:14 When the people saw the sign that he had done, they began to say, "This is indeed the prophet who is to come into the world."

 

6:15 When Jesus realized that they were about to come and take him by force to make him king, he withdrew again to the mountain by himself.

 

6:16 When evening came, his disciples went down to the sea,

 

6:17 got into a boat, and started across the sea to Capernaum. It was now dark, and Jesus had not yet come to them.

 

6:18 The sea became rough because a strong wind was blowing.

6:19 When they had rowed about three or four miles, they saw Jesus walking on the sea and coming near the boat, and they were terrified.

 

6:20 But he said to them, "It is I; do not be afraid."

 

6:21 Then they wanted to take him into the boat, and immediately the boat reached the land toward which they were going.

 

 

I really look forward to eating. When I was a kid in school, I couldn’t wait for lunch time. When I was younger, my mom—who worked the 11 to 7 shift as a registered nurse—would get home in time to pack my lunch and get me off to school, before she collapsed until time to start dinner and greet us when we arrived home from school. My lunch would usually consist of an egg salad sandwich, or a sandwich out of something called “potted meat.” I’ve come to find out what’s in THAT stuff, and still get the urge to “call up the Irishmen” (O’ROURKE…). Anyway, besides the sandwich, there might be something wrapped in Saran Wrap like a handful of potato chips or some cheese crackers. And then, there would be dessert—usually some kind of commercial baked good by Hostess, as we had one of their “day old” shops near us, so Mom could buy a bunch of these for about ten cents apiece, or so. My favorite was the “Banana Flip,” a thin slab of yellow cake, lathered with about half an inch of white, banana-flavored icing, and then folded over and shrink wrapped. Those things had never been NEAR a real banana, but we loved them, and the sugar load it gave was good for hours. That Banana Flip thing was worth sweating through math class and gym for, believe me! When I got into senior high, I think I started buying the school lunch program. Remember those? I think they cost us about fifty cents, and you got a sample of just about any surplus item the U.S. Government could supply, having purchased it from farmers and ranchers to keep them afloat. Our favorite school lunch meal was something we called “greaseburgers.” It was some kind of a meat thing, breaded, and cooked in oil, and the Lord only knows what kind of oil. If you ever dropped one of those patties onto your napkin, it would sop up all of that grease so fast, you’d wind up with nothing but a fifty-cent-sized hockey puck you could hardly chew. The culinary excellence came from the oil, after all. 

 

Even in seminary, I looked forward to lunch. By that time, we were paying a much higher price for food that was at least slightly better than in Lunch Lady Land. What I really enjoyed in seminary, though, was the camaraderie and conversation around the refectory tables, debriefing that morning’s dicing of the faith we brought with us, and that we had thought was pretty sound. How naive we were! But those conversations were lifesavers, and helped us “real world” the theology we were hearing, and compare notes on the tools for biblical interpretation we were getting. To this day, I can remember specific conversations at those lunch tables, especially on those days when our faith had been most jostled by a favorite professor.

 

Little did I know the joy that awaited over tables full of food of all kinds when I would land in a church as its pastor. There is no greater expression of the transforming power of the Christian faith than a church Potluck Supper! We pastors got to bless it, then eat it. Lots of it! Church Potluck Suppers were the best of the Banana Flip AND the seminary lunch table conversations. If you want to get to know folk, just eat with them. The most famous Psalm in the Bible—the 23^rd Psalm—gives us that great line, “Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies…” Some people think it’s a kind of taunt, or something: I get to sit here and eat at God’s lavish supper, while my enemy has to just watch and starve. Not so. I believe the Psalm is saying that God invites BOTH of us to the table. It’s really hard to keep an enemy when you break bread with them. Like most animals, we are most vulnerable when we are eating, so we let down our guard a bit, AND the ensuing conversation may start the bridge-building process. Trying staying mad at the person across from whom you are eating, and you’ll get one whopper of a case of indigestion, if not flat out sick to your stomach.

 

Church Potluck Dinners may have some of these elements, but they also showcase the love and generosity of the cooks who make the food and/or who pay good money to bring quality store-bought items to share, sharing being the key word. Church Potlucks usually also have one of those giant, orange coolers full of iced tea or lemonade, AND a tankard of hot coffee that would be welcome at any meeting of Alcoholics Anonymous. Most church Potlucks could have as their motto, “Eat, Drink, and Be Merry, for Tomorrow’s Monday!” Is there anybody who doesn’t like Potluck Dinners?

 

Oh, we’ve had a few in my day where weird things happened, like ten people bringing the exact same thing, or the provided “meat” or main course running out way too quickly because of a bigger than anticipated crowd. As the pastor, who usually hit the line last, I have filled up on potato salad and fruited Jello a few times. But these things are never a disappointment, and mostly because of the wonderful company, and good conversation—something we Christians call “Fellowship.” One of the strangest experiences I happen while serving as a pastor at St. Paul’s, in Allison Park, which is a large church. When I was serving as an associate pastor with senior pastor Ron Hoellein back in the early 1990s, Ron felt we should hold a Potluck Supper, despite “warnings” from members of our staff. When the day for the first Potluck in some time arrived, we were inundated with people! Hundreds showed up, and the church facility at that time could not handle so many folk at a “sit down” dinner! (It has since been greatly expanded.) While it was mayhem, and we decided we’d not try that again, everyone DID get fed. Fast-forward to 2014, when I became St. Paul’s lead pastor, and due to our serving public meals to various groups, including our large number of students in our weekday ministries, the church now had a full commercial kitchen and a chef, and therefore was highly regulated by the county health department. No “homemade” hot entrees may be brought in, by law, so Potluck’s were right out, even though we had the room for people. (We still had great fellowship meals, with a chef on staff, though!) Potluck Suppers are about more than just the eating, aren’t they?

 

Some of you know that over the past year and a half, or so, I put myself on a calorie-counting, app-based weight loss program, and have lost 45 pounds. I have new clothes and a new look to show for it, but it has also given me an even greater appreciation for the joy of eating. I don’t eat near as MUCH as I used to, and I still account for every calorie on my “MyNetDiary” app, but now I enjoy a wider range of flavors and variety in the food I eat. And eating smaller quantities and fixating on my actual appetite less leaves more room for conversation and an after-dinner libation. 

 

This weekend’s scripture text from the Gospel of John is about Jesus’ “feeding of the 5,000.” We all know this miracle, but did you know it’s the only one that is in all four Gospels? There must be something TO this Potluck Supper thing! We all know the story. While the gospels have a little different take on who and what the “great crowd” was, what is in full agreement is that Jesus told the disciples to feed them, which was met with great incredulity by the disciples: “Two hundred denarii would not be buy enough bread for each of them to get a little,” they said, and two hundred denarii was a LOT! (Actually, the equivalent of 200 days’ wages!) Andrew to the rescue, though. Andrew was always bringing people to Jesus, including his own brother, Peter, and according to our gospel, HE is the one who finds the lad with the five barley loaves and two fish, who apparently agrees to share it with the throng, for whatever that was worth. Jesus gives thanks to God for the sacrificial gift from the boy and tells the disciples to start passing the food out, amounting to the first “church” potluck dinner in history. The text tells us that all ate enough that they were “satisfied,” and the disciples collected 12 baskets full of left over bread and fish! I’ve had church potlucks go both ways on this: some have had their food peter out before people were “satisfied,” while others had more left over than when they started, it seemed. We’ve had several, though, where the turnout was greater than expected and “the kitchen ladies” were concerned. However, everyone seemed to BE satisfied, and pretty much every morsel was consumed, which was often touted as a modern-day “feeding of the 5,000” style miracle. 

 

I’ve heard this text preached by “realists” who suggested that what really happened was that the little boy being willing to share his lunch “shamed” the crowd to share THEIR lunches as well, and all were fed, including any who didn’t HAVE a lunch. It’s a nice sentiment—the power of suggestive sharing and generosity—but I think the text clearly wants us to see this as a divine miracle in the multiplication of resources. After all, there were TWELVE BASKETS FULL of food left over! Some folk just have a “thing” about wanting to make miracles seem practical and repeatable, or to turn them into a moral lesson, and that’s not necessarily a BAD idea. However, the definition of “miracle” includes the suspension of the “natural law,” so there’s that. In this case, the food just grew to feed a HUGE mob, even bigger than most Trump rallies, and lots of food was left over. I’ve always hoped that they sent the surplus home with the young lad. Imagine him trying to explain to his family where he got it all!

 

If there is a miracle in the Bible that really can’t be “explained away” as anything but a divine intervention, it would be this one. There are several important elements to it, if we want to “guess” why it was important to Jesus to feed this crowd. Let’s examine some of them:

 

·      Jesus did a lot of good ministry around food, and for good reason. We all DO need to eat, and like other members of the animal family, we are most vulnerable when we are eating. This makes for good conversation, and if you believe the 23^rd Psalm, possibly is a place where “enemies” may be converted into “neighbors,” or even “friends.

 

·      By feeding hungry people, Jesus did a “twofer;” fed hungry people AND demonstrated to the disciples how important it was for the organization they would have entrusted to them would DO this; AND, as mentioned earlier, the group meal—“Potluck Dinner”—instituted a key element of what a faith community provides, namely FELLOWSHIP.

 

·      All important ministries rely on some kind of “seed gift” to get started. God did not just hocus-pocus conjure up the food. Andrew had to do what he did best—canvas the crowd—and find the lad with some food who was willing to part with it. If it weren’t for that, the miracle would not have taken place. Sacrificial “seed gifts” from God’s people are still the necessary “sourdough” starter to get things rolling in the church!

 

·      Jesus starts by very publicly giving THANKS for the young boy’s barley loaves and fish, which we assume is where God begins the multiplying process. That works for the gifts church people give, too. The church ought ALWAYS to be thankful for the seed gifts, and say so, publicly. God WILL do the multiplying!

 

·      The extra is not wasted in the story. It was gathered up, and while I think it would have been cool to give the boy the food, it quite possibly was used to feed other hungry people in the area, or who showed up later? 

 

I believe the salient points of this story include the importance of eating together, as people of God. Conversation is how we get to know each other, and understand both our common interests and our differences. By having these conversations over eating, we are more vulnerable to each other, and apt to be more honest and less worried about “offending” than we are about displaying our human integrity. Is it any wonder that Jesus used a MEAL to institute a sacramental experience designed to “remember” what he was about, and what he taught us? I think not.

 

And maybe this is the “magic” of the church Potluck Supper? We share what we bring, engage in pleasant, yet revealing conversation, and “bond” to one another as the people of God. Of all of the church’s efforts to create, nurture, and encourage relationships, the meals we share together may be the “Jesus way” to succeed! What is multiplied is our understanding of each other and our commitment to building community, not just the food! And talking about evangelism—the easiest church activity to invite disaffected family members and/or your neighbors to is a meal. Again, everybody needs to eat.

 

As one who has put himself in a healthier vein by more wisely choosing what and when I eat, I suggest that using “breaking bread” as a way to build relationships and increase the “health” of the church is a “no brainer,” as they say. After all, Jesus rarely does anything without more than one item on his agenda. Feeding folk because they are hungry is compassionate; feeding them as a way to gather them together is a ministry. The church can use the Potluck Supper to do both!

 

To recap, there is a reason the feeding of the 5,000 is repeated in each of the gospels. Maybe the Bible is trying to tell us that the church Potluck Supper is one of the best ideas we have had. Everyone knows that the traditional “funeral luncheon” is a tremendous time of healing in the midst of grief, and “catching up” between separated family members and friends ever invented. Any group of people an dream up a reason to eat together, and in doing so, we, too, may experience healing, healing of whatever has hurt us or tore us apart. In this season of disaffiliation in the United Methodist Church, maybe it’s time we had more church Potluck Suppers! Amen.

Multiplication Vs. Division

 

Multiplication vs. Division

 

Jeremiah 23:1-6

 

23:1 Woe to the shepherds who destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture! says the LORD.

 

23:2 Therefore thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, concerning the shepherds who shepherd my people: It is you who have scattered my flock and have driven them away, and you have not attended to them. So I will attend to you for your evil doings, says the LORD.

 

23:3 Then I myself will gather the remnant of my flock out of all the lands where I have driven them, and I will bring them back to their fold, and they shall be fruitful and multiply.

 

23:4 I will raise up shepherds over them who will shepherd them, and they shall no longer fear or be dismayed, nor shall any be missing, says the LORD.

 

23:5 The days are surely coming, says the LORD, when I will raise up for David a righteous Branch, and he shall reign as king and deal wisely and shall execute justice and righteousness in the land.

 

23:6 In his days Judah will be saved, and Israel will live in safety. And this is the name by which he will be called: "The LORD is our righteousness."

 

 

Jesus always said, “Greater things you shall do, because I go to the Father.” In most cases, I think he meant GOOD, greater things? Unfortunately, one of the things the church has learned to do WAY better than Jesus, is DIVIDE. Throughout the history of Christianity, we got REALLY GOOD at dividing, and usually because we couldn’t agree on things. Actually, it’s even stronger than that—we made finding ways to DISAGREE into an art form. It started with Judas, and has “matured” since then. Jesus promised that the “gates of hell” will not defeat the church, but it sure seems like human beings are doing pretty good job of ruining it. Maybe that’s what he meant?

 

Church history is a messy affair. Early on, the persecution of Christ-followers (later dubbed “Christians” at Antioch) by early religious leaders guarding their turf and by the emperors of Rome, was a thing. Christians were suffering and even being martyred, just for what they believed. Today, in spite of often declaring that they are being “persecuted,” most Christians—at least in this country—are “suffering” because of intolerance and/or doctrinal conflicts among themselves. The tide turned in the early church when these theological and doctrinal differences began to divide us, even to the point of attacking each other over them. Joan of Arc was burned at the stake over these kinds of differences, and even a major Reformer, John Calvin, was instrumental in having Michael Servetus, whom he declared a heretic, beheaded. It doesn’t take much to be declared a heretic by somebody, today, and while we haven’t been lopping off each other’s heads, at least literally, suffice it to say we certainly have not buried the hatchet. We have found it so much easier—and maybe more titillating?—to divide, rather than multiply.

 

The United Methodist Church has obviously just gone through a traumatic schism. Here’s how it happened:

 

·      Disagreements over a number of different doctrinal and biblical interpretations have been going on in Methodism for a long time. “Liberals” and “conservatives,” often declaring themselves “evangelicals” have been at it over all kinds of things, but in 1972, at United Methodism’s first “full” General Conference, conservatives managed to pass a doctrinal statement that “homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teachings.” Thus began a systematic “wave” of tightening, conservative “rules” in the UMC against any “rights” that might be afforded to persons in the LGBTQ community.

 

·      Even though numerous statements like “all of God’s children are persons of sacred worth” also got voted in, the conservative sect of United Methodism succeeded in prohibiting any affirmation of LGBTQ persons (referred to in our Book of Discipline generally as “homosexuals”), including prohibiting their candidacy or ordination as pastors and any kind of official “blessing” of gay or lesbian couples, let alone allowing their marriages in the church or by any UMC pastor. These battle lines drawn between conservative and liberal forces in the church eventually fomented a heated and near-paralyzed 2016 General Conference wherein the voting delegates cried out to the bishops of the church to “lead us,” in short—“DO something!” A lot of money got spent on that General Conference, and very little got done, due to this standoff. 

 

·      The bishops labored to come up with something they dubbed “The Way Forward,” with three proposals to come before a specially-called General Conference to be held in 2019. The proposals basically represented conservative, moderate, and liberal positions on how to include (or exclude) members of the LGBTQ community, and offered various “compromises” that could have allowed the denomination to remain intact, but with allowances for our differences. At that special General Conference in 2019, the conservative voice, buoyed by a concerted effort to get conservative delegates elected across the denomination, and a strong lobbying effort among the churches African delegates, won the day. The “Traditional Plan” passed by just over 50 votes among the hundreds cast. As a ”bone” thrown to those not happy with this outcome, Paragraph 2553 was also passed by that Conference, which provided a way for those congregations disaffected by the vote—mostly the more liberal voices—to exit the denomination and keep their capital properties.

 

·      In a reaction to this new “Traditional Plan,” which really hammered on excluding the LGBTQ community from the UMC, many Annual Conferences, including some very conservative ones in the South, elected more liberal voices for the 2020 General Conference. Conservatives saw that they might lose in a subsequent vote at this Conference sat down at a table with moderate and liberal representatives and came up with something called “The Protocol of Reconciliation and Grace through Separation.” Were this “Protocol” to pass at the 2020 General Conference, a negotiated separation would occur in the UMC, with a conservative faction calling itself the Wesleyan Covenant Association leading a separation from the UMC, along with $25 million to start a new denomination. The protocol would amount to a kind of “controlled burn,” keeping the “fire” from destroying the denomination. We all know what happened to the 2020 General Conference, thanks to COVID-19.

 

·      When the pandemic postponed that General Conference, the members of the Wesleyan Covenant Association, announced they were going forward with starting a new, conservative denomination called “The Global Methodist Church.” In doing so, they violated the terms of the Protocol, and the liberal representatives withdrew their support of it, in protest. It was declared DOA, even before the pandemic later forced the further postponement of the 2020 General Conference.

 

·      Meanwhile, seeing that the 2020 General Conference may well be delayed until 2024 (it was), the Wesleyan Covenant Association and the principals of the new Global Methodist Church turned to Paragraph 2553, which they had pushed through as a “consolation prize” to any liberal churches that might want to leave the now more conservative UMC. Since the conservatives now realized that the jig was going to be up on this being a long-standing “reality,” they urged their affiliated congregations—and pastors—to use 2553 to negotiate their own exit. The problem was that 2553 gave Conference Trustees jurisdiction over just what “deal” would be struck for exiting churches to keep their properties, AND this process had a shelf life, expiring at the end of 2023 (remember, it was passed before there was a pandemic “interlude” to human life). 

 

·      Thinking the solution to guarding their doctrinal “purity” was in dividing, not multiplying, thousands of congregations—43% of them here in the Western PA Conference—exited the United Methodist Church, as well as a great number of pastors. This has left two struggling denominations, as well as a number of disaffiliated churches that have chosen to remain independent. 

 

Unfortunately, the disaffiliation process was riddled with much conniving and disinformation aimed at “scaring” churches into leaving the denomination. In our Conference, and I assume others, members of the Wesleyan Covenant Association distributed videos that threatened that cross-dressing, transvestite pastors would be proliferating in pulpits, and that in the future UMC, churches would be “forced” to host same-gender weddings, and pastors would be required to perform them. In some places, the appeal was “your church can regain full control of its finances if you disaffiliate,” which was not a condition of Paragraph 2553 at all. However, this “promise” had GREAT appeal to larger, wealthier churches, and those with large endowments and extensive property. Thanks to this “doctrine of the great divide,” as I mentioned earlier, we are left with two struggling churches, much angst still in the air, and “bad blood” in communities like Rochester, where disaffiliation divided cooperative charges and left the United Methodist remnant churches without pastoral leadership.

 

I share all of this because I have just begun to serve one of the churches left “orphaned” in its community, due to the disaffiliation of its yoked partner AND its pastor. The disaffiliation process required congregations whose Church Councils voted to consider disaffiliating, to hold a vote of a Church Conference to do so, and Paragraph 2553 required a two-thirds vote to approve leaving the UMC. Across our Annual Conference, and I assume the rest of the denomination where such votes were held, many churches either voted to disaffiliate or not to, by just a handful of votes, meaning that the vote effectively divided the church. If those wishing to disaffiliate lost the vote, many of them just left and went elsewhere, leaving a struggling remnant behind. This is what happened in my home church, and the large number of folk leaving went together to write a letter to the remaining members to announce their exit, rubbing it in, so to speak. How’s THAT for Christian behavior?

 

Unfortunately, we’ve gotten really good at dividing. The prophet Jeremiah, in today’s text, addresses the heinousness of this “dividing” act, decrying it as a cancer in Israel. He clearly believes he is “speaking for God” when he condemns this “scattering the flock” of God’s people, saying God will “attend” to the ones who have done this. How very sad. I’ll be honest: I’m still angry about those who chose to divide and “scatter” God’s people called Methodists, in the name of “biblical authority” or “doctrinal purity.” I can think of little as conceited as believing they have a corner on “the truth.” We are all in pursuit of a fulfillment of the Sermon on the Mount as preached by Jesus Christ, even as ancient Israel was hoping to BE the reality of a people blessed by God and living exemplary lives according to God’s law. Israel did not divide over faith-related or “doctrinal” issues. Fact is, even though we have different sects of Judaism in our day, when it comes to doctrines and “biblical authority,” they all share similar views, yet celebrate their differences, and still see each other as faithful Jews. Their differences are largely in customs, and cultures. Hear what I’m saying: Reform Jews—the most liberal of Jewish believers—still respect, love, and defend the Hasidic Jews, the most conservative. They all acknowledge each other’s faith, and see it as a true “expression” of Judaism. They believe each sect is glorifying Yahweh. They see their differences as MULTIPLYING the Jewish witness and EXPANDING their worship of God, not degenerating into “who’s RIGHT and who’s WRONG in their interpretive and biblical views. Why can’t Christians do this, too?

 

One of my good friends—now a retired Old Testament scholar and professor—once lamented to one of his seminary students who was promoting the disaffiliation process over “biblical authority,” thusly: “I want to be in the church with YOU, but you don’t want to be in the church with ME.” Why couldn’t we continue as a “big tent” faith, as Methodism has always been? Is this schism in the United Methodist Church just born of divisive leaders who made the decision that they “could not abide” the others who had differing views of things like historical/critical biblical interpretation and human sexuality? How is “I don’t want to be in a church where you believe the way you believe, which is different than what I believe” anything Jesus would have endorsed? This is the same Jesus who told the disciples who had heard there were “others” casting out demons and performing healings, and asked Jesus whether they should put a stop to it: “Whoever is not against us is for us.”  Jeremiah would not have abided what caused the schism in United Methodism, I’m pretty sure.

 

Jeremiah delivers the message that God’s will is that God’s people—the “sheep” in Jeremiah’s prophecy—be “fruitful and multiply.” And God, through the prophet, promises to help bring this to reality. Israel is called to “multiply” justice and righteousness: justice for all people, including “strangers in the land;” and righteousness “in the land,” meaning a form of “right living” that witnesses to the presence, power, and benevolence of God. God, in this vision, is a MULTIPLIER, not a DIVIDER. And if you don’t believe Jeremiah, look to all of the other Hebrew Bible prophets! You will get the same message. And if you STILL don’t see it, read the teachings and review the witness of Jesus Christ, the Son of God! Jesus was NOT a “divider,” but an “includer,” a multiplier, and a gatherer of the hurting, lost, and needy. I believe we are called to do likewise.

 

Friends, those of us in the “remnant” United Methodist Church have been handed a chance to retool our denomination into an inclusive, diverse, and “multiplying” community of faith! We can again pitch the “big tent,” in that more conservative persons who are not yet comfortable with full inclusion of LGBTQ persons are not being required to make an immediate change of beliefs, moderate individuals, who are in the majority and who generally want to welcome ALL into our churches, and more progressive believers who are excited about fully including LGBTQ persons in their churches, may all “live” under the same big tent. By removing the mandatory, excluding paragraphs of the UMC’s Book of Discipline, we have been given permission to open our doors, hearts, and minds, like our old slogan proclaims, and this “multiplying” permission is not exclusive to the LGBTQ community. It is not EASY to be an inclusive church, especially when it means passionately reaching out to all of the “least, the last, and the lost” among God’s people. As a middle-class-raised white senior citizen, I can attest to this. I’m way beyond my “comfort level” when reaching out to persons whose lifestyles and socio-economic sitz im leben is so different than mine, but this discomfort must not be a barrier to doing so. Surely, many of us “left” in the UMC must be willing to move beyond our comfort level, in these pursuits. The question we should always ask ourselves, especially when the question of LGBTQ inclusion is being debated, is: Will Jesus be more grieved by our INCLUDING (“multiplying”) our generation’s marginalized persons? Or more grieved if we EXCLUDE (“divide”) them from our affirmation and midst? 

 

Now that I am again serving a church, my congregation will hear a message of love, forgiveness, grace, and inclusion from me, and I will encourage them to be “prophetic” in their ministries of compassion and justice in the community they serve. Doing so will offer a “multiplying” witness to Jesus Christ, and I believe God will reward it by multiplying God’s blessing on the church, helping it receive healing from the trauma of schism and the dividing of its congregation. In short, I will do all within my ability, as led and fueled by the Holy Spirit, to see to it that the Faith Community United Methodist Church truly IS a Community of Faith! If the pastors and leaders of our remnant United Methodist Churches do likewise, I believe we WILL be a “fruitful and multiplying” people! Amen!