The Rabble Among Us

 The Rabble Among Us 

Numbers 11:4-6, 10-16, 24-29

The spirit is upon seventy elders 

 

11:4 The camp followers with them had a strong craving, and the Israelites also wept again and said, "If only we had meat to eat!

 

11:5 We remember the fish we used to eat in Egypt for nothing, the cucumbers, the melons, the leeks, the onions, and the garlic,

 

11:6 but now our strength is dried up, and there is nothing at all but this manna to look at."

 

11:10 Moses heard the people weeping throughout their families, all at the entrances of their tents. Then the LORD became very angry, and Moses was displeased.

 

11:11 So Moses said to the LORD, "Why have you treated your servant so badly? Why have I not found favor in your sight, that you lay the burden of all this people on me?

 

11:12 Did I conceive all this people? Did I give birth to them, that you should say to me, 'Carry them in your bosom as a wet nurse carries nursing a child,' to the land that you promised on oath to their ancestors?

 

11:13 Where am I to get meat to give to all this people? For they come weeping to me, saying, 'Give us meat to eat!'

 

11:14 I am not able to carry all this people alone, for they are too heavy for me.

 

11:15 If this is the way you are going to treat me, put me to death at once--if I have found favor in your sight--and do not let me see my misery."

 

11:16 So the LORD said to Moses, "Gather for me seventy of the elders of Israel, whom you know to be the elders of the people and officers over them; bring them to the tent of meeting and have them take their place there with you.”

 

11:24 So Moses went out and told the people the words of the LORD, and he gathered seventy of the elders of the people and placed them all around the tent.

 

11:25 Then the LORD came down in the cloud and spoke to him and took some of the spirit that was on him and put it on the seventy elders, and when the spirit rested upon them, they prophesied. But they did not do so again.

 

11:26 Two men remained in the camp, one named Eldad and the other named Medad, and the spirit rested on them; they were among those registered, but they had not gone out to the tent, so they prophesied in the camp.

 

11:27 And a young man ran and told Moses, "Eldad and Medad are prophesying in the camp."

 

11:28 And Joshua son of Nun, the assistant of Moses, one of his chosen men, said, "My lord Moses, stop them!"

 

11:29 But Moses said to him, "Are you jealous for my sake? Would that all the Lord's people were prophets and that the LORD would put his spirit on them!"

 

Believe me, we preachers have all preached a plethora of sermons on the “griping people of God”! Why? Because the Bible is full of stories of them, AND the church can be full of them, too! It is part of human nature that nothing decided “in community” makes everyone happy. In fact, as good leaders know, a plurality of important, pivotable decisions will initially make hardly ANYONE happy. People don’t like to have their “sacred cows” gored, or their favorite memories carried off to the fellowship hall for the church rummage sale. Neither do they cotton to having their long-venerated theological views/prejudices tossed aside by an “educated” pastor. 

 

In this weekend’s lectionary passage from Numbers, Moses is upset with the “rabble” among the people of God who have loaded their “laundry list” with complaints, especially about the menu selection afforded them in the wilderness. God had provided the manna, which was a kind of crusty flatbread with a taste of honey. If God provided it, it was probably nutritious, but as those of us who like cake with buttercream frosting know, it does get old, day after day…well, maybe after a week or two? You get the idea. Other related Bible passages have the people “pining after the fleshpots of Egypt,” meaning they were missing the “meat pottage” they were fed as slaves. I’m sure it wasn’t “Zuppa Tuscana,” but it did have meat in it, and was probably really salty—everything the manna wasn’t. 

 

In this passage, we see that the people got angry with Moses, for he was “the pastor in charge,” Moses got angry with the people for their bitching (as any good pastor would), and then Moses got angry with God for “treating your servant (Moses) so badly” for answering the call to serve these contentious, ungrateful people. No one is really happy. Later in the passage, we even have the story of a dispute between Joshua and Moses over a couple of young prophets. It sure sounds like a modern church board meeting, doesn’t it? It’s this propensity for allowing disagreements to rise to the level of community dysfunction that I’d like to address, today. According to this passage, it comes from the “rabble among us,” which is a way of expressing not people, as much as personality conflicts and values.

 

As I studied this passage this week, I kept thinking about how Moses kind of reminded me of my late father. Bob Sterling was a master of turning simple phrases to capsulize more complex gripes, assessments, or situations. I don’t know where he got these “Sterling-isms,” but they have stuck with me. As Moses may have addressed the complaining people of Israel, my dad would proclaim to one of his bitching sons, “You’d cry if you were hung with a new rope.” I never really knew what that meant, but it caught me off guard when he used it, causing me to stop, ponder, and be ultimately stymied by my puzzlement. I’m guessing that is what he intended? Still, I got the message that complaints over more trivial matters might just derail needed conversation regarding serious matters before me. Maybe I should be questioning why I was being “hung,” rather than griping about the vintage of the rope? This curious statement could nicely summarize what Moses was feeling in hearing the gripes of the people of Israel. Thanks to God’s gift of the manna, they weren’t starving in the wilderness. And yet, they were setting aside gratitude for this profound fact in favor of complaining about the nature of the salvific food.

 

Like my dad, Moses also got tired of the “queuing” and one-upmanship that was going on among the people. We certainly see this in Joshua’s complaint about Eldad and Medad, and their prophesying. When Dad Sterling heard one of us “bragging” about some accomplishment as a solo achievement—and it was usually me—he would say, “Where did you get this LINDBERGH stuff?” Again, one simple statement that summarized a reality, and one which yours truly was ignoring in my braggadocio. Even as Charles Lindbergh had a “cast of thousands” that made his “solo” flight across the Atlantic possible, so no accomplishment on my part could be claimed as achievable apart from the “community” in which it happened. If it was something “great” I had achieved at school, there were teachers and peers involved, as well as the resources of the school district. And since most of my accolades came from my academics and the “arts” in which I participated in in school (not sports!), this critique was appropriate, and I’ll stop with this illustration! I got what he was saying: I will always be a part of something larger than myself, and what I accomplish will be at least partly aided if not wholly made possible by the contextual community in which it occurred. Further, he would suggest that any accomplishment that didn’t BENEFIT the broader community wasn’t something I should boast about, anyway. This lesson was not lost one me, either. 

 

Like Moses, Dad Sterling knew that little things could escalate quickly, especially when not dealt with at their earliest stage of “breakdown,” and occasionally even WHEN you were fixing them! (Pastors know this, too, but are often in denial of these facts, eschewing conflict.) I remember helping my father one Saturday with a toilet problem, when I was probably about 12 or 13. Mom had complained that the downstairs toilet was “not shutting off,” and I remember dad suggesting that it was just a bad “flapper,” which wasn’t closing off, meaning the toilet tank’s water level was leaking into the drain, and the fill system would just keep running, as a result. I watched as Dad took the lid off of the tank, and watched the mechanism as he flushed the beast. Sure enough, it would keep running long after the tank should have been filled, but he was puzzled by the flapper, which he had recently replaced. It WAS “seating,” as it should, but water was still getting by it, which kept the fill system running. He deduced the problem was that the “seat” against which the flapper was to seal had deteriorated, and needed to be replaced. Things were indeed escalating, as now he would have to drain the tank and removed it, in order to remove the tank drain. After trying to turn off the water feed to the tank, he soon realized that the shutoff valve below the tank was frozen by corrosion. This meant turning off the main water valve for the whole house, as there was no other “sub valve” feeding the cold water to the toilet. He warned my mom that he would have to do this, as now neither bathroom would have water, nor would the kitchen or the laundry. After turning off the water main valve just after the water meter in the basement, dad flushed the toilet tank and began sponging out the remaining water. Removing the tank turned out to be a chore, as the two bolts holding it to the toilet itself had badly corroded. Both broke off as he wrenched them, and with each new piece that would be needed to reassemble John Crapper’s invention, he added them to a written list for the hardware store. After removing the tank, he started trying to unscrew the very large “nut” that torqued down the drain seat, and since he didn’t have the proper “large mouthed” wrench for this job, he had jury-rigged a way to use a couple wrenches he DID have. All well and good, until he next discovered that this large joint was ALSO corroded. He squirted some penetrating oil on it, and we took a break. After allowing time for the oil to do its work, he tried again to unscrew the joint. It began to turn, which seemed like a victory. What he didn’t realize was that, inside the tank, the whole assembly was turning, and when the lug that held the fill tube wedged against the back wall of the porcelain tank, it ruptured the tank, with one strong turn. I remember my dad just staring at the now split open tank, contemplating “what’s next?” Off to the hardware store we went for a new fill valve, a whole new tank, and all of the internal hardware for it. Almost three hours after turning off the water to the house, we were up and running again. As usual, dad used this as a “lesson” for me that “Nothing is as easy as it seems,” and “Plan for contingencies.” As I thought of this “lesson” in light of Moses’ issues he was having with the Israelites in today’s scripture, I thought of this additional lesson: “Things may escalate.” Prepare for it!

 

My dad’s regular reminders to “Consult your experts” sure sounds like an answer to Moses’ emotional appeal to God in verse 14: “I am not able to carry all this people alone, for they are too heavy for me.” How many of us either delay dealing with a situation or just simply ignore it, because we know it is a bigger problem than we are confident we can deal with? This is where Moses and dad were right—“Consult your experts.” Moses took it to God, and God told him to use his elders to help. Again, problems that arise in community will most likely need the community to fix. Even our “personal” problems may best be approached by relying on the support available in our community, and most certainly may involve “experts” who are part of it. I wish I was a better student of this latter lesson. What is it in us that tempts us to default to the “Lindbergh” approach to fixing things, be they with our household plumbing or our innermost psyche? I could cite an impressive list of things I chose to “fix” myself before finally reaching out to ask for help or pay an expert. I could have saved myself, time, grief, and money. Moses might have kept himself from getting so depressed, had he turned to God sooner! How about you? Have you “Lindberghed out” on too many things? Rarely in a healthy community is there a place for “Lone Rangers.” This was another lesson my dad tried hard to teach me.

 

The ”rabble” among us may not always be just a brood of gripers. Perhaps they are an alarm, letting us know of something that is starting to fester in community, or just downright alerting us to a dangerous situation. Any community is made up of a wide variety of personality types and persons of varied experience, including tragic ones. These “types” may more quickly see and react to stuff that could become stumbling blocks for the community. When they do, they may “rabble rouse,” rather than merely talk to the leadership. Why? Possibly because their past experience was that when they tried that, leadership either didn’t listen, or at least didn’t respond to their cries. While this was not the case with Moses in this scripture, it is often true of church and community leaders. There are legitimate reasons for some of their perceived “cluelessness,” such as having already too full plates, or a lack of knowledge regarding how to approach the issue, without some serious research. Unfortunately, there are less than helpful reasons for it: denial of the problem; becoming “hooked” by the complaint coming from an adverse personality type to their own; or even copping out by placing blame on someone else, hoping to be absolved of the responsibility. Good leaders should probably not be “politicians,” but chosen leaders of organizations often are, and we know that political types can succumb to placing blame rather than problem solving.

 

Another way that my dad reminded me of Moses was that both got their people to the “promised land.” My mother, brothers, and I had great lives, thanks to my dad’s hard work and counsel, and all three of “us kids” have had much success in life. And when we failed or fell short, in some way, we did not wallow in pity, but looked to our supportive community—and occasionally the experts—to help us out. And for each of us, we learned that God was the “Great Expert” we could always turn to, along with the others!

 

A lot has been made of God not “allowing” Moses to enter into the Promised Land with his people, but I think it’s overblown. We have to remember that the Bible was written by human writers. Regardless of how “inspired” we may believe them to have been in writing down what we call “holy writ,” the fact is, they were still seeing the religious world through human eyes. Their account says that Moses was not allowed to enter the Promised Land because he allowed the “rabble” to get to him when they were thirsty, and struck the rock when God told him to only speak to it to miraculously release its refreshing contents. Really? Possibly God just knew that Israel would need a new leader in a new world, so it was God who personally “retired” Moses for all he had put up with? Regardless, both Moses and Dad Sterling “retired to their heavenly reward” having never been guilty of “Lindbergh stuff.” Amen.

Arguing Together

Arguing Together

 

Mark 9:30-37

Prediction of the passion 

9:30 They went on from there and passed through Galilee. He did not want anyone to know it,

9:31 for he was teaching his disciples, saying to them, "The Son of Man is to be betrayed into human hands, and they will kill him, and three days after being killed, he will rise again."

9:32 But they did not understand what he was saying and were afraid to ask him.

9:33 Then they came to Capernaum, and when he was in the house he asked them, "What were you arguing about on the way?"

9:34 But they were silent, for on the way they had argued with one another who was the greatest.

9:35 He sat down, called the twelve, and said to them, "Whoever wants to be first must be last of all and servant of all."

9:36 Then he took a little child and put it among them, and taking it in his arms he said to them,

9:37 "Whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me, and whoever welcomes me welcomes not me but the one who sent me."

I am an arguer. (Is there such a word?) I like to DEBATE, which is actually a better word. “Argue” sounds negative, like a process wherein facts and persuasion are not important. “Debate” rings more serious sounding, like there will be a winner and a loser, but based on following some set of agreed-upon rules. No rules are needed for being an arguer. Shouting may be involved, as may be name-calling. I WISH I was only a debater, but honestly, I often backslide into arguing. Thankfully, I’m not a shouter or a name-caller, but I may fall prey to “arguing from authority.” Being both a well-educated person and an avid reader of books, periodicals, and “breaking news” regarding current events, I am capable of appealing to startling facts. This often provokes shouting and name-calling by my opponent. Thanks to a a certain orange-skinned individual on the national scene, a new factor has been added to any form of debate—even argument: Calling out “fake news.” Even the actual, provable facts may be called into question, in this vein of “argument.” It is a stopper, and the ultimate in name-calling, but one not named at the debating opponent, but at her or his FACTS. But it is not QUESTIONING the facts, just judging them as false or irrelevant. It would like be a police detective being told he had to make his case using NONE of the facts in evidence. Sound ludicrous. It is. But you want to know what is even more ludicrous? Arguing over “who is the greatest.” This is what Jesus is flagging in this text from Mark.

 

Arguing is not necessarily a BAD thing. As I mentioned earlier, I prefer the term, “debate,” as it signifies a more cultured conversation fed by factual assertions, or at least theoretical ones backed by already accepted information and constructs. “Debate” is affirmed by the university; arguing is more at home in a bar over a beer. As a “university guy,” you see where I’m coming from. Interestingly, Jesus was neither bar or bar mitzvah guy, and his response to his disciples over their “beer fight” pulled from a much higher source. Talk about an “argument from authority!” A good debate—or even a sober argument—has the possibility of making each party weigh their assertions carefully and even be persuaded that some part of their case is unsupportable. We had many such debates in seminary classes, which hopefully taught us that the “teaching” we would eventually feed our congregations may NOT be universally accepted by the masses. Especially when it comes to deeply-held beliefs, surrendering to the “superior” authorities of the lecture hall might be far from automatic, and much less than encouraging to one’s faith. Pastors who don’t learn to listen carefully to the emotional statements and “investments” of their congregants are doomed to “lose the argument” to something much deeper rooted than seminary “book learning.” 

 

People CAN disagree, not just over ideas, but even over the facts and their significance. What may be important information for YOU may be conversely be insignificant to me and my views. Arguments have ensued over less. That Jesus moved on to welcome a child just after hearing about what his disciples were arguing about along the road is a less than subtle allusion to his judgment of their debate as being childish. He’s planning on giving these guys the “keys to the kingdom,” and they are fighting over who is the “greatest.” Even Muhammad Ali had to fight for the right to call himself “The Greatest.” What did the twelve have to go on? Were they basing their argument on what their prior careers had offered up as collateral? Fishermen, tax collectors, a carpenter or two—not much here to present as evidence, except maybe an inflated “fish story.” As I suggested earlier, possibly they were arguing the post position as to whom would be their leader if Jesus’ prediction that he would lose his life in Jerusalem came true. I guess they missed the part about “rising again.” Peter must have won the debate, though, as he does seem to end up the head of what became known as the “Jerusalem Council.” When the Apostle Paul went up against them, it was Peter who was the point person. 

 

The church today argues a lot, too. Mostly over the Bible, or more correctly, what we interpret it to be “saying” to us. We rarely argue over what “servanthood” looks like, but like the first disciples, we fight over pecking order: who’s in charge; who is “included” in the promise of salvation; which church has the corner on the truth, etc. It’s the same fight as “who is the greatest,” but cleaned up to resemble a theological debate. It isn’t. The fact is, God sent Jesus to proclaim “release to the captives,” regardless of what has imprisoned a person. All are included in the “release,” and in this matter, ALL means ALL. What we fight about is power, not purity. Truth be told, we probably all know what “servant leadership” looks like, but there is not much power to be had in it, and “humility” is not a value of any magnitude in Western society. Should the church be different? Unique in this regard? Yes. Are we? Nope, at least not yet. 

 

I am old enough to remember the promise the Internet and search engines like Google offered to people. One could learn much by “Googling” something and reading the mass of articles that popped up. Unfortunately, with really no one “policing” the veracity of the resulting core dump of information, what has happened is it has created a universe of pseudo-intellectuals who can spout (or in the syntax of social media, “post”) fountains of “stuff” on any topic, much of which may be contrived or even bogus. Even as this has become a millstone weighing down informed dialogue today, I’m guessing Jesus was as discouraged by the bizarre assertions the twelve were making in support of their believe as to who should be “large and in charge.” He answered by throwing them the “servant of all” knuckleball.

 

The knuckleball was my favorite pitch in all of baseball. It is thrown by gripping the ball in one’s fingernails in such a way that, upon releasing it, all of the spin on the ball is abated by the last “grip” of the nails. The ball is thrown with a great degree of arm-strength and force, but with no spin. This causes the laces of the ball to be “caught” by the air turbulence and any cross-currents present as the ball travels toward the plate. These “ill winds” cause it to “dance” around, and no one—even the pitcher—knows exactly where it will end up. The lack of spin makes it hard to catch, too, as a baseball’s typical rigorous spin will cause it to “wedge” itself into the catcher’s mitt. Without the spin, it’s like a book hitting a pillow. Most catchers use an oversized mitt to catch a knuckleball pitch, guarding against it just dropping to the ground or winding up at the backstop as a “wild pitch.” For the batter, swinging at it is most often like trying to bring down a flitting bee with a stick. Even the pitcher turns it loose with little assurance that it will fly straight. What makes the knuckleball so hard to throw? If one does not hone the skill of turning it loose with NO spin, the ball is delivered with only moderate speed and just enough spin as to turn it into a batting practice pitch. Failed knuckleballs get hit very, very far, very, very fast. Hence, baseball has seen very few successful knuckleball pitchers over its long history.

 

In answering an argument over “who is the greatest” with the assertion that “the one who wants to be the greatest must become the servant of all,” Jesus threw the biggest knuckleball, ever. Even HE didn’t know how the pitch would be received by the church, down through the centuries; many would take a swing at it by feigning servanthood, but with the secret desire for power; and preachers (the catcher?) trying to corral it to properly expound from the pulpit on what Jesus meant by it have pretty much dropped the ball. I do believe Jesus was seeking to provoke conversation with this statement, conversation that could potentially lead to more people SERVING others than too many sergeants and not enough soldiers. Like the knuckleball, it’s a hard pitch to master. We tend to venerate those who have pulled it off—Ghandi, Mother Teresa, Albert Schweitzer. And while the Major Leagues have seen few good knuckleballers, countless sandlots have seen hitters stymied by those amateurs trying to get outs with the pitch. In the same way, the church most likely could count a large field of “sandlot” players who have put themselves to servant ministry in such a genuine, humbling way that their peers recognize them. I can name a lot of names of folk who “mastered the pitch,” but YOU have never heard of them—Jim Shifter, Julie Krantz, Dave Elkins, Sara Cassidy, Peggy Hines…I could go on and on, thinking of parishioners who took servant ministry seriously! Oh, and I’m married to one good knuckleball hitter! In each church, she found her niche were she could lovingly serve, and yet “stay out of the way” of the resident lay leaders. 

 

I called this message “Arguing Together,” as I do believe our debates over how the church should be led and do its work to be helpful, edifying, and even teasing forth wisdom from its members. Jesus didn’t “condemn” the twelve for their verbal machinations, but he DID throw them a knuckleball that cast a unique vision of what the church’s “pitch” to the world should look like! TOGETHER is the key word, even if we are arguing over our differences. If we successfully stay TOGETHER, our differences will get worked out. Sadly, what just happened in the United Methodist Church was truly a failed argument and a spinning knuckleball that got creamed. Oh well, forward we must now go. And let us accept Jesus’ invitation to “welcome the children” and thereby welcome HIM! Amen!

The Law Wins

The Law Wins

 

Psalm 19

The commandments give light to the eyes

19:1 The heavens are telling the glory of God, and the firmament proclaims his handiwork.

19:2 Day to day pours forth speech, and night to night declares knowledge.

19:3 There is no speech, nor are there words; their voice is not heard;

19:4 yet their voice goes out through all the earth and their words to the end of the world. In the heavens he has set a tent for the sun,

19:5 which comes out like a bridegroom from his wedding canopy, and like a strong man runs its course with joy.

19:6 Its rising is from the end of the heavens and its circuit to the end of them, and nothing is hid from its heat.

19:7 The law of the LORD is perfect, reviving the soul; the decrees of the LORD are sure, making wise the simple;

19:8 the precepts of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of the LORD is clear, enlightening the eyes;

19:9 the fear of the LORD is pure, enduring forever; the ordinances of the LORD are true and righteous altogether.

19:10 More to be desired are they than gold, even much fine gold; sweeter also than honey and drippings of the honeycomb.

19:11 Moreover, by them is your servant warned; in keeping them there is great reward.

19:12 But who can detect one's own errors? Clear me from hidden faults.

19:13 Keep back your servant also from the insolent; do not let them have dominion over me. Then I shall be blameless and innocent of great transgression.

19:14 Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart be acceptable to you, O LORD, my rock and my redeemer.

 

While the 23^rd Psalm is, overall, the most popular among the general population, Psalm 19 is the heart of the true believer desiring to love, serve, and praise God and God’s Word. One might call it a “love song to the law.” Several of its verses are oft quoted, and the final verse is employed by many of my clergy colleagues as a pre-sermon prayer, appealing to God for both guidance and humility in giving it. Evangelical Christianity—aided by the prejudices of many reformed thinkers—has beaten the “law of God” into submission, lasering in on Martin Luther and John Calvin’s emphasis on “salvation by faith.” But for most religious life, “the law” was not about soteriology, but praxis. God saved us through the Christ Event; we live a life glorifying to God by following God’s law. It behooves us to rediscover the “sweetness” of the law in our contemporary context.

 

At St. Paul’s, the church from which I retired in 2021, we had worked painstakingly to craft a new vision for our ministry, after having conversations—individually and in Appreciative Inquiry groups—with over 800 church members. The “finished product” stated our vision as: “St. Paul’s will be an inclusive, diverse church, loving others according to the teachings of Jesus, and working for justice and peace in our world.” This could be described as our “vision” of the Gospel, but it also could be inclusive of our understanding of how the “law of God” was to govern our earthly living. Jews were commanded by God to “welcome the stranger” and to treat the sojourner among them “like a citizen.” We would be an inclusive, diverse church, in order to “welcome the stranger.” “Loving others according to the teachings of Jesus” is the Christian summary of what the Hebrew Bible saw as living according to the law of God, especially when you amplify it with working for justice and peace! 

 

As I have often expressed in earlier sermons, John Wesley really believed in encouraging his people to “obey the law of God” by living out their faith. His emphasis on Christians “doing good works,” which he called “acts of mercy” and living a life of humble, quiet piety, was central to his understanding of the faith. Again, it had nothing to do with “works righteousness,” with which he is often accused of preaching, but action-oriented discipleship. One could not just “get saved” and declare oneself a “disciple,” in Wesley’s world. Instead, we experienced God’s “prevenient grace,” which led us to WANT to become a Christian disciple, then God’s “justifying grace,” which was merely accepting God’s acceptance in us, granted as a gift through the Christ Event. Finally, we lived into God’s “sanctifying grace,” which led us on a daily journey of faith, learning and living out the teachings of Jesus, meeting the needs of our neighbors and the world, and glorifying God through our earthly life. I truly believe this is the Christian “capture” of the precepts of the 19^th Psalm.

 

I am personally convinced that following the law of God was NEVER about salvation, or what we would more generally call “justification.” Even in the Hebrew Bible and in the long history of the people of God, I have come to believe that it was ALWAYS about God’s “pardon” or acceptance of God’s people, and then “the law” was about how God’s people could live in peace and harmony with each other in an inclusive manner, which was the highest way to honor our Creator God. Loving each other, genuinely, living in peace with each other, and “welcoming the stranger” or sojourner, was how God initially envisioned the human creation to “be.” The gift of freedom of thought and action God gave us led to an unfortunate history of eschewing healthy “community” in favor of personal wealth creation and individual autonomy. For God’s people, the Jews, life became a pulsing, undulating history of yielding to the law and then ignoring or “forgetting” its observance. 

 

I have also long advocated that the decalogue (the “ten commandments”) were given by God to bring us together as a community under a loving God, living at peace and harmony with each other. Even the first few about how we should “honor” or treat God were given to keep the people of God FOCUSED on a common deity. It was the Jews’ worship of and obedience to God that kept them together as a community, and the remaining commandments of the decalogue were specifically aimed at guiding them to live in harmony with one another. After all, God created us to LIVE and find wholeness and joy in this life, and to encourage one another in this pursuit. Of course, we humans had to “amplify” or “fix” God’s commandments, and we added to them, as well as intensified the meaning of them to such a degree that they eventually could fill whole libraries with the multiplication of them, coupled with the rabbinical interpretation OF them! This may be one reason we read in the Book of Revelation in the New Testament the “warning” in chapter 22 that “adding to or taking away from” the “words of prophecy of this book” (the Bible?) will bring about judgment. When we mess with and “strengthen” God’s law, we alienate and judge each other with it, instead of using it to maintain a peaceable, beloved community, and in doing so, we dishonor God.

 

As Psalm 19 states, God’s desire was that these commandments (God’s Word) would be sweet to the taste, and “more to be desired than gold.” If we succumb to what humans have often done to the observance of God’s law, we live in fear of it, or even avoid the discipline of living in accordance with it. But if we hold to God’s intent as to WHY the law was given, it DOES become something “sweet” and desirable, because it brings us peace, within our own souls, and with each other. A community living according to God’s “sweet” law is mutually respecting and accepting; no one goes without the basics necessary to life and sojourners (the wondering stranger) is welcomed and treated like they BELONG among us.

 

Verse 7 summarizes my thoughts—and indeed the central theme of the Psalm—that “the law of the Lord is PERFECT.” I guess I like this description because Mr. Wesley believed that we are on a journey “to perfection.” No one who understands Wesley even an iota believes that HE believed that we would become “perfect” in this life, if you focus on that as meaning “sinless.” I believe he was talking about building positive “habits” of learning and living according to God’s law. Being “perfected” was about how we structured and disciplined our lives, focusing on God’s call and becoming the person God created us each to be. 

 

If we let the law win, our souls AND our world will be revived, according to the psalm. We “let the law win” by first understanding the WHY of the law, as I have attempted to lay out in this sermon, and then yielding to its precepts willingly, rather than begrudgingly. Ultimately, the law WINS when humanity succeeds—with God’s help—to build the Beloved Community that Jesus gave his life for, and luminary leaders like Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. worked to bring about. Both gave their lives for it. What if we LIVE our lives for it? Amen.

 

What's In a Name?

 

What’s In a Name

 

Proverbs 22:1-2, 8-9, 22-23

A good name

22:1 A good name is to be chosen rather than great riches, and favor is better than silver or gold.

22:2 The rich and the poor have this in common: the LORD is the maker of them all.

22:8 Whoever sows injustice will reap calamity, and the rod of anger will fail.

22:9 Those who are generous are blessed, for they share their bread with the poor.

22:22 Do not rob the poor because they are poor or crush the afflicted at the gate,

22:23 for the LORD pleads their cause and despoils of life those who despoil them.

“Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me!” Remember that one? Of course, it was never really true. When this proverb states “a good name is to be chosen rather than great riches,” it is not blowing smoke. Families and their heritage have been ruined by someone in their lineage besmirching their name. Earning a good name is like earning trust—not easy, but when you do, the last thing you want to do is lose it, for even if you are able to gain it back, it is never at the same level as it first was. One only has to look to the “famous” people who have soiled their name through stupid, lascivious, or criminal behavior, to see this is true.

 

Names can do funny things to us, and they certainly CAN hurt. Even our own names may be cause for pause. Back in my high school days, I knew a kid whose parents named him “Aloysius.” There isn’t even a good nickname to obscure that, and it should surprise no one that, like Johnny Cash’s mythical “boy named ‘Sue’,” Aloysius didn’t fare so well. The peck of trouble that followed him around through life wound him up in jail, last I knew. Later, I had a “friend” whose evangelical fervor led him to name his firstborn, “Melchizedek,” after the “high priest of Salem” in Genesis 14 in the Bible. And this new dad demanded that his son be called by his whole name, never shortened to “Mel.” I often wonder what happened to him?

 

My loving wife has one of the prettiest names I have ever known: Dara, which was actually a male name in the Bible’s book of Chronicles. Her mom found it in a “baby name book,” though. While a novel name, she gets mail to Dora, Donna, Dana, Darla, and several others. She often gets called by those names, too. Until 1997, we only knew of one other “Dara,” and it was the daughter of singer/songwriter, Neil Sedaka. In 1997, though, I was appointed to the Coraopolis United Methodist Church, and there we met a member of my youth group named Dara. We have maintained a friendship with this “other Dara,” as she is among the cadre of friends our two kids gathered in life. She still gets called “other Dara” by our kids and their friends. I, on the other hand, never had a problem with “Jeff,” but my middle name—Dahle—which is my mother’s maiden name, was a bit of a trial. Those few formal occasions when it was invoked publicly, such as school graduations, I either had to “head off” its being pronounced wrongly, or tolerate being “Jeffrey DOLL Sterling.” (It is actually pronounced like “Dale.”) Not a big deal, I guess, but I DID go through four graduation ceremonies. 

 

Most of us don’t have to handle our handle being mishandled, but of course, the Proverbs text is talking about REPUTATION, not pronunciation. While we may benefit from inheriting a good family name, each generation must either live up to it or build a “good name”—reputation—for ourselves. In our current American society, we tend to venerate people who “earn their good name” either in successful business ventures, excellence on the sports arena, or luminaries in entertainment. Folks just a little up the “elite” spectrum highlight authors, composers, or artists in various media. Unfortunately, our generation doesn’t spend much energy uplifting standouts in academia or areas of scientific or medical research. The hit film, “Hidden Figures,” that spotlighted gifted women of color who advanced the space program was a revelation to many folk, which is why it became a popular movie. It shouldn’t have taken that effort to recognize these stellar “good name” folk, but it did. And other than very few like Ghandi and King, most Americans would be hard-pressed to name luminaries widely known for their work for social justice. Interestingly, this is where this ancient Proverbs author takes us.

 

According to the text, a “good name” comes from pursuing justice for all people and aiding those in poverty. There is no mention of outstanding entrepreneurship, great crooners, or even clever architects who can turn an edifice into a work of art. AND, the author reminds us that we are all “one people” under God, intimating that our earned status is a second rate endorsement, anyway. We’ve all heard the stories of “famous” people getting caught in awkward scenarios where they take the offensive by asking intimidatingly the question, “Do you know WHO I am?” Most of us “commoners” love the stories where the response to these egotists is: “I don’t care WHO the hell you are, you are under arrest!”, or something like that. I must admit, I still find it spellbinding that almost half of “common” America supports a monumental narcissist whose only “claim to fame” is the artificially ballooned name he has crafted for himself and plastered on buildings, golf courses, and airplanes…and again, election posters. Why is it that we cheer the “I don’t care WHO the hell you are…” line in a movie, but then root for such an egotist to be returned to the White House? I just don’t get it at all, and this Proverbs author would be shocked out of his mind over it.

 

If we project out from Proverbs into the teachings of Jesus, the Gospels, and the writings of Paul in the New Testament, we find other values that a “good name” represents:

 

GENEROSITY…God loves a cheerful giver…To whom much has been given, much shall be required…The poor you will ever have with you (meaning we will ALWAYS have them to be concerned about and to help get through life).

 

A BIAS toward the downtrodden…Jesus spent extra time with “sinners,” tax collectors, and the infirmed who had been rejected or even ostracized by society. 

 

Jesus told us that greatness came not from “success,” but from becoming the “servant of all.” Serving others in need was a sure way to get a “good name” in the Hall of Fame run by God, apparently. 

 

“Take up your cross and follow me” is not a call to stockpile millions or crave your fifteen minutes of fame. We know the name of Jesus because he took up his cross, and God challenges us to earn our “good name” in a similar way. Jesus suffered and died on his, but we can serve God and others by taking up ours, meaning finding our “call” or niche where we can use our gifts to serve others, thereby glorifying God. 

 

I guarantee you have never ever heard of the people I have come to recognize as “good name” folk during my long years of serving the church. “Jim” was a generous, dedicated trustee chairperson in my first appointment, who became a “quiet” opinion leader in that congregation because of his humility and service. He caught the vision of what his church could become in its recovery phase under my ministry and was instrumental in helping others catch it, too. I regret that I never had the chance to tell him how he SO inspired me, as a young pastor, but I think he may have known. “Julie” was likewise a humble servant in that church who had an incredible heart for people, and especially the spiritual formation of children. She was also a miracle worker when it came to creating inspiring programming and Christian education out of thin air. You never knew Jim or Julie, but I can tell you God did, because God honored their work in a monumental way, and what had been a “dying” church became an alive, growing, and exciting place to be! Other names come to mind: Faith, Mark, Jack, Joe, Joan, Peggy, Ed, Larry, Dave, Heidi, Brent, Rick…I could go on and on with people whose “good names” born of simple servanthood in the name of Christ throughout the churches I served. Believe me, I could also name a few who strove for recognition rather than results—both lay and clergy—and you MIGHT know some of them, but probably, like me, with a bit more disdain than adulation. Genuine “good names” make a difference. Self-made, ego-stroking “name recognition” only serves to set one apart from presenting needs and the “mission” of faithful service.

 

How are you doing with your “good name”? I think it is natural for us to run our own comparison as to how we’re doing with this question. As a pastor, who was obviously often “up front” and was blessed to receive multiple affirmations of my gifts for service, I can honestly say that I pray I was able to influence and encourage more folk who DIDN’T experience this via my “public” gifts, but through means I was never aware of. You see, as pastors, we are privileged to meet and work among hundreds—if not thousands—of folk who come expecting to experience the presence of God, and to find meaning. If we have been able to bring this to them WITHOUT EVEN KNOWING IT, then we may have truly earned a “good name,” in my mind. This would mean God was able to work through us, and often INSPITE of us, which I find comforting! May we all “earn our names” with integrity and true service by “taking up our cross” and following the example of Jesus! Amen.