Vacation's over...

Everyone surely experiences "end of vacation" anxiety, don't they? You know, that "blue" state that sets in when your time away goes away and the stacks of papers on your desk haunt anew? That's what I'm talking about in this blog post, so if that never happens to you, just go away.

Now, I really love my job. I really LOVE my job. Actually, being a pastor is a special calling that doesn't seem to fit into the "job" category. While we believe that ALL vocations are callings (from the Latin, vocatio, meaning "a call"), no one should take on the role of being clergy without a specific "call" story or faith experience leading to pursuing this unique "job." We're on call 24/7, carry the burdens of our parishioners around in our hearts right alongside those of our own kin, and "should be ready to preach, pray, or die at a moment's notice," according to a popular saying among pastors. Being a clergyperson is not for the faint of heart--or spirit. That being said, we all need some time to reflect, recharge, and remind our spouses we're still on the planet with them. Hence, vacations, usually in the "less active" weeks of Summer. In most churches--and especially in larger ones like St. Paul's--September through mid-June is just GO, GO, GO. (Of course, at St. Paul's, Summer just means you can drop it into second gear, but not pull over and park. And some of our staff--Children and Youth Ministries Directors, for example--have major events to coordinate in the Summer, too!) But still, Summer is when many pastors "steal away" for a respite.

By the way, I've tried just about every kind of vacation experience one can imagine. When our children were young, the Sterlings bought a tent camper and spent time with friends camping at the ocean. Between the sun, the mosquitos, and the wild horses jostling the camper in the middle of the night, that was about as restful as a hurricane. Oh, we even went through one of those on a vacation once--I don't recommend it. We've "done States" using AAA guides, flown to faraway places, and even stayed home for a few days of local R & R. I wish I could tell you that we found that miraculous blend of experiences making for the perfect vacation, but it would be a lie. Honestly, I still enjoy most those vacations where I can learn about things to be the most enjoyable. Art galleries, museums, science centers, historic venues--these are the fodder for a great vacation, in my book! I even like the occasional zoo, but when you've seen one Llama, you've seen 'em all. Pressed to answer the question, "But what has been your favorite vacation?", I would say the two times we have spend several days at Colonial Williamsburg, Virginia. Yeah, that would be my answer. My wife wants me to promise that we will spend the first Christmas after I retire in Williamsburg.

Back to the anxiety issue...when pleasant, restful experiences like a good vacation end, we do experience a bit of a letdown, typically. (Like many of you, this is amplified for us because part of our vacation is almost always spent with our grandchildren, and leaving those two precious little ones behind is hard!) Since I am writing this on my first full day back in the office, I thought I might suggest a few ways to combat this post-vacation malaise. Here are a few I came up with:

1. Make a list of all of the things about your vocation that really jazz you up. On your first week back, spend some time doing a couple of those particularly enjoyable tasks (I'm writing this blog post, and I like to write).

2. Pick one important task that you have been putting off, and tackle it with the force of a blitzing linebacker (I hope to clean up my desk, sort out the trash from the "keepers," and file some of this stuff--even Jack Lambert would have shied away if he saw this desk).

3. Get in touch with your soul! Take some extra time the week after vacation to meditate, pray, and read scripture. Here's a good thought to guide us from Philippians 4:8: Finally, brothers and sisters, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable--if anything is excellent or praiseworthy--think about such things.

4. Review any photos you took on your vacation and talk about the memories created with those who accompanied you. Remembering is a way of reliving a positive experience.

5. Start planning next year's vacation!

Here is another thought. My wife, the registered, licensed dietitian, tells me that humans would be much healthier if we would eat five or six small meals throughout the day rather than one, two, or three larger ones (or, in some of our cases, one small breakfast and then one LARGE dinner!). The same may be true of vacation time. Maybe we would do better to take two or three days here and there, if possible, throughout the year, rather than two or three weeks at one time? I know, some "experts" say that you should take at least two weeks because it takes a full week to "wind down." These people don't understand "Type A" personalities, do they? We never wind down, and usually don't even run down--we just make everybody else tired. So, vacation time spread judiciously throughout the year might be a good thing to consider...hmmmm...

I will say this: If ending your vacation and returning to work causes you such anxiety or depression that you fear even taking vacation, then maybe you should pray about finding a different job? Or maybe at least getting some counseling about whatever pathology is causing such a heightened state of discomfort? One of the greatest promises we have from God is Jesus' statement, Lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age. Even Jesus took brief "vacations" from his work--and the constant yammering of the disciples--to get in touch with his inner dialogue through prayer and meditation. So, even in the Divine, we have a model. But why not make coming back from vacation just as planned and anticipated as was the respite time itself? Think about it, Beloved. Shalom!

And more questions...

First of all, let me say that I could post about the recent violent and senseless shootings, but that is all over the media and FaceBook, so I won't say anything except urge us all to pray for the families of the victims, the shooters' families, and the souls of the shooters themselves. I do believe our society has to come to grips with the incredible proliferation of handguns as well as the rapidly growing number of "carry permits" being issued across the States of this great nation. We are arming ourselves to the teeth, and often with the false sense that somehow this will protect us, while it makes guns easier and easier for criminals, persons who are mentally disturbed, or young drug gang members to procure. I don't believe there is any way we can "fix" all of the ills of humanity (including those listed above), so the only alternative we are left with is rational limiting of the availability of concealable firearms. Even if making guns less available--and harder to get--only saves ten percent of gun deaths annually, we'll have saved between 3,000 and 4,000 lives. Otherwise, are we just going to sit back and lament, "Well...what are ya' gonna' do?"

Here is another question from St. Paul's UMC's "Ask the Pastors" Sunday:

What should I say to my child who says they don't believe in God?

When a person makes a statement like that, she or he is being brutally honest, and such honest feelings--when expressed--are wonderful "talking points" for parent and child (or young adult?) to engage in meaningful conversation. I would begin the dialogue by asking, "Tell me about that..." There are many reasons a person would make this statement:

They have heard about or experienced something that causes them to doubt that "anyone's in charge." The comment that someone "doesn't believe in God" may just be a way of asking for help and understanding in the wake of a tragedy (for many people, even one they see on TV) or a personal event that "rocks their world." Don't assume it is a theological question at all. Begin at this level. You may find out quickly that God--or the lack of God--is just a scapegoat for fear or confusion. Work with that in your discussion. Leave "God talk" out of it at this point.

Younger children see the world very objectively. Back in the day, when most families went to church and Sunday School, kids just "grew up" in an environment where they were taught God exists, and in their objective worldview, they just accepted this. This "prevailing environment" period had its problems, too. When that same child matured and her or his mind made the transition to the subjective, questioning "adult" mode, the church often didn't know how to "update" the faith message to make sense to this new mental reality (or it didn't even take the time to try). Therefore, many a young adult "abandoned" the faith of their childhood because it didn't square with how they were beginning to see life, the universe, and everything. If the "child" in question is one of these young adults now doubting the existence of God, talk with her or him about your own personal faith, and your own struggles with it. They need to hear honest talk about how we all have doubts, and not just about the existence of God. Healthy people are questioning people. Never denigrate them for their current doubt. Urge them to keep seeking greater truths, and be an open-minded, loving witness to them of God's love and grace. The last thing a young adult needs in this period of maturation is someone telling them they will go to Hell, or spouting verse after verse of scripture at them. Some of the greatest Christian people in history wrote or spoke honestly about their doubts. Mother Teresa of Calcutta is an example of this. We grow through our doubts and questions--lock-step "believing" and rigid doctrine imprison the mind and stunt human development.

Now, back to the objective child issue. Today, so many families have little history of being "churched," and may be the first-generation seeking a relationship with a community of faith. Therefore the "objective" oriented child has no heritage that gives her or him a "picture" of the existence of deity. Hence, after attending a Vacation Bible School, Sunday School class, or other such event for the first time, she or he may make a statement like "I don't think I believe in God," based on the other lessons they have learned about what is "real" (observable, provable, a lesson learned from someone they trust). Again, this is not time to panic, or to say, "Oh Honey, but we should believe in God!" Talk to them about why they made this statement. It could be something as simple as their friend "Jimmy," with whom they spend hours playing and whose friendship they value, told them recently, "I don't think there really is a God." You may just be hearing a repeated sentiment.

For the person who is reacting to some "trauma" they have experienced by denying the existence of God, just offer your support and be a loving presence while they work through it. God is big enough to make godself known to them at the proper time. For the others who may just be going through a developmental stage, continue to provide a context for them to explore and question her or his faith. Keep the conversation open, and don't panic. If God is love, then just love them and embrace them, and God will show up.

Finally, let me say that, as a pastor, I much rather deal with a person who claims to be an unbeliever than those who feign faith and yet only give it lip service or follow a few rigid rules they then call divine. Questioning is always good. And as the ancient Rabbis taught us, not every question has an answer, but every question expands our knowledge.

...And justice for all!

If you are a FaceBooker, you know that, in the wake of the Supreme Court's ruling on same-sex marriage, the "posts" have been showing up like flies at a deer carcass. Now, anyone with even a little legal knowledge pretty much knew where this ruling was going to go. Justice dictates equal rights in situations like this. The only reason it didn't come sooner was the historical disdain with which same-sex marriage (or even relationships, for that matter) was viewed by the wider society, thanks in part to religious beliefs on the matter. That being said, the court ruling (based largely on the due process clause of the 14th amendment, as I understand it) means the U.S. Constitution allows for this freedom and resulting legal protection. Same-sex couples can enjoy the same benefits, protections, and privileges as heterosexual couples, under the law. The court did not (and cannot) dictate how religions treat the subject.

Some denominations just simply will not accept same-sex marriages. They won't condone them, host them, or perform them. That does not have to change under this legal ruling, and in many cases will not. Others are willing to affirm the legal justice of the ruling, and even affirm the full rights of same-sex couples, but cannot marry or host religious ceremonies recognizing them, based on their current denominational "rules." That is the case with my denomination, The United Methodist Church. At our 2016 General Conference, which is the every-four-years assembly that has the power to make changes in our rules, the topic will be furiously debated. I am one who believes our church should remove its restriction on LGBT individuals (our denominational rule book states that "...the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching...") as the shelf life on this particular rule has expired. Science, medicine, and psychology have spoken about how LGBT persons just "are," and that theirs is not a chosen "practice" or lifestyle. As a pastor, I would like the freedom to minister equally with LGBT persons, including perform marriages or holy unions for them, without jeopardizing my career or church. I am in favor of removing the restrictions, but not including new language that "requires" pastors and churches to engage in these activities. In this time of re-evaluation and "widening the circle," this would give each a chance to search her or his own conscience on the matter.

I won't get into "The Bible says..." debates, as this is a short blog, but I will say that my tradition, and indeed the entire Christian tradition (and Jewish tradition, for that matter) has regularly revisited and revised our interpretation of scripture, based on new information and changes in the societies and times in which we minister. We no longer make "slaves obey their masters" or tell the women, "keep silent in the church." Our denomination has ordained women as full Elders for 60 years (and it's sad that is all the LONGER we have done it!). I believe that the few verses that address "homosexuality" in the Bible were addressing specific dysfunction in that time and place regarding sexual practices. The Hebrew law code (the same one that condemns persons with tattoos or body piercings and suggests that children who sass their parents should be stoned to death) was dealing with barbarous and predatory sexual practices. And in Paul's writings, he was addressing rampant "sexploitation" of young boys in the Roman culture (just read a little history of the Roman Empire, and you will get the picture). It is my belief that the Bible does not address persons who are attracted to their same gender and wish to spend their lives together in a covenantal union.

Now, some of my most tolerant and accepting religious friends have remarked that they are OK with all of the legal freedoms--and even religious affirmations--LGBT persons are beginning to enjoy, but struggle with applying the term "marriage" to their partnering practices. I confess that I was a short-term holdout here, too, but not for any biblical reasons. When you spend 60-plus years locked into a single definition of that word, it just takes a little time to widen it in one's mind. However, after conversations with LGBT friends, expressing their desire to be married to the person they love in the same way their parents were, I began to understand and adapt. Actually, marriage is a legal thing, anyway. Bonhoeffer felt the church should get out of that business, and perform blessing services for church members after their "State" marriage ceremony by a civil justice. The Bible has no consistent set of "rules" about marriage. In the various periods in which it was written, "marriage" was arranged by the families, with the woman as "property." Love had little to do with it, nor had choice. Women who were raped were ordered to marry the rapist! Sons were told they had to marry their brother's widow. Our current "Say yes to the dress" model of hollywood marriage has absolutely nothing to do with the Bible, nor its ancient standards.

One irrational fear that some FaceBookers have been propagating is that now that same-sex unions are acceptable, then next will be polygamy and other liberalizations of marriage rights. The court has regularly been more open to protecting individual rights but conservative about rulings that could harm second parties or the society at large. Take, for example, the First Amendment freedom of speech: It is stringently protected unless the speech could cause irreparable damage to others, like shouting "FIRE!" in a crowded theater. Then the speech is NOT protected. Polygamy has great potential for societal harm. The economics and legal quagmire of multiple "legal" partners becomes staggering. At a time when fifty percent of marriages end in divorce, imagine what a mess the courts could be when polygamous relationships begin to self-destruct. And what of the rights and welfare of any offspring of such marriages? These are key reasons why polygamy has not been legal in most societies, and why I don't believe the Supreme Court would ever extend freedom and protection to it.

Another irrational fear is that same-sex relationships might in some way weaken heterosexual or "traditional" marriages. I can't figure out the logic of this assertion at all. In fact, if LGBT persons use their new freedom to marry to build stable, loving, and nurturing homes, then they certainly could teach the rest of us a thing or two. Did I mention that that fifty-percent failure rate in heterosexual marriages is actually higher among church folk?

My prayer is that Christians will continue to support the great rights and freedoms we have as American people. We can debate among ourselves the "religious" issues of these, but when we do, we should go back to the ones that have proven to be far more destructive, like the proliferation of firearms, or the rapidly growing disparity between the "haves" and "have nots," especially when it comes to the availability of a decent education.

Did I say short blog? This is longer than most of my sermons! Shalom, Dear Ones!

Questions IV

Question from one of our church members: I have the desire to serve God, but I feel like I don't know how/where to start. What do I do?

First of all, we have all been offered many opportunities to serve God and be partners in the Realm of God emerging into our world. Jesus gave us all some "marching orders": Love your neighbor as yourself; Do unto others as you would have them do unto you; Forgive seventy times seven; Give a cup of water to one of these "little ones", and many more. We all can be about God's business doing these things, and returning kindness for hostility ("turning the other cheek"). Kind words, unexpected kind actions toward others, and a spirit of gratitude and joy will turn heads in our world, one that is at the least becoming more apathetic, if not down right angry. We don't need any special "call" from God to embark on a life-long journey of meaningful and compassionate engagement.

However, I believe the questioner may be asking something more. is there something special that I should be doing to serve God? Each of us is a unique individual, endowed with gifts and abilities. The first step in figuring out our personal "call" to serve God is to discover what these gifts are. Some of they may not be obvious--dormant until discovered and explored. We have a spiritual gifts test called "Spirit Gifts" available at St. Paul's United Methodist Church, but a person can also go to our denomination's website--www.umc.org--and look through the drop-down menus at the top of the homepage until you find the "Spiritual Gifts Test," which you can take online. It is a much simpler version of "Spirit Gifts," but it may give you some clues to explore.

Beyond spiritual gifts, it is good to ask yourself what you like to do. For some reason, many people feel that serving God--or being a responsible church member--means you have to "sacrifice," and do hard jobs or sign up for service opportunities that stress us out. I don't know why that is. Involving oneself in ministries of various kinds can be hard work, and it can mean giving time, money, and energy, but there is nothing wrong with it being fulfilling, meaningful, and even FUN! Read your church bulletin or newsletter, ask your pastor or other church leaders, or call your church office to see where people are needed to help. Then sign up or just show up. If you match your gifts to your service, things will go much better, but when you work with others on a "team," even simple jobs like setting up for church dinners or decorating the sanctuary for worship can be a blast.

One more thing. When you show up or get involved in a ministry or task around your church (or in the community, for that matter), you may find that the other members of the "team" have been doing this for some time and have formed friendships and bonds. You may, initially, feel like an outsider. Please don't be discouraged by this. Take simple task, do your part, and begin to methodically break into the conversations and "the circle." Your gifts may cause you to quickly analyze the situation and discern better ways to accomplish the task at hand, but resist the urge to be overly enthusiastic or forceful about suggesting your "fix." Remember, most opportunities to serve in the Realm of God are first and foremost opportunities to build community and create new, supportive relationships. The actual job is secondary to that, so make that your priority. It will all work out, as God's Spirit will be your guide.

And a final word to you church members who are already veterans of service and ministry: Be very intentional about watching for new people who join in. Make them feel welcome, help them build relationships within the group, and give them meaningful tasks to do and whatever orientation they need. People drop out when they can't break in.

Here is another: When you take Communion, what should you say when you accept the bread? 

When one receives Communion, that is exactly what you should do--receive. Communion is a sacrament, which means it was instituted by Christ and is God's action, not ours. Hence, we receive God's grace through receiving the elements of bread and wine. No words from the one receiving are necessary. I admit that when I receive Communion from a colleague, though, I usually say a simple "Thank you" or "Thanks be to God," both to express my gratitude to God and to God's "agent" administering the sacrament. Sometimes, though, I say nothing and just receive. That is most appropriate. United Methodists believe that Communion is a "means of grace" whereby God bestows a unique blessing called grace upon us. One simple definition of grace is "God's unmerited favor." Grace is not earned; it is a gift. Communion is a perfect example this grace, as well as a means of it. United Methodists practice a fully "open table," meaning that anyone who wishes to may receive. We don't require the communicant to be a "baptized Christian," a member of the church, or our denomination. John Wesley, who was Methodism's founder, believed that persons might be enlightened or even make a life-changing connection with Jesus Christ in this sacrament.

Questions III

Yet another in a series of "questions" from our congregation which I shall attempt to address...

Why does God allow bad things to happen to good people? And why is God's answer sometimes "No"?

This is one of the timeless questions labeled the "theodicy" question by theologians. Of course there is, in this time and in this realm, no absolute answer possible for it; we can only speculate. If a person harbors a belief that all things about God have to make total, logical "sense," or fulfill some expectation of divine "perfection" whereby everything has to be in harmony, then a long, convoluted explanation would be in order. I am not one of those people, and I don't recommend the approach.

Instead, I will default to my "heavenly parent" model whereby God creates humanity and loves us like a loving parent does her or his child. When we love our children, we want the best for them, and we do our best to provide opportunities for them to grow and thrive. But our love also requires that we "turn them loose," at some point, and this necessary freedom puts them at greater risk. So it is with us, as God's children. The world is a beautiful place and a great blessing to inhabit, but there are diseases, dangers, and consequences out there that may befall us, as we explore this freedom and carve out our own life and lifestyle. When bad things happen to our children, we do all we can for them, surrounding them with love and compassion, or grieving deeply for them if they don't physically survive the particular malady. I think God does the same for us. I believe this is what love is all about. How loving would it be to so totally control our lives that nothing bad could ever happen to us? We know that "helicoptering" parents can rob the joy and potential of children, and making God the ultimate helicoptering parent would be antithetical to the love in which we were created.

And what of God's "no" answers to some of our prayers? Again, the parent illustration applies: Does a truly loving parent give the child everything the child asks for? It would not be prudent, and it would not be loving. It might even be dangerous, from time to time. Sometimes God's answer may seem like a "no" when it is really "not yet." Patience and preparedness are two qualities we learn form this "delayed" fulfillment.

I had a young church member who tried and tried to get into law school because he wanted to be a lawyer. He was a good student, and a friend who was his academic equal had no trouble being admitted to one. "Why?" was his favorite question. By not getting into law school, that young man started working with the youth at his church, met the woman who would become his wife, and got called into the ministry. Today he and his wife are each pastors, and he is an important leader in his denomination. What seemed like a "bad thing" turned out to be an integral part of a future opportunity and calling!

How about some tips or advice about how to pray more purposefully? You know, without "begging" God to work for you? Is it best to pray for general guidance or with specific desires?

Let me try to answer the last part of the question first: YES! I pray for general guidance daily in my life, while at the same time--and throughout the day--asking for specific things, including letting God know how I'd like things to go or be. There is nothing wrong with focusing one's prayers on a very specific concern or need. Neither is it ever a bad idea to pray for God's guiding hand in our affairs.

Prayer is just conversation with God, and as a child asks its parent(s) for the things it needs to tackle life, so we should make our desires known to God. It doesn't even have to be in flowery language. If you're not sure how to pray about something, use the Lord's Prayer. Years ago, someone taught me the ACTS model in a Sunday School class: Start with Adoration - that's the "hallowed be thy name" stuff; move on to Confession - tell God any things you are sorry for doing or thinking; then be Thankful to God for your blessings, and even name some of them! And THEN move on to Supplication, which is a 64-cent word for "the ask." What's nice about this model is that you don't just start with the laundry list of stuff you want/need. Imagine how hard it would be to begin a conversation with a friend with "Hey, give me a dollar..."

I don't think an earnest prayer can ever be "begging God to work for us," anymore than a child sincerely asking a parent for assistance or for some resource that the child deems--at that moment--necessary, would be considered "using" the parent. It's just what we do when we love someone and are loved by someone. Such it is with God and us.

Can we bug God too much? Jesus tells a story about a friend who has a stranger come by his house late at night, and because of the Jewish code of hospitality, he is obligated to feed the guest. Having no bread, he knocks on his sleeping neighbor's door until the neighbor wakes up and give him some bread for the stranger. Jesus says God rewards us for this kind of persistence! So, the moral is: never be afraid to pray for anything. But remember, sometimes God--for reasons which may not yet be clear to us--may say "no" or "not yet"!

More questions next week...Shalom!

Questions II

As I mentioned in last week's post, we held a "Question and Answer" weekend at St. Paul's recently, and Pastor Karen and I fielded written questions from the various congregations during our five weekly worship services. The questions we didn't have time to address are the subject of this Blog over the next few weeks. Here are a couple more questions:

If God is perfect, why did God allow sin and an angel to become Satan?

And related to that:

Does God forgive Satan?

The second question is a little like the questions the sophists asked during the Dark Ages: How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? or Can God make a rock too big for God to lift?

Does God forgive Satan? Or put it in "Christian" terms, Does the redemptive power of Jesus extend even to Satan? Of course, the answer is unknowable. Could God forgive Satan? God can forgive anybody. What of the redemptive power of Jesus being able to bail Satan's butt out? Yes, I'm sure the redemptive power of the Christ Event could even redeem the devil. But beyond this wild speculation, we just don't know, nor do we need to. What we DO know is that God forgives any human who asks, and that the redemptive action of Jesus is able to transform anyone who desires for it to happen. The Bible is our main source for any information about God, and it does not address the question, Does God forgive Satan?

The first question, If God is perfect, why did God allow sin and an angel to become Satan? is much more interesting.

What do we mean when we say God is perfect? Are we using human understandings of perfection? Greek philosophical categories of perfection? The Hebrew descriptions of God in the Old Testament talk of a God who "mixes it up" with the human creation: arguing with Moses (and losing some of those arguments!); wrestling with Jacob; getting angry at Israel's lame-brain actions; and playing a game of "Survivor" with a guy named Job. This is not the "god" of Greek philosophy who is the "unmoved mover," or the Greek Gnostic construct of God who is so perfect and "pure" that God has to be in "a galaxy far, far away" from the human condition because God's utter perfection doesn't let God be any where near sin. While the writers of the Hebrew scriptures may be accused of overly anthropomorphizing God (applying human characteristics to deity), the reality of God's interactions with the Jews and which Christians through the coming of Jesus DO seem to demonstrate a God who chooses to relate to the human creation quite actively. I don't think we can say God is perfect anymore than the Bible does. The Bible talks of God's WAYS being perfect, although a better way to say it might be: "God's ways are perfected." Another text in the Psalms says "God's WORKS are perfect." Well, I would expect that God is pretty good at what God chooses to do. What, then, does the Bible say about God being "perfect"?

It says that God is LOVE, and that perfect LOVE casts out all fear. What is perfect about God is God's LOVE. Now that is something you can take to the bank. Perfect love "never leaves us or forsakes us." Perfect love is patient, kind, etc. Perfect love always holds out the offer of forgiveness and reconciliation, never jerking it back in anger or because, "Sorry, time's UP." Perfect love affords full freedom to its object--us and the creation. I often use the example of a loving parent as an analog for how I understand God being with God's children. A loving parent never stops loving a child; a loving parent provides lavishly for a child, while at the same time teaching the child how to be self-sustaining and productive; and a loving parent gradually gives a maturing child freedom to become the person she/he is to become, even when this seems fraught with risk. To protect, shelter, and coddle a child beyond the days of infancy and childhood becomes a form of abuse. "Helicoptering" parents are usually more selfish and controlling than loving, and may even cross the boundary to living vicariously through her or his child.

If God is a loving parent, God necessarily grants great freedom to the human creation. This freedom includes the ability to rebel, go in a direction in life quite counter to what is fruitful, or even safe, and to "sin with the best of them." Imagine if God had made us to automatically do the right thing, never free to "choose" our own directions and actions? Wouldn't we be automatons? Human robots? How much "life" would that be for us? And if God's purpose in creating us was to be able to have a relationship with us and to enable us to live abundant lives in this beautiful world God created, would this fulfill God's aim? Who wants to relate to something "programed" to love us and to be limited to a list of approved activities? What makes our most intimate relationships so fulfilling is that we choose the persons to whom we relate in this way, and they choose to reciprocate. Without the choice it is not a relationship but a contract, or maybe worse.

Jews and Christians believe in a God who does grant these freedoms and choices, and who invites us to follow, love and relate to the deity. Christians believe that God even "came down" among us in Jesus Christ to fully experience the human condition--especially the temptations of it--and to show us a better way of relating (there's that perfect love again).

Regarding the second part of the question--about allowing an angel to become Satan--we are back to some serious speculation again. The Bible says very little about this. Some of the extra-biblical literature talks more about the apocryphal understanding of Satan being originally Lucifer, a "top angel" who decided to stage a coup in heaven, and was banished to the earth. But if that is what did happen, in some cosmic drama, it would be for the same reason as why humans are "free." The few informational references we have about angels indicate that they are a created order--different from humans, which Psalm 8 says are God's crowning achievements. Angels have a defined job: they are messengers. As a created order, they don't share many of God's attributes, other than they are either immortal or at least have very long lifespans (we have no tales of angels dying, although there are apocalyptic references which talk of Satan being "thrown into the lake of fire," which sounds like capital punishment to me).

I find speculating about angels unfulfilling. I think there are angels, and in the Bible, they usually bear a message or a warning. Some of the descriptions of angels in the Bible make them sound like horrible looking, scary creatures. There is a reason why the first thing they say when they encounter a human is: "Be not afraid." If any of those "living creatures" surrounding the throne of God in the Book of Revelation are angels, well, good luck not freaking out when you meet one! Hollywood and Hallmark have given us our "nice" images of angels, and I'm OK with that, as long as we aren't too disappointed when we come face to face with a real one.

Let's summarize: God loves perfectly; God, in this love, creates us as "friends" and gives us a beautiful world in which to live and thrive; and God grants the freedoms necessary for us to choose how we will live this life and to whom we will relate. However, freedom allows for some bad choices and selfish living, just as it allows for affirming, joyous and "others-centered" ones. Let me finish on this note: I read recently that the motto of the Franciscans (a Catholic order following the teachings of St. Francis of Assisi) is: Engineering people for others. I like that. God's perfect love caused God to give us more freedom than this, but here is a group whose goal is to help put the crown on God's human creation by helping us become the kind of children that our Parent God would be very proud to have! Shalom!

Questions...

The Sunday after Easter of this year, Rev. Karen Slusser and I invited questions from the congregation via cards handed out to attendees as they arrived for worship in each of our five worship services. We addressed quite a number of these questions during the typical "sermon time," but were not able to take a shot at all of them because of time constraints, and I promised to get to those questions via this Blog. So, here goes...

With one God, why so many religions?

First of all, some might say that these various religious manifestations witness to more than one god. There are those who say that Muslims worship a different god than Jews or Christians. And this will always be a point of debate, I suppose. My take is that we, as human beings, have in intrinsic need to seek a wider, bigger, or encompassing truth, and that causes us to seek a divine being, or a divine mind that is behind our reality, drawing us together, in spite of our cultural, racial, philosophical, or socio-economic differences. Whether such a being exists is a matter of faith, as no proof (at least one that meets the criteria of science) exists. While the various religions have stories and beliefs codified in holy writ, or passed down by oral tradition or legends, we all tend to view deity from intensely personal angles, based upon our experience. The good news here is that we can imagine a God who cares for me as well as the we of the wider community or world. The bad news is that we can fall prey to something Ludwig Feuerbach, a 19th Century philosopher and anthropologist said: God is just our own humanity writ large. It would seem, therefore that the various religions are our attempts, within our cultures and human communities, to draw some tighter boundaries around what is "human" and what is "divine," and how the two entities interact. If this is true, then the next question is: Is God at work in all of these religions?

To that, I would answer yes, but I have to admit, my answer is connected with my own Christian faith. In the Christian scriptures (II Corinthians, chapter 5), it states to God is in Christ, reconciling the world to god-self. My belief system understands that the coming of the Christ into the world necessarily begins God's effort to find covenant, community, and relationship with humankind. Therefore, I don't question the "how" of that, and accept on faith that God really is working through the Christ Event to connect with all of God's people. Therefore, I believe God is at work in all faiths where people are seeking to "connect" with God, and to be reconciled with her or his creator. I put Jesus at the center of this effort. Obviously, I am not free to force this belief on persons who don't put the same degree of trust in Jesus, but this give me hope that--because it is God's effort--we will all eventually be brought into a benevolent relationship with God and each other, in time.

At this point in history, however, we continue to explore and seek faith through our cultural and religious differences. Even as Feuerbach's critique is a cautionary boundary, so is any doctrine of exclusivity by any one faith. If the Christian holds to her or his faith expression as being the "one true" one, or the Muslim, or the Hindu, then human boundaries are erected that create conflict and subdue necessary and helpful religious conversation. Isn't that just what we see happening? If we believe in a God big enough to be the creative force behind the processes which resulted in the universe and this world, can we also have confidence in that God to guide us toward a peaceful human community that manifests acceptance, compassion, understanding, and the ability to cohabit in said world? If our religion doesn't foster respect, one for the other, then it is a false religion.

How can we encourage other United Methodist Churches to be more accepting and diverse?

This question seemed to relate, to some degree, to the larger one above of "one God, many religions." United Methodist churches each have their own "cultures," history, and contexts, like the various religions referred to in this earlier question. As such, we have our different understandings. St. Paul's is generally a more progressive church whereby inclusiveness is a core value for us. This doesn't mean that we hold to one particular theological, political, or social philosophy, necessarily, but that we have decided as a church that the "open doors" part of our United Methodist promotional slogan, Open Hearts, Open Minds, and Open Doors is central to our congregation's ministry and witness.

Mr. Wesley wrote and preached about a few "essentials" of the Methodist faith: Jesus Christ as the central figure in God's redemptive action; the Bible as our main source of information about our faith; and the wider Christian Church as the "Body of Christ" in the world. He said if a person accepted these "essentials," then he would relate to that person as a fellow Christian. However, there are many points of life and faith which Wesley called the "non-essentials," about which we should "think and let think," meaning we can sometimes "agree to disagree," or to continue in conversation about without breaking our relationships with each other. This is something unique to Methodism. The danger here is that we grab some of those "non-essentials" and try to make them "essentials," using them as a proverbial "litmus test" of another's faith. What we think about the "hot-button" issues of our time such as abortion or sexual orientation, how we "do Communion," or for whom to vote are things we can continue to debate, seek more light about, and work out within the faith community.

Even as St. Paul's seeks to be a "broad-based community of faith" that welcomes all persons, some United Methodist churches make evangelism or missions and outreach their highest core value. I have always said that a healthy denomination has churches that understand these "contextual" or spirit-gift-driven values, and ministers according to them. Our church will appeal to folk who may not be reached by a church that offers only contemporary worship or where the preaching is mostly aimed at "the unsaved." And vice versa. We should be OK with that, and not want every church--even every United Methodist Church--to look alike.

That said, there are elements of welcome and inclusiveness which need to be on our denomination-wide agenda. Ethnic and racial diversity should be a universal goal for all of our churches. If we are not diverse, why? What keeps persons of color or persons of a different national origin from attending our churches? These are important questions for us to ask. Many of us believe it is time for the denomination to end religious discrimination against LGBT persons, allowing them to be ordained for ministry and supported in their quest for equality as citizens. Not everyone is there yet, but the world and many of our faith partners (Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Lutherans, United Church of Christ, to name a few) are passing us by. As was stated earlier, Mr. Wesley believed, "In the essentials, unity; in the non-essentials, liberty--we think and let think..." But there was a third part to this philosophy: "...and in all things, CHARITY (love)." May God's Spirit guide us as we seek to become "more accepting and diverse."

Next week, we'll look at a couple more of the submitted questions. Hope this was helpful. Shalom, Dear Ones!