A Strange Sight.

Last week, I was in Boston to help launch a major project.  It was a great week and the project launch was a success.  While in Boston, we took a day to do the sights.  It was a great treat.  I saw so many places that I had only heard or read about.  I saw the Old North Church, I stood on the very location of the Boston Massacre, went to the King’s Chapel one of the oldest churches in America; I also had lunch at “Cheers” the tavern that inspired the TV sitcom. 

But one sight struck me more than any other and I don’t even know her name.  She looked extremely aged, but life as a homeless person is hard so she was most likely much younger than she looked.  She sat in a sort of corner formed by two of the sights on the “Freedom Trail”.  On one side was a great historic church, on the other side the cemetery that was the final resting place for many Revolutionary era heroes.  She appeared to be wearing most of her belongings and around her were bags and bundles of the rest of her possessions.   She absent-mindedly held out a small cup to accommodate any compassionate donations.  She had the vacant eyes that one sees in the homeless.  Perhaps she was mentally ill, maybe her mind had been ravaged by drugs and alcohol, maybe she was so wounded by rejections she had shut down or it could have been she didn’t notice the people walking by the way. They seemed not to notice her, maybe a combination of some or all of the above.

In the moment I looked at her (I wasn’t staring) her expression changed.  Recognition came over her face, her eyes widened and her expression went from passive to animated.  The expression that took over was one of fear, not shock or surprise; there was no momentary pause to make sense of the situation.  She knew exactly what was happening and it scared her.  She reached in her cup pulled out a dollar bill and held it out.  A young man approached well dressed and in his early 20’s with a nice haircut.  He walked over to her deliberately and took the dollar, said something I didn’t hear, and walked away.  He disappeared into the crowds and I lost sight of him and her as I moved on to look at the grave of a hero.

In the moment I couldn’t figure out what had just happened.  I thought that maybe I miss-saw something.  But the look on the older lady’s face was unmistakable.  Later that day my wife asked me, “Did you see...?”  I had seen correctly.  My wife put into words my own conclusion.  “I bet that was some kind of protection money she has to pay to organized crime to have permission to beg on that spot.”  My wife’s words rang true, and my heart ached, and I was angry.

That night, as I thought about what I saw I wanted to launch a crusade, one middle- aged small town preacher from the deep south against organized crime in a big northeastern city.  I wanted someone to write a law, but there are probably laws on the books, another law will not help.  I wanted to find the young mafia muscle and tell him if he wanted to extort someone he ought to try it with a Marine or a Navy Seal, but what would that accomplish?  I wondered if the city fathers of Boston knew they had a problem in which the powerless were oppressed by the powerful?

But as often happens the question turned a little philosophical.  Where was the faith that believed that God had a better plan for her life, a faith that would allow her to move beyond that stuck spot?  Where was the hope that would grow out of that faith, and would manifest itself in joy and confidence?  Where was the love of God for this poor little lady?  The irony of this woman sitting between the church and the graveyard was not lost on my reflections.  I was frustrated that this great American city, that this grand church, could and would leave this woman to sit there and be compelled to pay protection money to a thug.  Where was the good news for this woman?

It was inside the person who watched this all take place. 

There are heroic people doing urban ministry and doing it well.  But if I am the hands, the feet, and the voice of Jesus, in that moment, I didn’t do much in that role.  I watched this lady, I watched this interchange, I watched this crime and I did nothing.  I am not sure what I could have done.  Replaced the dollar taken from her?  Prayed with her?  Told her that a Savior is coming and that He will set all things right?  None of those would have amounted to a real solution, but that might have had some impact, certainly more than doing nothing.   

I really don’t know how Jesus would do urban ministry today.  For that matter I’m not sure how Jesus would do sub-urban ministry, rural ministry or cross cultural ministry today.  Christianity has been practiced in that area of the world for about 400 years and it seems that the Kingdom has not yet come on earth as in Heaven.

Here is the conviction that has settled on me as I reflect on what I saw on the streets of Boston.  Ministry, whatever the location on context, has to be personal.  A passing tourist might be able to pray, give a little, or offer words of good news, which is what I should have done.  But real and lasting impact is impossible without a consistent human touch.  That was the point of the Incarnation.  What do you suppose the percentage of 12 people to the whole human population would have been in Jesus’ day?  Jesus invested deeply in a dozen people.  Beyond the twelve there were 70, and beyond that, there were larger numbers, but it appears their contact with Jesus was much more limited.  Jesus’ primary connection was with twelve people He drew close to Himself.  His relationship with them was much more deep and intimate than that of a casual tourist just visiting.  In the New Testament, two things we never see is the lone Christian ministry, or the ministry where a leader only relates to the masses in mass. 

I hope there is someone in a caring relationship with that homeless woman that loves her into a relationship with Jesus.  Someone who is a lot more like Jesus than I was that day.

In the Cause of Christ

Charlie

No more pearl tossing.

Last week, I wrote that in response to gay marriage issues I would, as of this summer, stop performing weddings in which I serve as an agent of the state, performing these weddings under the civil authority of the state.

Apparently, this was a controversial blog.  On any given week, a few folks will un-subscribe to my newsletter.  Those un-subscription numbers went up about 300% last week; that, in spite of my asking for folks to wait till this week and read this second part.  This week I want to address some of the problems and objections that might occur based on my new approach.  I will attempt to sum up my new position with one sentence, “I am going to stop casting my pearls before swine, especially in wedding ceremonies.”

Objection #1

One of the possible problems of this new approach is the lost opportunity to minister to seekers.  When I was studying for ministry, I was taught that weddings and funerals for people who are not a part of the church is a great evangelistic and ministry opportunity.  Honestly, how often does that really happen?  I have done many weddings for people with no church home in the hopes of being able to reach these couples.  After almost 30 years of ministry, I have never had an occasion in which a couple, with whom I had no prior relationship, connected with the church because we ministered to them in a wedding.   I fear that by performing weddings in the hopes that people will someday decide to connect with the church cheapens the holy and sacred, and we allow ourselves to be used and manipulated by people who care nothing about God.

Objection #2

A second question that comes to mind is, “If you require essentially two weddings, when can the couple have sex?”  At one level, the answer is, “Any time they want to.” I am in no way able to prevent people from having sex.  I think this is the wrong question to ask.  If asked by a couple, “When can we start having sex?  Can we start having sex after we have the marriage license filled out by the state official, but before the religious ceremony?”  I will answer,  “Are you saving yourselves as an act of worship or legal distinction?  Are you remaining pure for the state, yourselves, each other, or your Lord?”  To be frankly honest, the only sufficient and effective motivation for sexual purity, before or during marriage, is our commitment to Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit.  Real marriages are ordained by God and to His glory; I will teach couples to be sexually pure their whole lives.

Objection #3

What if a couple only wants a religious wedding?  What if for reasons of economics, family pressure, a disdain for government, or some other reason a couple says they won’t have a state sanctioned marriage.   I believe this reflects an unfortunate low view of marriage.  Let’s remember that we believe that in the act of sex a couple becomes one flesh.  This is not a metaphor or expression, but a spiritual reality.  In some way, that physical union will be enjoyed or endured for eternity.  This union is performed and consummated before the God of Heaven.  It is deeper, stronger, and more profound than all the laws of all the nations of the world today.  Compared to the grandeur of marriage, the U.S. Constitution is just old paper and old ink. In view of that high and holy place, why would someone not be willing to be legally bound to another person?  If it were a matter of economics, then it would appear that the couple doesn’t trust the God to whom they are appealing for blessing to be able to provide for them.  The only case or exception I could imagine is, if the government, as part of its marriage requirement, also required an oath of loyalty to Caesar or a prima nocturne type arrangement.  I am convinced that a pre-request for a spiritual commitment of marriage is the lower legal commitment.

Objection #4

Will this approach be a retreat from the world and a move toward a fortress Christianity?  We will be loosing our influence in society.  The battle for marriage is a battle that the church must fight.  I absolutely agree that this is a battle the church must fight.  I believe that what we see happening in the physical world is an expression of a spiritual reality.  I also believe that what has happened in the states of Indiana and Arkansas is evidence of the condition of our nation.  If this is primarily a spiritual battle, then the battle needs to be fought first at the spiritual level.  I believe this approach will begin to put holy back into Holy Matrimony.  If there is not holiness in the marriages we conduct, and if we cheapen the institution of marriage, we will not have a foundation from which to fight the battle in the physical, governmental, or social realm.  And in view of the results in Indiana and Arkansas, how much influence does the church have because it performs state sanctioned marriages?

Objection #5

What about the possibility of divorce?  Does the approach require, that if a couple has a secular and then sacred marriage and then decides to divorce, that the church will need to develop a sacrament of divorce?  I believe that divorce is more about the presence of ungodliness than the legal standing.  Jesus said that divorce was part of the Mosaic Law because of hardness of heart, but never God’s intended plan.  I have seen some of the couples I have married later dissolve those marriages in divorce.  In each of those cases, I see, in hindsight, there was a deeply rooted problem coming into the marriage and there was a notable lack of commitment to the Lord and the church.  I don’t believe we will need a sacrament of divorce; in fact, I believe we will see less divorce in the marriages the church sanctions because those couples will be specifically seeking the Lord’s blessing and will also be seeking Him in the difficulties of marriage.  Let me also say, that in no way, does this approach change any aspect of pre-marital counseling.

Objection #6

Will this really protect the church from persecution?  No, this is not a guarantee that the church will not be persecuted; in fact, I believe persecution is coming.  But persecution tends to require a church to really think about what it believes and helps it define its understanding on critical issues.  I believe the issue of ‘gay marriage’ can do that for the church today and my new approach is just one expression of how we can rethink our understanding of marriage.  My goal is to have an understanding of marriage that is more in line with the mind and the will of God.

Final thoughts:

I will still do weddings for couples, but the bar for my accepting those weddings has been raised.  The weddings I will perform will be sacred in nature.  That will, I hope, reflect the joy of Heaven and the will of God. They will be weddings in the highest sense of the word, but I will not do so as a representative of the state or as a civil authority.

By the authority invested in me as the author of this blog, I now pronounce that you may un-subscribe; though I hope you won’t.

In the Cause of Christ

Charlie

My last marriage

This summer over the July 4^th holiday, I will be performing my last marriage ceremony.  I am really looking forward to this wedding celebration.  The bride is a dear family friend that has found a good man and we anticipate many years of happiness for the couple.  I am really happy for the bride and groom and I am vey happy that this will, I believe, be my last wedding, well sort of. 

I generally do not like weddings.  Many times at weddings I feel the church, the minister, and the Lord Himself, are little more than props, decorations, or peripheral paraphernalia to the grand show that is being put on by the competitive families represented by the bride and groom.

I especially dislike having weddings for couples that want a “church” or “religious” wedding, but who have no, or apparently, no personal faith.  Almost every pastor can tell horror stories about weddings.  I was asked to do a wedding to cover for a friend who happened to double schedule that Saturday afternoon.  The groom was so drunk he had a hard time saying “I do” and the bride spent most of the ceremony crying, which I understood.  I did a wedding where the bride and groom danced inappropriately out of the church at the end of the service.  I did a rush wedding for a couple I did not know where the pianist played “Having My Baby” as the recessional.  I even heard a story of a preacher who was asked to perform a wedding for a couple who called out of the blue.  He found out ahead of time, thankfully, that the couple were nudists and were going to be married in the nude.

But a new dynamic has developed that has caused me to reconsider the matter of performing weddings.  That is the challenge of ‘gay marriage’.  If there is an intersection of faith and government that is a hotter, hot button in America right now than gay marriage, I don’t know what it would be.  The point of this article is not to argue for or against a given governmental policy; but, in fact, I am moving in a very different direction.  Currently, we are being told that churches will enjoy an exemption to any policy or law regarding ‘gay marriage’.  We are told that there will be no connection between a willingness to perform ‘gay marriages’ and, say, tax exempt status or 501 c3 status.  As a descendant of the Cherokees, I am not prepared to place great confidence in the promises of a government.  Should a government entity find that it could acquire significant resources by revoking the tax-exempt status of churches over ‘gay marriages’, some governmental agencies would jump at the opportunity.

Am I paranoid?  Am I crazy? Have I been listening to too many conspiracy nuts?  Maybe, yes, but I don’t listen to those guys.  Considering the current debate over ‘gay marriage’, would you have imagined this in 1970 or 1980 or 1990?  Can you tell me that you are certain that your church will enjoy a tax exempt status 30 years from now if you have a firm no ‘gay marriage’ policy?  

So is there a solution?  I have one that I am going to try.  Beginning after this summer’s wedding, I will delete one phase from my wedding ceremony.  To date, I have always concluded my wedding sermon with this phrase: “Under the civil authority of the State of Florida and as a minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, I pronounce you husband and wife.”  What I am going to start doing is this: I am going to remove the phrase, ““Under the civil authority of the State of ….”.   Additionally, I am going to direct couples that want me to perform a wedding ceremony to get their marriage licenses and have the civil portion of the marriage performed by a justice of the peace.  Fill out the form, get the signatures from the legal authority, and in the eyes of the state they are married.

Then, I will invite the couple to come before the Lord and to celebrate their commitment to each other in an act of worship.  The sacred event of marriage is primarily an act of worship beyond and above the authority of the state.  As a minister of the Gospel, I have the authority to lead in acts of worship and hold the authority to refuse or offer the sacraments of the church. 

In the same way that I do not believe that the Lord’s Supper is purely symbolic-Paul seemed to think it was a matter of life and death-or that baptism is purely an outward act of an inward grace-Peter connects it with the remission of sin-I do not believe that holy matrimony is merely a legal agreement.  It is the sacred preparation for two individuals to become one flesh.  Holy matrimony is an expression of a unique oneness that, in some amazing ways, is a reflection of the relationship within the Trinity.  It is so holy that no purely state sanctioned legal manifestation can express its glory.

I recognize that this departure from many years of traditions will not be universally well received nor is it without some struggles.  So, before you jump on this band wagon, unsubscribe to this blog, write hate mail that I am too conservative or too liberal, or begin a heresy tribunal, let me suggest you read next week’s edition. At that time, I will talk about what I believe are some of the strengths and struggles of this approach.

But, in conclusion, let me offer this metaphor.  A swamp is essentially a very wide and slow flowing river.  The classic example is the Everglades.  This massive swamp is more or less one very wide river that flows from Lake Okeechobee to the coast, that dissipates over a vast area and flows without a ripple or a stir.  A rapid, by contrast, is where the water of a river is constricted into a very narrow channel, for example, the Colorado River.  The very narrowing and restricting causes the river to flow with energy and evident power.  My goal is to see the power and the beauty of Holy Matrimony restored by narrowing the scope.

Until next week

Charlie  

I’m serious, I am only joking.

I would like to get your help with a little project.  If you would, please reply with your average attendance for 2014 and your attendance on this past Easter Sunday.  I am working on a little research project and your data input would help.

Easter is my favorite holiday.   Christmas, July 4^th, Thanksgiving, National Submarine Day (Yes, there is such a day- it is April 17^th, the day the Submarine force was established in 1900) and all the others combined, pale in comparison to Easter, in my opinion.  I think Easter becomes more meaningful for me every year.  At every level, Easter is a thoroughly inspiring, fulfilling, and rewarding holiday.  Every Lord’s Day is sort of an Easter, but the special day is the culmination of so much excitement and hope.  I hope that your Easter was the high light of your year or even your life so far. 

On this happy and celebrative occasion, I need to address something my wife told me some time ago.  She told me that my blogs are often either serious, grave, morose, or glum.  I told her when you are trying out for the role of “prophet of doom” you had to be serious.  She told me if God told me to become the prophet of doom that would be fine, but until then, I should lighten up a little from time to time.

This seems like a good time to lighten up.  So, I have decided, having celebrated the feast of Easter and the joy of a life that anticipates the resurrection, that today I will dedicate this blog to some of my favorite jokes.  My jokes, like my golf drive, tend to be long, way off center, and always in a hazard.  Some might be useful to use in a sermon or lesson, others, not so much.  If you find them to be in bad taste, please accept my apology in advance.   Oh, and none are originally mine, so, if you don’t like them, blame the original author (who ever that may be). 

Needing a little help (best told in an Australian accent)

Two Australian sailors arrived in London, England, after a long voyage.  They decided they would spend their first night in London drinking.  They made their way to a Pub, and spent the evening, night and early morning consuming copious amounts of alcohol.   By the time they left around sun up, they were exquisitely inebriated.  They came out of the pub walking as if they were on board a ship in the midst of a terrible gale.   Steading themselves on a lamppost, they discovered that a thick fog had rolled into London.  They were not able to see much beyond their hand’s reach.

Completely lost, they looked this way and that, but couldn’t find a clue as to how to get back to their ship.  Finally, they saw a figure approaching them through the fog.  Not realizing that this mysterious man was a highly decorated 4 star admiral, the first sailor called out to him as he came near, “Hey mate, can you tell us where we are?”

The admiral, infuriated by their slovenly appearance, drunken condition, and brazen familiarity, answered back, “Do you men have any idea who I am?”  

The second Aussie then said to the first, “Oh, were in trouble now, we don’t know where we are, and he doesn’t know who he is!”

Strange last Rites (use a Scottish accent if you have one)

Shamus and O’Malley were life long drinking buddies.  To be honest, they never really accomplished much with their lives except that they became highly capable of getting drunk.

As the years wore on, the abuse of their livers took its toll.  Shamus was taken to a hospital with a very advanced case of cirrhosis of the liver; it was only a matter of time till Shamus would pass from this life.  The day Shamus checked into the hospital his drinking buddy O’Malley comes to his room.  He is red eyed from crying and his hair is disheveled from running his fingers through it.  The sleeves of his shirt are caked and crusty from having served as a make shift hanky.   As soon as he walks into the room and lays eyes on his best friend, he begins to wail.

“Awe, Shamus, what will I do without you?  You’re my best friend, my best mate, and my drinking buddy for life.  What will I do when you are gone?”  His pitiful lament trailed off into pathos of sobs as he buried his face in his hands as he faltered over to the bedside.

Shamus, always the more steady of the two, spoke in a strong solid voice. “O’Malley get a hold of yourself lad, I got something I need you to do.  Will you do a great favor for your oldest friend?”

“Shamus, I would do anything for you,” O’Malley said with genuine emotion in his voice.  “You name it lad, I’ll do it what err it is.”

“Good lad, O’Malley.”  Shamus paused to collect himself.  “I want you to perform a memorial for me when I’m buried.  Will you do that for me?”

O’Malley nodded his assent.

“When they put me in the ground, I want you to come to me grave all alone, and do one last favor.  I want you to pour a bottle of fine Scotch out on me grave.  Will you do that for me lad?” 

O’Malley looked his friend in the face and said, “I’ll be glad to, but do you mind if I run it through me kidneys first?”

Not his house  (no accent needed, insert the coach and college of your choice.)

Urban Myer, head coach at Ohio State Uuniversity, dies and goes to heaven (hey it is just a joke).  St. Peter gives coach Myer the grand tour taking in all the sights.  The tour ends at Urban’s mansion.  It is a sight to behold; a two-story, Neo-Greek masterpiece.  It had great Corinthian columns across the front porch.  On each column there was a flag with the OSU logo.  In the front yard were massive spreading Buckeye trees casting deep shade on a manicured lawn, and OSU lawn furniture.  Coach Myer was duly impressed with the attention to detail and all the OSU paraphernalia.

He looked across the yard and noticed higher up the rolling hills a house that would make the palace of Versailles look small and inconsequential.  It was elegant beyond all others with accents of Crimson and White.  Massive and majestic elephants roamed the yard, each draped with a crimson blanket across its back emblazoned with a white scripted “A”.  Flag poles stood in the yard, the top of which were so high they almost disappeared, and from each waved a crimson flag with the same scripted “A” so large it could been seen anywhere.  In the middle of the front yard was a fountain that was a perfect reproduction in miniature of Bryant-Denny Stadium.  The water shot into the air and then would shape into a great moment in Bama football history before falling back into the pool.  The sight of the palace, the fountain, and the grounds left Urban stunned into silence for a moment. 

After a pause Urban turned to St. Peter and said,  “I don’t want to sound like I am complaining, but why is Nick Saban’s place so much bigger than mine?”

Peter, with a patient and understanding smile, said, “Oh that is not Saban’s house.  That ‘s God’s”.    

(Promise next week I will return to the more serious side of life.)