Sermons and thoughts on faith on Scripture from my time at Old Presbyterian Meeting House and Falls Church Presbyterian Church, plus sermons and postings from "Pastor James," my blog while pastor at Boulevard Presbyterian in Columbus, OH.
Tuesday, October 2, 2018
Sunday, September 23, 2018
Sermon: Getting Our Mojo Back
Mark 9:30-37
Getting Our Mojo Back
September 23, 2018 James
Sledge
I
spent much of my childhood and youth in Charlotte, NC, back in the days when TV
had a total of six or seven channels. Of these, the CBS affiliate dominated the
local market and also owned the largest radio station. It had a number of high
profile, charity events each year, but the one I recall the most vividly was an
annual on air blood drive.
They
advertised it heavily. Corporate sponsors provided food, refreshments, and
gifts. Radio and TV personalities worked the event. CBS sent in stars from
various shows, and all during the day they would have live broadcasts interviewing
donors, talking about how easy is was, how almost painless it was.
The
event was always a huge success with more than a thousand people donating
blood. The Red Cross blood bank would be as full as it ever got, but this blood
drive never seemed to convert many into regular donors. Year after year, most
of those interviewed were first time donors, and year after year, it wasn’t
long before the Red Cross was making pleas to the public about critically short
blood supplies. The gifts, glitz, celebrities, and chance to be on TV drew in
lots of people, but when it was all over, they went back to old patterns, ones
that didn’t include giving blood.
A
similar pattern showed up in the early Jesus movement. The gospels report huge
crowds coming out to see this miracle working, charismatic,
teacher-prophet-messiah. But by and large, the crowds saw the show, perhaps got
a healing, and then went home to their old lives.
The
early reflected this. It was a small movement, and you see that in the New
Testament. In his letters, the Apostle Paul deals with questions about what parts
of normal, civic participation are out of bounds for followers of Jesus,
questions that arise because the Christians are a tiny minority. So too some of
the gospels address communities struggling to remain faithful when doing so may
get them ostracized from polite society.
We
tend to think of the Bible as a public book, but the individual components of
the New Testament – which didn’t really exist as we know it for a few hundred
years after Jesus – were not understood that way. They were not used to spread
the Christian message but to help existing Christian communities deal with
issues that they faced. The books that would become the New Testament weren’t
for the masses, but for the dedicated few.
It’s
easy to see why the early Jesus movement tended to be small. While Jesus might
have made a big splash and attracted a lot of gawkers, people hoping for a
healing, or a political messiah to take on the Romans, many of Jesus’ teachings
were not real crowd pleasers. The teachings we heard this morning are no exception.
Sunday, September 16, 2018
Sermon: Answering (and Living) the Jesus Question
Mark 8:27-38
Answering (and Living) the Jesus Question
James Sledge September
16, 2018
The
other day I stopped into the grocery store to grab a couple of items. As I looked
for them, I happened down an aisle that was filled with Halloween candy and
paraphernalia. I shouldn’t have been
surprised – it’s September after all, but I was. It was one of those sultry,
ninety degree days, and it didn’t feel anything like fall.
But
fall is almost here, which means the election is just around the corner. I’ve
been something of a political junkie for much of my life, but I confess that
I’ve grown tired of it. I don’t want to see all the political ads. I don’t want
to see candidates who wrap themselves in a Christian mantle while spouting
hatred and intolerance and outright racist ideas. I especially don’t want to
watch another round of church leaders doing irreparable damage to the image of
the faith by insisting that candidates who show not the tiniest inclination to
follow the teachings of Jesus are somehow God’s candidate. Wake me when it’s
over.
Of
course then the Christmas shopping season will be almost upon us, complete with
culture war skirmishes. Some of the same folks who touted God’s candidates will
insist that we “put Christ back in Christmas,” and they’ll get angry if someone
says “Happy Holidays.” Sigh… Wake me when it’s over.
It’s
amazing all the ways that Jesus or Christ or God or Christian faith gets
invoked to support all manner of things. There are churches that celebrate the
Second Amendment in worship and encourage members to bring their guns. There
are churches that loudly proclaim, “God Hates Fags.” There are churches that
say Donald Trump is God’s man in the White House, and there are churches that
stage protests against Donald Trump. There are churches that see same sex relationships
as an abomination and sin, and there are churches that marry same sex couples.
And all these churches, at least all that call themselves Christian, claim
Christ in some way.
When
people insist that we put Christ back in Christmas, which one do they mean? Is
it the one who blesses same sex marriages? Is it the one who says to love your
enemy and not to resist the one who strikes you? Or is it a different Christ? How
many of them are there? Sometimes it seems that we Christians have been given
the answer to the question, but we’re not at all sure what that answer means.
Sunday, September 9, 2018
Sermon: Tribalism Meets God's Love and Grace
Mark 7:24-37
Tribalism Meets God’s Love and Grace
James Sledge September
9, 2018
A
great deal has been written and discussed of late on how tribal we’ve become in
America. I read something the other day following the death of John McCain that
said although Senator McCain was widely admired, he had become something of a
political pariah in his home state of Arizona. All three Republican candidates
in the recent Arizona senate primary either distanced themselves from McCain or
outright disparaged him.
McCain’s
hostility to President Trump is certainly one reason for this, but tribalism is
involved as well. Tribalism draws very clear us and them boundaries and tends
to view “them” as the enemy. Someone like McCain, who would work with members
of the other party and even work against his own party when his principles
required it, looks very suspicious to those who view the world from a tribal
perspective.
We
humans seem to have an innate tendency towards tribalism. We may not be born
racists or homophobes or sexists or elitists or any other sort of ists, but we
seek comfort and security and purpose by coalescing into groups with others who
are like us in some way. It starts at a very young age. School children often
form cliques that can be hostile and cruel to those who don’t fit into their
group.
This
is not a recent phenomenon. In Jesus’ day there were numerous divisions and
groups. The Pharisees were a reform movement centered on synagogue and
following scripture, opposed to what they saw as the corrupt, priestly Judaism of
the Jerusalem Temple. The Essenes withdraw entirely into their own, separatist
community in reaction to perceived Temple corruption and a world too accommodating
to Greco-Roman culture. Then there was the Jewish – Gentile divide, the biggest
tribal division of Jesus’ day.
These
divisions are different than those of our day, and some may strike us as odd.
But they functioned much the same as the divisions we hardly notice. We gather
here for worship each week and frequently hear Paul’s words that say, There
is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer
male and female; for all are one in Christ Jesus. But we hardly
represent the diversity and inclusiveness these words suggest. We’re not a
representative sampling of America or even our immediate community. We’re
whiter, wealthier, more liberal, more likely to be cultural elitists, and so
on.
Thursday, September 6, 2018
Sunday, September 2, 2018
Sermon: Stained by the World
James 1:17-27
Stained by the World
James Sledge September
2, 2018
There
was an article in The Washington Post recently
entitled, “Are rich people more likely
to lie, cheat, steal? Science explains the world of Manafort and Gates.”[1]
If you followed Paul Manafort’s recent trial, you know about the $15,000
ostrich and python jackets, the exorbitant lifestyle and the lengths he was
willing to go to maintain that lifestyle.
And of course Manafort is but one example in a
litany of cases involving insider trading, misuse of campaign contributions,
and so on. According to the Post article,
a growing body of scientific evidence finds that wealth, power, and privilege “makes
you feel like you’re above the law… allows you to treat others like they don’t
exist.”
Among the scientific studies was one where researchers
watched four-way stop intersections. Expensive cars were significantly less
likely to wait their turn than older and cheaper cars. The same researchers
sent pedestrians into crosswalks and observed which cars obeyed the law and
stopped when someone was in the crosswalk. Every single one of the older,
cheaper cars stopped, but only half of the expensive cars did.
Drawing on many different research studies the Post article said, “That research has
shown the rich cheat more on
their taxes. They cheat more on their romantic
partners. The wealthy and better-educated are more likely to
shoplift. They are more likely to cheat at
games of chance. They are often less
empathetic. In studies
of charitable giving, it is often the
lower-income households that donate higher
proportions of their income than middle-class and many
upper-income folk.”
This sort of research is relatively new, and so
there is a lot it cannot say about why or how this all works. But the evidence
is pretty compelling that being wealthy and/or powerful has a tendency to make
you an awful person. And perhaps that’s exactly the sort of thing our scripture
is worried about when it to keep oneself
unstained by the world.
Tuesday, August 14, 2018
Sunday, August 12, 2018
Sermon: More Than What We Know
John 6:35, 41-51
More Than What We
Know
August 12, 2018 James
Sledge
The bread of life; the bread that
came down from heaven; the living bread that came down from heaven. If
you’ve been around the church for much of your life, these sayings may not
register as particularly problematic. But think about what odd statements they
are. Jesus says he is bread, living bread at that, and bread that came down
from heaven. It’s hardly surprising that “the Jews” complain about this.
(Jews, by the way, is a term used in
John’s gospel to designate Jesus’ opponents and not all those who follow the traditions
of Moses. Jesus and his disciples are Jews after all.)
I would think that many Jews who
heard Jesus talk about bread that came down from heaven – and I include Jesus’
own followers here – would immediately have thought about the manna that the
Israelites ate in the wilderness when Moses led them out of Egypt. That was
truly bread that came down from heaven. And Jesus clearly wasn’t manna.
Then there is the whole “came down
from heaven” thing. Unlike manna, Jesus wasn’t found out of the ground early in
the morning. He showed up just like any of us did, born as a helpless little
baby. Some listening to Jesus knew his family. They knew without a doubt that
he had not come down from heaven.
Many of Jesus’ opponents were
religious leaders, and they “knew” lots of things about scripture and God and
how to be a good member of God’s chosen people. And along with obvious things
such as knowing Jesus’ mom and dad, there were religious problems with what
Jesus said. For Jews, and for early Christians, heaven was God’s home. People,
living or dead, didn’t go there. To be from heaven was to be divine, and
scripture clearly said that God was one. Jesus couldn’t be from heaven.
Sunday, August 5, 2018
Sermon: Fauxpologies and Acknowledging the Truth
2 Samuel 11:26-12:13a
Fauxpologies and
Acknowledging the Truth
James Sledge August
5, 2018
They have become so ubiquitous
that they have their own article on Wikipedia. I’m talking about the non-apology apology, sometimes called
the nonpology or fauxpology. Most of us have probably employed them at times. But
what makes them infamous is their use by politicians and celebrities in
attempts to quell some sort of PR nightmare.
The #MeToo movement has led to
some terrible examples. Take this one from Charlie Rose. "It is essential
that these women know I hear them and that I deeply apologize for my
inappropriate behavior. I am greatly embarrassed. I have behaved insensitively
at times, and I accept responsibility for that, though I do not believe that
all of these allegations are accurate. I always felt that I was pursuing shared
feelings, even though I now realize I was mistaken."
Why do such horrible non-apologies
occur so often, especially from, media savvy politicians and celebrities who
have PR people? Why do people try so hard, in such ridiculous and laughable
fashion, to avoid responsibility? What is it about us humans that so hates to
admit that we failed, that we hurt someone, that we were self-centered,
thoughtless, and cruel? Why do we try so hard to avoid blame, even when it
makes matters worse?
Martin
Luther, the great Protestant reformer, said that when you find yourself before
the judgment seat of God, plead your faults not your merits. Jesus once told a
parable that made much the same point. Two
men go to the Temple to pray. One says he isn’t as bad as other folk, tries
hard to follow the commandments, and gives lots of money to the church. But the
other man is a tax collector, literally a criminal enterprise in Jesus’ day. He
stood off in a corner, beating his breast and said, “God, be merciful to me, a
sinner!” And Jesus says it is the tax collector who goes home right in God’s
eyes. (Luke 18:9-14)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)