Browsed by
Month: March 2006

ten reasons

ten reasons

From the April/May 2006 edition of United Church News: Rev. Michael Kinnamon, a Disciples of Christ minister and a leader in the contemporary ecumenical movement, lists his ten reasons why someone might consider joining the United Church of Christ. His reasons echo many of the things I value most about my adopted church!

  1. Because, in an era when communities so often define themselves by whom they exclude, this community joyfully claims an identity as those who welcome the excluded, even as Christ had welcomed us.
  2. Because, in an age of growing fundamentalism, this community joyfully seeks to be a “People of the Book” who, at the same time, feel no need to protect the Bible from the modern world.
  3. Because, in a society where beating the competition is regarded as the highest value, this community joyfully treasures the gifts that God has given to other parts of Christ’s one body, and to neighbors of other faiths.
  4. Because, instead of focusing only on personal blessedness in another world, this community joyfully focuses on the power of God to make this world other, a place of shalom for all God’s children.
  5. Because, in a culture dominated by images of self-fulfillment, this community joyfully celebrates that its members live no longer for themselves but for Christ and, thus, for their neighbors, each of whom bears sacred image of the Creator.
  6. Because, resisting the extremes of hierarchical power and do-your-own-thing individualism, this community joyfully attempts to live by covenant of mutual accountability, grounded in God’s covenant with us.
  7. Because, in an age of horrifying violence, this community hears the call of the Holy Spirit to be just peacemakers, even when this is a costly thing to be.
  8. Because, while it resists bumper-sticker religion, this community joyfully insists on thinking globally and acting locally.
  9. Because, at its best, this community is marked by bold humility, precisely because it joyfully confesses that God is God and we aren’t.
  10. Because, in a culture that is willing to speak of God so long as God is kept safely contained in past traditions, this community joyfully proclaims that the living God is still speaking, and that is very good news.
new ucc ad

new ucc ad

The new UCC television ad is entitled “Ejector Seat.” It is scheduled to air nationally for three weeks, beginning April 3.

Watch the ad for yourself:

Let us know here what you think! Add your comment!

From what I had heard ahead of time, the ad sounded rather silly. But seeing it now for myself, I liked it better than I thought I would. It will make people take notice … and think.

whose church is it?

whose church is it?

Christ is like a single body, which has many parts; it is still one body, even though it is made up of different parts.

So, then, the eye cannot say to the hand, “I don’t need you!” Nor can the head say to the feet, “Well, I don’t need you!”

But that is just what we are doing! Saying we don’t need each other. Saying we’d be better off without each other. It breaks my heart! We call ourselves The United Church of Christ, but I wonder. Sometimes, it seems, we are hardly “united” and hardly “of Christ.”

We are increasingly polarized as a church, mimicking the increasing polarization of American society when we should be resisting it and showing the world another way! We show ourselves to be “just like everybody else,” as resentful and stubborn and proud and controlling as everybody else. When we don’t get our own way, we pout and call names.

It is increasingly difficult to “live in the middle” in the United Church of Christ, which is probably a poor description of what it is I am advocating. Being “in the middle” is not about compromising, but about being a bridge; not about being lukewarm or noncommittal, but about understanding and loving both “sides” … the eyes and the hands, the head and the feet.

The church belongs to Christ. not to us, and Christ the Lord hardly needs us to defend him! He wants us to love him … and to love each other.

The evangelical “wing” of the United Church of Christ has something of great value to offer the whole church. But to accuse the church of “abandoning historic Christianity,” to seek to divide the church against itself, to encourage and support churches in withdrawing from the United Church of Christ shows no love to the church nor to the Christ to whom the church belongs.

The liberal “wing” of the United Church of Christ has something of great value to offer the whole church. But to mock and ostracize and marginalize evangelical folks who are genuinely concerned about the integrity of the church and its witness, who genuinely love God and want to discern and to do God’s will only does harm to the cause of Christ and cripples the church’s witness.

It is about doing God’s will, about praying with Jesus: Thy will be done. It is about discerning God’s will — together. Sometimes, it will take time and patience and generosity and selflessness and lots of humility to reach a place of agreement — or better, a place of discernment — where we do know together what it is God is calling us to do.

But in the meanwhile, there is much that God does will that is abundantly clear!

  • God calls us to love the Lord our God above everything else, everything else. It is hard to imagine that we could turn our backs on each other if we would genuinely join hearts and voices in professing our love to God.
  • God calls us to love each other. Not to judge each other — that job God guards jealously — but to love each other.
  • And God calls us to be one. We know that! We take our motto from Jesus’ prayer: That they may all be one. Do we mean it? Can we show the world what Jesus wanted us to show the world, a people united, not by ideology or politics or race or even religious agenda, but by love alone, a love for God and a love for each other that never gives up?
tipping the scales in “balance of powers”

tipping the scales in “balance of powers”

From the Boston Globe (Read the entire article)

By Charlie Savage, Globe Staff | March 24, 2006

WASHINGTON — When President Bush signed the reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act this month, he included an addendum saying that he did not feel obliged to obey requirements that he inform Congress about how the FBI was using the act’s expanded police powers.

The bill contained several oversight provisions intended to make sure the FBI did not abuse the special terrorism-related powers to search homes and secretly seize papers. The provisions require Justice Department officials to keep closer track of how often the FBI uses the new powers and in what type of situations. Under the law, the administration would have to provide the information to Congress by certain dates.

Bush signed the bill with fanfare at a White House ceremony March 9, calling it ”a piece of legislation that’s vital to win the war on terror and to protect the American people.” But after the reporters and guests had left, the White House quietly issued a ”signing statement,” an official document in which a president lays out his interpretation of a new law.

In the statement, Bush said that he did not consider himself bound to tell Congress how the Patriot Act powers were being used and that, despite the law’s requirements, he could withhold the information if he decided that disclosure would ”impair foreign relations, national security, the deliberative process of the executive, or the performance of the executive’s constitutional duties.”

much ado about nothing

much ado about nothing

Much has been made of the missteps of the prosecution team in the trail of Zacarias Moussaoui, a confessed al-Qaeda operative. Because one of the prosecution lawyers illegally coached several witnesses, Judge Leonie Brinkema ruled that the witnesses could not be called, severely undermining the government’s case against Moussaoui. On Friday, however, Judge Brinkema agreed to let the government substitute other “untainted” witnesses.

The great outcry over the government’s mistakes, raised by media commentators and relatives of some of the victims of the 9/11/01 attack on the World Trade Center, disturbs me. I do understand the need to “get this right,” since Moussaoui is the only person to be tried in connection with the 9/11 attacks. And I do understand the extraordinary pain of those whose loved ones were taken from them through this hateful and horrible act directed against innocent people.

But Moussaoui has confessed, granted, not to involvement with the 9/11 attacks per se, but to conspiring to fly airplanes into buildings. He has been convicted and will face life in prison. The only function of the trial at this point is to determine sentence, and the only goal of the prosecution is to win the death penalty.

The cry is not for justice, it is for blood. What will be lost if the government fails to win its case? Moussaoui will have been apprehended and will pay for his crime with the rest of his life. He will not have “gotten away with it.” Justice will be done.

It is sad — and disturbing — that some will be satisfied with nothing less than blood for blood. Why do we require a life? What need will be satisfied in us if he is executed? Will the taking of his life compensate in any way for the 3000 lives that were taken from us? At best, we will have satisfied our own questionable need for retribution. And at worst, we will have shown ourselves no better than any of those who defend their cause, whatever it may be, by taking human life.

There are other ways of dealing with grief, other ways of responding to injury.

Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may become the children of your Father in heaven.

Connie Taylor’s son died in the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. Last Sunday, at a church gathering in White Plains, New York, she met Aicha el-Wafi, the mother of Zacharias Moussaoui, and embraced her. “She is blaming her son, in part,” Taylor said. “That must be so horrible. I didn’t experience that.” Read the report of their meeting: 9/11 Mom Hugs Moussaoui’s Mother.

Choose a different path. Choose Jesus’ way …

just say no

just say no

Thomas Powers writes in The New York Review of Books: ‘The Biggest Secret’:

In public life as in kindergarten, the all-important word is no. We are living with the consequences of the inability to say no to the President’s war of choice with Iraq, and we shall soon see how the Congress and the courts will respond to the latest challenge from the White House—the claim by President Bush that he has the right to ignore FISA’s prohibition of government intrusion on the private communications of Americans without a court order, and his repeated statements that he intends to go right on doing it.

Read the entire article: The New York Review of Books: ‘The Biggest Secret’

no matter who you are …

no matter who you are …

No matter who you are, or where you are on life’s journey,
you are welcome here.

The folks at my church have heard me repeat this tag line from the United Church of Christ national media campaign countless times. For me, it expresses something fundamental about the gospel to which I am called to witness, something not so much about our readiness to welcome anybody, as about Jesus’ readiness to welcome everybody, something not so much about our hospitality, as about Jesus’ gracious invitation. Jesus invited me and Jesus welcomed me! So I know Jesus will invite and welcome you … no matter who you are!

This is what love is: it is not that we have loved God, but that God loved us and sent Jesus to be the means by which our sins are forgiven.

That gracious invitation is especially vivid to me when I stand behind the communion table in our church sanctuary, inviting people to receive the food and drink that Jesus offers them. Because it is Jesus who makes the invitation! The bread and the wine are not mine to give, not the church’s to give, and most certainly not ours to decide who may or may not be invited to the table. This is one of the most meaningful things I do as a minister, extending Jesus’ invitation to eat and to drink, offering to each and to all these emblems of grace.

Communion is a sacrament, a means of grace, a means of experiencing/accessing/being touched by grace. We are called to the table to remember Jesus, and, perhaps even more importantly, to remember that we are remembered by Jesus. We are called to the table to meet Jesus, to be met by Jesus, to celebrate the possibility and to experience the reality of intimacy with Jesus. This is what the gospel is about! This is the good news!

So how could I possibly turn anyone away? How could I ever refuse you access to the Lord’s table … no matter who you are?

These thoughts were stirred as I read Katherine Willis’ blog post entitled, Never too broken. She reminds us: We are never too broken to receive the grace of God in all its tangible and intangible forms. Her post about access to the communion table, and how some have tragically been denied access, is well worth reading.

the sami got me thinking

the sami got me thinking

Sami dressLast evening my wife and I attended a Sons of Norway gathering as guests of some friends of ours. We shared a catered meal, listened as members conducted club business, and watched with them a documentary on the recent history of the Sami, an indigenous people of northern Scandinavia and far northwest Russia, known for their reindeer-herding, fishing, and colorful dress, among other things. (Photo courtesy: Trym Ivar Bergsmo/Finnmark Tourist Board; click on the photo to see a larger image.)

It was a troubling film. The story of the Sami is so much like the story of other indigenous peoples — in Australia, in Africa, in South America, and on this continent. They are pushed aside, displaced from traditional lands, absorbed or oppressed by the dominant culture. Traditional means of economic production often become unavailable to them, because of the encroachment of competing interests or the degradation of natural resources. They are forcibly “re-educated” in the language and customs of the dominant culture, and their own language and culture are threatened with extinction.

The Sami have done well, adjusting to a new way of life, surviving both within and alongside the European cultures of Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Russia, while preserving their own distinctive ways and forging a stronger social and political unity. But along the way, they have been caricatured, belittled, marginalized, and mocked. Just like the aborigines of Australia or the Xhosa of South Africa or the Sioux of North America, they have been treated as a lower form of humanity and their culture demeaned and expunged.

What is it about us? What is it about all of us that is so intolerant of diversity? What is it that makes us want to homogenize culture, to marginalize or eradicate or utterly transform what we find peculiar? We still do it. We disrespect immigrant peoples by proposing “English as official language” laws, supposedly to aid their assimilation into American culture, but oppressors and cultural elitists have always supposed they know what is best for everybody else. We export our preferred economic model and our preferred political model, sometimes by moral persuasion, sometimes by leveraging our power and influence, and sometimes by plain use of force. But we are not uniquely at fault in this. It seems no culture can resist the impulse to see itself as superior to any other culture with which it comes in contact, and to seek, if possible, to dominate and “convert” their “unfortunate” neighbors.

It is more than troubling. It causes me doubt and shame … because Christians, at least Christians in name, have too often been among the “culture-killers.” But I cannot believe, I do not believe, that such behavior is a product of Christian faith itself. This is not the way of Christ or the way of Christ’s faithful followers. Authentic faith does not encourage homogeneity, but diversity: The Spirit’s presence is shown in some way in each person for the good of all. And again: There is no difference between Jews and Gentiles, between slaves and free, between men and women; you are all one in union with Christ, which is not to denigrate the differences between people, but to say that differences in gender or race or social status offer no reason to make distinctions. We are one in Christ; in Christ we have equal value, equal importance … we are equally loved. And what shall we say to the God who is the creator of all living things, of every human person: You may think this is good, but we know better!”?

May God forgive us our cultural biases and our haste in equating “foreign” with “inferior.” And may our witness to Jesus be about spreading the good news of the gospel of peace, not about spreading our particular brand of culture.