Rev. Michael Denton
Annual Report for the
Chicago Metropolitan Association Spring Meeting and
The Illinois Conference Annual Gathering of
The United Church of Christ
May 5th, 2007
My peers and I are at that time in our lives when not just the fact but also the idea that we’re getting older is really starting to sink in. At the same moment we’re being amazed by the fact that we’re not all that far from our 25th high school reunion we’re also thinking about being 25 years from possible retirement. We have to pay more attention to what we eat than we used to. There are some activities that we have to be a little more careful about. There are some things we thought we would definitely do in our lives that we’re realizing we will probably not do (and, actually, don’t really want to) and things we said we’d never do that we now do regularly. Some occasional aches and pains are becoming a more regular part of our lives. Some marriages we thought would never last are still going strong and others we thought would last forever have ended.
Still, overall there is a sense of getting on track and feeling more grounded. This is becoming a time for making adjustments, reprioritizing, making new plans and using the information from our life experience to make decisions appropriate for this moment in our lives. Some ideals have been put away as impractical but many are being given a second chance with a whole new set of hopes and intentions. Overall we feel on the cusp of something very new and very good. It is a moment that is a combination of celebration and reflection.
As the United Church of Christ celebrates its 50th year, we find ourselves in the midst of a time of celebration and reflection. Unlike personal aging, this is about something that was here (in some form) before us and will continue (in some form) after us. We have among us those who remember and still most strongly identify with our denominational predecessors and those who have known nothing but the United Church of Christ. We have struggled with the balance between courage, wisdom, caution and faithfulness.
Some of the aches and pains that we hoped were only temporary have become chronic and, when we step back, we can tell they are about a lot more than our denomination alone; they’re a condition of the US Church. Church membership is down almost everywhere. More and more people, especially youth and young adults, are refusing to be involved with an institution that clearly and consistently calls their experiences with a loving God in nature, community and technology as invalid simply because these experiences don’t occur within the humanly perceived boundaries of the institutional church. And, if we’re honest about it, many people within our churches are having a very similar experience. In too many ways, we’ve moved from being a church that is rooted in the meaning and life of its traditions to a church that is anachronistically and idolatrously preserving previously effective practices and structures.
We’ve all heard that our financial resources have not been able keep up with the increasing costs of church life. However, we also have to admit that many of our churches and denominational structures have become so addicted to maintaining some version of the status quo that at least some of our financial support has enabled a sick, ineffective system. Maybe, just maybe, our lack of quantifiable resources and growth is actually God’s working through our church and society to lovingly redirect a community that has strayed from its expressed and intended vocation.
If so, we can approach this moment with gratitude. We can be thankful for a God that loves us so much that She is encouraging us to continue to walk after we’ve fallen. We can be thankful for a God that cares for this prodigal church so much that He is looking forward to celebrating our remembering of whose we are. We can be thankful for a God that flows like a mighty stream and moves that which seems unmovable. We can be thankful for a Christ that invites us into the process of our own transformation by taking away the need to fear the risk of death with promised resurrection. We can be thankful for a Holy Spirit that offers us, through the ongoing experience of Pentecost, an opportunity to celebrate both the birth of the Church and an invitation to the Church to be born again.
And the amazing thing is that I don’t think there’s really anyone – anyone – reading these words that doesn’t agree that the Church as we currently know it needs to change. Think about it. Not a one. What does that say? Sure, we may disagree about what is most important to change but I really do think that all of us believe the Church needs to change.
So, let’s do that. With God’s help and our careful discernment, let’s change the Church. Yep, I’m serious.
Sure, we have lots of questions we need to consider. How can we best make changes in our local settings as well as the settings of the wider (even the widest) church that begin to reflect this call all of us recognize? How can we best take the wide variety of opinions and suggestions and form them into an integrated and healthy whole? How can we best support, challenge and interact with each other in a way that best reflects our collective understanding of our accountability to God and each other? How can we best draw from the insight of those who are currently not a part of the Church in a way that’s both invitational and non-exploitive? I don’t know the answers but I’m convinced we can. We just have to be brave and faithful enough to seek out the answers and then lve them out.
Sisters and brothers, we’re turning 50 and at this moment of celebration and reflection we have some amazing and wonderful opportunities for honest reflection, evaluation, reconciliation and celebration that God’s presented us with. Today, let’s decide to change the Church. Reformation, revolution and resurrection all go together. This is a Jubilee moment. This is a Pentecost moment. This is a moment of new creation. This moment, as difficult as it may seem, is a gift. Let’s accept it graciously.
Monday, April 30, 2007
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Monday, April 16, 2007
Michael Denton
April 15th, 2007
First United, Oak Park
Acts 5: 27-32
27When they had brought them, they had them stand before the council. The high priest questioned them, 28saying, “We gave you strict orders not to teach in this name,£ yet here you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and you are determined to bring this man’s blood on us.” 29But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than any human authority.£ 30The God of our ancestors raised up Jesus, whom you had killed by hanging him on a tree. 31God exalted him at his right hand as Leader and Savior that he might give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins. 32And we are witnesses to these things, and so is the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey him.” (NRSV)
- Greeting
It really is an honor to be with you this morning to preach in this service where God is honored, thanked and praised. It is a privilege to thank God with you for the vessel of some of God’s gifts that Rev. Ed Bergstrasser has been for this church as your congregation honors him with the title, “Pastor Emeritis.” It’s obvious to you that Rev. Bergstrasser is held in high esteem within your congregation but I hope you know that his ministry has also been a great service to the wider church. Among your brothers and sisters in other parts of the denomination, I have only heard words of respect and appreciation shared for the work of your former pastor as he continues to listen and respond to the call of God in his life. It is a pleasure, on this day of celebration, to bring you greetings on behalf of all the churches of the Illinois Conference of the United Church of Christ and specifically those churches of the Chicago Metropolitan Association. Sisters and brothers, it’s good to be with you today. Let us pray.
- Pray
Well, if you didn't know who Don Imus was at the beginning of the week, you probably do now. Just in case you've had the blessing of living in a cave over the last week, the basic fact are these: about a week and a half ago, Imus used a racist and sexist slur to describe the Rutger's women's basketball team. Although he apologized the next day for his remarks, the controversy had only just begun. By last Monday, a firestorm had erupted with calls for his show to be cancelled for Imus to be fired. The controversy was front page news for the papers and the opening story on radio and TV news. It continues to be one of the primary topics addressed in the populist mediums of blogs and talk radio. By Thursday, a thirty year career was in tatters and Don Imus was fired.
Now, without question, part of the reason the story about Imus was so hot was simply because of Imus himself. He's quite a character and full of contradictions. He's been saying offensive things for years and this wasn't the first time he'd been confronted about making such comments. He also, apparently, did some pretty good work in educating and creating camps for kids with cancer and kids with autism. In his own words, he said that he wasn't a bad person but that he's just done a bad thing.
This one man was able to touch on issues of gender and race in a way that few had. At this one moment, there was more discussion about race than there had been since the OJ trial or the uprising that followed the Rodney King verdict. Many recognized how little of the discussion was really about gender however, we seems to be able to talk about one or the other but dealing with both isms seemed to be, simply, too difficult.
I'll be curious to see how much farther this discussion continues into this next week. I'm not sure this story was as much about race as it was about celebrity, and the importance we bestow on celebrities. Although they didn’t become nearly as big, think about the somewhat similar stories that we’ve heard in just the last nine months. The Imus story is in line with the stories about Mel Gibson, Michael Richards, Isaiah Washington and even Naomi Campbell. There's something about celebrities behaving badly that we're able to focus on. Mel Gibson has long been suspected of being anti-Semitic because of the religious group he is a part of but, during a drunken rant, people saw Gibson as someone who – with inhibitions down – revealed his “true self.” Richards video taped rant and Imus' racist and sexist slur allowed people to oppose the most egregious and obvious forms of prejudice. Washington's heterosexist slur allowed people to speak against verbally expressed homophobia during a time when various communities are intentionally limiting the rights of gay and lesbian people. Naomi Campball's assult of an assistant, although not spoken of in exactly this way, seemed to covered by the press in ways that spoke to issues of classism.
These behaviors were able to be portrayed as the bad actions of spoiled celebrities; actions by people who also seemed to be unaware of their impact in the world. The perception of their lack of self-perception was only enhanced by their denial of the nature of these statements. In three of these particularly named instances – they denied being an anti-Semite, a racist or a homophobe. There was even is the implication in these celebrity’s reactions to these accusations that their taking an anti-Semitic, racist or homophobic action - which speaking publicly is - was somehow not anti-Semitic, racist or homophobic. There was the implication that, in order to be anti-Semitic, racist or homophobic, one has to take some other sort of intentional action, or maybe actively participate in some ideological movement. Somehow, by the people who committed these acts, it was suggested that because these actions weren’t premeditated, they shouldn’t be “counted” (although in every case but Richards we know there’d been a similar problem before).
These folks who all have exceptional power and privilege, were portrayed as abusing that particular power and privilege. For some, these celebrities gave an easy way to be against anti-Semitism, racism, sexism, heterosexism and classism. It focused on a particular behavior that we could discuss and say was awful. We were able to focus on this behavior because these folks were considered fair game as “exceptional” people.
And in that last statement resides a significant problem. Particular behaviors by particular people are easier to cluck about than the actions we sometimes find ourselves taking or refusing to confront. Particular behaviors by particular people are easier to consider than the ways we may benefit from privilege in certain settings, around certain people. Particular behaviors by particular people are easier to focus on than the interwoven fabric of oppression that, in some way, covers us all. All too often, we look for someone else to blame or – just as damaging – focus on our own sense of shame instead of working to figure out some sort of way we can change the systems we’re a part of. We can easily admit that particular actions are wrong without necessarily having to acknowledge that there are larger human systems we are all a part of that need redemption.
Finally, I’m sure some of you are thinking, he used a somewhat religious term. I know that, up to this point, this may have seemed more like a bit of a rant on pop culture or politics but I really do see these ideas as closely related to the scripture from the Book of Acts. Let me read an interpretation of the text we read from a resource called The Message by Eugene Peterson. This particular reading is pretty close to the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible but I just like Peterson’s a little bit more. This is how Peterson writes chapter 5 verses 27-32 from the Book of Acts:
27Bringing them back, they stood them before the High Council. The Chief Priest said, 28“Didn’t we give you strict orders not to teach in Jesus’ name? And here you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and are trying your best to blame us for the death of this man.”
29Peter and the apostles answered, “It’s necessary to obey God rather than men. 30The God of our ancestors raised up Jesus, the One you killed by hanging him on a cross. 31God set him on high at his side, Prince and Savior, to give Israel the gift of a changed life and sins forgiven. 32And we are witnesses to these things. The Holy Spirit, whom God gives to those who obey him, corroborates every detail.”
Within this text, are ideas of blame and shame. The Chief Priest and the High Council were something like celebrities in their time and place and they were refusing to be blamed by these delivers of what was good news to many. “What?” they said, “You trying to blame this on us?” Peter and the apostles replied with resounding yes.
Andrea Medea, in her book Conflict Unraveled, talks about a cycle of human behavior in which there are the roles of villain, victim and hero. Usually it works something like this: one person claims that they have been victimized and accuses someone else of being the one who victimized them. By standing up to the villain in some way, the victim moves in to the role of hero. Now, heroes are powerful and are given a lot of power and privilege by those who recognize them as leaders. One of the things the hero is frequently given the latitude to do is to punish the villain. But something seems to happen after a certain amount of time. As the villain is punished, the villain is transformed in to the victim and, the hero eventually becomes portrayed as the villain.
This cycle can continue endlessly and, frequently, becomes a cycle of violence – a system of oppression – that involves more and more and more people and groups and institutions. Think about the way this plays out in families . . . or in workplaces. . .or in churches. . .or in politics. . . Think about Iraq within this context and you can see how deadly it can become.
On a much smaller level think about how this cycle was repeated and continues to be repeated as we look at all of those celebrity stories I mentioned in the first part of this sermon. These celebrities’ actions may seem to stand on their own but have to be seen in the light of larger system stories. Their stories are about more than their fall in esteem. They are about a much larger problem that can’t be laid on the back on one individual or another.
Before last week’s events, Imus was this rebellious, conservative hero who, by his promoters, was portrayed as standing up against the powerful and their ideas of what was correct and incorrect. But, he went too far and by victimizing these African-American women with his insults he became the villian. The cries for his firing came from all over the place, until he actually was fired. Then what happened? All of the shows that, the day before, had featured an overwhelming number of people calling for the firing of Imus, had brand new talking heads who spoke of how unfair the firing of Don Imus actually was. Within a week, Imus moved from being portrayed as a populist hero to a populist villain and now, he’s being portrayed as the populist victim. The system of villain, victim and hero is repeated again and again and again.
This text from Acts also illustrates this cycle. The very human high priests and the very human apostles were in this cycle with each other. The apostles were in the role of the victim and the high priests were in the role of villain. In the apostles resistance and claim that Jesus - this ultimate victim and ultimate hero – was on their side, the apostles themselves were moved in to the realm of the hero by the teller of this story.
This kind of thinking has rationalized some of the more negative actions of the Church for centuries. The Church, heroically (as it’s portrayed) took over the role of another villain. After awhile, it moved in to a role that, in way too many settings, was the victimizer. The Church did some awful, terrible things claiming themselves as heroes that were protecting the faith. The Church, in many of its forms, continues to be in this cycle of blaming and shaming; this cycle of the hero, villain and victim; this cycle of violence and oppression. I find it interesting that now that as the Church finds its influence reduced how often parts of this body claim that they are the oppressed and marginalized victim. The Church, along with the rest of the world, seems endlessly and hopelessly wrapped up in this cycle of oppression and conflict.
And that’s exactly what Jesus was working to change. Jesus is such an amazing figure not just because he was working at changing the hearts of humans, but because he was here to give a way out of this mess we’ve gotten ourselves in to. I’ve really been inspired by the work of Walter Wink and Rene Girard as I’ve struggled to learn more about this. The New Revised Standard version translates Verse 31 of the text read for today as:
God exalted him at his right hand as Leader and Savior that he might give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins.
The Message reads this way:
God set him on high at his side, Prince and Savior, to give Israel the gift of a changed life and sins forgiven.
Jesus was trying to end this cycle and give the whole world redemption. We talk about individual redemption a lot but Jesus – in fact the whole Christ experience - is really about more than that. It is about redemption of everything we know; the redemption and transformation of everything. The life, death and resurrection of Jesus continues to be an opportunity for the conversion and transformation of the systems of oppression and domination themselves. This is the kind of liberation that Jesus was offering and continues to offer.
Jesus reached out to all of those who were hurting - regardless of how they were perceived – and suggested another way. He reached out to those who were oppressed as well as those who were perceived as oppressing calling for, not simply rebellion against people, but rebellion against systems and conversion of systems. The whole idea of “turning the other cheek” moved outside the cycles of revenge and, if done consistently, presented the opportunity to convert the one whose cheek would have been slapped as well as the one who hit the cheek. It was a rebellion against system of domination. The whole idea of loving your enemies – think about how radical it is to love an enemy – transforms the one who persists in loving and the one who is loved. It was a rebellion against system of domination. The act of healing those who are sick moves the one who needs healing out of the roll of a victim of their disease. It was a rebellion against system of domination. Again and again, throughout his ministry, Jesus presented opportunities to move out of these systems and cycles of domination and oppression.
And Jesus didn’t just stop resisting these systems with his life but also with his death and resurrection. The ultimate way that humans oppress or punish each other is by killing one another. Jesus resisted capital punishment by forgiving those who had a part in his death while dying on the cross. “Forgive them because they don’t know what they’re doing” are the words quoted to us. These people, suggests Jesus, are participating in systems that are bigger than them and more powerful than them. They really don’t know what they’re doing. Forgive them, Jesus says. Jesus was naming the ignorance of those who, almost unthinkingly, took the only option that the system gave them against someone against whom no other tactics seemed to work. They killed Jesus. He was executed. The cycle seemed to continue.
But, Jesus established that even death was not the end of the holy persistence, the holy desire to show another way; a better way. Through resurrection, Jesus denied the power of the most extreme act of oppression the system of domination could wield. Death was not victorious. Death’s sting was denied.
And it didn’t stop there. By the establishment of small Christian communities of large faith; by establishing within these early communities standards that did not revolve around property; by establishing – as best as they could figure – structures built more on the power of love than the love of power; by establishing new patterns for sharing the Good News and the free gift of redemption; the early Christian communities were trying to, quite simply, change the world. They were trying to convert the world. They were trying to redeem the world. The early Christian communities were trying to break down the walls between what was understood to be heaven and earth and be re-created within something that was new.
Your church, through the time it was founded and with really good pastoral leadership, such as Rev. Bergstrasser, has done some excellent redemption work. Your dedication towards inclusion, mission and social justice is outstanding. Your commitment to being a bi-denomination church continues to be an opportunity to struggle with those ways the Church can be stronger, together than it is in its denominational separateness. Through the last few years, I’ve had the pleasure to get to know some of you pretty well. I’ve come to love this church and because I love you I encourage you to keep working hard. You still have a lot of work to do. This work of redemption that we’re all invited to participate in is not done, yet. Those of you who are sitting in these pews are here because this church was the best church you found in your search for a spiritual home and that’s a good and beautiful thing. The continuing challenge for those of us who recognize the redemptive intent of Christ is to persist in making this whole, entire world the best possible home for everyone; free of those systems of domination that oppress us all.
Sisters and bothers, Christ is risen (Christ is risen indeed [encourage congregation to respond with this]) and this is an uprising we are invited to participate in. Sisters and brothers, Christ is risen (Christ is risen indeed) and the redemption of the resurrection gives us an opportunity to make our own lives better. Sisters and brothers, Christ is risen (Christ is risen indeed) and with that resurrection the world began to change and we are invited to participate in its transformation as well. Sisters and brothers, Christ is risen (Christ is risen indeed) and we are called to be both the converted and the vehicles of holy conversion for systems that are focused on the power of the threat of death into systems that focus on the promise of life. Sisters and brothers, Christ is risen (Christ is risen indeed) and we have the opportunity to embrace new creation as it springs among us. Sisters and brothers, Christ is risen (Christ is risen indeed). Christ is risen (Christ is risen indeed). Christ is risen (Christ is risen indeed). Amen and amen.
April 15th, 2007
First United, Oak Park
Acts 5: 27-32
27When they had brought them, they had them stand before the council. The high priest questioned them, 28saying, “We gave you strict orders not to teach in this name,£ yet here you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and you are determined to bring this man’s blood on us.” 29But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than any human authority.£ 30The God of our ancestors raised up Jesus, whom you had killed by hanging him on a tree. 31God exalted him at his right hand as Leader and Savior that he might give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins. 32And we are witnesses to these things, and so is the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey him.” (NRSV)
- Greeting
It really is an honor to be with you this morning to preach in this service where God is honored, thanked and praised. It is a privilege to thank God with you for the vessel of some of God’s gifts that Rev. Ed Bergstrasser has been for this church as your congregation honors him with the title, “Pastor Emeritis.” It’s obvious to you that Rev. Bergstrasser is held in high esteem within your congregation but I hope you know that his ministry has also been a great service to the wider church. Among your brothers and sisters in other parts of the denomination, I have only heard words of respect and appreciation shared for the work of your former pastor as he continues to listen and respond to the call of God in his life. It is a pleasure, on this day of celebration, to bring you greetings on behalf of all the churches of the Illinois Conference of the United Church of Christ and specifically those churches of the Chicago Metropolitan Association. Sisters and brothers, it’s good to be with you today. Let us pray.
- Pray
Well, if you didn't know who Don Imus was at the beginning of the week, you probably do now. Just in case you've had the blessing of living in a cave over the last week, the basic fact are these: about a week and a half ago, Imus used a racist and sexist slur to describe the Rutger's women's basketball team. Although he apologized the next day for his remarks, the controversy had only just begun. By last Monday, a firestorm had erupted with calls for his show to be cancelled for Imus to be fired. The controversy was front page news for the papers and the opening story on radio and TV news. It continues to be one of the primary topics addressed in the populist mediums of blogs and talk radio. By Thursday, a thirty year career was in tatters and Don Imus was fired.
Now, without question, part of the reason the story about Imus was so hot was simply because of Imus himself. He's quite a character and full of contradictions. He's been saying offensive things for years and this wasn't the first time he'd been confronted about making such comments. He also, apparently, did some pretty good work in educating and creating camps for kids with cancer and kids with autism. In his own words, he said that he wasn't a bad person but that he's just done a bad thing.
This one man was able to touch on issues of gender and race in a way that few had. At this one moment, there was more discussion about race than there had been since the OJ trial or the uprising that followed the Rodney King verdict. Many recognized how little of the discussion was really about gender however, we seems to be able to talk about one or the other but dealing with both isms seemed to be, simply, too difficult.
I'll be curious to see how much farther this discussion continues into this next week. I'm not sure this story was as much about race as it was about celebrity, and the importance we bestow on celebrities. Although they didn’t become nearly as big, think about the somewhat similar stories that we’ve heard in just the last nine months. The Imus story is in line with the stories about Mel Gibson, Michael Richards, Isaiah Washington and even Naomi Campbell. There's something about celebrities behaving badly that we're able to focus on. Mel Gibson has long been suspected of being anti-Semitic because of the religious group he is a part of but, during a drunken rant, people saw Gibson as someone who – with inhibitions down – revealed his “true self.” Richards video taped rant and Imus' racist and sexist slur allowed people to oppose the most egregious and obvious forms of prejudice. Washington's heterosexist slur allowed people to speak against verbally expressed homophobia during a time when various communities are intentionally limiting the rights of gay and lesbian people. Naomi Campball's assult of an assistant, although not spoken of in exactly this way, seemed to covered by the press in ways that spoke to issues of classism.
These behaviors were able to be portrayed as the bad actions of spoiled celebrities; actions by people who also seemed to be unaware of their impact in the world. The perception of their lack of self-perception was only enhanced by their denial of the nature of these statements. In three of these particularly named instances – they denied being an anti-Semite, a racist or a homophobe. There was even is the implication in these celebrity’s reactions to these accusations that their taking an anti-Semitic, racist or homophobic action - which speaking publicly is - was somehow not anti-Semitic, racist or homophobic. There was the implication that, in order to be anti-Semitic, racist or homophobic, one has to take some other sort of intentional action, or maybe actively participate in some ideological movement. Somehow, by the people who committed these acts, it was suggested that because these actions weren’t premeditated, they shouldn’t be “counted” (although in every case but Richards we know there’d been a similar problem before).
These folks who all have exceptional power and privilege, were portrayed as abusing that particular power and privilege. For some, these celebrities gave an easy way to be against anti-Semitism, racism, sexism, heterosexism and classism. It focused on a particular behavior that we could discuss and say was awful. We were able to focus on this behavior because these folks were considered fair game as “exceptional” people.
And in that last statement resides a significant problem. Particular behaviors by particular people are easier to cluck about than the actions we sometimes find ourselves taking or refusing to confront. Particular behaviors by particular people are easier to consider than the ways we may benefit from privilege in certain settings, around certain people. Particular behaviors by particular people are easier to focus on than the interwoven fabric of oppression that, in some way, covers us all. All too often, we look for someone else to blame or – just as damaging – focus on our own sense of shame instead of working to figure out some sort of way we can change the systems we’re a part of. We can easily admit that particular actions are wrong without necessarily having to acknowledge that there are larger human systems we are all a part of that need redemption.
Finally, I’m sure some of you are thinking, he used a somewhat religious term. I know that, up to this point, this may have seemed more like a bit of a rant on pop culture or politics but I really do see these ideas as closely related to the scripture from the Book of Acts. Let me read an interpretation of the text we read from a resource called The Message by Eugene Peterson. This particular reading is pretty close to the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible but I just like Peterson’s a little bit more. This is how Peterson writes chapter 5 verses 27-32 from the Book of Acts:
27Bringing them back, they stood them before the High Council. The Chief Priest said, 28“Didn’t we give you strict orders not to teach in Jesus’ name? And here you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and are trying your best to blame us for the death of this man.”
29Peter and the apostles answered, “It’s necessary to obey God rather than men. 30The God of our ancestors raised up Jesus, the One you killed by hanging him on a cross. 31God set him on high at his side, Prince and Savior, to give Israel the gift of a changed life and sins forgiven. 32And we are witnesses to these things. The Holy Spirit, whom God gives to those who obey him, corroborates every detail.”
Within this text, are ideas of blame and shame. The Chief Priest and the High Council were something like celebrities in their time and place and they were refusing to be blamed by these delivers of what was good news to many. “What?” they said, “You trying to blame this on us?” Peter and the apostles replied with resounding yes.
Andrea Medea, in her book Conflict Unraveled, talks about a cycle of human behavior in which there are the roles of villain, victim and hero. Usually it works something like this: one person claims that they have been victimized and accuses someone else of being the one who victimized them. By standing up to the villain in some way, the victim moves in to the role of hero. Now, heroes are powerful and are given a lot of power and privilege by those who recognize them as leaders. One of the things the hero is frequently given the latitude to do is to punish the villain. But something seems to happen after a certain amount of time. As the villain is punished, the villain is transformed in to the victim and, the hero eventually becomes portrayed as the villain.
This cycle can continue endlessly and, frequently, becomes a cycle of violence – a system of oppression – that involves more and more and more people and groups and institutions. Think about the way this plays out in families . . . or in workplaces. . .or in churches. . .or in politics. . . Think about Iraq within this context and you can see how deadly it can become.
On a much smaller level think about how this cycle was repeated and continues to be repeated as we look at all of those celebrity stories I mentioned in the first part of this sermon. These celebrities’ actions may seem to stand on their own but have to be seen in the light of larger system stories. Their stories are about more than their fall in esteem. They are about a much larger problem that can’t be laid on the back on one individual or another.
Before last week’s events, Imus was this rebellious, conservative hero who, by his promoters, was portrayed as standing up against the powerful and their ideas of what was correct and incorrect. But, he went too far and by victimizing these African-American women with his insults he became the villian. The cries for his firing came from all over the place, until he actually was fired. Then what happened? All of the shows that, the day before, had featured an overwhelming number of people calling for the firing of Imus, had brand new talking heads who spoke of how unfair the firing of Don Imus actually was. Within a week, Imus moved from being portrayed as a populist hero to a populist villain and now, he’s being portrayed as the populist victim. The system of villain, victim and hero is repeated again and again and again.
This text from Acts also illustrates this cycle. The very human high priests and the very human apostles were in this cycle with each other. The apostles were in the role of the victim and the high priests were in the role of villain. In the apostles resistance and claim that Jesus - this ultimate victim and ultimate hero – was on their side, the apostles themselves were moved in to the realm of the hero by the teller of this story.
This kind of thinking has rationalized some of the more negative actions of the Church for centuries. The Church, heroically (as it’s portrayed) took over the role of another villain. After awhile, it moved in to a role that, in way too many settings, was the victimizer. The Church did some awful, terrible things claiming themselves as heroes that were protecting the faith. The Church, in many of its forms, continues to be in this cycle of blaming and shaming; this cycle of the hero, villain and victim; this cycle of violence and oppression. I find it interesting that now that as the Church finds its influence reduced how often parts of this body claim that they are the oppressed and marginalized victim. The Church, along with the rest of the world, seems endlessly and hopelessly wrapped up in this cycle of oppression and conflict.
And that’s exactly what Jesus was working to change. Jesus is such an amazing figure not just because he was working at changing the hearts of humans, but because he was here to give a way out of this mess we’ve gotten ourselves in to. I’ve really been inspired by the work of Walter Wink and Rene Girard as I’ve struggled to learn more about this. The New Revised Standard version translates Verse 31 of the text read for today as:
God exalted him at his right hand as Leader and Savior that he might give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins.
The Message reads this way:
God set him on high at his side, Prince and Savior, to give Israel the gift of a changed life and sins forgiven.
Jesus was trying to end this cycle and give the whole world redemption. We talk about individual redemption a lot but Jesus – in fact the whole Christ experience - is really about more than that. It is about redemption of everything we know; the redemption and transformation of everything. The life, death and resurrection of Jesus continues to be an opportunity for the conversion and transformation of the systems of oppression and domination themselves. This is the kind of liberation that Jesus was offering and continues to offer.
Jesus reached out to all of those who were hurting - regardless of how they were perceived – and suggested another way. He reached out to those who were oppressed as well as those who were perceived as oppressing calling for, not simply rebellion against people, but rebellion against systems and conversion of systems. The whole idea of “turning the other cheek” moved outside the cycles of revenge and, if done consistently, presented the opportunity to convert the one whose cheek would have been slapped as well as the one who hit the cheek. It was a rebellion against system of domination. The whole idea of loving your enemies – think about how radical it is to love an enemy – transforms the one who persists in loving and the one who is loved. It was a rebellion against system of domination. The act of healing those who are sick moves the one who needs healing out of the roll of a victim of their disease. It was a rebellion against system of domination. Again and again, throughout his ministry, Jesus presented opportunities to move out of these systems and cycles of domination and oppression.
And Jesus didn’t just stop resisting these systems with his life but also with his death and resurrection. The ultimate way that humans oppress or punish each other is by killing one another. Jesus resisted capital punishment by forgiving those who had a part in his death while dying on the cross. “Forgive them because they don’t know what they’re doing” are the words quoted to us. These people, suggests Jesus, are participating in systems that are bigger than them and more powerful than them. They really don’t know what they’re doing. Forgive them, Jesus says. Jesus was naming the ignorance of those who, almost unthinkingly, took the only option that the system gave them against someone against whom no other tactics seemed to work. They killed Jesus. He was executed. The cycle seemed to continue.
But, Jesus established that even death was not the end of the holy persistence, the holy desire to show another way; a better way. Through resurrection, Jesus denied the power of the most extreme act of oppression the system of domination could wield. Death was not victorious. Death’s sting was denied.
And it didn’t stop there. By the establishment of small Christian communities of large faith; by establishing within these early communities standards that did not revolve around property; by establishing – as best as they could figure – structures built more on the power of love than the love of power; by establishing new patterns for sharing the Good News and the free gift of redemption; the early Christian communities were trying to, quite simply, change the world. They were trying to convert the world. They were trying to redeem the world. The early Christian communities were trying to break down the walls between what was understood to be heaven and earth and be re-created within something that was new.
Your church, through the time it was founded and with really good pastoral leadership, such as Rev. Bergstrasser, has done some excellent redemption work. Your dedication towards inclusion, mission and social justice is outstanding. Your commitment to being a bi-denomination church continues to be an opportunity to struggle with those ways the Church can be stronger, together than it is in its denominational separateness. Through the last few years, I’ve had the pleasure to get to know some of you pretty well. I’ve come to love this church and because I love you I encourage you to keep working hard. You still have a lot of work to do. This work of redemption that we’re all invited to participate in is not done, yet. Those of you who are sitting in these pews are here because this church was the best church you found in your search for a spiritual home and that’s a good and beautiful thing. The continuing challenge for those of us who recognize the redemptive intent of Christ is to persist in making this whole, entire world the best possible home for everyone; free of those systems of domination that oppress us all.
Sisters and bothers, Christ is risen (Christ is risen indeed [encourage congregation to respond with this]) and this is an uprising we are invited to participate in. Sisters and brothers, Christ is risen (Christ is risen indeed) and the redemption of the resurrection gives us an opportunity to make our own lives better. Sisters and brothers, Christ is risen (Christ is risen indeed) and with that resurrection the world began to change and we are invited to participate in its transformation as well. Sisters and brothers, Christ is risen (Christ is risen indeed) and we are called to be both the converted and the vehicles of holy conversion for systems that are focused on the power of the threat of death into systems that focus on the promise of life. Sisters and brothers, Christ is risen (Christ is risen indeed) and we have the opportunity to embrace new creation as it springs among us. Sisters and brothers, Christ is risen (Christ is risen indeed). Christ is risen (Christ is risen indeed). Christ is risen (Christ is risen indeed). Amen and amen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
