Line in the Sand

altoday.com

Currently a group of people have drawn a line in the sand and have occupied a building in a national park in Oregon. Not only have they occupied the building they have weapons with them. They say they do not want violence, but they are prepared for violence should any law enforcement agencies try to remove them.

Having read part of their account of things over the years, it is not all that difficult to hear their frustration, anger, and feeling of being handled badly by the government. Not only are they mad, they are mad as hell and aren’t going to take it anymore. I know there is another side of the story. There always is. They have drawn their line in the sand.

Drawing a line in the sand can have a couple of meanings. One the one hand, it can mean that one has reached their limit. “I’m not compromising one bit more.” On the other hand, it can mean a limit has been defined for another. “This is where it stops. If you cross that line, there will be serious repercussions.”

The famous line of Martin Luther, “Here I stand, I can do no other,” indicates he had drawn a line in the sand. It is interesting that while he had drawn a line in the sand he never left the Roman Catholic church. In our recent past there have been many lines drawn in the sand concerning decisions and policies of the church. For some the church crossed the line in the sand with the ordination of homosexuals. For others it was approval of same gender marriage.

It was too much for some to tolerate any further. They could not remain in any portion of the church which approved or allowed what they considered to be biblical absolutes of forbidden belief or behavior. Rather than crossing that line in the sand they withdrew and joined others who think like they do. One minister told me that the approval of the ordination and marriage issues was a clear indication of the church’s total abandonment of biblical authority. He had reached his line in the sand.

In earlier times the same was said about women’s suffrage, racial equality, ordination of women, and several other issues which became lines in the sand, indicators that the church had gone much farther than some were able to go.

The funny thing about lines in the sand is that they are drawn in the sand, not in a substance which remains relatively unchanged over a long period of time. Draw a line in the desert sands and the elements soon cover it with more sand. Draw a line on the sand along an ocean shore and the water moves more sand to erase it. 

Lines of demarcation drawn in the sand do not last long. As time washes across the lines we have drawn in the sand, the lines eventually vanish. There are times when we have to say, “I’ll not go one step further.” In the long run, lines in the sand are not immutable. If one draws a line in the sand today will it still be there tomorrow, next week, next month, next year, the next decade, or the next century?  Eventually, changing times and circumstances will blow or wash away our line in the sand.

https://www.wayostccs.com

Bread

Over the years I have collected bits of “wit, wisdom, stolen quotes, attributed quotes, and smart ass comments.” I call them my RoEs (rules of engagement). Most are not a “practical” as Gibbs’ Rules on NCIS. Some of my RoEs are original to me. Some I thought were original and then in reading other material find that I have not been the only one to think in a particular direction.

One RoE which I came up with several years ago is, In the midst of an economic crisis many are too willing to give up their freedoms in order to have a loaf of bread; others are too willing to take away freedoms to increase their control over who gets a loaf of bread. This seems ever more true today. It is not just here in the USA, but in all countries, where this seem frighteningly true. In part, it explains cries to keep out the foreigners.

We could easily substitute “security” for the words “loaf of bread” in my RoE above. We encourage the government to make rules and to take action which will make us more safe and secure, to ensure we get our loaf of bread (even if it means others do not). I remember when automobile seat belts were first introduced and then required as safety equipment on all autos. Now, they are not only required to be installed they are required to be used. “Click it or ticket” signs are frequently seen along our highways. I remember when motorcyclists were first required to wear a helmet. There was a huge uproar about both seat belts and helmets. To counter the uproar official slogans and not so official statements were offered. “Seat belts save lives.” “What do you call a motorcyclist who refuses to wear a helmet? An organ donor.”

Economic security, or a great number of people feeling they have no economic security, has given rise in the current political campaigns to close our southern border to those who enter illegally because “they are taking our jobs and are a drain on public services.” In very few quarters do we hear calls to stop the exportation of the jobs which fueled the rise of the middle class in this country, or to stop the relocation of corporate entities to other countries to avoid paying taxes here. Those last two items are more to blame for the shrinkage of the middle class than foreign workers, illegally or legally, in the country.

Labor unions have lost their voice and teeth in fear of plants being closed, or whole industries being moved off shore. The United Auto Workers and the Teamsters were two of the largest and strongest forces in the country. The greatest “democratic socialism” we have seen in this country were the unions. It used to be that a presidential candidate knew there was very little chance of being elected without the endorsement of the unions. Now, it seems the candidates only give a slight nod to the unions.

In the name of personal security, the number of hand guns being sold and the number of concealed carry permit applications have sky rocketed. I read a slogan on Facebook which stated, “An armed society is a more polite society.” If I am afraid you are packing, I am going to be far more careful about what I say and how I act. I know that even the most level headed person can “go off” sometimes. If the other feels they have been unduly “disrespected,” or if they feel some level of physical threat, it is very possible they will meet threat with what their answer to stop or eliminate the threat. Even the sanest among us lives on the edge of insanity. Nobody knows the tipping point for themselves or others.

What if we all worked to make sure bread is broadly and evenly distributed to all? In Exodus the people were told to gather enough manna for their household for one day. None went hungry, there was enough for all. There still is enough for all. It is merely a problem of distribution and sharing equally. If the “bread” is evenly distributed and shared equally freedoms would abound and none could control who gets bread.

Fear

justmind.org

I have been reading and contributing on Facebook a lot in the last few days. It is true for me as for many others, when emotions go up the ability to reason diminishes. Some of the more intense topics have been gun control, pro-Trump and anti-Obama, racism, anti-Muslim, and welcoming refugees. Name any possible hot button in today’s news and it is an open topic for the social media. I have found very few conversations where there is any openness to the legitimacy of the other side.

Falwell, Jr. urges the students of Liberty University (there is irony in that name) to arm themselves. I have friends who are ardent supporters of the NRA and expanding concealed carry. Some of my friends even support the open availability of military type weapons for the general population. I am not anti-gun, but neither am I in favor of the general populace being armed to the teeth. Some of my friends believe we all need to be armed in order to resist a coming tyrannical government in our own country.

It seems the primary driving force in our country, in deed in the world, is fear. Fear is a base emotion which lives within each of us. We all fear something. We may fear the dark, spiders, snakes, terrorists, going broke, losing our job, or any number of things and situations. Sometimes we can overcome our fear. It may be that we have enough positive experiences associated with that which we have feared we learn the worst does not and will not happen. We might cognitively realize our fear is irrational.

I know some folks who fear driving in Pittsburgh because they might be shot. Do shootings happen in Pittsburgh? Yes. Of all the people driving in Pittsburgh are some shot? Yes. How many of those who drive in Pittsburgh are shot? Not very many. If I drive in Pittsburgh what are my chances of being shot? Minuscule. Do I allow my fear of being shot while driving in Pittsburgh keep me from going to Pittsburgh? No. I am not captive to my fear.

Fear cages us, enslaves us, immobilizes us. Fear motivates us to build walls on our borders. Fear drives us to not only arm ourselves, but to do so with the biggest, bad ass, weapon we can get our hands on. Fear diminishes us individually and collectively. Can/will we rise above our fears? Can/will we choose to live freely? Can/will we risk that which we fear in order to exhibit the kingdom of God? That is what we are called to.

"Diggin' Up Bones"

In 2012 Randy Travis wrote and recorded a song titled “Diggin’ Up Bones.” Yes, I have long listened to that genre of music. It is what I was raised on, payed on radios at home and jukeboxes in taverns and bars. Travis' song is about a guy grieving a relationship which has died. Here is the link to the song on YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6M2YuAVxuQ. Here are the words of the refrain,

I'm diggin' up bones, I'm diggin' up bones
Exhuming things that's better left alone
I'm resurrecting memories of a love that's dead and gone
Yeah tonight I'm sittin' alone diggin' up bones

One of the things I catch myself doing is "diggin’ up bones" of the church as I once thought it to be. I grieve its loss. I think many of us do that. It doesn’t matter if we are teaching elders (ministers), ruling elders, or members. Many of us who have a length of tenure in the church have a tendency to dwell on former years and experiences in the church. Today, compared to the former days, feels like a dearly held love which has left us alone.

We walk past the rogues’ gallery of portraits of former pastors, and sigh thinking how good things were back then. Somewhere in a classroom or on the walls in the basement are pictures of the men’s Sunday school class fifty plus souls strong. In a display case are the trophies from the church league softball, volleyball or basketball championships our folks won. Our hearts grow sad as those days have blown away like late Autumn leaves skimmering across the road, except in the memories we cling to while hoping beyond hope for their return.

We gather in naves built for two or three hundred or more worshipers and can still imagine seeing Aunt Minnie and Uncle Al Hoppe where they used sit, sometimes their ghosts appear occupying the pew. But the thirty of us who now come continue to sit in our usual places where our families used to fill a whole eight foot pew. On Christmas and Easter we sometimes took up a pew and a half, or had to sit on folding chairs in the aisles. Now, we feel so damn alone. Great voids of space exist between us another worshiper. The minister once joked that she felt the need to wear sunglasses on Sunday during worship so as to not be blinded by the shine off the varnish of the empty pews. That was cruel, and she didn’t need to say that.

Honestly, we spend a lot of time “diggin’ up bones.” We sit entombed waiting for Jesus to call to us, “Lazarus, come out!” and to give instructions to others for our unbinding. Maybe what is keeping us from finding new life is our propensity for “Exhuming things that's better left alone, and resurrecting memories of a church that's dead and gone.” The way it used to be is not the way the church is going to be. Can we dare bury the portraits, the pictures, the trophies of yesterday to make room for what the Spirit may be creating for tomorrow? Can we give up our sacred pew spaces to gather into a more critical mass as we pray and sing? Are we willing to clear out the reminders of yesterday for new treasures today and tomorrow? Or are we content to sit alone “diggin’ up bones?”

Unburied Skeletons

"Abandoned Church - Winter" by Brian Wallace

Across the stretches of rural areas and in the midst of urban neighborhoods lay grim reminders of communities and congregations which have literally given up the ghost. Abandoned and delict church buildings belie the ever optimistic challenge to renew, revitalize, transform a congregation which is just waiting to die, waiting for the last few members to die, waiting, waiting, waiting.

What witness do these buildings give? What hope do they offer? What consolation do they bring to others who are creepingly moving toward the same fate? No longer do hymns resound from them giving glory to God and fortifying the worshippers. Today, they stand like skeletons which were not buried. They are monuments to a past and warnings for the future. Mercifully some have collapsed in the wind, or have become a pile of ashes from a consuming fire. The agony of those still standing presses upon the souls who pass by them traveling to another destination.

Current congregants of declining congregations look upon them as a portent of things to come to their own frail existence. Even as the last gasps of life bleeds from the lungs of the dying ones, they insist, “That will never happened to us.” Some will seek to rally the troops with tales of the exceptional resuscitation of one which had been on the edge of demise. “If it could happen to them, it may be God’s will for us.” There is no one to play the piano or organ. The paint and wallpaper are stained with water from the leaking roof. A window, here and there is cracked from foundation settlement and bulging walls.

In far flung regions where the railroads and highways by-passed once communities fill of promise the people moved on rather than being starved of commercial and industrial energy which would have kept them alive. Yet their edifices of stores, homes, schools, saloons and churches stand in resistance to the primal elements. Only those who go seeking them find them standing lonely against the horizon. The “pickers,” the human vultures, have carried off anything which might have a few pennies of value. In the urban areas some have been repurposed into breweries where there is more life and fellowship than the congregation knew in its last decade or so. Others have become squatter havens and crack houses for those as bereft of life and hope as the cold and drafty buildings themselves.

Vestries, sessions and boards did their best to keep the spirit alive as along as possible. Dioceses, presbyteries and associations sought to provide the necessary life support. In successive efforts to save themselves from death only ensured their death. More tightly they drew their huddling. Insisting on maintaining their solo existence, and refusing to join forces with others near or distant to share resources, to reduce expenses, and to expand mission and ministry.

Has God abandoned them, abandoned us? It is God’s will or our stubbornness which has left these wreckages littering the landscape?  Vainly we struggle to delineate a new identify to carry into a changed and ever changing world. What witness shall we leave behind us, decaying structures of yesterday or vibrant communities of grace, peace, and reconciliation? Do we hasten our death in seeking to save ourselves, or do we boldly proclaim and demonstrate a new and vibrant life spending ourselves for the sake of others?

When we look upon the abandoned edifices of the past let them be a warning to us and a call to us to see our survival is bound to the abundance and free life of all others. Shall we learn nothing or everything from those unburied skeletons of the past?

What Is in a Name?

Names are very important. It is interesting in Genesis 2:19-23, God give the man the opportunity to name all the creatures of the earth. The, in the account, the female was created and the man called this creature “woman.” This new creature was the only one with which the man made a personal identification. I can imagine the man pointing to the different creatures and saying in a rote pattern: that’s a horse, that’s a cow, that’s a Northern pike, that’s a sloth, that’s a……. But with the creation of this last creature, I can imagine the man jumping up and down with excitement, “This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; this one shall be called Woman, for out of Man this one was taken.” (NRSV) This last creature was one with which the Man directly identified.

Maybe I have related this previously, but when my wife and I were expecting our children she wanted names which were not frequently used in her kindergarten classes. I wanted names which had a deeper meaning to them. We wore out more than one baby names book. So for our first born, a boy, we settled on Quinn (Irish, wisdom or the wise) and Amiel (Hebrew, the people of God). Our second born, a girl, we chose Chaya (Hebrew, life) and Elizabeth (Hebrew, the gift or promise of God). Not names frequently found in clsssrooms and names with a deeper meaning.

In Scripture there are several instances of people being given a different name to indicate a change in who/what they are. Abram become Abraham. Sari becomes Sarah. Jacob become Israel. Saul becomes Paul. Simon become Peter. What we call something speaks to its purpose or essence.

I have been fascinated with the changing names for various things or functions in the PC(USA) Book of Order. At one time the four decision making bodies were known a judicatories or courts. Their purpose was to make wise decisions for the life of the church and to render discipline as appropriate (really meaning to settle differences in behavior and theology.) Then, with the 1983 reunion and the cultural distancing from “discipline,” the name of these bodies was changed to “governing bodies.”  Again, in the first decade of the Twenty-first Century, the cultural enmity toward centralized, impositional, governance the name was changed to councils. The effort was to reframe the work of these bodies to be more for discernment than disciplining or governing. The idea is what we call it creates its purpose.

Another example of our renaming has had to do with those who are charged to provide theological leadership within congregations. From Scotland the name was Minister of the Word. As we began to experience liturgical renewal and the sacraments were lifted up, the name was expanded to be Minister of Word and Sacrament. There was a move to reclaim some of the other designations for this functional role, among which was bishop which had been used in pre-reunion days. Again in the early decade of this Century, the ecclesiastical name was changed to teaching elder. Some would say the name is a rather limiting name for the role, and one nobody outside of the officialdom of the PC(USA) understands what it means.

A third instance of changing names in the Book of Order and life of the church has been for some serving in non-ordained specialize service in the church. One of the oldest, I remember, was commissioned church worker. People with that designation may, or may not, have received some special preparation to serve as Christian educators or who had been given permission to lead worship in congregations without an ordained minister. In the later years of the 20^th Century that designation disappeared and a new name and function was given. In order to provide worship leadership for far-flung or language specific congregations the title of certified lay preacher was bestowed upon some. Within a couple of years that name was changed to Commissioned Lay Pastor, and a host of possible additional functions were added. In the early years of the 21^st Century the name was changed to Ruling Elders Commissioned to particular pastoral service. The keep it short they are known as Commissioned Ruling Elders.

The changing of names has become a difficult hurdle for some in the church. It could be likened to changing from the American System of measurement to the metric systems of measurement. It can be very mind twisting. How can we be clear about naming roles and functions without having to have people learn a new language? How do we remain identified excitedly identified with a particular thing if we are always changing its name? Follow this line, the General Assembly Council and the General Assembly Mission Board became the General Assembly Mission Council and then became the General Assembly Mission Agency. Now, there is discussion of combining the General Assembly Mission Agency and the Office of the General Assembly into something which is yet to be named.

I guess we adapt the old rule that “form follows function,” and roll with “name follows function and cultural sensitivities.” Even the Bard deals with the difficulty of what one is named and places it upon the lips of Juliet,

'Tis but thy name that is my enemy;

Thou art thyself, though not a Montague.

What's Montague? it is nor hand, nor foot,

Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part

Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!

What's in a name? that which we call a rose

By any other name would smell as sweet;

So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call'd,

Retain that dear perfection which he owes

Without that title. Romeo, doff thy name,

And for that name which is no part of thee

Take all myself. (Romeo and Juliet)

The Hispanic question is at the root of it all ¿Cómo te llamas?.  How are you called?

https://www.wayostccs.com/getting-started-1.html

A Reflection and A Projection

The recent edition of “The Alban Weekly” (https://alban.org/archive/alternative-pastoral-models/) deals with the issue of congregations not being able to afford full-time pastoral leadership. One of the models offered as an alternative is bi-vocational pastors. This model is nothing new, even though it is now being touted as the wave of the future. I remember when I was in elementary school (a long, long time ago) the local Baptist minister drove a school bus in addition to serving the congregation.

For over twenty years I advocated that prior to presenting a person for ordination as a teaching elder (PCUSA speak for minister) they must be able to demonstrate a second set of skills by which they could earn a living. I could see (serving a presbytery of mainly smaller, rural, aging congregations) that fewer and fewer would be able to afford a full-time pastor. The two general presbyters before me, going back into the 1970s, were already dealing with that. They developed and maintained a larger parish program with a single minister serving as many as six to ten congregations. The minister would itinerate among them on a revolving schedule and usually leading worship in two congregations each week. The congregations paid into the pool for compensation and the presbytery allocated mission funds from the larger congregation to provide a full-time compensation and benefits. For several years this model seemed to work as a means of keeping smaller membership congregations having weekly worship.

A few things eventually led to the end of that model in the presbytery. One was the reluctance of ministers to move into the area and to serve multiple congregations. Another was the growing reluctance of some of the congregations to share pastoral leadership. A third was a decreasing mission income to the presbytery and a greater inability of the participating congregations to contribute to the compensation pool. And I admit, my bias that just keeping the doors open on Sundays was not a particularly faithful model of stewardship.

As our larger parish model was phasing out, the denomination developed a ministry model called commissioned lay preachers. Initially this model was for congregations which were far flung from another with which to share a pastor, with insufficient financial resources, and for language specific congregations. The concept was that a congregation would identify a person in the congregation to serve the worship and pastoral needs of the congregation. Within a short period of time the name was change to commissioned lay pastor (CLP) and some specific educational grounding in worship, theology and polity was required, which was the responsibility of the presbytery to provide. Not too long after that the name was again changed to “ruling elder commissioned to particular pastoral service.” Usually, they were called commissioned ruling elders (CREs).

During this developmental process presbyteries began to determine that the CLPs and then the CREs should not/shall not serve their own congregation. Additionally, presbyteries began a general use of this model as a standard model to provide worship and limited pastoral care for smaller membership congregations. Many congregations seemed to feel entitled to have their own CRE rather than sharing a full-time teaching elder. CREs were not required to receive the full compensation and benefits which were required for installed ministers, or which some presbyteries required for those serving in what are now called “temporary pastoral positions.” By some they were referred it as the “cheaper preacher” model. It was more affordable for the congregations.

There were several consequences arising from this model. One consequence was that some CREs began to expect to be treated with the same status as those ordained as teaching elders. Some even began to wear the preaching robes, which had previously been an indicator of advanced theological education. In a few situations some even began to be referred to as “pastor.” As time passed some of the “sending congregations,” those from which the CREs came, began to want to hold on to their own cadre of leaders instead of sending them off to serve another congregation. Also, some of the CREs missed out on worship and participation in their “home” congregation. In our general area, we saw fewer and fewer people entering the educational process to serve as CREs. We had a consortium of presbyteries and a seminary working together to provide both face to face and virtual preparation courses. Just recently, the seminary has decided it would no longer provide the administrative and virtual support for the program due to decreased enrollment.

Another factor is the denomination, in an effort to give more desecration/power to the presbyteries, eliminated the specific requirements of educational areas for the preparation of CREs. Now each presbytery may decide what, if any, additional areas of preparation will be required. In the early CLP years, the presbytery I served made the decision that a person only needed a high school education to serve as a CLP and then CRE. My former partner in presbytery leadership rightly stated, “The CLPs/CREs are natural speakers of the indigenous theology found in the congregations.” I question if that is enough. A congregation’s theology and practice will only grow to the extent of the one(s)

teaching and preaching in the congregation.

I suggest we move to the hub and satellite model? The teaching elders of the congregations which are still able to afford an installed minister would serve as the hub for support, encouragement, teaching and oversight of the smaller congregations being served by a CRE from within that congregation? The teaching elder of the hub congregation would provide developmental support to the CREs in some core subject areas. In many ways this would reflect what Calvin did in Geneva. It is much the model which is in use in other parts of the world. I am specifically acquainted with Rwanda. The “evangelists” serving the outlying congregations gather regularly with the ordained minister for education, strategy and fellowship. Of course, the congregations with teaching elders and the teaching elders would need to see this as part of their mission.

wayostccs.com