Holy Hell Week and Low Sunday

It is Tuesday of Holy Week. Get some rest now for the marathon of worship services of Maundy Thursday, Good Friday and Easter Sunday. I remember feeling so exhausted by the end of the Easter worship I began to refer to the week as holy hell week. There was generally a minimum of three worship services to prepare and as many homilies or sermons to be written and delivered. One community in which I served had an early morning breakfast each day of Holy Week, which meant that five of the ministers had one more presentation to prepare for the breakfast.

In another congregation in which I served there were three deaths in the congregation during Holy Week, including the death of an infant. I had never had the experience of trying to minister to a family in such a circumstance. That truly was one holy hell week.

How do we bring a new word during this annual drama? The script never changes. Everybody in the pews has a minimal working knowledge of the four acts or movements of the Holy Week octave. Yet, each year we work hard to make it all fresh and deeply soul touching so it crescendos into the Easter acclamation “Alleluia! Christ is Risen!”

Bruce Reyes Chow postulated, in 2011, that we should not make such a big deal out of Easter in his blog titled, Why Easter Worship Service Should Be Nothing Special. It is clear to see why the Sunday after Easter is typically called “Low Sunday.” The preacher takes the Sunday off to recuperate from the physical and spiritual exhaustion. The fanfare and exuberance of the musicians is spent. The crowd has dispersed. The faithful few are the only ones in attendance. Compared to the week before, the whole worship experience feels flat, but does it need to be?

Isn’t every Sunday an Easter Sunday? Isn’t each Sunday called The Lord’s Day? Aren’t we in the liturgical season of Eastertide? What if each Sunday we began with the call and response, “Christ is risen!” “He is risen indeed!” What if worship began with strong, lively, rafter shaking music? What if preachers did not take the Sunday off? What if our worship was a startling as was Jesus’ appearances to the disciples?

Preachers, musicians, worshippers maybe we need to tone down Easter Sunday and amp up the Sundays after Easter.

Caught in the Middle, Again

Over the years I have observed an unspoken but very real tension involving pastors and congregants. There are plenty of areas for there to be tensions: politics, theology, external versus internal orientation, chaplaincy or mission, contemporary or traditional worship, and the lists go on. Each pastor can list their own series of tension areas. Yet, there is one in which the pastor is caught and very well may not have the first inclination of its reality.

For a while I thought this tension was peculiar to western Pennsylvania. Upon reflection on other areas of the country where I have served, I now think it is far more pervasive in the Church and across the country. As a pastor, as a member and chair of the Committee on Ministry, and as a General Presbyter (kind of like a Methodist District Superintendent) I have had ample opportunity to observe this cloaked tension. Regardless of congregational size or location this tension is not actually between the pastor and members of the congregation, but the pastor is definitely caught in the tension.

The tension is visible with the annual review of pastoral compensation, or when the pastor asks permission to go on a spiritual retreat for some decompression time. Listen in the corridors or in the parking lot and you will hear comments about the pastor being paid too much; “we don’t get four weeks of vacation after only a year on the job;” “I don’t get paid mileage;” “Don’t they learn enough in seminary? Why do they need continuing education time and funding;” “Now, the pastor wants more time off the job to gaze at their navel.”

The tension in the life of the congregation is between those with a labor or management mindset. There are those in the congregation with what I call a management or owners perspective. Likewise there are those with what I call a labor perspective. Before I go further, let me admit to using stereotypes and not disparaging any particular people or status. Those with a management or owners perspective tend to view the pastor as an employee. Those with this perspective typically want the most production for the least cost and with the least lost time. Those with a labor perspective tend to view the pastor as upper management, and “everybody knows they are paid too much for what little they do.”

Therefore, pastoral compensation and down time are suppressed by each perspective. If asked nobody in a congregation would admit to functioning from either perspective. Yet, listening to comments and observing attitudes the hidden management/labor perspectives function in the life of the congregation. It is possible for both perspectives to be voiced by the same congregants depending on the situation. There are very few voices from comparable “professionals” in the life of a congregation who will champion the cause of the pastor.

What is a pastor to do? There is little which can be done, other than to realize it is another of the tensions/binds which come with pastoral ministry.

The Detroit Presbyterian Council

In a little more than two months Presbyterians will gather in the supreme Council of our denomination. Teaching Elders (ministers) and Ruling Elders will gather much the same as the leaders of the early church gathered in Jerusalem, as did the Council of Nicaea, the First and Second Vatican Councils, and the myriad Councils of the Church throughout history. The one commonality among all the Councils is each convened amid controversy. Controversy will certainly mark the Council of Presbyterians which will meet in Detroit.

Some are referring to the three Ms before the General Assembly this year: Marriage, Mid-Councils and Middle East. The Council will make a decision as to whether to send to the presbyteries a constitutional amendment on changing the definition of marriage. The Council will decide whether to reduce the number of synods from sixteen to eight. The Council will add it voice to issues centered on Israel & Palestine. Any one of the three Ms could warrant the Council’s singular attention without the three being lumped into one meeting.

I believe there is a fourth and fifth M which are at the center of the Council of Presbyterians’ concerns. The two additional Ms are members and money. These two Ms are the epicenter of our collective anxiety. The issues of members and money are directly related to the other three Ms. Some of the largest congregations in the denomination have withdrawn or are in the process of withdrawing to other denominations, because of previous decisions of the General Assembly, members and money are drained from the denominational statistics and coffers.

I have lost track of how many Assemblies it has been since we have not begun the Council meeting with the question, “Is this the year when we will be torn apart?” In fact, following each General Assembly meeting there have been, and will be, those whose disagreement with a particular decision motivates them to seek another spiritual home. The last six decades have seen some the most serious fracturing of the Presbyterian Church, in this nation, since the division into the Northern and Southern branches. Since 1967 we have witnessed the rise of the Presbyterian Church in America, the Evangelical Presbyterian Church and the Covenant Order of Evangelical Presbyterians. With each fracture members and money are the real generators of our anxiety.

We will gather in Detroit with three Ms as the presenting issues and the two other Ms are the true sources of our anxiety. How much will our anxiety drive the decisions of the Council?

The Voice & Preaching

Tonight I was watching The Voice, again. Once again, I am super impressed with Usher as a judge and as a coach. His vibe seems so real and supportive of his team members. While watching The Voice, I was also on my Facebook page. A friend, Steve Fleming, recommended an article from the Ministry Today magazine and I read the article while watching/listening to The Voice. (http://ministrytodaymag.com/index.php/ministry-leadership/preaching/20795-how-much-sermon-preparation-time-is-enough)  Another friend, Jan DeVries, was wondering if anybody plans to attend the Homiletics Festival in May.

My thoughts began to combine the two media. Like many/most/all preachers, I know there are times when I think nobody preaches as well as I do. When I am in worship and hear other preachers, my mind cannot help but fill in some spaces, use some different illustrations, and exude more or less energy in the delivery. Many times, I am also collecting points on style and content to consider using myself. Also, I know other preachers do the same when I am the one preaching. It is the blessing and curse of being a preacher with other preachers present.

I wonder if we could improve the preaching, in general, if we had a periodic "preach-off" like the blind auditions, coaching and a battle round? What if instead of seminary preaching classes, with peers tearing apart each other’s sermon content and presentation, the classes were done more like the coaches on The Voice working with their team members? The idea is not to crown the best preacher, but to give improvement “notes” for each and all. (Yeah, “Preaching is not a competition,” say most preachers.) Who are we kidding?

As Teaching Elders and Commissioned Ruling Elders, eighty percent of our exposure to fifty to seventy-five percent of the congregation members and visitors happens in the worship hour. If we cannot proclaim the word with sincerity, devotion, and energy how can we expect the people to express sincerity, devotion and energy in worship? Like a song, a sermon builds to a crescendo and holds the congregation there to the end. This is true for those which are rafter shaking and those which are so tender and sensitive a profound hush is the only possible response.

There are a lot of theories on both the content and delivery of sermons. There is validity in each. Like the singers on The Voice each of us has to find our voice, our style, for sermon construction and delivery. How can we help each other improve in the construction, content and delivery of our sermons? Would working with a personal preaching coach help? Would a preach-off help, challenging preachers to bring their best stuff all the while being humble enough to take the “notes” seriously? Whatever it takes I believe we need a serious effort to improve preaching, across the board.

Council Minutes

The last two days have been given to the peer review of synod minutes. A synod, in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), is the third more inclusive geographic council. The councils begin at the local congregation (session); expanding to include all the congregations in a larger geographic region (presbytery); expanding to include all the presbyteries in a multi-state geographic region (synod); expanding to include all the presbyteries and synods on a national  level. Under the auspice of a “general administrative review,” each more inclusive council reviews the actions of the lesser inclusive councils. This is a means of ensuring the lesser inclusive council is doing things “decently and in order.”

That all seems to be a very dry and boring task. In some instances, it is. Sometimes the review seems to focus on straining at gnats and swallowing camels. Jots and tittles, sometimes, seem more important that the general flow of life and faith. Sometimes, it seems form is far more important than content. Sometimes, it seems the review is more looking for “gotchas” than encouraging.

However, the minutes of the various church councils are important because they are a continuation of the Acts of the Apostles. Council minutes not only are to accurately record the proceedings of each council meeting, the council minutes record how each council is carrying forward God’s salvific mission in that geographic area. If all which was recorded in the Acts of the Apostles is that the council met in Jerusalem, it was moved, seconded and passed to approve a mission to the gentiles, we would know very little about the spread of the Gospel.

Instead, what we have is a very lively account of the early decades of the Church. We are told, of the Council in Jerusalem, who attended, what the presenting issues were, how decisions were made and carried forward. We are told, “There was no small debate among them.” I love the understatement there. What was being proposed was a radical change for the Church. If, how and under what circumstances could gentiles be accepted into the Church were the primary questions to be answered. I imagine, from the understatement about the debate, it was an extended and heated debate. Even after the decision was reached, there were those who actively opposed it.

There were those who argued that those of the Way were a branch of Judaism and “followers of the Way” must adhere to all the rites and rituals of Judaism. On the other hand, there were those who clearly saw and experienced the movement of God’s Spirit among gentiles and who argued they should not be expected to subject themselves to practices and customs of Judaism to be included in the Church. A compromise decision was reached and gentiles could be included in the Church. Following that, we have the various accounts of the spread of the Gospel.

Minutes of our councils are, but are far more, than a record of the actions of each particular council. Council minutes continue to tell the story of God’s action with and through the Church. The review of council minutes provides a consistent form for the record of the council, and provides the continuing narrative of the Church seeking to be faithful to God’s mission. I only wish there were a way to lift up the content over the form in the peer reviews.

How Much IS Enough

This past Sunday, I worshipped at one of the more affluent congregations in a presbytery near where I live. I attend their “contemporary” Two weeks ago I worshipped with the same congregation in their “traditional” service. Two weeks ago, it was a very snowy morning; I was struck by the low worship attendance, compared to what I expected. Last Sunday, the room was packed. Usually, the seating is arranged for about 120 people. The two services are held simultaneously. The traditional service in the traditional worship area, and the contemporary service in a repurposed gym and fellowship area. The pastor told me that some folks go to the service where he is preaching.

What struck me most about last Sunday’s service was the gutsiness of the pastor. His primary verse of focus was Matthew 6:24. You cannot serve God and wealth. Remember, this is an affluent congregation in a very affluent suburb. The pastor did point out, Scripture does not say “money is the root of all evil,” but it says, “The love of money is the root of all evil.” (1 Timothy 6:10). Still in all, the sermon was bound to have seriously challenged the core of the life on many of the worshippers.

The pastor did not bludgeon the worshippers with the text. He did not point to their lavish lifestyles, opulent homes or the number of Mercedes and Cadillacs in the parking lots. (Something which was obvious to me when I parked my 2008 Pontiac G6 by a very well appointed Mercedes.

The pastor’s challenge to the worshippers was around what we do with our wealth. He pointed to the recent edition of Forbes magazine which listed the wealthiest billionaires in the world. (A decade or two ago, Forbes listed the millionaires.) What does one do with a billion dollars? How many homes, cars, yachts is enough. He point to J. D. Rockefeller, who when asked how much would be enough money, who replied, “Just a little more.”

It caused me to ask that question of myself. I have to admit, we live in a better house than I ever imagined us living in. We have greater financial flexibility than I ever imagined us having. Yes, I want to enjoy a few things in these later years which we couldn’t in earlier years. Yes, I want to leave some resources to our children and grand-children. I do, however, have to ask, “How much is enough, and what am I doing with our wealth to improve the lives of others?”

That is a question we all have to ask and answer.

Caution, Toxic Area

I just read a report about a nuclear waste dump in the area of the presbytery in which I served for 23 years. A company had established a nuclear materials facility in a flood plain and was not all that careful about the residue from their work. Some years ago the Army Corps of engineers began a toxic cleanup of the site. Over 100 truckloads of soil were hauled away to a dumping site out of the flood plain. Suddenly the cleanup stopped with the discovery of plutonium and uranium that the Corps was ill-equipped to handle. Since that time nothing more has been done with the cleanup. The dumpsite where the truckloads of material were hauled is surrounded with a tall metal fence with concertina wire atop it. At one point, military guards were stationed at the entrance with lethal firepower.

In my experience, there are some congregations which have become irreparably toxic. At some point in the past something happened. Years of effort to clean-up the mess have only removed some of the more superficial toxic residue. Perhaps the damage came in the form of sexual or fiscal misconduct within the congregation. Maybe the damage was done as the result of a congregational split. Regardless of the reason for the toxicity, in spite of rigorous efforts to remove the toxic memories, the life of the congregation has been so poisoned a thorough clean-up is impossible.

In the story of the nuclear site and the dump site, those in the town and surrounding area are fearful of the nuclear material getting into the food supply of gardeners and farmers. They are fearful further efforts to remove the even more dangerous materials might cause the materials to become air borne. This does not even begin to address how many others downstream have been or may be effected by the nuclear materials leeching into the water supply. Yet, there has been and is no mass exodus of residents. Most remain and try to carry on with their daily lives.

In toxic congregations some members hang on and hang on praying for the day a new cleanup effort might be successful. All the while, the presbytery, conference, or diocese has stopped cleanup efforts when discovering the extent of the toxicity and stuff they are ill-prepared to handle. At times members from the toxic congregation do move to a new congregation totally unaware they carry some of the toxin with them. The toxin has entered their emotional and spiritual DNA. The new congregation welcomes them with open arms. At some point in the future the toxin begins to replicate itself in the new congregation. A congregation of little conflict becomes a congregation of high conflict as members from the toxic congregation begin to react to situations or people which remind them of what happened or what might happen.

Dealing with toxic congregations is as perplexing as dealing with nuclear sites and dumps. I know of one toxic congregation which a presbytery closed, after years of trying to guide the congregation to being a nuclear free zone, and after four pastors all left within the third year of their service in the midst of high conflict. Maybe all we can do is to encase the toxicity, surround the site with high fences with concertina wire, and warn away future members and pastors.

I have no answers for this one. I have seen it in small and larger congregations; in city, suburban and rural congregations; in highly educated and barely literate congregations. There are no instant means of removing the toxicity of a nuclear site, nor of a congregation.