From Rev Claire Childress
With Claire's permission I share the sermon she preached on November 6th, 2005 at First United Methodist Church in Boulder, Colorado.
Oil Reserves
Matthew 25:1-13 November 6, 2005
A father was driving his daughter to a dance lesson early one November morning when out of the blue she asked, “Daddy, why are you wearing that flower?” It was a simple question, and all she wanted was a simple answer, but in the silent moments that he took to respond, wrestling to find the right words, many thoughts came to his mind.
Some of his friends had stopped wearing the poppy, because it was linked for them with the glorification of war, and he wasn’t wearing it out of a sense of national pride or valor. Remembrance Day ceremonies at his daughter’s school were days to sing and talk of peace; the days that formerly had led students into active military service had long passed. He himself had been born a decade after the last World War ended, and he certainly wasn’t wearing a poppy because he had personal memory of friends who had never returned. So why was he wearing the flower?
And then the words came. “I wear this flower every November because it reminds me of the people who died in wars.”
“That’s sad,” his five-year-old said.
“You’re right. It always makes me feel like crying.”
“Then why do you wear it, Daddy?”
“Because I don’t ever want to forget to cry.”
I like this story for this morning for several reasons. First, the remembrance of all who continue to die in wars. Next, our love and grief for those whom we especially remember today on All Saints Sunday. And also, sadly, for what has occurred in our denomination this past week.
As some of you know, The United Methodist Church’s Judicial Council – the equivalent of the Supreme Court – handed down two grievous decisions early this past week. One of them was expected – the final removal of the clergy credentials of The Rev. Beth Stroud, a gifted and beloved pastor who has been fighting to hold onto her ministry since she came out as a lesbian living in a long-term committed relationship. That one was pretty much expected.
What has stunned nearly everyone is what the Council did in a case few of us even knew about until this week, involving a pastor in Virginia who late last year denied church membership to a man because he is a practicing homosexual.
When that happened, his Bishop, district superintendent, and all but twenty of over six hundred pastors voted to remove him as leader of a congregation. The pastor then appealed that decision to the Judicial Council, who this week ruled that he was within his rights, and that pastors can exclude anyone we deem inappropriate for membership in our churches. This is frightening.
There has been a firestorm of protest, which I hope will only grow. In Denver, a prayer vigil at Iliff and conference offices took place on Thursday, along with a media statement and plans for an ad in The United Methodist Reporter.
The Council of Bishops has issued a pastoral letter which they request be read or distributed in every congregation, stating that homosexuality is not a barrier to membership and urging all pastors and laity to make every congregation a community of hospitality. Copies are available on the table by the main doors.
The Board of Ordained Ministry of the Baltimore Washington Conference has passed a resolution asking the Council of Bishops to call for a special session of General Conference to be held as soon as possible to clarify the authority and accountability of pastors, cabinets, bishops, Boards of Ordained Ministry and clergy sessions as to whom may be received as member of our churches.
Two former Judicial Council members, including Sally Geis of Denver, have formally requested that United Methodist Communications withdraw all references to the current slogan “Open Hearts, Open Minds, Open Doors,” since the Judicial Council decision makes the statement untrue and obviously false advertising.
St. Luke’s United Methodist Church in Indianapolis has e-mailed a petition addressed to the Judicial Council urging reversal of this decision. That is also in the narthex for any of you who wish to sign. It’s at the welcome table.
Don Messer, former Iliff president now an activist for AIDS awareness, cautions that reconsideration of this action will take months and that the composition of the Council would make a reversal a miracle. Instead, he finds hope that even in Virginia – far from the most liberal of conferences – only a handful of pastors thought this was okay, and that the overwhelming majority of United Methodists nationwide will be ashamed of this action and want to reaffirm our church’s open membership. The Judicial Council does not speak for the church, he insists, and reminds us that Bishop Melvin Wheatley used to always encourage us never to surrender the church to the right-wingers, and to affirm that it is our church regardless of those who seek to exclude us.
Likewise Ron Hodges, Director of Mission and Ministry for this conference, writes that when the many lay friends who are asking him why they should stay in the United Methodist church when the Council’s decisions are so foreign to their personal beliefs, he says this: “You need to stay because your witness is so much greater from within the church than it will ever be from without.”
Which brings me to the gospel lesson for today. (Matthew 25:1-13) This is the lectionary text; I didn’t select it. It’s perfect, though. Here’s why.
Most scholars consider this text to be an allegory – each major element is a symbol for something. The wedding banquet, for example, is a symbol for the kingdom of heaven; the long-awaited bridegroom clearly is the expected Son of Man, Jesus Christ.
[I need to stop here for a minute and tell you about this word “kindom.” I learned it from Cal McConnell. It’s in your bulletins twice this morning, not a misprint, but a word to use instead of “kingdom,” which can have connotations of male domination, hierarchy, and other things we don’t associate with God’s realm. If we leave out the “g,” and make it “kindom,” the word more accurately reflects what we imagine – the family of God, humankind, related to one another, connected in the Spirit.]
The strange midnight arrival of the bridegroom underscores the expectation that the messiah will come an unexpected time, like a thief in the night, and the cry of the foolish bridesmaids, “Lord, Lord” evokes the sad response of the groom, “I do not know you . . . .” It all echoes the judgment in Matthew Chapter 7 where “not everyone who says to me ‘Lord, Lord’ will enter the kingdom of heaven” and Christ will turn away from evildoers with a dire “I never knew you.”
This judgment stuff is hard for us – after all, we’re hurt and angry that some of our brothers and sisters have been judged unfit, so how can we do the same thing? I have a big struggle here, but what I can get into is this odd business of who is wise and who is foolish, and what having enough oil has to do with it.
Why is having an extra flask of oil the characteristic that distinguishes wise from foolish in this parable? Is it that the “wise” bridesmaids have enough oil to work through the long night of waiting for the bridegroom, doing the will of God without ceasing while the realm of God is delayed?
Sounds good, but there’s a problem. None of the bridesmaids not even the wise ones, actually worked through the night. They all slept, wise and foolish.
The wise bridesmaids are described as “those who were ready.” For what? We imagine it to mean ready for the bridegroom, but so were the foolish ones – all of them were eager for his arrival.
What were the wise ones ready for that the foolish were not? THE DELAY!!!!!
Bringing along an extra flask of oil signals that they are ready for the bridegroom to arrive early or late. If he had arrived on time, all the bridesmaids would have greeted him and waltzed merrily into the banquet.
But the groom, like the kindom of heaven, did not arrive promptly. He was delayed, and some two thousand years later, the kindom is still delayed.
The wise ones in the church are those who are prepared for the delay; who hold onto the faith deep into the night; who, even though they see no bridegroom coming, still serve and hope and pray and wait and work for the promised victory of God.
In the contemporary words of a good pastor friend who e-mailed me this week, “What distinguished wise from foolish is that the wise were prepared for the delay, were prepared for some stupid decisions from on high, were prepared for discouragement, were prepared to know that simply because some dumb judicial agency makes a foolish ruling, this cannot, cannot, keep the bridegroom from coming. And this bridegroom who comes is for mercy, righteousness, and peace. And those who try to keep gays and lesbians out of the kingdom are going to be off at the oil shop when the bridegroom comes.
‘Lord, didn’t we pass legislation that honored you?’ they will cry. ‘I never knew you,’ will come the awful reply.”
Regardless of our sexual orientation, any of us, or our theology, or our politics; whether we are proud of being a Reconciling Congregation or wish we had never heard the term, I solemnly hope that all of us are profoundly and personally offended by what the Judicial Council has done. I call on us, every one, to respond in some way, according to the Spirit’s leading.
It seems to me there is no more fitting way to honor those who have gone before us, giving so much of themselves to this church, and those who will come after us, that these doors will be open to them, whoever they are.
I’ll close with these well-known words by The Rev. Martin Niemoller, written in 1945. You’ve heard them:
First they came for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
and by that time there was no one
left to speak up for me.
Oil Reserves
Matthew 25:1-13 November 6, 2005
A father was driving his daughter to a dance lesson early one November morning when out of the blue she asked, “Daddy, why are you wearing that flower?” It was a simple question, and all she wanted was a simple answer, but in the silent moments that he took to respond, wrestling to find the right words, many thoughts came to his mind.
Some of his friends had stopped wearing the poppy, because it was linked for them with the glorification of war, and he wasn’t wearing it out of a sense of national pride or valor. Remembrance Day ceremonies at his daughter’s school were days to sing and talk of peace; the days that formerly had led students into active military service had long passed. He himself had been born a decade after the last World War ended, and he certainly wasn’t wearing a poppy because he had personal memory of friends who had never returned. So why was he wearing the flower?
And then the words came. “I wear this flower every November because it reminds me of the people who died in wars.”
“That’s sad,” his five-year-old said.
“You’re right. It always makes me feel like crying.”
“Then why do you wear it, Daddy?”
“Because I don’t ever want to forget to cry.”
I like this story for this morning for several reasons. First, the remembrance of all who continue to die in wars. Next, our love and grief for those whom we especially remember today on All Saints Sunday. And also, sadly, for what has occurred in our denomination this past week.
As some of you know, The United Methodist Church’s Judicial Council – the equivalent of the Supreme Court – handed down two grievous decisions early this past week. One of them was expected – the final removal of the clergy credentials of The Rev. Beth Stroud, a gifted and beloved pastor who has been fighting to hold onto her ministry since she came out as a lesbian living in a long-term committed relationship. That one was pretty much expected.
What has stunned nearly everyone is what the Council did in a case few of us even knew about until this week, involving a pastor in Virginia who late last year denied church membership to a man because he is a practicing homosexual.
When that happened, his Bishop, district superintendent, and all but twenty of over six hundred pastors voted to remove him as leader of a congregation. The pastor then appealed that decision to the Judicial Council, who this week ruled that he was within his rights, and that pastors can exclude anyone we deem inappropriate for membership in our churches. This is frightening.
There has been a firestorm of protest, which I hope will only grow. In Denver, a prayer vigil at Iliff and conference offices took place on Thursday, along with a media statement and plans for an ad in The United Methodist Reporter.
The Council of Bishops has issued a pastoral letter which they request be read or distributed in every congregation, stating that homosexuality is not a barrier to membership and urging all pastors and laity to make every congregation a community of hospitality. Copies are available on the table by the main doors.
The Board of Ordained Ministry of the Baltimore Washington Conference has passed a resolution asking the Council of Bishops to call for a special session of General Conference to be held as soon as possible to clarify the authority and accountability of pastors, cabinets, bishops, Boards of Ordained Ministry and clergy sessions as to whom may be received as member of our churches.
Two former Judicial Council members, including Sally Geis of Denver, have formally requested that United Methodist Communications withdraw all references to the current slogan “Open Hearts, Open Minds, Open Doors,” since the Judicial Council decision makes the statement untrue and obviously false advertising.
St. Luke’s United Methodist Church in Indianapolis has e-mailed a petition addressed to the Judicial Council urging reversal of this decision. That is also in the narthex for any of you who wish to sign. It’s at the welcome table.
Don Messer, former Iliff president now an activist for AIDS awareness, cautions that reconsideration of this action will take months and that the composition of the Council would make a reversal a miracle. Instead, he finds hope that even in Virginia – far from the most liberal of conferences – only a handful of pastors thought this was okay, and that the overwhelming majority of United Methodists nationwide will be ashamed of this action and want to reaffirm our church’s open membership. The Judicial Council does not speak for the church, he insists, and reminds us that Bishop Melvin Wheatley used to always encourage us never to surrender the church to the right-wingers, and to affirm that it is our church regardless of those who seek to exclude us.
Likewise Ron Hodges, Director of Mission and Ministry for this conference, writes that when the many lay friends who are asking him why they should stay in the United Methodist church when the Council’s decisions are so foreign to their personal beliefs, he says this: “You need to stay because your witness is so much greater from within the church than it will ever be from without.”
Which brings me to the gospel lesson for today. (Matthew 25:1-13) This is the lectionary text; I didn’t select it. It’s perfect, though. Here’s why.
Most scholars consider this text to be an allegory – each major element is a symbol for something. The wedding banquet, for example, is a symbol for the kingdom of heaven; the long-awaited bridegroom clearly is the expected Son of Man, Jesus Christ.
[I need to stop here for a minute and tell you about this word “kindom.” I learned it from Cal McConnell. It’s in your bulletins twice this morning, not a misprint, but a word to use instead of “kingdom,” which can have connotations of male domination, hierarchy, and other things we don’t associate with God’s realm. If we leave out the “g,” and make it “kindom,” the word more accurately reflects what we imagine – the family of God, humankind, related to one another, connected in the Spirit.]
The strange midnight arrival of the bridegroom underscores the expectation that the messiah will come an unexpected time, like a thief in the night, and the cry of the foolish bridesmaids, “Lord, Lord” evokes the sad response of the groom, “I do not know you . . . .” It all echoes the judgment in Matthew Chapter 7 where “not everyone who says to me ‘Lord, Lord’ will enter the kingdom of heaven” and Christ will turn away from evildoers with a dire “I never knew you.”
This judgment stuff is hard for us – after all, we’re hurt and angry that some of our brothers and sisters have been judged unfit, so how can we do the same thing? I have a big struggle here, but what I can get into is this odd business of who is wise and who is foolish, and what having enough oil has to do with it.
Why is having an extra flask of oil the characteristic that distinguishes wise from foolish in this parable? Is it that the “wise” bridesmaids have enough oil to work through the long night of waiting for the bridegroom, doing the will of God without ceasing while the realm of God is delayed?
Sounds good, but there’s a problem. None of the bridesmaids not even the wise ones, actually worked through the night. They all slept, wise and foolish.
The wise bridesmaids are described as “those who were ready.” For what? We imagine it to mean ready for the bridegroom, but so were the foolish ones – all of them were eager for his arrival.
What were the wise ones ready for that the foolish were not? THE DELAY!!!!!
Bringing along an extra flask of oil signals that they are ready for the bridegroom to arrive early or late. If he had arrived on time, all the bridesmaids would have greeted him and waltzed merrily into the banquet.
But the groom, like the kindom of heaven, did not arrive promptly. He was delayed, and some two thousand years later, the kindom is still delayed.
The wise ones in the church are those who are prepared for the delay; who hold onto the faith deep into the night; who, even though they see no bridegroom coming, still serve and hope and pray and wait and work for the promised victory of God.
In the contemporary words of a good pastor friend who e-mailed me this week, “What distinguished wise from foolish is that the wise were prepared for the delay, were prepared for some stupid decisions from on high, were prepared for discouragement, were prepared to know that simply because some dumb judicial agency makes a foolish ruling, this cannot, cannot, keep the bridegroom from coming. And this bridegroom who comes is for mercy, righteousness, and peace. And those who try to keep gays and lesbians out of the kingdom are going to be off at the oil shop when the bridegroom comes.
‘Lord, didn’t we pass legislation that honored you?’ they will cry. ‘I never knew you,’ will come the awful reply.”
Regardless of our sexual orientation, any of us, or our theology, or our politics; whether we are proud of being a Reconciling Congregation or wish we had never heard the term, I solemnly hope that all of us are profoundly and personally offended by what the Judicial Council has done. I call on us, every one, to respond in some way, according to the Spirit’s leading.
It seems to me there is no more fitting way to honor those who have gone before us, giving so much of themselves to this church, and those who will come after us, that these doors will be open to them, whoever they are.
I’ll close with these well-known words by The Rev. Martin Niemoller, written in 1945. You’ve heard them:
First they came for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
and by that time there was no one
left to speak up for me.
posted by Rev Waters | 9:07 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home