Beth Quick

Oops - I forgot to post these last week. Better late than never? 
Readings for 15th Sunday after Pentecost, 9/5/10:
Jeremiah 18:1-11, Psalm 139:1-6, 13-18, Philemon 1-21, Luke 14:25-33

Jeremiah 18:1-11:

• Potter imagery - God as the potter, remolding us, remaking our clay pots. This imagery of being remade, the flaws worked out of us can be so powerful and moving. The problem is that this passage actually speaks of God being quite upset with us humans! God wants to "pluck up and break down and destroy" because we've messed up so bad! Can we handle that? Are we willing to be remolded to that degree?
• What I do like about the image of potter and clay is that the same piece of clay is used - just remade. The clay is the same substance. We are not wiped out completely. Can we read this like we read being made new in Christ, casting of the old and putting on the new?
• I dislike that God seems so moody and temperamental here again, like a child throwing a tantrum - "one moment" wanting to destroy and "at another moment" building up.
• "I am a potter shaping evil against you and devising a plan against you." Eek! God shaping evil against us is not good. Jeremiah is warning with full force - get you act together, or you will have a lot to deal with!

Psalm 139:1-6, 13-18:

• Compare this with Pentecost 13C's reading from Jeremiah 1:4-10 - the same themes and imagery are in both passages.
• I would read the whole selection of vs. 1-18 in worship. The middle stuff is too good to leave out. 
• Not only did God knit us together in our mother's womb, but this whole passage reads like we are in God's womb - hemmed in by God behind and before. Our life is in God's womb - that is a very peaceful and comforting thought.
• How weighty to us are God's thoughts - great image - the heaviness of the deepness of God's creative mind. 
• "I am fearfully and wonderfully made." This psalm affirms God and God's power, but also affirms our human worth and goodness - a rare scriptural combination. You are fearfully and wonderfully made. How well do you know that? How many in this society know that and are taught to know that?

Philemon 1-21

• Poor little Philemon - such a short little book - better pay it some attention on the only Sunday in the cycle it makes it into the lectionary!
• Philemon has been an interesting book in the past in discussions about slavery - does the Bible justify it or not, and is that even a relevant/accurate way to ask the question? I think Philemon brings up the importance of looking at context of scripture and what the text says given the context. Here Paul is trying to argue for a runaway slave to stay freed - doing a little persuasive writing to the master of Onesimus. In a society with servants and masters, Jesus made use of these dynamics in his own teachings to turn our understanding of these roles and our status desires upside down. What other contexts do the scriptures work within to transform our understandings anyway? Gender? Sexuality? Economics?

Luke 14:25-33:

• This text is another from Luke that talks about the divisions that come with discipleship even into the closest relationships of family. Jesus is going straight to the point here, hitting us at our weakest points, our closest and dearest relationships (usually, at least!) What is your discipleship worth to you? What price are you willing to pay for the hard life of following Jesus? Count the cost!
• "All your possessions" - The Greek word for possessions, huparcousin, is interesting in its variety of meanings. 'Possessions' is a very accurate translation, but for fun, it also means: to begin, to make a beginning, to be ready, to be in existence, to be taken for granted, etc.
• Also, the Greek word translated as disciples, mathe^te^s, literally means a 'learner' or a 'pupil' - that's what Jesus wants us to be - students of his, learning from him as much as possible. What will we give to be his students?

Sermon 8/29/10Luke 14:1, 7-14, Hebrews 13:1-8, 15-16

Let There Be Peace on Earth

"Let there be peace on earth, and let it begin with me; let there be peace on earth, the peace that was meant to be/ With God our creator, children all are we. Let us walk with each other in perfect harmony. Let peace begin with me; let this be the moment now. With every step I take, let this be my solemn vow: to take each moment and live each moment in peace eternally. Let there be peace on earth, and let it begin with me." This short and simple hymn takes seventh place in our congregation's top-ten hymn list. According to their company, Jan-Lee Music, “Sy Miller and Jill Jackson were a husband and wife songwriting team, who, in 1955, wrote a song about their dream of peace for the world and how they believed each one of us could help create it.” Jill was a former actress, having starred in many Westerns in the 1930s, and Sy was a composer for Warner Brothers. Jill wrote lyrics. Sy composed music. “They first introduced [Let There Be Peace on Earth] to a group of teenagers selected from their high schools to attend a weeklong retreat in California. The young people were purposefully from different religious, racial, cultural and economic backgrounds, brought together to experiment with creating understanding and friendship through education, discussion groups, and living and working together in a camp situation.” Sy Miller describes how it happened:He said, “One summer evening in 1955, a group of 180 teenagers of all races and religions, meeting at a workshop high in the California mountains locked arms, formed a circle and sang a song of peace. They felt that singing the song, with its simple basic sentiment – 'Let there be peace on earth and let it begin with me,' helped to create a climate for world peace and understanding. When they came down from the mountain, these inspired young people brought the song with them and started sharing it. And, as though on wings, 'Let There Be Peace on Earth' began an amazing journey around the globe. It traveled first, of course, with the young campers back to their homes and schools, churches and clubs. Soon the circle started by the teenagers began to grow. Before long the song was being shared in all fifty states – at school graduations and at PTA meetings, at Christmas and Easter gatherings and as part of the celebration of Brotherhood Week. It was a theme for Veteran’s Day, Human Rights Day and United Nations Day. 4H Clubs and the United Auto Workers began singing it . . . It was taped, recorded, copied, printed in songbooks, and passed by word of mouth. The song spread overseas [and around the world.]” (2)For Jill Jackson, the song had a more personal meaning. According to peacehistory.org, Jackson spoke of her early life—how she became an orphan as a young girl, and her difficult journey through foster care, that led her into despair and attempted suicide. She describes that it was then that she realized the presence of a higher power in her life and how she eventually came to [develop] the song. She said, “When I attempted suicide and I didn't succeed, I knew for the first time unconditional love—which God is. God is unconditional love. You are totally loved, totally accepted, just the way you are. In that moment I was not allowed to die, and something happened to me which is very difficult to explain. I had an eternal moment of truth, in which I knew I was loved, and knew I was here for a purpose." (2) “Let There Be Peace on Earth was awarded the George Washington Honor Medal by the Freedoms Foundation at Valley Forge for “Outstanding achievement in helping to bring about a better understanding of the American Way of Life.” It also received a Brotherhood Award from the National Conference of Christians and Jews.” In Sy Miller’s words again: ‘This simple thought, 'Let There Be Peace on Earth, and Let It Begin With Me' first born on a mountain top in the voices of youth, continues to travel heart to heart – gathering in people everywhere who wish to become a note in a song of understanding and peace—peace for all [human]kind." (1) So today we have this peace song, and we also have our gospel lesson from Luke. Jesus is giving something of an etiquette lesson, with, of course, his own unique spin. He’s at the house of one of the leaders of the Pharisees, eating a Sabbath meal, and we read that he’s being closely observed by those who are there. No doubt, some of the religious leaders are just looking for Jesus to do or say something that they can criticize. But Jesus is also closely observing the guests. We frequently see Jesus at meals in the gospels, and he often uses mealtime as a teaching time. He watches how the social hierarchy plays out at meals. He sees people wanting the seats of highest honor. People sit according to status, and everyone seems eager to show off how important they are by where they’re sitting. But Jesus tells people to do just the opposite of what they would normally: When you're invited over to a wedding banquet - don't choose the best place - choose the worst. Why? Well, you don't want to be embarrassed and asked to move to a lower place so a more important guest can take a seat! Those who exalt themselves are humbled, but those who humble themselves are exalted. In the next example, Jesus advises that those who host a dinner should not invite relatives, friends, and rich neighbors, but should instead invited the poor, crippled, lame, and blind, those unable to return an invitation. Don't look for repayment from humans, Jesus urges, but from God, whose rewards much more valuable.Jesus' advice, as usual, goes against some traditional understandings his dinner guests would have had. His suggestions might sound to us just like savvy suggestions for maintaining a good public image. But actually, behaving as Jesus suggested - choosing the lowest seat at a meal, missing an opportunity for recognition by inviting less-than-classy people to a meal - these actions would have made a person seem quite odd if not altogether offensive. It's hard to find something to compare this to today - our culture and customs are so different. But actually, maybe we can relate. At today’s wedding receptions, guests are often seated at numbered tables in assigned groups. The wedding party sits at the front table. The other guests are seated usually based on relationship to the bridge and groom. Family and close friends are at tables close to the front table. Those who are acquaintances are likely to be farther away from the action of the reception. Perhaps we can connect to Jesus' words after all.But what does this parable have to do with peace? Well, what I like about Jesus’ teachings is that what he teaches is something you can do. Conversely, we should also note that Jesus never instructs you to tell someone else how to do it to do it right. Jesus tells you to go sit at the lowest place, you to humble yourself, you to invite the poor and the lame and the blind to your meals. He doesn’t tell you to tell others to do it. He tells you how to do it, live it. Now, I don’t mean that what he teaches isn’t challenging, that it doesn’t require us to change our lives. But what I mean is: what Jesus teaches is always within our grasp to do. It doesn’t require committee meetings or organizations or institutions. If we actually just did what Jesus said to do – well, the world would very quickly be a different place. But what Jesus says to do doesn’t require some special skill set. It doesn’t require a certain degree or level of education. You don’t need training to follow Jesus’ instructions. You don’t need to be a certain age – you won’t be too young or too old to follow Jesus’ instructions here. You just have to listen to what he says, and do it. And here’s the thing: if everybody did it – well, imagine what might happen, what might be possible. For me, the key to our hymn this week about peace on earth – well, it’s the second part of the first line that’s so important. “Let it begin with me.” When my brothers and I would get into arguments growing up, (which we never do anymore, of course) my mother would often say, “How can we expect there to be peace in the world, if we can’t have peace in our home?” Of course, this would induce some secret eye-rolling in us – at least we agreed on that – but I’ve always remembered it. How can we have peace in the world, if we can’t have peace in our home? In other words, why would we expect the whole world to do something that we’re not willing to do ourselves? When Sy Miller and Jill Jackson worked on this hymn, they did it with a group of teenagers who were ready let peace begin with them. And so they were able to transcend all the differences in their group – different religions, genders, races, classes – and together, because each person was committed to the task – they made a space of peace, and shared a song of peace that truly has spread around the globe. I’m generally not a fan of saying that something is “between me and God.” What’s between me and God, according to Jesus, is all of our neighbors. But here’s one way we can be self-centered: Let it begin with you. It is to you that Jesus is talking when he teaches. It is only you that you can change. It is only you who can make you follow Jesus’ teaches. Let there be peace on earth. Let there be disciples who follow Jesus. Let there be people who humble themselves so that others might finally be exalted. Let there be those who reach beyond all that boundaries and barriers we create between ourselves. And let it begin with you, with me. Amen.  (1) http://www.jan-leemusic.com/Site/History.html(2) http://www.rotaryfirst100.org/library/music/peace.htm

Sermon 8/22/10Jeremiah 1:4-10
How Great Thou Art

How Great Thou Art, at least in the form we know it today, has a somewhat of a complicated history. The original hymn, written as a poem, was penned in 1885 by Carl Boberg, and included nine verses. Boberg was a Swedish man who served as a lay minister, sailor, and member of the Swedish Parilament. He was the editor of Christian newspaper called “Witness of the Truth,” and published more than 60 poems and hymns. (1)The inspiration for the poem, which Boberg called, “O Great God,” came when Boberg was walking home from church and listening to the church bells. Boberg’s poem was based loosely on Psalm 8, and he said of his inspiration to write:  "It was that time of year when everything seemed to be in its richest coloring; the birds were singing in trees and everywhere. It was very warm; a thunderstorm appeared on the horizon and soon thunder and lightning. We had to hurry to shelter. But the storm was soon over and the clear sky appeared. When I came home I opened my window toward the sea. There evidently had been a funeral and the bells were playing the tune of 'When eternity's clock calling my saved soul to its Sabbath rest.' That evening, I wrote the song, [O Great God.]But that’s not the end of the story – the hymn took shape and was modified and changed through the years, and translated into many different languages. British Methodist missionary Stuart Wesley Keene Hine first heard this hymn as a Russian translation of the German version of the song that was originally written in Swedish! He heard the song while he was doing mission work in the Ukraine in 1931. Upon hearing it, he was inspired to write an English paraphrase of the hymn, which we know as How Great Thou Art. Hine started using the hymn in his services, and added two new verses that inspired him, which today make our third and fourth verses. And when I think that God, His Son not sparing,
Sent Him to die, I scarce can take it in;
That on the Cross, my burden gladly bearing,
He bled and died to take away my sin.According to Michael Ireland, “it was typical of the Hines to inquire as to the existence of any Christians in the villages [he] visited. In one case, they found out that the only Christians that their host knew about were a man named Dmitri and his wife Lyudmila. Dmitri's wife knew how to read -- evidently a fairly rare thing at that time and in that place. She taught herself how to read because a Russian soldier had left a Bible behind several years earlier, and she started slowly learning by reading that Bible. When the Hines arrived in the village and approached Dmitri's house, they heard a strange and wonderful sound: Dmitri's wife was reading from the gospel of John about the crucifixion of Christ to a houseful of guests, and those visitors were in the very act of repenting. So the Hines heard people calling out to God, saying how unbelievable it was that Christ would die for their own sins, and praising Him for His love and mercy. [Hines] just couldn't barge in and disrupt this obvious work of the Holy Spirit, so [he] stayed outside and listened. Stuart wrote down the phrases he heard, and they became the third verse that we know today. “The fourth verse was another innovation of Stuart Hine, which was added after World War II. His concern for the exiled Polish community in England, who were anxious to return home, provided part of the inspiration for Hine's final verse. Hines visited a camp in Sussex, England, in 1948 where displaced Russians were being held, but where only two were professing Christians. The testimony of one of these refugees and his anticipation of the second coming of Christ inspired Hine to write the fourth stanza of his English version of the hymn.”Again, according to Ireland: “One man to whom they were ministering told them an amazing story: he had been separated from his wife at the very end of the war, and had not seen her since. At the time they were separated, his wife was a Christian, but he was not, but he had since been converted. His deep desire was to find his wife so they could at last share their faith together. But he told the Hines that he did not think he would ever see his wife on earth again. Instead he was longing for the day when they would meet in heaven, and could share in the Life Eternal there. These words again inspired Hine, and they became the basis for his fourth and final verse to 'How Great Thou Art': "When Christ shall come with shout of acclamation to take me home, what joy shall fill my heart. Then we shall bow in humble adoration and there proclaim, My God How Great Thou Art!"Eventually, Hine’s paraphrase of Boberg’s original work, along with the verses added by Hines, because the popular version of How Great Thou Art that we know today, a hymn tied for eighth place on our congregation’s favorite hymn list. With a hymn with a story like this, it almost makes the whole sermon in itself, doesn’t it? Ah, but as a preacher, I feel obliged to give you a little more to the message. Let’s look at our scripture text. Our passage from the first chapter of Jeremiah describes the prophet’s calling, in his own words: He hears God’s voice, saying that God knew him before he was even formed in the womb, that before he was born, he was consecrated, in other words, set apart, to be a prophet. Jeremiah responds reluctantly, with hesitation: “Ah, Lord God! Truly I do not know how to speak, for I am only a boy.” But, as we often find in the scriptures, God is not impressed with Jeremiah’s excuses. “Don’t say it,” God says, “for you shall go and you shall speak what I command.” Pretty straightforward. But God adds, “Don’t be afraid – for I am with you to deliver you.” And then Jeremiah describes God touching his mouth and saying, “Now I have put my words in your mouth.” God’s plan for Jeremiah – to be appointed over the nations, to pluck up and pull down, to destroy and overthrow, to build and to plant. With that kind of job description, no wonder Jeremiah is nervous about the work ahead of him! But indeed, the Book of Jeremiah is the story of Jeremiah responding to God’s call and going where God sends him. I think Jeremiah’s story, like many of the stories of call and response in the Bible, is s story about someone learning to believe in what God can do. I think even though we talk about believing in God’s power, God’s greatness, God’s ability, God being able to do anything, we often act as though we believe this only until it comes up to our own lives. God is great, but is God really great enough to use even us? God is great, but can God really use me to do all the things that God is about? What do we really believe that God can do, and what do we really believe is within God’s power? Jeremiah is skeptical at first. What can God do with only a boy? But God says God shall and God does. Our hymn today is written from the perspective of some people who have learned how great God is. First Carl Boberg, and then Stuart Hines – both were overwhelmed by the greatness of the acts of God. Boberg looked around in nature, looked at the beauty of creation, and was amazed at how great God was, how great was the gift of this earth. His dependence on God’s goodness shaped his whole life. Stuart Hines was overwhelmed by the greatness of God made manifest in the gift that we have in Jesus – and Hines, as a missionary, regularly saw God’s goodness at work in the amazing stories he was hearing from people he met, who inspired his hymn-writing. How great is God? Is God great enough to create our world and all that is in it? We believe that. Is God great enough to come to us as God-with-us, God close enough to touch, God in human form as Jesus? We believe that. Is God great enough to take your life, shape your life, use your life – to change the world? Jeremiah believed it. Noah did. Moses believed it. Sarah and Abraham did too. Ruth and Naomi, Peter and Paul, Mary and Mary, and Martha – they believed it. Do you? How great is God? Amen.
(1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Boberg, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_Great_Thou_Art_(hymn)

Sermon 8/15/10Luke 12:49-56The Old Rugged Cross
            You can see crosses everywhere these days – the symbols of the Christian faith. You can find cross tattoos or cross jewelry – I certainly have necklaces with a cross. Churches are adorned with crosses, some simple, but some quite ornate. Crosses on bumper stickers and billboards, crosses made out of every imaginable material. There’s a certain poignancy, irony, that the cross is portrayed in so many ways when it was actually an instrument of execution. That was the primary purpose of the cross, of course – it was used to put people to death, including Jesus, the Christ. But our understanding of resurrection, our understanding of Jesus’ victory over that very death with life leads us to see the cross transformed – not a symbol of execution, but a symbol of forgiveness, salvation, and re-creation. Still, sometimes I wonder if our frequent use of the symbol of the cross leads us to forget the impact of its meaning. Do we lose sight of the cross by our very frequent use of it? This fear, fear of losing sight of the meaning of the cross, was actually what motivated George Bennard to write The Old Rugged Cross in 1913.According to the Christian History Institute, George Bennard was struggling with personal problems that were causing him a great deal of trouble and anguish. In his suffering, his mind returned again and again to Christ's anguish on the cross. This, he thought, was the heart of the gospel! The cross he pictured was not ornate, or pretty, or gold or silver. It was "a rough, splintery thing, stained with gore." "I saw the Christ of the Cross as if I were seeing John 3:16 leave the printed page, take form and act out the meaning of redemption," he said. Bennard wanted to put this theme, these thoughts, to music. The History Institute writes that, "In a room in Albion, Michigan, Bennard sat down and wrote a tune. But the only words that would come to him were "I'll cherish the old rugged cross." He struggled for weeks to set words to the melody he had written.As a Methodist evangelist, Bennard was scheduled to preach a series of messages in New York. He found himself focusing on the cross. The theme of the cross grew increasingly more urgent to him. Back in Albion, Michigan, he sat down and tried again to put together the words. This time the lines came. He later shared, "I sat down and immediately was able to rewrite the stanzas of the song without so much as one word failing to fall into place. I called in my wife, took out my guitar, and sang the completed song to her. She was thrilled!"On June 7, 1913, according to his own account, George Bennard introduced the new hymn in a revival meeting he was conducting in Pokagon, Michigan. "The Old Rugged Cross," soon became one of the top ten most popular hymns of the twentieth century." (1) In our congregation, this hymn tied for first place on our top ten list.             My images, memories of this hymn don’t seem to connect with the challenging gospel lesson we have today, the troublesome words from Jesus that we have to deal with eventually. This hymn was one of my grandfather’s favorites. Normally I naturally love anything he loved, but I just never could love this hymn. I can picture singing it, the little choir singing it at the country church in Westernville where I grew up – each stanza slower than the one before, warbling voices singing a sweet golden-oldie hymn, for it was certainly a golden-oldie to me even when I was little. How can such a sweet little hymn have anything to do with the angry-sounding Jesus we confront in today’s lesson from Luke?  “Do you think that I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division! From now on five in one household will be divided, three against two and two against three; they will be divided: father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law.” Nothing sweet in this passage, is there? This doesn’t sound like our Jesus, does it? Jesus doesn’t come to bring peace, but division? Turning households against each other? Is that why Jesus, who we call the Prince of Peace, came to earth? To pit us against one another? We’ve been studying hymns all summer long, and in a couple weeks, we’ll be talking about Let There Be Peace on Earth. How can we talk about that, when Jesus insists on making these troubling statements? “Do you think that I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division!” Our temptation whenever we read words like this from Jesus is to try to find a way to soften their blow, mute their impact so it doesn’t seem as bad as it sounds. But in this case, I think that’s exactly what Jesus is warning against. Do you think I come to make things easy, Jesus asks? Nope – I come to make them more and more challenging. That’s my paraphrase at least. Listen to the verse just before today’s passage: Jesus says, “From everyone to whom much has been given, much will be required; and from one to whom much has been entrusted, even more will be demanded.” In other words – we’ve received a lot – God’s blessings, God’s love, God’s unfailing grace, limitless second chances. But God expects a lot from us, too. And foremost, what God expects, what Jesus expects, is that if we choose to follow Jesus, we actually follow Jesus. It’s both that simple of a request and that hard of a request. Because following Jesus means choosing one path and not the other, and we’re very much a people who want to have our cake and eat it too. We want to take the path of Jesus, but we also want to make our own choices, choose our own way, and go our own direction when it suits us. Jesus says that he comes and shows a way to follow that we must either choose or not choose.One of my blogging friends, Shane Raynor, recently wrote a column responding to an article he’d read about why teens don’t attend church that appeared in USAToday. The article, reporting on some study results, implied that teens don’t attend church because they are too busy, have too many other things to do. But Shane offered up some different ideas, including this one: “Unchurched teens see no significant difference between church kids and everyone else.” That’s a reason they don’t attend church, he said. He continues, “This issue is bigger than you think. I’ve run into it over and over again. Put yourself in a teenager’s shoes– if one of the reasons they might go to church is to become a better person, what does it say to them when the church kids cuss [do the same things] as all the other kids? Suppose you were thinking about joining a diet program where the participants never lost any weight? Or a gym where no one ever showed any physical progress? Or a karate school where no one ever got a black belt? You’d see it as a waste of time. A lot of kids see church as a waste of time for the exact same reason. Most teenagers aren’t expecting church people to be perfect, but they do want some kind of assurance that church is going to make a difference in their lives or they figure, why bother? (2) That’s exactly what Jesus wants to know, too. If you want to follow me, but have following me not impact your life in any way, why bother? If you want to follow me, but not follow me, why bother? Jesus brings division because Jesus asks us to make choices, decisions, ones that really effect how we live. What difference has following Jesus made in your life? Choosing to follow Jesus Christ should not have as little or even less impact on our lives as choosing what outfit to wear or what restaurant to pick for dinner. Being a Jesus-follower ought to have some tangible, real result, real impact on us and those around us. What is the point of following Jesus if no one can tell, if nothing about me or the way I live changes as a result, what’s the point? Not peace, but division. Poet Marianne Williamson writes, "When you ask God into your life, you think God is going to come into your psychic house, look around, and see that you just need a new floor or better furniture, and that everything needs just a little cleaning - and so you go along for the first six months thinking how nice life is now that God is there. Then you look out the window one day and you see that there's a wrecking ball outside. It turns out that God actually thinks your whole foundation is shot and you're going to have to start over from scratch." (2) Being a Christ-follower, we declare that we are ready to open our lives up to God, to be examined thoroughly by God's probing eyes, to rid our lives of sin, and wrong-doing, injustice, and failure to love God and neighbor. We make a decision. Make a choice. Choose this path against all other paths. It is in this way that our hymn for today, the Old Rugged Cross, ties perfectly to our gospel lesson, and brings the message home to us in a beloved song. George Bennard didn't want a pretty cross, a soft and delicate cross, because he didn't want to lose sight of what the cross signified. Jesus told us that to follow him, we must take up the cross, the cross which symbolizes the difficult, life-sacrificing journey that Jesus ultimately had to make to be faithful to God's call. The Old Rugged Cross is a reminder to us that the faith we claim is more than a tradition into which we are born, more than a gathering of friends once a week. The life we choose is one that sets us apart if we are faithful to Jesus' teachings.But in the choosing, as Bennard penned in his tune, our life as in Christ is rewarding beyond our imagination, as we experience the love and grace of God that knows no boundaries, and learn how to share this love that gives life with others. So we cherish this old rugged cross - the symbol of peace, the symbol of division, the symbol of glory, the symbol of humility, the symbol of the life we choose in Jesus Christ. Amen.
(1) Christian History Institute, http://www.gospelcom.net/chi/DAILYF/2002/06/daily-06-07-2002.shtml(2) Shane Raynor, “5 Reasons Teens Are Avoiding Church,” http://www.faithexperience.com/2010/08/5reasons/(3) Williamson, Marianne, as quoted in Pulpit Resources, William Willimon, for August 15th, 2004, pg 30.

The first class session for my Doctor of Ministry is over, but my first project is still underway! My project is focusing on the practice of the Eucharistic meal in Paul's churches, and our celebration of the meal, particularly as a symbol of unity of the body of Christ. My hope is, with a group from my church, to plan a meal with celebration of Holy Communion for World Communion Sunday this October. We'll need to write a liturgy and order of worship. I'm particularly drawn to this excerpt from one of our textbooks. 

"The unity symbolized by the Lord's Supper, I have suggested, can be seen as a reminder or re-presentation of the liminal transcendence of societal oppositions that was declared in baptism. Now it is commonly asserted that this baptismal unity and egalitarianism is 'merely sacramental,' that is, as a purely symbolic leveling it signifies an ideal state, perhaps a future eschatological state, but has no effect upon actual social roles . . . For Paul, it was a matter of intense concern that at least one of the typical instances of reunification declared in the 'baptismal reunification formula' should have concrete social consequences. That there was now no distinction between Jew and gentile was for him . . . the most dramatic expression of the justification enacted by God through Christ Jesus . . . it was not merely a purely spiritual unity in the ritual meal that was at stake, but also the social unity of the church." (pg., 161, emphasis added.) - The First Urban Christians, Wayne A. Meeks

My questions for you all: 
Do you see Holy Communion as having concrete social consequences for us today? For Paul the elimination of distinction between Jew and gentile was ultimate. What social consequences would be ultimate for us today in the celebration of communion? Within our homogeneous-in-so-many-ways congregations, is it possible for Holy Communion to have concrete social consequences, or would this only be possible if we totally changed the way we celebrate the sacramental meal? 


I'd love your thoughts, comments, and questions. 

Sermon 8/8/10Hebrews 11:1-3, 8-16
Here I Am, Lord

            Today we’re talking about a hymn that tied for fourth place in our Top Ten list, “Here I am, Lord.” Like we talked about with On Eagle’s Wings, Here I Am, Lord is also a song that is a product of a time of musical renewal after Vatican II in the Roman Catholic Church, when changes made allowed the Mass to be celebrated in the language of the people, and music to be more reflective of contemporary styles. The author is Dan Schutte, who wrote these words in the 1980s. Schutte was a founding member of the St. Louis Jesuits, a group of Catholic Jesuit musicians who focused on comteporary music for worship. Dan himself shares on his website what let him to write “Here I Am, Lord.”            He says: When I was a young Jesuit, studying theology in Berkeley, California, a friend came to me one day asked me for a favor. "Dan, I know this is late notice, but I’m planning the diaconate ordination ceremony and need a piece of music set to the text of Isaiah chapter 6." He saw the look of shock on my face knowing I was well aware that the ceremony was only three days away. I told him that I was sick with an awful case of the flu and didn’t know if I could compose anything suitable in that short time. He encouraged me and I told him that at the very least I would try to complete something in time for the ordination. I had always loved the particular Scripture passage (Isaiah 6) where God calls Isaiah to be his servant and messenger to the people and Isaiah responds with both hesitation and doubt, but also with a humble willingness to surrender to God. If it was going to work, it would have to be God's power and grace making it happen. Much like Isaiah I was not very sure that I could meet the request my friend had made, but I was willing to try.I remember sitting at my desk with a blank music score in front of me and asking God to be my strength. As I sat there praying for help, I remembered also the call of Samuel, where God came calling in the middle of the night and asked Samuel to do something beyond what he thought he was capable of. I worked for two days on the piece and I remember being exhausted. I was making last minute changes to the score as I walked it over to my friend who lived several blocks away. I remember being very unsure of myself, but hoping that it would be what he had wanted for the ordination. And it was ok. It was more than ok. From the very beginning, people loved the piece and clearly identified with the dialogue between God and us that is the core of the song. In the years following, so many have spoken to me or written how they had their own experience of God "calling in the night" and being given the courage to respond.For me, the story of “Here I Am, Lord” tells of the God who overshadows us, giving power to our stumbling words and the simple works of our hands, and making them into something that can be a grace for people. The power God gives is far beyond what we could have planned or created.            Our epistle lesson for today from Hebrews is a chapter full of people who responded to God’s calling in the night with a bold, “Here I Am, Lord” – send me! In elemnatary school, at one of those end-of-the-year Children’s Sunday programs, my class was responsible for each student picking out and reading a favorite Bible passage. This passage from Hebrews was one of my favorites and one that I chose to read. Something appealed to me about the poetry of this passage – the repeated rhythms of “by faith, by faith, by faith,” and all the Bible stories I knew seemingly wrapped into one. In today’s selection we get a cut. We start out with perhaps the most famous verse about faith in the whole Bible. The author’s definintion: “Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the convication of things not seen.” Then the author continues, describing the faith of the ancestors – here we read of Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Jacob, but the author also writes of Abel, Noah, Enoch, David, Gideon, Samson, and others. It is a litany of faith, of those who responded to God’s call by faith.             What do we do by faith? And how do we hear and respond to God’s call faithfully? I think that we do things by faith every single day. Beyond trusting that it is the wind that we can’t see that makes the breeze, I think it takes an amazing amount of faith just to live in this world. Sometimes I think about driving a car, and the amount of faith it takes to trust that the hundreds, maybe thousands of cars we pass will all stay in the right lane. We have to have faith in all those drivers. We usually don’t even give it much thought, and yet we’re putting our faith in other human beings who we’ve never even met. I think we perform similar acts of faith every day, in the everyday things of our lives.             And yet, when it comes to having faith in God, we’re challenged. We’re overwhelmed. We’re full of doubts. We feel like we’re not up to what God asks of us. We’re not sure God really calls us, and we’re definitely not sure how to respond to that call. If we can have faith in each other, most of the time anyway, why is having faith in God so hard? Why is believing that God calls us so hard? I’m starting to think that part of the problem is that we make faith, God’s call, answering God’s call, such a special, unique thing in our minds. It’s kind of the same problem we have with prayer. Remember, when we talked about prayer earlier this summer, we talked about how prayer is just that – talking. It’s just that we’re talking to God. But we give prayer that special name and add all this pressure to be perfect and eloquent, and we’re suddenly a mess about talking to God. I think maybe it is the same way with faith, and answering God’s call. We have faith in things all the time. And we’re looking for direction, meaning, all the time. And then God enters, putting faith in us, seeking faith in return, and trying to give us direction, and we’re suddenly a mess.             So why is having faith in God so hard? I think maybe we equate 'having faith in God' with the belief that God will make sure everything goes smoothly in our lives. If we only have faith, we will prosper. If we only have faith, we will be protected from harm, from evil, from disaster, from pain and loss. We set ourselves up to believe that our faith in God is actually faith in God as a sort-of guardian angel or something. But we limit ourselves and our faith, and we certainly limit God with that view of faith. For better or worse, faith in God does not guarantee us some shield of protection - at least not the kind that prevents bad things from happening in our lives. I've seen many people come to struggle and have doubts in faith because of a death of a loved one, because of loss or hardships suffered, seeing these events as a sign that God is not really there, or God does not really care, signs that faith in God is not warranted. If we’re trying to have faith in God as guardian angel, our faith will disappoint us!But our whole biblical witness calls out to us that this is not what faith is, or what faith has been through the ages. Jesus tries to warn us throughout his teaching that our faith in God will likely cause us suffering, persecution, and bad intentions from those around us - our faith in God is no promise of a contented life, at least by society's standards. Indeed, if you read over today's passage from Hebrews, and read the rest of the chapter that we didn’t read this morning, you'll see a litany of people who had faith in God but who did not exactly have the most peaceful lives as a result. Abel is mentioned as a man of faith, and Abel was murdered by his own brother because of his faith and his brother's lack of faith. Moses had faith to lead the people from Egypt, yet never made it to the Promised Land that God described. And the author mentions the countless others who, in faith, were tortured, flogged, imprisoned, or killed throughout Christian history. On top of that, we read: “All of these died in faith without having received the promises, but from a distance they saw and greeted them.” This is what your faith may bring you!But before we get discouraged and figure that maybe we don’t want faith, we must turn back to the question. What is our faith all about? Our faith is in God – not God's magical powers to bless us – but in God and God's never-ending unfailing love for us. It is our faith in God, our knowledge that God loves us that gives us strength even when we have made mistakes, have sinned, have caused pain and hurt to our neighbors. It is our faith that supports us even when our lives are filled with loss or stress or worry or hardships. Our faith is in our God, that God is always with us and loving us, no matter what. It’s pretty hard to find that love anywhere else. It is faith like this that allows us to take the life-changing risks like those that the people of faith recorded in Hebrews took. They risked home, family, status, all their possession, security, shelter, even their very lives to follow God's call because in their faith they knew that God loved them and God would go with them.Answering God’s call is actually pretty simple. We need direction. God offers one. God says, “Here I am. Where are you?” And we respond: “Here we are, God.” We follow, answer, not because we are guaranteed success in every detail, but because our faith prompts us to share the love of God that we have with others. Our hymn today is about faith and where faith will lead us. If we insist that our faith in God guarantee our protection, guarantee things go a certain way for us, our faith probably won't take us very far. But if we realize our faith in God provides us with what we really need: the knowledge of God's loving presence – then there's no limit to where God will take us.Here I am, Lord. Is it we, Lord? I have heard you calling in the night. I will go, Lord, if you lead me. I will hold your people in my heart. Amen.
                          

Here's my last set of notes from my first DMin class - I really loved it! Now I just have to complete my project! I'm working on a project on Unity/Body of Christ and the Sacrament of Holy Communion. I'll keep you posted ;) ***Question from student –
1 Cor. 6: Malakoi – the weak ones – sexually, the penetrated one. One who submits his (usually male) body to penetration by a stronger partner for money, advancement, etc. Arsenokoitai – male/those who sleep – those who sleep with men
Romans 1: Worshipping humans, birds, animals, reptiles. God hands them over to their desires. Worshipped creature rather than creator.
References to Leviticus 18 holiness code.
Krister Stendahl “Good exegesis begins with the distinction between what the text meant and what the text still might mean.” If you skip over first, you can’t determine second.
What did this mean to Paul’s first readers? Homoeroticism in the Biblical World – Martti Nissinen (best book on topic)
Same sex relationships that Paul knew were consistently between a more powerful, wealthier, older male and a younger, weak, attractive, slave boy. Petronius’s Satiricon, Suetonius, Life of Nero: pederasty. Paul never experienced, no evidence he knew of adult, consensual, same-sex, committed, long-term relationships.
Not just homosexual relationships were different – heterosexual were too. Changes, over time, culturally.
Paul’s condemnation today would apply to pederasty, not adult, mature, same-sex relationships. Mistake to apply them to same-sex relationships today. Anachronistic.
Welborn’s own “Sin in First Century Rome” article. Read this passage in context of Nero’s Rome, Nero’s practices of pederasty.
Dale B. Martin, Sex and the Single Savior  
***
Module 11: Life: Partnership/Hospitality
Partnership
Believe this is three letters, redacted, but all written by Paul.
Note of thanks for a gift Philippians sent to Paul. J. Paul Sampley, Pauline Partnership in Christ: Paul has a relationship with this church that he doesn’t have with any other churches.
Koinonia – not fellowship/community, but a legal term that would be better translated as partnership – Latin – societas
Philippians 4:10 – revived is literally anethalete – “bloomed up again out of the darkness” – implies when there was a time when their concern was dormant, not evident. ἠκαιρεῖσθε – from Kairos – “right season”
4:11 Autarkes – self-sufficiency – top of list of virtues – totally confidence in self/gait
(Vincent Harding)
:14 Ple^n – cancel that – “you did well becoming partners with me in affliction.” (Paul’s in prison.)
Food not provided for you in prison. Hygiene is nil. Need someone on the outside. Craig Wansink, Chained in Christ
Although Acts says Paul is a Roman citizen, but Paul himself never mentions this, beaten with rods, not something to do with a citizen.
:15 No church partnered with me :18 apecho^ - “paid in full”
Taubenschlag, Law in the Greco-Roman Papyri  
Paul is acknowledging gift delivered by Epaphroditus, and also his services (his person on the outside) – this is sort of a receipt
Chapter 2 (last letter) :25 Epaphroditus
Mutual obligation, mutual benefits, consensual partnership
Paul’s partnership model has possibilities for today – this is the third way between patronage and tent-making, neither of which have worked for Paul.
Paul also has this relationship, partnership, with Stephanos, Phoebe, Philemon
4:15 Eis logon – not translated! – Paul preaching? Economic mutualism practiced. Justin Meggitt, Paul, Poverty, and the Bible
Hospitality
Romans 12:13 Is Paul just talking about the “welcome wagon?” We equate hospitality with courtesy, friendliness.
We’re missing something. Abraham Malherbe, Social Aspects, “The Inhospitality of Diotrephes” 3 John v. 10John Koenig
12:13 – Economic radicalism, “chase after with hospitality”
Xenos – Stranger, alien, but also guest – the process by which an ‘other’ is transformed into a guest, brother/sister ultimately. Chase after person to do this.
13:8 Unplug from the patronage system. The one who loves “ton heteron” – the other person (Leviticus 19:18)
Jacob Taubes, The Political Theology of Paul
Whole law can be fulfilled by loving the neighbor
Claudius expels Jews from Rome because of “tumult” they caused because of Christ. Most Jews just move out of city limits. (49 AD) Most just move back in after Claudius dies. Living in docks.
Paul is writing to a divided church in city of Rome. On West, slaves, poor, Jews, in tenements. On other side of river, 2 house churches, wealthy, villas, Gentiles.
This is context where Paul lays down rules for hospitality.

1) Welcome without conditions (Romans 14:1 – Welcome weak in faith/convictions, but not to dispute over opinions with them.)
2) No despising, no judging! (Romans 14:3-4, 13)
3) No basis for judging in culture/law (14:14)
4) So, criterion is welfare of brother or sister – don’t grieve them! “The criterion is not your damn Book of Order . . . or your church’s statement on this or that. The only criterion is the welfare of your brother or sister.” (14:15, 14:23)
5) Strong must bear the weak. (15:1 – “bear up”)
6) Let each please the neighbor for up-building/edification (15:2)
7) Christ bore the insults. (15:3)
Conclusion: Welcome one another as Christ welcomed you. (Receive one another.) (15:7)
***













Module 12: Ritual
How did Paul use ritual (certain patterns of liturgical behavior) to create the one body?
Ritual as a form of communication. Ritual as kind of language. Interpreting ritual is like discovering grammar/syntax of community. Ritual communicates fundamental values. But doesn’t just express, it also shapes and creates in communities.
Mary Douglas. Ritual forms not only as transmitters of culture but as creators of social reality. (Like when we know something, but can’t articulate it at first, and have ‘a-ha!’ moment through ritual.)
Baptism, Eucharist are major. But others. Exhortation as ritual. (Parakaleo^) 1 Thess. 5:27 Read letter to all community. Col. 4:16-17, similar.
Singing. Order of Worship – 1 Cor. 14:26: A hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Colossians 3:16
Hodayot – Mary Douglas
Philippians 2:6-11 – “The Christ Hymn”
Colossians 1:15-20, 1 Timothy 3:16, Ephesians 1:3-14 (Student of Paul)
Ephesians 5:19 Singing to the Lord and each other – community oriented function
Preference for worship things that are “for building up” – hymns over tongues.
PreachingNils Dahl, “Preaching Patterns in Paul” * Revelation Pattern – “You know now something that has been hidden” * Soteriological Contrast Pattern – “You once were, but now you are something different/no longer are” * Conformity Pattern – “Just as Jesus _________, so should you _________”* Teleological Pattern – “So that . . . 2 Cor. 8:9” * Simple Appeal – “I appeal to you by the name of Jesus: ________”
Prayer1 Cor. 14:13-15 Combination of planned/spontaneousDoxologies, acclamations, etc.










BaptismNowhere in letters do we get a straightforward description of baptism. Used it as a metaphor. When Paul construes baptism as a symbolic burial to be raised to new life in Christ – def. immersion.
Hippolytus (2nd century) gives account of baptism. He says three-fold immersion. Naked. Artistic representations though show pouring, with people standing. Didache, 1st century Syria, water scarce, speaks of pouring water three times. Intensely local, depended on where you were.
“no longer Jew/Greek” as baptism liturgy.
Baptism as cleansing/washing.
Difference between Jewish baptism (mikvah) and Christian baptism – Jewish baptism, you were unclean again. Christian baptism is a permanent transition. Marked a permanent threshold between the messianic community and the rest of the world.
Baptism creates a new community: dying and rising (Romans 6) The new person who lives in no longer ego^, but Christ who lives in me.
EucharistWe’ve already discussed. 

Sermon 8/1/10
Bigger Barns
As some of you know, I’ll soon be moving to a new home – I’ve been renting an apartment in Fayetteville, and I’ve been given the opportunity to rent the parsonage of a church in Syracuse that isn’t being used by their pastor instead. Getting ready to move again has made me think about all my moves since I left seminary. My biggest move was going from Oneida to New Jersey. I actually used movers and a moving company for that move. They came to my parsonage in Oneida and they walked around the many rooms of the parsonage with some handheld devices, clicking away entries based on what I have: 5 armchairs. Click. 3 televisions. Click. 4 couches. Click. 7 bookshelves. Click. 12 little end tables. Click. Most movers estimate based on pounds – how many pounds of stuff do you have to be moved? Well, at that time, I had over 7000 pounds of things to take with me to New Jersey, a number that I found a little embarrassing, frankly. I’m one person. OK – I will give my excuses – I do have a lot of Todd’s stuff, and occasionally Todd, that I have to transport from location to location – that has to be one or two thousand pounds right there. And I had a piano – that’s probably four or five hundred pounds – I looked it up online at the time, just to make myself fee better. But somewhere between four and five thousand pounds of stuff was all mine. I don’t think of myself as someone who has a lot of stuff. But when it’s time to pack all the stuff, weigh all the stuff, move all the stuff, I’m suddenly aware of exactly how much I have. Do I need 7000 pounds of things with me to make a home? To have an acceptable amount of things to fill up a house? To live my life? How much in that 7000 pounds of stuff is really important to me in any way? I pared down when I moved into this apartment in Fayetteville, but now that I’m heading back into a big house, will I need to start adding pounds to my possessions?             Our gospel lesson enters as an answer to these questions, a stark, direct answer. Our gospel lesson from Luke is one of my very favorites. It is the first passage I ever preached on, twelve years ago tomorrow. I have preached more times on this text than any other – this is my fifth time preaching this text! And because of that special place in my history, I know the text well, and the words of the passage are always close to my heart and mind. “One’s life does not consist in the abundance of possessions . . . These things you have prepared, whose will they be?”            Someone in the crowd calls out to Jesus, “Teacher, tell my brother to divide the family inheritance with me.” This like would have been the younger brother calling out – the older brother would by law get a larger share of the inheritance, and by law be responsible for handling the assets and giving the younger brother his share. (1) The younger brother, then, was looking for help getting his due. But Jesus doesn’t want to be judge and arbitrator, he says, and instead tells them a parable, beginning with a warning: “Take care! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; for one’s life does not consist in the abundance of possessions.” Jesus tells about a man who was wealthy, whose land was producing abundantly. He had no place to store his crops, they were so plentiful. What should he do? He says to himself, “I will do this: I will pull down my barns and build larger ones, and there I will store all my grain and my goods. And I will say to my soul, Soul, you have ample goods laid up for many years; relax, eat, drink, be merry.’ But that very night God speaks to the man, requiring of him his life. “This very night you life is being demanded of you. And the things you have prepared, whose will they be?” Jesus concludes, “So it is with those who stores up treasures for themselves, but are not rich toward God.” How did the younger brother respond to this parable? We don’t know. Perhaps he heard Jesus saying that his older brother shouldn’t try to take more than his fair share. Perhaps he heard Jesus telling him not to worry about how much he was getting – that how much he had wouldn’t really matter in the end anyway. But a more important question is what we hear in Jesus’ words.            What does your life consist of? Jesus says something we know – our life doesn’t consist of our things. Human life is made up of something else than that. We are not our stuff. But what does our life consist of then? What are we made up of? And how do we know? What evidence do we have that our life consists of more than what we have? What in our behaviors, our actions, and our attitudes can we point to that says we know our life is more than our stuff?            The problem with Jesus’ parables – or should I say, the problem with our understanding of Jesus’ parables is this: from our 21st century perspective, having a whole collection of Jesus’ parables, and knowing enough about Jesus to know what he taught, what he valued, what his basic messages were, we know enough to pick out who are the “bad guys” and the “good guys” in the parables. We know in the parable of the Good Samaritan that the good guy is, well, the Good Samaritan. We know in the parables about Pharisees and tax collectors that the Pharisee is the bad guy and the tax collector is the surprise good guy. And we know in this parable that the man building the big barns is the bad guy. After all, God calls him a fool! The rich man is the bad guy! We shouldn’t act like him. We shouldn’t build bigger barns. And then, happy with our clear understanding of the parable, we can go on our way.            But Jesus’ parables aren’t as simple as good guy and bad guy. The Pharisee is never really just a bad guy, but someone standing in the need of God’s grace. The tax collector is never a saint, but someone who has found out a truth about God and life and decided to live it. We always seem to fail to see ourselves in the parables because we’re never ready to admit we’re as bad as the bad guys, and never able to see ourselves acting as good as the good guys. And if we can’t really see ourselves in the parables, then we can’t really hear what Jesus is saying.            Is the rich man a bad guy? Let’s see exactly what he’s done. The possessions he’s accumulating are not exactly luxury items. We don’t read that he’s bought a summer home or a second camel or hired his own musicians to entertain. He’s rich, that’s true. And he has a lot of grain – that’s food. He has so much grain that he stores it, and gets bigger barns even to store it in. And finally, he feels relieved to have so much grain. Finally, he can relax, eat, drink, be merry, enjoy his life after working hard to get to this place. He has a little security for himself. He has security for his family, because, of course, they will inherit what is his when his life is demanded of him. He knows that he won’t go hungry now, even if a famine strikes. The Bible talks about times when famine wiped out whole families, whole nations. Living of the land was risky. This man was prepared. He had plans. Is that so bad? Are we much different?            I have a pension plan myself, of course. The pension plan for United Methodist Clergy is a good one – I may not get rich now, but I have the security of a good pension plan when I retire. In fact, the denomination is working very hard to make sure that clergy outside of the US have the same strong pension plan. We want to know we have a secure future, that we’ll be able to feed ourselves, clothe ourselves, house ourselves, and provide for our family, far into the future. Most of you probably have retirement plans, or are already enjoying the benefits of retirement savings or social security, things you worked hard to put in place. Isn’t this all the rich man is doing? I think about the financial status of this congregation. Our financial team tries very hard to keep us on track and aware of the deficit we have to cover. We’d like to be thinking about our future. Wouldn’t it be nice if we had had a bit of grain saved up, so to speak? So that an unexpected event wouldn’t send us reeling? I know how that feels, I understand why we want to be ready for anything. Secure. Can’t you see yourself in this rich man, with his barns of grain? Can’t you understand him?            And yet, God calls this man a fool. Jesus warns us against all kinds of greed, and says our life consists of more than our many possessions. And he says that if we are not rich toward God, but instead focused on storing up treasures for ourselves, we’re in trouble. Where’s the line, then? How much grain can we save up for ourselves without being in trouble with God? Are medium sized barns ok, just not extra large?Of what does your life consist? What’s your life all about? We know that our life doesn’t consist of stuff, of money, of possessions, of assets, of retirement funds, of pension plans, or even of the lack of all those things. But it would be hard to tell that we know this by any hint of our culture, our society, our work ethic, our financial priorities, our goals, or what we think it will take for us to finally be able to “eat, drink, and be merry.” As a rule – and sure there are exceptions – but as a rule, we’re just not happy with what we have. I’ve read that most people believe they would be happy if they had just 20% more than they have now. But the catch is this: that’s true at every level – no matter how much you have, you’re always convinced just a little more would make you happy. And so it is never enough. There’s always something on our wish list. Maybe a tangible thing like a newer car or a better laptop, both things I’ve acquired in the last six months. Maybe something less concrete like better health insurance or more vacation days. But there’s always something we think we need, or want, and we’re convinced that if we could just get to that thing, just get to that point, just get to that status, just get to that place of being settled and secure, we’d be set. We could eat, drink, and be merry. And maybe then we could be disciples. Then we’d be in a good starting place to follow God. During my first year of ministry, when I went from being a seminarian surviving on a $4000 a semester work-study job, to a full-time pastor with a full time salary, making so much more money then I’d ever made in my life, I was sure I’d be set. I felt so very rich. What else could I want? Four years and 7000 pounds of stuff later, I still have a wish list.            What do our lives consist of? What will we offer to God? There’s nothing in my house that God wants except my soul. And the shape my soul is in will probably have an awful lot to do with what it is my life really consists of. How is your soul? What does your life consist of? What do you still want to check off your wish list before you’ll finally be in the right state of mind to think about discipleship, to think about answering God’s call? The things you’ve been working so hard to prepare, to store up, to save up – whose will they be? Take care! God’s abundance is so much richer than the treasures you have here, and your life is so much more precious than you think, and God wants that life – your life – right now. What does your life consist of? What kind of soul will you give to God?
            Amen.

Module 8: Exhortation
Robert Bellah, Habits of the Heart - Conclusion: Churches might be the best place for us to work toward the emergence of communities of character/moral discourse.
Alasdair McIntyre – After Virtue
They would argue current moral crises are not because of advances in technology, etc., but that we can’t solve problems through more specialized knowledge. More fundamental problem: collapse of the ethos. Ethos: accepted right way of doing things in a group. “We don’t do that.” The force of the ethos depends on the strength of the “we” in that statement, and our “we” has collapsed. And as always, this is a phenomenon of urbanization.
The moment of the “why not?” question is the moment ethics begin. The moment for teaching, maturity, etc.
We have an assumption today that the “why/why not” cannot be answered, because of the huge emphasis we place on individualism. Ethics becomes reduced to lifestyle choices. Relativism is so absolute that people doubt whether “why/why not” can be meaningfully asked.
Resurgence: we should try to ask these questions.
McIntyre: Intentional “communities of moral discourse”Bellah: “communities of character,” dangers of “utilitarian individualism” aka “what works for me”
Alan Bloom – The Closing of the American Mind – the relativism is so rampant that our minds are closed to the big questions about the way to live
First century Christians have a lot to add to this project. Not from an interest in looking for our answers to questions about abortion, sexuality, etc. Not nostalgia for time that’s gone.
But, like us, they lived at a moment that was experiencing dissolution of ethos in every one of big cities where Paul was preaching. People asking, “Why not do this?” Their situation is like ours, so we can dialogue with them.
Early Christian writings contain:Paranoeo^, parakaleo^ - think alongside, call alongside
1 Thess. 2:12 “Lead a life worthy of God who calls you”
Conflict between ethos of clan and ethos of city/community/gov’t.
Ethics of private life: birth, sex, death.
In private life, Romans made little attempt to legislate. Public life restricted. Private life was laissez-faire.
Birth: Greeks and Romans (and every ancient society) except for Jews and then Christians practiced exposure. (Greeks and Romans also practiced abortion – dangerous, expensive) Just left child outside to die, dumped child in latrine. Paul makes no direct reference to abortion. Only time word appears in NT is 1 Cor. 15:8, metaphorically: ektroma (out of trauma) (responding to one who called him a sort of miscarriage, not ‘cooked’ long enough in church. All other NT writers except Luke are Jews. No need to address subject, because it wasn’t an issue. Not a Jewish practice. Sarah Pomeroy. 17% fewer girls than boys due to routine exposure.
First explicit abortion condemnation is in Epistle to Diognetus: says “we do not expose our children.” Clement of Alexandria
J.D. Crossan – A Revolutionary Life
Hilarion to Alis: "If it was a girl, put it out." 
Paul’s attitude toward the body provides an example of how he might have conducted a moral discourse about exposure.  
1 Corinthians 6:12-20 People are going to prostitutes. Saying “all things are lawful.” After all, Paul’s gospel talks about faith, not law, saving us. So why need laws?
Pompeii’s population never exceeded 30,000, yet 27 brothels found in excavation.
“korinthia kore” Corinthians girl = call girl. “korinthiazesthai” behave like a Corinthian – fornicate
Prostitution is not only legal, but has the endorsement/relationship with pagan religion. Paul’s words come in light of that.
Corinthian church members are going to prostitutes and justifying it. This is a dialogue, not a sermon, but quoting them.                                    1) What is beneficial? (1 Cor. 6:12a) sumpherei – better trans. “mutually beneficial”2) What serves freedom? (1 Cor. 6:12b) So many things in life forms of addiction, things which master us. Other stuff is enslavement. 3) God is the Lord of the body. Ethical dilemmas can’t be resolved by appealing to nature. Have to appeal to God. Nature is not sufficient ground for morality. Nature has a Creator. Body has a Creator. (1 Cor. 6:13 – appeal to nature as ground of moral choice. What comes naturally. If it feels good, is good. Cynic philosophy. Paul probably politely only quotes first part of proverb.) “God will destroy both one and the other.”4) God raised Jesus and will raise us. Resurrection signals a future use for our body. Can’t screw up body now. Our bodies aren’t meant for death but for life. (1 Cor. 6:15)5) Ethical choices are corporate not individual! No autonomous ethical decisions! We’re members of a larger body, the body of Christ. 3 &4 also apply to whole body of which we are just part. (1 Cor. 6:15-16)6) The corporeal is crucial (1 Cor. 6:18) We tend to forget this because we’re convinced only spiritual is important. “It’s just physical.” But physical is crucial. Body sins are very important because it is the temple of God, and the temple doesn’t belong to you!! Body is the temple of the Holy Spirit, desecrating holy ground.
Doesn’t quote scripture (except Genesis snippet) as foundation of his argument.Paul asks: What moral choice is consistent with God’s resurrection of Jesus and resurrection of us? We don’t just go around once in life – God has a plan for your body. Barth: Eschatology determines ethics. Bultmann: Eschatology is obscure mythology. Doesn’t matter what you believe. The ethical choice is to be confronted now. Climax of 1 Corinthians is chapter 13.
Module 9: Healing
Disease in the Ancient World
165-180 25%-33% mortality, Smallpox (Marcus Aurelius), Plague of Galen. (Galen fled.)
Measles
Underplayed/absent from commentary, but such a huge factor in life.
Thucydides – Peloponnesian War – Athens – priests leaving, “equally useless were prayers,” people overcome by suffering, visiting no one, dying alone
Cyprian – difference in Christian response: Measles – “The just are dying alongside the unjust. But it is not for you to think that the destruction is common for the evil and the good. The just are called to refreshment, the unjust are carried off to torture  . . . whether the well will care for the sick, whether relatives will dutifully love their kinspeople, whether masters care for slaves, physicians desert afflicted, etc.”  “We are learning not to fear death. These are trying exercises for us, not deaths.” “By our contempt for death, we prepare for the crown.”
Bishop of Alexandria, Dionysius (re: measles) “Most of our fellow Christians showed love and loyalty” “And with them, they parted this life, serenely happy.” “Many . . . in nursing others, transferred death to themselves.” Others “treated unburied corpses as dirt.” Pagan neighbours viewed some Christians who didn’t die as miracles (who we would call immune.)
Fleeing = normal. Christian response is abnormal one.
Theology/doctrine influencing social relationships.
Epidemics we suffer from: loneliness, burnout
Jesus’ healing ministry            - not seeking attention
Mark 7:31-37, Greek Magical Papyri, Jesus does a lot of the things found in this book.
Morton Smith, Jesus, the Magician
Jesus risks identification with shaman-types in order to meet the pressing need of sick and poor.
Gerd Theissen: disease did not fall with equal hardship on all classes, Miracles Stories in the Gospel Tradition
Man with withered hand, in Codex Beza (D), man tells Jesus, “I was a stone mason and earned my living with my hands. Jesus, I beseech you to give you back my health, so that I know longer have to beg.”
Doctors served the rich. The poor turned to temples. Most and largest temples were temples of Asclepius. (Giving of ‘replica’ body parts to the god)
Slaves with diseases dumped at temples. (Cities are our dumping ground – vets, homeless, etc.)
Jesus was a healer and exorcist. Undeniable!
What do we learn? 1) Not for the sake of publicity. 2) Prevalence of exorcisms distinguishes Jesus from other healers in ancient world. They signal Jesus’ convictions about God’s power over evil. (Luke 10:17-18) 3) No less than 8 of Jesus’ cures are of deaf, dumb, blind, and lame. This is unprecedented. Hardly an accident that they are those that Isaiah names as Messianic (35:5-6), Matthew 11:4-5. Jesus is enacting the reign of God. In a world where God reigns, these intolerable constraints on human dignity cannot stand. Ministry of healing is a sign of the kingdom.
If we want to follow Jesus, we have to expose ourselves to the diseases that Jesus’ did. Poor look at him and say he does everything well, but Pharisees say his power is demonic. We run that risk.
Rodney Stark Book (Change World/Three Centuries)
Earliest evidence of hospitals attached to churches.
Ancient world: Basically, if you aren’t healed, gods aren’t with you. Very little variances in that. Constant assumption in religion!
Paul – Thorn in the flesh. We don’t know what is. God’s presence even when we are not healed. Christ’s crucifixion is truth in his own life. All of ancient religion was wrong to assume that sickness = God’s anger or God’s absence. God’s grace is sufficient without healing.
***
Module 10: Faith
Many current theologians say we live in a post-Christian age.
George Lindbeck – The Nature of Doctrine. Calls for catechesis of all ages as ministry of church. Indoctrinate ourselves in it, in good sense.
People have no language to express faith.
How do we go about it? Especially if nothing corresponds to our experience?
Theology – God language – are expressions that form out of the convictions of experience of divine.
Every articulation of our basic convictions (ones that supply motives) is inadequate to the mystery of God.
Rowan A. Greer – Broken Lights and Mended Lives
Risk of finding a new language of faith that does correspond to our experience of God is worth taking even if it is feeble/broken. Our broken voices can be translated into virtue.
How did the early Christians find language for their experience of God?
3rd century sarcophagus – many episodes from Bible, but the focal scene story of Jonah. Jonah is the most frequently represented in early Christian art, not only on sarcophagi, but also in frescos.
Graydon F. Snyder – Ante-Pacem
Also Daniel/lion’s den, deliverance from Egypt, Meshach, Shadrach, Abednego
Christian experience of first Christians: Deliverance from death, evil, anything that holds us in bondage, moral confusion and turmoil, addictions, etc.
Cyprian: Letter to Donatus – describes himself as Jonah, then in the peace of a bower. Cyprian delivered from a world of sin. “how great is the Empire of my mind” – no longer captive, freedom, hope.
This experience of deliverance is essential to the growth of early Christianity.
Liberation of any one poor human has an economic/political cost.
What did ordinary people in the NT world pray for? Ramsay MacMullen – survey of ancient temples and the prayers recorded therePaganism in the Greco-Roman World“To Zeus, Savior, and Giver of Wealth” “To Silvanus, for freedom from slavery” “For relief from tax payment” “For a safe and successful journey” “For protection from one’s enemies” “For a safe return of my squadron” “For the safe-keeping of the colony” “For himself and his” for oxen, good harvest, for cattle, for hunting dog – utilitarian character to our need for God – we need God to be useful!
First Christians – how did they articulate their need for God to come to their aid?
Luke 10:25-37 Good SamaritanBailey – Poet and Peasant, Through Peasant EyesLevite, insubordinate middleman. Samaritan – splanchizomai: medley of three emotions – anger/outrage, (this shouldn’t have happened), anxiety, love, most frequently used in relation to Jesus. The man uses eleos (pity) instead of splangchnizomai in his response – Jesus who is moved by our plight.
Deliverance (salvation is traditional language)

Here's the next set of notes on Reconciliation and Consolation: 




Module 6 – Reconciliation
Practice of not naming the person who hurt you is wide spread in conciliatory letters. Perfect Tense: Present condition b/c of past event.
Physical pain and emotional pain had no different words, descriptions.
Stoics, etc., thought that a wise person could have no relationship to pain.
2 Cor. 1:11 – not outwitted, but defrauded. Indicates the person’s loss in community would have had an economic impact.
2 Cor. 7:12 – adikeo – injustice, legal wrong 2 Cor. 12: 16 – panourgos – capable of any work (of wrongdoing)
Paul is being accused of embezzling the offering for the poor in Jerusalem through means of Titus and his ‘brother’ – this accusation is the wrong done against Paul that has caused him so much pain.
Francis Watson: 2 Cor. 10:2, then v. 7 – switches from some people to someone. Why? Paul’s emphasis on cross?
10:10 Again, should say “Someone says” but not “They say” – this is an individual accusation. Words here are technical terms – a forceful style of writing, Demosthenes noted for. Person admires Paul’s letters, but is weak in person. :11 “Let this one” – not let such people, plural.
Best trans: New English Bible
Is this someone the owner of the house, the host of the ekklesia, so everyone was silent – not agreeing with, but not disagreeing with Paul’s accuser.





Paul lays out here his model of reconciliation.
Paul’s strategy for reconciling wrongdoer: (Deals with him first, victim after)1) Acknowledgement (2 Cor. 2:5) Someone has caused pain, pain is received. This step is so difficult – people can’t do it. 2) Discern a sufficient discipline/censure/reproof – not even just – only sufficient. We’re so uncomfortable with this! Squeamish! We don’t dare discipline anymore. Paul suggests that without this step to restore a right balance, can’t really go forward/move on. 3) Forgive and console. Literally give gift/grace, and call alongside. We’re with them, not above them. 4) Resolve/ratify to love – you may never like the person. This is an effort of will. MLK: “Aren’t you glad Jesus didn’t say “Like your enemies?” 5) Understand that forgiveness is obedience – we have to do it.
Paul’s strategy for those who were wronged/his emotional therapy for victims:(2 Cor. 7:9 – Paul is almost unique in saying that there is something godly in pain. Socrates is the only other writer who says this.) 2 Cor. 7:11 – A list of stages you have to pass through to heal from pain
1) Earnestness – spoude – Get up and go-ness2) Eager to clear – apologia 3) Indignation – aganaktesis – anger 4) Alarm – phobos – fear/alarm 5) Longing – epopothe^sis – deep down longing6) Zeal – zelos – burning 7) Justice – ekdikesis – restore balance/justice
This isn’t elsewhere before Paul! Unique to him.
***
Module 7: Consolation
1 Thessalonians 40/41 ADEarliest Christian and Pauline writing – experimental quality in Christian letter-writing
Paul is dealing with death, and is writing, perhaps, on the occasion of the death of an important community member in the Thessalonians’ community.
“Correspondence” portion of letter (chapters 1-3) – relationship maintenance portion of book.“Content” is in chapters 4 & 5.: Now concerning, now concerning, now concerning…
Disclosure formula: “Ou thelomen humas agnoein, adelphoi” (1 Thess 4:13) occurs thousands of time in papyrus letters. Like the subject lines in our emails. RE: This formula marks what follow as the real reason the letter is written.
Paul doesn’t say who died, but his metaphors are like windows: open to social realities of world, open in to writer’s heart.


2:7 We were like a nursing mother caring for her child2:17 We were orphans Metaphors suggest that the mother, matriarch of the community is the one who died.
2:11-12 Model for consolation? Call alongside, tell stories, bear witness
Tombstones: me^ lupe^sthe: stop grieving – because: ____ argument. (I no longer have toils, troubles, stop cutting yourself for Hades turns pity aside)
Lattimore: Themes in Greek and Latin Epitaphs – mainly a sceptical, if any, belief in afterlife. A couple, like Plato and Plutarch, believe in survival of souls.
Ouk e^men, genome^n, ouk esometha melei, ho bios tauta. I was not, I came into existence, I will not be in the future. Such is life.”
“Oh dear heart, what is down there?” “Much darkness.” “What’s up there?” “It’s a lie.” “What about Pluto?” “Myth.” “We are destroyed.”
“Suns set, and are able to rise, but our brief light, when it goes under: night is perpetual. One sleep.”
Most frequently occurring genre in Greek/Roman literature is the letter of consolation.
1 Thess. 1:2: “remembering you” is like memorial – funeral.
Adialeipto^s – not at all leaving/left behind (constantly) – three times.
Kai ho Heracles apethanon. Even Hercules died. (2nd most common tombstone inscription.)
Hoti ie^sous apethanen: If then Jesus died… But Paul adds Kai Aneste^: and rose! Revolution!
Harpazo^ - “snatched up” = death euphemism in tombstones, but Paul makes it metaphor for snatched up to heaven with God and loved ones.
1 Thess. 4:17 – Hama sun – “together with with,” opposing separation images – not survival of individual, but communion of saints. 

Here's my next set of unedited class notes - lots of them!:

Module 4: Managing Conflict
In voluntary association, the provider of the food, the householder, feels to have power over portion control, who gets what, best portions, dining customs.
1 Cor. 11:17-34 – In the house of Gaius – the haves and the have notsContrast between private supper and the Lord’s supper – you’ve made the Lord’s supper into a private supper.
Other Greeks complained about tendency to privatize public feasts. (ie Plutarch) Meant for community, being privatized.
Bread – part of supper – later the cup – part of whole meal.
v. 21: Prolambein – either eating before others (slaves and working poor) arrive, or “in front of” others, while others had to look on, literally wealthy eating while others are watching, also different quantities of food are being served (as would be in ‘regular’ club/association), and perhaps different quality of food as well.
Corinth – dearth of domestic archaeology – only 5 houses from time of Paul excavated – mostly public places.
Dining Room – Triclinium – room with three sided couches. Places for 9-12 people at most. The wealthy get seats. The rest have to go in atrium. So it heightens sense of class divisions.
This describes. But Paul expresses social intentions.
v. 20: When you come together like this, it isn’t actually the Lord’s supper. If it is private, not the Lord’s supper!
v. 30: Some people actually getting sick and dying when they are shut out of meal
Paul is trying to discern the body of Christ that we are.
Since Gaius is still host of ekklesia later, in Romans, then it seems like Paul’s message hit home. This would have been almost unheard of in Paul’s time, social situation.
***
11:5 Women are praying and prophesying – that’s not the problem. v. 6: “For if a woman will not veil herself, then she should cut off her hair; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or to be shaved, she should wear a veil.” Reduction ad adsurdum. Greek/Roman women did not wear veils. Wearing veils was a custom for Jewish/Persian women. Potential shame of women who had cut their hair: prostitutes.
(The Acts of Paul and Thecla)
At issue: “In Christ no male or female” – women are shaving head, which is one of gender markers? (Antoinette Wire: The Corinthian Women Prophets)
Weakest argument of Paul. Falls apart in his hands. “because of the angels.” (Genesis 6, nephalim) Paul knows his argument is lame, comes to his senses in verses 11 & 12.
Ple^n: Cancel what I just said
Any attempt, even by Paul himself, to erect a barrier that would maintain the old self, over against the new identity in the Lord, falls totally flat.
Paul leave it in to allow his struggle with this whole “new creation” thing to be seen.
***
Urbanization. Cosmopolitan. Greek citizens of Asia Minor complain about the privileges of the Jews: “If they’re our fellow citizens, they should worship the Ionian gods.”
Philo’s writings. Philo’s nephew is commander who is there at sacking of Jerusalem. Philo’s works are allegorical interpretations of Hebrew BibleAgainst Flaccus, Delegation to Gaius (Caligula). Alexandrian (as is big segment – 2/5? of city) like Apollos.
Greeks in Alexandria become anxious about growing presence/power of Jews in city. “Acts of the Pagan Martyrs” defending Greeks, anti-Semitic. Time of growing tension between Jews and Greeks – happening in Alex. mostly, but in other places as well. Benefits: citizenship. Wealthy Jews can put sons in gymnasium.
From 36-37 – 40-41, Caligula – emperor, smothered Tiberius adopted father with pillow. Megalomaniac. Caligula crisis: Barricades went up between Greek and Jewish neighbourhoods in Alexandria. Jews gradually pushed back into original quarter, and then out of the city altogether. Camped outside of city. Caligula assassinated, and family. Claudius becomes emperor. In such a context, Paul begins his work! 40/41 is when Paul writes Thessalonians. Claudius writes letter with solution: “Separate but equal” – stay away from each other.
Novel: Joseph and Asenath
Paul’s answer is not separation, but reconciliation. Katallasso – other-making.
Galatians 3:28 – “Baptism liturgy”
Boyarin: A Radical Jew
New identity by erasure: Not Jew, Not Greek, identity to be determined, one in Christ. This is primary conflict Paul faces.
Galatians 3:2 & 5, 4:21 – Jewish Christians are trying to sway Galatians. Call Paul’s gospel incomplete form of Christianity. More is required. Be part of covenant. Baptism is just ritual washing. The norm of a right life is the law of God, the Torah. The Judaizers has apparently been very successful.
Experimental quality to identity in Christ. Who are we? One of the consequences of the gospel of freedom is experimentation – bordering on chaos and moral confusion. Thin border!
Judaizers offer order out of moral chaos.
By their desire for something more, Galatians are denying own spiritual experience. Backsliding. Paul argues: you were like people who were healthy, breathing fine in the spirit, and now you want to hook yourself up to an artificial respirator! An appeal to experience – his own, and theirs.
Norm of identity that brings order: Torah. (Judaizers)*Norm of identity: faith in or of (debate of translation, prefer OF) Jesus Christ. Debate. (Paul)
Sam K. Williams, The Saving Significance of Jesus’ Death, Richard Hayes, The Faith of Jesus Christ
The only thing wrong for Paul with the Jewish law is that even if you keep it, you don’t show yourself to be as radically faithful to God as Jesus was in his giving of his life. Faith of Jesus Christ.
Badiou – Saint Paul and the Foundation of Universalism – Pauline gospel is the primal truth event! (Badiou is a Maoist Marxist)
***Romans 9-11 – most of the Jews, by this time, have rejected Jesus. Judaizers have already been to Rome. 9:4-5 – they have everything but the faith of Jesus Christ. If Israelites don’t have this, can we believe in new promises of God?
Three answers: 1) Romans 9:6-29 – Spiritual Israel will be saved (those Jews that have already joined the “Pauline experiment” 2) Remnant – 9:30-11:10 – Israel didn’t pursue righteousness through faith but through dependence on works, but God has kept promise to a remnant (Jewish Christians, faithful to law are saved too) 3) Romans 11:13-14, 15 – Ministry to Gentiles causes jealousy in Israel, that’s a purpose. Unbelieving Jews as a theological problem, confronted here for the first time, by using holy name Israel to them, 5 times. Romans 11:25 – the mystery: why the hardening of Israel? After all Gentiles have come in, at end of history, Israel will come in.
Lessons for us? Romans 9-11 tells us Jews won’t have faith of Jesus throughout historical time. So his “Jews and Greeks” project won’t be realized until the end of history. But Paul won’t give up on his vision of reconciliation between the races: all Israel will be saved.
15:30-31 – Knew his life would be in danger among the Israelites, but went anyway. In the end, Paul lost all his Galatian churches probably.
Author of Acts is silent about fate of collection to Jerusalem and Paul.

***
Module 5: Decision Making
We Decide Together – book: Donelson and Campbell – contemporary church decision-making
Some group decisions – some made by individual members, but actions of individuals can also threaten groups. Groups have a fragile hold on existent and identity – depend on commitment of members.
Have limited tolerance for conflict and diversity. When tolerance is overstepped, group either will begin to resolve, or make a decision about which way to go.
Groups, small or large, must have structure/mechanism for decision-making. Two types of decisions: 1) Task – functions performed by group. Maintenance: how can we keep this machine going, or of mission/vocation variety.
When groups are defined by single task, task/identity decisions are almost the same. Ie Cave Exploring Group
2) Identity – more volatile and explosive. Required of all groups. Membership. Discipline. Boundaries. Who is in and who is out. Where is boundary of group? Those decisions about boundaries implicate identity of group. How do you measure success or failure? What does it mean if someone is expelled? Who are we? In conflicts, both task and identity decisions are involved. Some groups more defined by tasks, others by “quality of their being.” Groups defined by doing, tasks might be more critical.
In making decisions of any kind, a group reveals something about itself and becomes whatever self it is. It is a fundamental articulation of a group’s life. And the process by which decision is reached will tell us a lot about the group – maybe even more than the group’s rituals.
If someone makes all decisions, or everyone votes – that is revealing.
What are the qualifications for participating in a decision-making process? Age, gender, property, etc.
Decision-making process of a group can be camouflaged – take effort to discover underlying process. Groups often have myths about themselves, that hide identity, make them resistant to change. Many group decisions are made implicitly, via path of least resistance, “we’ve never done it any other way.” In absence of crisis, process of group may never change. ie Men’s group, if women never apply to be part of it. Practices become explicit when ideology is challenged. Threat of changes force group to make explicit. Has to identify challenge, and its nature as a group.
Making decisions always involves a process of interpretation. Why did we just do that? Because we are ____ kind of group. The demand for group interpretation evokes other dynamics in the group. Who in this group is responsible for interpretation? One person? On what basis? By vote? If there’s more than one interpreter, whose voice is listened to? On what basis? What about outsiders we want to bring in? Are they interviewed?
Important to identify norms. By-laws. Constitution. Mission statement. In oral tradition, customs. Where do we find the measure for our identity? Finding the normative expression of group’s identity is a crucial moment. We must consider what roles norms will play in a situation of crisis or change. Does it address, and clearly, circumstances?
Acts 1: Decision of replacing Judas is pre-Holy Spirit, by decision, will articulate identity as new/true Israel. Defection of Judas is a threat to the identity of group as true Israel. “scripture had to be fulfilled” = a norm. Peter narrates what happened, uses scripture, places criteria. Pray, then cast lots. (Handing process over to Higher Power.) God decides.
What is the role of the assembly in decision-making? Listening. (Problem when people skip this step.) Nominate. Pray. Cast lots. Enrolled Mathias: confirmed him in God’s calling. (Steps 1 & 2 require discernment.)
What is the role of the leader in decision-making?Narrating. Showing, with fidelity, what has happened (with God) here. (Luke believes in Providential history. Luke has lengthy narrative here to show how God is at work in what has happened. When do refuse to tell the story because we are covering up or embarrassed? Interpreted by scripture. Scriptural memory of the community. Luke suggests scripture has a role in decision-making – not as a proof-text, but as an interpreter of experience. Proposes the action to be taken.
Acts 14:27 – 15 Debate, consensus, openness to Holy Spirit – is a search for God’s will.
Can we name aspects of discernment that belong to decision-making? How do humans discern God’s purposes?

Here are my unedited notes from class today at MTSO, with Dr. Welborn (Happy Reading!): 

DMIN 901
Continuity and ChangeThe Methodist Theological School in OhioSummer Semester 2010L. L. Welborn, Visiting Professor

Discover point of correlation between my point of ministry and ministry of first century Christians.
Ekklesia is formal name for voting place in community – when Paul uses as ‘church’, is making comparison.
***
Module 1 –
Sociological – insight into the social realities that helped to shape the NT can make the NT intelligible, but more importantly, applicable.
Paul uses this model himself. (1 Cor 1:26) These are the same three decisions Aristotle uses in his divisions in the Greek city in his politics. Wise = educated. Powerful = wealth (dynatoi). Nobly-born = birth. So in Corinth, some were, some weren’t – not many, but a few. Paul is making a social description of the Christian community – not individuals, but the group. That makes is sociological.
Celsus – anti-Christian writer, late first century. Ho alethes logos (the true story) he wrote. Was destroyed by Christian, but have large portions retained by Origen in his contra-Celsus. Celsus: “These Christians are all just a bunch of washer-women/day-laborers/mule-drivers.”
We’re dependent on survival of sources. The interests that shaped our sources weren’t always seeking to give us the information we now want. Speaking about God’s activity, HS, instead of describing sociological nature of groups.
We ask: how do we obtain information about the social circumstances of the early Christians from the religious expressions in our sources? There are very few explicit social statements. Mostly Paul is proclaiming, exhorting, poetic, etc.
How do we recover social reality, including practice of ministry, from these religious texts?
What is a sociological statement? It seeks to describe and ultimately explain interpersonal behaviour with reference to those characteristics that transcend the personal.
Implies that a sociological question is less concerned with what is individual, more concerned with what is general. Sociological questions are less concerned with singular conditions of specific situation than with structural relationships that apply to several situations.
***Three-fold method, for NT, but also applicable to my analysis of my context.
1) constructive – concerned with interpretation of those texts which have explicit (even if pre-scientific) sociological content. Gather all texts of that nature. (ie Church history documents)2) analytical – seeks to infer the underlying the social reality from kerygmatic, ethical, ritualistic religious expressions 3) comparative – considers text and other evidence that come from the environment of early Christian groups – what’s happening alongside text. We can figure out what is unique about Christian group. Highlights similarities, but differences.
Constructive: a few NT statements with explicit sociological content. Acts 4:32-37. Is it idealism? Romanticized? Sure.
Every statement has to be subjected to three tests: (Example: Acts 13:1)            Reliability – Do we know if Manaen was a member of the court? Luke as name-dropper. Points out lots of wealthy folks, of status. Gives information to us about what a later generation believed was possible.            Validity – What can we infer from reliable evidence. Manaen would have lost status/power because of Herod’s exile. He at one time belonged to upper class.             Representativeness – not the biography of Manaen, but the question of whether on the basis of Luke’s statement, we can refer anything about Christian teachers generally. Does Luke mention status because he was only one with background? Or other reason? If others, this is representative statement.
We get information about content, and who reported content.
Analytical – most fascinating? Focusing on unusual helps us look at background, usual. Ie Acts 11:26: We infer that before this, weren’t called Christians, weren’t seen as totally separate from Jews. We also look for events that recur. Ie Mark: Jesus comes into ‘region’ of a city, not polis itself. Early Jesus movement isn’t a city movement, but countryside. Conflict: exposes to view the structures which are ordinarily hidden – like a lightening flash. In most cases, entire groups are parties to conflicts, not just individuals, who might be spark plugs. Extraordinary lights up terrain of ordinary. Ie 1 Corinthians 8 & 10. We may also draw inferences from articulated norms. Social rules by which we live in groups. Primitive Christian norms come to us by explicit direction (Thou shalt not: Laws/commandments) or implicit by regularly exhibited behaviour. Ethical/judicial norms. Non-observance is punished. 1 Cor. 5. Didache. Norms come to us in ethical conflict. Inferences from symbols. Symbols in our religious life are the result of a metaphorical process. Images in daily life transferred to spiritual themes. Image/object or object/image. Ie “Body of Christ.” Fostering sense of community over individuality. Ebionites – “the poor” – not social condition, but radical/totally dependence on God. Poetic symbols. Parables. Rural persons. Parables compress normal experiences into penetrating scenes of social life. Mythical symbols – don’t open window directly on social reality, but making something ‘other’ their scene. Like actions of gods, angels, or demons. Ie Symbol of possession by demons: intensification of earthly oppression. Relationship between mythological and sociological that is most important to us. Comparative – Christianity has parallels in pagan and Jewish sources.
As pastors, we have to move beyond descriptive to prescriptive. Sometimes have to go against the grain!
***
Module 2 – Types of Leaders
Question between Paul and other leaders: who was an apostle?
Factor: Means of financial support. Who is worthy of it? Who can gather it? What are the marks of a true leader?
Commissioning speeches of Jesus, of 12, of 70. Didache (not a true prophet if ask for more than one night’s supply.)
Two types of Christians leadership had emerged in early Gentile mission.
* Itinerant charismatics. Legitimizes themselves ‘vertically’ by appealing to relationship with God. A “divine charisma.”
* Community organizer. Invests himself/herself completely in new group of people and derives legitimacy from that group. (Paul: you are my letter of recommendation.)
Jesus’ first followers are best described as a renewal movement. (So is Pharisaism, Essenes.) Presuppose small-town Galilean milieu. Confidence of charismatic itinerants in finding support has a religious basis.
When Jesus movement leaves Galilee, can’t count on legitimacy of Jewish piety (as instructed by Jesus), apostles need additional legitimization.  (2 Cor. 3:1) Letters of recommendation from Jerusalem. (1 Cor. 9) Rights of apostle, which Paul is not claiming. Gives his arguments more weight?
Jews in Diaspora. World into which Jesus movement is born. “Foxes have holes…Son of Man has no place to lay head.” Eating food out of field – hungry!
1 Cor. 1:12
Corinth and other colonies are stable and booming economically.
Romans 16:23 Duovir (Magistrate) then aedile (city treasurer).
Charismatic begging is not received well in big cities. The cynic philosophers did this, the ancient ‘hippies’, and it didn’t go well! Patron-client relationship. Patronage. The glue that held the Roman economy together.
Transition from begging into patron-client relationship. Apollos, a charismatic. Paul: 1 Cor. 1:17 “not with eloquent wisdom” – not like Apollos.
18:1-3 Not tent-maker but set-designer! Paul removes himself from both systems – not a beggar, but not part of patronage system either. Wealthy Corinthians don’t understand it. How could Paul refuse their gift?! They saw it as a system of friendship/love. Paul is rejecting friendship. Eloquent wisdom = patronage, Apollos. Not Paul! Not corrupt the gospel, emphasis on messy cross of Jesus.
Others are arguing that Paul is not living by means of gospel as commanded. Jewish Christian apostles seeing him as not obeying – he’s evading requirement of charismatic poverty – he doesn’t trust God enough to supply all needs. They argue Paul is not free, but a slave of his work.
Paul is trying to show that charismatic poverty in context of Corinth is no longer functional, just a privilege, that can be let go. Paul has to reinterpret the words of Jesus to do so. He can relinquish it, and boast of it, that it’s a necessity that God has laid upon him. Renouncing the privilege keeps in spirit, if not letter, of Jesus’ commands. Charismatics need secondary legitimization.
2 Cor. 11:4 Someone is preaching a different Jesus to you. Different spirit, different gospel. Paul doesn’t say what he means by this. (But must not emphasize the cross like Paul does.)
Biblical historians are reluctant to think that theology influences/determines social factors, but in this case, how does say, Apollos’ Christology work? Wisdom Christology?
Book: The Opponents of Paul in 2 Cor.
10:7 – Greek: tis – someone – saying that, implying that Paul does not belong to Christ, or at least so confident that he/someone does belong to Christ. From Apollos’ point of view, Paul’s gospel looks like a needless impoverishment of the gospel. Where has the pride/joy/confidence gone? Style of leadership corresponds with his Christology. Did Apollos’ way appeal particularly to more elite, and Paul’s emphasis on cross appeal more to lower classes?
Paul’s understanding of who he believed God had revealed God’s self to be. 2 Cor. 13:3-4 – Christ, crucified in weakness, is the place where God’s power is revealed to be.
Paul, the Fool of Christ. Paul is the fool, like in theatre. (1 Cor. 3:18) Aesop the slave, Socrates the stone maker.
***
Module 3 – Models of the Church
Are models from society informing church?
1) Households as basic units – oikos/okia Prisca/Aquilla, Philemon, household of Stephanos, Lydia, Philippian jailor, Crispus.  (Don Barker, book on households, containing 30+ people)
(Aristotle describes this in Politics)
Paul’s adaptation had implications, both for internal structure, and group as it relates to larger society. Paul inserts Christian movement into existing structure of relationships. Head of household does business at home, but provides some privacy, intimacy. Paul puts himself in role of some members of the household.
Tensions: - But also creates potential for emergence of factions. Do factions represent different households? Also conflicts over distribution of household. Head of household had such absolute power. Hierarchical structure. Complicates with church. Maintenance of hierarchy is considered as essential by society. Neither male or female, slave free, etc: what does that do to household that baptized in Christ none of that goes? Women, slaves, get chance or inclination to new identity. - Does everyone in household really share belief to same degree?- But advantages of intimacy, etc.
2) Voluntary association - the club, the guild, the cultic association. We know a lot about them because of inscriptions of rules and regulations that have survived. Household would host club, become basis of cultic association. It is voluntary. It is a social organization. To outsiders, church must look like this. Celsus draws parallel: what is going on is secret, uncontrolled, and therefore, is a seed-bed of immorality and social unrest. Because clubs provided wining, dining, and sexualizing J Unlike household, free decision, not birth, determined membership. Relationships other than blood/kinship were important. Had a place for common meals and cultic rituals, like church. Depended to some extent on patronage of wealthy individuals. Differences with church: Entry into church requires baptism/conversion. Difference in motivation or needs. Christian groups are for salvation and righteousness. Ecclesia is more socially inclusive than clubs and guilds. No clubs were cross-racial. More homogenous ethnically. Paul did not consciously model on clubs – no similar terminology.
3) Democratic Voting Assembly (ekklesia)  - Closest parallel to Gal. 3:28 is pseudo-Aristotle tract “De Mundo.” Also 1 Cor. 12:13, which is not neither/nor but both/and. Decisions are made, debate occurs, and future is determined.
4) Not included is synagogue – ekklesia is group apart from synagogue. Different. 

As  I mentioned before, I'm starting a DMin program (next week!), and keeping notes on my blog of my reading. 


First up: The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul, by Wayne A. Meeks (Second Edition). So far I've read the first chapter, "The Urban Environment of Pauline Christianity." I find the book pretty dry, frankly. It conveys a lot of facts, but doesn't necessarily have a particular argument - the aim is to describe the urban context of Paul's world, and the argument is mostly to note that Paul was an 'urban' Christian in 1st century terms, and that his environment shaped Christianity and how it unfolded, describing the context in which it unfolded. In particular, that the spread of Christianity was facilitated by urbanization in the Mediterranean. (25) But beyond that: just a very detailed description of how things were/probably were. Fascinating, in some respects, but in others, just dry. 


Notes: 

• Paul was a city person. Paul was an "urban handworker", which was neither a country person nor a city aristocrat. (9) Paul planted small cells of Christianity in households "strategically located" in cities around the northeast of the Mediterranean. (9-10)
• "Within a decade of the crucifixion of Jesus, the village culture of Palestine had been left behind, and the Greco-Roman city became the dominant environment of the Christian movement." (11) Significant shift, no? 
• Meeks argues that city life created a stable and secure atmosphere for urban people - local government, law, consistency in application of law, roads built and maintained, stable taxes, education, etc. (12) Road maintenance and military presence also make travel much easier/safer, which plays into Paul's story. (17) Sea travel is also faster and cheaper than travel by land. (18)
• Jews, as one group of "resident aliens," were a distinct community among Roman citizens/city citizens, had own laws and organizations, but also sometime had access to some rights or equal rights with citizens. 
• City life allowed for more, if perhaps still limited, social mobility. Physical and social advantages weighed in favor of city living. Cities "were where power was." (14-15)
• Irony: When Christianity finally permeated back into village cultures, where it had actually begun (Galilee), documents had to be translated back into Aramaic and other languages/dialects from Greek. (15)
• Mediterranean cities had a common idea about layout and construction of good city. (15)
• Paul's role as an artisan tent-maker made travel easier for him, natural relationships for him with artisans in places he visited. (17) Movement of artisans and tradespeople facilitates movement of religions/cults: Foreign settlers find neighbors, set up shrine to gods, increase in numbers, demand government recognition. (18) Cults spread not just through intentional 'evangelism', but through chatter and 'gossip.' (19) Families and households of individuals are important starting points for Paul, with connections of work and trade. (28)
• Biggest social mobility question for lower class folks was from slavery to freedom or vise versa. (20) There was some social order in households, and the threshold between slave and free was one of most significant. (21) Additional in-between category: those of the household of Caesar. (21) Upward mobility of imperial slaves and other slaves to freedman was resented by those who considered themselves better. (22) Women were often freed at an earlier age from slaver for "the purposes of marriage" - 29% to their own patron - one of the most common ways for women to improve social status. (23) Was this against their will? Meeks doesn't say. In the context of slavery, what would that even mean? How are you supposed to 'choose' between continued slavery and marrying the one who enslaved you? 
• Women: some argued for education for women, women could join clubs and organizations, but few were women-only groups. Women were present/active in religious matters. But as a small religious cult grew/gained status, "it would feel pressure to counter [attacks] by emphasizing its agreement with traditional values. Whatever 'women's movement' there may have been would be suppressed early." (23-25)
• Cities were densely populated - equivalent only in modern Western cities in "industrial slums" - people were crowded at home, "made tolerable" by open, nice public spaces. (28-29) Privacy was rare, even for VIPs. (29)
• Individual household is the "basic unit" both of Christianity and the city itself. But is much broader concept than our idea of a household. Would include everyone that the head of house was responsible for and expected obedience from: former slaves who were clients, laborers, associates, tenants, family, slaves, etc. (29-30). Did you ever watch Rome on HBO? This actually gives me a helpful picture of a 'household'! Slaves and freemen in a household felt relationships with one another more like kinship than friendship. (30) Also important: Voluntary associations. 12-few hundred members at most. (Same/similar word as synod, synagogue, for these associations.) (31) Clubs gave people a little bit of status in organization if they couldn't have it in government/society at large. 
• There hasn't been an "adequate taxonomy of first-century Judaism." Paul crossed so-called categories, for example. Jewish apocalyptic. Writes in Greek. Hellenistic. His Bible is Septuagint. Is a mystic. Is a Pharisee. "Hellenistic" and "rabbinic" Judaism are vague and, in the latter, anachronistic terms. (33)
• Question of the book: What, if any, were connections between Paul's Christian communities and varieties of Judaism existing at time? (34) 5-6 million Jews were living in Diaspora in 1st century. 10-15% of city population in Mediterranean border cities. (34) Had similar role as associations/club, but also exemptions, unique situations (like: was a birth right, and exclusive to Jews and proselytes. Not open membership.) (35) Not citizens, but shared some rights with citizens. (36) Jews wanted rights of citizens, but also wanted guarantees of not having to violate religious laws - tricky middle ground, not always a bad relationship with Rome and government. (38) Was "prudent" to adopt Paul's view: Romans 13:3-4. (39)
• Ephesus as the center of Paul's and his circle's activity. (41) Takes root in 4 provinces in Empire: Galatia (although what region this is exactly can't be determined), Asia, Macedonia, and Achaia. (42) Trade centers. (44) Philippi (Asia) has a more Latin character than other of these because of "double colonization" and constant passage of military through area. (45) Also different because was primarily a center of agriculture, not commerce. (46) We know less about Thessalonica because of modern city built on top of remains without less disaster/destruction through history. Was a free city, with own coins, government, no Roman garrison, etc. (46-47) Achaia: Corinth. Italian. (47) Wealthy. Commerce. Entrepreneurs. Many freedman, who, in unique setting, could actually be local aristocracy. (48)
• Paul's world, his target, is the Greek-speaking Jew of the Roman world. (50)