As I sit here, mentally preparing to write, I find I'm stuck between two different topics. One was an opinion piece on the Bruce-to-Caitlyn Jenner announcement, and the other was a reflection on my first "full" service at my "home church" (today) since the start of the sabbatical. While having a late breakfast with my lovely wife this afternoon, I found both topics intertwining. The church experience stepped into the Jenner topic, providing almost further support of the opinion piece yet to be written. With both topics being fenced in by the timeliness of their occurrences, I think I will focus on this morning's experience, and refer to it in a later blog when I go back to the Jenner story.
As I wrote in "B.I.B.L.E.", now that I'm at the end of my sabbatical, "Where do I go from here?" I decided to make this Sunday the day I would not exit after the praise and worship portion, and stay until the end of the service. My wife went to the church she has been attending during this period, so if I really felt I couldn't stay, walking out in the middle wouldn't be something that would embarrass her (I, for one, am difficult to embarrass.)
The pastor of the church preached the sermon. This is nothing new. It is actually a rare thing for him to not be preaching.
Let me add right here, that this is not the first time I've sat through a sermon since the start of my sabbatical. It's just the first time in my "home" church. I've had the pleasure of going to a friend's church, playing with him in the band, and listening to his pastor preach. That experience held little-to-no anxiety for me. I was hoping for a similar experience at my "home" church.
(Note: I was thinking of going into a detailed description of the sermon, but I think that it does not fit the purpose of this particular post.)
I found myself, not necessarily bored, but more mentally disengaged. This is not a reflection on the pastor's preaching ability: he is a hermeneutically excellent preacher/teacher. It was me.
I felt very disconnected. Not just while listening to the sermon, but the whole morning. The long and short of it is, I find I don't believe in what the church preaches anymore. It's more than the "worship" of the bible. It's how the church looks at the rest of the world outside of its stained-glass walls. There is this air of perfection required for God to accept you. That is not what is spoken, but that is the attitude. There is a focus on the depravity of the world outside of the church, and that focus helps to solidify the "we have overcome" persona the church claims. Unfortunately, it is THIS attitude that keeps many outside of the church from wanting anything to do WITH the church.
As my wife and I chatted (over some awesome chocolate-meringue pie), I realized that I had changed a lot. She used to shut down during conversations, because she was afraid that what she would say would seriously conflict with my belief structure. Now she says that has changed. I've become more tolerant. I've become more accepting. I've become less . . . religious.
In a sense, I would like to think I've become MORE Christ like. Jesus would not hesitate to eat with sinners. He would even occasionally invite Himself over to a sinner's house for lunch. He was tolerant. He was accepting of those "outside". He never made it seem one had to clean up their act BEFORE He would accept them. He was not religious.
The pastor mentioned that the pronouns in the passage he referred to (in Genesis) were plural ("Us" and "Our"), showing that the godhead was relational. As I've written a few times previously, if you look at the overall story of the bible, God is a relational god. Christianity is not a religion. It is a relationship. We have gone and made it into a religion. What is religion? Religion, at its root form, means "to strangle".
So, "Where do I go from here?" Do I give my "home" church one more shot? Do I, instead, continue to attend the way I did in the sabbatical (making a graceful exit at the "meet and greet")? Or do I make the decision to "cut bait"? Is it the whole idea of church, or the idea of this PARTICULAR church?
I told my wife that I had this fear, that if I left my "home" church, without having another place to go, I would find that I would stop believing all together. She doesn't think that would happen. My beliefs have transitioned over this period, not waned. Like REM, maybe I'm just "Losing My Religion".
There is the chance, that if I walk away from my "home" church, that I will never again find myself in a worship (music) team. And would I be okay with that?
You know what? I think I am.
© Emittravel 2015
Showing posts with label sermon. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sermon. Show all posts
Sunday, June 14, 2015
Sunday, December 7, 2014
You Don't Say!
As we grow up, there are a number of words deemed "inappropriate" to say. There was one that was the most egregious of them all. It's funny to me when I think about it: my parents said it all of the time. And now, as an adult, I find that using it is one of the most difficult things to do. You know which word I mean:
No.
That's right, "no". (What word were YOU thinking?!?)
There are some people with whom I have a harder time with its usage than others. Those tend to be friends. You'd think that would be my wife … or my boss. Nope. Friends. I find that I will put myself in an uncomfortable position later, so as not to use the word now. Let me give you a recent example.
For those of you who normally follow my blog or are intimate enough in friendship with me know, I am on a "sabbatical" from "intellectual Christianity". For those of you who aren't aware, you can check the following: one, two, three. A few weeks ago, my friend Jim and I were out having dinner, when he mentioned that the building fund offering song we did last year ("12 Days of Christmas" was being requested for another go.
As a quick overview: my church has a mortgage (insert sarcasm font - "shocking, I know"), and on the first Sunday of the month receives a special offering to help reduce it. Usually, we take a song, rewrite the lyrics, and perform it like the original. Usually the song is a humorous and "Christian" retelling. Thus the non-traditional "12 Days".
Since I was the lead vocal, Jim asked if I wouldn't mind leading it again this year. I, of course, told him, "No. I am on a sabbatical and am uncomfortable with the idea of standing before the congregation after being absent for these many weeks. This is a needed time and I need this separation."
Truth? I said, "Sure."
As the weeks went by, I more and more regretted my inability to say, "no". Just over a week ago, Jim sent an email out to those doing the song that we would have a rehearsal on Sunday (last week) after service to run through it. I emailed him back and got a good estimate of when that would be, since I did not plan on attending the service. I could see cars leaving the parking lot as I approached, so I knew that either service was over, or that those who bail early (for brunch?) were on their way out. I parked, walked in with minimal contact, and did the rehearsal. (The rehearsal consisted of one, train-wrecked run through.) I got caught by a couple of friends on my way out the door, and I was on my way home.
Part of my trepidation was that I did not want to have to explain everything to anybody for my absence. ("Read my blog, for cryin' out loud! I posted the links four times on Facebook!!") Partially, because I didn't want to make it seem like I was disrespecting our pastor. My wife said that it was not anyone's business, and that I did not owe them anything. If asked, just tell them I was on a sabbatical. That should be enough. If pressed, then they asked for it! That helped with my attending the rehearsal. I still had to be there for the performance.
Today (as this is being written) was the performance. A run-through rehearsal is done BEFORE the service starts, and the song is performed at the END of the service. That meant I had to be there at 09:30 for the rehearsal, service started at 10:00, and the song should take place around 11:15. My plan was to get there, do the rehearsal, and leave until the time for the song.
I got there at 09:30. I walked in and immediately went to the back room (behind the platform) to drop off my stuff. There was a special ensemble performance taking place for the regular offering, and they were rehearsing, so we didn't start our rehearsal until 09:40 or so. Fortunately, we had a chance to run over it twice (as the first time through was another train wreck. Second time came out great.)
I went in the back until the praise and worship portion of the service started (again, minimizing my contact with folks). I "snuck in" to the sanctuary through a side door, and spent time praising and worshipping God. NOTHING like worshipping with live music.
After it was over, I went back through the same door to hang out in the back room until time for the song. From there I can hear a muffled version of the service (occasionally listening by the door to determine where in the service it was). I visited with two members of the music team who came through, read, and watched the clock.
As I mentioned above, the building fund offering should be around 11:15. 11:15 came and went. Today we had a guest speaker who did not speak English. He would make a statement, and it would be interpreted. He would make another statement, and that would be interpreted. So, in actuality, the sermon took about twice as long.
When the sermon was over, close to noon, the pastor came up and said that the building fund would be postponed until next week. I turned to grab my stuff and head out the door, thinking that there goes three hours of my life I'll never get back. Jim opened the door to tell me what the pastor had said, and asked if I would be willing to come back and do the song next week. I told him, "Sure Jim. No problem. I'd be happy to come back and do this all over again."
Actually, I said, "Maybe you can find another song for next week."
I was proud of myself. I said, "No."
© Emittravel 2014
No.
That's right, "no". (What word were YOU thinking?!?)
There are some people with whom I have a harder time with its usage than others. Those tend to be friends. You'd think that would be my wife … or my boss. Nope. Friends. I find that I will put myself in an uncomfortable position later, so as not to use the word now. Let me give you a recent example.
For those of you who normally follow my blog or are intimate enough in friendship with me know, I am on a "sabbatical" from "intellectual Christianity". For those of you who aren't aware, you can check the following: one, two, three. A few weeks ago, my friend Jim and I were out having dinner, when he mentioned that the building fund offering song we did last year ("12 Days of Christmas" was being requested for another go.
As a quick overview: my church has a mortgage (insert sarcasm font - "shocking, I know"), and on the first Sunday of the month receives a special offering to help reduce it. Usually, we take a song, rewrite the lyrics, and perform it like the original. Usually the song is a humorous and "Christian" retelling. Thus the non-traditional "12 Days".
Since I was the lead vocal, Jim asked if I wouldn't mind leading it again this year. I, of course, told him, "No. I am on a sabbatical and am uncomfortable with the idea of standing before the congregation after being absent for these many weeks. This is a needed time and I need this separation."
Truth? I said, "Sure."
As the weeks went by, I more and more regretted my inability to say, "no". Just over a week ago, Jim sent an email out to those doing the song that we would have a rehearsal on Sunday (last week) after service to run through it. I emailed him back and got a good estimate of when that would be, since I did not plan on attending the service. I could see cars leaving the parking lot as I approached, so I knew that either service was over, or that those who bail early (for brunch?) were on their way out. I parked, walked in with minimal contact, and did the rehearsal. (The rehearsal consisted of one, train-wrecked run through.) I got caught by a couple of friends on my way out the door, and I was on my way home.
Part of my trepidation was that I did not want to have to explain everything to anybody for my absence. ("Read my blog, for cryin' out loud! I posted the links four times on Facebook!!") Partially, because I didn't want to make it seem like I was disrespecting our pastor. My wife said that it was not anyone's business, and that I did not owe them anything. If asked, just tell them I was on a sabbatical. That should be enough. If pressed, then they asked for it! That helped with my attending the rehearsal. I still had to be there for the performance.
Today (as this is being written) was the performance. A run-through rehearsal is done BEFORE the service starts, and the song is performed at the END of the service. That meant I had to be there at 09:30 for the rehearsal, service started at 10:00, and the song should take place around 11:15. My plan was to get there, do the rehearsal, and leave until the time for the song.
I got there at 09:30. I walked in and immediately went to the back room (behind the platform) to drop off my stuff. There was a special ensemble performance taking place for the regular offering, and they were rehearsing, so we didn't start our rehearsal until 09:40 or so. Fortunately, we had a chance to run over it twice (as the first time through was another train wreck. Second time came out great.)
I went in the back until the praise and worship portion of the service started (again, minimizing my contact with folks). I "snuck in" to the sanctuary through a side door, and spent time praising and worshipping God. NOTHING like worshipping with live music.
After it was over, I went back through the same door to hang out in the back room until time for the song. From there I can hear a muffled version of the service (occasionally listening by the door to determine where in the service it was). I visited with two members of the music team who came through, read, and watched the clock.
As I mentioned above, the building fund offering should be around 11:15. 11:15 came and went. Today we had a guest speaker who did not speak English. He would make a statement, and it would be interpreted. He would make another statement, and that would be interpreted. So, in actuality, the sermon took about twice as long.
When the sermon was over, close to noon, the pastor came up and said that the building fund would be postponed until next week. I turned to grab my stuff and head out the door, thinking that there goes three hours of my life I'll never get back. Jim opened the door to tell me what the pastor had said, and asked if I would be willing to come back and do the song next week. I told him, "Sure Jim. No problem. I'd be happy to come back and do this all over again."
Actually, I said, "Maybe you can find another song for next week."
I was proud of myself. I said, "No."
© Emittravel 2014
Sunday, October 19, 2014
Hey, Babe: Take a Walk on the Quiet Side
A few weeks ago, I wrote a blog called "Oh to be Ignorant", where I shared my desire to step back from the painting, stop staring at the brush strokes, and take in the whole "picture" of God. I wanted to share what has happened since, to let you know where that blog has taken me, and the uncertainty of where I'm going.
(If you haven't read "Oh to be Ignorant", please take a moment to read it before going on - it will help you understand what follows.)
My wife described what I've been feeling as "burn out". I think she's right. I'm not burned out on God, though. I’m burned out on the brush strokes - the driveway. To misquote Festus to Paul, "Much learning is driving you mad!" (Acts 26:24b NKJV) This is not something new. One of the symptoms of my burn out has been the complete emptiness I've been experiencing sitting through sermons over the last several months. Yes, I said "several". This is not new to me. Again, the sermons have been of high caliber - perhaps too high.
Last week everything came to a head. When we woke up Sunday morning, I told my wife that I just wanted to skip church. She said we should go - since it was a guest minister. I told her I "knew" what he was going to preach on (it was announced the previous Sunday), and I didn't want to go. We went anyway. After the service she said to me, "Halfway through I realized you were right." As a husband, I find those words don't come very often!!
The topic was "Healing Generational Issues". He pulled passages from Lamentations, Exodus, and Jeremiah (all Old Testament) to show where generational curses (sins of the fathers being passed down to the sons) is both acknowledged and contradicted. He then went on to show how the paradox (his word - used incorrectly I might add) can be reconciled. At one point I pulled up John 9:1-3 (New Testament) on my tablet and showed it to my wife. The passage is a discussion between Jesus and His disciples right after He heals a blind man. They ask him "who sinned? He or his parents?" Jesus replies "Neither!" Which, to me, totally wipes out this guy's total sermon. Also, not only does the passage contradict his entire sermon, there is no instance - that I've seen - where Jesus breaks a generational "curse".
He also brought up the "value" of praying in "The name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth Who came in the flesh". In other words, praying in the name of Jesus was not sufficient for this type of prayer. I concluded that this guy was a moron. So much for the value of a minister who has the title "Dr." in front of his name. Besides, I heard this kind of "preaching" back in the 1990s. We were right back to the Name-it-Claim-it-You-can-have-what-you-say-Positive-Speaking baloney that was so prevalent back then.
I spent the rest of the sermon catching up my journal - trying to ignore the blather.
During breakfast (a common thing for my wife and I to do after church) we had the discussion that culminated in a decision. A decision that some of my church friends may not agree with. I decided that I needed to take a break from church. Not God. Church. We call it taking a "sabbatical". I'm not church hopping. At this point I have no expectation of permanently leaving the church I attend. I just have no intention of attending ANY church. I will miss worshipping God in church - since I have NO qualms concerning the praising of God. I just can't go from worship-to-the-offering-to-the-car in good conscience.
I needed to tell someone at the church my decision. I didn't want to be one of those people that you suddenly realized disappeared - you know the ones, where you really can't remember the last time you saw them. And since I've been a member of the worship team for a long time, it was prudent that I told someone in leadership. I contacted the person who has led the worship team, the person I've been able to share concerns with over the years, and met him for dinner. He said that he understood my decision, said we needed to keep in communication (a.k.a. "accountability"), and that he would let the rest of the church staff know.
After dinner we went to the church - he went to make sure it was unlocked. I wanted to remove all of my equipment. There are too many idle hands that mess with things that aren't theirs. I packed up my Jeep, turned off the lights in the sanctuary (with a quick prayer) and went home.
And it's done. How long will this sabbatical last? I have no idea. I know that I'm going to do my best to step back and get as far away from the brush strokes as I can.
If anyone asks, tell them I'm taking a walk on the quiet side.
© Emittravel 2014
(If you haven't read "Oh to be Ignorant", please take a moment to read it before going on - it will help you understand what follows.)
My wife described what I've been feeling as "burn out". I think she's right. I'm not burned out on God, though. I’m burned out on the brush strokes - the driveway. To misquote Festus to Paul, "Much learning is driving you mad!" (Acts 26:24b NKJV) This is not something new. One of the symptoms of my burn out has been the complete emptiness I've been experiencing sitting through sermons over the last several months. Yes, I said "several". This is not new to me. Again, the sermons have been of high caliber - perhaps too high.
Last week everything came to a head. When we woke up Sunday morning, I told my wife that I just wanted to skip church. She said we should go - since it was a guest minister. I told her I "knew" what he was going to preach on (it was announced the previous Sunday), and I didn't want to go. We went anyway. After the service she said to me, "Halfway through I realized you were right." As a husband, I find those words don't come very often!!
The topic was "Healing Generational Issues". He pulled passages from Lamentations, Exodus, and Jeremiah (all Old Testament) to show where generational curses (sins of the fathers being passed down to the sons) is both acknowledged and contradicted. He then went on to show how the paradox (his word - used incorrectly I might add) can be reconciled. At one point I pulled up John 9:1-3 (New Testament) on my tablet and showed it to my wife. The passage is a discussion between Jesus and His disciples right after He heals a blind man. They ask him "who sinned? He or his parents?" Jesus replies "Neither!" Which, to me, totally wipes out this guy's total sermon. Also, not only does the passage contradict his entire sermon, there is no instance - that I've seen - where Jesus breaks a generational "curse".
He also brought up the "value" of praying in "The name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth Who came in the flesh". In other words, praying in the name of Jesus was not sufficient for this type of prayer. I concluded that this guy was a moron. So much for the value of a minister who has the title "Dr." in front of his name. Besides, I heard this kind of "preaching" back in the 1990s. We were right back to the Name-it-Claim-it-You-can-have-what-you-say-Positive-Speaking baloney that was so prevalent back then.
I spent the rest of the sermon catching up my journal - trying to ignore the blather.
During breakfast (a common thing for my wife and I to do after church) we had the discussion that culminated in a decision. A decision that some of my church friends may not agree with. I decided that I needed to take a break from church. Not God. Church. We call it taking a "sabbatical". I'm not church hopping. At this point I have no expectation of permanently leaving the church I attend. I just have no intention of attending ANY church. I will miss worshipping God in church - since I have NO qualms concerning the praising of God. I just can't go from worship-to-the-offering-to-the-car in good conscience.
I needed to tell someone at the church my decision. I didn't want to be one of those people that you suddenly realized disappeared - you know the ones, where you really can't remember the last time you saw them. And since I've been a member of the worship team for a long time, it was prudent that I told someone in leadership. I contacted the person who has led the worship team, the person I've been able to share concerns with over the years, and met him for dinner. He said that he understood my decision, said we needed to keep in communication (a.k.a. "accountability"), and that he would let the rest of the church staff know.
After dinner we went to the church - he went to make sure it was unlocked. I wanted to remove all of my equipment. There are too many idle hands that mess with things that aren't theirs. I packed up my Jeep, turned off the lights in the sanctuary (with a quick prayer) and went home.
And it's done. How long will this sabbatical last? I have no idea. I know that I'm going to do my best to step back and get as far away from the brush strokes as I can.
If anyone asks, tell them I'm taking a walk on the quiet side.
© Emittravel 2014
Sunday, December 29, 2013
Stuff My Brain Says #69
Went to Mass with my wife and her family. According to the Church calendar, it was the "Feast of the Holy Family".
The priest made a comment during his homily (Cliff Note Sermon), when he was talking about the differences between our families and the Holy Family (Jesus, Mary, and Joseph), that actually made me chuckle out loud. I tried to keep it down, but Lisa noticed. He mentioned the mystery of Jesus being conceived miraculously in Mary's womb, and Mary being conceived miraculously in her mother's womb. Okay, Jesus' conception was miraculous. He was conceived by the Holy Spirit overshadowing the (at the time) Virgin Mary. But to say something similar happened to Mary was hysterical to me.
(NOTE: Please understand that this is based on one comment during a 15-minute or so sermon. The rest of it was beautiful, honest, heart-warming, and challenging to us the listeners. It was a terrific sermon by a man who obviously loves God and His people.}
See, the Catholic Church has deemed that Mary is "ever virgin". She was the mother of God, and therefore HAD to be sinless in order to carry Jesus. The problem with that is that in order for Mary to be born sinless, HER mother had to be born sinless, and HER mother before her, all the way to Eve. She never consummated her marriage to Joseph (which means they lived in sin, doesn't it?!?) so she was "ever virgin". Something that powerful should be pretty clear in scripture. It's not. No where do you find a passage that tells of an angel coming to Mary's mother and telling her, "Behold, the Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the child that will be conceived will be the mother of God, who will have the Holy Spirit come upon HER, so that the child SHE conceives will be Christ the Lord." If the account of John the Baptist's conception/birth would take so much ink, you'd think something as important as Mary's conception would ALSO warrant a few lines of scripture.
Mary was a young girl, never having known a man, when the Holy Spirit came upon her. Because of this conception, Jesus was 100% God and 100% man. If Mary was conceived similarly, SHE would be 100% God and 100% man as well. That is not true. She herself said that she was in need of a savior. Jesus, on the other hand, did not. She was also not "ever virgin". She gave birth to her "first-born" child. To say "first-born" denotes at least a "second-born". Secondly, later in the gospels it is told of Jesus' brothers and sisters (the word used does NOT translate as "cousin"). And finally, it's difficult to believe that God would want Mary and Joseph to never consummate their relationship.
I understand why the Catholic Church came up with this: it was in response to the concept that if Jesus was born of sinful flesh, He Himself would be born with sin. But the solution given doesn't hold water (referring to Mary's whole lineage needing to be sinless).
I'm surprised that nobody even presented this argument at the time.
Or, maybe someone did. People died over "heresy" often back in the day. ;-)
© Emittravel 2013
The priest made a comment during his homily (Cliff Note Sermon), when he was talking about the differences between our families and the Holy Family (Jesus, Mary, and Joseph), that actually made me chuckle out loud. I tried to keep it down, but Lisa noticed. He mentioned the mystery of Jesus being conceived miraculously in Mary's womb, and Mary being conceived miraculously in her mother's womb. Okay, Jesus' conception was miraculous. He was conceived by the Holy Spirit overshadowing the (at the time) Virgin Mary. But to say something similar happened to Mary was hysterical to me.
(NOTE: Please understand that this is based on one comment during a 15-minute or so sermon. The rest of it was beautiful, honest, heart-warming, and challenging to us the listeners. It was a terrific sermon by a man who obviously loves God and His people.}
See, the Catholic Church has deemed that Mary is "ever virgin". She was the mother of God, and therefore HAD to be sinless in order to carry Jesus. The problem with that is that in order for Mary to be born sinless, HER mother had to be born sinless, and HER mother before her, all the way to Eve. She never consummated her marriage to Joseph (which means they lived in sin, doesn't it?!?) so she was "ever virgin". Something that powerful should be pretty clear in scripture. It's not. No where do you find a passage that tells of an angel coming to Mary's mother and telling her, "Behold, the Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the child that will be conceived will be the mother of God, who will have the Holy Spirit come upon HER, so that the child SHE conceives will be Christ the Lord." If the account of John the Baptist's conception/birth would take so much ink, you'd think something as important as Mary's conception would ALSO warrant a few lines of scripture.
Mary was a young girl, never having known a man, when the Holy Spirit came upon her. Because of this conception, Jesus was 100% God and 100% man. If Mary was conceived similarly, SHE would be 100% God and 100% man as well. That is not true. She herself said that she was in need of a savior. Jesus, on the other hand, did not. She was also not "ever virgin". She gave birth to her "first-born" child. To say "first-born" denotes at least a "second-born". Secondly, later in the gospels it is told of Jesus' brothers and sisters (the word used does NOT translate as "cousin"). And finally, it's difficult to believe that God would want Mary and Joseph to never consummate their relationship.
I understand why the Catholic Church came up with this: it was in response to the concept that if Jesus was born of sinful flesh, He Himself would be born with sin. But the solution given doesn't hold water (referring to Mary's whole lineage needing to be sinless).
I'm surprised that nobody even presented this argument at the time.
Or, maybe someone did. People died over "heresy" often back in the day. ;-)
© Emittravel 2013
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)