Preaching and Truth-Telling

I remember meeting a Presbyterian minister when I was at my seminary for a study week a few years ago. He was telling a story to those of us sitting around the table one night about a small group of ministers who gathered each week to eat, talk, pray, cuss, and sometimes drink. He said that once somebody came up with the idea that each of them would prepare and preach a sermon for the others like no other sermon they had ever preached. This sermon, for the pastor’s group only, would be what they would like to preach if they felt free to do it. Each minister prepared for their day. And, as this minister told us, his face glowed. You could tell this had been an experience that was very deep and dear for him. He said that the sermons were amazing. He said the first minister to preach really opened the door by just laying himself out there, with brutal honesty, and glorious mercy. As the minister tells it, at times they all laughed so hard, the sermon had to stop; and at times a couple of them cried so hard, the sermon had to stop for a minute. Each sermon by each minister was an act of freedom and grace and trust and courage. There were admissions made that would never be shared outside that group. There were cuss words said, there was anger expressed, there was love, there was real flesh and blood human life shot through with the grace of the living God, and there was ecstatic praise of God. It makes me think about the relationship between preaching the Gospel and telling the Truth. It is hard to tell the truth in public. It is hard to tell the truth unless you have the security of a powerful trust. When you can really tell the truth, amazing things happen. You are able to tell things that you didn’t even know about until you hear it coming out of your mouth.

Maybe the secret of life is finding a place where you can risk telling the truth of your life. My guess is that love is that place, and love is trust or it isn’t love. Sometimes you have to take the risk in order to find out if the love is trust, which is to say, ‘sometimes you have to trust someone before you are really sure they are trustworthy; otherwise, you will never know.’ Most of us figure out how to do this a little at a time, but there comes a time when you have to either stop and go the other way, or take a leap of faith. Maybe true preaching is like true love – it isn’t discovered without taking those risks, those leaps of faith. When you take risks, you may find out you have relied on those who are unreliable, that you have put your heart in the hands of those who do not care; but, you may also wonder in joy after you have taken the risk: “why didn’t I take this risk years before!!”

Quiet People Like Me

I like to go off from the crowd, either alone or with one or two friends. Sometimes, even one or two are too many for me to be around. Sometimes, it is enough for me to be with my self. But, just because being with people tends to wear me out, doesn’t mean people don’t mean a lot to me. It is because people mean so much to me that they wear me out. A stranger beside me on a bus. I notice them. I feel uncomfortable. I don’t want to say the wrong thing or give him or her the idea that I don’t care about their existence. But, I don’t know how to sit, what to say. It wears me out. A gathering of seven or eight people. I don’t know how to deal with that many people at once unless I have a clear role. Give me a thousand people in an auditorium, make me the speaker, I am not nervous. Give me four people I don’t know and put me in a room with them with the expectation of social interaction, and I am as nervous as can be.

It is a real misunderstanding of shy people when others think they don’t care about people or don’t care to interact with people. It is often an oversensitivity to others that causes so much reticence to interact. It is because human interaction means so much that many quiet people don’t take the risk of conversing with others.

Criminal Law and Social Control

This morning I am representing a relative of a church member in criminal court. So, this morning I will be a criminal defense attorney opposing the efforts of the government to prosecute my client. I will be playing a role as advocate for the defendant in an adversary system. I have a professional duty to "zealously represent my client," as our ethical standards say. I do not have the duty to sit back with the prosecuting attorney and figure out what will be best for my client (though, I may have to pretend I am doing that to get what my client wants). No, my client wants me to 'beat the case' if I can, and get the government off his back. And, that's exactly what I will try to do. Of course, if I look into things, and we aren't likely to "beat the case," I will negotiate something with the prosecutor that my client can live with. And, that's often what happens. At that point, defense attorney and prosecutor are fairly businesslike with the prosecutor making an offer to resolve the case, the defense attorney perhaps making a suggestion or a counter-offer after talking to his client; and, then, a plea agreement is reached, the matter is announced, and the case is over. The case I have this morning is not too serious. The worst that is likely to happen is 11 months, 29 days of probation. But, if my client fails on probation, it can mean 11 months, 29 days in jail at some later date. I have also stood up with clients entering plea agreements where the client was going to prison for 15 or 20 years. And, I have stood up with one client who heard the verdict of guilty read by the jury, and then heard that she was going to prison for the rest of her life without possibility of parole.

Hearing the judge pronounce a sentence is a fairly solemn moment. It reflects the lack of power that an individual has over his or her own life; and reflects an almost ultimate type of control that the government has over an individual, at least where the punishment strips a man or woman of their liberty and orders them locked up like an animal in a cage. It seems that this type of complete control over an individual should be used very rarely and only to protect society from those who are dangerous. But, in our society, we have chosen to lock up people for all sorts of reasons other than that they are dangerous. We use jail as a means of social control, to try and force citizens to conform to social expectations. "You want to drink alcohol and you are 20! If you do, we will charge you with a crime and lock you up!" "You want to drive a car when you don't have a licence; we will arrest you and lock you up!" "You want to smoke marijuana; we will lock you up in a cage.!" THE GOVERNMENT WILL FORCE YOU TO ACT LIKE THE GOVERNMENT WANTS YOU TO ACT!!!!

Of course, the government's efforts at social control through passing and enforcing the criminal code is basically the effort to control the poor, and the criminal code is not much enforced against the middle and upper classes. In a "good neighborhood" you are never subject to law enforcement "knock and talk," which is when an officer knocks on the door and coerces you into consenting to the search of your house or apartment. In a "good neighborhood" you are not approached and questioned and asked to show I.D., and then politely asked if you mind being patted down "for my safety and yours." The examples are numerous.

The criminal law has two intents: one is to prevent serious crime and punish those who commit serious crime; but, the second intent is social control of the poor or the "alternative." I really have a problem with the second intent of the criminal law. I have no problem understanding why someone who is robbing and raping needs to be locked up. I have a real problem understanding why someone who chooses to use a mind-altering substance should be locked up so long as that person is not violating the interests of others. I have a real problem locking up people for a lot of things. The reason we lock people up for social control is that those who have authority like to use it and show others who is in control. "You want to live life your way - forget it! We make the rules to tell you how to live. You don't obey our rules; we lock you up like a dangerous animal."

I guess when it comes down to it, society has decided that alternative lives and poor lives are dangerous to society. Anytime you can catch them violating any little thing, you best lock them up. And, anytime you can pass a law that will define how they live as criminal, by all means, do it.

Quakers

The Quakers began as a religious movement in England when George Fox experienced the 'Inner Light' that enlightens all of life. Fox saw that the clergy did not have the power of truth, but that truth was available to every person in the depths of his or her being. But, Fox's belief wasn't some simple affirmation of humanity. No, it was a spiritual, theological insight that shook him to his core and he found nothing left inside him after the shaking but the still, small voice of God. It was a deep earthshaking experience of God that gave him new eyes with which to view human beings. Fox said: "There is that in every man which is of God."

The Quakers believe that God - whose image is in the soul of every person - has re-claimed all humanity in Christ. Quakers believe that the seed of renewal and truth of Christ is planted in the soul of every human being. As Thomas Kelly says: "Deep within us all there is an amazing inner sanctuary of the soul, a holy place, a Divine Center, a speaking Voice, to which we may continually return. Eternity is at our hearts, pressing upon our time-torn lives . . . it is a seed stirring to life if we do not choke it. It is the tabernacle of the soul, the Presence in the midst. Here is the slumbering Christ, stirring to be awakened, to become the soul we clothe in earthly form and action. And He is within us all."

Thomas R. Kelly, from "The Light Within," in A TESTAMENT OF DEVOTION.

I have referred to Thomas Kelly's book of four talks in bold letters, because it is a book that comes from the depths of faith. I think that the Quakers, who began as a reform movement with God's revelations to George Fox, really get to the heart of faith. I have found no better guide in recent years to the spiritual life. Quakerism is a mystical faith, but it is grounded in the Gathered Meeting, which unites the people in communal worship and waiting on God and also serves as a check on individual nuttiness.

One other practice I respect very much about Quakers is the spiritual experience of having a "Concern" placed upon them by God, and then responding to this "Concern" as a way of drawing near to both God and people. For example, John Woolman, who lived in the late 1700s, had a concern placed upon his heart about slavery. So, he responded to this concern by refusing to write wills that passed on slaves as part of inheritance, and he travelled from Quaker home to Quaker home to speak personally to Quakers about this concern. When he felt he had done what he needed, he returned to his home.

I have wanted for a long time to go to a Quaker Meeting. They have a traditonal Meeting in West Knoxville that I could attend. If I went, I could go and just be silent - for the time of worship, joining my silence with that of others. Someone might say a few words, but maybe not. Instead I go and sing and pray out loud and preach on Sundays. But, I also have some time of silence in worship. That is the best part for me. All the talk, and singing and praying is really just to set the mood for the silence. It is the better part. Maybe the Quakers have figured out how to have that quality of holy silence without all the noise and orders of worship. Sometime I want to join with them and find out.

Religious Fanatics

As we follow different religious movements around the world, by reading history books, reading newspapers, or watching the news, we learn about all sorts of religious extremists: suicide bombers acting religiously in our day; Jim Jones calling his followers to join him in eternal life via suicide; young men and women joining cults and forsaking all ties with family and friends. When I was in graduate school at Vanderbilt, we lived in married student housing with international students. I used to talk with one student from Yugoslavia fairly often, and with a couple of students from India also. All three of them were complimentary about how Americans didn’t kill each other over religion. The man from Yugoslavia thought the most important freedom was really the freedom from religion, because all he had ever known of religion was violence and division. This was right before the “ethnic cleansing” in Yugoslavia in the early 90’s. I always hoped that he got that “green card” and was able to stay in the U.S. and work for a few years as he and his wife had planned.

Of course, I can certainly agree with these feelings about religious extremism, and I am as upset as the next citizen about religion that leads to violence. But, sometimes I have wondered: "am I a religious fanatic?" When I was in seminary, doing my summer internship in Foley, Alabama, my supervising minister called me on it towards the end of the summer. He was a very good pastor, and good supervisor for me as well. And, I think he genuinely cared for me and my family. In our closing meeting that summer, he complimented me on my work, then he added: “but, there is one thing: you should watch yourself, because you could become a religious fanatic.”

I put this conversation together with a conversation I had with my pastor from my home church. After hearing of my interests and views on church during my theological training, he said that he understood where my heart was and thought I probably might find my place more on the mission field than the parish church in the U.S. He also told me that he had always thought of me as a mystic. Now, my pastor was as good a minister as I could have had. And, he was one who listened and really communicated with me when I expressed views and raised questions.

Taking these comments together from insightful, well-meaning, and faithful ministers, maybe I ought to own up to the fact that I am at least somewhat of a religious fanatic.

Of course, like all other true religious fanatics, I want to distinguish myself from misguided and crazy and abusive and egocentric religious fanatics. And, I distinguish my self, just like they do, by saying: “I am in relation to that which is true. I am moved by the living Spirit of God.” Now, I believe that at the center of my faith is the conviction that only God holds the truth, that I do not, etc.; but, in relation to other human beings, there is still a real strong dose of religious fanaticism that feels empowered by a living truth. I want to defend my brand of fanaticism because I am fanatical about mercy and freedom. But, still fanaticism can start out with mercy and end up so unmercifully. It is a fanatical conviction that makes me disdain authorities in the name of God and go on cussing spurts like Luther when he mentioned the Pope, or John Knox when he spoke of the Queen. I know that those close to me must think at times: “O, here he goes again!” When I get on a real tear of fanatical talk, I often speak the deepest truths, but also some real half-truths, which are really falsehoods. It is a tricky thing being prone to fanaticism.

I went from full-time pastor to half-time pastor 18 years ago, not because I was moderate and not too excited about being a pastor. No, I needed secular, hands-on work to check my religion and keep it from being cut off from daily life. Religion is a blessing, but can be a curse. I have found that good, hard secular work that stands with people is a good anti-dote to the negative part of religion, especially for someone prone to fanaticism! Sometimes that good, hard work that stands with people represents faith a lot better than all the worship, theology and talk of the church. But, I do keep up the religious talk – my mind and heart are set in motion to make sense of things by faith. That is a motion I don’t think I could stop if I tried. It is a motion that feels like the power of life – in all its strangeness and beauty. But, the motion can deteriorate in the heart and mind if it doesn't lead to good deeds towards other people. If it doesn't turn outward in love, it turns inward and twists the heart and mind.

George McDonald once said that religion is not part of life, but life essential. I have heard people talk of some religious people as “God-intoxicated” men or women. I tend to recognize religious fanatics and react strongly to those I feel are false. But, I guess it takes one to know one.

Thinking Together at the Public Defender's Office

My mind is going in number of different directions today. I think of family, of friends, of church, of work, of what I am working on in my heart and mind. It seems to me that I am always working on a problem, or thinking in some certain direction. I don't know anybody else who is like that except my friend Mack, who is our head Public Defender. I don't know for sure. One or both of my children might be that way. Maybe a lot of people are that way.

My father always had a project he was thinking about or working on. His projects were not philosophical or religious, but working on land or buildings.

I think all the time as if I am working on a project. For me, it is about understanding in life, about understanding life, about understanding something above life and in life - God.

Mack and I have this continuous thought process going, and we share it through the week: between court, on the way to court, on the way back from court. The best I can tell we have this compulsion to make sense of things, and we report back to each other about how we are making sense of things. It's not like we decided to be this way; it is how we are.

One day, Mack will say something like: "I realize why the judge took the position he did . . . " And, he will go on to explain his theory on how the judge could have reached the conclusion he did - a conclusion which seemed to have no explanation. Or, the next morning I will go into his office and state some theory about why people act or believe as they do. He will join right in as if we had never stopped our conversation. Thing is, we really don't stop our conversation, because it is an extension of our ongoing thought process which we share now and then. We will be walking in the front door of the justice center talking about religion, and I'll be inveighing against some type of crazy biblical interpretation, and suddenly we are greeted by the court officer and we move into talking about how many inmates are on the docket.

Mack has all kinds of philosophy and theology and political science books, and also, poetry, novels, historical books. He is a much broader reader than I am. He is also a close reader of the Bible and some scholarly works on the Bible. Mack, who one of the wisest and most sane of people I know, basically thinks that most religion and theology is crazy. That is not to say that Mack isn't religious. He is deeply religious in the sense of giving praise to God in the depths of his life, and caring deeply for this creation and the creatures God has made. And, Mack understands the Bible. He understands it so well that he doesn't get too interested in going to any church.

Mack and I talk law one minute, then fall into theology the next, and then a little politics and psychology. We continue trying the make sense of things; we are compelled to. I don't know how I would have gotten through the past fifteen years without my friend, Mack. Our office is a place where you can try to figure things out, be a little out there at times, and find some real support when you need it. Through his decency as the head of our office over the years, Mack has drawn people to work here who care about our clients, care about people in general, and care about each other. Our work place is more in line with the spirit of the Bible than 95% of churches.

A Question of Identity

One of the great questions for religious people concerns identity, which is really at least a two-fold question: how do I identify with my religious group? and how do I identify with those outside of my religious group? For a radical sect, the answer is "I identify exclusively with those in my religious group." But, for those religious groups that don't identify exclusively with the insiders of their religious group, how is the question of identity answered?

H. R. Niebuhr wrote a book called "Christ and Culture" that proposed five typical answers given within the Christian tradition: 1) Christ against culture (Tertullian); 2) Christ above culture (Aquinas); 3) Christ of culture (Schleiermacher); 4) Christ and culture in paradox (Luther); 5) Christ transforming culture (Calvin). In parentheses, I've put examples of leading theologians of these ways of understanding the relationship between Christ and culture in the Church.

I have always been actively involved in this question since my late teenage years in which I was drawn both to the religious and the secular parts of life, and since I have always felt very close to believers and non-believers, and have always found it natural to speak of faith to those who don't believe - but, I don't mean speaking to try and "change/convert" these people, who were usually good friends.

To make my position clear: I am first a human being, and second a Christian. I am first a member of my family, and second a member of my church. Now, that may sound strange to some, make a lot of sense to others. As Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Christoph Blumhardt said so well: God means for us to be true human beings, and being a Christian is only a means to that end. If there is another way to get there, then praise God for it. The only way I know is to follow Christ.

But, this identity thing. I remember my young adult days, especially in college. I always felt like I wanted to say "shit" or something worse or at least fart to lighten things up when I attended Young Life meetings or Intervarsity meetings when I was young. I was a lot more comfortable in my faith going out for a couple and talking honestly with a friend than going through all of that. And, I don't mean to disparage everybody in Young Life, because I have a couple of old friends who are absolutely wonderful people and great ministers of the Gospel who work for Young Life. Jim Branch and Brett Allen - they are as good as ministers get. But, back on track, what really bothered me in high school and college about these groups was that they conformed so well to the surrounding environment. And, neither group knew shit about the Bible. I could argue them into complete despair within a few minutes when I went to their Bible Studies. For them, life was all happy and wonderful and authorities were fine, and beer and sex were the great evils. Well, not to say that beer and sex can't be really bad, but, then again, they can also be really good - of course, sex would have to be rated a lot higher than beer when its good, and a lot worse than beer when its bad.

The issue that really set me off in college (that was almost 30 years ago) was fraternities and sororities. The fact that Christians participated in all that bullshit that was so anti-Gospel just cranked up my mind and heart. I kept raising this issue about excluding people and faith and several of my friends at Wake Forest quit their fraternities or sororities, and, for the ones who didn't, they stayed with a sense of Christian responsibility. I've got a sermon I preached once that sort of touches on that. I might even put it on this blog. I preached it when my daughter was a freshman in college.

I started out talking about identity, and this has been a determining thing in my life. My Mom and Dad who were Christians would never cut themselves off from non-Christians or from people who were just a little on the wild side of life. I may just blog about Christmas Eve parties at our house when I was growing up. Those parties shaped me as much as any sermon I've ever heard. My parents sheer graciousness and openness and love and deep sense of solidarity with people of all sorts, not just on Christmas eve, but throughout the year - that is the determining factor in my life. That is the faith God has blessed me with. That is how Mom and Dad understood the Gospel, and that's who I am.

And, that leaves me to say: God's grace in Jesus Christ unites me with every damn person on this earth, and more closely with those others would cast out, whether they are Christian or not. That is my faith. That is my identity in Christ. I am so grateful to my Mom and Dad for showing me this by the way they lived, because it is the truth - it is the way of Christ.