Ramblings

Baiting - 10/22/2017

Sermon based on Matthew 22: 15-22.  Todays’ scripture reminded me about a small piece I heard about from last November in BuzzFeed, an entertainment and social news website. The website reported that Chip and Joanna Gaines, the popular couple who are the stars of the HGTV series Fixer Upper, attend a church that does not support same-sex marriage and views homosexuality as a sin.
The Gaines’s however have never commented on air about their views regarding the LGBT community, same-sex marriage or their faith, and many of the reader responses to the BuzzFeed article took issue with the media company's motives in reporting the story, some describing it as a “witch hunt” or the new mantra, “Fake news” or as some would suggest a “gotcha” question.
The Gaines’s didn't immediately respond until January 2nd of this year when they released some comments in a blog titled “Chip's New Year's Revelation.” In it, Chip said that he and Joanna don't always “see eye to eye,” but added, “If Joanna and I, who are best friends, don't see lots of things the same way --- how on earth do we expect a world of strangers to magically align? The reality is, we may not all get on the same page and I think that's okay.”
Then, alluding to this past Fall’s presidential race, Chip said, “Jo and I refuse to be baited into using our influence in a way that will further harm an already hurting world.” Chip continued to say, “If there is any hope for all of us to move forward, to heal and to grow -- we have got to learn to engage people who are different from us with dignity and with love. ... We care about you for the simple fact that you are a person, our neighbor on planet Earth. It's not about what color your skin is, how much money you have in the bank, your political affiliation, sexual orientation, gender, nationality or faith.”
Chip's response and especially his comment that he and his wife “refuse to be baited into using our influence in a way that will further harm an already hurting world,” we could see as a cynical way to avoid taking a position. However, in my opinion even though I personally disagree with the views and interpretation of scripture of that church they attend, Chip’s response is spot on. For as many of us know there are many social matters about which Christians disagree --- the death penalty, nuclear weapons, guns etc., --- to say nothing of Christians colliding with some of the values of the larger culture like the materialism. These divisions not only among Christians but in our society, makes it way too easy for many of us to be “baited” into deepening the divides in the world today.
Instead as we follow Jesus, it's worth noting that Jesus was a master at handling those “witch hunt, fake news or gotcha” questions that seems to be in the news every day. Today’s gospel event recorded in Matthew is a prime example.
I would begin today’s passage earlier. In Chapter 21 vs. 23, Jesus had been speaking to the “chief priests and elders,” then in vs. 45 Jesus is speaking to the “chief priests and Pharisees.” Now into our 22nd chapter the Herodians are brought into the picture, which means that the tension would have been ratcheted up. The “Herodians” were followers and supporters of Herod Antipas who ruled the regions of Galilee and Perea from 4 BC to AD 39.
What this indicates is that earlier Jesus had been speaking with the religious leadership. Now, we have an added group, representatives of the political leadership. This Herodian group had the power of the sword. Normally, the Pharisees and Herodians would be ideological opponents and would not have been seen together. Here, these divergent groups gather together in their powerful opposition to Jesus, for as we know politics and religion makes strange bedfellows.
The dialogue begins with these two groups, Pharisees and Herodians addressing Jesus as “teacher,” which sounds respectful, though by this time Matthew’s gospel, makes clear that when Jesus is called “teacher” it is only by those who don't follow his message.
The Pharisees and Herodians appear to flatter Jesus by proclaiming him “sincere” but then seem to take some of that away by saying that he cares not for other opinions. The sense of it all seems to be that Jesus is sincere, but does not know what he's gotten himself into. Jesus is in over his head to which these religious and political representatives where happy to inform Jesus.
Now the Pharisees and Herodians spring their trap cornering Jesus into a delicate debate. These two groups launch into an important question of that period, because tax was an important issue in Jerusalem. It touched on the question of how the Jewish people were to relate to their occupying power, the Roman Empire. It was a tricky question on that the religious and political forces in Jerusalem might have thought that a street preacher from Galilee --- the “sticks” --- might not be up to the task of dealing with it.
We also know from other sources, that at the time of Jesus, this “poll tax” was much hated by the people. The zealots, mainly rural anti-Roman terrorists --- or “freedom fighters,” take your pick --- flatly refused to pay it. The common people, the clear majority of whom were poor, sympathized with the zealots on this point.
Is it lawful to pay taxes the “poll tax” to Caesar or not? Which means that if Jesus says that the tax should be paid, he would lose much of his support among the people. On the other hand, if he says the tax should not be paid, the Herodians are right there to arrest him for sedition. Gotcha! By the way, back to the irony of religion and politics being strange bedfellows, because the Pharisees and Herodians, here portrayed as united in their opposition to Jesus, were themselves split on the question of paying the tax. The Pharisees generally, if somewhat tepidly, like the people opposed the tax, while the Herodians, naturally, supported it.
Matthew records that Jesus was “aware” and flatly called them “hypocrites.” Jesus then asks for the coin, a denarius, which was used to pay the tax. This simple action was an exceptionally deft political move. Note that the entire conversation has taken place after Jesus has “entered” the Temple. Coins with Roman images and inscriptions were not allowed in the Temple, so Jesus didn’t have one, but they did!
What's more, this episode takes place on the morning after Jesus had driven the moneychangers out of the Temple. The reason the moneychangers were there in the first place was to change Roman coins that had an image into Temple coins which had no image at all -- at a 50% mark up.
By asking for a coin, Jesus sent the message to the on-looking crowds that he, quite properly, did not possess one of these coins. When the Pharisees/ Herodians team gave him one, they reveal that they did possess such coins, and had them on their person, at that moment, within the sacred precincts!
Driving home his point, Jesus wants to know whose image is on the coin. The word used in Biblical Greek I think is better translated as “image,” not “head.” I feel this is an important detail because by pointing out the “image,” Jesus was referencing the Torah, the first 5 books of the Old Testament that restrict “graven images.” His message is clear: The image of Caesar is an idol. Jesus also asks what inscription was written on the coin, which, in at this period, would have been: “Tiberius Caesar Augustus, son of the divine Augustus.”
By asking for the inscription on the coin in front of the crowd, Jesus exposes the pretensions and pagan ideology not only of the occupying Romans but with those who collaborate, in this case the Pharisees who were tepid in their support as well as the Herodians who were all in.
Then comes the famous saying: “Give, therefore, to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's.” To which many people of faith within hearing distance, would know that “the earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof.” Everything is God's. There are no exceptions. In so saying, Jesus avoided the trap, while at the same time delivering a powerful message about the priorities and values of those who were out to get him. The Pharisees and Herodians can only be “amazed” and leave.
This illustrates one of the potential benefits of how Jesus dealt with some “witch hunt, fake news, gotcha” questions. Jesus could deftly avoid escalating conflict, but also providing an opening for those trying to trap him --- in this case the Pharisees and Herodians --- to reconsider their position. Jesus was teaching at the same time he avoided the trap. This of course is not the only time Jesus was able to avoid the challenges but likewise teach.
Nonetheless let us gets us back for not only is taking the bait an important skill for us, because in our world today, baiting is a very popular technique. This practice shows up every day in our ongoing discussions of religion, politics, social issues and other topics. Friends have parted company because of deep disagreements that could have been bypassed or addressed more civilly had the issue been posed differently or deflected by one of the parties.
One of many places where this practice shows up is in conversations with young people. Michael Bruce, who works with at-risk youth, says that one of the hardest things about working with youth is deciding which questions to answer. Some questions, of course, such as “When is lunch?” are simply seeking information and have no hidden agendas. But other questions, says Bruce, are techniques of power struggle, especially those queries that come in rapid succession or keep being repeated. He says that initiating power struggles is a learned behavior that is often employed by youth who are not aware of what they are doing. Who hasn’t heard something like this: “Can I play video games?” “Not until you have finished your homework.” “I haven't played all week. Can I play and do homework afterward?” “You need to finish your homework first.” “How come you won't let me do anything I like to do?” “You need to finish your homework.” “I don't get it. Why can't I play? Give me one good reason.” “You need to finish your homework and then you can play video games.”
What that means for us is that Jesus' example in these moments suggests two things for us. First, let us model appropriate behavior ourselves. And second, let us try not to take the bait from others. Both are counter cultural and redefine power.
Like any attempt to follow Jesus, some things are easier said than done. We can protest, “Jesus was the Son of God, but I'm a mere mortal.” And when our emotions are running high, it's easy to get hooked and drawn into arguments and power plays that resolve nothing and help no one. Still, attempting to model Jesus is a way of maturing spiritually.
To begin, let us remind ourselves of the underlying premise: because of the gift of grace given by Jesus in his life, death and resurrection to all of us, we are loved. As loved we love others. From that faithful basis, it's worth looking at ourselves especially when we communicate whether we are just looking for information or friendly discussion or whether we're trying to poke a hornet's nest in other people’s lives. When we are uttering religious, social or political pronouncements, our grounding is in God’ love.  As others are grounded in God's love.  From that we know not everyone sees things as we do.
Second, if we recognize that we are the one being baited, even if done unintentionally --- we might try this: make a clear and countering -- but very civil -- claim from the other side. For example, Being a white man and member of the clergy, I get put into this power play, baiting me to join them against others, a lot, “Well, pastor you must agree with me … "because me being white and knowing the Bible" ….” Rather as loved children of God, let us remember what we know to be true, God's grace whereby we have faith as well as God’s diversity; God’s kingdom in that “Good people can differ.” From that premise, let us begin to work ourselves out of the corners we have placed ourselves.
There are times, of course, when it is important to hold our ground and declare our position, but let us begin from our faith; adopted as forgiven, joyful, loved children of God without taking the bait of others hook, line and sinker. In today's text, Jesus modeled for us that practice as well as taught a God's revealing truth: Give to God the things that are God's.

God is not interested in producing “witch hunts, fake news or Gotcha” moments in our lives.  Rather we are to give what we have received from God, we are loved and forgiven in grace.  Joyfully following the example of Christ. Amen

"Let us change our Minds" - 10/1/2017

    Picture the Exxon logo, or the logo for a Greyhound bus. If that is a challenge can you conjure up in your mind the shape and form of a Coca-Cola bottle? What do they have in common? Only one thing that I am aware of: an industrial designer named Raymond Loewy.
Loewy was an immigrant who arrived in Manhattan in 1919, dreaming that New York would be an elegant and stylish place. When he arrived, he was very disappointed. What Loewy found was a grungy product of the industrial age --- “bulky, noisy and complicated.”
    Loewy decided to change things, designing products that ranged from Lucky Strike cigarette packs to International Harvester (IH) tractors. According to a 2015 article, Lowey did “more than almost any person in the 20th century to shape the aesthetic of American culture.”
    For example, during the Kennedy administration, Loewy complained to a friend in the White House that the commander in chief's airplane from the Truman and Eisenhower administrations looked “gaudy.” Determined to improve the presidential plane, he spent several hours on the floor of the Oval Office, cutting up shapes of blue paper along with President Kennedy. Finally, they settled on a design for the nose of the plane that has been in place ever since.
    So, what was Raymond Loewy's guiding principle? Lowey sensed that people are torn between two opposing forces: a curiosity about things that are new and a fear of anything that is too new. As a result, people no matter their background are attracted to what is daring but also instantly comprehensible. Loewy believed that people want things that are “Most Advanced, Yet Acceptable,” a motto which has been shortened to MAYA.
If you don’t believe me, think about how MAYA works in our own lives. I suspect many of us find ourselves drawn to the joy of a new discovery. But at the same time, we want something familiar, because it makes us feel safe. Just imagine the the iPhone by Apple. When it was introduced in 2007, it was a thrilling new discovery and it launched a new era of smartphones. At the same time, it was not too radical for customers to accept from the older clamshell phones. The reason being that the iPhone was familiar enough to people who had been introduced to iPod music players back in 2001. Which meant that over the course of six years, consumers had become accustomed to their distinctive shape, size and design. So, when the iPhone appeared, it was advanced, and yet, because of what had come before, like the Apple iPod, it made the iPhone acceptable. It was Most Advanced, Yet Acceptable. MAYA.
    As I said, Loewy believed that people are torn between a curiosity about new things and a fear of anything too new. I believe this is something Jesus understood, practiced and taught. Today, in the temple in Jerusalem, Jesus asks the chief priests and the elders in response to a challenge, “Did the baptism of John come from heaven, or was it of human origin?” This is a query which put his challengers in a considerable bind. “The baptism of John,” he asks, “From, where was it? From heaven or from humanity?”
    The “chief priests and scribes” correctly perceive their dilemma. If they say that John's baptisms were by the authority of heaven, Jesus will ask why they didn't “believe” John. If they say that John's authority was of human origin, they will aggravate the crowd because “all” regarded John as a prophet. Think of it using the concept of MAYA. The people loved John because his baptism was new and thrilling. In the eyes of Jesus and the people, John's baptism is clearly Most Advanced.
    And yet, if the priests and elders say, “John's baptism is of human origin,” the crowd would have criticized them because John came out of a long line of Hebrew prophets, and his baptism is rooted in religious tradition. Baptism by John very much resembled the Jewish ritual bath the Mikveh. John the Baptist is Most Advanced, Yet Acceptable. The priests and elders likewise are unable to conclude, and they say, “We do not know.”
Jesus is engaging in this debate because the religious leaders are questioning his authority. They want to trip him, trap him and ultimately destroy him. But Jesus like John is both fresh and traditional.
    We see this being displayed again later, when Jesus tells a parable that illustrates his ability to be simultaneously surprising and yet familiar. A man has two sons, and he asks both to work in his vineyard. The first says, “No, I don't think so,” but later he changes his mind and gets to work. The second says, “Sure, I'll go,” but he fails to lift a finger. “Which of the two,” asks Jesus, “did the will of his father?” “Duh,” say the priests and scribes, “the first.”
    “Truly I tell you,” says Jesus, “the tax collectors and the prostitutes are going into the kingdom of God ahead of you.” That kind of thinking is MA, Most Advanced. Prostitutes going to heaven ahead of priests? Such a thing is fresh, bold and surprising! But Jesus isn't finished. “For John came to you in the way of righteousness and you did not believe him,” he explains, “but the tax collectors and the prostitutes believed him.” The way of righteousness --- is entirely traditional and acceptable. Jesus was not explaining a concept that was unfamiliar. Jesus is saying that both he and John are delivering a message that religious leaders should endorse.
    Bold and traditional is what Jesus is all about. The heart of Jesus' argument, is that “authority” is about “trust.” That being the case, Jesus will not tell the chief priests and scribes where he gets his authority since they've already shown that they don't trust anyway. But the marginalized are drawn to Jesus’ message, and they are responding to what is good. They know they can trust Jesus, and therefore Jesus has authority. When they see it, they are responding to it, not only in response to a parable, but in Jesus’ discussion with the religious leaders.
    In his teachings, Jesus offers a surprise but traditional approach to transformation. For example, in his parable of the two sons, Jesus honors the son who changes his mind and goes into the vineyard to work for his father. More important than the son’s initial response is his willingness to turn himself around and go in the right direction. In this way, the tax collectors and prostitutes can be miles ahead of the chief priests and scribes who might be saying the right things but necessarily doing anything about it.
    John the Baptist challenges people to “repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near.” Jesus follows up with his own invitation to repent (4:17). In both cases, repenting means a change of heart and mind, an about-face, a 180-degree turn.
The audacious message of Jesus is that change is always possible. Our futures are not determined by our choices from the past, whether or own or others. None of us is trapped in the life we are living right now. Like the first son in the parable, we are free to change our mind and serve God. Jesus not only believes we are designed for change, he trusts we can.
    In his intrepid message today, Jesus criticizes the priests and the scribes by saying, “John came to you in the way of righteousness and you did not believe him.” By righteousness, Jesus means what we nominally refer to as “right” relationship with God, and “right” relationship with fellow human beings. What is “right” in this case is not based on an obligation. Jesus makes clear when he criticizes the scribes and Pharisees for being hypocrites. “Woe to you,” Jesus says later “for you tithe mint, dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith.” Righteousness means “right” in that it is a turned relationship grounded in faith in God regardless of who we are or what we have or have not done toward justice and mercy to our brothers and sisters.
    In the early church, James posed the question of what Christians ought to do when they see a brother or sister without clothes or daily food. He asked if it is enough to say to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and eat your fill.” That is the traditional response. No, a turned relationship means that we do what we can to supply daily needs. Anything else is not “right” righteousness or turned. This is new, but traditional. Jesus would agree with James.
    This is not the only place where Jesus demonstrates that he is both surprising and traditional. Later in Matthew 22, Jesus is asked by one of the Pharisees to identify the greatest commandment in the law. Jesus answers, “‘You shall love the Lord your God [and] you shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”
    Although this sounds like a new discovery, it is quite familiar and instantly comprehensible. “Love the Lord your God” comes from Deuteronomy 6:5 and “love your neighbor as yourself” is a quotation of Leviticus 19:18. This Jesus love-design is attractive because it is both bold, combining the two into one statement.
I    n a sense, this love-design is like the four chords that lie at the heart of many classic pop songs. In a popular online video called “4 Chords,” the group “Axis of Awesome” cycles through dozens of songs that are built on the same chord progressions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOlDewpCfZQ In a humorous way, they show the similarities between songs as diverse as “Let It Be,” “Don't Stop Believin',” “Take Me Home, Country Roads” and “Can You Feel the Love Tonight?” All those songs across genres are built on the same 4 chord progression. Although these songs are built on the same four chords, they sound nothing alike. Each one is bold, in its own way. But we are attracted to them because they are built on the familiar. The same is true for the love commandment of Jesus, which is both new and old at the very same time.
    What about us? Each of us can be audacious in love based on the same love of God. For example, going out these doors and saying to someone “can I tell you about my Christian faith” will be immediately seen as the religious leaders at the time of Jesus, traditional with no authority. Yet, how can we say share that builds trust? Well we have some guidelines we can learn from: Coke was MAYA, New Coke wasn’t. The iPhone was MAYA. Google Glass wasn't. Dove's Real Beauty campaign was MAYA. Protein's Beach Body Ready was neither advanced nor acceptable. French Fries were MAYA. Burger King’s Satisfries wasn’t.
    All though honorable attempts --- they failed, yet all those companies were willing to experiment. We fail to pursue “Courageous” because of fear, relying on our traditions. We fail to embrace “Yet Acceptable” by losing touch with the comfort of people. It's a difficult balance, Loewy knew that and that's Too advanced -- and we're too much of a risk. Just acceptable and we fade to gray --- irrelevant. So, what to do? In our faith and life, we are to do what positive companies do, be willing to experiment.
    I am not speaking about dropping this or adding that if it is as simple as eliminating a lesson or adding a guitar. I am not talking about being attractive enough to get people from other churches. Rather we are told that the tax collectors and prostitutes were receptive, the people on the margins, but Jesus did not expect to encounter those on the margins or Temple or synagogue.
    As Jesus shared, the first son said no, then went to work in the vineyard. What a sharp contrast between this first son, and the chief priests and scribes, and authorities. They were not sorry, did not change their mind, and, even worse, did not “trust” even though the mouthed the right lines. As we saw with John the Baptist, and we will see later with Jesus, those opposed colluded with the powers that killed John the Baptist, did not walk in the “way of justice,” and were opposing God.
    Today’s take away is to always remain wary of where we are in faith caught in tradition, yet sorry for where we have remained. (Personal Examples) Let us be receptive to the Holy Spirit opening to the new, trusting in the grace of God through Jesus Christ, bold in experimentation in the fight for justice. And if we have a few design failures, so be it. Let us continue to move outside our comfort zones, let us make some new contacts, let’s go out of our usual roles and attractive self-images, walk instead of drive, make a friend from another race or class. Let us live ourselves into new ways of thinking, which then seem so right and necessary that we wonder how we could have ever thought in any other way. Amen    .