Author: Sara Palmer

  • Sermon: “In Praise of Shame”

    This text was converted from the original print edition for full-text searchability. Formatting may differ from the original. Consult the PDF for citation and presentation details.

    Page 7

    Sermon: “In Praise of Shame”

    Brad A. Binau

    Columbus, Ohio

    But the thing that David had done displeased the Lord, and the Lord sent Nathan to David. He came to him and said to him, “There were two men in a certain city, the one rich and the other poor. The rich man had very many flocks and herds, but the poor man had nothing but one little ewe lamb that he had bought. He brought it up, and it grew up with him and with his children; it used to eat of his meager fare and drink from his cup and lie in his bosom, and it was like a daughter to him. Now there came a traveler to the rich man, and he was loath to take one of his own flock or herd to prepare for the wayfarer who had come to him, but he took the poor man’s lamb and prepared that for the guest who had come to him.” Then David’s anger was greatly kindled against the man. He said to Nathan, “As the Lord lives, the man who has done this deserves to die; he shall restore the lamb fourfold because he did this thing and because he had no pity.”

    Nathan said to David, “You are the man! Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel: I anointed you king over Israel, and I rescued you from the hand of Saul; I gave you your master’s house and your master’s wives into your bosom and gave you the house of Israel and of Judah, and if that had been too little, I would have added as much more. Why have you despised the word of the Lord, to do what is evil in his sight? You have struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword and have taken his wife to be your wife and have killed him with the sword of the Ammonites. Now, therefore, the sword shall never depart from your house, for you have despised me and have taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your wife. Thus says the Lord: I will raise up trouble against you from within your own house, and I will take your wives before your eyes and give them to your neighbor, and he shall lie with your wives in broad daylight. For you did it secretly, but I will do this thing before all Israel and in broad daylight.” David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord.” Nathan said to David, “Now the Lord has put away your sin; you shall not die. – 2 Samuel 11:26-12:13a

    A Fairy Tale? Once upon a time there was a dear woman whose brave husband died in battle. She grieved deeply, and when a goodly amount of time had passed she turned her face to the future to move on with her life. And at that point a generous man invited her to become part of his household. They married, and she gave birth to a darling baby boy.


    Page 8

    It reads like a fairy tale: one life ends and a new life begins, a widow is rescued from her misery and potential destitution by a generous man, sadness turns to joy, and they are poised to live happily ever after.

    NOT! The Lord is Displeased We could read the beginning of our first lesson that way, but the fairy tale ends SNAP!, just like that, when our story is just one paragraph old. We learn that “the thing this man had done displeased the Lord.” How can this be? This man is not just any man. This is David. This is the anointed king of God’s chosen people. He presents as a generous and noble man. So what is this thing he has done that gives his God no pleasure? This thing must be brought to his attention. There must be a reckoning, because God always gets the last word.

    How Does Someone Get Your Attention? How does someone get your attention when they want to tell you something important about yourself? How does God get our attention when God wants us to discover something about ourselves? That’s the question: how to communicate something important, but potentially uncomfortable, even shameful?

    David Has to be Confronted. But How? David has to be confronted about the thing he has done, and even, more importantly about the person he has become. But how? God can do this anyway God wants. Fire and brimstone? A plague of locusts? A barrage of CAPITAL LETTER emails to David’s in box? No. God is more subtle. God doesn’t overwhelm David. God undercuts him by sending the prophet Nathan, not to lecture him, but to tell him a story. Now the role of prophets in the Bible was not so much to predict the future as to help people discern the present. To help David discern the true nature of the thing he has done, and the true nature of the person he has become, Nathan tells him a story. It’s kind of a “counter-fairy tale.”

    Nathan’s Story Once upon a time there was a rich man who had everything he wanted. There was also a poor man who had nothing he needed. But the poor man did have one thing, something he cherished—a pet lamb whom he loved like his own daughter. Now the rich man, who had more sheep than he knew what to do with, got an unexpected visit from a stranger. And respecting the tradition of his culture, the rich man felt obligated to provide a meal—a nice meal—for his guest. The rich man had everything he needed to give a feast for his guest, but this man was not a giver. He was a taker. (You know the type.) He took the one thing the poor man cherished, his pet lamb, the one thing that comforted him in his miserable life, and the rich man slaughtered the lamb and served it to his guest. No happy ending there.


    Page 9

    David is Shocked David, who sees himself as generous and noble, is shocked by Nathan’s story. He is incensed! He is the King. He will author a fitting ending to this story. “By God!” he shouts. “The greedy, pitiless man who has done this thing deserves to die!”

    God is Still Displeased. Then the Stories Collide. But God is no more pleased with David’s reaction to this story than God was with the thing David had done and the person he had become. The purpose of Nathan ’s story, and the purpose of the story God gives us, the Jesus story that we call the gospel, is not to make us better accusers of others, but better assessors of ourselves. Nathan’s story, powerful as it is, doesn’t move David all the way to the self-awareness that God wants him to have. The moment of transformation begins, suddenly and unexpectedly, when David’s personal story and Nathan’s prophetic story collide. David is incensed about “the thing” that this wicked rich man has done. But things change in the blink of an eye when Nathan says, “The man? The one who has done this thing? That’s you. You are the man.” What happens when our story, and God’s story aren’t in sync?

    My Story When I was about half way through my internship as a seminarian, I was having a difficult time with my supervising pastor. A friend came to visit me and over lunch listened to me gripe and kvetch about my situation and air my sophomoric assumptions that not much good could come out of this internship. Then my friend cut me off mid-sentence and said, “You know, Brad, sometimes you can be pretty cynical.” I didn’t like what I was hearing. I didn’t immediately embrace the truth of what she was saying. It took a while before I understood that she was my “Nathan,” telling me “It’s not about your supervisor. It’s about you.” (Side note: In my first year as a parish pastor a few years later, I quickly realized how much my former supervisor had taught me and how much I still had to learn. I wrote him a letter thanking him for everything he had taught me. He graciously responded with a thank you and spared me the shame of hearing him say, “I could have told you.”)

    David Gets It David came around more quickly than I did. When Nathan said, “You are the man,” something shifted. David realized that when he said, ”The man who has done this thing deserves to die,” he was describing himself. He made the connection between the rich man in Nathan’s story and himself. The thing he had done in taking in this widow was not, in fact, a generous gesture . The thing was in fact a despicable cover-up. The thing David had done was actually a series of things that revealed who he had become. The story is there in the verses preceding today’s lesson if you want to read it. David had become a person


    Page 10

    who lusted after someone else’s wife, had his way with her, and got her pregnant. David became a deceitful and manipulative person who arranged for this woman’s husband to be exposed on the front lines of battle where he was sure to be killed. And he was. David, like the rich man in Nathan’s story, became a taker. And he realized that the God in whose image he was created is a giver.

    Shame This experience—when we are confronted with a truth about ourselves that we don’t want to own, when we are exposed in a way that we didn’t anticipate and weren’t ready for—is called shame. It’s about more than the things we’ve done. Shame is about who we are. Shame is the painful recognition that we are the kind of person who could do those things.

    In Praise of (Healthy) Shame Most of what we hear about shame these days is how terrible and toxic it is. And that we should purge it from our lives before it destroys us. But in the story of David and Nathan, God is speaking in praise of shame. But stay with me here, please! Not all shame is to be praised. Not the toxic, debilitating shame foisted on us by dysfunctional people and institutions that minoritizes or ostracizes us. There is no word of praise for the kind of shame that deforms us as persons. But the story before us this morning reminds us that there is such a thing as healthy shame. There is a kind of shame that informs us, in a generous and healthy way, about who we are becoming when we become “takers” rather than “givers.”

    Having Access to a Different Story What, then, makes it possible for us to heed the signal of healthy shame, to see that our story is becoming incongruent with the image of God in which we are created ? I believe it is having access to a different story, to one that we believe and trust to be ultimately true. It is the story of our Creator who always tells us the truth, but never gives up on us. It’s a story in which God always gets the last word, and the last word is always a good word. Because God is a giver, and not a taker. It is the story of One willing to be broken on a cross so that we can feed on the power of his self-giving love as the very bread of life itself.

    David’s Song So what does David do after he allows healthy shame to have its way with him. Tradition tells us that he went off and wrote a song. We know it as Psalm 51. But when he first sang it, I think it might have sounded something like this old gospel number:


    Page 11

    Give me a clean heart, so I may serve thee. Lord, fix my heart so that I may be used by thee. For I’m not worthy of all these blessings. Give me a clean heart, and I’ll follow thee.

    Lord, I’m not asking for the riches of the land. And I’m not asking for high folks to know my name. Just give me, Lord, a clean heart and I’ll follow thee. Give me a clean heart, and I’ll follow thee.

    Now that’s a praise song. AMEN.

  • Easter Preaching: A Matter of Hope

    This text was converted from the original print edition for full-text searchability. Formatting may differ from the original. Consult the PDF for citation and presentation details.

    Page 2

    Easter Preaching: A Matter of Hope

    Adam Mixon, Birmingham, Alabama

    Mark Ramsey, Charlottesville, Virginia

    For pastors, the pressure of preaching is a constant one. Sunday comes quickly — “instant in season and out”—and is no respecter of our emergencies, schedules, struggles, obstacles, or obligations. Week in and out, the anxiety of hearing clearly and expressing faithfully the Good News to those sated on other news and noise while striving for relevance and rightness—this is a blessed burden. But we wonder if it needs to be so? This pressure is amplified as we approach Easter. The pressure to preach our best sermon—you know the one that connects with those we see regularly as well as those we are less likely to see in the days, weeks, and months to come—heightens the precarious pitfall and subtle temptation to perform, to be relevant, to be engaging , to be funny, to be provocative, to be memorable, to be prophetic … to be this or that … to be all things to all people … We wondered, is there a faithful alternative? As we approach Easter, • How might we retreat again to contemplation and meditation that allows us to experience for ourselves the resurrection that we aim so intensely to express to others? • How might we resist the inclination for apology or explanation and abandon ourselves to the full-bodied, full-throated declaration that is rooted in our own encounter with the Resurrected Savior? • Can preachers experience an overwhelming flood of grace, filled to an overflow erupting in doxology that also invites others to join us in awe at the inexplicable hope of Resurrection? Is not this the power that contends with all that’s dead and dying while reminding us that death has been swallowed up in victory, that the grave has been conquered, that sin has lost its power, and that love and life prevail, no matter what? In this spirit, we asked several of our clergy colleagues to respond to these questions: The Resurrection is the ultimate good news in a world fraught with suffering and ravaged by violence. How do you/will you approach the preaching task this year? What is front of mind for you as think about preaching at Easter?

    1. Among the best guidance several colleagues offered was to not try to make Easter sermons explanations about Easter. One preacher noted: “None of the disciples knew what to do after Easter,” so why should our sermons be so definitive? To be able to reflect on the four gospels’ accounts of Easter Day should reflect the authenticity of confusion, fear (how many times does the angel in these accounts have to implore “do


    Page 3

    not be afraid”), and disruption. Often folks come to Easter in their best attire with a brunch reservation right after worship. An honest reading of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, and their four very different emphases about Easter morning, unify in one impression: something changed, disrupted, and unsettled. At least for the women at the tomb and the others that day, Easter is bad news (or at least unsettling news) before it becomes good news.

    2. This lack of immediate certainty in the gospels about the meaning of Easter, however, should not be mistaken for a lack of clarity about God’s message at Easter. Hope was the single word mentioned more than any other in the 40-50 responses we received from preachers. “There is no better news; there is no greater gift; there is no greater source of hope; there is no message more relevant,” one pastor shared. “Don’t give up hope in (God’s future); nothing has greater saving power than the resurrection of Jesus and God’s victory over despair.” Another colleague noted about their Easter preaching: “I encourage hope among the people. Generally, we suffer from lack (of opportunity, of resources). Even with all our real time challenges, there is still hope. Withstanding betrayal and even being abandoned by his followers, Christ endured. Sometimes we just have to endure and hope!” This message of Easter hope was raised by most preachers with a keen eye toward the struggles, pain, violence, and hardship of the world. The hope they seek to share is anchored in those challenges, not oblivious to them. One preacher responded to our prompt directly: “My answer is that the best way to successfully survive suffering and violence is with hope. Hope can provide the drive needed to survive the darkest of times.  Hope is the latent energy that drives individuals when the will to drive ourselves has been long lost. Therefore, the Resurrection in the big scheme of things is a message of hope.  In reflection of this question my goal is to illustrate to some and to remind others of the hope that is promised by the resurrection of Jesus.” Preaching hope in the wake of a national election in America a few days before the election, one pastor said: “It’s so hard to know without knowing the outcome of the election, but whichever way it goes, I know that we are a people for whom the sight of death has rendered us unable to envision a future with hope. We need a new vision, and as Christians, it begins with the resurrected Jesus early on Sunday morning.”

    3. Many preachers made a simple, but essential, point in talking about their Easter preaching. This hope, this life, this resurrection is not manufactured by humans. For all the planning churches put into Easter Day, the power of the resurrection is the power of God at work in the world. One


    Page 4

    preacher stated it plainly: “Jesus did not raise himself from the dead. God did.” Another commented: “As I approach preaching at Easter, I feel compelled to remind people that we are not the primary author of our story.  I will do all I can to put God back into the center of our narratives —our individual stories and our collective ones. I am convinced the absence of a God-dominated imagination is the fuel of all despair.”

    4. And with God at the center of the Easter story, several preachers noted that, looking at the state of the world today, God’s Easter message … has much to confront and much to answer for. “I’m struck with various things I’ve heard my parishioners say lately about how if they weren’t people of faith, they would find this world hard to live in,” one pastor responded. “I think there’s so much hope our faith offers that is hard to find if you don’t believe in the power of the resurrection – i.e. if you don’t have a greater narrative of life beyond death, what Martin Luther King Jr. talks about as God making a way out of no way. There are no dead ends with God, despite what it feels like to us, and with environmental catastrophe and looming authoritarianism in this country, that’s something I personally desperately need to hold onto.” In this spirit, another commented: “I think you would have to acknowledge the suffering part of the cross. In this world where there is so much suffering (outwardly and inwardly), I think I would approach it by recognizing the pain and violence present in the world, not shying away from its harshness. This can honestly create and form a connection with those who are currently struggling, making the message more relatable. We see in scripture where suffering is evident. Making the connection and acknowledging that human suffering has always been a part of life helps the message of the Resurrection become more life-changing, as it provides a hope to the people of God, as well as others.” Facing a congregation from the Easter pulpit is full of complexity, as most of our respondents acknowledged. This complexity finds its way into our Easter messages as well, as one observed: “My approach to the resurrection is to help our community appreciate the complexity of Jesus’s sacrifice as we seek to understand our own suffering and celebration. Often, we see life through the lens of celebration or suffering when it is both happening simultaneously for the glory of God. Jesus’s death, although physically painful , was spiritually liberating, just as our death to our former lives becomes liberating when we choose to follow Christ. This spiritual liberation empowers us and reassures us that we are on the right path. Too often, our reflections center on the either/or rather than the both/and. Life is complicated and can often feel unjust, but through our trials and tribulations, we are blessed with messages that can uplift and transform.” Another in this vein:


    Page 5

    “In preparation for Easter preaching, I try to pay attention to the community around me, listen to the voices in my setting, watch for those being muted, pray, and try to listen and watch for God’s movement. I wonder if God is calling the congregation to hear more of an invitation to ‘come to the table’ and break bread together or be prepared to hear God coming to us in the darkness that surrounds us.  How, or where, or why do we see the Easter hope when there are no lilies in sight?” Many preachers held this tension of the world of today and the world of Easter promise with integrity. As two colleagues reflected: “I’d like to consider what it means to live the resurrection as a frame of mind and heart, to be able to hold the pain and despair and injustice of the world with honesty and empathy without letting go of the promise that God makes everything new. New life is possible whether or not we can see how. What does it look like to hold space for that to be true?” And: “I used to enjoy approaching Easter Sunday as a time to celebrate ‘our’ story as an ‘in house’ event. I have come to appreciate Easter Sunday as an opportunity to whet people’s appetite for the larger story and to avoid ‘bottom lining’ those who hear—whether they are familiar with the story of Jesus or not. I now approach Easter with a greater sensitivity to the trauma that appears in the text and the trauma that may be resting in the bodies of the hearers. It is good news to us because we are so far removed, but how long did it take for it to be good news to the disciples and the crowds?” And this: “I tell the congregation and others that are believers that they need to give up the milk and it’s time to eat meat, because the Bible makes it clear that there will be rumors of war and wars but be of good cheer because our Savior has already overcome.” This complexity of reality and transcendent hope is summed up in one colleague’s reflection: “One thing that strikes me in the Easter story and the traditional Easter liturgical texts is that there is a deliberate movement into the darkness and emptiness of the tomb that always precedes the encounter with light and the hope of the resurrection. In a sense, the flow of these resurrection narratives depicts the nature of real hope. Hope is not a flight from the darkness that animates our lives and our world. And Easter is not a momentary occasion where we drape pastels over the dark and broken places in our lives and in our world and pretend that it’s not all that bad. Rather, Easter is an invitation to come into the tomb and face the worst of it, death. To practice an unfiltered honesty about how bad and hopeless some things really are. And paradoxically, it is that kind of honesty and posture wherein we discover those places can become the doorway into or ground zero for resurrection hope to break in. Easter is good news only insofar as it has something to say when our worst fears are realized. And it does: He is not here; He is risen.”


    Page 6

    5. God is present in the Easter event, seeking to change lives. This is a straightforward proclamation, but several preachers noted that all that accompanies Easter worship and plans can obscure that truth if we are not attentive. “I think my approach can be summed up like this,” a pastor notes, “in all this—whatever our ‘this’ is—God is present so that we can remain present, even when death and/or end is inevitable. For resurrection people, an end is merely the preamble to a new beginning.” And: “I would say, speak the gospel with power and conviction, knowing the message itself is enough to turn the world upside down.” Again, this power to sense the presence of God and the obedience to follow resurrection hope where it leads us to change our lives is not our work alone. This is what God seeks and wills for us in power and presence. In this light, another preacher noted: “The hope of Easter is that God moves ahead of our actions and our perceptions, and though the world continues to groan in long labor pains which perhaps began with the groaning of the Israelites in the wilderness, the power of the Risen Lord is afoot before us, beckoning us to join within and without to the indefatigable work of redemption in Jesus Christ.”

    6. “You can’t have Easter unless someone is dead.” This straightforward declaration leads us to a final cluster of reflections on preaching Easter. There is a particularity and a specificity to Easter proclamation that prevents us preachers from settling for “Easter as beautiful metaphor .” Years ago, in Easter worship in a congregation, the well-meaning preacher said amid the Easter sermon “and to illustrate this, I found a wonderful story this week on the internet.” At which point a companion leaned over and whispered, “I thought we were here today because God has already given us the most beautiful story of all time.” An experienced Easter preacher offered this wisdom: “How do you name and connect and evoke the big, big story of Easter in a way that is accessible to folks who either know the story too well or are in the room against their better judgment? It’s tough. I don’t want to make the story small in order to make it more accessible. On the other hand, staying big and expansive and up in the theological sky will just leave folks feeling unconnected to the good news.” On anchoring Easter proclamation in the real world of suffering and hope, we are grateful for long-time JP contributor Tom Long to offer this: “This Easter I will be preaching about the resurrection, of course, but I will be emphasizing as forcefully as I can the resurrection of the body. The promise of a bodily resurrection—Jesus’s and ours—is not a magic trick but an affirmation that all that Jesus was and all the he did—the words he spoke with his mouth, the healings he did with his hands, the places of service to which


    Page 7

    his feet took him, the offering of his own body on the cross—have been glorified and gathered up into the victory of God. And the bodily resurrection is a promise that our embodied sacrifices in the name of Christ are not in vain. I will be counseling against all dainty and spiritualized notions of the resurrection of the soul alone. As the Black biblical scholar Esau McCaulley has written, “The depiction of the afterlife in which we live apart from our bodies gives physical suffering the final word. If a Black body can be hanged from a tree and burned, never to be restored again, what kind of victory is the survival of a soul? The mob, then, would be able to take something that even God cannot restore.” My sermon this Easter will have in full view the bodies of those who have suffered and died in places like Gaza, Israel, Palestinian refugee camps, the Congo, a high school in Georgia, hospice units, and many others. As faithfully as I can, I will be shaking my fist in the face of Death and saying, Where O death is your victory? Thanks be to God who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.”

    With deep gratitude for all who responded to our query about Easter preaching, we are struck by the faithfulness and focus expressed by nearly all those pastors as they considered their approach to Easter preaching. Inherent in nearly every response was the sense that the task of preaching Easter is the same as it has always been. The Gospel is eternally relevant, just as it is urgent for today. Whether one suffers as a victim or as judgment is of little consequence. What is most important is faithfulness in its declaration of this Good News that finds and meets us where we are but will not leave us there. There is grace for all of us. As the epistle reminds us:

    3Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! According to

    God’s great mercy, God has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you, 5who by God’s power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time. 6In this you rejoice, though now for a little while, if necessary, you have been grieved by various trials. (1 Peter 1:3-6)

    We are both challenged and encouraged by the faithfulness and sensitivity of those who are bold to step into the role of proclamation on Easter. It seems, then, that the great challenge of this season is not one of creativity—God’s work has Easter power and presence for this and every time. But our greatest challenge is one of conviction . We hear the bold proclamation that “Christ is Risen!” as we move through the darkness, through the fear, and through the despair. Easter hope calls us forward, holding us up, holding us together until we come through on the other side. Easter hope reminds us that we are held in the light, love, and the new life that the Resurrection guarantees.

  • Sermon: “Changing the End of the Story”

    This text was converted from the original print edition for full-text searchability. Formatting may differ from the original. Consult the PDF for citation and presentation details.

    Page 31

    Sermon: “Changing the End of the Story”

    Andrew C. Whaley

    Roanoke, Virginia

    But Mary stood weeping outside the tomb. As she wept, she bent over to look into the tomb…

    – John 20: 11-1

    We are a storytelling species. Storytelling distinguishes us among the animals. We pass down family stories. We tell stories of our nation. We tell stories of the gods. Myths and Adventures and Mysteries and Family Sagas capture us. Oral stories became written ones so that they could be preserved and passed down and continued. Written stories became printed, and through large global literacy efforts, words and stories permeate the globe. We can read a book, a story, by someone we have never met, whose life is wholly different from our own, and yet we feel we know these characters. The plot of the book intersects with the plot of our lives. We understand our existence through the stories we encounter. They provide purpose, direction, comfort, and hope. They become a script for living. How many teenagers have found themselves as Holden Caufield?1 Who hasn’t stood in rapt silence, awe, and fear when Boo Radley stands in the corner of the Finch house after rescuing Jem and Scout from the drunken Bob Ewell?2 Who can read without weeping as they hear of Little Anne laying down upon the grave of Old Dan, the two inseparable hounds, and giving up her life?3 You know these stories. They sting you. They hold you. They mold you. They enchant the world. Through them we begin to see our own lives as something precious, maybe even sacred. “Once upon a time …” There is rising concern, however, that an attraction to stories that define us is fading from modern life. In a recent article in The Atlantic magazine, Katherine Marsh highlights how the statistics of children ages nine to thirteen who read for fun has dropped by double digits since 1984. There are many explanations, but as Marsh says, “One of the most compelling—and depressing—is rooted in how our education system teaches kids to relate to books.”4 Analytic reading has become the measurable standard. Books are to be dissected , evaluated, critiqued, and recalled. These are necessary skills, especially in a generation of students who are bombarded with true and false information every day. But to read a story and be shaped by it, this is harder to evaluate. It is emotional, psychological, mythic. A similar story came out in February in The New Yorker magazine called “The End of the English Major.” The piece chronicles the almost 50% decline in Humanities majors in colleges and universities since 2007. They credit the pre-professional


    Page 32

    emphasis of college education as one reason. Another is a bias against engaging with old ideas because they represent outdated worldviews and contain prejudices we cannot tolerate now. As a result, some schools are trying to integrate the Iliad into business classes or bring in other ethical ideas of literature into medical ethics courses so that the humanities are not lost entirely. Other schools are simply moving toward eliminating those programs.5 What’s the risk of losing our connection to great stories? We lose the enchantment of life, the possibility, the myth for living. We are left with utility. Money, security , legacy, leisure—these become the “story” we live with shrunken imaginations devoid of stories that draw us beyond statistical analysis and measurable results. The only story we have is the one we write for ourselves, and a “successful” story must meet the Standards of Learning or the income bracket we want to reach. Mary Magdalene knows a world devoid of story as she stands in that garden on the first day of the week. She has lost the story for her life. The great story of love that she entered through Jesus and his teachings had died. It was cut off. It ended in tragedy. She witnessed him arrested, tried, crucified, and laid in the tomb. She has come on the first day of the week to prepare the body for burial, but she finds the stone rolled away and the body missing. How much worse could it get? Couldn’t he be left alone in death? She weeps outside the tomb, unable even to recognize the angels who speak to her, “Why are you weeping?” I’m weeping because the story has ended as all stories end, in death. I’m weeping because life is only survival of the fittest. I’m weeping because those with the power make the rules. I’m weeping because wealth and prestige are all that matter. I’m weeping because analysis and data and convenience are the only things to strive for. I’m weeping because there are no stories worth telling. Life is only what can be touched and tasted, smelled and heard, observed and harnessed and manipulated and abused. I’m weeping because my life is only what I make of it, and then I die, so what’s the point? Mary knows this world without a story, without imagination, without possibility beyond what she can make for herself. We, too, have been trapped in that story, and it is only through a new story, imagined and resonating in a depth we rarely acknowledge , that a new future arises. Something from beyond must come to re-enchant our existence. Gospel arrives in such stories that entwine themselves with our own. And in such a story, a weeping sufferer realizes there is a future beyond what she makes for herself. People of faith look for echoes of this enchantment around us, those who find their futures changed from a power beyond them. One such character is Ms. Honey in the classic children’s book Matilda by Roald Dahl.6 You may remember this story. A young girl from a horrible family is sent to a terrible school


    Page 33

    Easter 2025

    run by a tyrant, known as The Trunchbull. She reigns with an iron fist, despising the children in her classrooms and hallways and regularly abusing them physically and verbally. Matilda’s one saving grace is that she gets to learn with Ms. Honey who teaches with kindness and respect and joy. You learn through the story, however, that Ms. Honey is the niece of the Trunchbull , raised by her abusive relative after her parents died, and upon her adulthood, the Trunchbull handed her a bill for the expenses she incurred in raising Ms. Honey. It is an astronomical sum, and so she must work at this terrible school until she pays the debt, but she will never be able to pay the debt. Ms. Honey lives in a disenchanted world, weeping, hopeless, with no possibility of freedom or joy until Matilda, who has been gifted from some power beyond herself, is able to use her telekinesis and her cunning to overthrow the power of the Trunchbull and send the tyrant running for the hills. The book was adapted into a musical several years ago, and in the final song, right after the Trunchbull has abandoned the school, leaving Ms. Honey free and able to transform it into the school she has longed for, she begins to sing, “I was sure that I would never escape the story I’d written for me. I couldn’t find a way out. I couldn’t see beyond the clouds that swirled around me. Then one day I opened my eyes, and looked up to find that the sky had turned blindingly blue. And right by my side there was you. Quietly taking a stand, and you were holding my hand.”7

    Do you hear Mary Magdalene in those words? A story written for her. No way out. No one to rely on. Just learn to survive. Do you hear yourself in those words? In a disenchanted world marked only by spreadsheets and formulas and pharmaceuticals and artificial intelligence and war mongering. Just survive. Rely on me. No way out. The story of the Gospel, however, invades a story-less world. And the one who by observation could only be a gardener is revealed as the one who created the first Garden of Eden. And the woman weeping in despair, in a depth of suffering she can never pay off, in a future that is gray and bleak and with no possibility other than her own life, she hears him speak her name, “Mary.” And she opens her eyes, and she looks up to find that the sky had turned blindingly blue. And right by her side there was you. Quietly taking his stand. And holding her hand. “You were just holding my hand. You were just there for me. Quietly taking a stand.


    Page 34

    Changing the end of my story for me. You were there as I battled my fears. I fell and you helped me to stand. When the storm finally cleared You were there. You were still holding my hand.”8 “Changing the end of my story for me.” That is the gospel. Jesus speaks Mary’s name, and the end of her story changes from death and hopelessness to a love without fear, a belonging without performance, forgiveness instead of retribution, eternity instead of just mortality. We do not come to that place on our own. It takes God’s resurrection, and we can only know it in the power of stories, the biblical witness and those other stories which knowingly or unknowingly keep reflecting that ultimate truth back to us again and again. We live in an enchanted world, for we claim and cling to this story of Easter, that we are not the ones who define our own life, and we thank God for it, for the Master and Savior is the one who has changed the end of our story for us so that a bright and joyful future invades the present. We are not beholden to our debts, trapped in fear and conquest, riddled by anxiety and purposeless wandering. We are claimed by God’s love for love and our names have been spoken anew. So wipe your tears, brothers and sisters; the impossible is now possible. Keep telling the story. The Lord is Risen! He is risen indeed! Alleluia! Amen!

    Notes

    1. J.D. Salinger, Catcher in the Rye, (Boston: Bantam Books, 1969). 2. Harper Lee, To Kill a Mockingbird (New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1960), 317. 3. Wilson Rawls, Where the Red Fern Grows, (Boston: Bantam Doubleday, 1997), 246-248. 4. Katherine Marsh, “Why Kids Aren’t Falling in Love with Reading” in The Atlantic Monthly (March 22, 2023), https://www.theatlantic.com/books/archive/2023/03/children-reading-books-english -middle-grade/673457/. 5. Nathan Heller, “The End of the English Major” in The New Yorker (February 27, 2023), https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2023/03/06/the-end-of-the-english-major. 6. Roald Dahl, Matilda, (New York: Viking Books, 2007). 7. Lashana Lynch, “Still Holding My Hand,” Track 22, Roald Day’s Matilda the Musical (Soundtrack from the Netflix Film), Netflix, 2022, mp3. 8. In the original sermon, at this moment, a clip from the Netflix movie was used in the worship space. To see the original sermon presentation, visit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYdut6SUfv8 &list=PLyiuJQOfz1n1SB7ASZJLjoSJY8-j_jFnh&index=37

  • Preaching Toward True Repentance

    This text was converted from the original print edition for full-text searchability. Formatting may differ from the original. Consult the PDF for citation and presentation details.

    Page 14

    Preaching Toward True Repentance

    Thomas G. Long

    Cambridge, Maryland

    “One can tell the age of a tree by looking at its bark. One can also tell a person’s age in the Good by the intensity and inwardness of his repentance. It may be said of a dancer that her time is past when her youth is gone, but not so with a penitent. Repentance, if it is forgotten, is nothing but immaturity . The longer and the more deeply one treasures it, however, the better it becomes.” – Søren Kierkegaard, “Emissaries from Eternity”1

    “Or those eighteen who were killed when the tower of Siloam fell on them— do you think that they were worse offenders than all the other people living in Jerusalem?  No, I tell you, but unless you repent you will all perish just as they did.” – Luke 13:4-5

    The Christian faith proclaims that repentance is essential, to the Christian life of course, but also crucial for humanity in general. Given the vexed nature of every human life, repentance is a necessary practice for all who strive to be honest to experience , responsible to others, and whole as human beings. How strange, then, that true repentance is almost impossible to find in our society. Take the case of baseball superstar Pete Rose, who died at eighty-three this past fall. Rose was undoubtedly one of the greatest baseball players ever to grace the game. A key figure in Cincinnati’s legendary Big Red Machine teams, Rose’s strong hitting, gold glove fielding, and hard hustling style made him an icon to baseball followers everywhere and an idol especially for young fans. Voted to the all-star game a remarkable seventeen times in his career, he was, it seemed, sure to be a first-ballot inductee to baseball’s Hall of Fame. But those who really knew Pete Rose were aware that there was a different person lurking behind the astounding athlete. “He was Charlie Hustle on the field,” wrote sports columnist Thomas Bowell, “Pete the hustler in cheesy business ventures off it.”2 Eventually it was revealed that the hustler in Rose had touched the third rail of professional sports by betting on baseball while still active in the game, including placing wagers on his own team. Consequently, he received the ultimate stiff-arm from the game he loved. He was banned from baseball permanently, the door to the Hall of Fame he coveted so dearly, closed and locked. Rose, aggrieved, fought mightily for restoration. For years, he showed up at Hall of Fame induction ceremonies, signing autographs (for a fee) and making his case for restoration to all who would listen. At first, he tried the timeworn approach


    Page 15

    of many snared in wrongdoing: lying and special pleading. Despite a freight car full of evidence against him, for fifteen years he denied any involvement in gambling. Finally, realizing that his denials were implausible, Rose switched tactics. In a tellall autobiography in 2004, self-pityingly titled, My Prison without Bars, he at last admitted what he had done, confident that the mere act of confession at this late date would wipe the slate clean and usher him, with trumpets resounding, into his rightful place in the Hall of Fame. In the book, he complained that he had been unjustly singled out, saying that if he “had been an alcoholic or a drug addict, baseball would have suspended me for six weeks and paid for my rehabilitation.’’3 In the book’s epilogue, he pleaded for American-style redemption, namely moving on and letting bygones be bygones. “I’m sure that I’m supposed to act all sorry or sad or guilty now that I’ve accepted that I’ve done something wrong,’’ he wrote. “But you see, I’m just not built that way. So let’s leave it like this … I’m sorry it happened, and I’m sorry for all the people, fans, and family that it hurt. Let’s move on.’’4 When baseball didn’t move on, Rose soured into bitterness, which he carried to the end. Convinced that an admission “I screwed up; let’s move on” was the magic formula to absolution, he never grasped the nature of honest repentance. In fact, he played every move on the chess board to avoid honest repenting. Now that Rose is dead, baseball may ultimately decide to forgive and to admit him to the Hall of Fame. But what Rose wanted was never forgiveness. He never really believed he needed that. What he desired instead was simply forgetfulness, a cost-free shrugging of the shoulders, which he thought was his due. He thought the mere passing of time should provide a passport to amnesty. “I’ve been suspended over thirty years,” Rose carped. “That’s a long time to be suspended for betting on your own team to win. And I was wrong. But that mistake was made. Time usually heals everything. It seems like it does in baseball, except when you talk about the Pete Rose case.”5

    The Near Impossibility of Repentance Because Pete Rose was a celebrity, his sad case has been widely chronicled. But Pete Rose’s desperate scramble to avoid repentance is representative of countless less-heralded and more everyday people in our society. We have somehow backed ourselves into a cultural trap where honest repentance is as rare as white truffles. Repentance has always come with a cost, but we find ourselves at the place where either we do not see the need for repentance ever, or, if we do, the cost seems too high for most of us to bear. At first, church life seems to be an exception. Every week many congregations, in the confessional sequence in liturgy, lift up the centrality of repentance. Worshipers kneel or bow, and they repent, admitting to God, in words such as those in the Book of Common Prayer, “that we have sinned against you in thought, word, and deed” that “we have not loved you with our whole heart; we have not loved our neighbors as ourselves,” and pleading for forgiveness and restoration. “We are truly


    Page 16

    sorry and we humbly repent … have mercy on us and forgive us; that we may delight in your will and walk in your ways, to the glory of your Name.” But if we momentarily put down the prayer book and listen with a discerning ear to the intonations, it becomes apparent that our hearts don’t seem quite in it. We hear the words of repentance, but we do not hear much deep sorrow nor do we see much beating of breasts that accompanies true remorse. We are like that character in the old commercial, “I’m not a doctor, but I play one on TV.” “I’m not a true sinner, but I play one in worship.” As Stanley Hauerwas once wrote in this journal,

    [I]t remains the case that though we know we may be sinners, we have trouble taking that description of ourselves all that seriously. We know we are not perfect, but most of us think we are good enough. The truth is most of us are conventional people who lead good conventional lives. It is not at all clear to us that we are all that sinful, but as I suggested, we are willing to try to play being a sinner for God’s sake—at least at Lent.6

    And indeed, here comes the reflective season of Lent, demanding that we do more than play at remorse, do more than merely think deeply about the concept of sinfulness or meditate at length on the idea of repentance, but instead insisting that we actually do the thing itself: repent. In Lent, there is an amplification of the reality that hums in the background all seasons of the Christian year, the urgency of repeatedly turning away from the distractions that have captured our fleeting imaginations, from the desires that lured us away from our faith, from the sins that have ensnared us and dragged us down toward death, and then turning again to the source of life, to the mercy of God. Repentance involves the courage of deep introspection, the honesty of authentic confession, and an earnest move from the far country back home. So why, then, are we so reluctant to repent, or even to acknowledge that we need to do so? Perhaps Hauerwas is right. Most of us know we aren’t perfect but are convinced that we are nevertheless “good enough.” Recently, in the small weekly lectionary study group of which I am a part, we wrestled with a biblical text that included the word “wicked.” One pastor in the group balked at the term, saying, “You know, I don’t think of myself as wicked. There are wicked people in the world, I’ll admit, but I am not one of them.” The rest of us knew what he meant and indeed felt some kinship . All of us were ready to admit that we were “sinners,” at least in the mild sense that we occasionally are short-tempered with others, often more self-centered in our desires than we should be, sometimes reluctant to show love to difficult people, that sort of “sin.” But wicked? None of us had committed murder, embezzled funds, or planted a terrorist bomb. Like having Covid, we were ready to admit that we were infected with the disease of sin, but that we, thankfully, had only mild symptoms. “Wicked” we were not. But such a distinction reflects a misunderstanding of the nature of sin. The ancient biblical stories tell the story of a common human experience of deception,


    Page 17

    rebellion, and treachery. The narratives of our first ancestors failing in Eden are not historical accounts of some pollution of sin that entered the river of history at an early point in time and which flows from that headwater to stain our own experience today . They are instead myths, stories that are true not because they were true at some point in the past, but instead stories that are true because they are always true, true every day, true about us all. The stories of Eden are not origin stories (Adam and Eve sinned one day and, therefore, we continue to be responsible for their transgression) but existential stories in which we recognize the way it is with human beings. The Bible tells a story of the way things were at the beginning of human time in order to disclose the reality of who we are in the middle of time. The Catholic theologian Herbert McCabe says that we know the truth of the Eden stories when we admit that we live in a society, despite many efforts of ethical people, that is nevertheless based on fear, “driven by fear of poverty, starvation, prison, torture, and killing.”7 This fear is not the exception to the rule, the fly in the ointment. This fear is, in fact, the water in the aquarium, the world in which we live. McCabe continues:

    This is what, in John’s gospel, Jesus calls “the World.” This is what we are born into. This is what we are enmeshed in … When we speak of “original sin” we are not referring to some ancient and original sin of our first parents … But when we speak of original sin we mean the sin we have from our own origin in this world: not a sin we have committed, but a distortion of our world which leads us away from God, a distortion that leads us, when we encounter love, to crucify it.8

    If we are honest with ourselves, we recognize our participation in this distortion, our inclination to push away the love of God. “Prone to wander, Lord I feel it. Prone to leave the God I love,” goes the old hymn. Yes, it is not insignificant and a very good thing when one stops short of murder or child abuse, but such restraint, however laudatory, should not deceive us. To create a class of people who are genuinely “wicked,” people who are worse sinners than we, is simply a way of deflecting blame away from ourselves. All human wanderings and rebellions are springs that arise from the same underground river of death. To admit “that we have sinned against you in thought, word, and deed” and that “we have not loved you with our whole heart; we have not loved our neighbors as ourselves,” is the honest to God truth. To own the truth about our sin can be the soil in which compassion grows. Yes, there are murderers and torturers, people who have lost their way so tragically that their destructiveness can be seen in dramatically cruel ways. But to know that we ourselves are lost in the same dark forest undercuts self-righteousness. An honest acknowledgement of our sin also magnifies the wonder we experience in the face of God’s mercy. It is said that when we see the picture of the criminal on the website, television screen, or newspaper page, we see what God sees when God looks at us. Salvation is not an hors d’oeuvre God offers to his best friends at a garden party; it


    Page 18

    is a rescue from death God performs for God’s mortal enemies. “[W]hile we still were sinners Christ died for us,” Paul wrote.”[I]f while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son, much more surely, having been reconciled , will we be saved by his life” (Romans 5: 8, 10). Among my own tribe of left-of-center Christians, there is another reason why repentance is rare. We fancy ourselves as the kind of open-minded and progressive Christians who are eager to show forth righteousness, to seek justice, to combat racism, to address poverty, to be a prophetic community in society. Having taken the high moral ground, we are able, perhaps, to acknowledge that we are technically sinners, but we are often quite unable to admit that sin has us in its grip and that we need to be rescued. Like the rich ruler who came to Jesus, we have arrived at our moral standing through virtue, and if there is anything we still lack, we will work our way out of it on our own steam, thank you very much. Entranced by the old gnostic deception that the human plight is not one of captivity to sin but of a lack of enlightenment , we polite, deeply responsible, socially conscious Christians are often quick to tell ourselves that we are the righteous ones in this world. Churches like my own rightly strive to practice a different kind of Christianity than the culturally bound churches around us. We are proud of the fact that we resist being co-opted by the white nationalism and the jingoism of much that passes for Christianity in our culture. But when a church specializes in being just, it can so easily lose awareness of our participation in the human condition and the accompanying need for repentance. Our role, we say to ourselves, is to point out the sins of society, but, funny, it is always someone else’s sin, never ours. When we get the nagging sense that our own righteousness might not be entirely pure, we coo to ourselves that we may have drifted into error here and there but that we can educate ourselves back into rectitude. If there is anything missing, we can study our way to get it. As Robin R. Meyers insists, in Saving Jesus from the Church: How to Stop Worshiping Christ and Start Following Jesus, the point of the Christian faith is not any idea that Jesus is a savior. Never. To emphasize Jesus the savior is, in Meyers’s view, a weak, childish, and idolatrous religion, a confusion of the messenger, Jesus, with his message, enlightenment. Jesus, Meyers says, teaches the wisdom of righteousness . We should follow Jesus, he argues, not worship him. To worship Jesus is to choose a distorted story of Jesus’s life as “a rescue mission that trumps … wisdom.”9 But we know better. In our hearts, we know better. We know that Psalm 51 is not just David’s prayer of confession, but ours too:

    For I know my transgressions, and my sin is ever before me. Against you, you alone, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight, so that you are justified in your sentence and blameless when you pass judgment (Ps. 51:3-4).


    Page 19

    We also know better about the gospel, that the gospel story is precisely a rescue story, a story of a world gone astray and lost, liberated by the love of God in Christ. Jesus’s very name means “God saves.” As the Book of Hebrews beautifully expresses it, Jesus, who was “the reflection of God’s glory and the exact imprint of God’s very being” (1:3) was “spoken” into a suffering, lost, and captive humanity. Jesus became “like his brothers and sisters in every respect,” and yet without sin (4:15), “so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make a sacrifice of atonement for the sins of the people” (2:17). Jesus was “not ashamed” to call broken human beings his brothers and sisters (2:11), as he held us by the hand and led us to salvation. According to Hebrews, the theme song of the gospel was sung by Jesus himself, who having lived a life of trust in God and obedient suffering, reentered the realms of Glory triumphant in his saving mission, shouting with joy, “I am home, and I have the children with me” (2:13). The gnostic-tinged theology of much progressive Christianity tends to replace the grateful confession that “God … even when we were dead through our trespasses , made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved,” with a more worldly “Knowledge (gnosis) is power.” This suggests, perhaps, one more reason why repentance is rare in our experience. Knowledge sometimes leads not to power but to self-deception and finally to self-destruction. Repentance requires that we stand naked and unprotected before God and others, admitting our lostness and culpability. Everything in us resists such vulnerability. True repentance requires that we tell the truth about ourselves, the very truth we cannot bear. In a remarkable essay, “Anxiety, Courage, and Truth,” William H. Poteat, who taught Christianity and Culture at Duke Divinity School, spoke eloquently about the instinctive human fear of the truth. He noted that on hundreds of college and university campuses there are buildings with the following motto carved over their doorways: “You Shall Know the Truth, and the Truth Shall Set You Free.” Whenever he sees these bold claims that the truth sets us free, Poteat says, “my natural rejoinder is: ‘The hell it does.’ In the context of compulsive modern optimism these words lose all sense of paradox.”10 In order to show that the truth, in and of itself, does not set people free, Poteat probes three primary myths in our culture— Oedipus, Adam and Eve, and Faust. Each of these mythic narratives is the story of people who encountered the truth about themselves, but this truth did not set them free. To the contrary, facing the truth resulted in a catastrophic loss of innocence and a moral collapse. From these ancient formative myths, claims Poteat,

    we learn that we are not simply available to our own conscious management; that we are in fact mysteries to ourselves. We learn too that there is painful, threatening, anxiety-producing truth about ourselves and about our human condition which we repress, concerning which we rationalize, from which we are forever in flight. And finally, we learn that none of us can face these


    Page 20

    without courage—indeed a courage which itself appears to us unbidden from our own intractable depths.11

    In other words, none of us can face the truth about ourselves without courage, and, ironically, the source of that courage does not lie within. It is a courage that comes from without, a courage that comes not as a human achievement, but as a gift from God. Indeed, Poteat reminds us that in St. Paul’s world there were no universities , no proud buildings to bear the optimistic claim, “You shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free.” What Paul had was not a university but a savior, a faith “that Jesus Christ had overcome both sin and death; that He had deprived them of their binding power upon the human imagination.”12 It was this faith that nurtured the human courage to seek the truth, indeed that birthed the very idea of a university. Here, then, is the deepest irony: the words “you shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free” are not true … except in one and only one context: the one who first spoke them, Jesus Christ. In the context of the mercy and forgiveness of Christ, human beings can open our eyes wide to the full truth about us, others, and the world.

    Preaching Toward Repentance The affirmation that Jesus Christ is the savior who gives us the courage to face the truth points to at least one more reason why repentance is rare in our world, and it is a dramatic reason. The fact is that repentance is rare because, apart from the embrace of the gospel, nobody of sane mind would ever actually repent. Repentance as a naked act is an obliteration of the self. Here is a prayer of confession from one of the major prayer books:

    Eternal God, our judge and redeemer, we confess that we have tried to hide from you, for we have done wrong. We have lived for ourselves, and apart from you. We have turned from our neighbors, and refused to bear the burdens of others. We have ignored the pain of the world, and passed by the hungry, the poor, and the oppressed.13

    Anyone who seriously confesses these words is standing up in a public place and admitting to God, to other people, to oneself that one is a moral failure devoid of the good. Who would do that? Who could face the truth, much less admit it out loud, that at the core of one’s being is a creature who has fled from ultimate reality, who has committed evil, who has rejected all responsibility toward others, who has been indifferent to the care of others and utterly selfish in the face of human need. To admit such things is to be incinerated as a human being. Taken by itself, honest repentance is self-obliteration, a form of moral suicide. No right-minded person would engage in such an act. No one can say such things and then simply lay aside the sackcloth, put on work clothes, and go to the law firm, insurance agency, gift shop, or clinic. We know the ancient human story. No human being stands in a clearing in the garden


    Page 21

    and honestly confesses. We just don’t do that kind of thing. Instead, we hide from the presence of God among the trees of the garden. This is why it is important to underline that Christian repentance is never a solitary and naked act. It is not standing all by oneself in a clearing in the garden and blurting out the truth. We stand not alone, but with Jesus Christ standing by us. Only one who knows the love and mercy of God can truly repent. To admit one’s sin is to stand under the judgment of God, but the one who repents also stands under the promise of God. In the light of the gospel, the repentant sinner, as Barth taught, is one who knows that the promise of God has already been given, the future of life in God has already been anticipated.14 To put it more concretely, because we have to do one thing after another in liturgy, the usual sequence in worship goes prayer of confession followed by the assurance of pardon, but in fact, the promise of pardon not only follows the prayer of confession but also precedes the prayer of confession, indeed surrounds it. If we did not know we are forgiven, we would never confess our sin, in fact wouldn’t even be aware of our sin and the need to confess. Only one who already knows the truth of God’s forgiveness and restoration can muster the courage to admit one’s failures. Only in this sense do we know the truth and find that the truth sets us free. In the ancient baptismal service, those who were to be baptized would turn toward the West, toward the world, toward the darkness, and would spit on Satan and renounce all of his lies and empty promises. They would then turn toward the East, toward the brightness of the rising sun. They would “orient” themselves … literally. While they were facing West, the priest would change into a resplendent white and golden robe, so that when the baptizands turned around they would see a radiant symbol of the joyful kingdom toward which they were going. They had just performed an act of repentance, but one not provoked by shame but beckoned by the glory of the new land toward which they now traveled. By repenting they had not just changed their values; they had changed their citizenship from the old world to the new. Repentance is not just looking into the dark abyss of our failure. Repentance is a turning: a turning away from sin and a turning toward the light of God. Only those who already know that the light even now shines in the darkness have the courage to repent. This is an important truth for preaching. No one is motivated to honest repentance by guilty shame. Love is the only motivation. Consider the Lenten text Luke 13:1-9, a conversation between Jesus and the crowd about repentance. The conversation gets going in the previous chapter, when Jesus informs the people that are pretty good at meteorology but not so keen on theology. They know quite well that a wind whipping up from the south signals a hot day on the way, but they don’t have a clue how to read the “the present time” (12:54-56). A few people in the crowd sputter in protest. As a matter of fact, they insist, they do know very well how to interpret the signs of the times. What about those Galile-


    Page 22

    ans who went to the temple only to find themselves slaughtered by Pilate’s armed guards. If they had only known that death was near, they would have gotten their lives in order. You want a sign of the times, Jesus, well there! So, in the view of the crowd, the Galileans who were slaughtered needed to repent . It’s always someone else’s sin. We are good at pointing away from ourselves, but Jesus will not let us or them get away with that ploy. Do you really think “those Galileans were worse sinners than other Galileans, or worse than you?” Jesus said. “And don’t give me that noise about those poor victims on which the tower of Siloam fell. They were no better or worse people than anybody else in Jerusalem” (13:2-4). And then Jesus turns on the terrifying searchlight: “No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all perish just as they did” (13:5). So, what is Jesus saying, that these people better repent from their sins or else God is going to slaughter them in the temple or make a tower fall on them? No, the key is what comes next, the parable of the barren fig tree. In this parable, a fig tree is not producing fruit and hasn’t been for years—a symbol of the unfruitful, unrepentant people of God. The owner of the fig tree has had enough and bangs his fist into his palm: “Cut it down!” This, of course, echoes the earlier warning John the Baptist thundered beside the Jordan: “Bear fruits worthy of repentance. … Even now the ax is lying at the root of the trees; every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire” (4:8-9). But then the gentle gardener, who is after all Jesus, intervenes. “Let me give this tree some tender care for one more year. Perhaps it will bear fruit. If so, well and good. If not, then you can cut it down” (13:8). This “one more year” of mercy is the true sign of the times, the ministry of Jesus shining in the darkness, proclaiming “the year of the Lord’s favor” (4:19). What is the sign of the times that discerning people see? It is not falling towers and flashing swords and bloodshed. CNN chronicles that stuff every day. No, the real sign of the times is the saving mercy of God in Jesus, a present sign right in front of our eyes. This is the true call to repentance, not a call to collapse in human shame or to run in fear from falling towers, but a call to turn around, to turn away from the barrenness of a life given over to death and to turn toward the brightness of one who brings freedom and gives life. Only those who know of the promise of God’s love and mercy have the courage to repent. To turn is to have a future in the promise of God; to refuse to turn is to continue to embrace the powers of death. To refuse to turn is to be paralyzed in a posture of rejecting grace. To refuse to turn is to choose citizenship in the land of death when the way to the land of freedom has been opened up before us. “Unless you repent you will all perish; unless you turn you forfeit the chance to embody the promise of life.” So, if we want to preach repentance in Lent, then we should first preach the gospel of promise, mercy, and forgiveness. The first word of Lent is not that we have sinned but that we are loved. Only when we are assured of grace can we ever tell the truth of our unworthiness, only when we have been invited to the feast of


    Page 23

    God’s abundance can we come admitting our poverty of spirit and deed. To believe the gospel of love is to be able to honestly repent, but more, to make again the turn we first made in our baptism. To leave behind the lies we once embraced and to turn back to the way that leads to life. That’s how the prayer of confession ends, in our desire that “we may choose your will and obey your commandments; through Jesus Christ our Savior.”15 Channah Page lives in an intentional Christian community in England with her husband, Allen, and her ninety-year-old mother, Ruth. She wrote recently about memories of her father, Josef Ben-Eliezer, a holocaust survivor. Her father told her that, as a Jewish child growing up in Poland, he remembered neighbors going houseto -house in their village in the days before Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, asking each neighbor for forgiveness and seeking to set any wrongs right. Her father remembered that “they would eat lekach (a kind of sponge cake) and drink a glass of wine together”16 as the culmination of a long day of fasting and prayers. But then, in 1939 the Nazis invaded Poland. Jews were no longer permitted to gather in the synagogue, but her father remembered that they would observe Yom Kippur despite the prohibitions. “[S]ince it was Yom Kippur,” he said, “we met in one of the houses anyway, to hold our prayers. I will never forget that ardent crying -out to God for his intervention and protection.” Page’s father witnessed many terrible things in the war, too many. Not only did he see first-hand the atrocities of the Nazis toward Jews, he himself fled to Russia only to be exiled to Siberia, where he experienced near starvation. Josef Ben-Eliezer witnessed the cruelty of others, but, when he looked honestly at his own life, he also found himself to be the author of cruelty. “He had deep regrets,” writes Page, “about the part he had played in the expulsion of the Palestinian population from a small town called Lod as a member of the Israeli Army in 1948.” The burden of all of this suffering and guilt was too much to bear, and BenEliezer became an atheist, never celebrating Yom Kippur again. But then, through the mysterious workings of grace, there was a dramatic change in his life. He found himself gathered into the love of Christ. Page describes what happened: “Long years of desperate searching followed until he found what he never believed possible—a place where all sin and evil is atoned for, a place where all of creation finds redemption : the cross where Jesus died.”17 Page reported that, when her father was elderly, she would often come home to find him with his old Jewish prayer book in hand, listening to a cassette tape recording of the Yom Kippur service. The part of the service that moved him the most, the part he would play over and over, tears in his eyes, was the cantor’s personal prayer of confession, sung before the service. He had written down his own translation of the Hebrew:

    Here I stand, lacking in good deeds and in fear and trembling before the throne of the God of Israel. I come before you to beg for mercy for your


    Page 24

    people Israel who have sent me. Even though I am unworthy and unsuited for the task, I plead to you, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob: Lord, Lord, compassionate and merciful, God, Shaddai, awesome and fearsome. May you bring success to my task of pleading for compassion for me and for those who sent me. Do not reckon my sin or my evil deeds against them, since I am a sinner and evildoer. May they not be put to shame by the evil I have done, nor may I be put to shame because of them. And receive my prayers as of one of the elders who has a good reputation among the people. Rebuke Satan not to mislead me. And may love to you be the essence of our prayers. And cover all our misdeeds with love.18

    “What meaning did this prayer hold for my father, who had experienced the reality of forgiveness through Jesus?” asked Page. “Surely he must have felt that in a deep way it pointed to redemptive suffering, and that each one of us in our own way only finds forgiveness through repentance.”19 Late in his life, Josef Ben-Eliezer’s memories of Yom Kippur and prayers of repentance led to concrete action. He traveled to the village of Lod and met with a Palestinian who had been driven out in 1948. “This man graciously accepted my father’s apology and granted him his forgiveness,” wrote Page. “This moved my father deeply and gave him hope that one small act of forgiveness could start a healing process that could spread from person to person like ripples through a pond.”20 The great turning of repentance, the move away from darkness and toward the light, is possible not because the darkness is so deep and shameful but because the light of God’s mercy is so dazzlingly bright. Madeline L’Engle, who wrote enchanted fiction for children and youth, was a devout Christian with a strong conviction about the breadth of God’s mercy. Her books were banned from many Christian bookstores because of her views on the wideness of God’s grace. God’s salvation, she believed, was for all the sheep, “All the strayed and stolen sheep. All the little lost ones.”21 In one of her essays, she told the legend of Judas’s repentance:

    There is an old legend that after his death Judas found himself at the bottom of a deep and slimy pit. For thousands of years he wept his repentance, and when the tears were finally spent he looked up and saw, way, way up, a tiny glimmer of light. After he had contemplated it for another thousand years or so, he began to try to climb up towards it. The walls of the pit were dank and slimy, and he kept slipping back down. Finally, after great effort, he neared the top, and then he slipped and fell all the way back down. It took him many years to recover, all the time weeping bitter tears of grief and repentance, and then he started to climb up again. After many more falls and efforts and failures he reached the top and dragged himself into an upper room with twelve people seated around a table. “We’ve been waiting for you, Judas,” Jesus said. “We couldn’t begin till you came.”22


    Page 25

    Notes 1. Søren Kierkegaard, “Emissaries from Eternity,” in Provocations (Farmington, PA: Plough Publishing House, 2007), 41. 2. Thomas Boswell, “No One Loved Baseball, or Damaged It, as Much as Pete Rose,” The Washington Post (October 2, 2024), https://www.washingtonpost.com/ sports/2024/10/02/pete-rose-tom-boswell/ 3. Pete Rose, as quoted in Don Burke, “Pete Rose Was Unapologetic to the End,” The New York Post (October 1, 2024), https://nypost.com/2024/10/01/sports/pete-rose-was-unapologetic -until-the-end/ 4. Ibid. 5. Ibid. 6. Stanley Hauerwas, “Repentance: A Lenten Meditation,” Journal for Preachers (Lent, 2019), 38. 7. Herbert McCabe, God, Christ, and Us (New York: Continuum, 2003), 66. 8. Ibid. 9. Robin R. Meyers, Saving Jesus from the Church: How to Stop Worshiping Christ and Start Following Jesus (New York: HarperCollins, 2009), 44-45. 10. William H. Poteat, “Anxiety, Courage, and Truth,” Duke Divinity School Bulletin (January 1, 1966), 205. 11. Ibid., 207-208. 12. Ibid., 210. 13. Book of Common Worship (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2018),58. 14. Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics, IV.1.2.57 Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1956), 115. 15. Book of Common Worship,58. 16. Channah Page, “The Meaning of the Day of Atonement,” Plough (October 11. 2016), https://www.plough.com/en/topics/faith/why-is-the-day-of-atonement-important-forchristians . 17. Ibid. 18. Ibid. 19. Ibid. 20. Ibid. 21. John Wilson, “A Distorted Predestination,” Christianity Today, 47/9 (September, 2003), 73. 22. Madeline L’Engle, “Waiting for Judas,” Plough (March 24, 2024), https://www. plough.com/en/topics/culture/holidays/meditations-for-lent/waiting-for-judas

  • Psalm 51: Spasmodic Petition and Repentant Interiority

    This text was converted from the original print edition for full-text searchability. Formatting may differ from the original. Consult the PDF for citation and presentation details.

    Page 26

    Psalm 51: Spasmodic Petition and Repentant

    Interiority

    Scott R. A. Starbuck

    Spokane, Washington

    “It is said that the age of a tree can be reckoned by looking at the bark—one can also truly know a person’s age in the good by the inwardness of the repentance .” – Søren Kierkegaard1

    Although Psalm 51 appears in the lectionary readings for Ash Wednesday as frequently as Christmas trees at Christmas, reading it with fresh eyes might help recover an embrace of repentance in postmodern contexts otherwise inoculated from it. My introduction to the salvific importance of repentance came in college readings from the Dutch theologian and pastor Hedrikus Berkhof: “Without repentance, all the notes of the Christian faith are off-key or fall silent … repentance is not just a passing mood at the start of the road of renewal, but the abiding undertone of all the Christian life.”2 As such, I learned that repentance is not only a requirement for the tragically flawed but a deep spiritual commitment for all who would dare to live before the presence of God. Moreover, if repentance is, indeed, the “abiding undertone of all the Christian life,” then repentance itself could be a powerful witness to the reality of God in our post-repentant, post-Christian culture. Yet, it seems that either the commitment has fallen out of favor or, worse, it has been misemployed, distorted , and cheapened. This, of course, happened with biblical lament. Almost forty years have passed since the publication of Walter Brueggemann’s seminal essay, “The Costly Loss of Lament.”3 Drawing attention to the rhetorical power of the biblical lament form to confront divine neglect of justice, Brueggemann recovered the theological and psychological importance of complaint, noting its risky determination that injustice “can, must, and will be changed.”4 In doing so, he warned that when lament is avoided in worship, “the point of access for serious change has been forfeited.”5 One suspects that we have entered another ecclesial tipping point at which we might forfeit access to serious change because of a loss of commitment to repentance . We live among cultural forces that increasingly celebrate public performances of denial, deflection, and diversion while at the same time belittling the metacognitive work of repentance. Hegemonic praise and tribalistic arrogance now obscure (and therefore gaslight) the inaugural message of Jesus that “the time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God has come near—repent, and believe in the good news.”6 By the example of our most visible leaders, the cultural preference is to avoid any appearance of “flip-flopping,” remain resolute—especially when facing litigation—


    Page 27

    and blame the victim. At the same time, we have grown familiar with public political demonstrations of realignment; standing in public condemnation of a political figure ’s actions only to, over time, entirely and subserviently align with the previously castigated, especially if the realignment allows for a thinly veiled transactional power grab. I find it encouraging that this is not an entirely postmodern phenomenon. Søren Kierkegaard grounded such convoluted about-face contrition to dispositions of impatience and momentary regret rather than committed repentance: “impatience, however long it continues to rage, however darkened the mind becomes, never becomes repentance; its weeping, however convulsed with sobs, never becomes the weeping of repentance; its tears are as devoid of beneficent fruitfulness as clouds without rain, as a spasmodic shower … momentary repentance is very dubious and is not to be hoped for at all simply because it perhaps is not the deep inwardness of concern that sets forth the guilt so vividly, but only a momentary feeling. Then regret is selfish, sensuous, sensuously powerful in the moment, inflamed in expression, impatient in the most contradictory overstatements—and for this very reason it is not repentance .”7 In our world dominated by social media, this seems eerily true today. Though commonplace, impatient regret, the desire to reverse a situation of misfortune or loss through a transactional public appeal, is not repentance. For Kierkegaard, true repentance is deeply inward, metacognitive, reflective, not reactionary, and slow to take its course. It is important to recognize that the interiority of repentance was developmental. David Lambert has argued that many Old Testament texts traditionally read as indicative of heartfelt repentance should be understood primarily as transactional and spasmodic, narcissistic and ugly: appeals for release from punishment, redemption from disaster, expiation from disease, or restoration of social status.8 As such, they bear markers of impatience and regret, not the metacognition of individuals reflecting on past actions and attitudes with sorrow, insight, and resolve toward a change in future actions. Repentance, presupposing individual responsibility and agency, reflective interiority, and the capacity to will moral change, is primarily a later development attested in the New Testament and Rabbinic Judaism. Being the case, an unwitting proclamation of a “supposed” Old Testament repentance text might reinforce a mistaken view that repentance is characterized primarily by public impatience (anxiety) and regret rather than a deeper longitudinal metacognitive inwardness, thus confirming a cultural norm while obscuring an opportunity for serious personal and societal change. However sensually powerful, transactional appeals to the deity are not repentance but more likely narcissistic cries for relief as Kierkegaard suggests. I am not the first to consider Psalm 51 a notable exception to Lambert’s review of Old Testament texts. Even more, Psalm 51 is particularly relevant to the grievance culture of postmodernity. On the one hand, it meets the Kierkegaardian requirements


    Page 28

    for true repentance. On the other hand, it voices powerful yearnings for transactional lament. Psalm 51 is a potential Kierkegaardian dialogue between spasmodic petitionary showers and thoroughgoing metacognitive repentance. Anyone who has repeated and earnestly prayed Psalm 51 in the face of the power of world-shattering de-habilitating sin knows the confluence of both. Psalm 51 contains twenty petitions (some would say erratic demands) of the deity: “have mercy on me,” “blot out my transgressions,” “wash me thoroughly,” “cleanse me,” “teach me,” “purge me,” “wash me,” “let me hear joy,” “let the bones … rejoice,” “hide your face,” “blot out,” “create in me,” “put a new and right spirit ,” “do not cast me away,” “do not take your holy spirit,” “restore to me,” “sustain in me,” “deliver me,” “open my lips,” and “do good.” Although Lambert does not comprehensively treat the psalm, all of these fit his understanding of performative appeals for divine help rather than interior repentance. The force of these imperatives in the lyrical structure of the psalm evokes an impression of personal distress, pastorally identifiable as sensuously powerful in the moment, inflamed by poetic expression. The psalmist is miserable, panicked, deeply anxious, and somatically suffering. Similar urgent petitions are found in areas outside ancient Israel, such as among Mesopotamia’s Akkadian prayers. Consider these requests: “release and remove the iniquities,” “drive it out,” “may my guilt be distant,” “disregard my transgressions,” “receive my prayers,” “turn my sins into virtues,” “avert the anger,” “command my health,” “remove from me the evil,” “lengthen my days,” “release my curses,” “tear out … my evil,” and “drive away my trouble.”9 These imperatives, often voiced to a personal god, exploit vividness and myside biases. “Pain is unbearable.” “Be on my side, O personal god.” These petitions are desperate, neither metacognitive nor enduring. As such, the petitions in Psalm 51 and the Akkadian prayers embody the universal human desire for release from pain, anguish, and misfortune and stipulate a motive for transactional appeal to whatever perceived power is approachable and potentially effective. In the prayers themselves, a communicative structure much like the Karpman Drama Triangle is formed where the petitioner assumes the position of the victim; disease, sin, or trouble is placed in the position of the persecutor; and the deity is implored to be the rescuer of the troubled victim. Dysfunctional and addictive at their core, these triangulated prayers can hardly signal deep and reflective repentance. At the same time, their voice is eerily modern, or postmodern, with the exaltation of the ego self above all else. Might such desperate prayers signal an emerging opportunity to transform speech from victim-centered into metacognitive repentance? In Psalm 51 the answer is “yes.” Three hermeneutical openings in Psalm 51 balance the text toward the Kierkegaardian view of repentance. First, there is the unusual working of verse 6: “You desire truth in the inward being, therefore teach me wisdom in my secret heart.” The phrase “inward being” is lexicographically


    Page 29

    elusive. The Hebrew term ṭūḥōt likely derives from an association with the Egyptian God Toth.10 The powers or mission of Toth, a moon god, a deity of cutting (dissection ) and justice, may be linguistically invoked through this term to describe the neurological regions that would later be identified as the dark unconscious of the mind/soul. Likewise, the parallel term “secret heart” suggests a personal awareness of self where all one’s secrets are locked away. The hermeneutical opening seems to be this, then: what God desires, realizes the psalmist, is a true reckoning or enlightening of the unconscious self. The allusion to the qualities of Toth suggests cutting, separating, differentiation, and then weighing, taking responsibility, and seeing what is true in the light rather than locking it away in secret darkness. This is remarkable and Kierkegaardian. Even more, the non-spasmodic petition to teach the psalmist wisdom in the hidden dark place is not a plea for deliverance but an appeal for transformational partnership. It is an urgent request for soul surgery that produces moral and enlightened metacognition rather than lobotomized fealty. It is a petition to become more desirous to the deity through moral introspection and courageous differentiation rather than appeasing the deity through a transactional payment. The second interpretive opening occurs in verses 16-17: “For you have no delight in sacrifice; if I were to give a burnt offering, you would not be pleased. The sacrifice acceptable to God is a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God you will not despise.” We are so familiar with Psalm 51 that the audacity of this verse might be blunted. That sacrifice does not delight the deity would have been shocking, though not wholly unvoiced in Israel’s prophetic traditions. Most often in the ancient Near East and Israel, restoration into the sacrificing community was the goal after healing and cleansing. It was assumed that the deity delighted in proper sacrifice, and each Israelite needed to follow ritual and symbolic purity expectations to be healed and restored for participation in the main event. But the psalmist suggests otherwise, overturning populist religious expectations. Samuel Terrien captures the poet’s transformative insight well: “Sacrifices of animals and plants are superfluous because gifts to God tend to become techniques of mercantile manipulation of divinity.”11 If Psalm 51 were merely a liturgy of outward repentance with the transactional goal of restoring positional relationships within the larger Israelite community or restoring access to the priestly sanctioned system of worship and blessing, then offering burnt offerings would be the legitimating activity of choice. The socially expected route of return from divine punishment, sickness, retribution, and rejection was the sacrificial system designed to bring balance and order. “Sacrifices are necessary because humanity needs symbols, acts with which to come before God to restore right relationships .”12 Still, the poet seems to realize how, in the end, even these symbols can become manipulative for both participants and deity. With deep (God-given?) insight, the psalmist voices desirous dissatisfaction. So much of this thinking went against the totalistic worldview of the ancient Near East. Repentance, cleansing, and sacrifice were to be practiced when alienated from the divine powers. Only through


    Page 30

    these rituals can one be granted access to the community celebrations with proximity to the deific power. Deconstructing this assumption, the psalmist boldly identifies that what God desires instead of burnt offerings is a “broken spirit, a broken and contrite heart.” This, too, is shocking and unanticipated. Usually, a crushed spirit and a crushed heart, a disassembled spirit and mind, would be evidence of divine curses and punishment. For example, in the Akkadian pleas for deliverance, one reads: “A mighty storm has bowed my head, like a bird my pinions have been cut off, I have shed my wings and am unable to fly. Palsy has seized my arms; impotence has fallen on my knees. I moan like a dove night and day. I am inflamed, weeping bitterly.”13 The petitioner reports these disorders as a victim because the maladies presumably do not reflect the wholeness the gods want for their subjects. The voicing of these somatic complaints becomes the implied motive for divine healing and rescue. How worldview-reorienting would it be, then, if the sacrifice that God wants is not an unblemished animal but a shattered spirit and mind? A person with such a cognitive and emotional breakdown would likely move in opposite directions than expected by the community and appear stuck, depressed, isolated, confused, and overwhelmed. They would appear as the modern street homeless, seemingly cursed. Is this truly the sacrifice that God desires? Is this the gift of a vulnerable self in which God delights? The third possible opening that allows for a shift towards Kierkegaardian repentance is verse 5: “Indeed, I was born guilty, a sinner when my mother conceived me.” It is not exactly clear what the poet has in mind. Three interpretations seem available to the audience. The psalmist may refer to the transfer of generational sins, such as the reference in the Akkadian texts already cited, “Release me from the iniquities of my father and mother.”14 It is also possible that the poet believes that their conception came about through sinful acts, such as adultery.15 Lambert opts for this second interpretation, suggesting “that David could be speaking in the voice of his doomed son.”16 Although poetry often stretches the logic of discrete referent, it would be quite a curious leap of poetic imagination. As such, though possibly read this way by the restoration community, it is unlikely that a psalm that was secondarily associated with King David and the Bathsheba affair could have anticipated this connection in its composition. The third option, if the poetic insight of the psalm holds recognizable modern pastoral integrity, is to accept a psalmic recognition that the bias toward sin as systemic, multigenerational, and uniquely situated in families of origin. This seems not only appropriate but necessary for a type of ongoing repentance that is deep, metacognitive, and responsive to the uncovering of cultural idols as well as the Imago Dei. These three openings read together shift Psalm 51 from a mere transactional appeal for divine help to include a metacognitive assessment of self and fresh prophetic insights into the desires of God. The psalm, like the biblical texts of the literati, is mixed. It reflects, as would the emerging polyphonous scriptural cannon, a sacrificial


    Page 31

    system that dominated ancient Israel as a totalizing force and captured the imaginations of the Second Temple community while also including prophetic counter-voices declaring that covenantal integrity was the true yearning of God: Isaiah 1:11-17, Isaiah 66:1-4, Amos 5:21-24, Micah 6:6-8, and Jeremiah 7:1-15. Importantly, Jeremiah expressed having something akin to a shattered mind and spirit (Jeremiah 20:89 ). These prophets believed the divine will was for wholeness and relational integrity over and against “amazing” transactional worship. As a mixed text of the spasmodic petition and metacognitive repentance, the psalm rings pastorally true that wholeness and growth are hardly straightforward and without confusion, setbacks, embarrassment, and pain. The pleas of Psalm 51, in light of these openings to metacognitive repentance, can best be read as cries for help along the arduous interior path of covenantal fidelity and failure. In Psalm 51, repentance is a cooperative covenantal process based on divine and human inputs and insight. The urgency that God would provide a clean heart and place a “new and right spirit within” the psalmist becomes more than a request for simple healing. It is the sincere, even desperate, hope that psychological and emotional health, seemingly beyond the psalmist’s control and vision, will indeed be had. Although the psalmist recognizes the call to rigorous and unflinching personal truth within, the psalmist cannot imagine pursuing the hard metacognitive work of individuated repentance apart from the presence of God and the divine spirit (verse 11). The psalmist finally prays to be sustained with a willing spirit and for the restoration of joy, already sensing that metacognitive repentance is more endurance sport than sprint. It is not often joyful, though one will emerge, by faith, embodying joy. Importantly, repentance is not to be faced alone but in the presence and sustenance of God. This way, the imperative pleas for help are resituated from a transactional Karpman triangulated ask to a cooperative covenantal journey deep within. There are no victims. There are no persecutors. God is not the rescuer but the divine presence within and without. I think this is the crucial Lenten insight. Even as Psalm 51 stands as a mixed text, the psalmist is never separated from the deity in its lyrical development. Because of this, the words of the fourth verse express a surprisingly deep intimacy in misgiving: “Against you, you alone (in differentiation) have I sinned.” Could a courageous and profoundly metacognitive commitment to repentance lead one to a realization that sin affects not only the person within and access to God within but also reveals God’s fearless and graceful presence within? If so, repentance, interiorly endured, reveals unmerited grace and may eventually become a path of redemption for others (verse 13). Might another opening for Kierkegaardian repentance emerge by reading the psalm through the story of David? Dennis T. Olson indicates that given the superscription , “A Psalm of David, when the prophet Nathan had come to him, just as he had gone into Bathsheba,” there are three places in the David story that the redactors of the Psalter might have had in mind.17 The first is 2 Samuel 12:13a, where David


    Page 32

    confesses to Nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord.” Psalm 51 could be read as the more fulsome poetic expression of the narrative statement. The second could be an association with Nathan’s judgment sentence against the child that is born from an adulterous relationship (2 Samuel 12:13b-14). Olson suggests a third possibility occurs after David and Bathsheba’s son dies. David enters the house of the Lord to worship (2 Samuel 12:20).18 None of these suggestions, however, are completely obvious or satisfactory. As such, the superscription stimulates its own metacognitive reflection. Just as Psalm 51 pictures a new and more rigorous way forward through covenantal intimacy and confessional integrity with the deity, perhaps the David reference—like many of the Davidic superscriptions in the Psalter—looks to David not only as a historical king but even more as the typical human; complex, sinful, courageous, hard-pressed, tragic, and repentant. The only way to access David’s interiority is through one’s own. That is the point. The openness of superscription allows each reader to make it their own. Finally, it might be a surprising about-face that the psalmist petitions the deity to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem, promising that once rebuilt, God will “delight in right sacrifices, in burnt offerings and whole burnt offerings; then bulls will be offered on your altar” (verses 18-19). How can that square with verses 16-17, where the psalmist proclaims that God does not delight in sacrifice? This curious contradiction has led some scholars to view verses 18-19 as secondary.19 Perhaps not. Insight gained through the enduring metacognitive process of repentance is seldom directly lived out without contradiction. Pastorally critical, then, is that Psalm 51 also reveals that the interiority of repentance does not necessarily lead one to disengagement with a diverse ecclesial community—quite the opposite. Kierkegaardian repentance, evident in Psalm 51, opens the possibility of the shattered and broken, the guilty and wronged, the confused and the disassembled, the spasmodic and deeply grounded, to seek a life-long Lenten pilgrimage amidst the transactional and post-repentant. Such is the power of God to meet us exactly where we are and to call us to our true selves. No wonder Jesus said, “Repent and believe in the good news.” Notes

    1. Søren Kierkegaard, “On the Occasion of a Confession,” in Upbuilding Discourses in Various Spirits, ed. and trans. by Howard V. Hong and Edna H. Hong (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1993), 18. 2. Hendrikus Berkhof, Christian Faith: An Introduction to the Study of the Faith, trans. by Sierd Woudstra (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1979), 429. 3. Walter Brueggemann, “The Costly Loss of Lament,” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 11 (36): 57–71. 4. Ibid., 63. 5. Ibid., 64. 6. Mark 1:15 NRSV 7. “On the Occasion of a Confession,” 17, emphasis mine. 8. David A. Lambert, How Repentance Became Biblical: Judaism, Christianity, and the Interpretation of Scripture (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016).


    Page 33

    9. In Christopher B. Hays, Hidden Riches: A Sourcebook for the Comparative Study of the Hebrew Bible and Ancient Near East (Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 2014), 340-341. 10. Mitchell Dahood S.J., Psalms II: 51-100: Introduction, Translation, and Notes (vol. 17; Anchor Yale Bible; New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008), 4. 11. Samuel Terrien, The Psalms: Strophic Structure and Theological Commentary (The Eerdmans Critical Commentary; Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2003), 408. 12. Nancy de Claissé-Walford and Beth Tanner, “Book Two of the Psalter: Psalms 42–72,” in The Book of Psalms, ed. E. J. Young, R. K. Harrison, and Robert L. Hubbard Jr. (The New International Commentary on the Old Testament; Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2014), 457. 13. Hidden Riches, 340 14. Ibid. 15. Ben Witherington III, Psalms Old and New: Exegesis, Intertextuality, and Hermeneutics (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2017), 135. 16. Lambert, Repentance, 39. 17. Olson, “Concept,” 89-90. 18. Ibid., 91. 19. See, among others, Marvin E. Tate, Psalms 51–100 (vol. 20; Word Biblical Commentary; Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1998), 29, Erhard Gerstenberger, Psalms Part 1: With an Introduction to Cultic Poetry (vol. 14; The Forms of the Old Testament Literature; Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1988), 214, and Walter Brueggemann, The Message of the Psalms: A Theological Commentary (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1984), 101–102.

  • The Church: Crisis and Opportunity (The journey of St. Matthew’s, Westerville)

    This text was converted from the original print edition for full-text searchability. Formatting may differ from the original. Consult the PDF for citation and presentation details.

    Page 33

    The Church: Crisis and Opportunity

    (The journey of St. Matthew’s, Westerville)

    Joseph G. Kovitch

    Westerville, Ohio

    “St. Matthew’s, behold your parish!” It was Pentecost Sunday 2014, and a procession of thirty of St. Matthew’s Episcopal Church faithful proceeded out of our large church building. Leaving behind pews, stained glass, chancel, narthex, choir loft, Sunday school classrooms, and fellowship hall, we stood together at the foot of a large wooden cross placed in the church building’s front garden many years prior. Standing there at the cross, our St. Matthew’s faithful knew they were about to leave sixty years of memories and rich tradition to enter the great unknown. Now, the reality of their exodus was here. Some were in tears, others in shock, as we stood in the shadow of the large “For Sale” sign, gazing at the beloved building for the last time. I had been appointed the priest at St. Matthew’s just three weeks earlier. I found myself standing with them amidst a complex past and uncertain future. As we stood there, exposed to passing cars, curious onlookers, and pedestrian traffic , a leader from the Diocese invited us to turn around. Facing the street, with our backs to the building, he proclaimed, “People of St. Matthew’s Episcopal Church … behold your parish!” In this moment of vulnerability and uncertainty, a seed of re-imagining was planted and began to germinate. Standing amid this congregation determined to survive, I realized the gravity of the journey upon which we were about to embark—the need to maintain a traditional sacramental community while simultaneously completely re-imagining ourselves into a church without a building. After twenty years’ experience as a priest (at the time), I began to ask questions: In a time of “siloed” denominational structures and a need for imaginative and courageous visioning, how shall we serve the community beyond walls of religious isolation? How shall we inspire a church to let go of its attachment to buildings as the primary source of identity in the community and the traditional narrative of how it has always been done and dare to find its survival bound to new structures and stories yet to be discovered in the neighborhood? Almost instantly, the moment St. Matthew’s left our building, our identity re-focused on relationships as the structure of belonging. Parishioners began to recognize that we were indeed a church without walls—vulnerable and yet accessible. We started to show up in the community—coffee shops, pubs, city hall, neighborhoods, a college campus, the library, and a local bookstore. We discovered that not having a building to invite the community into freed us to truly listen to the stories of those in our


    Page 34

    community. In a way, we were asking neighbors to help us write a new narrative for ourselves. We found new members who wouldn’t have darkened our door on Sundays. For example, I was befriended by a self-identified atheist (a regular at the local coffee shop). One day, my new friend was excited to share that he had made up a new name for me. “Father Joe, I have a new name for you, and I want to help you market it … Papa Pure Love … you like it?” I replied, “John, I love it!” (and still do). We genuinely began to identify with John Wesley when he wrote, “I look upon all the world as my parish; thus far I mean, that, in whatever part of it I am, I judge it meet, right, and my bounden duty to declare unto all that are willing to hear, the glad tidings of salvation.”

    How Did We Get Here? As we stood outside on that Pentecost Sunday, St. Matthew’s was remembering their past—a story of prosperity and growth intermingled with much grief and loss. The imposing “for sale” sign was a reminder of the church’s tragic split over homosexuality five years earlier. A full two-thirds of the congregation had left to form another parish, leaving the remaining one-third unable to pay the mortgage. However much they loved their church building, they were even more committed to radical hospitality and love for all. It was this remnant that faced a wilderness journey into the unknown. All experienced grief, and while many of the remnant also felt the adventurous urgency, for others, it was too deep of a struggle to imagine a new future. Through the mystery of God’s leading and without a gathering space of our own, St. Matthew’s experienced the hospitality of others. We moved into a temporary location called Respite (a non-profit agency that cared for the developmentally disabled ) for the first five months, giving us time to catch our breath. As St. Matthew’s new priest, I found my “office” at a coffee house in the center of an Uptown area about five blocks from our original building. I started a public conversation on Christ and Culture at a local pub. We slowly started to claim all of Uptown Westerville as our “building,” where human relationships became the actual building blocks of our sense of place. Within a year and in quick succession, we embraced opportunity after opportunity as we paid attention to Spirit’s leading. It’s hard to recall them all, but here are a few: • We were offered free space to worship and house our office in a Presbyterian chapel near Uptown Westerville (we stayed a year and a half). • We discovered a house for rent that was perfect for establishing our community’s “footprint.” We called it The Pray Think Love House, enabling us to be more accessible to Uptown and have a unique space for small gatherings and our administration.


    Page 35

    • Two years into our exodus, we moved our worship to the third floor of a local Irish pub in the middle of Uptown, one block away from our community house. • A year later, a larger Victorian home next to the pub became available. In partnership with the diocese, we moved The Pray Think Love House into this beautiful space to better serve the community and congregation. This community house has become our identity of hospitality in the neighborhood, serving as an art space, co-space, prayer space, and administration space; this is our home to this day. • During the pandemic, St Matthew’s discovered that our journey over these past twelve years naturally prepared us to adapt with resilience.

    Liturgy as a Way of Life Amid this resilient community of St. Matthew’s, I saw a sacramental theology of place emerge, one of incarnational community-first belonging. A faith community must give itself away to express Christ in the neighborhood authentically. To be a “real presence” as the Body of Christ means seeing Eucharistic living as the very form of mission and liturgy as a way of life. We must embody the Eucharist and liturgy, not just on Sunday, but as a life practice of missional imagination. When a church sheds its identity of brick and mortar, success by numbers, and the fear driven by a scarcity of not enough, it begins to find renewed vitality and a theology of abundance. Our journey begins at the Eucharist and ripples out, affecting human encounters with liberating, radical hospitality.

    Story: Once, I was led to an encounter with the Director of City Compliance. He shared with me that he struggled every time he had to bring a community member before the Mayor’s Court for small infractions—like overgrown foliage or exterior house disrepair—that could have been prevented if their neighbors simply knew their plight. Out of this conversation, St. Matthews partnered with the mayor’s office to start Neighbor 2 Neighbor—a movement to unite citizens and other community leaders around the theme of kindness. More agencies and leaders joined the cause for neighborly connection. We began identifying “kindness heroes” and showed up as a reminder to our community to pay attention to the needs of others. Through this opportunity, the people of St. Matthew’s began to see itself as a conduit of God’s love throughout the city. They began to discover their renewed purpose. It is amazing how a crisis can inspire a sense of urgency. Since the death and resurrection of Jesus, the church found itself in a state of crisis and urgency. What did this all mean? What were they called to do next? On the day of Pentecost, the Holy


    Page 36

    Spirit helped turn that sense of urgency into momentum for spreading Good News. Up to that Pentecost day in 2014, the script for St. Matthew’s had been written like that of many other mainline congregations—a scarcity of resources, grieving the loss of what was, a fear of change, and romanticizing days gone by. Finally, leaving the safety of our building behind called forth the best in us, creating urgency and momentum. St. Matthew’s started to say, “No building, no problem, for we desire to become members of the neighborhood.” Like in Jeremiah 29, we recognized that our welfare was now bound up in the neighborhood’s welfare. Deconstructing our need for a traditional church building and the identity that comes with the facility, we reimagined what sacred space could look like in relationship with the neighborhood. This mindset shift helped us evolve our culture from a tradition-driven parish to a missional-driven one. This was a time to ask better questions about how we inspire creativity and embolden courage in the parish. Thus, St. Matthew’s Episcopal Church in Westerville, Ohio, embraced the adventure of truly following Jesus into the neighborhood through an asset-based approach to congregational development. We celebrated crisis as a pathway to opportunity as our narrative began to get the attention of the neighborhood, as we became more vulnerable and accessible among people hungry for relationships.

    Asking Better Questions As we continued to live in this new way of being a small but vital parish in the community, we discovered that the old questions of scarcity no longer served our mission. Measuring our success by numbers, be they how many people attended on Sunday morning or how much money we had in the bank, didn’t quite fit our discovery of the abundance found in the stories of those we met along our pilgrimage way. Through our witness to God’s love, our questions of identity and the purpose of the church began to be formed by those we encountered in our neighborhood. As we worshiped and served in our wilderness sojourn, we began asking better questions about ourselves and the community. We especially wondered what our neighborhood thought of our presence among them as a church community. It started with listening to the community around us; new questions arose in the priest and the Vestry. Suddenly, the parish members began to share stories of conversations and questions they were hearing in the neighborhood. It started with two questions: What does being an Episcopal community of Jesus in the neighborhood mean? How can we serve the common good with those around us? And these opened our imagination to more: • What is our essential witness to the gospel as we become exposed to the communal “elements”—the sacramental elements of bread, wine, water, and Word in, with, and under individual and community relationships? • Can we truly embrace our new congregational identity in the community without the protection of the traditional sacred space


    Page 37

    of church building? In other words, what does it mean to be vulnerable , communal, and liturgical simultaneously? • Can we learn another cultural language of the community as we hold on to the best of our traditional language and ancient ecclesial rhythms while re-imagining ourselves as a community partner? • Can we surrender ourselves to the community in its beautiful diversity —that is, become Holy Listeners, vulnerable and risk-taking , join the community as members, and overcome our need to measure success by numbers and membership? • Can we genuinely give ourselves away with a “community first” and “congregation second” intention? St. Matthew’s continues to innovate and sustain our energy as we seek to balance the best of our Episcopal tradition and identity with the innovative re-imagining necessary to be the church in a rapidly changing world—a hybrid. We want to focus on what we have and not what we don’t have, even with the sometimes-present temptation to return to “Egypt” and the security of our old insulating structures. Put simply, we have embraced living the questions: • What do you have to teach us? • Can we reimagine how we show up as the church in the community ? • Can we see the classrooms as a local pub, a coffee house, a prison , a street corner, or a kitchen table? • Can we see faculty members as seasoned bartenders, baristas, immigrants, and refugees, the differently abled, or unhoused among us? • Can we re-envision the role of the ordained as a Holy Listener and One Who Accompanies? • Can we seek to become members of our neighborhood before we solicit members for our parish? My journey with St. Matthew’s has opened my mind and heart to new possibilities of what it means to be the church in the world. As we discover our restoration as a parish, it is bound to how we joined the amazing acts of God’s love already present in the community. While sitting in the local coffee shop one afternoon, the owner approached me with a dilemma. They have noticed an increasing number of young people hanging out in the coffee shop because they have nowhere else to go. These kids had been kicked out of their homes because they were gay. They asked me if I could be available to talk to one young person in particular and then join the baristas in a conversation about offering support and options to those in need. St. Matthew’s joined the cause from this encounter to connect more closely with a local day shelter and safe place for youth. This is


    Page 38

    an example of how I came to be seen as a safe spiritual leader and St. Matthew’s a secure and brave community that cares and desires to offer a space of belonging and holy listening to all. The beginning of the Church was ignited on the Day of Pentecost, when Jesus’s followers left the upper room and committed themselves to going out into the neighborhood , and, ultimately, the world. I suggest that the future of the Church lies in the community’s grassroots and the collective wisdom and imagination it contains. The revival of the church is bound to the revival of the neighborhood. This quest is a mutual and transparent conversation about the traditional and non-traditional ways of being a church worldwide. The story of St. Matthew’s is a missional case-in-point, presenting an incarnational vision of the church as a sacramental presence in the community and its leaders as prophetic practitioners of the gospel. It was born out of necessity and raised into an ancient/future way of being a parish. The courage it takes to be the body of Christ in the world must be a work of proximity, offering “real presence” in, with, and under each relationship and community organization. Proximity means moving closer and genuinely listening to each other’s stories. By being a church that enters intimately into the community, walls of religious distinction become secondary and eventually dissolve into embodiment and accompaniment in the name of Jesus. St. Matthew’s has re-imagined itself into a community of engagement, determined to witness to God with a cultural “bilinguality;” that is, while we express a religious language, we can likewise value a non-religious language that will also be found within the community in which we serve. We have found that discovering true congregational identity is born of urgency and surrender. A congregation is always a community of learning and risk and should be willing to be curious and vulnerable. Once we get caught in a scarcity modality of “not enough,” we begin to let fear and worry consume us, thus stifling creativity and innovation. We can get comfortable in our narrative. Our core values are found in the three words: Pray, Think, and Love, as they form a Venn diagram of our spiritual identity in the community. Thus, our Pray Think Love House has become the portal for relationships in Uptown Westerville as we re-envision the front porch, living room, pub and sidewalk, coffee house, and neighborhood as sacred places. This new identity has established deepening relationships and a narrative that resonates with many “spiritual refugees” seeking a community of belonging. The Pray Think Love House is a safe space to welcome their being and seeking. Amid this journey, I invited St. Matthew’s Vestry to join me in capturing our parish journey in a Collect Prayer that is now spoken in every Sunday worship: Holy God, whose beloved Son commanded us to go forth and make disciples of all nations, help us to bring the Word to others in our community. Create a deep love


    Page 39

    for You, dear God, and a growing love for our neighbor. Through outreach at our Episcopal House and Sunday gathering space in Uptown, may we bring those who desire to know you better and share the Holy Eucharist with all who hunger for belonging . Show us our future in the reflection of our present mission as we celebrate the past that brought us this far. Through Jesus Christ, who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit, one God, now and forever. Amen. Our work as a parish has now replaced the old congregational adage of “location, location, location” with a new mantra of “relation, relation, relation” as the understanding that sacred space is built one relationship at a time and not merely in bricks and mortar. We are held together by uncompromising hospitality, and our house facility is a means, not an end. In this, the people of St. Matthew’s embarked on this new journey not as tourists or settlers but as pilgrims and pioneers; it is at this revelation that the culture shifted from a tradition-centric to a missional-centric identity. Like the early Christians, after the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, we are defining our sacred space to the very shape of the community, and we would do well to learn how the first-century believers of the Way followed Jesus into the neighborhood . In this ancient/future mindset, we pay attention to the signs. We discover the rhythm in the relationships between the core congregation and the now-emerging “indigenous” congregation of city officials, artists, organizers, pub and coffee house culture, merchants, and many unaffiliated spiritual sojourners. Our purpose is to exist in community, with each person, and under the social fabric of our everyday life together. It is to be the bread of life by giving ourselves away to others as a sacred offering. We do this by sitting in coffee houses with a fellow brother or sister, calling the coffee and scone our communion. We sit with the local police officer and explore ways to connect to the youth on our streets. We involve ourselves in the arts community, offering them our space and support. We join the conversation on how to cultivate a deeper neighborliness.

    And the Beat Goes On St. Matthew’s finds itself truly unfettered from the silos of scarcity and the serving of bricks and mortar, discovering that its very weakness and vulnerability offers a witness to the gospel that is authentic and accountable to a community hungering for hope. Now, we can reimagine sacred space and see our front porch as a fellowship hall, our living room as a classroom, our family room as a chapel, our kitchen and dining room as a place of holy listening, and our back room as an art studio and meeting space. The community has embraced us as one who comes alongside and not one who is separate from us. In essence, St. Matthew’s and its priest invite the greater community to help write its narrative with each conversation encounter and community partnership. St. Matthew’s has been recognized in the Episcopal denomination for its courage and creativity and has captured the imagination of the surrounding area and


    Page 40

    other congregations around us. The actual reality is that our wilderness journey is the promised land. Our story shows that there is always opportunity in any crisis when we offer God our love for the neighborhood and desire to serve through innovation . Twelve years later, we are innovating and reimagining our Episcopal witness to God’s hospitality as we join the neighborhood as a partner and collaborator for love. The story of Pentecost is a call for new wine to be placed in new wineskins. The church is dying to be reborn as it has since the beginning. We are in the death and resurrection business, for Christ’s sake! If St. Matthew’s has discovered anything, it is that a community is defined by how it loves and nurtures deep and abiding relationships in the world. Following Jesus into the neighborhood does not negate the need to care for the parish. When we embrace an urgency to reimagine what it means to be a parish for the community, the circle widens and includes everyone we meet, and we can genuinely “behold our parish” beyond the walls.

  • An Easter Sermon: ‘A Sliver, A Cloud, An Opening.’

    This text was converted from the original print edition for full-text searchability. Formatting may differ from the original. Consult the PDF for citation and presentation details.

    Page 37

    An Easter Sermon:

    “A Sliver, A Cloud, An Opening.”

    Matt Fitzgerald

    Chicago, Illinois

    I had to buy a used stove recently. The search took me past 500 taquerias to a lonely stretch of the west side and a small storefront full of hard-used appliances. I felt so out of place. There wasn’t a Whole Foods or sparking hibiscus icedtea for miles! The store did have two Lurch-like employees throwing refrigerators around. The entire scene had a whiff of volatility. The prospect of violence always makes me acquiescent. I almost asked the salesman if I could help him. I have never felt more over-refined in my life. The salesman saw it. He had me back on my heels immediately. We struck a deal that seemed to make him happy. When it was time to pay I saw a bald head with a gray horseshoe fringe around it, hunched over an adding machine in a small back room full of filing cabinets and old calendars. The salesman asked me what I did for a living. I said “Pastor” and he replied, “A pastor!” Then he turned toward the head, “Hey Mushy, this guy’s a pastor. This stove better work or God’s gonna punish you!” It doesn’t work that way. This guy liked his joke though. He said it again, “You hear me Mushy! You better look out.” Mushy didn’t look up. I never saw his face. But I heard his voice. His accent was so deep into Eastern Europe it might have been Indian. Speaking very slowly he said, “God is not punish. God is love.” His words cracked a space open. Just a sliver of space. But it was real. Prior to Mushy’s words there were no options but my own anxious mood and the store’s frightening environment. To use Donald Winnicot’s formulation, prior to Mushy’s words, all I had was “my inner experience and my outer environment.”

    Months before Easter, Jesus told his followers he would be resurrected. It was an average day. They were walking down a dusty road. His friends and disciples heard him say it. He would suffer. He would be rejected. He would be killed. And on the third day he’d rise again. They believed half of what he said. He’d die. Who doesn’t? And he would suffer. The facts guaranteed it and their mood portended it. They felt the threat of the forces allied against him. “I’ll suffer.” Yes you will. “And on the third day, I’ll rise again.” That sentence hung in the air. His words cracked something open, a new space between the hard facts all around them and the ominous feelings deep inside them. His friends kept on walking.


    Page 38

    Karl Barth says mortality pronounces “A great no” over us. The moment we realize we are going to die, the grave begins to erase our significance. We cannot stand it. Human strength loves to surface in defiance. So we protest death with a thin, shrill yes. As individuals we scurry to earn by working too much in order to consume too much, convinced that every experience not realized Now will be denied eternally. As a nation we amass power and significance, backed by enough weapons to guarantee some kind of forever. What I am trying to say is that death forces us to try and wring an eternity’s worth of meaning, pleasure, power, security, and satisfaction out of our constantly diminishing life-span. So we make too much of life. Then we suffer for it. That’s one option. The second is simpler: give up. You don’t need me to list examples of our exhausted cynicism. You feel it. Dietrich Bonhoeffer says it perfectly. In the face of death our mood can either “frantically affirm life or hold it in indifferent contempt.” Either way, death wins. This means that mortality is the most powerful, unavoidable, all-determining force you or I will ever encounter. Which makes it God. Which means that God is negation, cessation, nothingness. All of which is to say that if death wins, God does not exist. If you haven’t considered that possibility you’ve let piety silence honesty. And church is no place for lying. We’ve got to consider the possibility.

    The women who made their way to the grave must have. Immediately Christ’s death and their own pain came barreling toward them. They wake up. Then they begin to give up. They trudge to the graveyard. The grief inside their hearts syncopated to the facts all around them. Death wins. There is no other truth, no other realm. Just the sadness inside them, and the grim reality outside them. They walk straight into the tomb. Suddenly two men in dazzling clothes emerge. The women are terrified. Terror is logical when a stranger shocks you in a graveyard. But angels live to upend logic. They speak. “Why do you look for the living among the dead? He is not here, but has risen.” The women look at each other. The space Jesus’s words cracked open on that walk has closed, but they remember it. His words are in their ears, but barely there. The angels begin to turn the echo of his strange promise into the sound itself. “He is risen.” He said it would happen. That he would rise from death. The space his words cracked open grows wide, and then wider. Wide enough to be a Kingdom. The women leap in. And then they run. They can’t wait to tell the others. Our faith’s first four preachers , shouting while they run, “Peter, James, John, listen: Christ is risen!” God has beaten back the grave. Death may have a claim on you, but its grasp is weak. When


    Page 39

    Easter 2025

    it comes for you, the grave’s great “no” will be overwhelmed by Christ’s resurrection day-break brilliant “YES.” He is risen!: They mean it. They feel it. They’ve heard the angels say it. Their words are met with disbelief. The apostles hear the women’s sermon and write it off as nonsense. They close the door before it has the chance to open. Jesus is dead. A sermon in the face of that fact and their own feelings? Come on. The women won’t be silenced.

    “Christ is risen. Christ is risen indeed.”

    Words can make you doubt the strength of reason. They can push you past the limits of our logic. They can gesture toward something else. They can name a new space between your “inner experience and your outer reality.” Consider this: There is another way of knowing. There is another kind of truth. On Easter morning God creates a new way of living, more than this, a new reality, a new realm where death does not win. The new space I am describing may feel smaller than the hint of a sliver most days, but there is more than enough room for you to leap in. Donald Winnicott echoes Jesus when he says that children have access to this realm. This is why they are fascinated by clouds and bits of fluff. Children thrill to aspects of reality that refuse to fit within its frame. Things that are with us, but also seem elsewhere. What if Christ is risen? What if God is real?

    You can call yourself a Christian and never come to church. You can celebrate Easter by going straight to brunch. And yet, you’re here. You’re here because you wonder. What if Christ is risen? Quick! Before death slams the door shut again, listen: You’ve been taught to live as if the whole of reality were confined to what you can see and to how you feel. But there is another reality! A realm that does not correspond to what you’ve been trained to look for. A kingdom that exists beyond and beside what our limited, blinkered facts can report. All the facts can see is what we’ve told them to look for. Live your life according to the results, and you’ll shrink existence to a level far far beneath God’s glory. What if there is more? Peter wondered. Peter wonders. The reality outside him can wait. The doubt inside him can wait. He sprints to the tomb. Who sprints to a tomb? Has such running happened since? When Peter gets there, wariness eclipses wonder. He steps as cautiously as many of us stepped into church this morning. And he sees what we see. Christ is gone. There are no angels either.


    Page 40

    All he has is the story the women told him and Christ’s empty burial cloth. Peter picks the linen up. The cloth is in his hands. Sunlight through the tomb’s door lights up its gossamer weave. Peter feels its warmth on his face. With nothing but this fine lightness in his hands, it hits him. Christ is risen.

    how should tasting, touching, hearing seeing breathing any-lifted from the no of all nothing-human merely being doubt unimaginable You?

    Peter steps into the Kingdom.

    (now the ears of my ears awake and now the eyes of my eyes are opened)

    Christ is risen indeed.

    Back in that appliance store on Laurence Avenue I didn’t know what to say after Mushy preached the Gospel. “God is not punish. God is love.” I wasn’t in the mood for a sermon, no matter how short. The store remained intimidating. My mood was still sour. But Mushy’s words stayed with me as I stepped outside to find my car. It was a flat March day. More winter than spring. Maybe 40 degrees. Sunlight cut through the clouds in sharp rays. I looked down. There was a kid next to me. He leaned against the store. He was holding a plastic jar of bubbles in one hand and its wand in the other. Bubbles are a strange toy for a late-winter day. Or maybe bubbles are always strange. He didn’t say anything. He just looked at me and then he blew a bubble. This kid had a gift. The bubble got huge, as big as my head. It expanded and wobbled. Then it floated off its cheap plastic wand, up into the sky. We stared at it. The bubble was thin, but its skin held a translucent rainbow, shining against the March sky. It rose. It floated. I stepped in. Christ is risen indeed. My story won’t convince you. It holds no evidence. But evidence is not what God gives. Instead we get linen and angels, bubbles and sunlight, the words of the Gospel and the truth of resurrection. A sliver, a cloud, an opening. Christ is risen. Come on in.

  • Sermon: ‘Something Got a Hold of Me’

    This text was converted from the original print edition for full-text searchability. Formatting may differ from the original. Consult the PDF for citation and presentation details.

    Page 47

    Sermon: “Something Got a Hold of Me”

    Charles Maxell

    Smyrna, Georgia

    When the day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in one place. And suddenly from heaven there came a sound like the rush of a violent wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. Divided tongues, as of fire, appeared among them, and a tongue rested on each of them. All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other languages, as the Spirit gave them ability. Now there were devout Jews from every people under heaven living in Jerusalem . And at this sound the crowd gathered and was bewildered, because each one heard them speaking in the native language of each. Amazed and astonished, they asked, “Are not all these who are speaking Galileans? And how is it that we hear, each of us, in our own native language? Parthians, Medes, Elamites, and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia , Egypt and the parts of Libya belonging to Cyrene, and visitors from Rome, both Jews and proselytes, Cretans and Arabs—in our own languages we hear them speaking about God’s deeds of power.” All were amazed and perplexed, saying to one another, “What does this mean?” But others sneered and said, “They are filled with new wine.” But Peter, standing with the eleven, raised his voice and addressed them, “Fellow Jews[a] and all who live in Jerusalem, let this be known to you, and listen to what I say. Indeed, these are not drunk, as you suppose, for it is only nine o’clock in the morning. … Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and to the other apostles, “Brothers, what should we do?” Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins may be forgiven, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you, for your children, and for all who are far away, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to him.” And he testified with many other arguments and exhorted them, saying, “Save yourselves from this corrupt generation.” So those who welcomed his message were baptized, and that day about three thousand persons were added. Acts 2:1-15; 37-41

    When the angel of the Lord appeared to the virgin Mary, she received these words from the Lord: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be holy; he will be called Son of God” (Luke 1:35). Not only does this verse foreshadow the miraculous birth of the Savior to come, it is also a reminder that the spirit responsible for the birth of Jesus is also the same spirit responsible for the birth of the church. The gift of the Holy Spirit fulfills the


    Page 48

    prophecy of Luke 3:16, when John the Baptist proclaims: “I baptize you with water, but one who is more powerful than I is coming; I am not worthy to untie the strap of his sandals. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.” And the same spirit that descended upon Jesus in the form of a dove at his baptism in the Jordan River is the same spirit that fills the disciples in the upper room in Acts 2. Brothers and sisters, I don’t want you to miss this: Bethlehem is God with us. The Cross is God for us. But Pentecost is God in us. Therefore, Acts chapter 2 must be interpreted in the light of Acts chapter 1. And specifically in contrast to verses 4-8 where the risen Lord instructed the disciples to wait in Jerusalem for the promise of the Father which was the Holy Spirit. And that leads us to our big idea for today: obedience is a prerequisite for a move of God. Naaman would never have been cured of his leprosy had he not obeyed. The walls of Jericho would still be standing this morning had the children of Israel not obeyed. The ten lepers in the New Testament would never have been cleansed of their leprosy had they not obeyed. We would still be sinking deep in sin if Jesus had not obeyed his assignment on Mt. Gethsemane. Because he started praying, “Abba father, with you all things are possible. Remove this bitter cup from me. Nevertheless , let not my will, but your will be done.” And he went to the cross and died a sinner’s death but rose the third day with all power in His hand. Obedience is better than sacrifice because all sacrifice does is try to make up for what obedience would have prevented in the first place. I had a dream the other day that I was in the golden years of my life and my grandchildren asked me a series of questions. They asked me: Papa, what did you do when you realized that 1.75 billion people lived in poverty? What did you do when you realized that one billion people go to bed hungry every day? What did you do when you realized that there was a generation who were being consumed by the darkness of the Adversary? Did you love on them? Did you preach Jesus to them? Did you pray for them? Or did you simply say, I have my own problems.” Unfortunately , I woke up before I gave the answer. Yet, I hope and I pray that when that time comes, my life and my ministry will tell the story that we preached Jesus. Loved folk. Served God. And lead souls to Christ. That was Jesus’s last instructions to his disciples before he ascended into heaven . Acts 1:8 records Jesus this way: “You will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.” The Acts of the Apostles, written by the Gospel writer Luke, is our reminder that the Good News of Jesus Christ didn’t stop with His earthly ministry. Because even after Jesus rose from the dead and ascended into heaven to be with the Father, we see the birth of the church and are reminded that there was still work to be done and Good News to be shared.


    Page 49

    When you read the Acts of the Apostles, you will discover something in it that you don’t see in Matthew, Mark, and John. When they write their gospel story, it reads like this: Jesus lived. Jesus died, and on the third day He rose again. Yet, Luke takes it one step further and argues that the Gospel story is more like this: Jesus came. He lived. He died. He rose. He ascended into heaven. The Holy Spirit came down. And one day He’s coming back again. That shouts at me. Because one day I will see Jesus face to face. And just like God shaped Adam from the dust of the earth and breathed into him his Ruach, breath of life, the same came be said of the church on the day of Pentecost. Pentecost was the day that the Father sent the Holy Spirit. And She came and breathed into the church the Ruach breath of life. And since that day, the church became a living entity to preach and teach and lead the lost to Christ until he comes back again. Pentecost means “fifty days” and it was celebrated on the fiftieth day after the beginning of the Jewish Passover. It was essentially an agricultural feast where the Jews presented unto the Lord the first fruits of their labors. However, this day later came to be associated with the reading of the Law because it was believed that on this day Moses received the law at Mt. Sinai and delivered it to the people of Israel fifty days after the angel of death had passed through Egypt slaying the firstborn of Egyptian households to secure the release of God’s people from slavery. The Bible records that the resurrected Jesus walked among his disciples for forty days following his Easter morning resurrection, and on the fortieth day ascended back to the Father in heaven. Gathered in an upper room, we find the disciples restlessly waiting and praying to receive the promise of the Holy Spirit that Jesus had foreshadowed. However, ten days had passed since Jesus had ascended into heaven and the promise of the Holy Spirit had not yet come. What I find interesting about this text is not just the obedience of the disciples to wait (because we’ve said that obedience is the prerequisite for a move of God) or the understandable fear that kept them locked behind closed doors due to the threats of the Roman government. If they could crucify Jesus, can you imagine what they would do to them. No, what’s interesting to me is a particular, yet arcane, fact found in Acts 1:15. If you still have your Bibles open, verse 15 says that 120 persons are gathered together waiting and praying. How many people are gathered waiting and praying? 120. You must understand that 120 is not some random number. One hundred twenty is not just some number that is a multiple of 10 and 12. In fact, 120 is a number that has significance in Jewish culture. For if you do your homework, you will discover that under Jewish religious law, it took 120 men gathered together in the same place to establish a valid synagogue. I know what you’re thinking. Matthew 18:20 says: “If two or three are gathered in my name, I will be there also.” And that’s true when it


    Page 50

    comes to Jesus. But when it comes to establishing a church in Jewish culture, it took 120 men to deem itself a synagogue. So, what’s gathered here in our text is not some random grouping of disciples but enough folk to establish the formality of a religious institution that could worship God and be about God’s business. And that’s what I love about God. God is intentional. He is deliberate, precise, and knows what He is doing. In response, your job, our job, is to keep the faith, be obedient to His word, wait on Him, and know that He is God. Sometimes God will bypass what you hope for to give you what you really need. Sometimes your clearest view of God will be in the fires and the trials of life. And even when the world throws you a curveball, know that we serve a God that can use all things for your good. Because God is intentional. That’s why when I’m down and out and need a word from the Lord, when my money is funny and my change is strange, when I find myself with problems that seem bigger than my prayer life, when the doctor gives me a bad report, when my home life is shaky, when my children are struggling, when my boss is acting the fool, when over my head I see trouble in the air, I don’t need a convenient, casual experience with God. I need a God that is intentional about meeting me at my point of need. It’s interesting to me that when it comes to making that paper or buying that new gadget or being in the right organization, we are so intentional. But when it comes to worship, when it comes to Bible study, when it comes to prayer, when it comes to tithing, when it comes to church attendance, when it comes to sharing the good news of Jesus, we are so casual and nonchalant. Beloved, hear me when I say this: you can’t have a personal relationship with God with a casual Sunday morning experience .

    Nobody just stumbles into intimacy with God. You must be intentional.

    Now notice what happens with intentionality. The Holy Spirit shows up.

    Acts 2:1-2 say: “When the Day of Pentecost had come, they were all together [the 120 men] in one place. And suddenly from heaven there came a sound like the rush of a violent wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting.” Now listen to the New King James translation: “When the Day of Pentecost had fully come, they [the 120 men] were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting.” Did you catch it? Not only did the Holy Spirit show up but they were gathered together in one accord. Maybe that should be our barometer with respect to the power of Pentecost is in this place. Not only should the power be measured by our intentionality , but it should also be measured by our love for one another.


    Page 51

    Maybe that’s why so many of us are walking wounded today? We’ve come from places where there was no love. Places steeped in conflict. Places saturated in controversy . Places where folk were more concerned with dividing than with discipleship . More driven to be right than to do the right thing. More consumed with finding a boo than in finding Jesus. More moved by the show than seeking salvation. More focused on gossiping than giving God the glory. And as a result, we have created a generation of folk who attend but don’t commit, who consume but don’t sow, who would rather be entertained than hear the good news of Jesus Christ, and who blame the hypocrisy of the world on the church. Yet, the Lord sent me here to tell you who the real enemy is. It’s not the church. It’s the adversary. Because the devil knows that if he can keep you isolated, keep you frustrated, keep you angry, keep you broken, keep division in the body of Christ, there can be no full manifestation of the Holy Spirit to empower you or the church to do God’s work. But when the church is one accord, the Holy Spirit shows up. When we love on one another, yokes are destroyed. When we pray together, the devil gets nervous. When we work together, purpose isn’t petty. When we serve together, communities are transformed. When the church operates under the anointing of the Holy Spirit, mess and conflict and confusion become unwelcomed spirits in this place. Because: the Holy Spirit will not let you sit next to me and not speak to me. The Holy Spirit will not let you run around the church and not lend a hand to someone in need. The Holy Spirit will not let you do all that dancing and all that screaming and let you rejoice when I’m in trouble. The Bible says … When the Day of Pentecost had fully come, they (the 120 men) were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. And verse three says: Divided tongues, as of fire, appeared among them, and a tongue rested on each of them. All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other languages, as the Spirit gave them ability.

    In other words, not only did they hear something, but they also saw something.

    Let me explain this to you. The speaking of tongues that we see here in our text is different from the Gloriosa that Paul speaks about when he writes to the church in Corinth. In 1 Corinthians 14, we see the people speaking in tongues, but Paul warns them that they are out of order because they are speaking in tongues without interpretation. And this act of the Holy Spirit as recorded by verses three and four is different from the manifestation of the Spirit that Paul writes about in Romans 8 when he says that when we don’t know how to pray, the Holy Spirit intercedes on our behalf with sighs and groans too deep for words. That’s not the manifestation of the Spirit that we see in Acts 2.


    Page 52

    I submit to you that if you read the text carefully, maybe the purpose of Pentecost and this demonstration of the power of the Holy Spirit was to equip the church to minister outside its four walls. Do you still have your Bibles open? Look at verse four. It says that the disciples, filled with the Holy Spirit, started speaking in tongues and in other languages as the Spirit gave them ability. Now jump to verse six and eleven. And as they did so, folk outside the church began to hear the word of God in a language that was familiar to them and were drawn to them. In other words, the person who speaks English starts talking in Spanish. The person who speaks Spanish starts talking in French. The person who speaks French starts talking in Yoruba. The person who speaks Yoruba starts talking in Mandarin; before you know it, folk who never stepped foot in church started finding their way to the house of God. That’s how we change the world. That’s how we unleash the power and the potency of the Holy Spirit. When the church makes a sound and the culture hears and sees the fire of the Holy Ghost in us and all around us, folk will be drawn to Jesus. That’s our church growth strategy. That’s our Kingdom Purpose. No fancy gimmicks. No special giveaways. Just a church filled with the Holy Spirit and people telling other people about Jesus Christ. Jeremiah said: I’m going home. I’m not preaching another word in that name. But then something happened to him. And he said, “It’s like fire shut up in my bones.” Somebody in here and online this morning said, I wasn’t going to tell nobody. But I can’t keep it to myself. God’s been too good to me. So, I’ve got to say something. God has opened some doors for me that man has closed. So, I’ve got to say something. God has defeated some enemies for me. So, I’ve got to say something. God has provided for me and mine when I didn’t even have a dime to my name. So, I’ve got to say something. God has made a way when it looked like there was no way. Is there anybody here who can testify, I wasn’t going to tell nobody, but it’s like fire shut up in my bones. I can’t keep quiet. I can’t be still. I can’t sit here and be all sophisticated when I’m wearing God’s clothes. I can’t be quiet when I’m spending God’s money, living in God’s house, enjoying the life that God has given me. I tried to keep it to myself, but I’ve got to tell somebody! How will we know that Pentecost has come? We will know it … when people from various backgrounds and experiences come to this church and still find relevance and hope in the house of Lord. When Welcome Home is more than just a slogan. It’s how people feel every time they come through our doors. When that brother with braids and tattoos on every inch of his body can walk into the church and get a fresh and relevant word. When that sister who just got out of jail can find her place and purpose and passion in the work of the church without judgment or shame. When that single mother can find somebody to say: “The Daddy may be gone but you are not alone. I will help you with your child and I don’t want anything from you.” When that father


    Page 53

    discovers his child is gay, but he proudly says, “I love God. And I love my child.” When tithing and sacrifice and commitment and service are not just mere words in the dictionary, but they represent who we are and what we do. Now, some of you all didn’t shout. You didn’t say AMEN. You didn’t clap or wave your hands. That’s okay. Because the more I spend time with the Lord and under the anointing of the Holy Spirit, the more I come to understand that there’s no homogeneity in the Holy Spirit. Say what, Pastor? Let me say it another way, the Holy Spirit is not homogeneous. Come on Pastor, that’s the same word. In other words, I’ve come to understand that what Holy Spirit is for you may not be what She is for me. And that’s okay. Because when I look at the text, verses 7-11 say the folk heard the good news of God in their native tongues. In other words, when the Holy Spirit made Her presence known, everyone didn’t respond in the same way. Some folks worshipped in one language and some folks worshipped in another, but they all worshipped the same God. Let me say it this way. When the Holy Spirit comes, God is not expecting everyone to worship the same way. Some folks will clap their hands. Some folks will pat their feet. Some folks will stand to their feet. Some folks will speak in tongues. Some folks will take a lap. When it comes to praising our God, I don’t care how you worship. I don’t care how you praise His name. If you want to shout, shout. If you want to dance, dance. If you want to run, run. If you want to sit, sit. If you want to wave your hands, wave your hands. If you want to stand, stand. If you want to jump, jump. Just do me one favor. Just give Him glory! The Bible says on the day of Pentecost, the Holy Spirit came and filled the people, and they worshipped God as the Spirit gave them the ability to. Their worship was loud. Their worship was free. Their worship was spontaneous. Their worship was contagious. Their worship spread like fire on dry straw. And when the nonbelievers saw them, they thought the people were drunk. But Peter declared, “Don’t blame it on the alcohol. Blame it on a man named Jesus.” And when Peter got finished preaching, three thousand souls were added to the church.

    Where I’m from we use to sing a song that James Cleveland made famous:

    Something got a hold of me. I went to a meeting last night. and my heart wasn’t right. Something got a hold of me.

    That’s the power of the Holy Spirit. She will make you act right. She will make you talk right. She will make you walk right. She will make you give right. Is there anybody who can help me testify that something got a hold of me?


    Page 54

    Yet, as much as I like that song, let me clean up its theology. It wasn’t something got a hold of me. It was somebody who got the hold of me. And his name is Jesus Christ.

    He walks with me. He talks with me. And He tells me I am His own. And this joy we share as we tarry here. None other as ever known. ~C. Austin Miles

    That’s why my testimony today is:

    Blessed assurance, Jesus is mine! Oh, what a foretaste of glory divine! Heir of salvation, purchase of God Born of his Spirit, washed in His blood.

    This is my story, this is my song Praising my Savior all the day long This is my story, this is my song Praising my Savior all the day long. ~Fanny Cosby

  • When you Preach Resurrection, Preach The Disabled God

    This text was converted from the original print edition for full-text searchability. Formatting may differ from the original. Consult the PDF for citation and presentation details.

    Page 16

    When you Preach Resurrection,

    Preach The Disabled God

    John 20:1-31

    Erin Raffety

    Princeton, New Jersey

    One of the most confounding, awe-inspiring phrases on Easter is the proclamation by the women or in other accounts by the angels that when they go to the tomb that morning “He [Jesus] is not here.” In the miraculous resurrection, Jesus’s wounded body seemingly disappears. The smells the women planned to confront with the spices they brought to adorn the body vanquish. The gruesome marks of the torture he suffered visible on his body are nowhere to be found. But is the disappearing body of Jesus from so many of our Easter sermons really Good News? Do we not miss something of the story when we fail to reckon with the distinct and disabled body Jesus inhabits when he intentionally reappears, resurrected yet scarred, on the road to Emmaus, in the garden to Mary, into the locked room, at the table, and then, even hungry for fish on the beach? This Easter, what could it mean for your preaching to keep reading and remembering, to tell the story of why and how and to whom Jesus’s body also shows up? There’s a way in which preaching resurrection can end up (unwittingly) denying Jesus’s humanity. But as the disabled theologian and activist Nancy L. Eiesland wrote, it’s significant that Jesus shows up with his scars, as a disabled God, in our midst.1 It’s significant, because not only did the God we serve not shy away from bodies, but in his final acts on earth, as the risen Lord, he took on a distinctly disabled one, as a minister. Jesus, the resurrected, disabled God is not the God they were looking for, but the God who finds them and with his scars, stretches all our imaginations of what ministry looks like. In 1994, Nancy Eiesland, with her book, The Disabled God, began a movement in U.S. theology. The new field would be called “Disability Theology,” and not only this image of a disabled God, but the conviction was born that disabled people could move from the periphery to the center of theology, not as imperfect beings but as dignified , incarnate ones. If you think about it, the image of a disabled God, especially for Christianity, and especially at Easter, shouldn’t be such a stretch. But with the emphasis on the unclean nature of disabled bodies in the Old Testament and Jesus’s healings of disabled people of bodily impairments and sin in the New Testament, it’s tempting for theologians to presume that certain bodies are fundamentally out of line with Jesus’s ministry. Yet, this is why the disabled God moving off the cross, as God incarnate, in resurrection , is so noteworthy. For those who haven’t read Eiesland’s slim but profound book, I highly recommend it. You could skim it in a few hours, but if you don’t, here


    Page 17

    are few takeaways. First, Eiesland anchors contemporary prejudice against disabled people in structural inequalities. Writing just after the establishment of The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 she was both aware that legislation would not necessarily change attitudes, but also frustrated that the church continues to view disabled people as recipients of charity rather than advocates and instruments of change. As a disabled theologian she challenged us to acknowledge that disabled people’s liberation stems from human, corporate sin; as such, liberation has transformative power for all of us. Second, Eiesland argues that symbols, especially Christian symbols, have power and that God on the cross needs to be reconceptualized from suffering savior to disabled God2 in order to truly usher in our collective, new humanity.3 Hence, she argued that reconceptualizing Jesus as the disabled God both contextualizes disabled people’s experiences in powerful, dignifying ways, but also invites a holding together of all of our bodies in collective resistance4 that has the power to create “new symbols of wholeness and embodiments of justice.”5 More on that later … Finally, she locates this new embodiments in the common Christian practice of the eucharist, in making it truly accessible, not just individually but corporately, to all. Although we don’t necessarily think of it this way, it is in the eucharist that Jesus imparts not his perfected body, but his disabled body to all of us: we are restored by our consumption of the symbols of Jesus’s disabled body as not just our common humanity, but a humanity redeemed and resurrected as is. One wonders, in fact, how our sacraments would be different, let alone possible, if Jesus’s body had fully disappeared . Instead, we have a sacrament that honors and dignifies scars. If you read past the disappearing act on Easter morning, perhaps through the end of the Gospel of Luke or John, you will be preaching not only the staggering reality of Jesus’s resurrection but the important, perplexing quality of his subsequent hybrid reappearances. Here is a Jesus who is both recognizable by his disabled body and yet still hidden in his humanity. When he walks, talks, and eats typically, it’s as if his humanity actually disguises him. Only when he reveals his scars do his followers know him to be the Messiah. Although the scars offer a kind of proof, they also seem to go further in expanding and even reshaping the disciples’ imaginations about who God is. In fact, with this in mind, preachers may find some empathy and even some proclamation to “doubting Thomas’s” remarks. After all, the other disciples had also come to believe because they had seen this Jesus, both divine and decidedly markedly enfleshed. So in demanding to see, feel, and experience this Jesus for himself, Thomas desires to know and behold not the Jesus he thought he knew, but the Jesus who is. Maybe Thomas knows that Jesus’s scars are part of his ministry now, so his remarks are not just a defiance but a conviction that the scars matter? Maybe despite what appears, this is an Invitation for preachers not just to focus on Thomas’s doubt but his imagination? What was it that he now imagined about Jesus’s ministry and his own ministry because the scars remained?


    Page 18

    Journal for Preachers

    What I find so prescient about Eiesland’s writing is that she knew it would be hard for people to behold God as disabled. She anticipated our failure of imagination as she writes:

    Liberating our theology from biases against people with disabilities is a process that will require tremendous and continual commitment to identifying with the disabled God in our midst. Even in the process of developing the symbol of Jesus Christ, disabled deity, I have heard numerous objections. Individuals who are heavily invested in a belief in the transcendence of God constituted as radical otherness will undoubtedly find this representation disconcerting . The theological implications of the disabled God resist the notion of power as absolute control over human-divine affairs. For people with disabilities who have grasped divine healing as the only liberatory image the traditional church has offered, relinquishing belief in an all-powerful God who could heal, if He would, is painful. Yet who is this god whose attention we cannot get, whose inability to respond to our pain causes still more pain? This god is surely not Emmanuel—God for us. The second objection some have expressed is the articulation of a model of God that incorporates disability signals confusion for the church, and they insist that a halt shall be called on all representational language for God. With the emergence of African American, feminist, gay-lesbian, and Latin American liberation theologies in recent history, models of God have proliferated. Yet this representational proliferation does not portend chaos; rather it is the corporate enactment of the resurrection of God.6

    What Eiesland reminds us of in some of these remarks is not just the miracle of Jesus being resurrected with his scars, but the ministry of that Jesus coming to his followers as Emmanuel, God for us. This is a God whose attention, despite his death and pain, is still very much on us in his final days, in making clear to us that we’re not alone. So it’s not only that we wouldn’t know God as disabled had he not returned, but we would be left much as Matthew and the original Gospel of Mark leave us, in wonder, fear, and aporia, rather than in reassurance of God’s attentiveness and persistence as pastor. Writing several decades after Eiesland, my own research shows that our imaginations are often far too constrained and limited when it comes to disabled ministers and leaders. This is why I devote several chapters in my book to not only lamenting prejudice against disabled people and calling for the church to repent from ableism, but providing what I call “glimmers of the kingdom.”7 In one of those chapters I share about my friends the Clarke family, whose Joyful Noise worship service, emerged out of a place of pain. Their son J’den, who has autism, was being scolded because he couldn’t be quiet. But in Joyful Noise, a service designed for disabled children to worship and even lead, J’den could stim, move around, use his voice to cry out, or retreat to the sensory room if he needed a break. Because J’den’s family couldn’t drive


    Page 19

    thirty minutes every month to the church that hosted Joyful Noise, they implored the pastor to help them host a service at their home church. And over time that service, that takes place on Sunday afternoons once a month has impacted not just disabled children and their families but the pastor and the church that hosts it. Because when children started to see that they could lead worship and serve communion in Joyful Noise, they asked why they couldn’t do so in the typical service. And so, the typical service began to change, too.8 The ministry of disabled children in Joyful Noise started to press the boundaries about what we thought we knew about God. And sometimes the service does look a bit like chaos, but I think Eiesland is right to proclaim it more as the “corporate enactment of the resurrection of God.” If Eiesland were alive today I think she would not only recognize the risen God in worship like Joyful Noise, but she would continue to challenge our imaginations. In chapter five of her book, she writes:

    I had waited for a mighty revelation of God. But my epiphany bore little resemblance to the God I was expecting or the God of my dreams. I saw God in a sip-puff wheelchair, that is the chair used mostly by quadriplegics enabling them to maneuver by blowing and sucking on strawlike device. Not an omnipotent, self-sufficient God, but neither a pitiable, suffering servant . In this moment, I beheld God as a survivor, unpitying and forthright. I recognized the incarnate Christ in the imaged of those judged ‘not feasible,’ ‘unemployable,’ and ‘questionable quality of life.’ Here was God for me.9

    Perhaps the real Easter miracle is not that God appears as such, but that the Spirit gives us the wherewithal to even recognize him. “Blessed are those who have not seen but yet believe,” the disabled God does not so much chide but charge us, to imagine, someday, a liberation that does not discount any of our bodies. So this Easter, let the disabled God help us to imagine and reimagine that liberation as part of the unfolding resurrection story. “He is not here” is hardly the end of the story.

    Notes 1. Nancy L. Eiesland, The Disabled God: Toward a Liberatory Theology of Disability (Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 1994). 2. Eiesland, The Disabled God, 94. 3. Eiesland, 100. 4. Ibid., 97. 5. Ibid., 98. 6. Eiesland, 104-5. 7. Erin Raffety, From Inclusion to Justice (Waco, Texas: Baylor University Press, 2022), 168. 8. Raffety, From Inclusion to Justice, 134-38. 9. Eiesland, 89.

  • Sermon for Pentecost: ‘The Fire Next Time’

    This text was converted from the original print edition for full-text searchability. Formatting may differ from the original. Consult the PDF for citation and presentation details.

    Page 19

    Sermon for Pentecost: “The Fire Next Time”

    Melanie Marsh

    Miami, Florida

    When the day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in one place. And suddenly from heaven there came a sound like the rush of a violent wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. Divided tongues, as of fire, appeared among them, and a tongue rested on each of them. All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other languages, as the Spirit gave them ability. Now there were devout Jews from every nation under heaven living in Jerusalem . And at this sound the crowd gathered and was bewildered, because each one heard them speaking in their own native language. Amazed and astonished, they asked, “Are not all these who are speaking Galileans? And how is it that we hear, each of us, in our own language? Parthians, Medes, Elamites, and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pam-phyli -a, Egypt and the parts of Libya belonging to Cyrene, and visitors from Rome, both Jews and proselytes, Cretans and Arabs—in our own languages we hear them speaking about God’s deeds of power.” All were amazed and perplexed, saying to one another, “What does this mean?” But others sneered and said, “They are filled with new wine.” But Peter, standing with the eleven, raised his voice and addressed them, “People of Judea and all who live in Jerusalem, let this be known to you, and listen to what I say. Indeed, these are not drunk, as you suppose, for it is only nine o’clock in the morning. No, this is what was spoken through the prophet Joel: ‘In the last days it will be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your young people shall see visions, and your elders shall dream dreams. Even upon my slaves, both men and women, in those days I will pour out my Spirit; and they shall prophesy. And I will show portents in the heaven above and signs on the earth below, blood, and fire, and smoky mist. The sun shall be turned to darkness and the moon to blood, before the coming of the Lord’s great and glorious day. Then everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved. Acts 2:1-21

    “I will pour out my Spirit upon you, and you shall prophesy … Young and old, slave and free, all shall be filled by the power of the Spirit.”

    Just this past week, an immense wildfire blazed through the Ocala National Forest , a 430,000-acre protected wilderness at the outskirts of my hometown in Central Florida. Five hundred acres—an area roughly the size of our neighborhood, here in


    Page 20

    University Circle—was consumed by the flames. Fifty households had to be evacuated from the fire area, less than five miles from the neighborhood where I grew up. As a kid, this time of year always meant fire season in the forest that surrounded our small town. As predictable as summer rains, flames would blaze through, leaving a charred and unrecognizable landscape in their wake. Often, on summer trips out to the beach, we would drive through the forest and see the blackened bottoms of trees, the scorched earth, the bareness of the land that had once been thick with wild undergrowth and wild creatures. What’s interesting is what we learned in school as kids about these wildfires: Far from being a devastating disaster to the forest ecosystem, fire is actually necessary to renew and transform the forest. Pine cones only release their seeds when they come into contact with intense heat. Destructive and invasive species are killed off. Sure enough, as you move through the forest, you’d begin to notice those areas that had been burned last year, or the year before: the old blackened sticks of pine trees were still pointing to the sky, but here and there you’d see that the undergrowth was lively and green. Animals had returned. The forest was being born anew. We are in our own kind of fire season. And it’s fitting that we come at this particular moment to the season of Pentecost, a season where the winds whip and the flames of the Spirit burn within, because we are a community primed for transformation . There are deep, burning questions, just under the surface in our conversations all around this church: How do we continue to follow Christ in this place, when we feel like the church that we’ve known, the church that we’ve loved, is disappearing so fast that it feels like it’s going up in smoke? How do we continue to exist in the midst of this unrecognizable landscape? Could it be that God is calling us to participate in the end of the very church as we know it? It seems unthinkable and yet … this is Pentecost—fire season—when the Spirit of God rages through the people, and transforms everything we thought we knew. It’s clear from this morning’s text that the early apostles found their Pentecost moment as unsettling and bewildering as our present moment might feel to us. Yet Peter does not follow the crowd in dismissing his fellow apostles as outliers —labeling them as drunken or crazy because what they are saying may not make sense to some. Instead, Peter makes the bold move in this moment to affirm the power of the Holy Spirit at work, and to claim a place for himself and his partners in the long line of messengers sent by God to bear witness to the truth of God’s reign—an old message given new voice, for a changing community. The good news that we recognize in the midst of the unsettling reality of Pentecost is that this has all happened before. The Church has been here before.


    Page 21

    Pentecost 2025

    This church community has been here before, and in those former dark times, the community of faith was able to respond with creativity and imagination. By the power of the Spirit we discovered a new normal in the midst of an uncertain present moment. The Spirit’s work in Pentecost is to reveal God’s deep love for us, a love so intense it is able to burn away all that is not our most holy selves. Our call is to let those Pentecost fires burn: living with the reality of an unsettling present moment and faithfully allowing God’s deep and intense love to transform us and lead us in a new direction. In his 1963 essay The Fire Next Time, James Baldwin writes about precisely this type of love as he examines the consequences of racial injustice on the soul of America. He imagines what our cultural landscape might look like if we were bold enough, and brave enough, to seek the thing we most desperately need and want— deep, intense, and honest love. He writes, “Love takes off the masks that we fear we cannot live without and know we cannot live within.” Baldwin goes on, “I use the word ‘love’ here … as a state of being … a state of grace. [Love] in the tough and universal sense of quest and daring and growth.” That kind of life-changing love can be terrifying. Like facing a blazing wall of wildfire, it is not for the faint of heart. It can strip us to our very foundations and leave us unrecognizable. Perhaps that’s exactly where we need to be. From ancient times, the phoenix has been a symbol of rebirth. Every 500 years, so the story goes, the phoenix would go up in flames, and rise again from the ashes of her former self. For Friedrich Nietzsche, the story of the Phoenix was a call for humankind toward transformation—but Nietzsche believed you had to be willing to go all the way. “You must be ready to burn yourself in your own flame,” he once wrote, “how could you rise anew if you have not first become ashes?” How can we know the true power of the Spirit if we do not allow ourselves to be fully consumed by its fire? You see, radical change does not mean that we are left with nothing. What it does mean is that what we find when it’s all over may be something that we never, ever, expected. Yes, it will hurt. Yes, it will be strange. Yes, everything will be different, and yes, in the end, it will be ok. Are we ready to live into our call as Pentecost people? If we are, we can dwell in the fire. We can exist in the midst of it and not be afraid because we know out of ashes, God makes all things new. We may not see literal flames of fire in this room today, but make no mistake, there are fires burning in this place. The Spirit is present and already doing the work of creative destruction, of renewal and rebirth—in our church, in our culture, the Spirit is urging us toward a radical transformation. It is calling us toward a reckoning with who we are at our deepest core.


    Page 22

    The Spirit is calling us to unmask ourselves, to be true to our own story—our gifts and our brokenness, our joy and our pain. May the fires of God’s Spirit continue to burn within us, this day and in the days to come. May we, like the forest and the Phoenix, be born again out of these flames. Amen.