Reformation and the World We Now Live In

Job 42:1-17

Mark 10:46-52

Today is Reformation Sunday, the day when we celebrate that an injustice that was going on in the Catholic church at the time was confronted with depth, commitment and a promise that if the Catholic church would not or could not change, that people would step out of it and find another way to be Church in the world.  And while I had an entire sermon planned around this, I feel that the world, once more, has stepped in and needs to take first focus.  So yes, we are going to talk about what it is to be Protestants, reformed people, but we will be doing it today in the context of what is happening in our country.

You know what began the Protestant Reformation.  Martin Luther, a Catholic monk, was incensed at the corruption in the leadership of the Catholic church, a corruption that led to taking advantage of the poorest and most vulnerable in the church communities.  Priests “sold” indulgences, which meant that they were selling “get out of purgatory and hell” cards.  You had to have money to be “saved” in this model, and you had to be giving it to the church.  There were other problems as well, but of the 95 theses, the injustice of selling heaven was a theme that came up again and again, the cruelty of the church towards the poor was a central motif.  Martin Luther was not trying to leave the church, he was trying to change it.  But the selling of indulgences was a lucrative business, and so those in charge at the time were not really interested in the major overhauls Martin Luther was suggesting.  As a result, the protestant church was formed.  Note the name “protestant.” 

Diana Butler Bass says, “Luther and his associates were protesters rather than reformers—they stood up against the religious conventions of the day, arguing on behalf of those suffering under religious, social, and economic oppression. …In the United States, Protestantism has often been torn between the impulse to protest (the abolition movement, women’s rights movements, the Civil Rights movement) and the complacency of content by virtue of being the majority religion. After all, if you are the largest religious group in society—if you shape the culture—what do you protest?  Yourself?”

And yet, that is what we are being called to do again.  The racism, the hatred, the white, “our way is the only way”  and “our faith is the only faith” attitudes are leading to a violence in our country against anything that is other than mainstream, white, Christian.  And these attitudes are not only tearing our country apart, are not only destroying lives, are not only causing irreconcilable divisions, but are, absolutely, unchristian in every possible way.  Jesus never advocated violence. I want to be clear about this.  He never advocated or condoned or supported violence, even as self-defense. When his disciples defended him against the guard trying to arrest him, he healed the guard and told his disciples this was not the way.  He also said, “you’ve heard it said an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, but I say to you, do not resist an evil doer.  If someone slaps your right cheek, turn to them the other cheek as well.”  He never harmed another person and he called us to behave in the same way.  There is no excuse, none for shooting people in a school or a synagogue or on the street.  And the hatred and racism and anti-every-other-belief system, and the sexism and heterosexism that we see being demonstrated more and more each day has to stop.  Doing it in the name of God just deepens the evil.  We are protestants for a reason.  And we are, frankly, called to continue to be protestants, “protest-ants.”  We are called to show a different way, to continue to live a radical way, and to stand up for those who do not have the power or authority that we do.   

Easy to say.  Hard to do.

We, like the Catholic church of 500 years ago, can become stuck.  Despite our catch phrase of “reformed and always reforming,” it is easy for protestant churches to become comfortable country clubs where what goes on in the world outside is not about us.  We gather together to be friends without recognizing that our call to be together is so that we are then empowered to do the work of Christ in the world: confronting injustice, healing the broken, loving the unlovable, empowering the unempowered, and seeing everyone as our brother and sister, who should have the same luxuries, experiences, gifts and lifestyles that we want and claim for ourselves.

We aren’t called to be comfortable.  Our scriptures for today really point that out.

Change is hard.  Standing up against injustice is hard. But frankly, I believe very deeply that a lot of the exodus we see from our churches has to do with the fact that we claim to follow a God who calls us to justice and action, and yet most of us do not act.  We are comfortable being reminded that God loves us.  We do not feel the need to take the next step into, “and therefore we will serve God by serving, loving and caring for all of God’s people.”  That hypocrisy, I believe in my soul, is the major cause of people leaving the church.  And if we cannot step forward into being the church in a real way in the world, then Protestants too will be split in half, just as the catholic church was so long ago.

God calls all of us to continue to move forward.  Therefore God’s answer to Job, and Jesus’ answer to Bartimaeus did not just leave them where they were or call them to a life of ease and comfort.  Even as God restored Job’s fortunes, God still did not leave Job comfortable. 

Bartimaeus, too, was not allowed to just celebrate his new sight.  He was called to radical change as well.  He answered that call by following Jesus after he gained his sight.

I want to point out, it is not enough to comfort the afflicted.  We are called to live lives and create a world that prevents situations like the Pittsburgh shooting from taking place at all.  Comfort is not enough.  We are called to create a world in which there is justice and people have what they need.  Carl Denis wrote a poem called Editing Job that I think describes the reality of our world right now well.  I am just going to post a piece of it here.  He wrote:

….

Let Job be allowed to complain

About his treatment as long as he wants to,

For months, for decades,

And in this way secure his place forever

In the hearts of all who believe

That suffering shouldn't be silent,

That grievances ought to be aired completely,

Whether heard or not.

As for the end, if it's meant to suggest

That patience will be rewarded, I'd cut it too.

Or else I suggest at least adding a passage

Where God, after replenishing Job's possessions,

Comes to the tent where the man sits grieving

To ask his pardon. How foolish of majesty

To have assumed that Job's new family,

New wife and children and servants,

Would be an ample substitute for the old.

           

            The reality is that when we try to offer comfort after the damage is done, it is just not enough. Those lives that died will never be replaced.  The families will never be whole again.  We can’t give them back that sense of a safe place of worship. We must be "protest"-ants still, actively working to change a world in which violence, hate, and fear are the new norm; where that kind of anger that cannot see the other person as a human being, as a brother or sister has become the way of life.  We have to start now, and we have to start today by loving much more deeply, much more fully; by standing up for those who are without voice; by speaking with clarity and demonstrating with our lives behavior that is about love rather than hate, hope rather than fear, and compassion rather than anger.  It starts with us.  And it has to begin today.

Reformation - Big Time

Jeremiah 31: 27-34
John 8:31-36

Today we celebrate the 500th year of the beginning of the Reformation.  This sermon will be unusual in that it will focus more, therefore, on church history.  As you know, Martin Luther is known as the father of the reformation, though his work of reformation was continued by John Calvin and Huldrych Zwingly whom we name as the Presbyterian Founding Fathers.  Most years on Reformation Sunday I therefore have focused more on Calvin and Zwingly but because this year marks the 500th anniversary of the publication of Martin Luther’s Ninety-Five Theses in 1517, today I will focus more on Martin Luther and what was happening that began the Reformation 500 years ago.
Martin Luther’s was not the first attempt at reformation within the Catholic Church.  Jan Hus, Peter Waldo, John Wycliffe all made significant efforts at confronting problems in the Church.  However, Martin Luther took advantage of the newly available Gutenberg printing press and with that at his disposal, he was much more successful where others had not been able to make significant strides in either changing the church or creating a new church movement. Martin Luther was a prolific writer and he used the printing press to quickly disseminate religious materials to the people. Luther had been a Augustinian Monk and a lecturer at the University in Wittenberg.  And his publication of his 95 theses was not for the purpose of starting his own break off denomination, but rather it was simply an attempt to reform the Catholic Church.  However, he was excommunicated in 1521 at the Diet of Worms.  After his excommunication, he translated the Bible into German (before that it had only been in Latin and therefore only the priests were able to read it). 
Martin Luther’s main issue with the Roman Catholic Church, as you may have read in the 95 Theses, was the sale of indulgences, which basically were “get out of purgatory with payment for sins” cards.   Luther stated, in particular, that the Pope had no authority over purgatory, could not grant people “get out of purgatory” tickets, and certainly could not SELL them.  That was his primary gripe.  However, he also confronted the idea of saints as people to whom we should pray in place of God.  He felt very strongly that this was not a biblical concept in any way.  As the reformation continued, there were several key points that he emphasized.  First, that it was the Bible and not tradition that should inform spiritual practices, or as we say it, “scripture alone”.  Second, that we find our salvation through our faith and not through works, hence, “faith alone”.  And third that salvation comes only from God through grace, not by anything we can do and certainly not by someone else speaking on our behalf, praying on our behalf or selling us a way into eternal life, (in other words, he challenged the idea of praying to specific Saints for them to advocate to God for us, confessing our sins to a priest rather than directly to God, and again, the priestly ability to grant people access to heaven) hence, “grace alone.”  These are the main points of the protestant reformation, though there were many other points made along the way. Since purgatory is not a biblical concept that was tossed out.  As I said before, the idea of saints was rejected by the protestants except in the global sense that all who die in the faith become the saints of God.  “The priesthood of all believers” meant that all of us are able to have personal and direct relationships with God.  We are also all able to read scriptures in our own languages and with our own interpretations.  Other issues that were important to Luther included a confrontation of the Catholic devotion to Mary, as well as the mandate for clerical celibacy.  More importantly, he presented a different idea in what constituted sacraments (as you know we only have two: baptism and communion), and what the sacraments really are (for example, do the communion elements become the literal physical body and blood of Christ or not), as well as whether or not they are considered necessary for salvation.  The reason we only have communion in most Presbyterian Churches once a month was a statement, for example, against the Catholic idea that it was necessary to take communion to clean yourself of sin so that you had to have it as close to death as possible.  For most Protestants, it is a celebration of community and the Church, it is a way to remember all that God has done for us, and most importantly, it is a way of participating in Jesus’ life, death and resurrection, but it is not necessary for salvation.  He confronted and challenged ideas about censure and excommunication, challenged practices of Christianity’s involvement in secular laws, and continued to challenge the authority of the Pope in many matters.  He also challenged which books of the bible would be considered “scripture” and as you know, protestants have fewer books than Catholics as a result.  Luther decided that what should be considered “canon” would be determined by practice, or what had been used most frequently and liturgically, theology and politics. 
Many of the issues that divided the Catholic and Protestant churches continue to do so: Protestants still do not focus on Mary, we do not pray to saints, we do not follow a Pope or even hold our pastors with too much authority, we still only have a few sacraments and our understanding of those sacraments remains different, we don’t believe in purgatory, we still stick to the three key phrases of the Protestant Reformation, “Scripture alone, faith alone, grace alone.” 
        At the same time, as you know, these differences have become much less important than they once were.  For example, the idea of “faith alone” has been tempered by most Protestants with the understanding that if you really and deeply believe in the words Jesus gave us, works will be part of your faith.  As the book of James in our scriptures says so very articulately, “My brothers and sisters, what good is it if people say they have faith but do nothing to show it? Claiming to have faith can’t save anyone, can it? Imagine a brother or sister who is naked and never has enough food to eat. What if one of you said, “Go in peace! Stay warm! Have a nice meal!”? What good is it if you don’t actually give them what their body needs? In the same way, faith is dead when it doesn’t result in faithful activity. Someone might claim, “You have faith and I have action.” But how can I see your faith apart from your actions? Instead, I’ll show you my faith by putting it into practice in faithful action.  It’s good that you believe that God is one. Ha! Even the demons believe this, and they tremble with fear.  Are you so slow? Do you need to be shown that faith without actions has no value at all?...  As the lifeless body is dead, so faith without actions is dead.”  As a result of these statements in the book of James, Luther actually did not want to continue to include the book of James in the Canon.  He felt very strongly that our actions have nothing to do with salvation and so found these words offensive.  But, the people prevailed on this.  The book of James was very much in use and he was unable to strike it from the Canon.
Additionally, the problem that Martin Luther was most concerned about, that began the whole Reformation, naming the selling of indulgences, is no longer practiced in the Catholic church either.  The Catholic Church additionally now uses lay leadership to a much greater degree, recognizing that all of us have a call, and Bibles are translated into many languages and read in the native languages of the people in almost all congregations.   I think one of the greatest changes recently is that we are now working together, across denominations, more and more.  We no longer see those differences with the same sense of importance that we had before.
There were many results of the Protestant Reformation.  It led to a series of religious wars that culminated in the thirty years war which killed between 25-40% of the entire population of Germany between 1618 and 1648.  While many believe the Reformation ended in 1648 with the passing of the Peace of Westphalia (which declared that each prince could determine the religion of its own state but also allowed Christians of different denominations to continue to practice their own faith in peace), many others say it never ended since we continue to have different Christian denominations and splinters within all of those denominations continue.   Scholars credit the Protestant reformation as being the catalyst for a higher literacy rate, lower gender gap in school enrollment, higher school enrollment, more pro-market and pro-work attitudes, among other things.  In the negative, Witch Burnings were more common and witch hunts more active in communities that were torn between Catholic and Protestant believers.
While Luther was the founder of the Reformation, as you know, the forefathers of the Presbyterian Church: Calvin, Zwingly and later, Knox, took the reformation further even than Luther.  One of the phrases of our denomination is “reformed and always reforming” or “reformed and always being reformed” depending on the translation.  We believe that God is always at work among us, guiding us forward into new and deeper understandings as well as into change.  But we also know that change is hard, change is not comfortable, and if it is not intentional decision to move forward, the church will stumble. 
       Diana Butler Bass wrote, “Luther and his associates were protesters rather than reformers—they stood up against the religious conventions of the day, arguing on behalf of those suffering under religious, social, and economic oppression. …In the United States, Protestantism has often been torn between the impulse to protest (the abolition movement, women’s rights movements, the Civil Rights movement) and the complacency of content by virtue of being the majority religion. After all, if you are the largest religious group in society—if you shape the culture—what do you protest?  Yourself?”
       Bruce Epperly put it this way, “Reformation faith is forward, rather than backward-looking, evolving rather than static, at home in this world, rather than in a previous age or a heavenly realm.”
       But the unfortunate truth is that Protestant Churches have become “stuck” as well, in large part because we ARE the dominant religion, the religion of our culture.  Christianity began as a movement against the status quo: challenging the system that oppressed many and lifted up a few.  But now we are the dominant group, and that means we are part of the system that is oppressive.  So, as Diana Butler Bass wrote, do we protest ourselves? 
     Change is hard.  And we are not keeping “at home in this world rather than a previous age” with a great deal of success.  As a result, there is a new movement “out” of the Protestant Church just as in the Protestant reformation, there was a large movement out of the Catholic Church.  You know this, I’ve mentioned it before, you see it within your own families as your own children or your children’s children no longer value church or go to church.  And what is interesting is that they are right on schedule.  There has been some kind of major Reformation of the church every 500 years and as we celebrate the 500th anniversary of the Protestant Reformation, we are right on schedule for another one. What will that look like?  We know, we trust that God is simply doing a new thing, but we do not yet know what that will look like. 
     In the face of all of this, what is important to take away?  Perhaps what is most important is what has always been and what always is most important: that our identity, worth, and well-being should not determined by our successes and failures, by our actions, by our virtuous living, even, but by God's gift of loving us into being.  It is, therefore, our relationships with God that matter.  We could argue theology and we could argue about how we do worship, what we emphasize, what the sacraments mean, who should have authority and who shouldn’t.  We could grieve the changing, diminishing Church, as I know many of us do.  And we could look forward towards where and how the Church will be newly reformed, what it will look like and how we will move forward. But I think all of these things are not ultimately that important.  What matters again is the relationship.  And as far as Church goes, the question should always be, when we come to see who Jesus is, does it matter to us, does it affect us? Are we changed in our encounter with the living Christ, are we challenged, moved by our presence in this place.  And if we aren’t, what is Church about?  What is the purpose in coming here if it does not change us and strengthen us to be the people God calls us to be in the world?  And perhaps what is of bigger question to us today as we reflect and remember the Reformation, what would make this place, now, a place that inspires growth, change and movement?  What reforms need to happen within the Church, big C and within this congregation, little c, that would make this a place of growing deeper in our relationships with God and in our commitments to live lives that challenge systems that oppress, that help people who are suffering, that change the world?  I encourage you to  think about this because in our fellowship hall we have sheets up that I would like to invite you to write on about Reformation – what do you value about who we are, both as Christians and part of the big Church, and as members of this little congregation.  But additionally, what changes, reforms, protests need to continue to happen in the large church; and what changes, reforms, protests need to happen within this congregation.
        Are we willing to let go of what we think we want, what we think will make us happy, and instead to be open to the path Jesus wants us to go, to follow in the way, in the path of a man who ends up dead before he ends up resurrected?  Does our faith, does our encounter with the living Christ make a difference for us?  The question on Reformation Sunday is: are we willing to give up what is comfortable and easy as a church to follow Jesus?  Are we willing to step out to hear what the people of God, God’s children, all of God’s people really need to experience God’s love, God’s grace and God’s presence in this place at this time?
That is the question that we are constantly called to ask as we continue to seek to be a church that is reformed and always reforming.  Amen.

Reformation, canon, etc. - Sunday's Sermon

Psalm 46

Luke 19:1-10

               Today is reformation Sunday when we celebrate and remember how we became the protestant church.  But I thought I would start by answering another of the many questions that came to us in our theological panel conversations and that is about the Canon in particular.  The Old Testament had been set for some time by Jewish practice, tradition and decisions.  But the Western Christian Canon (which includes different books than what is included by the Eastern Orthodox and other Eastern Christian sects, was decided over time.  In the early church, the letters or Epistles circulated around as distinct letters but by the end of the 1^st century were in some form of collection.  The first suggestion of a Christian Canon came about 140AD by Marcion.  However, for about 250 years after that there was a great deal of arguing over what should be considered canon and which books would be considered heresy. Origen of Alexandria pretty much used the same 27 books that we now consider the New Testament.  So by the year 200, the major writings that we still consider canon today were the central books being used by most Christians.  But the first really big and definitive decision about that was made in 393 at the Synod of Hippo Regius in North Africa.  St. Augustine headed this council as well as two others that followed it and considered the canon pretty much closed at that point.  The book of revelation was the most contested book and in the end, the belief that it was genuinely written by John seems to be at least one of the predominant reason it was included in the Canon.  As we know though, with the Protestant reformation, the canon was reevaluated.  For example, Luther moved some books that the Catholic church included in their canon into what we now call the Apocrypha which is not considered part of the Protestant canon.  What is interesting though is that as a result of the Protestant Reformation, various denominations, including the Catholic church, revisited what was considered Canon.  Council of Trent in 1546 decided canon for the Roman Catholic church.  Presbyterians decided it around 1647.  The response, again, to why some books were included and some weren’t is a long one, each book considered and included or excluded for different reasons, but the main reasons for why a book was included or excluded were centered around three major things: practice, or what had been used most frequently and liturgically, theology and politics.  For example: Luther wanted to remove from canon several books that included specifically Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation.  The reason was these books seem to argue against the basic protestant reformation ideas of sola scriptura and sola fide (Scripture alone and faith alone for salvation).  Luther wanted them removed for these theological reasons.  But for political reasons, namely that he could not get support on this from his followers for excluding these books, as well as practice – these books were well used, well loved and strongly appreciated, he was not able to remove these books even into the Apocrypha.  For Protestants, the stated criteria for inclusion in the canon were the following:   

1.       They needed to be of Apostolic Origin — attributed to and based upon the teachings of the first-generation apostles (or people close to them).

2.       They needed to have Universal Acceptance — acknowledged by all major Christian communities towards the end of the 4th century (as well as accepted canon by Jewish authorities for the Old Testament).

3.       They needed to be in regular Liturgical Use — read publicly and in worship with some consistency.

4.      They needed to have a Consistent Message — containing a theological outlook similar to or complementary to other accepted Christian writings.

               The parishioner who asked about canon asked very specifically about the gospel of Thomas and why it was not included in the Canon (and it has been excluded from early on). It was not included for several reasons: First, most scholars question its authorship and don’t believe it actually was written by the disciple Thomas.  Second, it is a list of sayings rather than a story like the other gospels.  Third, many of the sayings are gnostic in their theology, which was considered a big heresy at the time canon was being discussed.  And finally, most scholars believe many of the sayings written were things unlikely to have been said by a Jewish Rabbi at the time, in particular, again, the sayings that have a gnostic aspect to them.  If you are unsure what Gnosticism is and are curious about it, we can discuss it at another time.

               The point here is that there were many writings about faith.  There still are.  And so criteria were set for what would be considered scripture and what would not, and these criteria were based again on practice, theology, origin, and, realistically, politics. 

               So that’s the answer to the question that came in.  But what does this have to do with the reformation?  Or today’s scriptures? 

               What it has to do with the reformation is that a big and important piece of the reformation was an intense look once again at what was to be considered canon.  What it has to do with today’s lesson is that the reformation is a reminder, as were the long debates about what was canon, that we are imperfect people on an imperfect but holy path.  We search for wholeness, we seek to follow Jesus.  But the best we can hope is that in community we do better than as individuals, and that through time the Holy Spirit continues to speak to us and continues to move us into deeper wisdom, understanding and closeness with God.

               Jesus came for the lost. He said this again and again, but he also showed it in his choice of people he picked to visit, to be with, to heal, to transform.  People were unhappy that he took the time to be with Zacchaeus.  And people are unhappy that our churches are not yet perfect and are not make of perfect people.  But that is who Jesus came to be with.  Real people, on a journey of creating community that strives to follow Christ: US. That does mean, however, that we can’t stop being people striving to do better.  Reformed and always reforming.  Or rather, protesting and always protesting.  The Protestant reformation was about protesting, about changing what is.  It was about standing up against the status quo of the time and insisting on justice for those who are poorer, for those who are underprivileged, for those being used and abused, in the church but also beyond these walls.  To quote Rev. Michael Piazza, “The church always has been at its best when it has acted as Jesus did, consistently and persistently, using our energy and strength on behalf of the poor and those who have been pushed to the margins of life. Now, you may agree that this is what the church should do and that it is a great idea to spend the next year protesting, but what about YOU?”  Are we still doing what it is we are called to do?  Sometimes I wonder if the decline of the church in the United States (and as I’ve mentioned before, this is not a small decline.  It is sharp, it is strong, and if predictions are correct, there won’t be a Presbyterian church in another 15 years) is not a condemnation from God on our stuckness again.  The prophets warned against this again and again, challenging us to be more loving and more giving and warning that if we weren’t, we would become irrelevant and would therefore die.  The Protestant reformation challenged what was happening in the Catholic church at the time because it was becoming corrupt.  What is interesting is that while it ended with a split, it also changed the Catholic Church.  It reformed them as well as the church came to see its own sin of the time and realized it had to change.  The larger Christian church is dying again, and I think it, too, is an indictment in many ways on how internally focused we have become once again.  We have become once again about serving each other.  But that is not what we have been called to do.  And I believe the only way the church will survive is for us to go back to what the protestant reformation was about, or to go back farther to what the prophets preached about, and once again confront the injustice of caring for ourselves over others. 

In today’s story, it was not enough for Zacchaeus to just talk with Jesus.  His is a story of transformation as all of our stories must be.  And it was not just the transformation of Zacchaeus.  The man others knew only as “the tax collector” or “the sinner” was called by name, and he was changed by it.  But his change did not stop with himself.  Because he returned the money, because his behavior changed, his transformation meant the transformation of the larger community as well.  Those who had been oppressed by him, used by him, taken advantage by him were now freed too.  Our transformation has to look like this as well. 

               The question is, always, when we come to see who Jesus is, are we willing to change our lives?  To change what feels “comfortable and easy”?  Are we willing to let go of what we think we want, what we think will make us happy, and instead to be open to the path Jesus wants us to go, to follow in the way, in the path of a man who ends up dead before he ends up resurrected?  Does our faith, does our encounter with the living Christ make a difference for us?  The question on Reformation Sunday is: are we willing to give up what is comfortable and easy as a church and as individuals to truly follow Jesus?  Are we willing to step out to hear what the people of God, God’s children, all of God’s people really need to experience God’s love, God’s grace and God’s presence in this place at this time?

               The debates over canon, the protestant reformation, the current church crisis: these are times ripe for challenge of who we are and who we are called to be.  Who does God call us to be?  That is the question that we are constantly called to ask as we continue to seek to be a church that is reformed and always reforming.  Amen.

Sunday's Sermon - Protestant Reformation

Jeremiah 31:27

Matthew 6:9-13

Luke 11:1-4

Today is the day of the year that we celebrate the reformation and I’d like to talk to you a bit about the reformation, what came from that, and why we do some of the things we now do in worship.  When I was at seminary, my professor described the reformation this way.  He took a bureau full of clothes and he said that that bureau was in essence the Catholic and Orthodox churches.  My professor said that Luther basically approached the bureau by opening each drawer and pulling out the things he found offensive, problematic, ungodly or unchristian and left the rest of the bureau intact.  That, then, became the Lutheran church – very similar to the Catholic Church except for a few things that were removed or changed.

Calvin and Zwingly, the founders of the Presbyterian Church, on the other hand, approached the bureau that was the church very differently.  Instead of pulling out the offensive articles, these two emptied the bureau completely, dumping everything onto the bed, and only putting back into the bureau those things which they found justified and upheld by scripture.  This then describes for us the Presbyterian Church…only those things which could be supported by our scriptures.

That meant that everything for Presbyterians was created, in a sense, again, from the beginning.  None the less, there is a lot that is similar with all of our protestant churches that arose through the reformation.  Some of those things we still value highly, and a few of them we have let slide.  Some of the key things that the Protestant reformation focused on was:

Priesthood of all believers.  This means that there is a recognition that all of us are called.  Pastors are not somehow better or more holy.  We are all equally called by God as God’s children.  We have a unique call to the ministry.  But you also have unique calls.  And together, we make up the church.  The ministers of the church are all the people.   The pastor of the church fulfills his or her call in a particular way. 

As a result of this reminder that all are called, many things changed.  One of the things that changed was the ROBES that the clergy wore.  Before the protestant reformation, the robes the priests wore were to signify that they were different, that they had a special calling that others didn’t.  But the robes changed for protestants.  For Presbyterians, they became academic gowns.  This signified that again, we were only different by what we had been trained to do.

Another important change was that the scriptures, prayers, etc before the reformation were written and read only in Latin.  That meant that only people educated in particular ways had access to the Biblical materials.  With the Protestant reformation, and the reminder that all people are God's children, it became important to recognize that God spoke to everyone through scripture and therefore it was very important for people to be able to read the scriptures in their own languages. Through the reformation it was recognized that people did not have to "go through" priests or saints to connect to God.  They could pray to God on their own, read scripture on their own, be in relationship with God directly.

Songs were set to accessible tunes in the music of the people of the time.  Catholic and Orthodox practice at the time meant that songs were  sung FOR The people – they were performed, rather than people singing the songs themselves.  But all of this, too, was changed.  Kierkegaard talked about worship as a theater.  He said that we tended to think of God as the prompterm the preacher and worship leaders as the performers and the congregation as the audience.  But he said this was wrong.  Instaed, God is the theatergoer.  The speaker (and worship leaders) are the prompters and the congregants are the performers.  Everything in worship then is done BY the people, though encouraged by the pastor and the other worship leaders.  And everything in worship is done FOR God.  

Much of this we still value, and yet there have been some reversions in this.  Going back to the beginning of this list – robes.  While originally, the robes of Presbyterians were academic gowns, making a statement that we are NOT different from everyone else – that we are called just as anyone is called to a profession, not separate, not better, not ABOVE, but a professional outfit, now, it has once again become a mark of being separate.  It distinguishes us, when the original point was to state that we are not “other” and not different. 

Reading the Bible in our own language.  Yes, our scriptures have become written in our own language now.  However, at the same time, we have hung on to archaic language that is no longer the language of the people in things like the way we say the Lord’s Prayer.  As we read in today’s scriptures, the way we say the Lord’s Prayer is NOT an accurate translation into today’s language of the people.  But we have become used to the way we do it.  It brings comfort at some level to say it in the words our parents used and our parents’ parents used.  There is value in that.  But there is also a cost.  The cost is that the children do not know what they are saying.  The prayer does not have the same meaning for them that it does for us.  And while we can talk about what these words mean with the kids, saying our most common prayers in THEIR language, in the language they use also sends an important message that God is not so lofty as to not want to hear from children.  God is here, and accessible and open to hearing even from our kids.  Similarly with some of our other songs and prayers.  When we use words like “thee”, “thou”, “thine” we set God off.  And again, while the message in that has value for some people, that God is above and holy and other, it also sends a message of inaccessibility.  The very message, in other words, that the protestant reformation was working to challenge.

Church music…Luther put his words to tunes that were similar to bar tunes, the tunes that the regular people listened to during their regular days.  How many of you listen to hymns other times than when you are in church?  Hmm….

But to me one of the bigger problems that the reformation was addressing was that people had become unaware any longer of why things were done the way they were done.  They had become stuck in traditions that no longer had any meaning other than a connection to what had gone on before.  So another part of what I want to do today is to talk to you about why we do some of the things we do, in church.  For example, what is the passing of the peace? 

Presbyterian Church is a constitutional church which means we have two books that tell us who we are and why we do what we do.  The first is our book of confessions, the second is our book of order.  This is what the book of order says the passing of the peace is:  “It is important in worship that we take the opportunity to seek and to offer forgiveness for hurts, misunderstandings and broken relationships among ourselves and that we respond to God’s act of reconciliation by exchanging signs and words of reconciliation and of Christ’s peace through the passing of the peace.”  (2.6001b)  So what does this mean?  The passing of the peace is a mending–of-hurts time, an act of forgiveness time, a reconciliation time.  In other words, the people we might approach during this time are those with whom we feel the need for reconciliation, or for offering or seeking forgiveness.  You can pass the peace on to others as well, but it is as a sign that God forgives and reconciles everyone.  You notice what it ISN’T?  It isn’t a “greeting time”.    In most churches it follows on the heels of our prayer of confession and acceptance of God’s grace because it is a sign that we have taken to heart God’s grace and now want to pass that on to each other.  And for this it is a wonderful gift to one another that we can touch and recognize the grace that is literally, physically given to us.

Because we are all the participants in worship, when the choir sings or when the children “perform”, they are praying or offering up to God on our behalf the prayers, praise, celebration, declaration of God’s love and our commitment to God.  So one of the questions that has come my way has to do with clapping in response to these offerings.  Is clapping in worship appropriate and why or why not?

To me the answer is this: if you are clapping as a way of saying, “Amen!  Yes, that’s my prayer!  Well said on our behalf!” then I think it is absolutely appropriate to clap in worship.  Calvin, though, says that if anything is not referencing God, then it should not be included, so our clapping is best when it honors God rather than the people who are offering the prayer on our behalf.

In worship, faith and celebration are not done for you.  You are the participants, and we are all equals before God.  As Jesus tells us in Matthew, “you have only one Master and all of you are brothers and sisters”.  You are the ones here to worship and honor God.  This is your performance or offering to God.

The bottom line, through all of this, is that everything in worship should be to God’s glory.  Every banner, every song, every prayer should be focused on God.  If a piece of art or an article in the sanctuary is focused on anything else – anything else, it is not appropriate in this space.  If something takes the place of prayer, it is not appropriate.  Our musicians work hard to prepare because they want to offer their best to God – and that is appropriate.  So, in light of this, what does it mean that we offer up announcements, joys and concerns during worship?  These, too, are prayers for the people of God.  They are celebrations of God’s acting in our lives.