Blessed are People of Integrity Who Go Unrewarded

 “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.” --Matthew 5:8 NRSV

For the last two weeks, I have been sharing about the Beatitudes in Matthew 5:1-12. They form the beginning of what is called The Sermon on the Mount, a collection of Jesus’ sayings in Matthew 5-7. I believe the best way to interpret these verses is not as an instruction manual from Jesus, but as declarations from Jesus about how the world really works, all appearances to the contrary. 

 

A group of clergy called SALT Project does a nice job of describing this way of understanding the Beatitudes:

 

Jesus paints an utterly counterintuitive picture of blessedness: looking around the world, then and now, and it’s easy to conclude that the “blessed” are the rich, happy, strong, satisfied, ruthless, deceptive, aggressive, safe, and well-liked — and yet here’s Jesus, saying that despite appearances, the truly “blessed” are actually the poor, mourning, gentle, hungry, merciful, pure in heart, peacemaking, persecuted, and reviled.

 

It seems easier to me, however, to think of God declaring the poor in spirit or those who mourn are blessed than it is the pure in heart. It feels self-righteous or even hypocritical to declare oneself pure in heart. Which one of us doesn’t have some kind of falsehood, selfishness or double mindedness inside of us? As Christians we are taught that all of us are sinners who stand in need of the grace of God. With all that we know about psychology today and how our unconscious urges, desires and biases shape our behavior, how can anyone say they are really pure in heart?

 

For the biblical writers however, purity of heart seemed to be attainable. This Beatitude echoes the 24th Psalm which declares:

 

Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord?

    And who shall stand in his holy place?

Those who have clean hands and pure hearts,

    who do not lift up their souls to what is false,

    and do not swear deceitfully. (Psalm 24:3-4 NRSV)

 

Purity of heart might be rare, but it was possible, so it must mean something other than perfection or a complete lack of sinful thoughts and actions in one’s life.

 

For me, this Beatitude is not about getting everything right or being utterly innocent of thoughts and actions that hurt ourselves, others and God. Rather it is about being a person of integrity. 

 

• Being pure of heart means keeping one's promises and commitments.

• Being pure in heart means speaking truthfully yet lovingly to others.

• Being pure in heart means accepting hard truths about oneself and taking responsibility for one's mistakes and faults, making amends whenever possible. 

• Being pure in heart means being a person whom others can trust and who are consistent in their actions, beliefs and words without changing them for different audiences or circumstances.

 

Purity of heart takes concrete form when one refuses to triangulate against a coworker just to get ahead or even to make oneself feel better about one’s own inadequacies.

 

Purity of heart takes concrete form when one chooses to be honest when no one is looking or could ever know if you were dishonest.

. 

Purity of heart takes concrete form when one sticks with the truth of who you are and what you have done in the face of criticism, rejection and even false attacks. A person who has integrity of heart does not need to respond in kind to people who unfairly criticize them behind their backs or undermine friendships or relationships. Purity of heart means not having to lower oneself to the false behaviors of others, because you know your own truth which gives you all the reassurance needed.

 

In a world with “alternative “facts” and where truth is bendable depending on which cable news channel you are watching, it may not seem like integrity matters. In a world where those in power declare “greed is good” and “winning is everything,” integrity doesn’t seem to offer much reward. Yet Jesus declares that no matter what our culture says, integrity means everything to God. God sees and knows our hearts. God knows when we are being truthful and living with integrity even if nobody else does. The greatest reward of all--greater than getting ahead in office politics, greater than any popularity context, greater than achieving any power in this world--is our integrity allows us to “see God.” to recognize the true reality of love and grace which pervades all of creation.

 

Psalm 24 declares the pure in heart shall enter the Holy of Holies in the Jerusalem temple, the most sacred spot on earth, and see God face to face. Jesus declares the pure in heart shall see God without any such restriction of location. The person who walks and lives and speaks with integrity can see beyond the lies and deceits of our culture to lay eyes on God’s work of love and justice which is so often obfuscated by human deceitfulness. This reward offers more blessedness than any half-hearted or false-hearted person can ever know.

 

Grace and Peace,
Chase

Blessed are Those Who Show Mercy in Big and Small Ways

 “Blessed are the merciful, for they will receive mercy.”
--Matthew 5:7 NRSV

Mercy sounds like a word for another time or at least another realm. It seems like a word used on the HBO series Game of Thrones, as if the person sitting on the Iron Throne offers mercy to a defeated foe. Who uses the word “mercy” anymore?

The last time I can remember using the word “mercy” was probably as a kid when another boy would put me in some kind of wrestling hold until I would cry, “Mercy!” It was the same as crying, “Uncle!” I guess that’s not too far from the modern-day definition of the word. According to Google, “mercy” means “compassion or forgiveness shown toward someone whom it is within one's power to punish or harm.” In other words, I don’t have to be a reigning monarch or the biggest kid on the playground to offer mercy. Any time I offer compassion or forgiveness towards someone whom I could punish or harm, I am offering mercy.

A way to misinterpret this beatitude, I think, is to understand it as some sort of transaction with God. If I show mercy to others, God will show mercy to me. This sort of “if. . . then. . .” theology is a superficial reading of not only this beatitude but the “Parable of the Unforgiving Servant” found later in Matthew 18:21-35 (which I preached on back on September 17—if you missed it you can watch it here). A similar idea exists in the Lord’s Prayer which we pray every week: “Forgive us our sins, as we forgive those who sin against us.” Yet, to read these verses about mercy as a transaction where we show mercy in order to get mercy is to make God into a math problem (me + mercy = God being merciful to me), and God is free to give mercy or not to us anytime anywhere. For grace to be grace, it cannot be a transaction.

I believe Jesus connects the mercy we give others to the mercy God gives us in such stark terms, because for Jesus, mercy is just that important. Jesus wants us always to remember that we are people who have received mercy from God—we do not instantly get zapped for the sins we commit against God, others, ourselves and creation. Our very lives are grace because we do not have to exist in the first place. Every day in countless ways we receive mercy and grace from God whether we know it or not. Since we are supposed to live our lives in gratitude for the mercy God has shown us, our gratitude naturally translates into mercy toward others. In fact, one of the most common ways God shows mercy to us is through the mercy we give to and receive from one another.

Mercy—as in showing compassion and forgiveness towards people we could punish or harm—can be understood in what I will call “big” or “small” ways. The Catholic Worker movement founded by Dorothy Day understood mercy in what I’ll call the “big” way. They understood acts of mercy to fall into two categories: corporal and spiritual.

The corporal works of mercy:

feeding the hungry
giving drink to the thirsty
clothing the naked
offering hospitality to the homeless
caring for the sick
visiting the imprisoned
burying the dead 

The spiritual works of mercy:

admonishing the sinner
instructing the ignorant
counseling the doubtful
comforting the sorrowful
bearing wrongs patiently
forgiving all injuries
praying for the living and the dead.

Another way to think about mercy is what I will call “small,” as in the everyday acts of mercy that we choose as we go about our daily routines. United Church of Christ minister and author Quinn Caldwell writes the following about this “small’ kind of mercy:

Maybe I didn't have to have such a big sigh when my partner forgot to bring home milk, even though he totally said he'd do it, and then totally didn't. 

Maybe I didn't have to lay on my horn quite so harshly when that lady cut me off on the way to work this morning, even though she was obviously in the wrong. 

Maybe mercy is about self-control, about choosing not to use power to convict someone (even tiny power, like a disappointed sigh or an angry horn blast), choosing not to vent one's spleen just because it feels good. 

So today, I will try to be self-controlled. I will focus more on relationships than being right, more on building others up than pointing out the ways they've wronged me. Today, I will try to show the world the mercy I hope to one day receive when I find myself kneeling before the One with all the power.

Whether today your acts of mercy are “big” or “small”, may you abundantly offer compassion and forgiveness to those whom you could punish or harm because God offers the same to you.

Grace and Peace,
Rev. Chase Peeples

Can a Church Be Common Ground in 2020?

As I write this, our nation still awaits election results. One’s political views will determine how one feels once the outcome is known. Many people feel our society is more politically polarized than ever (probably an overstatement—remember the Civil War?) or at least as much as anyone can remember in their lifetime (still a possible overstatement—remember the 60’s?). It is probably safe to say that given the rise of social media and partisan cable news channels, people feel as polarized as ever. Throw on the crisis of the COVID-19 pandemic, continued unresolved conflicts over racism and potential economic woes and times seem difficult with no clear solutions in sight.

How can Christians be church in the midst of these polarized times?

One way to be church is to stick our heads in the sand. We can just avoid talking about controversial subjects altogether among church folks. This avoids conflict but it is not very healthy. It also happens to be unbiblical. Jesus, the Hebrew prophets and other biblical writings have much to say about how communities and societies treat people, especially those with the least power and money. If we avoid all controversial topics, we risk avoiding our obligations as Christians.

A second way to be church is to pick a side. Many conservative Christian churches have equated being Christian with voting Republican. They are fewer in number, but there are progressive churches who equate being Christian with voting Democrat. Often this type of partisan Christianity centers on particular issues like abortion, homosexuality, etc. The problem with this view is saying being Christian is the same thing as voting for a certain party. Such a move is essentially making a false idol out of a party that competes with God for believers’ allegiance. Many of the most controversial issues of our day are more complex than can be addressed by a particular party’s platform. Furthermore, there are politicians in all parties that are unworthy of the support they expect from people of faith. Picking a political side and sticking with it under all circumstances is a guaranteed way to end up on the opposite side of what God expects sometime or the other.

A third way to be church is the one least tried—the way of common ground. Our culture is beset by powerful forces that have a financial interest in us staying as divided as possible. Everyone from the lobbyist to the politician to the media mogul knows the best way to make money and accumulate power is to create enemies that their supporters or audience can rally against. Nothing makes Americans more devoted to a cause than sharing the same enemy. It is much harder to find goals and interests we can agree upon. Can a church be a place where people who disagree with one another’s political parties can find things they do agree upon? There’s not a lot of evidence out there which says this is possible, but the alternative is we retreat further from one another while our churches become just an extension of the political parties.

Is it possible that people who vote Democrat and want to fight climate change and people who vote Republican and want free market economics could find common ground over finding ways to support renewable energy, control pollution and protect wilderness lands?

Is it possible that people who vote Republican and want to support police officers and people who vote Democrat and want to overcome racism could find common ground on training of police officers, fairness in sentencing offenders regardless of their race and increased resources for people with mental health issues?

Is it possible that people who vote Republican and are against access to abortion services and people who vote Democrat and are for access to abortion services could find common ground working so all low-income women and children have access to quality healthcare, adoption services are made more affordable and our foster care system is better than its current deplorable state?

Is it possible that common ground exists in other areas too?

If common ground is to be found among church people, a few things are necessary:

·         A commitment to love one another even when we disagree;

·         A commitment to remembering God is greater than one political party;

·         A commitment to share one another’s personal experiences and personal stories rather than repeating the talking points of pundits, talk radio and internet memes;

·         A commitment to restraint on social media so that we don’t fire off replies without thinking or post things that might hurt people we care for but who don’t share our views;

·         A commitment to value the full humanity of other people, especially people who’s worth as a person has been called into question by politicians and media figures;

·         A commitment to use the Bible, religious tradition and church teachings as tools for understanding and respect rather than as weapons or prooftexts to demean others.

·         A commitment to sticking with our relationships with one another as church members even when dialogue gets uncomfortable and difficult.

This may be a tall order for ordinary human beings to accomplish, but we do not journey alone, God is with us. A church that wants to find common ground in order to work for the common good can do so if it walks humbly with God. The love, peace and grace promised by Jesus Christ is available to us, if we are willing to accept them and extend them to one another. A church doesn’t have to be just another partisan tool or a group that ignores the conflicts of our times. Instead it can be a place where we find love and community in spite of our differences while we serve others in Jesus’ name.

Grace and Peace,
Chase

Blessed are Those Who Provoke Righteousness

“Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled.”
--Matthew 5:6 NRSV 

On the day after Election Day when our nation waits anxiously for election results, it is perhaps a good time to reflect on the beatitude: “Blessed are those who hunger and third for righteousness.” It’s worth noting that in Luke’s Gospel this beatitude only says, “Blessed are those who hunger.” (Luke 6:20 NRSV) Many scholars believe the shorter version is what Jesus actually said and Matthew added the spiritual stuff to make the beatitude not about actual hunger but a hunger (and thirst) for righteousness. Whether Jesus actually said Matthew’s version or not (he could have said it both ways for all we know), Matthew’s version certainly remains consistent with Jesus’ teachings. In the end, the kind of righteousness Jesus is talking about means, among other things, feeding those who are hungry.

Later in Matthew’s Gospel, Jesus tells a parable about the Son of Man judging “the nations” and separating them into “sheep and goats.” (Matthew 25:31-46) Jesus offers the remarkable concept that whatever these people have done or not done for others is the same thing as what they have done or not done to himself. This disturbing concept of Christ somehow mysteriously being present in every person we care for or do not care for includes people who are hungry and thirsty (“for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink,” Matthew 25:35 NRSV) Righteousness means, therefore, caring for the needs of others and when we do so, we also care for Christ.

For most of Christian history and especially in American Christianity, the kind of righteousness that meets the needs of those who are marginalized has been understood in individualistic terms. Understood this way, a Christian cares for those whom society considers “the least of these” through personal acts of charity or perhaps through a church collection of money or goods. This manner of righteousness is undoubtedly biblical, but it is not the only understanding of caring for people in need.

The Hebrew prophets and Jesus himself speak of societal injustices where the rich oppress the poor. Indeed, Jesus’ one arguably violent act took place when he ran money changers out of the temple. This wasn’t just about the proper use of religious space it was a rejection of a religious system that used the worship of God to exploit powerless people. That same religious establishment accommodated and benefited from a civic authority that further exploited the majority of the population. For Jesus and the prophets, righteousness meant working against the kind of systemic and complex sins that come about through the participation of individuals in a community and society. Biblical righteousness, therefore, is not merely individual virtue but communal wholeness, not only about individual choice but communal responsibility.

In a democratic republic that has a market economy and exists in a culture two thousand years removed from Jesus’ day, figuring out how to apply Jesus’ understanding of righteousness can be difficult. The interconnectedness of power, wealth and influence in our society staggers the imagination, so a precise mixture of public and private responses to injustices is impossible. Yet, if we wish to be Christ’s disciples in our day, simply doing nothing because the problems are too complex remains a non-option. Followers of Jesus, have no option but to try and demonstrate a righteousness that individually and communally meets the needs of those at the bottom of our society’s ladder, even as we understand our efforts remain imperfect and incomplete. How we do this is, of course, up for debate; that we must do so is not.

When I consider whether or not Jesus’ righteousness is more of an individualistic or systemic concern, I often think of a quote by the Brazilian archbishop Dom Helder Camara, “When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist.” Individual acts of charity remain relatively easy—just think of how many marches and walks you and your friends take part in for good causes. Yet, asking the more difficult questions about the inequalities that exist in our society veers into the territory of politics. When we get into politics, I feel like the debate becomes more about ideology than about the needs of real people.

I have been in conservative churches and liberal churches (and churches in between), and whenever the larger questions of injustice in our society are raised it’s not long before people stop listening to Jesus and start listening to whatever partisan news source they prefer. When that happens, it’s not long before Jesus starts sounding like a cable news pundit. Then the discussion is not about correcting injustices in society but deciding who is wrong and who is right, as well as labeling whoever is considered “wrong” a fascist, communist, or whatever.

On the 50^th anniversary of the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr., his daughter Bernice King wrote in The Atlantic about the kind of righteousness her father spoke about, a righteousness drawn from the teaching of Jesus and the prophets. She wrote that we must “serve as a force of light” and explained what that means in the following way:

My father stated, “Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that.” This is often quoted, but I’m concerned that we seldom realize he was expressing both a physical and a spiritual truth. When we show up as light in dark places, the darkness must depart. If we become darkness in response to darkness, then we perpetuate a descending spiral of hate and hopelessness. Each of us must decide whether it is more important to be proved right or to provoke righteousness.

During this fraught political climate, we must choose “whether it is more important to be proved right or to provoke righteousness.” We can spend our time name calling on social media as we retreat to our separate bubbles, or we can get to work creating the kind of righteousness that meets the needs of those most in need of help. We can become as bad as the people we say we oppose, or we can choose to work for a more just world. Too many Christians believe following Jesus means proving they are right and others are wrong instead of provoking the kind of righteousness that Jesus calls us to create.

Grace and Peace,
Chase

 

Blessed are the Meek on Election Day 2020

 “Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.” --Matthew 5:5 NRSV

Today is Election Day, and this particular election seems more chaotic than most. Pundits and politicians predict violent protests by whichever side loses. Uncertainty over whom to trust for accurate information runs rampant. People on both the right and the left have begun stockpiling ammunition. There has to be a better way than this.

Last week and this week I am writing about the Beatitudes, and the third one is most commonly translated “Blessed are the meek.” It seems especially appropriate for Election Day. The word “meek” is also commonly translated as “gentle” and sometimes “humble.” Meekness, gentleness and humility seem in short supply on Election Day. The brashest pundits and most sensational headlines get the most clicks and viewers. Lawyers lining up at election offices get paid to be aggressive. Politicians talk tough in order to win and don’t get bumps in the polling for being humble. Are we sure Jesus knew what he was talking about?

A problem for the modern reader of this verse comes from the words used to translate Jesus’ original words. “Meek” in contemporary usage seems to imply one who is timid or afraid to stand up for one’s self. “Gentle” similarly implies the opposite of strength. “Humility” may be prized as a virtue but it seems the opposite of assertive and bold. What does meek/gentle/humble mean in this verse?

The Greek word praus translated as meek/gentle/humble did not imply weakness. It was the word used to describe horses who had been broken in. The horse remains strong, but its wildness is under control. It’s energy and strength are put to the use of its rider. For Christians, the metaphor implied by this word means that we do not sacrifice our strength and energy, but they are under God’s control and used for God’s purposes. 

The one who is meek/gentle/humble remains strong but demonstrates a different kind of strength. No more are one’s power and will bent towards one’s own shallow desires but towards love of God and neighbor. This means that the bombastic, aggressive and violent ways of our culture and world are not the ways of God. Despite appearances to the contrary, those who abuse power to control others are on the losing side. God is on the side of the meek/gentle/humble who allow the higher power of God to flow through them.

The reward for those who are meek/gentle/humble is that they will inherit the “earth” or “land”. This seems like a strange reward, since most of the other Beatitudes promise the Kingdom of Heaven. The “earth” seems like a poor runner up to a heavenly reward. The interpretation of this verse depends not upon a Greek Platonic worldview of the spiritual being superior to the material, but rather it depends upon the Hebrew concept of “the land” found in the Hebrew Bible, what Christians call the Old Testament.

With this Beatitude, Jesus is quoting Psalm 37 verse 11, which reads: 

But the meek shall inherit the land,

    and delight themselves in abundant prosperity. (NRSV)

In the Hebrew Bible, to live according to God’s purposes meant to live in the land promised to their ancestors. Much more than geography, this “promised land” meant a return of Creation to God’s original intentions. To live in “the land” meant to experience the abundance and prosperity God intended for all people. Unlike a culture which declares the most powerful get to take what they want from those who are powerless, God’s reality says the real power (God) shares abundantly with all of God’s children.

Psalm 37 speaks to God’s reality which flies in the face of what we see on cable news and our smartphone instant notifications.

Do not fret because of the wicked;

    do not be envious of wrongdoers,

for they will soon fade like the grass,

    and wither like the green herb.

Trust in the Lord, and do good;

    so you will live in the land, and enjoy security.

Take delight in the Lord,

    and he will give you the desires of your heart.

Commit your way to the Lord;

    trust in him, and he will act.

He will make your vindication shine like the light,

    and the justice of your cause like the noonday.

Be still before the Lord, and wait patiently for him;

    do not fret over those who prosper in their way,

    over those who carry out evil devices.

Refrain from anger, and forsake wrath.

    Do not fret—it leads only to evil.

For the wicked shall be cut off,

    but those who wait for the Lord shall inherit the land.

Yet a little while, and the wicked will be no more;

    though you look diligently for their place, they will not be there.

But the meek shall inherit the land,

    and delight themselves in abundant prosperity. (NRSV)

The words of Jesus in this Beatitude and the words of the Psalm Jesus quotes from, speak to the truth that those with the strength that matters will not be the ones making headlines on election night. As important as government and law is for opportunity and prosperity (and they are very important), they are still not as important as a God who stands with those who have ceded their power and freedom to God so that love of God and love of neighbor may increase. I believe elections matter greatly and I have strong opinions over which candidates I believe should win, but more than these things I believe that governments and even nations come and go, but the only thing that really endures forever is God. So, what we do to demonstrate love of God and love of neighbor shall endure too. 

We may be waiting for election results possibly for days or weeks to come, but as I wait to find out who won this election I shall also be meditating on this verse from Psalm 37.

Be still before the Lord, and wait patiently for him;

    do not fret over those who prosper in their way,

    over those who carry out evil devices.

Grace and Peace,
Rev. Chase Peeples

Blessed are Those Who Grieve

“Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted.” --Matthew 5:4 NRSV

I shared in Tuesday’s post about how the liturgical church calendar has All Saints Sunday as the first Sunday after Halloween (All Hallows Eve). It’s customary to read from the Gospel of Matthew’s Beatitudes, Matthew 5:1-12, which forms the introduction to Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount (chapters 5-7). I won’t be preaching on the Beatitudes this Sunday, so I felt it was a good idea to share about them via these emails. 

Remember, the Beatitudes (the verses that begin “Blessed are . . . “) are not instructions to be poor in spirit, mourners, meek, persecuted, etc., but rather declarations of the way God sees the world. Jesus depicts God’s reality in a way which is contrary to how we understand how the world works. This seems especially true in the case of the second beatitude (“Blessed are those who mourn. . . “).

Often interpreters who understand the Beatitudes as instructions or as ideals to strive for see this beatitude only in  communal terms. In this kind of view, the mourning in question is  concern about the sinful or unrighteous state of the world. In other words, those who are a part of the Kingdom of Heaven grieve all the ways our world falls short of God’s intended purposes. I certainly don’t think this kind of mourning is bad, rather I think it is an appropriate perspective for people of faith to mourn the ways humanity despoils the earth, commits acts of violence upon one another, supports prejudice of every kind and allows a sizable chunk of humanity to live in squalor. Nonetheless, I do not think this is what Jesus had in mind with this beatitude, at least not exclusively.

I believe Jesus meant people are blessed by God who are mourning losses. It sounds absurd, so I get why interpreters have found ways to understand this mourning as something other than the death of a loved one, the loss of a job, the end of a dream or the dissolution of a marriage. How can one possibly be blessed when they are enduring the inevitable losses in life?

I think the answer comes when we understand “blessed” less as a tangible benefit of some kind and more as divine favor or concern. Attempts to point out the blessings that may or may not arise from grief can come across as cold or cruel, as if one is telling someone in pain to “look on the bright side” or remember “every cloud has a silver lining”. If blessings ever do come from times of grief, they come in the form of personal growth, an increase in compassion and empathy, or gratitude for the love received from others. These may come eventually, but they never fill the void left in one’s life.

For me, the words “Blessed are those who mourn . . . “are a comfort in and of themselves, because it means when I grieve that I am not forgotten or abandoned by God.  God cares for me. I am not being cursed or punished because of some sin or shortcoming but rather painful losses happen in life for reasons that remain a mystery, and God is present with us during those times. 

Indeed, the Gospels reveal Jesus wept over the death of his friend Lazarus, wept over the fate of Jerusalem, and wept facing his impending death. The power of the Incarnation is that in Christ God experienced what it is to grieve. This is not a God who remains far off from us but a God who draws near to us and shares our pain. The loss we feel is felt by God too.

This blessedness or co-suffering of God with those who mourn is beautifully expressed in the hymn “Be Still My Soul.”

Be still my soul the Lord is on thy side

Bear patiently the cross of grief or pain

Leave to thy God to order and provide

In every change He faithful will remain

Be still my soul thy best, thy heavenly friend

Through thorny ways leads to a joyful end

The hymn speaks to the second half of the beatitude “. . . for they shall be comforted.” There is no time table given for when this comfort will show up. In this life, comfort may come in the faithfulness of friends and family, a sense of God’s presence or simply the passage of time. Comfort in its fullness comes in the mysteries that await us after this life is over.

The future orientation of the second half of the beatitude (“. . . for they shall be comforted”) offers us the guarantee that the comfort will come even though we may feel our pain will never end. This promise is essential, because so much of what we grieve is the loss of an expected future that will not come to pass.  Former General Minister and President of the United Church of Christ John Thomas  speaks eloquently of this facet of grief:

We often think of grief as the loss of something or someone that has been important to us in the past. But the sharpest pain of grief comes, I believe, in the moments when we suddenly find ourselves confronting a vastly altered future . . . It is not so much the loss of a rich past as it is the prospect of a barren future that causes us our most profound grief.  

 

Jesus’ declaration that those who mourn “shall be comforted” is a promise that when we think our lives are over and believe we can’t go on without what or whom we have lost, God offers a future still. Our lives will never go back to what they were before our losses; our losses remain with us. But a new kind of life always lies before us, because our Divine friend walks with us into that future.

 

In 2020, we have known so many losses of all kinds: over 220,000 (at the time of this post) people in our country dead from COVID-19, loss of community, jobs and our best laid plans. The interpreters who  want to interpret this Beatitude as communal, mourning over the state of our world, are not all wrong. I just believe our mourning is not an either/or proposition. We mourn for the suffering in our world and we mourn for the losses in our individual lives. Whatever our suffering, whatever we mourn, Jesus promises us that the blessing of God's presence remains true. New life remains in our future and our God walks besides us on our way there.

 

Grace and Peace, Chase

 

What Happens When a Church Building Stops Housing a Congregation?

This week the New York Times ran an article entitled “New Spirits Rise in Old, Repurposed Churches.”  It described church buildings around the country that were sold by closed congregations and have been repurposed for new uses. Many times when a congregation closes another one buys it, but in a growing number of cases the church building becomes something else entirely. The articled offered these statistics:

It is unclear how many religious buildings are repurposed. Roughly 1 percent of the nation’s 350,000 congregations — or 3,500 — close each year . . . But not all find new uses and some buildings are filled by different congregations. 

These “different congregations” sometimes look very different from a house of worship. An Episcopal church in Denver founded in 1880 became a dance club called “The Church” (real original). In Troy, NY, a former Catholic church was bought by the Phi Sigma Kappa fraternity. The frat brothers made an agreement with the town when they bought it that they would keep it alcohol-free, but if they’ve done so, then they would be the first college fraternity to do so, well ever. Second Presbyterian Church of Newark, NJ, became the headquarters of Audible, a digital audiobook and podcast provider. While in San Francisco, a Christian Science Church founded in 1923 is now home for an archive of everything ever posted on the internet.

I know a church is the people that make it up and not a building, but it just feels wrong to transform a building dedicated to worshipping God into a building used for such secular purposes. I guess I should keep in mind that in many cases a church might sell its building and use the proceeds for good causes. I’ve known churches that closed and sold their property which gave the money from the sale to start new churches. Also, just because a congregation sells its property doesn’t mean it died. In some of these cases, the neighborhood around the church building changed or its members began moving to other parts of their cities. So they sold their property and built a new building elsewhere. I also know of congregations who couldn’t afford to keep up a big expensive building, so they sold them and used the money to support ministry in a rented property like a storefront.

I first began taking notice of articles describing the fate of sold church buildings a few years ago. The first one I saw was an article in The Atlantic titled “America’s Epidemic of Empty Churches.” It detailed the decades-long decline in church membership and attendance, as well as demographic shifts in some expensive real estate markets. In places like Brooklyn, NY or around Washington, D.C., historic church buildings were being bought by developers and turned into hipster lofts and condos. Preservationists were aghast and so were many church folks.

My whole career as a minister I’ve been hearing about the decline of denominations and local congregations. There are so many reasons for this, such as generational change, lower commitment to institutions, disillusionment with organized religion and more. Predictions vary, but it is clear that sometime not too far off in the future as churches lose their older members--the most numerous and most committed in churches today--there is going to be a massive sell off of church buildings.

I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, as I’ve said, as a lifelong churchgoer it just feels wrong to me to no longer use a church building for spiritual purposes. On the other hand, the biggest source of conflict and the biggest obstacle to actually doing the ministry of Jesus Christ I’ve seen in the congregations I’ve served has been (you guessed it) the church buildings. Again and again, staff, ministries and more essential things have been sacrificed to maintain buildings too large for dwindling congregations to manage. It’s as if church folks felt like they were actually doing the work of the Gospel as long as they kept the roof from caving in. This idolatry of church buildings is pretty sad when one considers Jesus did just fine without his own building. So did the early church; Christianity survived for centuries before the first church buildings were built.

As congregations get smaller and have fewer resources, it is fair to ask whether or not it is good stewardship of God’s money to work so hard at maintaining buildings that stand empty most of the week. I wonder why we ever thought this was a good idea in the first place. In no other sector do buildings get so much attention but get used so infrequently.

In this week’s New York Times article, there were some church buildings which had been repurposed for uses that were at least closer to their original purposes. One had been made into a winery and another was made into a restaurant. Hey, Jesus spent a lot of time sitting around tables eating and drinking with people, so much so he was criticized for it. A church building in New Orleans that a congregation couldn’t afford to repair after hurricane Katrina became a recording studio used by local jazz musicians and even stars like Willie Nelson, Eric Clapton and Janelle Monae. I’ve certainly had plenty of spiritual moments listening to music and attending concerts, so this doesn’t seem so bad to me.

One church building, however, had been repurposed into something that seemed closer to its original use than the others. A Methodist church in South Charleston, WV has been transformed into Cafe Appalachia. A non-profit group runs the restaurant that serves comfort food and prides itself on being a part of its community. At the heart of Cafe Appalachia are the kitchen workers. They are part of a job training program for women recovering from opioid addiction. West Virginia has the highest rate in the country for opioid deaths and everyone knows someone affected by the crisis. Two quotes about Cafe Appalachia caught my eye:

“There’s sadness when a worshiping space changes, but this is a whole different kind of sanctuary,” said the Rev. Cindy Briggs-Biondi, the former pastor at St. Paul United Methodist Church.

“If Jesus were here now?” said Ronnie Skeens, a regular. “The way my faith works? He’d be back there cooking with them.”

I can’t help but think that if more churches looked and acted like Cafe Appalachia, then there would be a whole lot fewer church buildings on the market.

Grace and Peace,
Chase