Monday 25 May 2015

May 24 2015 sermon: The Guidance Counsellor

"... now I am going to him who sent me. None of you asks me, ‘Where are you going?’ Rather, you are filled with grief because I have said these things. But very truly I tell you, it is for your good that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Counsellor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you. When he comes, he will prove the world to be in the wrong about sin and righteousness and judgment: about sin, because people do not believe in me; about righteousness, because I am going to the Father, where you can see me no longer; and about judgment, because the prince of this world now stands condemned. I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. He will glorify me because it is from me that he will receive what he will make known to you. All that belongs to the Father is mine. That is why I said the Spirit will receive from me what he will make known to you."
(John 16:5-15)
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

     Her name was Mrs. Kostagner. She was the guidance counsellor at the high school I attended back in Scarborough so many years ago. One year (it was probably around this time of year actually, and I think it was as I was about to move from Grade 11 into Grade 12) after I had picked the courses I was going to be taking in September I got a message that Mrs. Kostagner wanted to see me. This was strange. It wasn’t quite as terrifying as being called to the Vice Principal’s office, but - still - this was strange. Something was wrong. Something must be up. Why would the guidance counsellor want to see me? I showed up rather hesitantly at her office, and she invited me in and asked me to take a seat. She wanted to discuss my course selections. She was concerned, she said, because she thought I was making a mistake in some of the courses I had selected - that I was selling myself short in some areas and she was concerned that I might start to limit my prospects for post-secondary education in an area that I would find fulfilling for the sake of taking courses that I thought I should take but didn’t really seem to have much interest in - and perhaps not even much aptitude in. We had a good conversation and she made a lot of good points. I told her I’d think about what she had said. She really had made some good points. I ended up changing some of my course registrations on the basis of what she had said, and - frankly - those decisions changed my life. It wasn’t a religious epiphany of any sort. This had nothing to do with faith. It wasn’t life-changing in that sense. But if I hadn’t responded to what Mrs. Kostagner had said to me, my life would almost certainly have turned out very differently. I would have no way of knowing how to get in touch with her (if she’s even still alive after all these years) but I owe her a "thank you" for the advice that she gave me in her office on that day.

     I thought about Mrs. Kostagner and the advice she gave me as I read this passage. Jesus refers to the Holy Spirit as our "Counsellor" - one who will guide us "into all the truth." That’s a journey that begins with a step of faith: a willingness to say to those around us that we believe, that Jesus is the centre of what we believe and that we invite the Holy Spirit to be our guide as we explore this faith that we choose to proclaim. Nine people have just done that. Males and females, some younger than others - but in Christ the differences don’t matter. All that matters is what binds us together: a common belief that Jesus is with us, and a constant willingness to be led deeper into that relationship by the Holy Spirit, whose coming we mark on this Day of Pentecost - the day generally thought of as the birthday of the church; a day appropriate for welcoming those who make the choice to proclaim themselves to be disciples of Jesus.

     It’s a shame what’s happened with confirmation over the years. Like so many other things in the Christian faith, it’s been turned into a rite of passage by many, an excuse to celebrate, maybe a reason to have a party or give a card or a present or to have a cake. There’s nothing wrong with any of those things, but confirmation should be so much more. And, so often, confirmation becomes a graduation from Sunday School rather than a welcome to the church; it becomes an end rather than a beginning. From time to time we get bats in the church, and there’s an old joke that gets told about church bats - when you find one all you have to do is confirm it, and it will never come back again. That’s what we want to avoid. That’s what we don’t want to happen. We want people who stand up and proclaim themselves to be Christians to think of the church as their second home and their fellow church members as their second family. And the responsibility of making sure that happens rests on all of us.

     For those who are already members - the Holy Spirit guides us in gifts of hospitality, gifts of teaching and gifts of wisdom and knowledge - all of which we’re called to share in order that the church might be a welcoming place for anyone who proclaims Christ as their Lord. For those who have just become members - the Holy Spirit guides you (and all of us) into a deeper knowledge of Christ and a deeper understanding of what it means to be a disciple of Christ - the privileges and the responsibilities involved in being a Christian; the great benefits of belonging to Christ, but also the sacrifices that are sometimes called for from those who belong to Christ. For those who may still be considering becoming members - the Holy Spirit is guiding you as well, asking you to go deeper into what faith in Christ is all about and challenging you to be willing to make those same professions of faith; that you be willing to declare yourself a follower of the way laid out long ago by Jesus.

     The Holy Spirit - whose presence is always with us, and whose coming so long ago we commemorate today - is a counsellor who will guide us into all truth. The ultimate truth is found in Jesus; the ultimate truth is Jesus. May we all - young or old and no matter how long we’ve considered ourselves Christians - commit ourselves each day to growing just a little more into his likeness, and may we grow together as a family with a common faith in the one who is with us always.

Monday 11 May 2015

I've Been Thinking About The New Curriculum

Recently, the Ontario Government has introduced a new curriculum which includes revised sex education teaching. It replaces a curriculum that virtually everyone agrees was out of date, but has become a source of a great deal of controversy. I've watched the debate with some interest. Most of the opposition has come from what would be called the conservative religious movement - and if the new curriculum has accomplished nothing else, it has given conservative Christians and conservative Muslims a point of connection, which has some value I suppose. But what bothers me - based on reports I've seen in the news media, signs I've seen held aloft at protests and postings I've seen made on various social media sites - is that so much of the opposition to the new curriculum seems based on misunderstanding, misinformation or downright deceit. There seems to be an "ends justifies the means" approach being taken. "I'll say anything - no matter how much it stretches the truth - to derail this." From a Christian perspective that bothers me. Honesty and truth should be at the heart of what people of faith stand for. That has been discarded by too many people in this debate.

I admit that I have mixed feelings about the curriculum. Most of the content I have no problem with, but I concede that it's imperfect and needs some tweaking. There are some legitimate concerns being raised about the age appropriateness of certain topics that are introduced in certain grades - although I'm not sure I understand the concern about teaching young children the proper names for body parts. (Should schools also dispense with singing "head and shoulders, knees and toes"?) But that really is tweaking. It doesn't require throwing the whole thing out, nor does it really seem to justify the rabid anti-curriculum protests that have been spawned. Make no mistake - I support people's right to protest, and I support people using their democratic right to try to get the government to change course. But such attempts should be based on honesty - on serious criticial evaluation of the curriculum, not on knee jerk reactions based on questionable interpretations.

I've read the curriculum, and as I said I've seen the basis of at least some of the protests. Here are just a few observations of where the protests seem unfounded:

Opponents of the curriculum have claimed that it encourages children to consent to sex. It doesn't. It teaches the concept of consent, so that they will know that it's wrong for anyone to touch them sexually without their consent, even if the person is in a position of authority: pastor, priest, teacher, police officer, parent - anyone else. If you don't give consent to be touched, then you shouldn't be touched. I think children should be taught this from a very young age.

Opponents of the curriculum have claimed that it teaches and encourages masturbation. It doesn't. It merely points out that masturbation is normal activity.

Opponents of the curriculum have claimed that the new curriculum encourages anal intercourse. It doesn't. It includes anal intercourse in a section dealing with STDs and it actually points out that abstention from all sexual contact is the only way to avoid STDs. It's mentioned, I assume, because I have read over the years that some teenagers engage in oral/anal intercourse in order to avoid pregnancy, but not thinking of the risk of STDs.

Opponents of the curriculum claim that it "promotes" or offers graphic information about homosexuality. In fact, it teaches respect for those who come from same sex families or who question their own sexual orientation. I should think that being respectful of those who are different is in keeping with the example of Christ.

Opponents of the curriculum claim that it was designed by a pedophile. While Ben Levin was the Deputy Minister of Education for part of the time that the curriculum was under development (and he left office in 2009, before it was completed), the reality is that the Deputy Minister would not be directly involved in such work. He wasn't sitting at his desk writing the curriculum. There were literally thousands of people involved in the work. Levin would have been one very minor voice with lots of eyes looking at it as it was developed.

Opponents of the curriculum claim that parents were given no input into the development of the curriculum. In fact, each school in Ontario has a school parent council, and every school parent council was encouraged to offer input.

Opponents of the new curriculum claim that it takes away the right of parents to be the ones who teach their children about sex. In fact, parents have the right to opt their children out if they so desire. And the curriculum encourages children to seek out guidance from parents, doctors, religious leaders, etc.

In general, there's all sorts of misinformation about the ages at which concepts will be introduced, and there's the continuing barely disguised smear about "Ontario's lesbian premier" - which is trying to fear monger among the religious right: "the gays are coming to get your kids." Interesting that in the previous dispute and protests over the curriculum, when Dalton McGuinty was premier, no one complained about "Ontario's straight premier."

As I said, I fully support the right of parents or anyone else to protest the new curriculum, and there are aspects of it that could be improved and should be tweaked. But continuing to base the protests on groundless accusations serves no productive purpose, and - speaking from a Christian perspective - gives no honour or glory to Christ.

May 10 2015 sermon - Salvation Without Limits

O sing to the Lord a new song, for he has done marvelous things. His right hand and his holy arm have gotten him victory. The Lord has made known his victory; he has revealed his vindication in the sight of the nations. He has remembered his steadfast love and faithfulness to the house of Israel. All the ends of the earth have seen the salvation of our God. Make a joyful noise to the Lord, all the earth; break forth into joyous song and sing praises. Sing praises to the Lord with the lyre, with the lyre and the sound of melody. With trumpets and the sound of the horn make a joyful noise before the King, the Lord. Let the sea roar, and all that fills it; the world and those who live in it. Let the floods clap their hands; let the hills sing together for joy at the presence of the Lord, for he is coming to judge the earth. He will judge the world with righteousness, and the peoples with equity.
(Psalm 98:1-9)
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

     I truly dislike hyphens - with a passion. Yes - hyphens. Sometimes known as dashes. That little line that gets inserted between two words. Sometimes they serve a purpose, I suppose - but most of the time they just irritate me, and I really, really dislike them. Why, you may ask, do I dislike hyphens so much? Well, it’s because by their very nature hyphens place all the attention on the adjective rather than on the noun - but shouldn’t the noun really be the foundation of what it is that’s being talked about? One example of what I dislike about hyphens is illustrated by nationality. The hyphenated nationality seems to me to be an opportunity to identify yourself by your past rather than by your present. I’m a Canadian. That’s how I self-identify in terms of nationality. On those census forms you get every few years when you’re asked to identify your ethnic origin, and there are all sorts of options given, I’m one of those radicals who simply checks "Canadian." I have nothing against people being proud of their heritage, but as far as I’m concerned a Canadian is a Canadian. But hyphenated Canadianism is all the rage. So, a lot of people don’t call themselves Canadian. They’re English-Canadian, or French-Canadian. Or Polish-Canadian, or Ukrainian-Canadian, or Indo-Canadian, or Chinese-Canadian, or African-Canadian, or Italian-Canadian. The list goes on. To me, the emphasis seems to be on the adjective rather than the noun - but what unites us as a nation should be the fact that we’re Canadian first. At least as far as I’m concerned.

     What really bothers me is that the same thing happens within the church. We should all be Christians. That should be the fundamental identity we have - Christian; follower of Christ; disciple of Jesus. But we choose to differentiate ourselves and divide ourselves up. Denominations are a problem in that regard, but I’m thinking of something that’s become all the rage in recent decades. More and more, it’s not even denominationalism that’s separating Christians. Now we have hyphenated Christianity. You almost have to use an adjective to identify yourself. Now we have liberal-Christians and conservative-Christians. We have evangelical-Christians and fundamentalist-Christians. We have charismatic-Christians and mainline-Christians. We have progressive-Christians and even post-theistic-Christians (and that last one is double hyphenated!) We put the emphasis on the adjective to define what we believe rather than on the noun. And by doing so, it’s no longer Christ who holds us together as his one body - it becomes what we choose to believe about Christ, or how we choose to follow Christ, or in what manner we choose to worship Christ that becomes the key. For me - no. Christ is quite sufficient as the centre of who and what I am. I’m a Christian. I reject the labels. I reject the adjectives. The noun is sufficient. I’ll be simply a disciple of Jesus - and let others make of that what they will.

     Why bring all this up today? What does it have to do with the Psalm we just read? How does it tie in with a Sunday on which we celebrate the idea of family, reflected in Mother’s Day, or Christian Family Sunday as we call it in the church? Well, the Psalm is about the unity of God’s people, and it’s about where the centre of that unity was found - in God; in God’s works and in God’s nature. It was God who was the defining element in the identity of Israel as the people of God. Israel was the people of God because Israel was the people of God. It was that simple. It’s not that the community wasn’t diverse - it was that neither the community nor the individual members of the community decided to be the people of God. They were the people of God because God made them the people of God. And so Psalm 98 becomes a celebration of God and of God’s works among his people. The people of God didn’t always agree - they fought a civil war against each other - but in the end, regardless of the nature of the disagreements or the passion that marked them, they were the people of God. For them, this identity as the people of God was their salvation. They would not let it go. They would disagree with and fight and sometimes, tragically, even kill one another. I’m not justifying any of that, nor do I think God approved of it, but in the end, for all that, they were collectively the people of God. It’s something, unfortunately, that’s been lost in modern-day Christianity, which has come to be plagued with labels and hyphens, with every group thinking that they have the truth to themselves, and that to be a "real" Christian you have to agree with them.

     The Psalm says that "all the ends of the earth have seen the salvation of our God." Salvation means basically being saved from the natural consequences of our actions. It doesn’t mean being let off the hook and given a free pass, but it does mean that we can live without fear and put our faith to work as best we can. The people of God in the psalmist’s day understood that. They weren’t always in agreement on everything - but they were the people of God; they lived as the people of God; they were known as the people of God - and "all the ends of the earth" saw a difference in them because they were the people of God.

     "All the ends of the earth." That’s where we make the linkage to Jesus and to the children of God who are the Christian family today. Jesus came for the world. Jesus came to ensure that the salvation of God would, indeed, be seen by "all the ends of the earth." Jesus came to give his followers a common identity as a family, as children of God and as brothers and sisters to one another. Christians who claim that they have all the answers and that everyone else better do things their way and believe everything they believe (or else!) have missed the point. Our only identity as Christians is in Christ. As long as we’re in Christ all other things are secondary at best. And that can’t be limited to any one group or anyone people. It does extend to "all the ends of the earth." It is, indeed, salvation without limit!

Monday 4 May 2015

May 3 2015 sermon - The Fruit Of A Christian Vine

"I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener. He cuts off every branch in me that bears no fruit, while every branch that does bear fruit he prunes so that it will be even more fruitful. You are already clean because of the word I have spoken to you. Remain in me, as I also remain in you. No branch can bear fruit by itself; it must remain in the vine. Neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in me. I am the vine; you are the branches. If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing. If you do not remain in me, you are like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned. If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you. This is to my Father’s glory, that you bear much fruit, showing yourselves to be my disciples."
(John 15:1-8)
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

     It’s funny how we have a tendency to look for the negative. I alluded to that a little bit last week when I was reflecting on the need for Christian love to be actively controlling us, part of which means that we have to try to be positive and encouraging rather than negative and condemning. And then I read our passage for today and found myself thinking about the negative. I discovered - somewhat uncomfortably - that the first thing I took from this passage was a renewed appreciation of where the traditional image of hell for non-believers came from. That’s what leaped out at me. Seriously. If we take this "literally" then at least in part we do see the fiery furnace of hell don’t we. Separate from Jesus and be burned. Of course the problem with that is that we can’t take the words literally because Jesus isn’t a vine and we aren’t the branches. It’s an image Jesus is using that’s trying to make a point.

     This image Jesus used is addressed to those who call themselves believers. The point seems to be that if you’re a believer (if you’re a part of the Christian community) who isn’t really connected with Jesus then you really can’t be a productive member of the community. Some might argue that point, but I still see it as the point. It’s not a threat of burning in hell - it’s more of a warning that without Jesus you simply have no logical role in the Christian community that's founded on Jesus. It's a plea for those who want to be disciples of Jesus to stay close to Jesus. But then I realized that there’s an even more important image in these words of Jesus. There’s the image of bearing fruit.

     For Jesus, the key to what he was saying in this exchange with his disciples revolves around two things. First, his disciples are to remain in him. He says that seven times in these eight verses (and once he speaks of the consequences of not remaining in him.) But then he goes on to explain why that's so important. Then he focusses on bearing fruit. That image appears seven times in the passage. So, we’re the branches attached to the vine that is Jesus and we’re supposed to bear fruit. The question is what kind of fruit? If you're an apple tree and you produce cherries there's a problem. There's nothing wrong with cherries but apple trees have to produce apples or they have no real purpose. So, what's the fruit of the Christian vine?

     I think traditionally we’ve understood that in evangelistic terms. I’ve heard many preachers look at this image in that way - so that the "fruit" are the converts you create; the folks you bring into the Kingdom. If you’re not converting people, there’s something wrong with you. But is that really productive fruit? I know people who've interpreted the image that way and it seems to become prideful; it gets into the notches on the belt mentality - you keep track of how many you’ve "brought to the Lord," so to speak. Which, of course, seems to give a lot of credit to us rather than the Holy Spirit for people’s faith. "Look at me - I’ve led "X" number of people to Christ. Yay for me!" I don't think that's what Jesus meant by fruit.

     It’s probably better to understand fruit from Paul’s perspective in Galatians. He was producing a lot of converts in the Gentile world - or at least his ministry was. But those converts weren’t "fruit" to him. They were the result of the Holy Spirit working in the hearts of those who heard the message and saw it being lived out and came to understand the difference it made. Now there's the key to understanding Jesus' words! You’ve heard Galatians 5:22: "the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control." To Paul, the "fruit" was not the results of our labours, it was how we lived and the qualities we displayed. It seems to me that’s how we should read these words of Jesus. Not as a threat that if we don’t convert enough people we’re going to be punished for not doing it or they’re going to be punished for not listening to us but as a reminder that if we don’t allow ourselves to be transformed more into the likeness of Jesus - displaying these qualities Paul wrote about and that Jesus lived out - then we’re not being productive members of the church; something's gone wrong and we're not properly connected to the vine.

     The fruit is the way we live and the qualities we show in our daily lives. Converting people says nothing about us. The biggest hypocrites around can put on a good show and result in people being "converted." The question is whether we’re showing fruit in our own life. Are we living our faith in such a way that we’re growing in holiness? Not by external measures - how many are we converting - but by internal measures - are we more able day by day to be a reflection of Jesus to those we encounter? Matthew Henry wrote that "from a vine we look for grapes, and from a Christian we look for a Christian temper, disposition, and life."

      I’m interested in the idea that healthy branches will bear much fruit and we are branches growing from the vine that is Jesus. The great theologian Augustine said that "whatever is cut off cannot live apart from the vine." That’s a way of saying that we can’t live as Christians unless we’re truly open to Jesus, connected to Jesus and even clinging to Jesus. Jesus promises never to let us go; we need to make the same promise to him. It’s easy to get fixated on the negative ways of interpreting this passage - the burning imagery that brings hell to mind, or the idea that we have to be converting people day after day if we’re going to show the fruits of our faith. It’s easy to read this passage as one of judgment and threat, but it’s important to remember that Jesus didn’t say "abide in me or else." Jesus said "abide in me as I abide in you." That’s more than good advice and it’s more than an invitation. That’s a promise - that no matter what happens, Jesus will be with us; that no matter what happens, Jesus will hold onto us; that no matter what happens, God in Jesus will bring all things to a good end. With Jesus in us, our lives and our way of life changes so that we become more and more an image of him. That new life we lead is the fruit of a Christian vine.