“Strangers, Friends, Neighbors, Enemies and Us” (sermon with readings)

Put simply, love is life’s yearning for more life. It is the artist at work on a new painting. It is the conversation between friends on a winter afternoon that turns deeper, becomes livelier as it bares the soul of each friend. It is the weeds that sprout up in the most desolate places. It is the heartbeat that returns to the grief-stricken heart. To describe life as a steady march toward death is to forget about love’s part in it. As individual beings, as individual forms, we age, we die; our time is transient. Love outlasts every individual form. It is the light from a star, visible millions of years after the star has died. It is the light from a candle, remembered in the heart long after no wax remains. Love if life’s yearning for more life. It is always with us, and we live in it.

***

PRAYER:

I invite you now into a time of meditation, reflection, and prayer. Let us join together into this contemplative time.
Continue reading

Posted in Sermons, Sermons - Text | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Poem: Santa Letter

Santa Letter

 

At my age, I seldom hear reindeer in the night.
The wise and the wondrous, in search of the Christ child, pass my door by.
No crying here. It’s as it should be.
My eye swims in miracles, my neurons hum Handel,
and I am nothing special.
Far from the cradle, close enough to Heaven
the angels know where to reach me
in a pinch.

I have it easy.
I never have to crane my neck too much to watch the stars take their places.
Let me come to the little children. On my knees
amongst glorious gizmos and treasured characters,
let me serve those who serve joy.

If you would bring a rapping to my door, friends,
bless you. Come with the spirit of the Shamash candle,
remind me that if I give myself away seven times,
on the eighth day there would be enough light
For tradition to hold, and travelers to make their way.

Posted in Other poetry | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Sermon: Was Jesus a UU?

Was Jesus a UU?

Rev. Bob Janis-Dillon

The First Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Hunterdon County

12/3/2012

 

You may have heard the one about the two strangers who met while crossing a narrow bridge. They got to talking, and soon discovered they both were Christians. “That’s wonderful!” one man said. “What denomination?” “I’m a Baptist.” “Me too! Northern or Southern Baptist?” “Southern.” “Wow, me too!” “Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?” “Northern Conservative Baptist.”

“Me, too! Northern Conservative Great Lakes Baptist Regional Council of 1879, or Northern Conservative Great Lakes Baptist Regional Council of 1912?”

 

“Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Regional Council of 1912.”

 

So the second man said, “die heretic scum!” and pushed him off the bridge.[i]

 

Emo Phillips first wrote that joke, and it’s been retold many times, because it gets at a long-standing truth. Christians have been arguing with each other about whose is the “real” Christianity for over two thousand years now. Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox Catholic. Lutheran Protestant or Calvinist Protestant. Christianity has split more often than a couple on a soap opera.

Many of these schisms have occurred over the true nature of Jesus. In our tradition, Unitarians became their own group, and got their name, over the belief that Jesus was a great man, but not a god. There was only one God: hence the name Unitarian. Universalists, back in the early 19th century, believed that Jesus saved all souls, not just believers. They got the name Universalist because they held to Universal Salvation, all people reaching heaven through Jesus.

Nowadays, Unitarian Universalists live in, and embrace, a scientifically literate and religiously pluralist age. Because so many of us have doubts about the resurrection or the virgin birth, and because so many of us find truth to not be the exclusive province of Christianity but present in Buddhism and Paganism and many other religions as well, many Unitarian Universalists do not self-define as Christians. Some Unitarian Universalists, I’m sorry to say, even denigrate Christians en masse as a group that believes outlandish fairy tales, or a group that hypocritically espouse one set of values while living another (as if we’ve never fallen short of our ideals.)

I don’t want to contribute to the divisive, “us and them” view of humanity that is so prevalent in the world today. And yet I titled this sermon, “Was Jesus a UU?” I did this because I wanted us to not be so quick to throw Jesus of Nazareth out of our faith just because there are Christians we disagree with on certain issues. Yes, few of us believe the world was created in six days, as some Christians do. We are perfectly fine with the phrase “Happy Holidays” and tend to push the point a bit further by pointing out the pagan origins of the Yule Log and the quote-unquote Christmas tree. We don’t believe Buddhists are going to hell – in fact, as Universalists we believe whatever happens to us after we die, we are in this together, now and henceforth.

However, we don’t need to disavow Jesus for any of this. There are no instances of Jesus claiming that the world was really created in six days, nor did he make a big deal about his own birthday. And the only time he mentions Heaven and Hell is when he is urging his followers to feed the poor and welcome the stranger and visit the prisoner. “That which you do to the least of humanity, the least of the King’s brothers and sisters, you do to me,” Jesus says.[ii] In other words, you want to take care of me, take care of those who need help the most.

But I’m getting ahead of myself. For the sake of us reclaiming Jesus as our own, I will now make a case that Jesus may have been at least in sympathy with the Unitarian Universalist point of view. And, in deference to the Christian tradition of preaching, I’ll do it as a four-point sermon. First: Jesus was opposed to dogma; second, that he was tolerant; third, that he was radical about social justice, and fourth, that he was mystical about heaven. Ready? Here we go.

First: Jesus was opposed to dogma, an iconoclast of the highest order. In the Gospels, the Pharisees tell Jesus he can’t heal on the Sabbath; Jesus replies that man wasn’t made for the Sabbath, but the Sabbath for man.[iii] In other words, religious traditions like the Sabbath are meant to be of help to us, not the other way around. Time and time again, Jesus breaks the religious laws of his day, for a greater purpose. He speaks up in Temple when he is supposed to stay quiet; he has dinner with people no good religious person is supposed to sit down at a table with. The Pharisees are horrified by this. According to the Gospel, they are the most upright, particular followers of the law that there are. They have dotted every I, crossed ever t on the road to holiness.[iv] But Jesus says, it’s not about following the rules. Don’t try to get 100 percent A+ in holiness, because it can’t be done. What’s important is how you treat your sisters and brothers. Not whether you observe this religious law or that one.

Even what you believe isn’t as important as what you do. Jesus didn’t say this in so many words. He used parables. In his most famous parable, the Good Samaritan, a man on the street who has been attacked and left for dead is helped by a Samaritan. The Samaritan tended to the man’s wounds with own hands, pouring healing herbs on, wrapping him in bandages. Then he picks him up, puts him on his donkey and takes him to an Inn, and pays for a room so he can recover.[v] Now, it’s significant that this man was a Samaritan. In first-century Palestine, a Samaritan was a nobody, less than a nobody. They aren’t considered real Jews; in fact they are considered dangerous outsiders. It’s like a white person being rescued by a black person in the 1950s, or being rescued by an Arab the year after 9-11. So here is Jesus saying, the person who reaches out to her neighbor is really the good person. Doesn’t matter that they live somewhere else, are of a different tribe, believe something else. We’re all in this together. All neighbors, and what matters is how we treat each other, not dogma. Jesus is very clearly saying: the person you disparage today may save your life tomorrow.

Which brings us to my second point: Jesus was not only opposed to dogma, he was strongly in favor of tolerance.  He hung out with everybody. He ate with tax collectors and sinners, talked with prostitutes; had women in his inner circle in a male-dominated society; healed the sick in an age where no one went within five feet of lepers and other outcasts. Tolerance and respect for all is a pillar of our Unitarian Universalist tradition, and Jesus is certainly a source of that tradition. He saw people as far too quick to condemn others based on what they felt was right and wrong. Far too quick to play God. “Judge not, lest ye be judged,”[vi] he said. Don’t take notice of some fault in your neighbor without noticing your own.

The religious people of his day responded to this, “but Jesus, what about people who are doing wrong? Don’t we have to judge them?” Well, Jesus answered that with the woman who had committed adultery. The proper judgment of the day was that a woman who had committed adultery should be stoned to death (actually, the definition of adultery at the time was different for women then for men). And Jesus responded, “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.”[vii] Of course, as you can imagine, no one picked up that rock. Jesus is very clearly sending a message: we’re all human, all of us do some stuff right and some stuff wrong, and any of us who think with certainty that we can judge the actions of others is suffering from hubris. We’d be a lot better working on our own faults, then looking around for someone else to call a sinner or an evildoer or a bad person.

Now, Jesus did think we should strive for good. My third point is that Jesus had a vision of justice that was dangerous to the established order, then and now. You heard the words of the reading, Jesus famous sermon: “Blessed are the poor.”[viii] These words, from the book of Luke, are so scandalous that Matthew changed it to “blessed are the poor in spirit,” which reads a lot better to middle-class tastes. Blessed are the poor in spirit; a nice sense that anyone of us who have hard times can be a part of the kingdom of God. But Jesus not only says “blessed are the poor”, not “poor in spirit” in Luke, the word he uses in Hebrew for “poor” means someone who is a destitute beggar. It’s as if he is saying blessed are the homeless, they are the chosen ones in heaven. Scandalous! The homeless junkie on the corner; the street preacher; the borderline insane woman at the bus station? Theirs is the kingdom of heaven?

For a long time, Western Europe and America has fostered this myth of a kind of middle-class Jesus, not too rich, not too poor, that espouses some good deeds: you know, giving a little money to charity now and then, but at the end of the way gives heaven to people who believe the right way, and belong to the right church, the people who are proper. This is simply not who Jesus was. First of all – and I’m indebted the scholarship of John Dominic Crossan here[ix] – first of all, there was no middle class in first-century Palestine. Secondly, if Jesus was a carpenter and the son of a carpenter, in First-Century Palestine that would mean that Jesus was even lower than a peasant. The peasant were subsistence farmers, 2/3 of their crop went to the rich. Those who couldn’t even rent a plot of land to farm on were artisans. A carpenter was not a middle-class profession but a nobody. Jesus gathered around him fisherman, unemployed relatives, and tax collectors, who were sort of an equivalent of debt collectors and loan sharks today – they did a necessary job but were maligned by everyone. As John Dominic Crossan put it, Jesus’ Kingdom of Heaven was a kingdom “of nuisances and nobodies.”[x] When Jesus says the poor shall inherit the Kingdom of God, he is turning the established order on its head.

Nor is this a mere philosophical exercise. There were, in fact, numerous revolutionary movements in that era, poor people’s revolts where apocalyptic preachers gathered hundreds, sometimes thousands of followers and attacked the Roman rule. All were extremely unsuccessful, in military terms; thousands of people in Palestine and Egypt and other places were crucified by the authorities, just as Jesus was.[xi] The royal powers-that-be thought it ludicrous that the poor thought they could be in charge in society in any real way. This is a conversation that is still ongoing. Jesus’ call for radical poverty – to give all one’s possessions to the poor and seek a different kind of success than material success – is often ridiculed, but it is still a part of the conversation.

Jesus was more than just an apocalyptic, poverty-proclaiming rabble rouser, though he was that. The Jesus of the Gospels outlined a religious perspective that was as beautiful as it was mystical. “If you only had the faith of a mustard seed, you could move mountains.”[xii] But what is this faith, that so little of it could change the world? Well, Jesus answers this question in parables and riddles, speaking of the Kingdom of God, the true, hidden nature of the universe in which the first shall be last and the last shall be first. This is of course paradoxical, but Jesus insists this paradox is the true, ultimate nature of the universe.

In a much misquoted passage, Jesus says if you want to live life to the fullest, you must first give it up.[xiii] What does that mean? To really live, you must first give up life. Many people have their own view on this enigmatic passage. I think of it through the lens of Buddhist non-attachment. Jesus didn’t know of Buddhism, as far as we know, but he did seem to espouse the view that clinging to the material things of this life wasn’t the way to happiness and inner peace. You have to be able to give life up to get the most of it. He said this again and again using different metaphors. The kingdom of heaven belongs to the servant, the one who serves others, he says to his disciples. The kingdom of heaven belongs to those who are like children – to the innocent, to the helpless, to those who are willing to live in wonder and dependence. The kingdom of heaven belongs to the poor.

And Jesus said that the kingdom of Heaven was at hand. Some take this to mean that the apocalypse could happen any minute, but I prefer to take it more literally, that the kingdom of heaven is near enough to touch, to taste, to feel, near enough that we can live in it this day, today, today, if only we let go to hanging on to the existing structures of this life, the things we have, the things we want, the things that protect us from nameless fears; and letting go and embracing that all that really exists are meaningful relationships. Give away our lives and live in love.

So there you have it. The four point sermon on why Jesus was Unitarian Universalist: he attacked dogma; he preached and lived tolerance; he advocated a radical egalitarianism of justice for all, starting with the poor; and he used poetry and parables to hint at a world where the good life was accessible to all, at a moment’s notice. In short, Jesus may not have been officially a member of the Unitarian Universalist Association, but he wasn’t a million miles away from us, either.

It’s an interesting argument. But I must add that my sisters and brothers of the Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912 would probably respond to this sermon by claiming that I had chosen texts selectively from the Gospel, and preached those texts from my own skewed interpretation. I suspect they’re probably right on both counts. Everyone, throughout the history of Christianity, has constructed their own Jesus from the texts and traditions, according to what they want to see. I am no exception.

Are their texts in the Bible that are more dogmatic in nature, less centered around tolerance and justice? Of course. There are reasons why conservative evangelicals always start with John 3:16, “I am the Way the Truth and the Light” and rarely with “Blessed are the poor.” Almost every statement you can make about Jesus, you can find a text somewhere that seems to disprove it. One of the reasons Jesus has been such a fascinating figure for the millennia is that he is not monolithic. You can find many different Jesuses through the ages, and all have something to say to somebody.

So I would ask us to be humble enough to recognize that we don’t know that our Jesus is the true Jesus. And I would ask us to be bold enough that we can claim Jesus in our own tradition, that there is, very clearly, in the Gospels a Jesus outlined who follows his own drummer, loves everybody, tries to make the world better for those who are the worst off, and has a vision of the good life here and now, right in the midst of our troubles and woes. Does that make him Unitarian Universalist? I don’t know. But this is the Jesus our Unitarian and Universalist ancestors proclaimed, and the world is not so divided that no one would pay heed to such a Jesus today. To all who would listen, let us speak of a radical love for all that responds even to hate, a world led by servants, children, nuisances and nobodies, and a heaven near enough to touch.

Blessed be, AMEN

 

 

 


[i] see Emo Philips tell the whole joke at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2y_kI_-x1Q. It’s been rated one of the top jokes of all time.

[ii] Matthew 25:31-46

[iii] Mark 2:23-27

[iv] Whether the Pharisees were really so dogmatic, to the point of forbidding healing, has been questioned by modern scholarship, both Jewish and Christian. It could be that later writers made them out to be so to prove a point.

[v] Luke 10:25-37

[vi] Matthew 7:1

[vii] John 8:3-11

[viii] Luke 6:20

[ix] from Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography, John Dominic Crossan

[x] ibid. The “class status” of Jesus is much debated in historical Jesus scholarship. Other scholars, such as Geza Vermes, suggest that tekton (“handyman” or more specifically carpenter) might instead be a reference to a highly literate rabbi.

[xi] ibid.

[xii] Matthew 17:20

[xiii] Matthew 16:24-26 The King James translates it, famously as “what profits a man to gain the whole world, but lose his soul?” This is beautiful poetry but a poor translation: in reality the same word, psyche (life, being, the whole of a man) is used where KJV puts “life” and “soul”. In King James Jesus’ echoes between Matthew 16:25 and 16:26 are lost.

Posted in Sermons, Sermons - Text | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Questions about your spiritual growth – part 2

 

Seven Suggestions toward Spiritual Growth (by Bob Janis-Dillon)

Here are seven tips on how to nurture spiritual growth on the individual level.

  1. 1.       Attend Services whenever you can. Services are the heart of our communal religious life as a congregation. The more you attend, the more you get out of them. It’s not just about being entertained by a magnificent choir, or an inspirational speaker with great hair (though we have both). Attending services is a religious practice – getting in the habit of doing it, as an individual or as a family, will affect your life in subtle and profound ways. Just as importantly, attending services is collective religious practice – so it’s not just a question of “what will I get out of it?” as “does someone else benefit from my being there?” And I will say, even though humble congregants don’t always believe me, the answer to the second question is always “yes.” This is what it means to be in worship, shaping the worth of the world, together. It is a rehearsal for the kingdom of heaven, a practice of beloved community.
  2. 2.       Attend to your spirit every day. Every day, try and find the time to center yourself and remember that you are alive. How you do this is up to you.Meditation works for many, as does prayer. You could find this centering in exercise, in being outdoors, in being with others. But allow yourself, every day, to acknowledge your fundamental existence. Don’t skimp on this practice.
  3. 3.       Be in accountable relationship to others who support, trust, and respect you. While every human being is in some sense responsible for her own life, we are not isolated beings, and were never meant to be. Having people in our lives who can remind us of our best selves is essential for spiritual growth. Here at the congregation, Covenant Groups are one way to do this.
  4. 4.       Ask for help. “Going it alone” when resources are available isn’t courage, it’s an inability to be vulnerable. There are people who want to help you in your time of greatest need. Find the ones you can trust – they do exist!
  5. 5.       Make life meaningful. If you want to know the “meaning of life” intellectually, get a dictionary. Really, the meaningfulness of life comes in how we practice it. No matter who you are, it’s 99% certain  that you will feel life as more meaningful if you offer your time to others; if you acknowledge the specialness of other people and yourself; if you hold lightly onto stuff and tightly onto giving; and if you seek to live authentically. In every hour of your life, if you look for it, there is an opportunity to do something a little bit wonderful. If you don’t believe me, try looking for these opportunities for a few days.
  6. 6.       Take volunteerism as an opportunity for spiritual growth. There’s always a lot to be done around the church. But if lay leaders see it all as chores to be done, sooner or later they’ll burn out, no matter how noble the chores are. Leadership is an opportunity for spiritual growth – to learn about ourselves through serving others. As much as possible, try to “follow your bliss” in your areas of service to the Fellowship, and you’ll get more out of it.
  7. 7.       Have fun with it. This is a very un-American thing to say, but I don’t believe we were put on this earth to be productive.  The intention and spirit with which we perform the acts of our lives can be as important as the acts themselves. Humor and humility are related words: if you ever feel yourself burdened by being the center of the universe, take two steps to the left. Better yet, start dancing.
Posted in Prayers & Meditations, Random Writings, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Questions about your spiritual growth – part 1

Spiritual growth can be hard to define. Everyone’s spirituality is unique. Below are some questions that may help you explore your own personal spirituality, and how you might like to see that spirituality deepen.

  • Where do you find your spirit nurtured? Do you enjoy being out in the open air, or reading a book, or in conversation with another person?
  • What are your spiritual goals for the next few months, year, or years? What direction are you hoping your life to go in?
  • Do you have spiritual practices (or non-spiritual practices) that help you feel more grounded, peaceful, inspired, generous, courageous, loving, and whatever else you’d like to feel? -If not and you’d like some, we have some ideas.
  • If you had a magic wand and could change one thing about the world, what would it be?
  • Is there an activity where you get so engrossed in it, you don’t even notice time passing?
  • Remember one instance when you felt most helped in your life. Is there a way you’d like to extend that helping to others?
  • What would you like to offer the world – or, in the words of the poet Mary Oliver, “tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?”
Posted in Random Writings | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

Sermons I like: Gail Geisenhainer on the beloved community

I think I could listen to the Rev. Gail Geisenhainer preach every day. She’s one of our finest. Here, she shares what is so special of religious community.

 

http://www.uuaa.org/images/stories/audio-sermons/gail_geisenhainer_3june2012ten_steps_for_building_beloved_community.mp3

Posted in Sermons, Sermons by others (sermons I like) | Leave a comment

Sermon on stress (audio)

Delivered a couple years ago – a spiritual response to stress. Happy listening!

 

http://chirb.it/BDce59

Posted in Sermons, Sermons - Audio | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

“A Rainbow Connection in the Neighborhood” (text)

“A Rainbow Connection in the Neighborhood”

Rev. Bob Janis-Dillon

The First Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Hunterdon County

October 14, 2012

 

(If you know it sing it out loud before reading any further…!)

It’s a beautiful day in the neighborhood,

a beautiful day for a neighbor…

would you be mine?

could you be mine?

won’t you be my neighbor![i]

 

For children and parents of a certain era, children’s television was Mister Rogers Neighborhood and Sesame Street. The two shows were on almost every day; Kermit the Frog and King Friday were regular visitors to households across America. But I am not celebrating Fred Rogers and Jim Henson, the originators of these shows, merely because they were famous. As Fred Rogers himself said, “Fame is a four letter word, and like tape or zoom or face or pain or life or love, what ultimately matters is what we do with it.”[ii]

Henson and Rogers were prophetic people. Each had a vision for what they wanted to accomplish in their lives. Their individual visions took time to develop, but once they knew what they wanted to do, they did it with all their heart. And they did it for the children, for our future. Some of you know there is a traditional greeting among the Masai people of East Africa, “And how are the children?” Kasserian Ingera¸literally “are the children well?” They ask this of one another because the future of the people depends upon the well being of the children. How are the children?

There are many Unitarian Universalists I could have spoken about today who have dedicated their lives to the well being of children in our society. We have deep roots in children’s development: Abigail Adams Eliot and Elizabeth Parker Peabody, who pioneered nursery and kindergarden education in this country, Dorothea Dix, Joseph Jordan, Arthur Lismer, Bronson Alcott, and Peter Cooper, who founded schools for African-Americans, impoverished youth, young inventors, young philosophers, and young artists, Sophia Lyon Fahs, who more than anyone else helped create our own religious educational approach of fostering young people’s own ideas and spirituality.[iii] This tradition continues with many in this room who work in education, serve on school boards, raise children, and care for kids in so many ways.

Fred Rogers and Jim Henson were not Unitarian Universalist. Mister Rogers was an ordained minister in the Presbyterian Church. Jim Henson grew up in the faith of Christian Science, and though in later years he was not an active participant in any organized religion, he remained a deeply spiritual person. I celebrate them today because I believe the way they made use of their lives and abilities was of great significance, and we can learn something from them both.

They were starkly different people.  Fred Rogers was a rather awkward, stiff man; even in adult company he spoke in that meticulous-enunciating-every-word-drawl that you may have heard on his show.[iv] He was an only child growing up in Western Pennsylvania. He went into television after watching some and being disgusted by how bad it was. He thought to himself, well, that’s terrible, I must be able to do better than that. He went to New York and was soon working as a floor manager on shows like NBC Opera Theater and Gabby Hayes’s western hour.

Although these shows were popular, they still didn’t satisfy his vision of what television could be. In his words, Mr. Rogers felt that those who work in television are chosen to be servants – and as servants, that they have an opportunity to meet the deeper needs of those who listen day and night. So he moved back to Pittsburgh and helped start a public television station, WQED, the first community-sponsored station in the United States. And he began his own show, “The Children’s Corner”, kind of a precursor to Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood, which began nine years later, in 1963. He got his seminary education around then – not to be a congregational pastor, he always knew his ministry was in television, and he always saw it as a ministry. He would wake up at 5 am every morning and spend the next three hours praying for everyone in his life, and then he would go to work.

The show Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood ran for over 30 years. It didn’t change much, in format, during all that time: Mister Rogers, walks in, sings some songs, changes his sweater, the show visits a fantasy land with some trains and a king and queen, Mister Rogers talks with some people in his neighborhood, like Mr. McFeely, the mailman, and then he changes his shoes and the show ends. It is, to be honest, almost excruciatingly boring from the viewpoint of most adults. But Mister Rogers didn’t make the show for adults. There are no knowing asides for the benefit of the parent population, as you find in almost every kids’ movie of the last twenty years, there are no adult jokes flown way over the head of the infant. Mister Rogers has his focus on one thing – the little child on the other end of the camera. He always tried to imagine, in his mind, one child sitting at home, and speak to that child. Not any child in particular, just imagine there was one child watching who he needed to reach. He spoke slowly and carefully, didn’t try to be clever or wow them.

Because he wanted that child, whoever she or he was, to know that they were special, they were important.

You remember what Mr. Rogers said at the end of every show? “I think you are special. I like you just the way you are.” He said his grandfather, Fred McFeely, who the mailman was named after, who used to spend time with Fred as a boy, and at the end of the day, Grandpa McFeely would say, “you’ve made this day special, Fred, just by being you.” Fred Rogers spent thirty years, every single day, trying to get that feeling across to children. Think how many kids heard that – think how many kids in troubled homes heard that, and maybe, just maybe, against all the evidence around them, they believed it. He told kids they were special. That’s all he did, in his own brilliant, peculiar, incredibly persistent way.

Now Jim Henson – Jim Henson was cut from a very different cloth than Fred Rogers.[v] Jim Henson grew up in small town Mississippi, where with his brother and cousins he would happily play in and around Deer Creek, a little river there, frolicking and daydreaming outside all day. Jim loved TV, especially the puppet shows like “Kukla, Fran and Ollie” and soon after high school he had a job in television, as a puppeteer. A year later, at 19, his “Muppets”, as he called them, were on the Tonight Show, and before Henson graduated from college the Muppets were starring in commercials for Wilkins coffee.

So with fame and fortune within his grasp, Jim Henson did the obvious thing: he packed it all in, handed over the business to his partner, and later wife, Jane, and went off to Europe to become a painter. Well, we might think he was crazy, but then, none of us came up with the Muppets. And maybe Jim just had a sense, I guess, that there was something in Europe he needed to find. Or at least that he needed to follow his heart.

As it turned out, Jim Henson did not become a famous painter – instead, he discovered, with fascination, the centuries-old traditions of puppetry in Europe. He came back with a new perspective on his art. As his wife Jane put it: “What Jim saw was that the puppet is as powerful as a human being . And in fact is more powerful – less concerned about what it looks like, more direct, more able to go to the heart of things…There is something about putting life in the inanimate doll. there’s a bit of divinity in it that all puppeteers understand.”[vi]

With a new sense of the divine power of puppets, Jim Henson rededicated his career to puppetry. But unlike Fred Rogers, Jim Henson was never the type to do one thing for thirty years. Although he was an incredibly hard worker, Henson said he never made a conscious career decision; he just followed one project to another to another. Jim Henson’s Muppets were on several quixotic episodes of Saturday Night Live, they were in several movies; including movies with pretty dark themes like Dark Crystal and Labyrinth; they were in Fraggle Rock as well as The Muppet Show, a variety show one eminent critic, a Unitarian Universalist minister, called “the greatest show in television history”[vii]; and of course they were featured in, and continue to be featured in, in Sesame Street.

Sesame Street was really the first fully intentional attempt to make television actually educational rather than just entertaining.  The research of many experts on child development went into it, and Jim Henson was just a part of the overall genius of the show. But Henson had no problem with this: he was always collaborative, always delighted to work with others. He brought out the best in others, often in wacky ways. When he played Ernie and Frank Oz, his legendary sidekick, played Bert, he loved to play funny tricks on Oz, just like Ernie would play on Bert. This would keep Oz on his toes and Oz, in his quietly brilliant way, would muster a response. The Muppeteers were never satisfied with the first take, they were always trying to see if there was something else they could add in there to spice it up. Henson would actually encourage his colleagues to upstage him – and so you had this group of highly creative people who were trying to upstage each other in this atmosphere of joyful chaos. Very, very different from Mister Rogers, who thought through, in advance, every single word he said on camera because he wanted to make the absolute most of his viewers’ time. Of course, they’re both right. As Henson said, there’s a lot of different ways to grow spiritually, we’re all growing spiritually all the time, even if we don’t notice it.[viii]

It’s kind of an urban myth that Jim Henson didn’t seek medical treatment for the virus that was to kill him, in 1990 at the age of 53, because he was a Christian Scientist. Henson grew up Christian Scientist, and even taught in Sunday School, but he stopped attending later in adulthood. He really just was hesitant to seek medical care, like quite a few men tend to be, and what he thought was just a bad cold turned out to be a virulent form of streptococcal pneumonia.

As I said though, Henson was a deeply spiritual person. He found inspiration in nature and never took it for granted, always stopping to notice the way the moon looked or a leaf on the ground. Interestingly enough, Jim Henson, like Fred Rogers, started the day with prayer and meditation (in his case, a few minutes). He said he thanked whoever is helping him – and he was sure somebody or something is helping him; he expressed gratitude for all his blessings, he tried to forgive anyone he was feeling negative towards, and he would try to bless everyone who was in his life. And this is interesting – he would especially try to bless anyone he was having any problems at the time.[ix]

Although an extremely optimistic person, who always felt he could succeed at his life if he really tried at it, Henson was also aware of the reality of death. He wrote a letter to his children to be read at his memorial service. Part of it read: “please watch out for each other and love and forgive everybody. It’s a good life, enjoy it.”

It’s a good life, enjoy it. You know, when I first thought about writing a sermon about these guys I knew there’d be plenty to talk about, they were amazing people. What I didn’t know at the time was just how grounded their work in a certain outlook on life, dare I say, a theological outlook. Frank Oz said if any character got too serious on their show there’s always another character there to blow them up,[x] so I’ll look out for the dynamite, but I do also know that Jim Henson said if there was a “message” to his work it was that life, and people, were basically good. Life is good, people are good. Sounds like a simple vision, doesn’t it? Easy enough to say – but to preach it, I mean to really sing it from the hills, it’s best to have a crew of creative collaborators, a lifetime of dedication to the spreading of love and wonder, and hundreds of furry, intricately-designed, imagination-ready, vehicles for the divine spirit. (And maybe we all, deep down in our most authentic place, are really  vehicles). Then you’re really saying something.

Or Mister Rogers, and his neighborhood. You know, Mister Rogers was never one to push his religion on others, but “neighbor” is a theologically rich term in Christianity. Christians are commanded to love their neighbor, and Jesus, in the parable of the good Samaritan, makes it quite clear that our neighbors are not merely those who look like us or act like us or believe like us, or even live near us. Our neighbors are whoever we meet on life’s roadway that we can serve somehow. Fred Rogers’ vision of the neighborhood wasn’t simply a location where everyone happened to be. It was a process of relationship rather than an accident of location: trying to be close to those around us, by taking a genuine interest in who they were. For him, it was in recognizing that God loved each and every one of us. Each and everyone of us are special, just the way we are.

So let us all, whatever our theology, seek to be a part of the neighborhood. Let’s see the magic of rainbows and the specialness of everyone, and sing it out in the way we live our lives. Because…

 

It’s a beautiful day in the neighborhood,

a beautiful day for a neighbor…

would you be mine?

could you be mine?

won’t you be my neighbor![xi]

 

 

 


[i] from “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood”

[ii] from his acceptance speech at the Emmy awards.

[iii] All of those pioneers referred to in this sentence is due to the exemplary research of Pat Kahn, http://www.uuca.org/race-to-nowhere

[iv] My research on Fred Rogers comes mostly from the excellent documentary, Fred Rogers: America’s Favorite Neighbor, produced by WQED. And a few tidbits from his Wikipedia page as well as http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/5943.

[v] much of the research on Jim Henson comes from The Importance of Jim Henson, by Deanne Durrell.

[vi] ibid.

[vii] Don’t quote me on this, but I believe it was Ralph Waldo Emerson.

[viii] his thoughts paraphrased from It’s Not Easy Being Green, by Jim Henson and others.

[ix] also from It’s Not Easy Being Green.

[x] ibid.

[xi] from “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood”

Posted in Sermons, Sermons - Text | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

“A Rainbow Connection in the Neighborhood” (audio)

Check this out on Chirbit

Posted in Sermons, Sermons - Audio | Leave a comment

The Prophetic Tradition

“The Prophetic Tradition”

Rev. Bob Janis-Dillon

The First Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Hunterdon County

October 7, 2012

Even though it begins with “in the beginning” and ends with the end of the world, the Bible is not a single, unified story. At least not in the way that, for instance, novels tend to be one story. The Bible is many voices in conversation with one another. The Bible was written by multiple authors. Even if you believe that all those authors were inspired by God, as Jewish and Christian tradition holds, it’s also true that each of those authors had their own unique style and personality. Some write love poetry, others account for the generations, who begat whom begat whom. Each writer has his – or maybe, in some cases, her – own perspective, from their own background and experiences.

Sometimes the writers of the Bible seemed to contradict each other. We see this in Genesis, where there are two differing accounts of the creation of humankind.[i]  The existence of multiple voices in the Bible has rather radical implications on the way we read it – yes, even for us Unitarian Universalists. Walter Brueggemann, the scholar of the Bible you heard from earlier, argues there are two competing narratives interwoven throughout the Bible.[ii] One is the narrative of empire, of accumulation. This narrative of empire tells the story of mighty kings like David and Solomon, who are said to be wise and brave and strong. Let’s bear in mind that their own official scribes, their own speechwriters as it were, may have had a hand in writing the Bible. Rulers almost always seek to justify themselves, and the rulers of Israel created a narrative that justified their rule.

So we have David the courageous and Solomon the wise. And maybe they were courageous and wise, we don’t know we weren’t. But did you know who created the great palaces of Solomon? According to the Bible itself, Solomon’s temple was built was thousands of slaves.[iii] Do you know what Solomon ate for dinner? According to the Bible, every day ten oxen, twenty cows, a hundred sheep, deer, gazelles, roebuck, and many birds were killed for his meals.[iv] Maybe he shared them. The text doesn’t say. We should be careful interpreting the Bible, it’s so easy to think it says what we want it to say. As Brueggemann reads it though – and I find his reading compelling – the text seems to be saying, “greed is good”. Solomon was clearly loved by God, says the text, because look at all the wealth he has. Consumption is glorified, and consumption comes through oppression, the slaughtering of one’s enemies, and enslavement. This is one of the places where the “Old Testament” gets the reputation that I so often hear – as a book of violence and an oppressive God.

And it would be easy to say “that’s just the way it was back then” – but this isn’t just ancient history, you understand. When we think about that wealth created by slave labor, another country’s history perhaps comes to mind. Historically, slavery built our current economic system, at least in part. And last I heard, war is still extremely profitable.

Along with consumerism and oppression, the third side of this unholy trinity is religion. A specific brand of religion that glorifies the empire and its rulers. This religion brings God near, names God, and claims God for one’s own. After he has built the Temple, we hear Solomon say, in the first book of Kings in the Bible, “The Lord has said that he would dwell in thick darkness, but I have built you an exalted house, a place for you to dwell in forever.”[v] Solomon is claiming God for himself, saying that God lives at the very center of his empire. Thus, to pray to God is to affirm Solomon’s rule. And the role of God, in Bruegemann’s words, is to “maintain our standard of living”; God solves our problems for us, and manages society so that we are prosperous. You know how strong this religious outlook is in America. You can find it expressed in New Age to fundamentalism.

Now, the prophets: the prophets present an alternative voice. Or rather, many alternative voices: the prophetic books of the Bible were written over many centuries – stretching from the time of the Jewish kings until the exile, where the Jewish people were held in captivity in Babylon, and beyond to the time of the Persian empire.  Four hundred years later, much of Jesus’ ministry clearly is in a prophetic vein.

So there are many voices that make up the prophetic tradition. It’s important to note that prophecy, in the Jewish and Christian tradition, is not the same as fortune-telling. These are not men and women taking clients to tell them about their individual futures (and there are women prophets in the Bible, by the way). While predicting the future was sometimes a part of what the prophets did, the Hebrew word for prophet, “navi”, meant someone who uses their mouth, a spokesperson. They were people who told truths, people who were audacious enough to speak for God.

They spoke about the future; they also spoke about the past. They presented a vision, not just of how things might be, but how things currently were.

In the alternate vision that the prophets preach, life is not an “onward and upward forever” of powerful empires. Many of them wrote during difficult times, times the Jewish people were powerless or enslaved, so it was obvious that life was not rosy. But the interpretation of this was very important. The prophets could have preached that life was hard, but God was just around the corner, looking to make the believers prosperous again. Think about our times in America, today – it’s so easy, so tempting to preach that God wants us to be successful, that we just need to get with the right program, drink the right tonic, use the right magic potion. Such remedies are always popular. They’re on every channel, preached at every demographic.

But the prophets – get this – they said God caused the devastation! That will make them popular, huh? God has no intention of always being on our side. And, furthermore, the prophets said to the people, God did this because you had forgotten God. Oh, you said you worshipped God, you built a temple, you performed all the necessary rituals. But the prophets said, you want to worship God, live the right way. Obey the commandments. Help the poor. You think building a grand temple, saying your prayers at night is worship? That’s just serving yourself. You’re trying to get God on your team. God could care less.

Here it yourself, the words of Isaiah 58, talking about the day of prayer, the fast day. He speaks:

“Look you serve your own interest on the fast day,

and oppress all your workers…

such fasting as you do today will not make your voice heard on high…

Is not the fast I choose to loose the bonds of injustice, to undo the thongs of the yoke, to let the oppressed go free, and to break every prison? is it not to share your bread with the hungry, and bring the homeless poor into your house…

Then you shall call, and the Lord answer, you shall cry for help, and He shall say, ‘Here I am.’”

If Isaiah was preaching today, he’d say, “so you say you have the ‘right’ religion? You see the believe the correct dogma, your mission statement is perfectly on point?’ Who cares. Look out the window. People are starving. The earth is sick, it’s going to fall apart in environmental devestation. Spare me your correct worship. Spare me your noble words of praise. Go out there and take care of my people, go liberate the people, go tend to the earth, or to hell with you.”

Strong words, I know. The prophets rattled the walls of decorum; they yelled out in anger. Frequently they compared Israel to a prostitute. Pretty misogynistic o today’s ears, I know, but just think: the glorious empire that David and Solomon had extolled in that same Bible, here’s Jeremiah and Hosea saying, it’s a harlot, it’s just trading stuff for money. That’s all it is.

So these prophets were certainly extreme – Jon Stewart had nothing on these guys and girls – but ultimately, for all their talk of devastation, they were trying to push the people to a vision of hope. The prophets preached that many people will go to God’s mountain, beat their swords into ploughshares, study war no more. The lion will lie down with the lamb, justice will be like a river and righteousness like a mighty stream.[vi] See they were frustrated because, like Dr. King who echoed those words centuries later, they could see the promised land, they knew there was another way to live. And they were trying to point us there.

And that right way to live? In covenant. In right relationship. They said, if you can see beyond the stuff, beyond the accumulation and consumerism, beyond the dog-eat-dog world, there’s a whole ‘nother world out there. “The Kingdom of Heaven is at hand” as Jesus put it. You want to gain life? First you have to lose it. You have to let go of life as a means of getting, of storing up, of trying to be great, and you have to allow yourself to be in harmony with the earth, to serve your sister and brother, to be a part of it all. When you lose your old life, a new life will come. Not in some heaven off in the clouds. Here. Now. [vii]

A new spirit in those dry bones, as Ezekiel put it[viii]: you’ll breathe in one day <>, look around, and say, “what was I thinking?” Hanging on, trying to get as much as I can. This is life. Letting go is life, not hanging on.

I could name you a thousand prophets throughout history, who have learned how to serve, to let go. You know many of the names: Gandhi, Mother Theresa, King, Olympia Brown, Henry David Thoreau. I’ll leave you with one: Clare Butterfield.[ix]

Clare’s a Unitarian Universalist who lives in Chicago. Since 1999 she’s led an organization called Faith in Place, which helps congregations from different faith traditions consider what their own faithful response should be to our ecology, and then helps these congregations achieve their environmental goals. As of April she’s worked with over 900 congregations – maybe it’s 1,000 now. Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh, Zoroastrianism, Baha’i, and Unitarian Universalist. She’s eager to work with every congregation, of every possible outlook and philosophy, if they’re willing to talk to her. She’s done everything from urban community gardens to irrigation systems to designing church buildings to discussion groups and sustainability circles to educating the youth, and giving them hope.

She also, she freely admits, made a lot of mistakes and had plenty of stumbles along the way. She’s no stranger to failure. And besides which, as everyone working in the environmental field knows, it can feel a little like hanging on to an iceberg with paper clips. If you’ll pardon the metaphor. Everything, all that work, can just slip away.

But you know what gives this remarkable woman – this prophetic woman – hope to do her job? It’s interesting, she said she was inspired by learning about the nonviolent revolutions in Czechoslovakia and Poland, the Velvet Revolution and the Solidarity Movement. The people in these countries lived under the repressive regime of the old USSR. Life seemed almost hopeless, hope like a puff of smoke in the distance. They were waiting for one day they didn’t know would ever arrive.

And what they decided to do in Czechoslovakia and Poland (and I know this myself secondhand, by the way, from a dear friend of mine named Eva who lived through those times) what they decided to do, in Clare Butterfield’s words, was to “live as if the reality of what they wanted was already here.” As if the change had already come, as if were already free. They decided to live as free people, to embrace culture, to practice the democratic spirit, to be autonomous. They lived as if the new world was already here, even though it plainly wasn’t. They didn’t ignore their grief – they felt it all the time – but they let their grief lead them to a stubbornness, a strength they wouldn’t otherwise have had.

So Clare Butterfield, 5,000 miles away, in Chicago, thinks about those revolutions n Eastern Europe, and she considers the environmental movement, and she says, “you know, the world isn’t the way we want it to be. But let’s be the change we want to see, in Gandhi’s world. Let’s start living it right now.” In her words, at Faith in Place they “obstinately and naively imagine a reality in which people are kind to one another. And we’re sincerely curious about a different way of seeing things.” Butterfield goes on, “In a tiny way we’ve created that reality. How could I leave now? It’s way too much fun.”

There is another way of being in the world. We want to be aware of the past, to draw strength from the prophetic tradition that insisted there was another way than grab the gold, oppress the weak. And then we have to live the future, be the future, right now. We can do this. We can do it today. May we live hope in our lives, and call a good future into being, as naturally as we draw breath in our bodies. Breathe in frustration with what is, and sit with it, until we are ready to breathe out visionary hope.

May it be so,

AMEN

 


[i] Genesis 1:26-27, Genesis 2:7-8

[ii] Walter Brueggemann, The Prophetic Imagination.

[iii] 1 Kings 9:15-21

[iv] 1 Kings 4:22.

[v] I Kings 8:12-13. This and the three previous references all cited first in Brueggemann, op. cit.

[vi] Various prophetic books of the Bible.

[vii] cf. Matthew 16:26-28. As I’ve said before, it’s critically important that the reader understand that Jesus uses the same word, psyche, for what appears in most English translation as two words, “life” and “soul”. The whole power of the passage is lost through this common mistranslation.

[viii] Ezekiel 37

[ix] From the wonderful Social Action Heroes: Unitarian Universalists who are Changing the World by Michelle Bates Deakin. Very inspiring book.

Posted in Sermons, Sermons - Text | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment