Mahalia, Martin, and Lessons for Preachers

I love this story of how one of he greatest moments in history almost didn't happen.

After she had given an amazing performance in front of the crowd of 250,000 people, Mahalia Jackson was sitting on the stage when the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr came to the podium.

Pastor King began to read from his prepared remarks. If you watch the video you can see it. For the first 12 minutes of the speech, King looks down from time to time - checking his manuscript.

And then, Mahalia Jackson shouted to King "Tell them about the dream, Martin! Tell them about the dream!"

This was not the first time that King and the Gospel singer had shared a stage. In fact, they had developed quite the friendship. And this was also not the first time that King had talked about his dream. And so Jackson called out, "Tell them about the dream, Martin! Tell them about the dream!"

And then, according to Clarence Jones, King took his manuscript and set it to the side of the podium and set his hands on the side of the podium. Jones said to those standing nearby, "These people don't know it, but they're about to go to church."

And from that point, from when he says "I still have a dream" (12:13 in the video) to the end of the speech, King does not again look down to his prepared remarks. Like a jazz improviser, King weaves together ideas from other speeches, images from Scripture, and the mythology of America to create a masterpiece. It seems clear that he is sharing his heart and his passion with the crowd.

As preachers, we are taught to prepare. We are taught how to do exegesis and how to shape a sermon and how to craft language. But I wonder how many of us have learned to improvise?

As preachers, we step into the pulpit and we pray that God would give us the Word that our community needs to hear. But more often than not, there is an asterisk on that prayer. "Give me the words," we pray, "As long as they are the words on this manuscript. Let your Spirit move through me, in exactly the way that I expect it to."

I am not saying that manuscript preaching can't be Spirit-filled. It absolutely can.

But there comes a time when we have to set the manuscript off to the side and share our passion with the crowd. There comes a time when we are called to tell them about the dream.

Fellow preachers, share your passion with the people whom you serve.
Tell them about the dream! 

Clarence Jones was an advisor to the Rev. Dr. King, and the author of Behind the Dream: The Making of the Speech that Transformed America.

Watch the full version of King's speech from the March on Washington:

In Defense of $700,000 Crosses

Earlier today, popular blogger Rachel Held Evans posted a story from her hometown of Chattanooga (which also happens to be my hometown). It was about a church in town which is erecting large set of crosses at alongside an extremely busy stretch of interstate. The reaction from the satirical "Stuff Christian Culture Likes" sums up the reaction I saw across my social media streams:

A church in Chattanooga is spending $700,000 on crosses but I'm sure the sick & widowed & orphaned will understand. http://t.co/0SmUfYHgi5
— Stephanie Drury—SCCL (@StuffCCLikes) August 8, 2013

What a waste! What about the poor! What about mission! No one needs that! What a perfect example of what is wrong with the conservative Christianity!

(From the Crossing Church FB Page)

My first impulse was to chime in. But I didn't, I sat on my hands and thought.

I thought about the time I spend helping congregations and other organizations think about communications. And they say to me - How can we spend money on that? It's so wasteful! No one needs a website! Every day, congregations around this country are spending money to share the Word of God. Newsletters are printed and mailed. Advertisements are bought in newspapers and radio. Mailers and invitations are sent out. This congregation may have spent a lot, but I bet you that the cost per impression - given the amount of traffic on that stretch of road - is significantly less than the average church newspaper ad.

One of the things I love about the church is that it has traditionally been the patron of the arts and other projects that would not have been possible in any other way. I am grateful that they church through history has paid artists (sometimes quite handsomely) to create art that tells the story, art that has been passed through generations. And this project - whether you like it or not - is a form of art, and stands in the long tradition of large-scale church-funded projects.

Could the money have been used to help the poor? Of course!
But the same could be said of each and every dollar spent by the church.

In fact this is precisely the argument used against any spending in the church that one disagrees with. It is a strawman argument, used only against those with whom we disagree. Unless a church has zero expenses and zero assets, it could be said that they are using money that should be used to care for the poor. And while there are some of those churches, there aren't many.

Frankly, I think we should become worried when we find the words of Judas in our mouths. "Why was this perfume not sold for three hundred denarii and the money given to the poor?" (John 12:5). Or, perhaps, with the Pharisee we pray "I give you thanks O God, that I am not THAT sort of Christian."

At the end of the day, though, it is not about the money. It is not about budgets or about roadside crosses.

It is about how easily Christians find it to criticize one another. The church is every bit as divided as the political sphere. And that is troubling.

There is criticism that comes from love. There is helpful correction within the Body. But that is not what we are doing. Both "sides" believe that the other are not "real Christians." Both publicly belittle, chastise, mock, and ridicule the other. Both are quick with the playground defense, "But they started it!"

In what way is that helping the Gospel?

I don't want to be a conservative Christian or a liberal Christian. I want to be a Christian. Period.
I don't want to criticize the choices of other Christian communities. I want to do what is best for the Gospel here in my context, and assume others are doing the same.
I don't want to try and knock other Christian leaders down a peg. I just want to do my best to care for the flock that has been entrusted to me.
I don't want to sit back and try and judge the orthodoxy of people I have never met. I just want to do my best to understand the God who has loved me and called me to love my neighbor. 

-------------

UPDATE: My friend Aric Clark wrote a wonderful response to this post, which offers some great pushback. Aric is - as always - insightful and gracious in his critique. You should go read it at Two Friars and a Fool.

The Ends of the Earth, Easter 4C

A sermon for the 4th Sunday of Easter, preached at St. John Lutheran Church of Prairie Hill on April 14, 2013. We welcomed the Rev. Mike Rinehart, bishop of the TX - LA Gulf Coast Synod of the ELCA, as our guest preacher. Texts: Acts 9:36–43 and Hebrews 12:1-3.

For more from Bishop Mike, visit his blog, follow him on twitter, or connect on facebook.








Subscribe to Sermon Podcast via Itunes

Subscribe to Sermons in an RSS reader

Scheduled Social Media?

Buffered tweets. Scheduled Facebook posts.

Almost every social media guru you consult suggests it. I get why. Sit down and do all that sort of stuff at once, then schedule it to come out at the best times for your audience (which may or may not be the best times for you as a content creator). I get all the very good reasons why you should schedule your social media.

But I don't. I won't. Here is what often happens during and following a crisis when people have scheduled tweets:

(This is not a one time occurrence. Someone does this every time - it just happened to be @ArtieDavis this time).

There are lots of good reasons to schedule tweets. There is one exceptional reason to not do so: It is called social media. Your audience can't have a conversation with a post scheduling app.

Do you want to excel at social media?
Quit talking at people, and starting talking with them.

Oreos in the Dark

$4,000,000 for 30 seconds. That's how much airtime for a Super Bowl ad cost this year. $130,000 per second. And that is just the airtime. Don't forget all the money paid to the advertising agencies. And the celebrities who got paid to appear in those ads.

And for all that, the best ad of Super Bowl XLVII was not even on TV.

In the middle of the Super Bowl, the lights went out at the Superdome in New Orleans. A power outage. CBS put up its best talking heads to try to fill the time. And over on Twitter, everyone at home was having a great time making Super Bowl Blackout jokes.

In the midst of it all @Oreo posted this:

No need to pay for air time. Oreo captured the moment perfectly. Or rather their social media team did. 15,500 retweets later, Oreo had a viral hit their hand. And how much does their Twitter presence cost the company? Oh yeah, that's right. Nothing. Nada. (Sure, sure. They pay their social media team. But no air time cost. No celebrity endorsements to pay.)

And here is the kicker. Your congregation has the exact same tools at their disposal.

That is the power of social media. The playing field is leveled. Everyone has the same tools. Everyone has the same power to share their message. Everyone has the same megaphone to talk about their work.

Which really only leaves me with one question: Why is the church not making better use of this tool? Why would the church pass up this opportunity to share the good news with the world?

Be a Scrooge!

(Altar of St. John-Prairie Hill
with memorial candles)

In the middle of our Advent celebrations, along come John the Baptist proclaiming his radical message: Dream Small!

A little longer than my average sermon, here is audio for yesterday's sermon. Where the heart break the Newtown tragedy meets the hope of Advent. "Be a Scrooge" a sermon for the 3rd Sunday of Advent, Year C.


Subscribe to Sermon Podcast via Itunes

Subscribe to Sermons in an RSS reader

Occupy Wittenberg?

It started with one man, a pastor. Fed up with watching the poor in his community get taken advantage of so that those who were wealthy could get even wealthier, he protested publicly in the town square. Making use of the latest technology, his ideas spread. What was a local protest became a worldwide movement, spread farther than could ever have been imagined before. Those in power, those with the most to lose, dug in their heels and refused to hear the very real critique against the corruption and abuses of the current system, but the protest only grew stronger.

Looking out over the past few weeks, and the growth of the Occupy movement, this story is familiar. It started with one blog post, and grew into a movement making use of social media to spread the word. Concerned with the well-being of the poorest in the US, they have lobbed some very real critiques at the current political and economic systems of the US; but those in power have not listened.

But this is not the story of Occupy Wall Street, this is the story that we recount every year on this day, the story of the Reformation. While Martin Luther's critique of Rome and her power structure had a profound theological motivation, he appears to have been compelled to act - above all else - out of pastoral concern for his flock. Watching the poor families under his charge hand over what little they had only to have that money go into the pockets of bishops who already had more wealth than they could possibly spend, Luther could not remain silent. And, thanks to the new technology of the printing press, Luther's ideas spread farther and faster than anyone could have anticipated.

Am I overstating the case? Am I seeing connections where there are none? Have a listen to Martin Luther himself, in the 95 Theses he posted on the evening before All Saints Day, in 1517:

46. Christians are to be taught that, unless they have more than they need, they must reserve enough for their family needs and by no means squander it on indulgences.

And as he later explains what he means by this thesis:

There are many who have neither bread nor proper clothing and yet, led astray by the din and noise of the preachers of indulgences, rob themselves and bring about their own poverty in order to increase the wealth of the indulgence sellers.

Certainly, Luther is not opposed to wealth. He goes on to argue in other places that the princes and public officials have an obligation - in their public office - to acquire and accumulate a certain amount of wealth ... But that wealth is to be acquired and accumulated for the public good. That is, certain members in society as Luther envisioned it had an obligation to acquire wealth so that they could make sure that everyone else in the town/province had enough. How different would our conversation be today in America if this was how we viewed wealth?

Martin Luther saw the poor being exploited by the wealthy, and he attacked the underlying theological system that allowed such exploitation to take place. At the end of the day, the truth our current system believes in is this: Those who have the most deserve it, because they have worked the hardest. Make no mistake, this is a theological claim. But the Reformation truth is this: "Work" and "deserving" are not a part of the gospel lexicon, but grace and mercy are. On Reformation Day, in a country with a predominantly Protestant Christian population, I cannot help but wonder: Where is the grace and mercy of our political and economic systems?

Faithful Conversation

On Sunday night, I was up late watching the news come in that US Special Forces had killed Osama Bin Laden. The next day, processing my reaction to the news, I felt the need to have some sort of service at the congregation I service - some opportunity for us to pray and talk together. I bounced the idea off colleagues who helped me think whether or not this was really the appropriate course of action.  In the end I decided to go ahead and have a service of prayer and conversation on Tuesday night.

I had a couple of reasons for deciding to do this. First, this was a historic event - one of those, "you will remember where you were when you heard," events. And I believe that we need to make the faith community a part of those events in our lives. As people try to figure out the meaning of major events in our world, the church cannot afford to sit on the sidelines. People are looking for answers - and if they cannot seek those answers in the church, they will look for them elsewhere. The death of Bin Laden certainly will not be the end of terrorism, but it is a symbolic victory - and who knows better how to talk in symbols than the church?

Second, the death of Osama Bin Laden brought forward raw emotion for many people. It brought back to the surface feelings of grief, anger, and fear that originated in the terrorist attacks of 9/11. The church needs to be a safe place for people to come and live out those emotional responses. A place where the people of God can expose their wounds and their scars, seeking the comfort of one another and the presence of the Great Healer.

And third, the death of Osama Bin Laden stirred in many people the tension of their dual citizenships in the United States and the Kingdom of God. As Americans, there is a natural response of nationalistic triumphalism, a certain rejoicing at the execution of justice. As children of God, a pondering of how this fits into God's justice and Jesus' command to love our enemies.

And so I called for a service of prayer and conversation. It was intentionally not a "class" or a conversation in the Parish Hall. We met in the sanctuary. The people of God find our meaning in worship, in prayer, and in Scripture. I sent out emails, spread the word over facebook, and on Tuesday night about 30 people gathered in the sanctuary of St. John - Prairie Hill.

I prepared a bulletin of sorts. It had a bare bones liturgy, but more importantly it had some pertinent prayers and readings from Scripture. I didn't know if we would use the liturgy, but I wanted it to be available as a structure in case the conversation got heated or we need the structure to move us forward.

We opened with the gathering litany from the ELW Vespers service, and a prayer for the Spirit's guidance in our worship and conversation. And then, I opened the floor. We talked about how we heard the news, and our initial reactions. We talked about how our reactions changed after we had sat with them for a couple of days. As we talked, from time to time I would stop the conversation and offer a prayer or a reading, to keep us centered. Almost everyone present shared in some way, and in all we talked for about 45 minutes. We closed with Luther's evening prayer and a benediction.

The prayers I included came from ELW with some slight modification. The were the prayers for enemies, prayers for our nation and our leaders, prayers for those in military service, the prayer of St. Francis, and a few others. The readings I included were the judgement of Cain, Romans 12:2-21, and Matthew 5:38-48.

Everyone in that group that gathered expressed some sort of conflict about their reactions. What did it mean to pray for our enemies? What if you were not able to forgive your enemies - not just Bin Laden, but the people in your life who had wronged you? And we talked about those tensions, together. I shared with them the story of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, and his conflict over the decision to take part in the plot to assassinate Hitler. I talked a little bit about Luther's two Kingdoms. I'll be honest, I don't remember everything I said. What I know is that, at the end of the night, we had all expressed our relief at the death of Bin Laden, our struggles to love and forgive our enemies, and our desire to become people who live into the Sermon on the Mount.

And I took a number of other things away from this. Even in the very conservative area where I serve, there was a real sense that rejoicing was not the right response to the death of another. As much as my clergy colleagues have been talking about this over the last few days, you would think that most people's reaction was one of joy. I certainly did not see that. Relief is a much better word. Less a shout of alleluia, and more a collective sigh of relief.

I also observed that people were hungry to hear what the church has to say. They wanted to know, what does this mean for my faith? What does Scripture say? I think we (clergy, church leaders) have done the people of God a disservice by not making the church a place where people can come to make sense of the events of the world. I'm not talking about political commentary or partisanship -- they can get that everywhere else. Nor am I talking about being berated by a prophetic pastor who tells them how far short they fall and how wrong their politics are. No, I am talking about a safe place, where they can engage in dialog with each other, the Scriptures, and their pastor about how their faith can help them understand the political and historic events of the world.

Finally, I observed that the congregation was hungry for me, as their pastor, to be honest and authentic with them. The room opened up when I talked about my own struggles to love and forgive my enemies. Had I tried to say that I am able to live into the Sermon on the Mount without struggle, they probably would have tuned me out. Yes, pastors, speak with authority when God calls us to. But, there are other times when your people need to hear you say, I don't know, or I pray for God's strength - because God knows there are people I struggle to forgive.

Pardon the rambling nature of this note. I am still very moved by the experience that we had, talking and worshiping with these people whom I love so much. Their faith inspires me, and their willingness to listen for God's voice speaking through the Body. It was a small group that gathered, but I think that what took place last night at Prairie Hill was exactly what everyone needed.

Why Twitter Matters

I avoided Twitter. I set up an account about a year and a half ago (@rev_david), but it largely sat their unused. I didn't see the point. It seemed like a waste of time. I couldn't see the personal or professional benefits of learning my way around Twitter. Sure, I used Facebook extensively. I blogged. I was not opposed to social media. I just didn't see the benefit of this particular form of social media.

About a month ago, I thought I would dive in.  I connected with some people. I had some good dialog with new people and with old friends. As a theological, homiletic exercise, I tweeted as Judas.

And then came Wednesday, April 25. It was in a flash on my Twitter feed, which I keep up while working in my office, that I saw the news of tornadoes in Alabama. Tornadoes headed for Chattanooga, my hometown, and the current home of family members and friends.

So I searched. Who was tweeting from Chattanooga? From North Georgia? I contacted my parents, to check and see if they were okay. They were without power, riding out the storms. Sitting at my desk in Brenham, Texas, I had better information about what was happening in and around Chattanooga than they did at times. Through Twitter, I knew exactly when and where the tornadoes where appearing in the Chattanooga area. All of a sudden, Twitter didn't seem like a waste of time.

And then came tonight, Sunday, May 1. Relaxing after getting home late from a very long Sunday, I was talking with recently met colleagues about "low Sunday," the first Sunday after Easter. Just about ready to call it a night. And then, a tweet: "President to have a press conference at 10:30 pm." People began to speculate. This was sudden. This was late at night. What could it be?

Many guesses. Then, a few rumors. Then a flood. "POTUS Press Conference national security related." "Related to Bin Laden." "Reliable sources say Bin Laden is dead."

I turned on my TV. Nothing. The Apprentice was still on NBC. The news channels said it was a security related press conference. That was all. And then, some fifteen to twenty minutes later, "Confirmed: Osama Bin Laden dead."

Ok, it was fifteen to twenty minutes that the news was out on Twitter before in the media. That may not seem like much. But the fact is, this was reliable information, spread by the people, directly to the people; without filter. And all of a sudden, Twitter didn't seem like a waste of time.

Yes, you can still waste time on Twitter. Yes, there is a great deal of inane content on Twitter, and even more unreliable information disseminated through Twitter. Like any crowd-sourced information source, Twitter has its flaws. And yet, at times it works. And when it works, we get a glimpse of what social media is designed to do.

Many thoughts running through my mind tonight, waiting for the press conference to begin. But among them is this: Twitter does not seem like a waste of time tonight.