In the sermon I delivered (and posted) yesterday I said that I'd actually written another sermon which I came to realize was not the sermon I needed to deliver. For what it's worth, here's that first version:
After coming home
from General Assembly this past summer, our Director of Faith Development, Leia
Durland-Jones, told me that I should watch the Sunday morning service and,
particularly, to listen to the sermon that had been given by the Rev. Nancy
McDonald Ladd. Not that much after, our
Director of Administration and Finance, Christina Rivera, told me that I needed to hear it – “You’ve really got to listen to this sermon!”
she said. It’s really, really
powerful.” That was in early July.
Well … a week or
so ago, while I was home sick, I finally cued it up and watched. And they were right. Oh my goodness, they were right. I put a link to the video of the sermon – and
the whole service, actually – in the insert in your Order of Service, and I
strongly encourage you to watch it, because it isn’t just Nancy’s words, but
her delivery – and not just her tempo, tone, and body language, but her presence as she delivered it – that
makes it so powerful.
I mention all of
this because in this powerful, and truly prophetic, sermon, Nancy says some really
important things about just what it takes to make “a people of prophecy,” and,
perhaps more specifically, what it will take to make us – Unitarian
Universalists – able to live into this role.
She grounds her
prophetic charge in the importance of relationship
for building up our communities into places where real change, real
transformation, can come about. She quotes the anti-racist organizer MickeyScottBey Jones – whom she calls “wonderful” and “deep-spirited” – as saying:
relationship
is the sandpaper that wears away our resistance to change. Relationship is the
abrasion that agitates enough to make a way forward. Relationship, consistent and ongoing
encounter with people and perspectives different than our own - it smooths the
way for the sacred, even as it rubs us raw.
There is a
holy abrasion of the spirit born in deep relational encounters across
differences. We, as congregations and as
a movement, exist to be instruments of those very encounters.
Let me say that again – “We, as congregations and as a movement,
exist to be instruments of those encounters.”
You may have seen the bumper sticker that says, “The most radical thing
we can do is introduce people to one another.”
The Rev. Mark Morrison-Reed has said, “The task of religious community
is to unveil the bonds that bind each to all.”
In other words, as Nancy said, we exist to facilitate these kinds of
deep, real, and, yes, raw-rubbing encounters.
And yet we
know [Nancy continues] that there are so many ways to hide from the discomfort
inherent in a holy abrasion. There are plenty of opportunities presented each
and every day in the life of the church to back away from the hard work of
continually and repeatedly relating meaningfully to one another and the world.
And one of
them is to insist [she says], at any possible juncture, that you get what you
want out of the experience of congregational life, as if church is a short
order menu and community is a product to be consumed on your terms, in your
time, without making you uncomfortable or demanding a whole lot of you in the
first place.
One of the
ways to block the holy abrasion that brings change is to imagine that both
congregational life and religious liberalism itself are contests compete with
winners and losers and if we don’t get our way – well – we are wanderers, worshipers – and lovers of leaving,
are we not?
Does any of that
resonate with you? I can tell you that as
I was watching the sermon, when I’d reached this point, I was glad I don’t wear
mascara. She’d brought me to tears. There she was, behind that pulpit, speaking
to a couple of thousand of us UUs, and speaking truth to us. Hard truth.
Challenging truth. Truth we need
to hear.
One of the ways we
hobble ourselves – as a movement, and here in our own “local franchise” – one
of the ways we hobble ourselves is by spending … wasting … so much of our time
and energy on trying to make sure that everything is arranged just so … just so
that I feel comfortable and
affirmed.
When we hear – as
Christina reminded us just a couple of weeks ago – that one task of the
religious enterprise is to “comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable,”
we give a deep sigh of gratitude that there is a place like this that will offer
us such comfort. We rarely, though, if
ever, see ourselves as the ones in need of afflicting. As I said last week, we’d like them to change so that we can just get
on doing what we’ve been doing, the way we’ve been doing it. But, as I also said last week, that’s just not
the way things work.
Nancy got even
more specific, and offered us language that will no doubt be used for years to
come:
[T]he
greatest impediment to the efficacy of the liberal church today [she said] is
not the real fights and real failures we get into when we’re doing hard work – it is the fake fights [that’s the
phrase!] we waste our time on while our
own people and the people all around us struggle to survive.
I worry
literally every day [she continued], that in this moment of utmost urgency -
we, the very ones the world has been waiting for, are wasting our capacity to
build change on fake fights that distract us from the work at hand.
We go over
and over again who’s a humanist and who’s a theist and who got their way in
what bylaw discussion and what color we should paint the church bathroom - so
protected by our busyness that the real fights, the honest conversations, and
the transformative sandpaper of real relationship presented to us Sunday after
Sunday, week after week, slip right past us and we remain thoroughly agitated
but fundamentally unchanged.
“Thoroughly
agitated but fundamentally unchanged.” As
I watched the video I sat there, weeping at the power of this prophetic
preacher who was speaking truth to us – to me – with such love. Yet I was weeping, too, because her words
were unveiling in me a deep sense of cynicism, revealing to me my own crisis of
faith. “Thoroughly agitated but
fundamentally unchanged.” “Thoroughly
agitated but fundamentally unchanged.”
Again and again,
that crowd of a couple of thousand Unitarian Universalists applauded and
cheered as Nancy challenged them with hard truths. I’ve preached hard-truth sermons here, as
well, and people have afterward told me how brave I was to do so, commended me
for taking such a risk. Yet as I
listened to Nancy do just this, I was struck by the idea that, really, there is
so little risk involved. Those people in
that hall that Sunday morning wanted
to be challenged – they ate it up. You
all want me to challenge you – I’ve
also received applause and affirmation whenever I’ve spoken “hard truths with
love.” We want to be challenged, but I fear that we want to be challenged
because, on the one hand, we know – know in our bones – that something is
wrong, and it fills us with anxiety, stress … with agita. On the other hand, though, I fear that we
want to be challenged because we know – know beneath our consciousness of our
knowing – that by listening to these hard truths our agitation can be assuaged,
and that by affirming them we can allow ourselves to remain, “fundamentally
unchanged.”
Nancy told me that
when she looked out at that crowd of thousands of Unitarian Universalists from
around the country and around the world and said she worries, “literally every
day that [we] are wasting our capacity to build change on fake fights” that she
meant exactly that. She meant that she
worries about this all the time, that we, as a movement, are far too often “thoroughly
agitated and fundamentally unchanged.”
She told me that she understood my frustrations, but she also said that
she did not share my despair.
Instead, in her
sermon she’d decided to take advantage of that bully pulpit to publicly declare:
I tell you
what, I’m tapping out. Right now. And I invite you to join me. I’m tapping out of every fake fight in our
congregations and our movement about getting what I want or what you want or
what we think we want - because in this age the stakes are too high and we
don’t have time for fake fights anymore. […]
[T]he world
does not need another place for like-minded
liberal leaning people to hang out together and fight about who’s in
charge. The world does not need a place
where you or I or any single one of us is going to get what we want.
What the
world needs is a movement like ours to step more fully into our higher calling
- to serve as an instrument for encounter - with one another, with the holy and
with the world. So that we might love
more fully, and speak more truly and serve with greater efficacy, in such a
time as this.
More tears poured
down my cheeks, my friends. New
tears. Because her faith had reignited
mine; her hope had brought my own back to life.
Having lived with this sermon – its vision, its challenge, its truth,
its hope – I can honestly say that I feel thoroughly less agitated, and can feel the stirrings of change.
Pax tecum,
RevWik
2 comments:
Great post, Minister. Can you help on how to validate a degree from another country because I'm a foreigner wanting to do missionary work overseas?
This wwas lovely to read
Post a Comment