-or- How long, Lord, How Long?
"For surely I know the plans I have for you, says the LORD, plans for your welfare and not for harm, to give you a future with hope." Jeremiah 29:11
This passage from Jeremiah is beloved by many. And rightly so, for it is a word of hope and assurance from God. We are comforted in the knowledge that we have some One looking out for us, that some One has a larger plan for our lives.
If, however, by this passage--or by any other passage in the Bible--anyone comes to think that the life of the Faithful One is supposed to be without pain and suffering, that one is mistaken. How easy for one to think by Jeremiah's prophesy that 'If I am right with God, then God will keep me from all harm.' or 'Harm will only come to me if I stray from God's plan for my life.' When, in fact, we only deceive ourselves by these statements.
While we are suffering, we try to issue blame. Although many Christians claim to believe that Satan is the source of all evil, these same Christians end up blaming either themselves, another human being, or God for their pain and suffering. Blame must be handed out to an individual, or to a personified entity, in order for that blame to be cathartic. I believe that the reason we don't blame Evil for evil is because Evil has become an amorphous concept. We have rejected the personification of evil in the Devil, and most of us (whether because of the Church's weakened message, or because of cultural forces) think of evil as some kind of vague and general force...or still weaker, as some human affectation. The result is that when suffering comes to our lives, instead of turning toward God, others or self for strength, we turn away. In a spirit of blame, we turn against the good instead of turning against evil. And in this way, we play right into Evil's hand. For Evil only wishes to isolate us so that we are easier to tempt and torture.
What blessed joy is mine that, in Christ Jesus, I am not to blame.
As soon as we begin to suffer in any way, often times our first response is, "What did I do wrong?" We think or say to ourselves, "I must have offended God somehow. Why is God punishing me?" We assume that we ourselves are the source of the evil that has befallen us. I did something to deserve such suffering, therefore, I am being punished for my deeds. This base, initial reaction is so far from the concept of grace that one totally forgets the Cross. Such a reaction is paramount to saying, "Jesus' sacrifice on the Cross is not powerful enough to help me in the least." So strongly do we bind ourselves to our own sin! Even as Jesus is trying to tear that sin away from our grasp.
The truth is that our Father in heaven, "...makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous" (Matthew 5:45). In the Kingdom of God, we might reap only what we sow. However, in the Kingdom of the World--that is, here on earth--we cannot judge a person's character or actions based on the result, whether or not they end up blessed or cursed, prosperous or impoverished. Thus, we have no cause or basis for judging ourselves on account of what befalls us in life. For life in this world just doesn't make sense in that regard. The sun just shines, the rain just falls--neither the shining nor the falling is meant for me alone. No one can call down rain, and no one can tell the sun to shine--no matter what one does, good or bad. Ah, but what blessed joy is ours that no matter what happens, whether we are rained on or have light, we are justified by grace alone, and not because of our works. If you could judge my worth based on what sufferings I have had in life--I would be worthless. For the rain falls on my when I am righteous and the sun shines on me when I am sinful. There is no correlation...so let us not turn against ourselves. Our suffering is not a punishment, it simply is.
What blessed joy that you are not to blame, either.
If we cannot blame ourselves for this reason, then neither can we blame another. Because what is true of us is also true of our neighbor: if suffering is not our fault, it cannot be "their" fault, either. Why? Because we are all in the same boat. Sunshine and rain are conditions that come with being human. That is, suffering is a part of our human condition. We all suffer in our own ways. For this reason, we need salvation--we need God. The psalmist writes: "The days of our life are seventy years, or perhaps eighty, if we are strong; even then their span is only toil and trouble; they are soon gone, and we fly away." (Psalm 90:10). We are all subject to the changes and chances of life. We are all vulnerable in this life to suffering, and ultimately to death. After the Fall from Eden it became a part of our human nature. How can I blame my neighbor for the nature of life, for the way life in this world simply is? How can I blame my neighbor for my suffering, when they,too, suffer?
What blessed joy that our God is always and absolutely blameless!
When we can no longer blame ourselves or others, because human existence in the world is simply what it is--and it is not always sunshine and roses--then we often turn our blame toward God. After all, God allows life to be the way it is. God allows suffering to befall me. Oh! But for some it is even worse! Some take the extra step to say that God has caused this suffering to befall me. God made my spouse leave. God sent that hurricane or tornado which took my house and town. God called us to acts of war. God needed an angel, and so he took my child. Is that our view of God, that he is a cruel torturer, immune to the sorrows of his children? How wicked that we assign what we consider evil to the action of our God, who, in fact, is the source of all goodness and mercy. But in our quest to blame, no one is safe, no one is immune, not even God. Yet God is perfect and holy and without a spot of guilt.
So whence comes hardship and sorrow?
And why must we go through these things--even we, who strive to be good?
My reflections on these questions must come in another blog, as I have reached the end of the page here. In the meanwhile, how would you answer these questions?
Stay tuned...
Saturday, July 13, 2013
Thursday, July 11, 2013
One Holy, ________ and Apostolic Church
-or- What Does it Mean to Be "catholic"
"There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all and through all and in all."
(Ephesians 4:4-6)
On Sunday July 7th, I preached a teaching sermon about the word "apostolic," which we use to describe the Church in the third article of the Nicene Creed:
".... We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church..."
I will not recap my comments on apostolic here. Feel free to acquire the audio recording of my sermon, or contact me and we can have a discussion about it. Or, one can always "google it."
Instead, I wish to treat an issue that arose in my preaching on this particular line in the Creed. My sermon touched on controversy--not because of the radical message that we are all apostles called to spread the Word of the Kingdom of God, that we are all called to be spiritual leaders and mentors in the world, but rather because of another pesky word in this sentence of the creed: "catholic."
At St. John Church, we do not say "catholic." Instead, we have worship booklets which have changed the word to "We believe in one holy Christian and apostolic church...." I suppose I should not say "we" don't say "catholic," since some (including me...who speaks in the microphone) do say "catholic." But this is an old debate at St. Johns that at one time caused an unknown (to me) amount of argument and division.
The issue, as far as I can tell, was that the congregation wanted to differentiate themselves from the Roman Catholic Church in town. And saying the word "catholic" in the creed brought to mind the Roman Catholics. Having the Catholics brought to mind in worship was far from up-lifting, because there was a time when Roman Catholics in Toluca were told in strong terms never to socialize--and certainly not worship or commune--with "the protestants." This created a great deal of hardship to friends and family and spouses that stood across the Catholic/Protestant line from one another. The Toluca Lutheran retaliation came in the form of changing our creed: "You excommunicate us? Fine, we excommunicate you---your word is out of our creed." And so the creed was changed to read "Christian" church. [I understand that this is not a local phenomenon, but that many other churches prefer to use the term "Christian" in that part of the creed. However, this is the first and only Lutheran Church that I have lived and worked in that does not say "catholic"--and so the issue seems local to me.]
Since I don't know where I stand with people when I say "catholic" and since I received several questions and comments about my mentioning that part of the creed in my sermon (although my focus was on the very next word, "apostolic"), I feel compelled to explain myself. What follows, therefore, are some reflections on the word "catholic" and how it both differs from the word "Catholic" and is preferable to the term "Christian." Please bear with me to the end.
The Nicene Creed was originally written in Greek. The Greek word in the spot in question is καθολικὴν, which means "universal, general or complete." It comes from the root words kata (by) + holos (whole), and thus is a word that refers to the whole, undivided Church consisting of those who follow Jesus Christ. The word catholic in the creed, then, simply means the whole Church, that is, not just this congregation or even this denomination, but all churches everywhere which proclaim Christ crucified.
Historically, the Roman Church has adopted the word "catholic" and have made it a part of their proper name for themselves. They claim to be THE catholic church. And before there were any splits in the Church, that would have been very nearly correct. After Luther and other reformers (and even the much early split between Eastern and Western Christianity), this no longer held true--but the Romans kept the name, and they kept the idea that they were the only ones.
I do not think we should let the Roman Church get away with this claim. I believe that the ELCA is a part of the universal church and without the Lutherans the catholic church would not be complete. Therefore, I call the commonly known "Catholic Church" the Roman Church (which is a lot more accurate, as their structure is and has historically been centered in Rome). And I try to reclaim the word catholic as a term that fits any follower of Christ--which was its original intent.
If that is not compelling, then here is an argument from the other side, namely the reason why using "Christian" is, in fact, worse than using "catholic." Christian is used to convey the same concept as catholic in the creed. The intent is to point toward the larger church, recognizing that we are all in the same boat. On the surface, it would seem like Christian does a better job--since we all seem to claim to be Christian, right?
Well, the word Christian has also been co-opted by a particular denomination--just like the word Catholic. Here in Toluca, we have Antioch Christian Church. Although they are technically "non-denominational" and therefore the word Christian is meant to be a descriptor, in reality there is a historical movement in christian theology and church polity that can be designated as the Christian Church. Think of it this way, just because the word "christian" is not in the name of St. John Lutheran Church, does not mean that our congregation is not christian. Indeed, we are christian first, and Lutheran is a secondary term that gives people an idea about what type of christians we are. Just as the words Catholic and Christian are used in St. Mary's Catholic Church and Antioch Christian Church to describe what kind of christians they are. The names Catholic and Christian are a bit more general than ours, but that does not give them any right to claim that they are representatives of the universal Church while we are not. In point of fact, we are just as catholic and just as christian. How? Because Jesus unifies us and makes us one in the complete and whole and universal church.
Therefore, even if we use "Christian" in our creed (which is quite all right), we must use it in the lower case so that we do not confuse it with the proper name claimed by Antioch and other "Christian" churches.
Moreover, it is much better for us to conjure up the image of Catholic instead of Christian, because we are much closer in theology and in practice to the Roman Church than to the Christian Church. For instance, (and this was one of the major issues for Luther) we--that is the Lutherans and the Romans--baptize infants. The Christian Church requires what are called "believers baptisms." In other words, in the Christian Church, one must be old enough to decide to claim Jesus as personal Lord and Savior before one can be baptized rightly. For Lutherans and Romans, it does not depend on our decision or even our ability to decide, but instead depends on God's choice and action. God chooses us, we do not choose him. We baptize infants to show that God sends the Holy Spirit to us whether or not we call on him. God can act, even if we choose not to act. It is about what God can and cannot do--not about what we decide to do.
From a practical standpoint, Lutheran worship is much closer to Roman worship than it is to Christian worship. Our use of the liturgy and the lectionary bind us together with the Roman Church. We hear the same Gospel Reading each Sunday. We both have important parts of the liturgy: a kyrie, a gloria, three readings, confession and forgiveness, etc. The Christian Church has a similar order of worship (Gathering-Word-Meal-Sending), however they often are a lot looser in their use of the the liturgy.
All this to say that if we kept the word capitalized (no matter which word we decided to say), then it would be best to use the word Catholic--since we are closer to the Romans than to the Christians. No matter which one you use, always think of it with a lower case "c."
At the end of the day, it doesn't matter. I encourage you to proclaim loudly and proudly whichever word speaks to you. As long as what is in you mind and heart is a believe that all christians, everywhere, in every time are all made one in Jesus, then you have the right belief. Whichever word helps you say, "Yes, even my Roman brothers and sisters are Christian" (and vise versa), then that is the word that is best to use. Because the point of the creed is to say that in Jesus Christ there is no longer any distinction. "...for in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith. As many of you as were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female," there is no longer Catholic or Lutheran, there is no longer Christian or Roman, "for all of you are one in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3:26-28).
That sentiment from Paul's letter to the Galatians is exactly what the creed is trying to convey when it asks us to say: "We believe in one holy καθολικὴν and apostolic church...." So whichever word helps you remember that we are all one in Christ, use that word. For me, the unifying word is "catholic," particularly because it reminds me that we no longer need to have animosity against the church that we have protested against. Rather, through Jesus Christ, we are one even with our rivals.
Thanks be to God for that....and for the rich words he gives us to understand and convey the Word.
Amen.
"There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all and through all and in all."
(Ephesians 4:4-6)
On Sunday July 7th, I preached a teaching sermon about the word "apostolic," which we use to describe the Church in the third article of the Nicene Creed:
".... We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church..."
I will not recap my comments on apostolic here. Feel free to acquire the audio recording of my sermon, or contact me and we can have a discussion about it. Or, one can always "google it."
Instead, I wish to treat an issue that arose in my preaching on this particular line in the Creed. My sermon touched on controversy--not because of the radical message that we are all apostles called to spread the Word of the Kingdom of God, that we are all called to be spiritual leaders and mentors in the world, but rather because of another pesky word in this sentence of the creed: "catholic."
At St. John Church, we do not say "catholic." Instead, we have worship booklets which have changed the word to "We believe in one holy Christian and apostolic church...." I suppose I should not say "we" don't say "catholic," since some (including me...who speaks in the microphone) do say "catholic." But this is an old debate at St. Johns that at one time caused an unknown (to me) amount of argument and division.
The issue, as far as I can tell, was that the congregation wanted to differentiate themselves from the Roman Catholic Church in town. And saying the word "catholic" in the creed brought to mind the Roman Catholics. Having the Catholics brought to mind in worship was far from up-lifting, because there was a time when Roman Catholics in Toluca were told in strong terms never to socialize--and certainly not worship or commune--with "the protestants." This created a great deal of hardship to friends and family and spouses that stood across the Catholic/Protestant line from one another. The Toluca Lutheran retaliation came in the form of changing our creed: "You excommunicate us? Fine, we excommunicate you---your word is out of our creed." And so the creed was changed to read "Christian" church. [I understand that this is not a local phenomenon, but that many other churches prefer to use the term "Christian" in that part of the creed. However, this is the first and only Lutheran Church that I have lived and worked in that does not say "catholic"--and so the issue seems local to me.]
Since I don't know where I stand with people when I say "catholic" and since I received several questions and comments about my mentioning that part of the creed in my sermon (although my focus was on the very next word, "apostolic"), I feel compelled to explain myself. What follows, therefore, are some reflections on the word "catholic" and how it both differs from the word "Catholic" and is preferable to the term "Christian." Please bear with me to the end.
The Nicene Creed was originally written in Greek. The Greek word in the spot in question is καθολικὴν, which means "universal, general or complete." It comes from the root words kata (by) + holos (whole), and thus is a word that refers to the whole, undivided Church consisting of those who follow Jesus Christ. The word catholic in the creed, then, simply means the whole Church, that is, not just this congregation or even this denomination, but all churches everywhere which proclaim Christ crucified.
Historically, the Roman Church has adopted the word "catholic" and have made it a part of their proper name for themselves. They claim to be THE catholic church. And before there were any splits in the Church, that would have been very nearly correct. After Luther and other reformers (and even the much early split between Eastern and Western Christianity), this no longer held true--but the Romans kept the name, and they kept the idea that they were the only ones.
I do not think we should let the Roman Church get away with this claim. I believe that the ELCA is a part of the universal church and without the Lutherans the catholic church would not be complete. Therefore, I call the commonly known "Catholic Church" the Roman Church (which is a lot more accurate, as their structure is and has historically been centered in Rome). And I try to reclaim the word catholic as a term that fits any follower of Christ--which was its original intent.
If that is not compelling, then here is an argument from the other side, namely the reason why using "Christian" is, in fact, worse than using "catholic." Christian is used to convey the same concept as catholic in the creed. The intent is to point toward the larger church, recognizing that we are all in the same boat. On the surface, it would seem like Christian does a better job--since we all seem to claim to be Christian, right?
Well, the word Christian has also been co-opted by a particular denomination--just like the word Catholic. Here in Toluca, we have Antioch Christian Church. Although they are technically "non-denominational" and therefore the word Christian is meant to be a descriptor, in reality there is a historical movement in christian theology and church polity that can be designated as the Christian Church. Think of it this way, just because the word "christian" is not in the name of St. John Lutheran Church, does not mean that our congregation is not christian. Indeed, we are christian first, and Lutheran is a secondary term that gives people an idea about what type of christians we are. Just as the words Catholic and Christian are used in St. Mary's Catholic Church and Antioch Christian Church to describe what kind of christians they are. The names Catholic and Christian are a bit more general than ours, but that does not give them any right to claim that they are representatives of the universal Church while we are not. In point of fact, we are just as catholic and just as christian. How? Because Jesus unifies us and makes us one in the complete and whole and universal church.
Therefore, even if we use "Christian" in our creed (which is quite all right), we must use it in the lower case so that we do not confuse it with the proper name claimed by Antioch and other "Christian" churches.
Moreover, it is much better for us to conjure up the image of Catholic instead of Christian, because we are much closer in theology and in practice to the Roman Church than to the Christian Church. For instance, (and this was one of the major issues for Luther) we--that is the Lutherans and the Romans--baptize infants. The Christian Church requires what are called "believers baptisms." In other words, in the Christian Church, one must be old enough to decide to claim Jesus as personal Lord and Savior before one can be baptized rightly. For Lutherans and Romans, it does not depend on our decision or even our ability to decide, but instead depends on God's choice and action. God chooses us, we do not choose him. We baptize infants to show that God sends the Holy Spirit to us whether or not we call on him. God can act, even if we choose not to act. It is about what God can and cannot do--not about what we decide to do.
From a practical standpoint, Lutheran worship is much closer to Roman worship than it is to Christian worship. Our use of the liturgy and the lectionary bind us together with the Roman Church. We hear the same Gospel Reading each Sunday. We both have important parts of the liturgy: a kyrie, a gloria, three readings, confession and forgiveness, etc. The Christian Church has a similar order of worship (Gathering-Word-Meal-Sending), however they often are a lot looser in their use of the the liturgy.
All this to say that if we kept the word capitalized (no matter which word we decided to say), then it would be best to use the word Catholic--since we are closer to the Romans than to the Christians. No matter which one you use, always think of it with a lower case "c."
At the end of the day, it doesn't matter. I encourage you to proclaim loudly and proudly whichever word speaks to you. As long as what is in you mind and heart is a believe that all christians, everywhere, in every time are all made one in Jesus, then you have the right belief. Whichever word helps you say, "Yes, even my Roman brothers and sisters are Christian" (and vise versa), then that is the word that is best to use. Because the point of the creed is to say that in Jesus Christ there is no longer any distinction. "...for in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith. As many of you as were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female," there is no longer Catholic or Lutheran, there is no longer Christian or Roman, "for all of you are one in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3:26-28).
That sentiment from Paul's letter to the Galatians is exactly what the creed is trying to convey when it asks us to say: "We believe in one holy καθολικὴν and apostolic church...." So whichever word helps you remember that we are all one in Christ, use that word. For me, the unifying word is "catholic," particularly because it reminds me that we no longer need to have animosity against the church that we have protested against. Rather, through Jesus Christ, we are one even with our rivals.
Thanks be to God for that....and for the rich words he gives us to understand and convey the Word.
Amen.
Wednesday, July 10, 2013
The Harvest is Plentiful
-or- Ask the Lord of the Harvest to Send Out Laborers
Almost one year ago, I moved to Toluca, IL to begin my first call at St. John Lutheran Church. In my time here in small-town Illinois I have learned more about farming than a city boy thought could be learned. And so, I appreciate this past Sunday's texts in a whole new way. Here are the parts I refer to:
"...for you reap whatever you sow. If you sow to your own flesh, you will reap corruption from the flesh; but if you sow to the Spirit, you will reap eternal life from the Spirit. So let us not grow weary in doing what is right, for we will reap at harvest time, if we do not give up. So then, whenever we have an opportunity, let us work for the good of all...." (Galatians 6:7-10)
and again,
"He said to them, 'The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few; therefore ask the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into his harvest." (Luke 10:2)
One thing I have learned about farming--and I believe it is regarded as a startling change even to veteran farmers--is that, today, the laborers in the field are, indeed, few. Due to advances in farming technology and changes in the economics of land and agronomy, only a few laborers are needed in the field. Years ago, a family farm could be found every mile or so; and that family farmed the few hundred adjacent acres. Now, farmsteads have disappeared to make room for larger and larger planters and combines. Now, in order to be competitive, one must farm several hundred to over a thousand acres. Land is owned by one group, and rented out to others to do the labor of cultivation. Plots of soil are spread out over miles. These changes are both good and difficult. Farming has become more efficient. Culture and community, however, have been indelibly altered.
Whatever ones opinion on the quality of the changes, it has become true: harvests are plentiful, but laborers are few. Teams of people and animals have been replaced by individuals who operate machines: tractors, combines, trucks that haul grain to the elevators, and other cultivating equipment. Farming has industrialized, allowing fewer people to do more work than was ever done in the past--and to do it quicker.
If the goal is to farm well, efficiently and profitably, these changes, as difficult as they may be, are good. The problem arises, however, when we find that our culture often wishes to have more--and it wants more faster and easier. This desire has become so pervasive, that we see it bleeding into our churches (and not just in farm communities, but in many contexts).
Thus, what holds true of the world--that plentiful harvests can and should be brought in by few laborers--is applied to the church, to our spiritual lives and work.
Faith communities rely more and more on a priestly class to labor in the spiritual harvest. Larger congregations leave the field labor to ordained and lay staff. In mega churches, and today even in smaller congregations, churches rely on equipment and programs instead of good old fashioned manual labor and personal contact. Gone are the days when the whole family pitches in to steer the plow, walk beans, detassel corn or pick the crop by hand.
The difference is that, in farming, advancements in technology and method do not jeopardize the quality of crop at harvest time. Quite the contrary, today just as much attention has been placed in making harvests of quality grain. We have become so good at it that the quality of crops nowadays is better and more reliable than crops of generations past. The same does not necessarily hold true for our churches. Often times the focus on quantity makes the quality to suffer.
You may ask, quantity and quality of what? Well, Jesus was talking about a harvest of souls, if you will. The spiritual laborers were being sent out into the fields to plant the Word about the Kingdom of God like a seed in the minds and hearts of people.
Sowing that type of seed--the spiritual type--resists industrialization.
When Paul writes to the Galatians, his message is that every individual is a spiritual farmer--or if you prefer, we are all hired men and women, since God owns the ground. Whatever each person sows, that is what that person reaps. Each of us is required to tend and care for the soil in which the Word is planted. Each and every individual is responsible for nourishing the plants that spring up from the ground. For this to take place, what is needed is an passionate response to the Good News. Every person must be watered and fed by the Word, in order to bear good fruit...good grain.
And in Luke, Jesus' aim is not simply to point out that the laborers are few, but to encourage more laborers to come out and work in the field. In this passage, Jesus is sending out 70 of his followers to plant the Word throughout the land. Jesus is not satisfied with 12, and he is not satisfied with 70 workers. There is no spiritual farming equipment that allows a few laborers to haul in major harvests. Spiritually speaking, each plant requires a laborer to tend it...and someone is needed to help nourish each laborer. And so, the individual, impassioned response to the Good News also entices each person to look not just to their own harvest, but to the harvest of the whole world.
In other words, we are all called and sent to be apostles, or missionaries...or spiritual farmers.
Thus, we go to church for a purpose: to learn the art and science of spiritual agronomy.
Luckily we have a great instructor.
Unfortunately, there is not a whole lot of time. Just as the farmer will work hard and long hours during planting and during the harvest, just as the farmer works with haste to get the work done in the allotted time, so too must we spiritual farmers work like we have a purpose and a deadline. There is no time to waste, friends, we have to get the corn and beans in.
Almost one year ago, I moved to Toluca, IL to begin my first call at St. John Lutheran Church. In my time here in small-town Illinois I have learned more about farming than a city boy thought could be learned. And so, I appreciate this past Sunday's texts in a whole new way. Here are the parts I refer to:
"...for you reap whatever you sow. If you sow to your own flesh, you will reap corruption from the flesh; but if you sow to the Spirit, you will reap eternal life from the Spirit. So let us not grow weary in doing what is right, for we will reap at harvest time, if we do not give up. So then, whenever we have an opportunity, let us work for the good of all...." (Galatians 6:7-10)
and again,
"He said to them, 'The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few; therefore ask the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into his harvest." (Luke 10:2)
One thing I have learned about farming--and I believe it is regarded as a startling change even to veteran farmers--is that, today, the laborers in the field are, indeed, few. Due to advances in farming technology and changes in the economics of land and agronomy, only a few laborers are needed in the field. Years ago, a family farm could be found every mile or so; and that family farmed the few hundred adjacent acres. Now, farmsteads have disappeared to make room for larger and larger planters and combines. Now, in order to be competitive, one must farm several hundred to over a thousand acres. Land is owned by one group, and rented out to others to do the labor of cultivation. Plots of soil are spread out over miles. These changes are both good and difficult. Farming has become more efficient. Culture and community, however, have been indelibly altered.
Whatever ones opinion on the quality of the changes, it has become true: harvests are plentiful, but laborers are few. Teams of people and animals have been replaced by individuals who operate machines: tractors, combines, trucks that haul grain to the elevators, and other cultivating equipment. Farming has industrialized, allowing fewer people to do more work than was ever done in the past--and to do it quicker.
If the goal is to farm well, efficiently and profitably, these changes, as difficult as they may be, are good. The problem arises, however, when we find that our culture often wishes to have more--and it wants more faster and easier. This desire has become so pervasive, that we see it bleeding into our churches (and not just in farm communities, but in many contexts).
Thus, what holds true of the world--that plentiful harvests can and should be brought in by few laborers--is applied to the church, to our spiritual lives and work.
Faith communities rely more and more on a priestly class to labor in the spiritual harvest. Larger congregations leave the field labor to ordained and lay staff. In mega churches, and today even in smaller congregations, churches rely on equipment and programs instead of good old fashioned manual labor and personal contact. Gone are the days when the whole family pitches in to steer the plow, walk beans, detassel corn or pick the crop by hand.
The difference is that, in farming, advancements in technology and method do not jeopardize the quality of crop at harvest time. Quite the contrary, today just as much attention has been placed in making harvests of quality grain. We have become so good at it that the quality of crops nowadays is better and more reliable than crops of generations past. The same does not necessarily hold true for our churches. Often times the focus on quantity makes the quality to suffer.
You may ask, quantity and quality of what? Well, Jesus was talking about a harvest of souls, if you will. The spiritual laborers were being sent out into the fields to plant the Word about the Kingdom of God like a seed in the minds and hearts of people.
Sowing that type of seed--the spiritual type--resists industrialization.
When Paul writes to the Galatians, his message is that every individual is a spiritual farmer--or if you prefer, we are all hired men and women, since God owns the ground. Whatever each person sows, that is what that person reaps. Each of us is required to tend and care for the soil in which the Word is planted. Each and every individual is responsible for nourishing the plants that spring up from the ground. For this to take place, what is needed is an passionate response to the Good News. Every person must be watered and fed by the Word, in order to bear good fruit...good grain.
And in Luke, Jesus' aim is not simply to point out that the laborers are few, but to encourage more laborers to come out and work in the field. In this passage, Jesus is sending out 70 of his followers to plant the Word throughout the land. Jesus is not satisfied with 12, and he is not satisfied with 70 workers. There is no spiritual farming equipment that allows a few laborers to haul in major harvests. Spiritually speaking, each plant requires a laborer to tend it...and someone is needed to help nourish each laborer. And so, the individual, impassioned response to the Good News also entices each person to look not just to their own harvest, but to the harvest of the whole world.
In other words, we are all called and sent to be apostles, or missionaries...or spiritual farmers.
Thus, we go to church for a purpose: to learn the art and science of spiritual agronomy.
Luckily we have a great instructor.
Unfortunately, there is not a whole lot of time. Just as the farmer will work hard and long hours during planting and during the harvest, just as the farmer works with haste to get the work done in the allotted time, so too must we spiritual farmers work like we have a purpose and a deadline. There is no time to waste, friends, we have to get the corn and beans in.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)