The Challenge of Hope

 Let me begin with two quick notes: 

 

First, if you have not yet turned in your pledge card for 2021 please do so as soon as you can. As you can imagine, 2020 was a challenge for us. Our pledged giving came in well, but we lost a lot of the revenue that we often gain from different groups using our campus for one-time or recurring activities. When we combine our income losses with our commitment to increase mission giving and to pay our employees, we have run a deficit in 2020. We have the reserves to cover those deficits – and that is precisely what reserves are for – but a strong showing of pledges for 2021 would enable us to continue our ministries without and undue effects of cost-cutting. You are a generous congregation and I fully believe we will come through this pandemic strongly, so thank you for all that you do as St. Mark Presbyterian Church. 

 

Second, we had a very ambitious “Giving Tree” this year, filled with tags representing people in need whom we can help during Christmas. Those gifts are due next weekend, so we can use a few more folks dropping by to take a few more tags. I truly believe that generosity is the mark of the church during a pandemic, when gathering is limited and people are insecure about their future. Once again, St. Mark, you’re doing a great job being the church. Very well good job. 

 

Now, a brief word about our Advent theme, worship services, and how you can participate even as we continue to be physically distant. “Angels of Hope” is our theme and we are looking at four stories where angels visited different persons involved in the birth narratives of Christ. Last week we heard the story of Zechariah, the priest who struggled to believe the angel’s message about the forthcoming Messiah as well as a forthcoming child for him and his wife Elizabeth. Genuine hope is never without struggles. That is why I wanted to bring James Baldwin’s wisdom into the story as well, when he said that “Hope is invented every day.” We do not inherit hope, it is never automatic, there are often a myriad of reasons against it, and so it is always only appropriated by faith. In the end, Zechariah and Elizabeth did have a child even in their post-child-bearing years, their child did become the forerunner to the Christ, and, in Christ, God has fulfilled God’s promises. But, it was not because Zechariah and Elizabeth willed it into being. They had a child because God is faithful; the Christ came and dwelt among us because God is faithful. Zechariah’s and Elizabeth’s lives were enriched with hope when they trusted that God is faithful. And, to be clear, Elizabeth trusted far more quickly than Rev. Zechariah did. (On behalf of pastors everywhere, let me sarcastically add, “Way to represent, Zeke!”) 

 

So here we are, also struggling with hope. Will the truth set us free, in a time when people seem able to say anything at all and call it “their truth”? Will the meek inherit the earth, when the market seems to reward those who already have much more readily than those who work themselves ragged? Are the peacemakers blessed, when a pacific tone is treated as irrelevant weakness in the “real world”? Is there room for “peace on earth” when we seem fundamentally divided and incapable of listening to one another? Like Zechariah, we have every reason to doubt and to struggle with the messages of hope that angels share with us. But, God is faithful. And God’s faithfulness is always the one and only reason for hope. Thanks be to God. 

 

Mark of St. Mark

 

Pre-preparing

Friends o’ the Mask, 

 

We had a brief conversation yesterday at dinner over whether there was such a thing as “pre-preparing,” or if simply “preparing” includes all of the stages of getting ready for something and not just the last part. The word “prepare” is curious in itself. The root, pare, taken by itself can refer to cutting the outsides away, like we might do with a paring knife, or simply to reduce something down. To pre-pare, then, would refer to the process of focusing, prioritizing, paring down ahead of time in order to be ready for the event for which we are preparing. You can see why the discussion might arise sitting at a Thanksgiving meal. The food was prepared all morning – in our house that meant baking garlic, caramelizing onions, chopping vegetables, and so forth, all of which was done by three marvelous cooks not named me. But, before all of that preparing could happen, Wednesday had trips to Grower’s Ranch (our favorite produce store), Trader Joe’s, and elsewhere. And before those trips, someone had to volunteer to take a side, a dessert, a main course, etc., and make up a list of ingredients that we needed. And so on. The ‘preparing’ on Thursday morning was preceded by several steps of preparing. Hence, the discussion of whether to repeat the prefix ‘pre’ and create the word ‘pre-preparing.’ 

 

The dinner conversation ran out of steam with no resolution, but the issue remains a live one, because we are now getting ready for the season of Advent. Since the word “Advent” means “coming,” it is a season where we prepare for the coming of Christ. We sing, “Prepare the Way, O Zion,” and hear the words of John the Baptizer that are echoed in that song. We prepare for the coming of Jesus by listening anew to the prophets of old, and sing, “O Come, O Come, Emmanuel.” And we give ear to those messages of the New Testament that point to what we call “the Second Coming” or, properly, “the Second Advent.” That’s a bit trickier for us, since we have heard so many misguided attempts to dissect the mystery out of those messages and to treat the Second Advent as a kind of parlor guessing game. But, still, we know that the early church was animated by the idea that the world-as-we-know-it is a time-dated reality that will one day give way to a ‘new heaven and new earth,’ where peace and justice kiss, the sting of death is gone, and every tear is dried. So, the season of Advent is that time when we focus directly on the double-layered experience of anticipating the coming one. 

 

But, as our dinner conversation displayed, ‘preparing’ has many layers. Today, an Advent Team will be preparing the sanctuary, fellowship hall, and other spaces for you to have a fulfilling worship experience, we have been pre-preparing for this preparation for quite a while. Likewise, the idea of ‘preparing for the Second Coming’ is multi-layered. “Preparing” is rarely a matter of a last-minute rush to make sure that all things are ready. It is, rather, a discipline, a manner of living a lifetime of expectation. We go through this Advent season year after year - not because we are mad and imagine that if we do the same thing over and over we might get a different outcome, but because we are cultivating a mindset of living toward the coming of Christ. That’s the pre-preparing that enables us to hear the words of the prophets, angels, and characters in the stories anew. And that is why we participate in the Alternative Christmas Market or take a tag off of the Christmas Angel tree. These are our ways of preparing, by living into the coming one’s reign of justice and peace.

This year our theme is “Angels of Hope.” We’re not so interested in vexing over whether angels are real or mythological symbols, whether they are like giant bird-people or shiny choir members, whether rational 21^stcentury people should even be using that language when speaking of sacred things, or the long-lasting waste of time wondering how many of them can dance on the head of a pin. The word “angel” actually means “messenger,” an etymology in Greek that carries over into English in the word “evangel,” or “good news.” Each week we will hear how the good news comes to people and we will marvel at how powerful, but complex hope is. Through the stories of Zechariah, Mary, Joseph, and the shepherds, we will see how angelic messages bring faith and doubt, wonder and fear, hope and despair – a genuine look at what it means to prepare for a new world. 

 

So, today, we are pre-preparing - or, for you sticklers out there, we are in early stages of preparing. Get ready. The season of preparation is at hand. 

 

Mark of St. Mark  

On Election, pt.5

 IMPORTANT NOTE: Starting Monday, Nov.2, I will be out of the office for three weeks. I will have an “out of the office” autoreply on my email and any concerns that you may have should be directed to Sue-Ann Wichman (sueann@stmarkpresbyterian.org) or Hayes Noble (hayes@stmarkpresbyterian.org). Thanks to the HR commission, session, staff, and many of you who have helped to make this sabbatical space possible. Our Saturday livestream worship will show reruns for those Saturdays, but the Sunday ‘in person’ worship will continue per normal. 

 

SECOND NOTE: November 15-22 is Hunger and Homelessness Awareness Week. If you or someone you know is a rental property owner in Orange County, United to End Homelessness has an incentive program to help provide Permanent Supportive Housing that may be of interest. Feel free to check out this description or pass this information along. https://www.eventbrite.com/e/welcomehomeoc-property-owner-workshop-november-tickets-112888566742

 

Last week I left off by noting that, for John Calvin, the doctrine of election was not about speculation, but more about taking comfort in God’s steadfast love. To continue …

 

One big concern among Calvin and his followers – which seems to be the what hardened this doctrine of comfort into a doctrine of judgment – was the need to avoid human pride, particularly the arrogant assumption that we can do anything to “deserve” God’s favor. For them, ‘grace alone’ means that it is not up to us to earn salvation, not even in making the critical decision to believe. In other words, faith is a gift from God. Think about that for a moment. Most people would not react against such a notion, but most of us do not follow that belief to its logical conclusion. If faith is a gift from God, that means that the faith I have is something that God freely chooses to give. God freely choosing to give is exactly the language of the doctrine of election. It is a way of holding on to Paul’s language, “It is by faith that we are saved” while not assuming that faith is some form of accomplishment on our part, but a result of God’s grace. 

 

I believe that the real challenge for Calvin and others was something like, “Why in the world would someone not believe in a loving and just God?” Imagine them asking that question while contemplating the cross, where the cruelty of human rejection is met with God’s loving act of sending the beloved son even to die on behalf of that cruel human race. A conclusion might be, “I have faith because I have received it as a gift that God has freely chosen to give. If others hear this message and do not respond with faith, then for whatever reason God did not choose to give them the gift of faith.” Suddenly we have a doctrine of “double predestination,” which – taken out of that context – sounds horribly judgmental and depicts a capricious God. But, within the context of humility in our own standing before God and joy in trusting in God’s grace, even the doctrine of “double predestination” loses some of its edge. Don’t get me wrong – this doctrine is still problematic, because Calvin and particularly his followers expressed this belief in the rawest of terms, that some are predestined for salvation while others are predestined for damnation. 

 

I think a better expression of divine election comes from Karl Barth, who argues that, in Christ, God has elected humanity for salvation. For Barth, Paul’s language of Jesus as the “second Adam” and those long conversations about Jesus being “fully human and fully divine” are intended to show that when God raised Jesus out of death, God issued a divine “yes” to humanity, overriding even humanity’s “no” to Jesus. It is God, in utter freedom, choosing humanity, even over our own resistance. That is the kind of confidence and joyful hope that the doctrine of election is intended to capture. 

 

I’m sure that these reflections have raised more questions than answers, and perhaps have even dredged up some nightmares among those who were raised among hyper-Calvinists. I think it is unfortunate when people simply dismiss the language of election or predestination as if the Reformers were either idiotic or cruel. But, it is even more unfortunate when people take those doctrines and use them as oppressive tools of judgment against others. I’ve tried to show that the motive behind election was not to deny human freedom or pretend that everything that happens was charted out before creation, but to provide a doctrine that says, even in a world where cruelty and pain are always part of the story, God’s steadfast love is the story itself. 

 

That’s all I got. Cheers, 

 

Mark of St. Mark

 

 

 

On Election, pt.4

 Election, pt. 4 

 

Quick Notes: There are two events coming up soon that may be of interest to you. The first is a “Matthew 25” event by the PCUSA, on October 28 at 11:00am, looking at the challenge of global, systemic poverty. For information, click here. The second is a Webinar on “Creating and Maintaining Empowering Mission Partnerships” on Thursday, Oct. 29, at 7:00pm by the Presbytery of Los Ranchos. For information, click here. (Full disclosure: I’m a panelist.) 

 

It has been said about those who believe in the philosophical doctrine of determinism, and likewise can be said about those who believe in the theological doctrine of election: “If you throw a baseball at their head, they will duck.” What they won’t do is just sit there thinking, “God has chosen everything that happens, so Imma let this ball smack me in the head.” The conversation about election is simply not that daft.

 

Everyone, regardless of their philosophical or theological bent, has to deal with the senselessness of chance, luck, happenstance, and unintended consequences – whether it seems to work in our favor or bedevil us. For example, one of the Scriptures that the doctrine of election is based on is the often repeated “Jacob have I loved; Esau have I hated.” We can – and should – nuance the words “love” and “hate” in this phrase, but the shock value of keeping them is what forces us to take election seriously. If God chose Jacob (aka, the People of Israel) over Esau (Israel’s enemies in the OT era), the verbs “love” and “hate” bring that free act of God’s choosing into bold relief. Do we dare say something like this about God? Do we even dare say something like this about the way the world works? If God is sovereign in some way over the world, can we look at great events and say that the results were God’s doings? Abraham Lincoln, in his second inaugural address, could only look at the War Between the States and say, “The Almighty has His own purposes.” That is similar to the humble wonder that concludes the story of Job. Sometimes that’s the best one can say when believing in an “almighty” but unable to make sense of how things happen in the world. 

 

Science offers an analogous puzzle for us. J.S. Whale once fabulously said, “The modern mind which is revolted by this doctrine of Election cheerfully accepts the modern doctrine of Selection, and is not appalled by the thought: ‘The warm-blooded mammals have I loved, but the Ichthyosauri have I hated.’”[1] The problem of randomness does not diminish just because we call it evolutionary selection rather than divine election. And the angst of the question of election arises any time we hear of a disaster that seems to strike randomly (“act of God” according to insurance claims), or anything that seems unfair and undeserved, like the death of a child. Sometimes we try to console ourselves with the words, “Everything has a purpose” or “God is in control” or “All things work together for the good.” (Friend alert: These phrases may offer comfort when we appropriate them for ourselves, but they rarely have that effect when we say them to others who have experienced tragedies.) While these words point to something true and comforting, they often feel empty and unsatisfying.

 

The doctrine of election aims at this feeling of emptiness and dissatisfaction. I read recently that John Calvin – whom many people ‘blame’ for the doctrine of election – considered it a great mystery, to be approached with trembling and faith. He did not see it as a stern doctrine of inescapable judgment and doom for some, but as a comforting doctrine, because it did not leave salvation up to fragile humans, but to a God whose steadfast love endures forever. 

 

I will pick up on this thread next week. There’s still a lot more to ponder here.

 

Cheers, 

Mark of St. Mark

 

---

[1] The Protestant Tradition: An Essay in Interpretation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1955), p.143.

On Election, pt.3

 Note: I have heard that some of you have been reticent to sign up for in person worship because you do not want to take up a space that someone else might want or need. What a beautiful concern! Here’s how you can address it. So far, we have not had to deny anyone because we’ve reached our max capacity. Even so, when you register there is a space for you to add a note. Simply indicate that, if we reach our max, you would be happy to yield your seat to someone else. Then, if that is necessary, we’ll contact you with thanks. If not, you’re in!

 

During this month I am addressing the topic of election. You can read the two previous essays on my blog here. Today I want to address the most common way that people think about election: “Election means that we are predestined to go to heaven or hell regardless of what we believe, how we live, or what we choose.” If election is that automatic, we appear to be nothing more than programmed robots, and here we are imagining that we have lives of passion, conscience, deliberation, and choice. 

 

First, let me say, this common presentation of election is simply not biblical. Biblical election is when the texts express confidence in God’s power and God’s goodness together. And, biblical election is found in texts that deflate human arrogance by reminding us that some folks have ears to hear and some don’t; some folks have hearts that are hardened and some don’t; and that God is free to initiate, rather than dependent on our invocations or incantations. So, something as simple as beginning a prayer with “God is great, God is good” reflects part of the biblical tradition that ascribes sovereignty and freedom to God. Still, it is overspeaking to describe election as God’s whim that takes away human agency. There are too many texts, stories, testimonies, and claims in the Scriptures that express the human capacity to participate in, to follow, to trust in, and to respond to God. Claims about God’s power and goodness do not preclude human choice and will. In fact, the name “Israel” means “one who wrestles with God.” That’s not a robot. 

 

Also, the chief way that God is described – perhaps the only claim that tries to get to God’s essence – is that “God is love.” The nature of love, insofar as we understand and experience it, is that for love to be genuine it requires freedom. Therefore, if God’s love is important to us, then God’s freedom to love (or not) is important to us. And love not only requires freedom to be given, it grants freedom to be reciprocated. God’s freedom to love and our freedom to respond are expressed and implied repeatedly in the most repeated phrase of Scripture, “God’s steadfast love endures forever.” 

 

So, election, as God’s free choice to love, really is a thing in the Scriptures. All of the great stories then begin with God’s free choice: Creation begins with “Let us make ….” The promise to Abraham begins with God’s choice. God consistently exercises freedom by choosing the younger over the older (Isaac over Ishmael, Jacob over Esau), inverting the typical means of allocating power in the Ancient Near East. And, of course, in the New Testament, it is God who sends God’s son to bring salvation. 

 

However, while the idea of “election,” as God freely choosing, is the foundation for the biblical stories, that is far different from a definition of election that makes God an arbitrary power and that reduces us to robots. Love requires freedom, yes, but it also requires vulnerability. And that is where we’ll pick it up next week. 

 

Mark of St. Mark 

On Election, pt. 2

As you might remember from last week, I am spending October talking about election. Last week I invited you to think of all of the “givens” in your life – the abilities, proclivities, qualities, and other traits that were given to you long before you made any conscious decisions or choices about your life. And, as I said last week, the ‘givens’ have enormous consequences for who you are, how you live, what you do in life, who you love, and how you roll. That part of your life is primarily what the doctrine of election aims to address. Paul’s question, “What do you have the you did not receive?” invites to approach our faith with the starting point of “the givens.” 

 

One implication that starting with “the givens” has for us is that our theology – our inquiry into who God is before us and who we are before God – is grounded in humility. The 19^th century Reformed theologian Friederich Schleiermacher articulated this starting point in a way that has always been helpful to me. Speaking of religion in general, Schleiermacher argued that the beginning of religion is “the feeling of absolute dependence.” The very fact of my existence, of existence itself, is a reality into which I am thrown prior to any exercise of free will on my part. Is existence itself not worthy of wonder? And not only the fact of existence itself, but the capacity that you and I have to wonder at existence is another given for us. Rene Descartes expressed the philosophical conclusion to his method of doubt as, “I think, therefore I am.” I would express the religious starting point as “I am, therefore I wonder.” 

 

To me, this starting point of ‘existence that leads us to wonder’ is the chief purpose of any doctrine of election. “But wait!” you may be thinking, “Isn’t ‘election’ all about whether we are destined to go to heaven or hell?” That is indeed how most conversations about election go. I do not think that is exactly how Augustine of the 4^th-5^th century or John Calvin of the 16^th century – the two most prominent theologians who are invoked in conversations about election – intended for it to go. But, that is how the conversation has normally played out, whether by advocates for the doctrine of election or opponents to it. I find that unfortunate, but history rarely asks my opinion about things like that. 

 

So, next week let’s look precisely at this question of whether the doctrine of election means that I am personally destined to go to heaven or hell, regardless of how I live, what I believe, or what I want. It is a compelling question in many ways, a misshapen on in others (in my humble opinion). 

 

Until then, Cheers,

 

Mark of St. Mark

 

On Election, pt. 1

I am going to spend the month of October talking about election. No, not “the election.” I have plenty of opinions about that, but this is not the place for me to share most of them. I really don’t talk about partisan politics a lot, but I do address matters of truth and justice that have often been politicized. There’s a significant difference. 

 

Still, that’s not what I am talking about this month. I’ll be discussing the doctrine of divine election that has been part of Reformed theology from its inception and part of many theologies prior to that. This topic has been in play much longer than democracy and electoral votes. And it aims to address something quite different than our electoral process. In the electoral process, we exercise our voice and we choose leadership, policies, and directions. The doctrine of election rests not on our choosing, but on our having been chosen; not our initiative, but God’s initiative; not our will, but God’s will. And, frankly, because it does not rest on our choosing, our initiative, and our will, many people reject or simply do not like the doctrine of election. 

 

If you are someone to whom ‘election’ and its sister-term ‘predestination’ give the heebie-jeebies, I hope to persuade you to reconsider it over this month. Here I go. 

 

I invite you to begin by thinking of some of the most significant things about your life, some of which seem essential and some accidental. You are human, not a rabbit. You are male, female, transgender, non-binary, or your gender is fluid or unique. You may be attracted to males, females, both, all of the above, or none of the above. You were born into a family (for good or for ill), into a particular national identity, with a particular ethnicity. You are tall, short, or of medium height relative to others. You are left-handed, right-handed, or ambidextrous. You can roll your tongue or not and cilantro may taste like an herb or like soap to you. Except for rolling a tongue and eating cilantro, most of these distinctions have enormous consequences for who you are, how you live, what you do in life, who you love, and how you roll. And, you did not choose a single one of them. They were given to you, either via your DNA or by the happenstances of your birth. Perhaps you have made many choices related to these given qualities of your life. But, long before you made any of those choices, your identity was shaped by all of these “givens.” 

 

If nothing else, the doctrine of election invites us to pay attention to the “givens” – dare I say, “the given-ness of the givens.” That’s what the Apostle Paul was encouraging those feuding Corinthians to do when he asked, “What do you have that you did not receive? And if you received it, why do you boast as if it were not a gift?” 

 

So, if nothing else, let’s start this conversation where it belongs: Not with the question, “What about my freedom?” but the question, “What do I have that I did not receive? And if I received it, why do I boast as if it were not a gift?” 

 

Then we’re on our way to talking about divine election. 

 

 Mark of St. Mark

 

 

The Reign of God and Pool Noodles

 As we look ahead to in person worship beginning October 4, below are some of the practices that we will follow in order to gather safely as a community that cares deeply for one another. Please remember: We will continue to offer livestreamed worship on Saturday evenings and post the recording of that worship on our website by Sunday morning. If you are at all concerned about your health, exposure to others, or the risk of exposing others; if you are at all unwell; and if you have been exposed to someone with COVID-19 in the last 14 days, please feel free to continue worshiping virtually. And, if Orange County experiences another wave of infections, we will respond accordingly. 

 

There will be a day when each of us has an “all clear” to gather safely without extraordinary precautions. Until then, here are the covenantal agreements that we will practice when we gather at 9:30 or 11:00. 

 

-       By attending, we will attest that we are not feeling sick and have not been exposed to someone with COVID-19 over the last fourteen days. 

-       We all wear masks. 

-       We will register ahead of time to ensure a safe number of attendees. 

-       We will honor social distancing before, during, and after worship.

-       We will practice non-touching ways of greeting one another. 

-       We will expect Ushers to offer reminders or corrections and respond kindly. 

-       We will be patient with each other as we all figure out how to do this well. 

-         

In addition, there are some modifications to worship and gathering that we will need to accept. 

-       We are unable to sing, serve communion, pass the peace, or pass offering plates. 

-       Restrooms are for emergencies and one person at a time, if possible. 

-       We will not offer child care, nursery, or Sunday School. 

-       There are no pew Bibles, so you should bring one if you like to read along. 

-       We will not have printed bulletins. 

-       We will not have our beloved “Patio Time” following worship. 

-       We are limiting the number of worship leaders using microphones. 

 

Our Ushers are meeting and focusing diligently on how to enable us to turn our ‘on paper planning’ into ‘in person practice.’ You are free to seek their direction or help at any time.

 

We will use six-foot pool noodles to ensure safe, social distancing during worship. We have staggered noodles on the pews, so that some folks can sit by themselves, while other families can sit together. Our pews are spaced so that every other row is six-feet apart. What that means is that if the space on the pew immediately behind or in front of you is empty, you are safely distant in those directions. Then, if you honor the pool noodle on either side of you, you are safe in those directions. Unlike ribbon or taped signs, the noodles will allow us to make small adjustments to accommodate larger families or to ensure your comfort. And, when the pandemic is a distant memory, we will have a pool party and pretend they are swords.

 

As I was spacing out the noodles this week, it did occur to me that sitting six feet away from others in every direction can feel a bit lonely. Then, a friend shared a story of her friend who felt isolated during worship because he was unable to sit closer to others. It is a reminder that even when we gather in person for the first time since March, it will not be the same experience that we have had for many years. So, we will give it some time, we will practice patience, and we will make adjustments along the way as we learn better. 

 

Registration for October 4 worship begins on Monday morning at 10:00am. You can click here to register. And please feel free to contact the church office if you need assistance (info@stmarkpresbyterian.org; or 949-644-1341). 

 

Thanks for being the church,

Mark of St. Mark

Hopeful Realism and In Person Worship

 There’s a really wonderful announcement at the end of today’s message. Don’t miss it! 

 

But first, I want to begin with a moment of what the theologian Douglas Ottati calls, “Hopeful realism.” That’s how I invite you to think about our forthcoming in person worship services. We will approach them with joy, but also with a clear-eyed understanding that we continue to live in the midst of a pandemic, so we glorify God and love one another best by practicing self-denying precaution. I want to be very clear that we are not gathering as a kind of brazen defiance of science. We’re not “sticking to the man” or baptizing arrogance by calling it faith. And we’re certainly not lending any credence whatsoever to divisive nonsense being perpetuated by QAnon and those who glibly perpetuate their lies. I hope that is clear. There are plenty of things in this world that are protest-worthy and plenty of causes worth living or dying for, but impatience with public health precautions is not one of them. 

 

Here’s what we are doing: We’re listening to science. We have an epidemiologist on our Faithful Phasing Team, who has helped us to understand Orange County’s recent movement from ‘purple’ to ‘red,’ in the State’s tracking system. We can safely gather, under very deliberate circumstances. Here’s what we are doing: We’re continuing to offer online worship. We know that some folks are more susceptible to this virus than others, some are more cautious about the possibility of exposure than others, some folks don’t agree with the fact that we are offering in person worship. If you are one of those folks, you matter, your opinion matters, and your health matters. So, the right thing for you is to stay home, stay safe, and participate in our worship online. And here’s what we are doing: We are demonstrating that a community of faith can gather and, at the same time, practice caring responsibility for one another. But, we can only do that if each of us subjects ourselves to the health and wellbeing of others. And this is key: If the county’s numbers change for the worse, we will change course. We mean it when we say that we are listening to science and practicing responsibility. 

 

I know this sounds awfully finger-waggy and I hope you know that I try not to use this tone very often. This tone is dedicated, not to the 99% who are well-intended, but to the 1% who might confuse liberty for license. And, as your pastor, I feel an enormous weight of responsibility regarding this decision and the process by which we will gather. So, let me be clear regarding my own role: If, when we gather, there is anyone not wearing a mask, not observing social distance, not abiding by the covenantal practices that enable us to gather safely, we will not worship. Back when the prophet Amos demanded that the people cease “the noise” of their worship, it was because they tried to offer worship while denying justice to others. I would rather risk my reputation, risk our friendship, and even risk my job, than to risk your life. Next week we will review some of these “best practices” that we will follow, enabling us to gather safely, while practicing justice and compassion toward one another. Thanks be to God. 

 

And now, for something completely joyous: We have hired DeJohn Brown, Jr. as our Director of Virtual Music Ministry here at St. Mark! DeJohn is a high school music teacher, who has been part of our choir for many years. We are delighted that DeJohn has agreed to take on this role, particularly during a time when we have to reimagine all of the traditional and familiar ways of being a choir and engaging in music during worship. Thank you, DeJohn, for leading us and thanks to all of you who supported this effort. It is so nice to have good news to share, and this is as good as it gets. 

 

Mark of St. Mark

Big News

 A Deliberate Step 

Friends, I have some very exciting and sober news to share. St. Mark will begin in person worship on Sunday, October 4, at 9:30 and 11:00am. Since the State of California has moved Orange County from ‘purple’ to ‘red’ in the color-themed tracking of COVID-19 data, we will be gathering in the sanctuary. So, for now, this is the news: In person worship resumes at St. Mark on Sunday mornings beginning in October. There are details below. Please review them so you will not be surprised and so that we can all work together to make this as smooth as possible. 

1. First and foremost, we will continue to offer our Saturday worship service via Facebook Live and post it on our website by Sunday morning. If you are unwell, if you are concerned, or if you need to sing in order to have a fulfilling worship service, the online service will continue to offer you a chance to worship with joy, gladness, and safety. 

2. If the County’s color code changes we will move worship outside. The staff and Worship Commission are preparing for either indoor or outdoor worship and the Faithful Phasing Team is monitoring the situation. Local epidemiologists have cautioned us that following the Labor Day weekend, with some schools opening, and with the usual flu season at hand, we may see a spike in our numbers, so we are prepared if that happens. 

3. We will be limited to 25% of our sanctuary capacity, which means 75 persons can attend a worship service. Therefore, we will have a registration process that you will need to use in order to attend. We can also use that information to contact you if we discover that another person in attendance subsequently has been diagnosed with the virus. We will make the registration process as easy to use as possible and you will always have a chance to call the church office if the online process is not feasible for you. The registration page will be up by September 21. 

4. Some things that you may be accustomed to in worship are not safe and will not be part of our services. They include: Passing the peace, communion, receiving the offering pew by pew, singing together, Sunday School, nursery services, and the doughnut hole-laden patio fellowship time. Bulletins will be virtual or on a self-serve table and we will need to be deliberate regarding how we enter and exit in order not to bottleneck around the doors. We are also exploring ways that one can sit outside and still hear the service. 

5. Families who shelter together will be able to sit side-by-side, but seating space will be staggered with proper distance beside, in front, and behind each other. 

6. Masks will be required. 

As you can see, we are trying to be attentive to the changing situation in Orange County while, at the same time, ensuring that we take every precaution possible. And, to repeat one last time, if the county’s situation changes for the worse, we will respond appropriately. 

Amid all of the precautions and adjustments, this is a very joyous occasion for us! There is something delightful about seeing one another’s faces, even if part of them are covered with masks. And I am especially happy to note that we will continue to make online worship available so that nobody is excluded. The amount of care, work, and consideration that your leadership have put into this decision is enormous. And while I’m sure that we all have some helpful ideas about how we navigate this change, please know that many of us have attended numerous webinars, read every article we could find, taken surveys, collected ‘best practices,’ and have spoken with others who have taken steps forward and backward to come to this moment. 

Thank you all for the patience that you have shown and for the ongoing support as we have taken a cautious approach to this pandemic. Your kindness and generosity have been key to bringing us to this moment. 

Blessings, 

Mark of St. Mark 

Moving Forward

 This week, the session of St. Mark made some important decisions that will affect the life of our church now and in the future. I’m going to share two of those decisions with you now, one of which is a done deal and the other of which is a work in progress. Next week I will share two other important decisions as well.  

 

First, the done deal: As of August 31, the St. Mark campus will be open for small group meetings, with10 or less people. We are specifically thinking of some of our commissions, forthcoming book groups, and other gatherings. We have a “Faithful Phasing” framework that clearly spells out the expectations that we invite those who gather to agree to, such as not attending if one is feeling unwell, keeping safe distance, and wearing masks. Our framework also invites meeting conveners to keep a zoom component to meetings, so that those who are not able or comfortable attending meetings in person can still participate. Each meeting will have a convener and the Faithful Phasing framework will be sent to each convener who will be responsible for ensuring that they are followed. It all sounds very cautious, because our goal is to ensure that the most vulnerable person is able to participate fully in the life of the church. 

 

If your commission or small group wishes to gather in person beginning August 31, you start by contacting the church office and scheduling the meeting with Sue-Ann Wichman.[1] The Church Office Staff will ensure that there is hand sanitizer available for each meeting, that you have a restroom available, and that the space will be sanitized before and after your meeting. Finally, we encourage groups to meet outdoors if they are able and have obtained shade umbrellas to make that feasible. 

 

Next, the work in process. We have a Faithful Phasing Team that meets every Tuesday morning, keeping an eye on how the numbers are trending in Orange County, what the State mandates and allows, as well as collecting resources about best practices for gatherings, worship, and so forth. The Session has set a process so that when the Faithful Phasing Team sees a three-week decline in important trend numbers, we can make a recommendation to initiate outdoor, in person worship gatherings. We have not set a date yet. We have set the process for making that decision and, meanwhile, the Worship Commission is working on how we plan to approach worship when that time comes. Even when we begin in person, outdoor worship, we will continue to have an online service for those who are not able or ready to begin gathering in person. 

 

In the meantime, the Membership Commission has put together a brief survey so you can let us know how you feel about our worship services going forward. The results of the survey will be collected and anonymous, so you are invited to be as candid as possible. Click here for a link to the survey.  

 

Finally, we know that the world is facing many challenges today, some far more severe than the question of when we can gather in person. There are fires in the west, storms in the east, and again we have witnessed an act of Police violence against an unarmed African American. Our call to pursue racial justice, and to begin by examining our own participation in systemic racism, is as important as ever. To provide a way for us, the Adult Discipleship and Nurture Commission will be starting a 4-week book discussion group on Robin DiAngelo's White Fragility starting in the first weeks of September. We will do our best to accommodate a range of schedules and hope that this will provide a congregation-wide opportunity to concretely engage on issues of race and racism. We only ask that you come with open hearts and a willingness to be challenged. Please email SueJeanne Koh-Parsons at suejeanne.koh@gmail.com if you are interested in participating or have any questions. 

 

Mark of St. Mark

---

[1] Sue-Ann Wichman’s contact: SueAnn@stmarkpresbyterian.org ; or 949-644-1341

The Two Faces of Anxiety

It’s curious how we have come to use the word “anxious” in two different ways. We might say, “I’m anxious to get started on our presentation, so please send me your part of the project soon.” As such, we use “anxious” to mean, “ready” or “eager.” Or, we might say, “I’m anxious about this presentation.” In that case, we’re not expressing eagerness but “apprehension” or “reservation.” Isn’t it weird that a single word can lean in two very different directions, of readiness to go and dreading to go? 

 

To wit: “I’m anxious to get back to in person worship” and “I’m anxious about getting back to in person worship.” Both of those comments are true for me. And, please note that what follows is an intensely personal perspective. When we get back to in person worship is a matter that our session will decide, not your pastor or staff. I am only disclosing my own reflections with that caveat in mind. 

 

I’m anxious to get back to in person worship. I miss you, I miss your faces, and even though I am more of an introvert than an extrovert, our gatherings on Saturday evenings and Sunday mornings are very meaningful to me far beyond the personal experience of praise, prayer, and preaching. I am getting my fill of praise, prayer, and preaching through our virtual worship services. It’s not the same as how I’ve been doing those things all of my life, but it is actual praise, actual prayer, and actual preaching – things that I thirst to offer as my response to God’s grace. Even so, while we have praise, prayer, and preaching, we’re missing ‘people’ (I decided to keep all of these descriptions in the ‘p’ family.) One day our praise, prayer, and preaching will be a people event. And I’m anxious for that day to happen. 

 

And I’m anxious about getting back to in person worship. Every physician, nurse, epidemiologist, or hospital technician that I know is deadly serious about the real and present dangers of COVID-19. The persons whom I know who have lost family members to this pandemic are crying out for people to take it seriously, to listen to experts, to attend to safety precautions, and to act accordingly. And, to be painfully candid, it seems that Orange County has long cultivated a “You’re not the boss of me” attitude of individualism that makes it challenging to respond to a virus with the kind of concern for communal well being that is required. Even churches have tried to baptize this individualist perspective by painting themselves as oppressed and forgetting the Apostle Paul’s warning about harming our neighbors by turning our liberty into license. I am anxious about getting back to worship for both sheer safety reasons and because I don’t want to play into the hands of those who are ignoring or demeaning the concerns of public health. 

 

So, I am torn between the two differing modes of the word “anxious” when it comes to in person worship. I suspect that we all are, to one degree or another – just as we are when it comes to attending any public event; visiting parents, grandparents, children, or grandchildren; attending school in person or remotely; even hugging people whom we love. 

 

I wish I had some kind of magic answer to how we resolve these competing forms of anxiety. It seems that we may have to simply fall back on the virtues that we’ve always known were required for making community – love, listening, patience, honesty, and at times deferring our own desires for the sake of the common good. 

 

When the time comes that the session is ready to resume in person worship, you will – of course – have the final say over whether you will attend. That is a matter of your conscience over which God alone is the judge. So, you will not be judged one way or another by us. Rather, we will try to ensure that we can honor both definitions of what it means to be anxious for in person worship.

 

Mark of St. Mark   

Trend or Movement, pt. 2

 Last week I raised the question of whether the Black Lives Matter and anti-racism moment is a trend or a movement. You may have noticed that I raised the question but didn’t actually answer it. I will offer my best answer at the end of this message. Until then, I want to add two thoughts, which burrow a bit more into the complexity (and perhaps unfairness) of the question. 

 

First, last week someone asked me to consider the relationship between the Civil Rights actions of the 60's to what is happening today in my question. And while there is no shortage of people making reference to Martin and Malcolm and John Lewis, etc., it was a wise correction for me. I should not pretend that anything of significance arises out of nothing, so a 'beginning' point may be as hard to pinpoint as an 'ending' point. As I reflect on the current BLM moment, I will be mindful that our moment has numerous histories that inform, empower, shape, and challenge it. 

 

Maybe I ought not to think about big seismic movements, like the Protestant Reformation (which also had a history but we see it as a significant, lasting event of change.) More common, yet perhaps just as long lasting in their significance, would be something more like associated waves of change. The abolitionist movement, the reconstruction period, the civil rights movement, and so forth could be part of a long, series of connected waves that wax and wane, with moments of progress, followed by reactionary pushbacks like Jim Crow, redlining, and the school-to-prison system in many cities. 

 

To use my favorite metaphor for how I think God is at work in history, I do not accept the idea that history is always a trajectory of progress, like the “onward and upward,” “every day in every way getting better and better” idealism of the late 19^th century. But, neither do I think history is a static pendulum of progress and regress, with every progress accompanied by an equal regress. I like the metaphor of “Foucault’s Pendulum,” which has that back and forth quality of static realism, but even while the pendulum swings back and forth it makes it way ever so steadily to a new place. The idea of Foucault’s pendulum is that between the force of gravity and axial tilt, the back and forth motion will actually knock down pegs in a full circle over a 24-hour period. So, again, perhaps our BLM moment is part of a larger movement that is progressing ever so slowly despite the pendulum swinging back and forth. 

 

Second, when I ask whether the BLM moment is a trend or a movement, I need to say also that I am strongly opposed to predictions. Whether it is a bookie in Vegas placing odds on a Laker’s game or a Fundamentalist pretending to read biblical tea leaves, prediction is always a guess. And that’s true, even if we present it under the guise of “prophecy.” It is a sad thing that the word “prophecy” has been reduced to guesswork. The prophetic tradition did speak to trajectories often, warning that if such-and-such a practice continued there would be dire consequences. I’m posing the question not to invite guesses or to make one myself. I am posing the question because it is often the case that some passionate moments are short-lived and some are long lasting. And, if we’re committed to BLM as a matter of justice, we have to ask this kind of question. 

 

So, when I pose the question of whether our BLM moment is a trend or a movement, here’s how I think a biblical prophet would answer – or, at least, this is how I want to answer: The moment will become a movement if we follow the leading of the Spirit and make it so.[1] I believe we should be asking ourselves, “What do we need to be doing now in order to assure that this will be a movement that significantly changes the story of racism in our society?” That question brings together the imperative and hope that we face today. 

 

That’s my best answer so far. Thanks for stopping by. 

 

Mark of St. Mark

 

---

[1] I am not denying the sovereignty of God by making this claim. It is in the spirit of Mark 6:5-6, where Jesus could do no miracles in his hometown because of their unbelief. I believe, in a nutshell, that this is how God chooses to roll, which is why ‘predestination’ and ‘free will’ are not incompatible. 

Trend or Movement, pt.1

 I have a question. Do you think Black Lives Matter (hereafter BLM) is a trend or a movement? Here is how I’m using those terms: By a ‘trend’ I do not mean ‘unserious’ or ‘faddish,’ but something that we consider to have temporary attention and/or seriousness. And by ‘movement’ I mean something that we consider to have lastingattention and/or seriousness. So, to call something a ‘trend’ is not to demean its importance but to see it as contained within a particular time, a specific zeitgeist, whereas a ‘movement’ would have more profound effects, at least time-wise. 

 

So, my question: Is BLM is a trend, pertinent to our particular moment; or a movement, which deserves our attention and will re-direct our course for a long time? Let me flesh that out with a few examples. Should a Presbyterian Seminary have required courses in “Reformed Theology,” requiring readings of Augustine, Calvin, Schleiermacher, and Barth; then elective courses in “De-Colonizing Reformed Theology” where non-western and feminist voices are represented? Should the required “Introduction to the Bible” class teach exegesis using Greek or Hebrew and introduce critical studies regarding form, history, and redaction; while an elective class could be “Reading the Bible through Third World Eyes”? These were actually the ‘required’ v. ‘elective’ classes I took in Seminary, so I’m not making these examples up. If the big downtown church hired an “Associate Pastor for Pastoral Care,” would there be any pushback? What if they hired an “Associate Pastor for Anti-Racism”? Should a Ph.D program in theology require German and French proficiency (like mine did), but not Spanish or Korean? 

 

These examples show that we have a set of expectations as to what constitutes Christianity as a movement and what we regard as trends within the Christianity. But why should Gustavo Gutiérrez’ theology be optional while Karl Barth’s is required? My sense is that we assume Christianity is – at its core and as a movement – a western, white phenomenon. Most of the art, Bibles, educational materials, and hymnody of the church reflects that part of the tradition when 93% Christians were from the Europe or the Americas (1910). Back then, the Global North (commonly defined as North America, Europe, Australia, Japan and New Zealand) contained more than four times as many Christians as the Global South (the rest of the world). Today, more than 1.3 billion Christians live in the Global South (61%), compared with about 860 million in the Global North (39%).[1]

 

So, here’s why the question of whether BLM is a trend or a movement is important to me: If BLM is a trend (again, that does not trivialize the significance), then readings by people of color will likely remain in the ‘elective’ course, strongly encouraged but not likely to be part of the core curriculum in ten years; while Barth will continue to be required. But, if BLM is a movement, even our most standard texts should be open to critical reconsideration, especially if they have been instrumental in legitimizing racism over the years.[2] If BLM is a trend, our work of protesting, organizing, educating, and praying about anti-racism is here for now and anyone who disagrees can just roll their eyes and wait it out until we get back to normal. But, if BLM is a movement, then someone who disagrees might face the options of being transformed by it or going elsewhere because the attention will not pass. 

 

We’re not the first to ask this kind of question. The early Christian movement caused a lot of consternation to established religious leaders in the Book of Acts, when a particularly wise leader named Gamaliel put the matter into bold relief. After citing a few other failed messianic attempts, he said this to the Council: “If this plan or this undertaking is of human origin, it will fail; but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them—in that case you may even be found fighting against God!” That, to me, is the question. If BLM and anti-racism more generally is the work that God is doing in the church and society today, then we cannot treat it as something ancillary to our calling, but must lean into it as precisely what we are about. And that would require moving anti-racist work from the elective to the required categories of our priorities. 

 

Mark of St. Mark

  

 

---

[1] https://www.pewforum.org/2011/12/19/global-christianity-exec/ accessed 080620. 

[2] I am not suggesting that Karl Barth’s writings legitimized racism. I am only using him as an example, because his work is so widely read in Presbyterian seminaries.