Why do you go to church? That’s a tough one. After all, there probably isn’t one single reason.

My mother, in her earlier years, used to say that she went primarily for the music (until, that is, her faith became far more critical to her in her final years).

My paternal grandfather, a pastor, once told my father the main reason people go to church is to be reassured.

I think there’s something to this. But what? To be reassured about what? Moreover, why do we need to be reassured?

Someone recently asked me why God allows innocent suffering, of, say, a child. This is one of the more difficult questions Christianity faces. Why does an all-knowing, all-loving God allow such a thing? Why indeed do “bad things happen to good people”?

As a pastor who’s considered this question over the years and heard it posed by any number of people, I still can’t offer an adequate answer – or at least one that truly satisfies.

The traditional answer, of course, is that we live in a fallen world where bad things happen, things God does not intend.

While getting a haircut the other day, my barber suggested that “everything happens for a reason,” including illness and other maladies. Though I didn’t argue with her, I’ve always believed this sentiment to be contrary to the biblical witness.

I don’t believe, in other words, that God purposely inflicts suffering in order to help us grow spiritually (or for any other reason for that matter). Rather, God enters into life’s inevitable pain seeking to bring healing and spiritual growth.

The reason we come to church, therefore, is precisely because we live in a fallen world where suffering and pain affects the just and the unjust alike. It’s a part of life. We can’t ever fully know why. Suffering just is.

And because suffering is both real and a part of everyday life, we are drawn to that place which not only provides us with meaning in the midst of our pain, but promises us relief, not just in this life but the next.

The life, passion, and death of Jesus Christ teaches us that even God is not spared innocent suffering. (We’re even assured that God suffers with us.) Yet in and through our suffering there is meaning and purpose; we can draw closer to God.

Along these lines, Paul tells us that suffering can have one of two effects – it can lead to death, he says, or life. Suffering can cause us to become embittered and lose hope. Or it can open us up to the awareness of God’s life-giving presence.

In the final analysis, if there was no suffering or pain (not that God causes it), we wouldn’t need to go to church. And we wouldn’t need a Messiah.

The reason we go to church, then, despite all others ancillary reasons to do so, is the enduring assurance that in the midst of a broken and fallen world, God is with us, redeeming us, and saving us, with the ironclad promise of eternal life.

Peace and grace,

Thomas C. Leinbach, Pastor

Looking out over the current political and cultural landscape is to be confronted with an increasingly balkanized world. Rather than a community united in common purpose, what we tend to see is identity politics, with one group pitted against the others.

This is compounded by our technological world. We can craft our own personal space without ever having to encounter someone who thinks or feels differently. We can choose which sources of information or media we wish to view, select our own music playlists, and interact only with “friends” on the web we find suitable.

Gone are the days when we actually considered the free exchange of ideas as a worthy enterprise.

One of our members, keen to this problem, offered the example of his debating class in college. There he was required to argue for a particular point of view and then later the same day to advocate from the exact opposite perspective. The result, he said, was that he learned something about all sides of the issue, even if it didn’t always alter his previously-held position.

What we see today is a new and troubling form of tribalism. In this exercise, we are not required to consider another’s point of view. Worse still, we are uninterested in any sort of objective reason or truth. In fact, one might argue that truth is irrelevant. All that matters is that our side wins.

Our political debates increasingly have this flavor. Self-referential talking points abound. He or she who talks the loudest, or last, wins. The sheer force of self-will prevails. But again, the point is winning, not allegiance to truth.

One of the basic foundations of any healthy society is its rule of law. And the law is, as has been said, “no respecter of persons.” This means the law does not favor one person or group. In theory at least, the law doesn’t care whether you’re a Silicon Valley billionaire or the pastor of a local church. The rule of law applies equally.

The human tendency, on the other hand, is to favor our friends or group. We’re willing to cut corners in order to take care of them. This is the kiss of death, not just for a nation, but for any human society, including the church.

If we humans were truly devoid of sin and partiality, there would be no reason for rules or laws, including church by-laws. Angels don’t require such things. But the reason we have them is that we’re not always impartial or selfless in our thinking and doing. We’re human.

That’s why the church has by-laws and why we should seek to make them not only as equitable and fair as possible, but why we all should be encouraged to follow them.

When I first came to First Church as settled pastor in 2006, I noticed there were a lot of well-meaning people running around doing what they thought needed to be done. The problem was that they didn’t always go through the proper channels.

Rather than taking their ideas or proposals to the appropriate board or committee, they would simply run with them. The effect, not surprisingly, was conflict. For when corners are cut and people are left out of the decision-making process, the perception, if not the reality, is one of unfairness.

So if we find fault in others for acting in such a way, we need to be careful we aren’t guilty of it either. Cutting corners is always a mistake. Oh, we may justify this by seeing the rules as “man-made” and thus arbitrary. We may even think that following them is a form of pharisaism (following rules for the sake of following rules). Yet they exist for a reason.

As we consider the proposed by-law changes at our upcoming Annual Meeting on June 4^th, may we keep all of this in mind.

Grace and peace,

Thomas C. Leinbach, Pastor

 

Christian author Russell Reno recently wrote, regarding the incipient ethos of our age, “In the place of traditional culture, the globalized future will be governed by the hearth gods of health, wealth, and pleasure. Our high priests will be medical experts, central bankers, and celebrity chefs.”

His reference to “hearth gods” is an allusion to the pagan house gods of the average Roman citizen prior to Christianity. After Rome fell, and with it formalized Christianity, these hearth gods reemerged, with many homes having little altars dedicated to these gods.

As Christianity has weakened in our time, our culture has increasingly replaced the traditional biblical God with new gods, though, admittedly, there’s really nothing new about the pursuit of health, wealth, and pleasure.

Reno’s argument is that, in general, the West, since the end of WWII, has consciously sought to weaken its ties to particular, specific truths and traditions. After the horrors of the first half of the 20^th century, the West, he says, has sought “disenchantment” from these things, perhaps especially the church and its deep-seated loyalties.

“If there are no strong truths,” or so the argument goes, “nobody will judge others or limit their freedom. If nothing is worth fighting for, nobody will fight.”

This seemed to make sense in the aftermath of the wholesale slaughter born of the two world wars in Europe and elsewhere, but, as is often the case, the natural human response was and is to lurch toward the opposite extreme. Now no one is to stand for any declared set of principles or truths, much less a sovereign, providential God as found in the Old and New Testaments.

Human beings, however, never operate in a vacuum. Others gods inevitably and reliably fill whatever space has been vacated. In the absence of the substantive God of the Judeo-Christian tradition, what other gods shall fill the vacuum?

The question, finally, is not whether or not we should hold onto certain values and truths, but which values and truths. In the same vein, the question is not whether or not we should worship gods, but which one(s).

Richard Foster once said that most people worry that those who take their Christianity seriously have “gone off the deep end.” The greater danger, he says, is that we Christians will “go off the shallow end!”

To pursue Christianity with great passion, as the gospel requires, means that we are to worship and obey a God who instills within us humility, gentleness, kindness, selflessness, charity, forgiveness, godly truth, and love. (No doubt I’ve left a number of things out!)

To not pursue these things hardly benefits anyone.

To repeat, it’s not whether we should or shouldn’t worship God or hold onto certain truths, but whether the things we worship and obey are worthy.

Many have suggested that the church needs to become “relevant” to the culture. My view, however, is that the church instead needs to become more the church, to reclaim its historic mandate to worthily and passionately worship the God revealed in Jesus Christ.

Aldous Huxley, the 20^th century British writer and novelist, once quipped, “You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you mad.”

This, of course, is a take-off on Jesus’ words in John 8:32, where he says, “And you shall know the truth, and the truth will make you free.”

Generally less known is what he says right before this. In verse 21 it reads: “Then Jesus said to the Jews who had believed in him, ‘If you continue in my word, you are truly my disciples.’” Only then does he talk about the truth making us free, or, as in other translations, setting us free.

Jesus’ comments are especially relevant as we enter the season of Lent. Lent is, after all, a time to reflect on the truth of God’s word and to assess how our lives conform to this same truth.

As Huxley’s witty phrase has it, this is not always a lot of fun. Hearing the truth is sometimes an offense. It upsets us. It can even make us angry (or mad). Why? Because sin has convinced us that we get to decide what is right and wrong, as well as what is acceptable conduct and behavior.

Martin Copenhaver, currently Dean of Andover Newton Theological Seminary, writes in his Christian primer, To Begin at the Beginning, that his idea of hell is when, after we die, we are placed in a room with countless witnesses and a movie of our lives is shown.

With each passing frame, all can see clearly our less than stellar moments, and they ask us, “You did this?” or “You said that?” Such, he suggests, may very well be a tad uncomfortable!

This is perhaps another way of saying that one day we all shall see our lives as God sees them! In some ways that will be great, but in other instances perhaps not so much.

When confronted with things we don’t like about ourselves, the natural tendency is to react, deny, and perhaps even lash out. Yet, we’re told, God is an ever-merciful God who wishes more than anything for God’s children to repent, that is, to acknowledge their errors and resolve to change.

It is akin to a father or mother who observes his or her child misbehaving. Nothing gladdens the heart of a parent more than seeing that same child come forward and say he or she is sorry. Joyous forgiveness, followed by hugs and kisses, is the typical end result.

Lent is a time for us to respond to God’s gracious invitation for us to repent, to acknowledge those thoughts, words, and deeds which separate us unnecessarily from God and others. The intended result, again, is joy!

Holding to the truth, however, can be difficult. There are many temptations, both internally and externally, that prevent us from adhering to God’s word, God’s truth. Yet the one thing we should always seek to do is precisely this, to hold onto the truth. For ultimately, we know, truth will be vindicated.

That may mean periods of discomfort, or doubt, discouragement, or even persecution. But we Christians are not running a short sprint, but a long race. As such, our eyes are always set on the prize – God’s glory – even when it appears far away.

During this Lenten season, therefore, let us be steadfast and immovable, full of resolve, trusting in God’s promises, God’s word, God’s truth, and knowing, ultimately, that in the end it shall set us free.

Grace and peace,

Thomas C. Leinbach, Pastor

Acts 2:43-47 reads: “Awe came upon everyone, because many wonders and signs were being done by the apostles. All who believed were together and had all things in common…Day by day they spent much time together in the temple, they broke bread at home and ate their food with glad and generous hearts, praising God and having the goodwill of all the people. And day by day the Lord added to their number those who were being saved.”

This is an account of the early church. What is striking is its excitement and sense of community. It depicts more a movement than the frozen inner workings of a settled institution. Its members betray a life-changing, compelling sense of mission and ministry, one that judges all other interests as necessarily of lesser account.

Consider now our current by-laws regarding membership: “Members are classified as active if they have supported the Church in the prior 24 months through one or more of the following: identifiable financial support, attendance at worship services and/or by showing devotion and loyalty to the Church by participating in other Church support activities…”

Pretty weak tea, I’d say. Its language reflects not a movement born of passion for ministry, but a settled, sclerotic institutionalism that demands little in the way of faith or community.

In studied contrast, I recently conducted a Google-search of U.C.C. by-laws. The first five “hits” came up with startlingly similar results. My favorite was this, from the First Parish Congregational Church, United Church of Christ, in Yarmouth, ME:

“Upon reception, a candidate shall become a member of the Church, having pledged to attend the regular worship of the Church and the service of Holy Communion and, as he/she is able, to give systematically to its support for current expenses and benevolences, to share in its organized work, and to seek diligently the spiritual welfare of the membership and community.

“In like manner,” it continues, “the existing Church membership shall provide a receptive atmosphere in which each new member may effectively contribute his or her own talents to the enrichment of the Church community. It is the responsibility of each Church member to stimulate and encourage each other in the ways of active Church life, and to celebrate the unique talents each brings to the life of the Church.”

Now which description of church membership strikes you as closest to the early church in Acts 2? Not only does the latter exhort its members to live out an active worship and communal life, but it charges the congregation to welcome and encourage the participation of even its newest members. The idea, in short, is that all members are called to truly active ministry.

I recently contacted the Rev. Don Remick, our Massachusetts Conference Southeast Regional Minister, to get this thoughts on the matter. His response reads as follows:

“I like the language in the Yarmouth Bylaws that you quote. But the language you share from your bylaws is, in my experience, more common among churches. However, you are among many churches who are raising these questions around how folks are selected for leadership positions.

“The direction you are moving towards is the recommended direction of having greater checks and balances on the finances, complete clarity and transparency with the congregation and an expectation that people in leadership positions (particularly those that involve policy making and financial decisions) should be people who actively participate in the life of the church, particularly in worship and spiritual formation. These are no brainers and should be agreed upon expectations.”

As we move forward, and in anticipation of the as yet unscheduled series of congregational meetings/conversations regarding our by-law re-write, it might be helpful to consider carefully Don’s words.

Moving from the old stultified “board culture” of bureaucratic, top-down “management” and toward a new “ministry culture” that seeks to involve all members in genuine active ministry is the wave of the future, though also, ironically, a return to our roots, to the spiritual and communal integrity found within the early church, and as described in Acts 2.

Grace and peace,

Thomas C. Leinbach, Pastor