Part of John Wesley’s genius, as the founder of the Methodist Movement, was the way he organized to make disciples. He established small groups everywhere he went. When these small groups met, they would go through a list of questions at each meeting. The questions were designed to guide the group members into a deeper walk with God.
Here is the fourth question:
- Am I a slave to dress, friends, work , or habits?
Wesley knew better than to think that spirituality, or following Jesus, was simply a matter of spending time each day in prayer and bible study. He knew that following Jesus would affect every area of our lives: including the way we dress, our choice of friends, where and how we work, and habits we hold on to.
But the wording of this question reminds us that neither is following Jesus only about shopping at different stores, befriending a different group of people, etc. The beginning of the question is as important to the disciple of Jesus as the ending: “Am I a slave…?”
In John 8:31-32 Jesus said “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to my teaching. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” Following Jesus sets us free from all matters of bondage, including things like clothing, friends, work, and habits.
Perhaps the most basic way this question challenges us to grow is in facing the truth that everyone who follows Jesus doesn’t look exactly like us. They won’t all dress the same, have the same friends, work the same jobs, or have exactly the same habits.
I’m reminded of a story told by a deeply faithful Free Methodist college Professor. His young adult daugther was in a relationship with a young man of the Dutch Reformed tradion. Unlike the Free Methodists, Dutch Reformed do not carry the same social taboos on alcohol and tobacco.
Knowing the young man to be a committed Christian nevertheless, this professor told me how he and his wife sought to reach out across such different practices. If their daughter was serious about him, they would make every effort. They invited him to join them at the symphony.
The young man graciously declined. “While I very much appreciate the invitation, I would never dream of doing such a thing on the sabbath,” he told them.
When we find ourselves enslaved to some social particulars, we might set up barriers that keep us from fellowship, and that can poorly represent our Lord.
Dress, friends, work, and habits matter. They matter deeply. But they are not lord of our lives. That place is reserved for Jesus.
“Put Jesus first.” I feel like I hear this a lot. The scripture that has informed our current sermon series, Colossians 1:15-20, supports this directive. It says, after all, in verse 18
He is the head of the body, the church,
who is the beginning,
the one who is firstborn from among the dead
so that he might occupy the first place in everything.
But what does “putting Jesus first” look like?
In our society, people who “get to go first” don’t have to stand in line like everyone else. They receive protection from all the normal people; they can have guards and gates and get ushered to the front row or the luxury boxes.
Not only was Jesus NOT treated this way; there is no indication that Jesus ever sought to be treated this way. In fact, I’m reminded that he said that “Whoever wants to be first among you will be your slave— just as the Son of Man didn’t come to be served but rather to serve and to give his life to liberate many people.” (Matthew 20:27-28)
Jesus WAS the head, the firstborn from among the dead. He DOES and WILL occupy the first place among everything. He was also so secure in his relationship with God that he felt no need to act like it, or to show it off. In fact, he emptied himself, humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. (Philippians 2:7-8)
May you and I, and all who are trying to follow Jesus, be secure enough in our relationship with God that we, too, might not seek to be recognized as first, or as more important than others. May we follow the way of Jesus – and, in doing so, we’ll find we are putting Jesus first.
“You didn’t begin your sermon with the reading of the scripture text. You are always supposed to read the scripture as the beginning of your sermon.”
This is a very close approximation to something a colleague of mine was told recently. This colleague is soon to go before the Board of Ordained Ministry for commissioning – a major step towards ordination.
Part of the qualifying process is submission of a sermon – both manuscript and video recording.
My colleague asked for my insights as to whether such a particularity could, in fact, derail his quest.
I shared that I cannot remember the last time I read the scripture text as the beginning of my sermon.
For me, anyway, this rarely if ever happens in part because our liturgist reads one of our texts immediately before I stand to preach. Re-reading the scripture myself would give in to the notion that preaching is not really a part of the worship service as a whole, but rather a stand-alone event thrown into the midst of a worship service.
I encouraged my colleague to continue to preach the Word, and to preach the text for the service, whether or not that scripture text was written into the sermon.
A much larger concern for me is that someone would suggest so simple a component done differently would disqualify a sermon altogether. What I think really happened was an incident of either
- “You didn’t preach the way I was taught to preach” or
- “You didn’t preach the way I like to hear someone preach.
Are there specific mechanics that you believe are absolutely essential to the successful preaching of a sermon? Do Jesus’ and Peter’s and Paul’s preaching always follow your rules?
Having the right to do something does not necessarily make doing it the right thing to do.
Case in point: Jacyln Pfieffer was allegedly fired from her position as a teacher at Aloma Methodist Early Childhood Learning Center. Further, she was allegedly fired because it was learned that she was living in a lesbian relationship.
The discussions about this that I’ve seen, and been part of, on social media, tend to end up with people on either of two sides of this polarity
- The ECLC was within its rights as a religious organization to fire someone engaged in conduct they believe to be immoral; and
- Ms. Pfieffer was a victim of discrimination.
I am not taking sides on that polarity.
Knowing a little about Church-State matters, I expect the ECLC, related to its host Church, may well be perfectly within their rights to have fired her.
Even if they were within their rights as a religious organization, though, I think they blew it. They failed. They did not represent Jesus well.
This is stronger language than I usually use on this blog, but this is serious business.
Whatever your position on sexuality and orientation and same-sex marriage, if you are a Christian, I assume you would agree that we (Christians) represent Christ, and therefore God.
I think you would also have to agree with this: whether we approve of someone else’s behavior/orientation/lifestyle/fill-in-your-preferred-term-here,we are commanded to love them. All of them; friends, enemies, strangers, etc.
Christians do not get to choose whom to love and whom not to.
But we do, according to the law, receive some leeway according to our religion, in choosing whom to employ and whom not to.
I believe that choice is far better made before hiring than after.
So, even if you fully support Aloma Methodist ECLC’s decision, you must agree that they would have represented Christ better had they been open upfront and refused to hire Ms. Pfeiffer in the first place than to fire her.
I don’t know where the law places the burden of proof. Should Ms. Pfieffer have self-identified as lesbian in the hiring process?
How self-disclosing are you when you apply for a job?
No; from my perspective – and it would be very, very hard to sway me on this – it is on the church-affiliated organization to be very, very clear during the hiring process what their moral expectations of employees are.
If Aloma Methodist ECLC presents itself as representing the God we know in and through Jesus, they owe it to the world around them, the culture in which they serve, to love the other. If this means anything, it at least means treating them with respect.
Simply put: I’m pretty sure that if Jesus wouldn’t allow a lesbian to work for him, he wouldn’t have hired her in the first place.
Go, thou, and do likewise.
We had a fascinating discussion yesterday at our Lenten Wednesday Lunch Study. As you might expect, the discussion really got me thinking.
We were talking about being righteous. Specifically about whether or not we are. Righteous, that is; whether or not we are righteous.
Of course, the talk quickly moved toward our being righteous “in God’s eyes.” This, many Christians understand, is the work and gift of Jesus.
God sees us as righteous thanks to Jesus’ life and sacrificial death on the cross.
Good news, right?
Yes, except that thinking of ourselves as righteous tends to get us into trouble. (See “self-righteous”)
On the other hand, refusing to recognize that Jesus actually opens this opportunity to us, leaves us as miserable sinners, condemned always to fail.
How do we carve out space in the middle – acknowledging AND accepting this good gift from God – to understand that, thanks to Jesus, we are (first) seen as righteous by God and (second) actually grow in righteousness as we follow Jesus?
I’ve got a few ideas, and invite yours as well.
- We must keep in mind that the righteousness that indeed becomes ours is given – offered freely – to us.
- In would likely help if we focused more on recognizing everyone else as someone who has been offered this gift even more than remembering that we (ourselves) have been offered the gift. In other words, practice this: every person you see, think to yourself “God sees that person as righteous through Jesus’ gift.”
- Take some time each day to reflect on the ways God has worked in your life that day.
I have long said that Christian are at our best when we are advocating for the rights, liberties, fair treatment of others. I suppose I am willing to allege that this is true for everyone, not only for Christians. But I especially want Christians to own it.
I think it represents Jesus far better than getting all whiney about our own rights, liberties, or fair treatment.
To be fair, people can advocate for their own rights, etc., without being whiney. This is just my opinion: but US Christians seem to go whiney awfully quickly if we feel our rights, etc. threatened.
Just look at all the fuss we’ve been making over the persecution of Christians around the world lately. I believe we would make a better case AGAINST persecution of Christians and FOR following Jesus if we opposed all religious persecution.
Speaking of which, I don’t know if you noticed, but a case of religious freedom was argued before the US Supreme Court yesterday. Samantha Elauf was 17 when she applied to work at an Abercrombie and Fitch store. She was rated as a very good candidate. Her rating dropped when management found out she wore a hajib – a traditional headcovering worn by some Muslims. This dropped her rating enough that she wasn’t hired.
I don’t know how the case will come out. The report I heard indicated that most of the Justices, in oral arguments, sounded like they leaned in her favor.
I have heard Christians lament about not being allowed to wear cross necklaces to work; shouldn’t we be just as concerned for the religious liberty of others?