Healing

This sermon was preached by Rev. Dan Harper. As usual, the sermon below is a reading text. The actual sermon as preached contained ad libs, interjections, and other improvisation. Sermon copyright (c) 2005 Daniel Harper.

Reading

The reading this morning is from a sermon by Theodore Parker, a sermon which almost split the Unitarians in the middle 19th C., by minimizing or denying the importance of the miracles of Jesus which are reported in the Christian scriptures. The sermon was called “The Transient and Permanent in Christianity,” and Parker wrote:

“Let us look at this matter a little more closely. In actual Christianity — that is, in that portion of Christianity which is preached and believed — there seem to have been, ever since the time of its earthly founder, two elements, the one transient, the other permanent. The one is the thought, the folly, the uncertain wisdom, the theological notions, the impiety of man; the other, the eternal truth of God. These two bear perhaps the same relation to each other that the phenomena of outward nature, such as sunshine and cloud, growth, decay, and reproduction, bear to the great law of nature, which underlies and supports them all. As in that case, more attention is commonly paid to the particular phenomena than to the general law; so in this case, more is generally given to the Transient in Christianity than to the Permanent therein.”

SERMON — “Healing”

If you had read our church’s newsletter, or our church’s Web site, you would have seen that I gave my sermon topic for today as “Forgiveness.” No doubt some of you actually came here this morning to hear me preach on forgiveness; and no doubt some people stayed at home so they wouldn’t have to hear me preach on forgiveness. Well, I started to prepare a sermon on forgiveness, but I didn’t get very far before it turned into a different sermon. Yet even though this isn’t quite the sermon that was advertised, I hope it will do nonetheless. And some Sunday, I promise you that I will return to the topic of forgiveness.

As I was preparing the sermon this week, I found myself thinking about something that happened late last winter, when I wound up at the beside of a man who was unconscious and who… but let me back up a little, and tell you a little bit about where I was late last winter.

Last year, I was serving as the interim associate minister with the Unitarian Universalist Society of Geneva, Illinois. They were a congregation of down-to-earth, no-nonsense Midwesterners without an ounce of pretension. And they have long been a congregation of radicals and skeptics. The Geneva Unitarians took the word “God” out of their congregational covenant in the 1880’s, with the result that the congregational church in Geneva broke off having shared worship services with them in the 1880’s because, said the Congregationalists, the Unitarians couldn’t be trusted to actually believe in God. Even more radical, the Geneva Unitarians had three women ministers before 1910. In other words, they were and are typical Midwestern Unitarian radicals who have had no truck with the supernatural for over a century.

The current senior minister in Geneva is a woman named Lindsay Bates, a hard-headed New England Yankee who grew up in the Bridgewater Unitarian church. Like many of us New Englanders, Lindsay is plain-spoken to the point of being sharp-toungued. She does not tolerate sloppy thinking, and she’ll let you know when she thinks you’re not quite up to snuff. Which meant I liked her pretty well.

I was surprised, therefore, to learn that Lindsay was a certified Reiki master. I admit that I know next to nothing about Reiki, except that it is a kind of system of healing based on the old Chinese concept of “ch’i,” or the energy flow within a person. (I’m sure some of you know quite a bit about Reiki, and will be able to tell us more during social hour.) I don’t know much about Reiki, but it didn’t seem to fit in with the rest of Lindsay’ Bates’s personality. There were some members of the congregation who were also Reiki practitioners; and, since it is a Unitarian Universalist congregation, there were also those who thought the whole Reiki thing was a crock of beans.

Yet no matter what people thought of Reiki, there was this strong sense throughout the congregation that part of the business of the congregation was healing. Not just spiritual healing, or emotional healing, but physical healing as well. Lindsay was widely credited with one or two definite physical heaings (not that she’d make that claim herself). Now I realize that historically religions have been in the business of healing. But my sense has been that for the large part North American Unitarian Universalists feel that healing is a very small part of what we do in our congregations. Many of us don’t even pray, and we certainly don’t do anointing or laying-on-of-hands, or anything like that.

The Geneva church, however, placed some stock in the healing powers available at that church; even the ones who didn’t believe in Reiki. And as I thought about it, even a skeptic like me could think of some good and reasonable explanations for the repots of healing: coincidence; the mind-body connection we’re learning about; the reported power of prayer; and so on. And I found myself becoming more attuned to the possibility that even Unitarian Universalist congregations might have something to do with healing. Maybe I had missed something in the past. I was willing to keep an open mind.

One Sunday afternoon in late winter, we got two pastoral calls – crises, really – that needed the immediate attention of the ministers. A long-time member of the congregation died suddenly (but not unexpectedly), and it made the most sense that Lindsay, as the minister who had been there 28 years, should visit that family. And a man in the congregation had been in a terrible car accident, was in the Intensive Care Unit or ICU at a nearby hospital, having just come out of surgery. I’d spent some time doing volunteer chaplaincy in a hospital, so I went of the visit him.

I arrived at the hospital to find the family in shock. Only his wife had been allowed in to see him yet. She came out to get her children, and invited me to go with them into the ICU. He was still unconscious, completely unresponsive, and he looked pretty bad. His doctor came to talk with his wife; the doctor was pretty non-committal: He’d probably recover (probably!), he’d likely have some cognitive impairment, there was a good chance he’d wind up in a wheelchair or he’d probably need crutches or a cane for the rest of his life. All the nurse would say was that they had the best ICU around. It’s always very worrying to me when the doctors and nurses remain so noncommittal.

After the doctor left, I talked with the family. They wanted to pray (one never knows with Unitarian Universalists, because some of us don’t do that kind of prayer, or don’t pray at all). We gathered around the bed, they held his hands, and we did some praying together.

Then I thought it might be a good idea to do a little praying for healing – not something I ordinarily would do, but it was a part of that congregation’s culture. So I had his wife take his hand, and I took his hand, and we prayed in silence for a while — I emptied my mind of all thoughts, and just focused on healing.

And that was that. From then on, what I did was pretty conventional pastoral care and counseling. Much of pastoral counseling involves what are known in the trade as “active listening” and “presence.” Back in the 1950’s, psychologist Carl Rogers did research at the University of Chicago demonstrating that listening and just being present contribute to mental and emotional health, and the pastoral care and counseling I do is a kind of healing that draws from the research of Rogers and others. So that’s what I did, and after two hours at the hospital with this family, I went home.

When I got home, though, I wondered: when it comes to healing, what did my religion actually provide? I borrowed a few healing techniques from psychologists, true. And I thought then, as I have often thought: our liberal faith can claim to provide some relief from spiritual distress in times of accident, crisis, or illness; and that little bit is enough. There exist religious traditions which offer the certainty of healing –- physical, emotional, spiritual, intellectual healing. We Unitarian Universalists do not deal in such certainties. We offer a “faith without certainty,” in the words of theologian Paul Rasor. We do not claim to have religious certainty of any kind; we know that we are limited beings and that we cannot ever know for sure about the mysteries of life and death, or of sickness and health. While you may feel that our religious uncertainty is not as comforting as you would like, I try to remember this: knowing that we are uncertain about many things is better by far than a certainty that doesn’t work in the end; consider what it would be like to pray to your God in the certainty that you will be healed, only to find your prayers don’t work; you pray for a loved one to recover and he or she doesn’t.

Religious certainty can back-fire, and I would rather accept the uncertainties that must come with my limited understanding as a limited being. I don’t want to pray that Lazarus is going to rise from the dead because odds are pretty good that when Lazarus is dead he’s going to stay dead.

At the same time, there is more than one kind of religious healing. We don’t have to ask for people to rise from the dead. We don’t have to ask for the cure of uncurable illness. There is the healing that comes after grief. If someone close to you dies, it is possible to become so burdened by the weight of grief that you are smothered by it and literally die of grief. I’ve seen it happen: one member of a couples dies, and the other, though in perfect health at first, dies within a year or two. Or if someone close to you dies, it is also possible to deny your grief, to the point where something inside you becomes frozen and you can never fully love again. Hatred and anger can consume us, when we find it impossible to forgive, leading to physical disease.

For all these: — grief, hatred, anger, and so on –- religion can provide healing. But this seems different than physical healing. Yes, I know body an mind are connected, are truly one, but I also know that a supernatural miraculous healing of physical illness requires a suspension of the generally accepted natural laws. I don’t need to believe in supernatural miracles of healing. But I do know that within ourselves we human beings to have the ability to heal ourselves; and perhaps to heal others. We get sick and somehow our immune system fights off the disease and we are well again; that is a true miracle. We get sick, and a doctor or nurse helps us to heal, sometimes with medical procedures and sometimes with just a good bedside manner; that’s a true miracle. We suffer from a broken heart, grieving over lost love, but with time we can heal and love again: another miracle.

That we heal at all is a kind of miracle; that we can promote healing in ourselves and in others is a miracle; these small miracles are enough, and help me be more understanding when the day inevitably comes when healing does not take place.

Last February, I stood by the man in the ICU, and I was convinced it was going to be one of those situations where complete healing does not take place; I was ready for him to make only a partial recovery. I left the hospital feeling down, worried about him and his family.

But he did recover. He recovered consciousness with all his cognitive faculties intact; after a couple of months he was able to walk without assistance, and has had essentially a complete physical recovery. His recovery is a kind of miracle.

Did our little beside prayer help effect that recovery? Perhaps it helped, but of course it’s more complex than that. He was in excellent physical condition before the accident, and that always betters the odds for recovery and healing. He was immediately surrounded by love and support, and that must have helped. His entire extended family came as soon as they heard he had been hurt; the church provided the family with casseroles and child care and rides; and as a result of all that support his immediate family were able to devote their time and attention to helping his healing. I think that the presence of all that love from friends and family and church must have had positive effect. We do not heal completely on our own. Doctors and nurses and primary caregivers promote healing, sometimes by what they do and sometimes by their mere presence. That’s why we visit people in hospitals: just the presence of a friend or a family member can promote healing; you don’t even have to say or do anything besides sit there.

I have come to believe that healing is one things that our Unitarian Universalist congregations can actually do pretty well. Now you and I know that churches don’t do everything well, and sometimes they can be frustrating places. You can wind up arguing and fighting with people at church, sometimes about minor matters. And you and I know that churches can be boring places at times. We come for that blast of inspiration but wind up with a dull sermon or music you don’t. Yet the core of what our congregation does well is it allows us to be with other people, to be present with other people. As when you visit someone in the hospital, healing can take place in churches just be present for one another; as we sit side by side with other people who care about truth and goodness. I’ve never been healed by sitting on a crowded subway car, so I know there’s something qualitatively different about sitting in a church: being in the presence of other people who are willing to be present for you, willing to sit near you while recognizing your human value and worth; recognizing that we heal each other, that we can be healed by each other.

We can come to church to be healed and to heal others by our presence: when we are in grief or in joy; when we are dying or sheltering new life; when we are embarking on a new relationship or ending one that has gone wrong. We come to church for healing. And while being a Reiki master might help some people, you don’t need to be a Reiki master; nor do we need miracles or supernatural explanations. All we have to do is show up, and be present. We need the caring presence of others to begin to promote our own healing; we can join in the collective caring presence of the congregation to help others heal.

That’s one of the main reasons to come to church, my friends: to heal ourselves; to help each other heal; that we may in turn begin to heal the world.

Ingathering water ceremony

The following words were given by Rev. Dan Harper at the annual ingathering water ceremony. As usual, the text below is a reading text. Copyright (c) 2005 Daniel Harper.

INGATHERING WATER CEREMONY

It has become the custom in many Unitarian Universalist congregations to hold an ingathering water ceremony each year at the close of summer.

The water ceremony started in the 1970’s, when Lucile Shuck Longview, Carolyn McDade, and other strong feminists wondered about creating a worshipful ritual which would recognize the strength and power of women. They created a ceremony where women got together, each woman bringing a small amount of water to represent some part of her life; and then the waters from each woman were gathered into one communal bowl to symbolize that we are all connected, that we are all a part of life.

Each person here this morning will have an opportunity to come forward, and add a small amount of water to this bowl. Perhaps you read the newsletter or the announcement in last Sunday’s order of service and brought water from some place that is important to you, or from some place you visited this summer. Or perhaps you brought a memory, or an idea of a place that is important to you, and you will use one of the small cups of water up here to symbolize water from some place that is important in your life, or from some place you visited this summer.

One by one, we will pour water into the communal bowl. Each of us is an individual, each of us is important to this community: even if this is your first time here, this morning you are as important to this worshipping community as someone who has gone to this church all their lives. Our worshipping community is made up of the hopes and dreams and aspirations that each of us brings here this morning. We symbolize that by pouring a bit of water, a bit of who we are, into this bowl.

And water connects us with the wider world as well. When it rains, the water tha falls on this church drains into the harbor just down the hill from where we sit, and flows into Buzzards Bay, and out into the stormy Atlantic Ocean: so rain becomes oceans, oceans become clouds, clouds become rain –– become us become the world. Water connects us with each other, and with the whole world.

The original ingathering water ceremony was created in protest and in anger, and some of that remains as we gather together today. Bodies of water around the world are threatened by pollution and misuse. Our own New Bedford harbor is a Superfund site due to years of pollution with PCBs. Fresh water sources are getting contaminated, or overused. Water ties us to everything around us, and so this ceremony also represents a responsibility and a commitment for making the world a better place.

If you would like to add water to the communal bowl, please come forward now, and line up over there (point to my right). One by one, walk up and put your water in the bowl. If you would like to tell us where your water came from, please say your name first, and speak clearly into the microphone. And please limit yourself to one or two sentences, so everyone can have an equal chance to speak –– and so we’re not here all afternoon.

I’ll begin: My water comes from the Fox River in Geneva, Illinois, where I lived up until month ago. The Fox River is a quiet little Midwestern River currently suffering from a severe drought….

*****

So we have mixed water from different places, water of memories and thoughts and emotions. So we come together again as a worshipping community. Rivers and oceans run though us….

A Fresh Look at Familiar Things

This sermon was preached by Dan Harper at the Unitarian Universalist Society of Geneva, Illinois, on Saturday, January 8, and Sunday, January 9, 2005. As usual, the sermon below is a reading text. The actual sermon as preached contained ad libs, interjections, and other improvisation. Sermon copyright (c) 2005 Daniel Harper.

Readings

The first reading comes from words traditionally ascribed to King Solomon:

Take my instruction instead of silver,
and knowledge rather than choice gold;
For Wisdom [Sophia] is better than jewels,
and all that you may desire cannot compare with Her.
[Proverbs 8:10-11]

The second reading is a contemporary poem titled, “Money (That’s What I Want)”:

The best things in life are free
But you can keep them for the birds and bees

Refrain: Now give me money (That’s what I want)
That’s what I want (That’s what I want)
That’s what I want (That’s what I want), yeah
That’s what I want

Your loving gives me a thrill
So your loving don’t pay my bills

(Refrain)

Money don’t get everything it’s true
What it don’t get, I can’t use

(Refrain)

Now give me money (That’s what I want)
A lot of money (That’s what I want)
Wow yeah, I wanna be free (That’s what I want)
A lot of money (That’s what I want)
That’s what I want (That’s what I want), yeah
That’s what I want, well
Now give me money (That’s what I want)
A lot of money (That’s what I want)
Wow yeah, you need money (That’s what I want)
Oh now give me money, that’s what I want (That’s what I want)
That’s what I want (That’s what I want), yeah
That’s what I want

Song by Berry Gordy and Janie Bradford; the “reading” actually consisted of a recording of this song as performed by The Beatles.

SERMON — “A Fresh Look at Familiar Things”

Our readings this morning give two different — I almost said “opposing” — opinions about money. In the first reading, we heard a proverb which has traditionally been attributed to King Solomon, that ancient king of Israel known for his deep wisdom and good common sense. Nowadays scholars are pretty sure that King Solomon didn’t really write this proverb, so I like to imagine that these words were spoken long ago by some great anonymous Hebrew sage.

As a follower of feminist theology, I like to imagine that these words were actually spoken by a woman sage or prophet. Carole Fontaine, a feminist scholar and self-proclaimed “Bible geek” (who also happens to be a Unitarian Universalist), writes: “The figure of Woman Wisdom may be a survival of goddess worship within the monotheistic structure of Israelite theology… At the very least, Woman Wisdom represents a synopsis of all the positive roles played by wives and mothers in Israelite society.” And so perhaps this is our collective Mother Goddess passing on her greatest wisdom to us: Choose wisdom rather than silver, or choice gold, or beautiful jewels; “and all that you may desire cannot compare with Her.”

Our second reading today is a contemporary poem or song which offers another opinion about money. The recording we heard was a fun, almost lighthearted interpretation of this poem by the early Beatles. I’m more familiar with a later recording of the song, interpreted by the Flying Lizards, which made the pop charts in Great Britain in 1979.

If you’ve ever heard that version, you cannot forget singer Deborah Evans’s deadpan rendition of the lyrics, backed by David Cunningham’s “poststructuralist” [according to Mark Allen’s fan Web site http://home.netcom.com/~logan5/], John-Cage-influenced instrumentals: “Your love brings me such a thrill/ But your love won’t pay my bills/ I want money.” This hip, postmodern rendition of a contemporary song couldn’t be more different than the words of the ancient Goddess found in the old Hebrew proverb….

…so which opinion do you find to be most true?

Now the pious among us might say, Why of course Wisdom is of more value than money. And the cynical rebels among us (that would be me) might reply, Yeah, but if you can’t pay the bills you’ll wind up on the street where you won’t have time for wisdom, so who are we trying to kid? Money — that’s what I want.

I believe there is a real and present tension between these two attitudes in our churches. Let’s explore that tension a little further. And to do that, I’d like to start with what I feel is absolutely the most fascinating branch of theology, which is to say ecclesiology — the study of how churches are supposed to work, and how they actually work in the real world.

Some of you may be familiar with James Luther Adams, who was the most prominent and best-loved Unitarian Universalist theologian of the past hundred years. Adams like to think of churches as “voluntary associations.” A voluntary association is a group of people who decide to come together to share some common bond or interests. Voluntary associations can range from the sublime, like our church — to the mundane or even silly, like the Barcroft Neighborhood Eighth Road Precision Lawnmower Drill Team, in Arlington, Virginia.

James Luther Adams believed that voluntary associations are the cornerstone of democracy. You see, in a mass democracy, one person’s voice doesn’t go very far — but when a group of people join their voices together, then they can be heard over the din of mass democracy. Adams also discovered that totalitarianism hates voluntary associations, and totalitarian governments always try to either shut down, co-opt, or severely limit, voluntary associations.

Here in the United States, churches and other religious groups are voluntary associations. For example, our Unitarian Universalist churches are not run by the government — nor are they run by multinational corporations — we run ‘em ourselves. So James Luther Adams says that our free churches open up space within mass democracy where your individual voice can be heard. Our free churches open up both a literal physical space — this beautiful building — and, metaphorically speaking, we also open up a figurative space where we can talk openly and freely about religion.

It is only by creating this open space that we can truly become seekers after truth and goodness — so I believe, anyway. Let me put it another way —

If you wanted to, you could leave this church and go off to become one individual seeking after truth and goodness on your own. But if you did try that, you would face two big problems. First, you would have only your own resources to draw upon. I think it would be hard to do all the reading on your own, to gather the insights, to check in with other people to be sure you weren’t deluding yourself,– all this to seek truth and goodness on your own. Given all that effort, it seems easier to simply return to church. Second, and more importantly, you would have to have enormous self-discipline to create a space for yourself — both a metaphorical space and a real, literal space — where you could carry on your search for truth and goodness.

This church creates that space where we can seek after truth and goodness. We have this space where we can come and sit and listen to sermons and stories and music, and sometimes we even get to enjoy a little silence together. And in the other spaces in this building, we get to have informal conversations over cups of coffee, and we get to meet in small group ministries, in education programs and study groups, and in support groups. This church gives us the space to engage in our search for truth, to receive help and guidance from others, and in our turn to guide and help other people in their searches for truth and goodness.

When you come right down to it, that’s what we spend our money on. The money we give to this church — and of course, the only place this church gets money is from us — our money pays the salaries of the ministers and staff who work as hard as they know how to keep this space physically open, intellectually open, emotionally open, religiously open. Theologically speaking, that’s what our money does in this church — and in my view, it’s really a balance between those two attitudes towards money with which we started.

I’m here as an interim minister. As a result, I am particularly curious to know whether or not people understand where their money goes, when they give money to their church. So I have been listening hard to try and hear what you all have to say about money. And I can sum up what I’ve heard very simply:

[SILENCE for 10 seconds]

Exactly. This congregation really doesn’t talk about money much at all. Except to say one of two things: “We don’t have enough money!” Or: “Good grief, why do we always have to be talking about money?! I’m not going to talk about money any more.”

Here’s how I have experienced this playing out in practice. When I arrived here six months ago, I immediately began to hear talk about how this church doesn’t have enough money. Yet although I came here expecting to be asked to pledge to this church — yet although I came here wanting to be asked to pledge to this church — no one would ask me for money. After two months, I brought this up at a Board meeting, and I asked for someone to canvass me (in other words, I asked for someone to sit down with me and talk about the church, and how much I might be able to give). Nothing happened. I asked the members of the Finance Committee to canvass me. Nothing happened.

Then Kevin O’Neill sent me a letter in October asking me to donate to the capital campaign, the fund drive to raise money to pay of the extensive restoration of the historic exterior of this building. At last! Someone had asked me for money. I carefully read the guidelines Kevin enclosed, and calculated that I should give $800 to the capital campaign, and sent my check in to the church.

But I still hadn’t been canvassed for my regular pledge. I asked the Board, I asked the Finance Committee, seems to me I asked the Membership Committee at one point, I began to ask random people in social hour. Somebody — take my money, please!

As you can gather from this little story, there is a certain reluctance here at this church to talk about money.

But if this church is so reluctant to talk about money, you may ask, why is it that people here report that they are sick of hearing talk about money? That same question came up for me, and I began to listen hard to what people were saying, and to ask a few questions.

And I got a good, solid answer to this question. People have told me again and again that they get tired of constant, ongoing, small demands for money for all sorts of programs and other things.

Here are some of the things people have told me they are tired of:– I have been told that people are tired of church school registration fees that keep going up (and as a result, I lowered them this year). A few people have said they are tired of registration fees for adult classes. Some people said they did not like to be asked to pay for coffee at social hour (and as a result, we have done away with the basket asking for donations for coffee money). Above all, I have heard that people do not like constant fundraisers during social hour. A number of people said they stopped going in to social hour because in the past there were always people selling something and it could cost you twenty bucks or more if you knew whoever was running the fundraiser. (And I am glad to report there has been far less fundraisers at social hour this church year — so if you are new, don’t be scared off by this story from the past — and furthermore, I tell you that with whatever power is invested in me as a Unitarian Universalist minister, I hereby empower you not to feel guilty when you say “no” to fundraisers at church.)

In short, people are correct — there have been too many requests for money here at this church. Theologians have a technical term for this phenomenon — it’s called “nickel-and-diming.” When your church constantly asks you for nickels and dimes, you tend to become cynical, and you tend to wind up giving far less money than you otherwise would give.

I believe nickel-and-diming is ending here at church. And I see signs that people are increasing their giving. Last weekend, even with low attendance due to the holiday, this church donated an astounding $2,849 for tsunami relief. We are a generous people. But we still don’t know if this increased generousity will in turn be extended to this church itself. How will you, the members and friends of this church, respond to the annual fundraising drive this spring?

Being a plain-spoken New England Yankee, let me give you some straight talk about my own pledge to this church. Because Rick Veague at last heard my plea, and agreed to canvass me — to ask me how much I’m willing to give to this church. Here’s what I told Rick:–

I make fifty thousand dollars a year. My goal for this year has been to give five percent of my annual gross income to my church — I’ve been working up to this level for about four years now. I particularly want to increase my level of giving to the liberal church this year because I feel our liberal voice is being drowned out by some strident voices from the far religious right.

Now, as an interim minister, I belong to the Church of the Larger Fellowship, or CLF. CLF is a Unitarian Universalist congregation that serves isolated and peripatetic Unitarian Universalists around the world, including those in the military or foreign service, other expatriates, those who live too far to drive to a Unitarian Universalist church, as well as people like interim ministers who have to move frequently.

I already pledged $900 to CLF this year. Since five percent of fifty thousand dollars is two thousand, five hundred dollars, that means I should pledge sixteen hundred dollars to this church. That’s what I told Rick Veague, and that, my friends, is the amount of my pledge.

I do not particularly care how many dollars you decide to give to this church. I do not even particularly care what percentage of your annual gross income you decide to give to this church this year. In practice, the calculations are not that simple. If you are out of work, or have recently been out of work, obviously you cannot give as much money to the church this year! If you are in your twenties, you are not likely to be earning much, and so you might give less. If you are still paying off loans for education, again you will wind up giving less.

Similarly, if you are in your peak earning years, with a stable job, you should be giving more to the church, in part to help out those who can’t afford to give right now. And if you are retired and on a fixed income, your ability to give cash may be limited, and so you may choose to work out some kind of planned giving or future bequest. There is no single, simple calculation — no easy equation that generates a firm dollar amount.

I said I do not particularly care how many dollars you decide to give to this church. What I do care about is your level of commitment. To my way of thinking, if you are trying to achieve financial stability soon with the hope of being able to give something to the church in the future — then you have a high level of commitment to the church. I am more impressed by your level of commitment, than I am by some specific dollar amount, or by some percentage of income. Your commitment is revealed to you in your heart of hearts; not in some arbitrary numbers.

By now, you may be thinking:– Oh, so that’s where Dan stands, he agrees more with the song: “Your love won’t pay the bills, I want money”; Dan stands opposed to the Proverb, where Wisdom is more important than jewels.

Well, maybe. But remember, we’re not taking a stand somewhere, we are trying to balance between these two.

We live in a world dominated by money; a world where you and I are judged by how much money we have. One of the reasons I come to church is to be in a space where people care less about my money, and more about my humanity.

We keep this church as an open space where we can seek truth and goodness, where we can be more authentically human. No wonder we don’t want to talk about money here. We don’t want to sully our sacred, open space. But it takes money to keep this space open, to hold back the money so we can come here to get away from money and be more authentically who we are.

We have inherited Wisdom from our ancestors. We have inherited this open space where we can meet Wisdom. We can continue to use money to keep this space open —

Or not.

You get to choose.