A Chance to Change

The familiar words we just heard from Saint Paul’s letter to the Philippians [Philippians 2:1-11] were written to the Christian community Paul had founded and left behind at Philippi. Paul wrote to thank them for their generosity in the past and to encourage them to face the future.

Have the same attitude that is also in Christ Jesus, he advised them. Paul’s idea of encouragement was to identify with the fundamental truth about Jesus, which he proceeded to express – not in his own words but with what most likely was already a well known Christian hymn, an early profession of faith in Jesus:

Who, though he was in the form of God did not regard equality with God something to be grasped.

Rather, he emptied himself, taking the form of a slave … becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.

Because of this, God greatly exalted him and bestowed on him the name which is above every name,

that at the name of Jesus, every knee should bend … and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

In direct and conspicuous contrast to what seems like typical, ordinary, normal, human behavior, Jesus was unselfish, humble, and obedient. In contrast to the typical, ordinary, normal, human self-centered narcissism, which dominates and directs most of human history, Jesus’ obedience has made it possible to undo that destructive pattern and alter the course of human history, by creating new possibilities for us, both in relation to God and to one another.

Jesus’ obedience to his Father was not some isolated act. It was a total attitude that characterized his whole self. That was how God originally intended all of us to live. We cannot return to that original innocence; but, with God’s help, we can change course – like the first son in the parable in today’s Gospel [Matthew 21:28-32], who first answered, “I will not,” but who then afterwards changed his mind.

It is certainly true that we cannot undo the past. How well we know that! But that can also become an excuse, a rather lame excuse, and a particularly poisonous excuse, to do nothing, to become (as one of my professors once said) a sort of silent spectator in the story of one’s life. How often have we heard someone say – or perhaps have said it ourselves – “What can I do? That’s just the way things are,” or worse “That’s just the way I am. I just can’t change!”

It’s true, of course, that we cannot undo the past; and that we are in a certain sense always in part products of our past. But the good news of the Gospel is that there is no sin that we cannot break away from. So, while we cannot undo the past, we can change course in the present - remodeling ourselves in the image of God’s Son so as to share in his new life, already here and now in the community of his Church on earth and then forever when our risen selves are joined with Christ completely in the kingdom of the Father.

In telling us a parable about two sons, Jesus makes clear that there is more than one possibility - and that he does not want us to focus forever on our first response, on our initial (and however often repeated) failure to follow. Rather he challenges to become like the first son - and so change. Let’s get going, Jesus is telling us, into that vineyard where his own life and example are leading us!

Homily for the 26th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Immaculate Conception Church, Knoxville, TN, October 1, 2017.

October

All summer long, whenever the season's hateful heat would come up in conversation, my standard response has been, "Every morning I wake up and pray for October." (Once upon a time, before Global Warming, maybe it would have sufficed to pray for September!)

As its name indicates, October was originally the 8th month in the Roman calendar, before Julius Caesar made it the 10th month, which it is still. In the Northern hemisphere, October brings the Harvest Moon on October 5. That Full Moon, of course, corresponds to the middle of the 7th month of Jewish calendar (Tishri) and hence the start of the third of the three Old Testament pilgrimage festivals, Sukkot, usually thought to have been the biggest of the festivals in Jesus' time.

October 12, the anniversary of Christopher Columbus' first landing at San Salvador was traditionally observed as Columbus Day, until that holiday was devalued (like so many other civic holidays) by being moved to Monday (this year, October 9). Columbus Day is traditionally when we Italian-Americans get to celebrate our heritage. (In fact, the entire month is now officially "Italian Heritage Month"). When I was stationed in New York, I often attended the annual Italian Columbus Day Mass at Saint Patrick's Cathedral. The Columbus Day Parade in New York is essentially an Italian-heritage parade, and in that sense has as much or as little to do with Columbus as the Saint Patrick's Day parade has to do with Saint Patrick. Of course, Columbus himself sailed in service of the Spain's Reyes catolicos, and his heirs became Spanish nobility. So the day is also celebrated as El Dia de la Hispanidad. (In New York, the Hispanic parade is held on Sunday, the day before.)

In the Church, the feast of Our Lady of the Rosary (originally Our Lady of Victory) occurs on October 7, and October is observed as the month of the Holy Rosary. October 7 is, of course, the anniversary of the great naval victory at Lepanto in 1571. Referencing that famous victory and the feast, in 1883, Pope Leo XIII officially dedicated the entire month of October to the Rosary and prescribed its recitation in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament daily during the month, a a once widely common practice that survived until the 1960s.

In the 20th century, October received an added social significance with the introduction of World Mission Sunday by Pope Pius XI in 1927 in order to emphasize universal solidarity in sharing in our common responsibility for evangelizing the world. (World Mission Sunday this year will be Sunday, October 22.) The same pope had already in 1925 instituted the feast of Christ the Ling on the last Sunday in October (the Sunday before All Saints Day) to highlight Christ's rule over all peoples and nations. (Since 1969, the feast is now observed on the last Sunday before Advent.)

All in all, unless cliamte change keeps the temperatures high, October is a month to look forward to!

(Photo: October, with the Louvre palace in the backgournd, from the famous Très Riches Heures du Duc de Berry, an early 15th-century prayer book, which is generally considered perhaps the best surviving example of medieval French Gothic manuscript illumination)

Brad's Status

Brad's Status stars Ben Stiller as Brad Sloan, a middle-aged entrepreneur settled in Sacramento, who runs some sort of non-profit. He is married to Melanie (Jenna Fischer), who has some sort of government job. They have a 17-year old son Troy (Austin Abrams), who is apparently a very good student and musician. Brad and Troy fly to Boston for Troy's college admission interviews at Harvard and Tufts. The interplay between father and son stands out as one of the film's dramatic highpoints.

Meanwhile, Brad suffers from serious status anxiety (presumably exacerbated by his son's growing up, which highlights how he and his wife are now in middle age and so will not accomplish much more with their lives or - what seems to amount to much the same thing - make a lot more money in their careers.)

In particular, Brad keeps comparing himself with several of his former college classmates, all of whom have been more materially successful than he has been. One is even on the cover of Architectural Digest. Another has worked in the White House, is a published author, and is recognized by strangers in restaurants. Another is already retired and lives in Hawaii  Etc. In contrast, Brad worries not only that he has not made a lot of money but that he and his wife have settled for mediocrity. Brad's anxieties are reinforced by learning that he was not invited to one wealthy and prominent classmate's wedding in LA - presumably because he is not in the same league of wealth and prominence. His status anxieties are reinforced again by learning that his favorite Tufts professor died recently and that one of his more prominent classmates gave the eulogy, while he was not even informed. The result is that, throughout the trip, Brad keeps tormenting himself and behaving in ways which perplex and annoy others - including Troy, who wonders whether his father is having a "nervous breakdown."

The lesson, of course, is that Brad's anxieties are rooted in reality. His classmates have largely done better, both in wealth, and prominence than he has. To the extent that that matters they represent success, and in comparison he has failed to make much of his life. The question, however, is to what extent that really matters or should matter. There is some evidence that the others' successes may not be all they appear to be. Even the wealthy and the prominent cannot completely escape the vicissitudes of life like illness and addiction. Even without that comparison, however, Brad has a good marriage, a happy wife, and a talented son - both of whom love him. Should that be enough?

The film forces us to ask ourselves what is enough? Can we be satisfied with a good life or are we forever sentenced to compare ourselves with those who seem to enjoy a fabulous life?

Saving a Church on Screen and Saving the Church in Real Life

The film All Saints tells the true story of Rev. Michael Spurlock (okayed by John Corbett) and of his first assignment at All Saints Episcopal Church in Smyrna, Tennessee.. The real Michael Spurlock was born right here in Knoxville in 1968 and graduated from the University of Tennessee in 1993. In the late 1990s, he worked in editing and publishing in New York City, where he met his wife in Central Park. In 1999 they moved from New York to Tennessee where Michael worked as a salesman. In 2004 Michael entered Nashotah House Theological Seminary, and was ordained an Episcopal priest in 2007. He was sent to All Saints by his Bishop with the expectation that the church and its property would soon be sold. As with too many churches today, the church was broke and its membership dwindling. At the time, the church had only 25 members and a mortgage it couldn't afford. As pastor he was sent there to inventory the property and oversee its sale to make way for that great job-creator, a big-box store.

But then, a group of refugees from war-torn Burma arrived - Karen farmers, led Ye Win (Nelson Lee). Despite opposition and all the ordinary practical difficulties, Michael decided to them stay and farm the land surrounding the church, thus providing them with food and shelter and hopefully creating much-needed income for the church. the film effectively and movingly retells this story - was shot at the actual All Saints church in Smyrna, with several real-life parishioners playing themselves. It highlights the challenges and conflicts that the pastor experienced - above all within himself as he struggled to discern what was God's will and what was his, and how to tell the difference. That, of course, is always a challenge in pastoral ministry, even in less dire circumstances.

The movie shows how, despite all the combined efforts and hard work of the Spurlocks (pastor, wife, and son Atticus), the Burmese Karen refugees (so ably led by Ye Win), the remaining parishioners, others who came to their aid, the whole project seemed on the brink of failure; but., almost miraculously it seemed, the church was saved and survives to this day as a successful mission. Spurlock himself is now Curate at New York City's esteemed Saint Thomas Episcopal Church on 5th Avenue.

Since it is a true story, and we know it is going to end well, we are relieved of some of the tension and so can focus on the interpersonal relationships and struggles as well as the inner struggles of Spurlock and others and appreciate the creation of an authentically Christian community in a traumatized world

The on-screen retelling of this inspiring story is also a welcome and much-needed corrective to the corrosive but all too prevalent mentality which judges the viability of churches and parishes in primarily economic terms – a mentality within the Church itself that could actually countenance a church being replaced by a big-box store. It also has  the added plus – so salient in this era of anti-immigrant xenophobia in our country - of reminding us that welcoming the stranger remains one of the purposes of the Church and that, in the end, nothing may be better for the Church’s survival than devotion to its purpose. 

We All Lose

I have zero interest in football and zero interest in the fortunes of the NFL (which undoubtedly has done and will continue to do quite well without my interest). I had never even heard of Colin Kaepernick until he started not standing for the National Anthem as a protest and even then have paid little attention to the resulting controversy until it escalated to unexpected prominence as a national issue this past weekend, thanks to President Trump's deliberate highlighting of the issue. 

To the extent that professional athletes are high-status celebrities in our society, if an athlete chooses to use his position of prominence and privilege to advocate for those less prominent and less privileged, which I assume is Kaepernick's intention, that would seem to me to be a quite commendable use of one's status and privilege. Consider, for example, the good that Jimmy Kimmel, a TV celebrity of a different sort, may have accomplished this past week if his high-profile attack on the latest Republican assault on the Affordable Care Act successfully saves access to affordable coverage for those who need it!

I have serious reservations, however, about the manner of Kaepernick's protest. The National Anthem, like the Flag, is a symbol of who we are as a nation, a symbol of what unites us across time and space and across whatever else divides us from one another. In a sense, the Anthem and the Flag function as substitutes for a monarch and the monarch's role in those countries fortunate enough to have one. They serve as a sort of symbolic social glue. To disrespect the Anthem or the Flag is inevitably experienced as disrespecting the whole society, disrespecting what we share in common, dividing us at our very core. This is seldom helpful - and is more likely hurtful to society over the long term. 

Even as a tactic, it is, I submit, generally a somewhat ineffective tactic. Instead of calling attention to the legitimate issue underlying the protest, it makes the protest itself the issue. Conflict is unavoidable in any society, no matter how well ordered. It is inevitable in a society such as ours with so many competing interests and ideas. Equally inevitably, however, a protest against injustice, which already presumes a degree of division in society, usually needs to reach across at least some of those divisions to appeal more broadly and widely. All political movements in a democratic polity are about widening their base and building coalitions with others to whose interests and/or ideals they must appeal. The most successful protest movements in American history (e.g., the Civil Rights movement, the Labor movement) have done this, and they have highlighted their identification with our society's purported values. In contrast, those movements have generally been unsuccessful that have emphasized their alienation from and their rejection of our purported principles and ideals and the rituals that symbolize them and thus bind us together.

Kaepernick, of course, has every right to choose whatever tactic he wishes, even if it risks making him (rather than his cause) the issue and risks alienating people who might otherwise have been potential allies. 

But then the President intruded into the controversy Kaepernick's tactic had caused. He did so in a profoundly "unpresidential" way, suggesting players should be fired for their protests, thus causing more players to protest, and to focus their protests primarily on the president's intervention. .However one judges this particular president's political talents, clearly he has a notable talent for sensing and identifying divisions in our society and exploiting them. Like most emotions, anger can be positive or negative. It can be exploited for good or for ill. Jimmy Kimmel exploited his own anger and that of many others to try to salvage affordable health care for those less privileged than himself. But anger can also become an end in itself and be exploited simply to achieve or maintain power. The campaign Donald Trump waged in 2016 was all about anger - sensing, identifying, and exploiting anger to increase (rather than to resolve) conflict and to further divide society so as to secure political victory and then continue in office to increase conflict and further divide society. 

Ours is a society increasingly divided into two hostile tribes that share less and less in common and so seek only to hate and despise each other. Protesters who disrespect our few remaining shared symbolic rituals and politicians who stir up resentment against those protests play into each other's hands. When we no longer share even the most basic civic rituals in common - when the Anthem becomes a battleground between those who support and those who oppose a particular president or policy - we all lose.