THE REPENTANCE CLAUSE

Saul and David were the kings of united Israel.  They were alike in many ways.  Yet, one of them died a tragic failure at the end of his royal dynasty while the other concluded his life in triumph and peace.  What made the difference?

The answer isn’t what you might think.  Discover how to recover from an epic fail.  

Learn the lesson of THE REPENTANCE CLAUSE.

Listen well.

If you are unable to get the audio on this page, click here.

---Anderson T. Graves II   is a writer, community organizer and consultant for education, ministry, and rural leadership development.

Rev. Anderson T. Graves II is pastor of Miles Chapel CME Church in Fairfield, Alabama;  executive director of the Substance Abuse Youth Networking Organization (SAYNO);  and director of rural leadership development for the National Institute for Human Development (NIHD).

Subscribe to my personal blog  www.andersontgraves.blogspot.com .

Email atgravestwo2@aol.com

Friend me at www.facebook.com/rev.a.t.graves

You can help support this ministry with a donation to Miles Chapel CME Church.

You can help support Rev. Graves’ work by visiting his personal blog and clicking the DONATE button on the right-hand sidebar.

Support by check or money order may be mailed to 

Miles Chapel CME Church

P O Box 132

Fairfield, Al 35064

BURNING BIBLES

 Then Jeremiah called Baruch the son of Neriah; and Baruch wrote on a scroll of a book, at the instruction of Jeremiah, all the words of the Lord which He had spoken to him.

… So the king sent Jehudi to bring the scroll, …and Jehudi read it in the hearing of the king and in the hearing of all the princes who stood beside the king.

Now the king was sitting in the winter house in the ninth month, with a fire burning on the hearth before him. And it happened, when Jehudi had read three or four columns, that the king cut it with the scribe’s knife and cast it into the fire that was on the hearth, until all the scroll was consumed in the fire that was on the hearth.

 Yet they were not afraid, nor did they tear their garments, the king nor any of his servants who heard all these words. (Jeremiah 36: 4, 21-24)

An English teacher friend gave me an old 1979 reprinting of Fahrenheit 451.  I opened it last night before the game and finished it this morning.

I really needed to read that book.

In the back of the book comments, author Ray Bradbury talked about how critics, publishers, producers, and representatives of different interest groups pushed him to censor, reword, and otherwise politically correct his work.  Bradbury recounted the many letters he had received and then replied:

How do I react to all of the above?.... By sending rejection slips to each and every one. By ticketing the assembly of idiots to the far reaches of hell.

The point is obvious.  There is more than one way to burn a book.

THERE IS MORE THAN ONE WAY TO BURN A BOOK.

And there’s more than one way to burn a Bible.

In Jeremiah chapter 36, Jehoiakim, king of Judah, burned an original copy of the book of Jeremiah.  He burned it because the words were unpleasant, convicting, disruptive, and true.   

The king of Judah was supposed to defend God’s people, God’s temple, and the truth entrusted to the people and the church (temple).  Instead he used his position to attack and try to silence the truth of God.

But he didn’t just burn the book. 

The king first attacked the book with the weapons of a scholar.

And it happened, when Jehudi had read three or four columns, that the king cut it with the scribe’s knife (Jeremiah 36: 23)

Which is how most Bibles burn.

Read the most popular textbooks, listen to a few seminary lectures, pay attention to the most popular preachers on tv, and you realize pretty quickly that the kings of contemporary Christian theology are attacking the text that is the foundation of the Kingdom they’re supposed to defend.

They slice at the divinity of Jesus.  They stab at the Resurrection.  They cut the throats of Moses and the prophets and cast whatever is left into the fire of “re-interpretation in light of our current social realities.” 

And we just let them. 

Yet they were not afraid, nor did they tear their garments, the king nor any of his servants who heard all these words. (Jeremiah 36: 24)

They may not literally snatch away our Bibles and cast them into bonfires, but there’s more than one way to burn a book.

If we let them cut God out of the Bible, if we lounge by the fire while they revise away miracles and moral absolutes, if we brush lint from our clean clerical robes while they disparage every inconvenient truth the Holy Spirit ever spoke and reduce Jesus to a skinned, deboned, demarrowed, scarified, melted, rendered down, and destroyed^* motivational speaker----- then what do we have left of the Scriptures BUT ASHES?

The Word of God is bread and life.  These ashes cannot sustain us. 

He feeds on ashes;

A deceived heart has turned him aside;

And he cannot deliver his soul,

Nor say, “Is there not a lie in my right hand?”  (Isaiah 44: 20)

So, how should the church react to all of the above? 

By rejecting the rejection of God’s Word. 

Read it yourself.  Feed yourself of the fullness of God’s Word.  Struggle through the uncomfortable parts.  Cringe at the disturbing parts.  Talk about  it.   Build fellowship around wrestling with the Bible as Truth.   And when someone tries to make you believe that your faith is in vain, listen carefully.  Nod politely. 

And tell them to kick rocks.

Does this offend you?  What then if you should see the Son of Man ascend where He was before? It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life. ---- Jesus (John 6: 61-63)

---Rev. Anderson T. Graves II   (email:  atgravestwo2@aol.com )

Anderson T. Graves II is a writer, community organizer and consultant for education, ministry, and rural leadership development.

Rev. Anderson T. Graves II is pastor of Miles Chapel CME Church (5220 Myron Massey Boulevard) in Fairfield, Alabama;  executive director of the Substance Abuse Youth Networking Organization (SAYNO);  and director of rural leadership development for the National Institute for Human Development (NIHD).

Subscribe to my blog at www.andersontgraves.blogspot.com  

Friend me at www.facebook.com/rev.a.t.graves

*Paraphrased from the 1979 author comments in Fahrenheit 451 ,p. 176.

GHETTO NAMES

From time to time, groups of African-Americans get into debates over which names we  should give our kids.  For Black people this is serious business because newspaper investigations, generations of personal anecdotes, and multiple studies, like the one conducted by the National Bureau of Economic Research, have shown that ethnic sounding names can be a hindrance to success in the corporate world.

What researchers call “ethnic sounding names,”  were once called Afrocentric names.   Informally, we now usually use the disparaging term “ghetto names.”  And African-Americans still pass those names to our children--- a lot.

Oh, wait.  You do know the kinds of names I’m talking about, right?  These are names typically built around the consonant sounds  q, r, and sh.    Multi-syllabic names with lots of a’s, long e’s, er’s, and ia’s .   Some parents take a common name and spelling it too phonetically.  For example, Airwreacka for Erica.   

Another way is to appropriate a brand name or a complex term and use it as a name, like calling a girl Alopecia Areata-- which is a skin disease that causes hair loss.   (Yes, I’ve met a girl named Alopecia Areata.)

In some cases, parents choose such names because they have a genuine linguistic translation into something significant.  Ashanti or Asante, for example, is the name of a Ghanaian tribe that once held a vast empire.

But most of the times, parents give their babies “ethnic sounding” names because the parents think they sound cute or look cool.

But, here’s the point of this post:  this whole debate over ethnic names isn’t new, nor is it unique to Black people in America.

1 Chronicles chapter 3 lists the genealogy of Saul, the first king of united Israel.  Verse 33 says that Saul named one of his sons Esh-baal.  Saul’s oldest son Jonathan named one of the grandbabies Merib-baal. 

Baal was a generic name for any of the pagan gods worshipped by the surrounding Philistine and Canaanite tribes.  So, Esh-baal means “man of Baal.”   Merib-Baal means something like “Baal Is My Advocate.”

So, think.    Why would two generations of good Jewish men from a good---- heck, from a royal---- Jewish family give their babies pagan, Philistine sounding names?

Cause they sounded cute.  Cause those names were cool.

At the time Saul came to the throne, Philistia was the dominant military and political power of the region.  Israel was like a minor, ethnic minority, tributary territory of loosely connected backwater tribes.  Heck, until Saul, “those people” didn’t even have a king.

To Israel, the Philistines would have been cool.  Yes, they were uncircumcised heathen oppressors, but they were powerful.  They had culture and money and their own blacksmiths.  I bet you that young Israeli girls wanted to wear their hair in Philistine styles.  I bet you that teenage Israeli boys wore their robes like the Philistines did.  (And if the Philistines had been sagging, the Israeli boys would have been sagging.)  Because that was swag back then.

After Israel became a “real” kingdom and Saul’s family became royal, it wasn’t cool anymore to have a Philistine name.  Kids with Philistine sounding names were considered less patriotic, less desirable to employ than kids with good, strong, Anglo--- I mean Hebrew--- names.

That’s why, if you follow the story chronologically to 2 Samuel, King Saul’s family doesn’t use those ethnic sounding names anymore. 

2 Samuel 2: 8 refers to Ishbosheth, the son of Saul.  He’s not Esh-baal anymore.

2 Samuel 4: 4 refers to Jonathan’s son named Mephibosheth.   They don’t call him Merib-baal anymore. 

Mephibosheth means “destroyer of idols” or “exterminator of shame.”    O.K., so it’s obvious how that name change reflects a genuine linguistic translation into something significant.

But his Uncle Ishbosheth’s new moniker means “man of shame.”  Not exactly a kingly title, but so what?  It’s a Jewish name, not an “ethnic” name.

It’s like a kid named Keniqua who decides to start going by Kennedy.  Never mind that Kennedy means “helmet head.”   Or, a parent who decides to shorten Porsheresa to Portia, nevermind that Portia means “pig.”  Or the Vietnamese immigrant who drops Ngyuen in favor of Nelson.

The way we beat each other up over names, hairstyles, clothing fads, etc. is nothing new.  It’s not unique to the American experience or the African-American experience. 

That which has been is what will be,

That which is done is what will be done,

And there is nothing new under the sun. (Ecclesiastes 1:9)

All this stuff is just part of the age-old human experience.

Changing names may have made Mephibosheth and Ishbosheth sound more acceptable.  But the name changes didn’t keep the throne in their family.  Some kid out of nowhere named David still came to power.  The name didn’t make the man.

God made the man and the name followed.

…to My servant David, ‘Thus says the Lord of hosts: “I took you from the sheepfold, from following the sheep, to be ruler over My people, over Israel.

 And I have been with you wherever you have gone, and have cut off all your enemies from before you, and have made you a great name, like the name of the great men who are on the earth. (2 Samuel 7: 8-9)

My all Black household has a collection of the most anglo names in America:  Anderson, Sheila, Katlin, and Anderson III.  But those names don’t guarantee success.   Just like a ridiculously ethnic sounding name like, for example, Barack Hussein Obama, doesn’t preclude success. 

Each of us has to choose how we will relate or not relate to Jesus Christ.  Each of us has to choose how we will obey or disobey God’s Word.  Each of us has to choose whether or not we will live in line with or aligned against God’s will.  Because ultimately, 

God decides whether or not to pour out his favor and it is God’s favor that makes the man or woman A GREAT NAME, LIKE THE NAME OF THE GREAT MEN WHO ARE ON THE EARTH.

---Rev. Anderson T. Graves II   (email:  atgravestwo2@aol.com )

Anderson T. Graves II is a writer, community organizer and consultant for education, ministry, and rural leadership development.

Rev. Anderson T. Graves II is pastor of Miles Chapel CME Church (5220 Myron Massey Boulevard) in Fairfield, Alabama;  executive director of the Substance Abuse Youth Networking Organization (SAYNO);  and director of rural leadership development for the National Institute for Human Development (NIHD).

Subscribe to my blog at www.andersontgraves.blogspot.com  

Friend me at www.facebook.com/rev.a.t.graves

SELF CONTROL

The Apostle Paul was all about self-control.  In 1 Corinthians, he referred to himself as a spiritual athlete who disciplined his body to keep it under control (9: 24-27).  In advice to his protégé Titus, Paul advocated self-discipline and self-control as necessary for a Christian leader (1: 8; 2: 12).  In Galatians 5, Paul listed self-control as one of the fruit of the having the Holy Spirit.  Paul developed such mastery of his desires that he remained celibate his entire life---- and not-locked-in-a-monastery celibate or restricted-by-a-vow-and-church-mandate celibate, but traveling-all-over-the-middle-east-and-Mediterranean celibate because I choose to be.

That’s some serious self-control.

But, sometimes Paul got really, really emotional, like in 2 Corinthians.

O Corinthians! We have spoken openly to you, our heart is wide open. (2 Corinthians 6: 11)

“Hear wide open”?  Sounds like the title of an emo-rock song.

Paul went on to say:

We are not withholding our affection from you, but you are withholding yours from us (verse 12, NIV)

And to ask/ beg the Church of Corinth to:

Open your hearts to us. We have wronged no one, we have corrupted no one, we have cheated no one.  (2 Corinthians 7: 2)

Paul sounds downright SENSITIVE.   

I was thinking about this for Sunday school and wondering, “What happened to all of that 1^st century self-control?”  And I realized that the question revealed as much about me and my social context as it did about Paul and his.

My community in Bassfield, Mississippi, trained me to control my emotions.  From my earliest memories of interacting with adults, my father, my mother, aunts, uncles, older cousins, teachers, my big sister---- everybody taught, tested, and reinforced the idea that to “man up” and “grow up” I had to put my feelings in check.  Strength and maturity meant emotional self-control.

Since those formative years I’ve been blessed to learn other perspectives on emotional well-being.  I came of age at the height of the sensitive man movement.  My peers have led the charge in giving men and boys the freedom to cry.  I look back now on those early rural lessons in self-control, and I compare that with what I’ve learned in my intellectual wanderings, and Paul’s emotional perspective in the Bible.

Now I know.

My folks in Bassfield were right.

Kinda.

Emotional self-control is a mark of maturity.  Emotional self-discipline does indicate personal strength.

But not the way we typically practice them.

Love, mercy, transparency, forgiveness, humility, compassion, tenderness, etc. make you vulnerable.  These feelings lead you into situations in which you give more than you receive.  These emotions make you available to people, some of whom will inevitably hurt you.

Anger, vengeance, lust, ambition, etc. make you feel strong and powerful.  They lead to the pursuit of immediate self-satisfaction, which is ---- well, it’s immediately self-satisfying.

Most people, especially men, think “control” means suppressing the emotions that make you feel vulnerable while feeding the emotions that make you feel strong.

That’s the exact wrong kind of self-control.

God wants us to have the RIGHT KIND of self-control.  In Genesis 2, Cain, Adam’s & Eve’s oldest son, got angry at his little brother Abel.  God told Cain to get a hold on his emotions.

So the Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry? And why has your countenance fallen?  If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin lies at the door. And its desire is for you, but you should rule over it.”  (Genesis 4: 6, 7)

Don’t let your feeling control you, Cain, but you should rule over it.

Biblcal self-control means that we check, cool, suppress, subjugate, rule over the negative emotions that make us feel strong.  Those are the ones we watch and hold in check.

We feel anger, but we control it so that it doesn’t become sin. (Ephesians 4: 26)

The Old Testament passage that Ephesians quotes explains how to self-regulate that anger.

Be angry, and do not sin. Meditate within your heart on your bed, and be still. (Psalm 4: 4)

The sun shouldn’t go down on our wrath because we’re supposed to sit down, calm ourselves, and find our emotional anchor in God.

Offer the sacrifices of righteousness, and put your trust in the Lord. (verse 5)

This is how the Bible teaches us to control our emotions.

Consciously check the emotions that make you feel close you off and make you feel strong in the short term, and deliberately nurture the emotions that open your heart to others.

And may the Lord make you increase and abound in love to one another and to all, just as we do to you (1 Thessalonians 3: 12)

Peter said

Finally, all of you be of one mind, having compassion for one another; love as brothers, be tenderhearted, be courteous; not returning evil for evil or reviling for reviling, but on the contrary blessing, knowing that you were called to this, that you may inherit a blessing. (1 Peter 3: 8, 9)

And even though Peter didn’t always get his fellow-apostle Paul (2 Peter 3: 15, 16); Peter didn’t think it was too hard to understand Paul’s perspective on self-control.

Paul, the apostle of self-discipline, was so touch-feely in his letter to the Corinthians because transparent, vulnerable brotherly love is the epitome of strength and self-control.

Think about Moses.

Now the man Moses was very humble, more than all men who were on the face of the earth. (Numbers 12: 3)

Think about Jesus.

Think about the discipline, the strength, the self-control it took to not burn down the whole doggone planet, but instead to love, forgive, heal, help, listen to, repeat Himself over and over and over to, and sacrifice Himself for------ everybody.

Individual self-control is good, and Biblical, and necessary.    But’s it’s different from what we may have learned.

And so, self-control in Jesus’ name in Jesus church is not the stuck up, funless, heartless shallow religiosity we have too often practiced. 

Christian self-discipline in the church means having the strength to be humble, weak, and vulnerable in front of people.

It means being strong enough to speak openly and say, “My heart is wide open to you.”

In the church, ruthlessness means immaturity. Maturity brings transparency.  Power struggles are for babes in Christ.  Mature Christians seek opportunities to give not to acquire.

I speak as to my children--open wide your hearts also. (2 Corinthians 6: 13)

Add that kind of self-control to sound knowledge of Biblical truth, and God will add to the church today like He added to the church in Paul’s and Peter’s day.

But also for this very reason, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue, to virtue knowledge, to knowledge self-control, to self-control perseverance, to perseverance godliness, to godliness brotherly kindness, and to brotherly kindness love. For if these things are yours and abound, you will be neither barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. (2 Peter 1: 5-8)

---Rev. Anderson T. Graves II   (email:  atgravestwo2@aol.com )

Anderson T. Graves II is a writer, community organizer and consultant for education, ministry, and rural leadership development.

Rev. Anderson T. Graves II is pastor of Miles Chapel CME Church (5220 Myron Massey Boulevard) in Fairfield, Alabama;  executive director of the Substance Abuse Youth Networking Organization (SAYNO);  and director of rural leadership development for the National Institute for Human Development (NIHD).

Subscribe to my blog at www.andersontgraves.blogspot.com  

Friend me at www.facebook.com/rev.a.t.graves

WHICH CHRISTIANITY?

I saw this picture on Pinterest.  I choked down the reflexive indignation and took a moment to really, really think about what the poster was saying.  

I see her point.

Think about it.  If all you knew of Christianity was what you saw on tv then what would you know?  More importantly, what would you NOT know?

You wouldn’t know about the Methodist preacher pastoring 2 churches every other Sunday and working a 3^rd job because those two salaries together still aren’t enough to cover gas money on the 4 hour commute.  But that pastor still teaches Bible study at both churches, still visits all of the sick, elderly, and incarcerated, still makes graduations (even the GED ceremonies), and still gives more financially than any other member of either congregation.

But that pastor doesn’t get on “Preachers of L.A.”

If all you knew of Christianity was tv, then you’d see us spending all our time waving flags, toting guns, and yelling hate at gays, pregnant teens, Democrats, Republicans who vote with Democrats, and soldiers coming home in caskets.  If you got your Christianity from tv, you’d think that we sat around idly watching Black communities dissolve into violent, drug-ridden 3^rd-world type neighborhoods.  You’d think we walked out of church stepping over the bodies of Black men until somebody White pulled the trigger so we could march downtown and elbow each other for camera time in our gaudy suits.

You wouldn’t know about the 20 person congregation that picks up cans to keep the hot water on, and only keeps the hot water on because they let homeless families sleep in the sanctuary even though they aren’t zoned for that.

That congregation won’t get a featured segment on TBN.

If you got your Christianity from tv, you’d know about “Preachers’ Wives” and “Preachers’ Daughters,” but you wouldn’t know about the pastor who has to explain to his family why he spent the Disney World money saving somebody else’s family from eviction.

Those pastors don’t get their own show.

I understand why the poster of that picture is so indignant.  If seeing is believing, then how can she believe anything other than that Christians suck?

^ [You]…rest on the law, and make your boast in God, ^and know His will, and approve the things that are excellent, being instructed out of the law, ^and are confident that you yourself are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, ^an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, having the form of knowledge and truth in the law. ^

You, therefore, who teach another, do you not teach yourself? You who preach that a man should not steal, do you steal? ^You who say, “Do not commit adultery,” do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? You who make your boast in the law, do you dishonor God through breaking the law? ^

For “the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you,” as it is written. (Romans 2: 17-24)

And what does it say about us---- us church folks---- that these are our representatives? What DOES it say that we make their shows possible with our credit card donations, dvd purchases, and orders of prayer cloths and anointed miracle water?

Where ARE the shows about community ministries?  Where are the features on the pastors who were reaching out on behalf of young men in Michael Brown’s neighborhood while he was still ALIVE?  Where are the special reports about good old-fashioned, boring, Jesus-style Christianity?

Would we support that with our one-time gifts of any amount?  Would we consider being a gold-level partner to make those broadcasts possible?

I hope the person who put up that picture on Pinterest gets to see some boring, not-made-for-tv Christianity.  I hope she gets to see love, and mercy, and grace, and self-sacrifice like I see (and try to live) every day.  I hope she gets to see Jesus Christianity not just channel 10 Christianity.

I hope we get the chance to show it---- in person, not just on tv.

---Rev. Anderson T. Graves II   (email:  atgravestwo2@aol.com )

Anderson T. Graves II is a writer, community organizer and consultant for education, ministry, and rural leadership development.

Rev. Anderson T. Graves II is pastor of Miles Chapel CME Church (5220 Myron Massey Boulevard) in Fairfield, Alabama;  executive director of the Substance Abuse Youth Networking Organization (SAYNO);  and director of rural leadership development for the National Institute for Human Development (NIHD).

Subscribe to my blog at www.andersontgraves.blogspot.com  

Friend me at www.facebook.com/rev.a.t.graves

MOVING THE WALL (The Separation of Church and State)

In 1 Samuel 8, the people of Israel demanded a king.  In doing so, they divided authority and influence in Israel between the priesthood and the kingship, effectively erecting a wall of separation of church and state.  It worked pretty well----- for a while.

In 1 Samuel 9, God chose Saul of the tribe of Benjamin to be the 1^st king of united Israel.  Saul was anointed by Samuel, the great prophet and priest.  In 1 Samuel 10, Saul was filled with the Holy Spirit and confirmed the hand of God on him by prophesying alongside the sons of the prophets.  In chapter 11, Saul showed decisive leadership and a heroic heart by bringing the tribes together to rescue the besieged town of Jabash Gilead.  He even showed a merciful heart by pardoning a hardline group who had initially refused to recognize his right to the throne (1 Samuel 11: 12,13).  By this demonstration of mercy in the midst of military power Saul even won over Samuel, who had been anything but enthusiastic about this whole make-us-a-king thing.

Then Samuel said to the people, “Come, let us go to Gilgal and renew the kingdom there.” ^ So all the people went to Gilgal, and there they made Saul king before the Lord in Gilgal. There they made sacrifices of peace offerings before the Lord, and there Saul and all the men of Israel rejoiced greatly. (1 Samuel 11: 14-15)

The king was doing good things on his side of the wall, and the church (the priesthood) was doing good things on its side of the wall.  The system was working just fine.

But, then.

When we get to chapter 13, Saul reaches over the wall of separation and takes it upon himself to offer a sacrifice that only the priest could offer.  (Think of it like an unordained state governor deciding to offer communion or a line of presidents dictating Christian theology.)

The state just up and occupied territory that was supposed to belong to the church.  The state moved the wall and pushed the church farther back.

But there was a reaaaally good reason:  it was a matter of national security. 

And Samuel said, “What have you done?”

Saul said, “When I saw that the people were scattered from me, and that you did not come within the days appointed, and that the Philistines gathered together at Michmash, ^then I said, ‘The Philistines will now come down on me at Gilgal, and I have not made supplication to the Lord.’ Therefore I felt compelled, and offered a burnt offering.” (1 Samuel 13: 11-12)

See?  Saul HAD to (he felt “compelled”) take a little more control of the religious establishment because he was losing public support for a military campaign.

Thank goodness, that kind of stuff doesn’t happen in modern America.  [Insert emoticon for sarcasm here.]

In chapter 14, King Saul declared a fast in the middle of battle and then accused the people of sinning when God didn’t immediately answer his prayer for direction in battle (1 Samuel 14: 24, 37, 38). 

So, King Saul, head of state and commander-in-chief, was about to kill his own son Jonathan for eating a spoonful of honey without permission.  And this was despite the facts that (a) Jonathan didn’t know about his father’s stupid order to fast while running around in he desert fighting Philistines; and (b) Jonathan had overrun an entire Philistine base with only his armor-bearer as back-up; and the armor-bearer didn’t even have a sword. (1 Samuel 13: 22; 14: 1-14)

Oh, and if you read chapter 14 carefully (verses 31-33), you’ll see that EVERYBODY broke the fast and Saul knew it.   So, the only reason he was tripping about “sin” was that he was embarrassed and angry that GOD had the audacity to keep him, the freakin’ king of all Israel, waiting on the answer to a prayer.

The state pushed the wall back a little further.

In chapter 15, Saul just flat out disobeyed God.  Why?  Because it was better for the economy.

^Thus says the Lord of hosts: “I will punish Amalek for what he did to Israel, how he ambushed him on the way when he came up from Egypt. ^Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them.”

 But Saul and the people spared Agag and the best of the sheep, the oxen, the fatlings, the lambs, and all that was good, and were unwilling to utterly destroy them. But everything despised and worthless, that they utterly destroyed.  (1 Samuel 15: 1-3,9)

And then, with a straight face, Saul declared this his DISobedience was actually what God wanted.

Samuel asked Saul, “Why then did you not obey the voice of the Lord? Why did you swoop down on the spoil, and do evil in the sight of the Lord?”

^                        And Saul said to Samuel, “But I have obeyed the voice of the Lord, and gone on the mission on which the Lord sent me, and brought back Agag king of Amalek; I have utterly destroyed the Amalekites. (1 Samuel 15: 18-20)

By what possible logic could the king conclude that doing the opposite of what God had said was the same as having obeyed the voice of the Lord?

Saul/ the king/ the state decided that public opinion determines what God REALLY means.  The state/ the culture decided that when the expressed Word of God conflicts with the opinions, economic interests, or national security priorities of the state then they can just change what God’s Word means.

And they push the wall back farther and farther.

What was meant to be a wall of separation between the church and the state inevitably becomes a wall of confinement around the church.

When the state can outline the constraints of speech in the pulpit but the pulpit has no right to speak in state facilities or on matters of the state, then the wall between church and state has become a wall around the church---- a very, very small and continually shrinking wall.

And don’t misunderstand what or who “the state” is.  The state is not just the collective of duly elected and appointed officials.  The state is the nation, the country itself.

Look around and you’ll see that the church is being shut out from the life of the country itself.  And where the church or churches do have great influence, it is often as mere mouthpieces for the political agenda of other “parties.”

Let me make it plain.

T(And oh, the theological acrobats used to try to make the capital gains tax into a crucial heaven-or-hell spiritual issue.)

Whatever.  I’m right. 

November 2011 Mormonism was a cult. January 2012 when Romney was about to win the nomination, suddenly the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints was just another Christian denomination of our brothers and sisters.

And.

The progressive, urban (Black) church hasn’t composed an original thought on social issues since Reagan’s 1^st election.  We have parroted the Democratic party platform even when candidates’ positions and personal morality was so absolutely the opposite of what God’s Word says.

We have been so afraid to divide the vote that we wrongly divided the Word of Truth.  And now, we have the audacity to do, say, and endorse the opposite of what God expressly said, and do it all in Jesus’ actual name.  (Yes, I’m talking about homosexualty, but doggone it, I’m talking about a whole lot of other stuff too.)

The American church in all its various branches has become institutionalized behind our tiny wall.  We have developed spiritual Stockholm syndrome, and allied ourselves with the very forces that have pushed Christianity to the fringes of American society.

Wake da’ crap up, church! 

Ya’ll been locked up too long.

“The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me,

     Because He has anointed Me

     To preach the gospel to the poor;

     He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted,

     To proclaim liberty to the captives

     And recovery of sight to the blind,

     To set at liberty those who are oppressed;

To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord.” (Luke 4: 18-19)

Stop begging THEM to pull down the wall.  Climb over it. 

Put down the talking points and get back to the Word of God.  Speak truth to power, beginning with the power for which you usually vote.

Or, don’t.

But I guarantee you this because this is the way it’s always been: the state will not stop shrinking the wall, not until they have completely crushed you with it. 

^Then King Saul said to the guards who stood about him, “Turn and kill the priests of the Lord, because their hand also is with David, and because they knew when he fled and did not tell it to me.” But the servants of the king would not lift their hands to strike the priests of the Lord. ^18 And the king said to Doeg, “You turn and kill the priests!” So Doeg the Edomite turned and struck the priests, and killed on that day eighty-five men who wore a linen ephod. ^19 Also Nob, the city of the priests, he struck with the edge of the sword, both men and women, children and nursing infants, oxen and donkeys and sheep—with the edge of the sword. (1 Samuel 22: 17-19)

---Rev. Anderson T. Graves II   (email:  atgravestwo2@aol.com )

Anderson T. Graves II is a writer, community organizer and consultant for education, ministry, and rural leadership development.

Rev. Anderson T. Graves II is pastor of Miles Chapel CME Church (5220 Myron Massey Boulevard) in Fairfield, Alabama;  executive director of the Substance Abuse Youth Networking Organization (SAYNO);  and director of rural leadership development for the National Institute for Human Development (NIHD).

Read my blog at www.andersontgraves.blogspot.com  

Friend me at www.facebook.com/rev.a.t.graves

THE SEPARATION IN OUR HEARTS (The Separation of Church & State, sermon #2)

In the last month, at least 5 unarmed Black men have been killed by police officers.  What does that mean?  Is there a way to make sense of it all?    It’s all too easy to accuse all police officers and fall into the easy indignation of stereotyping, but what does God have to say?

Plenty. 

Open your Bibles to the book of 1 Samuel for a timely installment in our emerging sermon series.

It’s part two of the series we’re calling The Separation of Church & State. The message is called: THE SEPARATION IN OUR HEARTS.

Listen well.

---Anderson T. Graves II   is a writer, community organizer and consultant for education, ministry, and rural leadership development.

Rev. Anderson T. Graves II is pastor of Miles Chapel CME Church in Fairfield, Alabama;  executive director of the Substance Abuse Youth Networking Organization (SAYNO);  and director of rural leadership development for the National Institute for Human Development (NIHD).

Subscribe to my personal blog  www.andersontgraves.blogspot.com .

Email atgravestwo2@aol.com

Friend me at www.facebook.com/rev.a.t.graves

You can help support this ministry with a donation to Miles Chapel CME Church.

You can help support Rev. Graves’ work by visiting his personal blog and clicking the DONATE button on the right-hand sidebar.

Support by check or money order may be mailed to 

Miles Chapel CME Church

P O Box 132

Fairfield, Al 35064

NO. ACTUALLY, YOU DON'T KNOW

It’s popular say, “You don’t know my story.  You don’t know my struggle.”

Well sometimes we do.

For example, we all know the professional and personal life of actor and comedian Robin Williams.  You and I know the story of his life.  We can download a list of his struggles.

We know his story and struggles so well that when he committed suicide, we assumed that it had to do with his past struggles with drugs, or the past story of depression off-setting his manic stage presence, or the old story of an ego crushed by waning popularity.  We knew that these were problems he’d faced repeatedly in the past.   So people speculated and pontificated based on what they knew of his story and his struggles.

But we didn’t know until days after he died that Robin Williams had Parkinson’s disease.  This incurable, degenerative disease of the central nervous system gradually robs its victims of control of their body, their voice, and their mind. Advanced Parkinson’s brings dementia, but every stage of the disease causes depression.

So maybe Robin Williams wasn’t too “weak” to stay off drugs.  Maybe he wasn’t too much of a “coward” to deal with being less popular on camera.  Maybe he was, in the most basic, literal, physically observable sense of the word, just SICK.

Maybe Robin Williams wasn’t looking back at the stories and struggles we commonly knew of his past, but ahead at the new struggles and the impending story we didn’t suspect were in his future.

Robin Williams lead a very, very public life.  We knew his story.  We knew his struggles.

But we really didn’t know.

We didn’t know his whole story, and the struggles we knew weren’t the toughest struggles he had to face.

Which is true for EVERYone. 

No matter how well you know someone either publicly or personally, you never really know their whole story.    You may know what they HAVE struggled with; but until (and unless) they tell you, you don’t know what they ARE struggling with.

But we assume we know, don’t we?  At a certain point, we have so much information about them already that we stop listening. 

 

They start a sentence and you finish it for them----- but do you see the look in their eyes, a pained look that says, ”No.  That’s not what I’m feeling”?

They tell you what they feel and you waive it off because you’re certain it’ll pass like all the other times, but do you see the hurt in their eyes that says, “It’s not going to pass this time,” and maybe, “It’s NEVER passed.  You just stopped paying attention”?

Jesus’ disciples knew His story.   They’d been to His hometown of Nazareth.  They’d met His mom and siblings.  They’d heard the stories of His birth and early years in Bethlehem and Egypt.  Some of them were there,\ the day John baptized Him.  They witnessed the Pharisees' attacks.  They sat with Him at night and reviewed each long day of healing and preaching.  They asked Jesus about what he did in the years not recorded in the gospels.  They watched His every move for 3 ½ years.  The disciples knew Jesus’ story.  They knew Jesus’ struggle. 

But they really didn’t.

When Jesus said, “I’m going to be killed.”  They said, “No, you ain’t.” (Matthew 16: 21-23)

Jesus told them and showed them who He was.  They affirmed, “You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God,” but they didn’t really see Him for Who He is. (John 6: 69; 14: 1-12)

Jesus told His disciples what He needed from them as followers and as friends, but they assumed that it wasn’t that big a deal or that it would pass like every other previous storm had passed.

 And He took with Him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, and He began to be sorrowful and deeply distressed. Then He said to them, “My soul is exceedingly sorrowful, even to death. Stay here and watch with Me.”…

Then He came to the disciples and found them sleeping. (Matthew 26: 37-38, 40)

They didn’t see; they didn’t understand.    This wasn’t just a passing request.  This was it.  This was what it has always been, but you think you know me so well that you don’t take me seriously anymore.

“What! Could you not watch with Me one hour?”(Matthew 26: 40)

The night Jesus was taken away to be killed, He was alone.  He was in a garden with his 11 closest friends just a stone’s throw away, but He was alone because His friends didn’t really know His story.  They didn’t really know His struggle.

The disciples only really learned Jesus after His death and resurrection.

The public is learning Robin Williams after his death.

So sad, that we wait that long to really know someone’s story and struggle.

We don’t have to. 

Listen to the ones you love. Hear them for who they are not just for who you already automatically know they have been.

Give them the space to tell you what their story IS, what their struggles ARE.

You never know when morning will come and they won’t be there to tell you.

---Anderson T. Graves II   is a writer, community organizer and consultant for education, ministry, and rural leadership development.

Rev. Anderson T. Graves II is pastor of Miles Chapel CME Church (5220 Myron Massey Boulevard) in Fairfield, Alabama;  executive director of the Substance Abuse Youth Networking Organization (SAYNO);  and director of rural leadership development for the National Institute for Human Development (NIHD).

Email atgravestwo2@aol.com

Friend me at www.facebook.com/rev.a.t.graves

You can help support this ministry with a donation to Miles Chapel CME Church.

Support by check or money order may be mailed to  

Miles Chapel CME Church

P O Box 132

Fairfield, Al 35064