I was five years old when Neil Armstrong walked on the moon. I have memories of standing in the backyard at our house in Garland, TX looking up at the moon through binoculars and telling my father, “I think I can see them.” I was away from the Internet and TV news media this weekend so I didn’t see the coverage of his death and the humility of his life. Apparently, the country missed it as well based on the reporting of the Washington Post via the Associate Press on Aug. 26. So, this morning I’ve been catching up and remembering his family and friends in my morning meditation. What saddens me is that Mr. Armstrong’s example of humility, his expression of gratitude for the teamwork at NASA, and his responsible citizenship after his 15 minutes of fame was lost as “News” outlets reported on the tropical storm and the impending GOP Convention. Information and news has become a “voyeuristic” business that promotes, creates, and profits from drama more often than reporting the news without bias or at least naming their bias. The FOX News channel is the best example of tabloid TV journalism passing for “news and opinion” journalism that pushes a white Christian-centric conservatism wedded to a capitalism that profits from division, soft racism, and has no problem with, “there will always be poor among you.”
From what I have read about the man, Mr. Armstrong, was not interested in the “celebrity” nature of his existence as one of the few human beings to exit earth’s gravity field, walk on the moon, and return earth safely. Government and private business worked to solve a problem, created technologies that did not exist, cooperated, compromised, and collaborated. One of the best TV series about this time in NASA’s history is HBO’s, “From the Earth to the Moon.” I trust they will bring it back as a tribute to Mr. Armstrong, the other astronauts, the scientists, engineers, and the technicians that made Armstrong’s small step and giant leap possible. That “NASA age” in our Nation’s history might be the last time, in my lifetime, that government functioned well enough to do a thing that no one thought was possible. If, government leaders today could take that example and apply that cooperation and collaboration to our economic crisis, poverty, or disease then people like Grover Norquist (watch his honesty on 60 Minutes) and those that want to manipulate government from the anonymity he offers them would cease to be relevant. Our economy would not trickle down it would bubble up. That’s the difference between Democrats, Republicans, Libertarian, and Independent candidates it seems to me. One set is comfortable with the “lottery winner” mentality of “reality TV” and game shows like “American Idol” because those support the “trickle down” model. The last great “bubble up” economic growth was decades ago after WWII when the “greatest generation” provided an example to people like Neil Armstrong about humility, service, civic responsibility, and what really makes America exceptional. Thank you Neil Armstrong and all the people at NASA.
And now an Aside.
This is the difference in the election for President this November. One candidate’s life has been about enriching himself, his family, and those close to him through every “legal,” not necessarily “moral,” means possible based on his inherited wealth. Government non-regulation and government subsidies or tax breaks have been useful in that process from time to time. The other candidate actually climbed the ladder of economic opportunity that echos across the globe as the American dream. One knows something about collaboration that helps bubble up the ideas that can solve problems or do a thing no one says can be done. That takes relationship, trust, and hope. It takes partners with diverging ideas that want to solve a problem. The other candidate knows how to maintain his status and the status of others like him. It is a choice election about the evolution of our Nation. We can either embrace the multi-ethnic, diversity rich collaboration of our National ideals that learns from the example of the work that Mr. Armstrong and NASA did decades ago or we can embrace the robber baron vision of the white aristocracy behind Rove, the Tea Party, Sen. McConnell, Limbaugh, and Norquist that have gone out of their way to, paraphrasing the Honorable Clarence Thomas(1), “perform a high tech lynching” of President Barrack Obama. The new “Obama 2016” film is the new version of the Sen. Kerry “swift boat” attack.
Note
1. I’m not a fan of Justice Clarence Thomas. I don’t dislike the man. I believe the allegations of Ms Hill about Justice Thomas. Read those quotes here on ThinkExist. But, his words ring true of what white “conservatives” have done and are doing to our President who is pulling the America toward being “post-racial.” I imagine they will do a similar thing to the first “Democrat” woman elected President.
These are thoughts on the texts for September 2, 2012. Subscribers of Sacred Steps: Children’s Sermon Journal receive exegesis, commentary, and ideas for crafting the children’s sermon based on the Lectionary each week.
Psalm 15
If we simply take the final form of Ps 15, the plot twist can still make sense. While the one praying may begin the liturgy with an expectation of gaining access to a place, at the end she/he learns that worshiping God is best done in how one lives than in where one worships. This is a lesson that Israel struggled to remember throughout the stories of the 1st Testament. It is a reminder that prophets attempted to provide for the community throughout the generations. We also need to be reminded of this important connection between our worship and our work, between our prayer and our practice. What images do the “LORD’s tent” and “holy hill” call to mind for you? What is a holy place in your life? Is the sanctuary of your congregation such a space? Who gets to enter the sanctuary? Can you think of people who may not feel worthy to be in church because of the words spoken there? How does your life reflect the God you worship? How does your congregation live out their worship of God through service to the world? Does the liturgy in your worship assure people of God’s enduring presence, so that they “shall never be moved”?
Song of Solomon 2:8-13
While the Lectionary has listed “Song of Solomon” as the name of this biblical book, that is a traditional title and not its actual name. In Hebrew, this book is titled shir ha’shirim, which translates as “Song of Songs” (SoS). This is the Hebrew way of expressing the superlative; this text is the song that is better than all other songs. The next words in the Hebrew text are ‘asher le’shlomo, “which is of Solomon.” Like the many superscriptions in the Psalms (e.g., le’david), this is not meant as a byline but rather probably indicates that the text is “in honor of” Solomon or “dedicated to” Solomon. Since King Solomon was known for his many wives and concubines, one can see why this book of love poems would come to be associated with him. One tradition suggested that Solomon wrote these poems about his relationship with the Queen of Sheba (see 1 Kgs 10 or 2 Chr 9), but there is no evidence to support this claim.2
SoS is found among the Ketuvim, “Writings”, the third portion of the Jewish Bible, which was the last section to be canonized (perhaps not until 200 CE). Scholars think that SoS either was written at a late date (after the Babylonian Exile, no earlier than 5th century BCE) or was not accepted until late in the canonization process. The subject matter of SoS is erotic love that is expressed within a non-marital context. It contains no expressions of Israelite nationalism or of any explicit religious/ethical values. It is suggested that the subject matter of SoS almost prevented it from making it into the canon, or it might have been questioned because the female has such a dominant voice; she is in control of her sexuality and not the possession of some male (which was common in many ancient cultures, including Israelite). We know that the rabbis did debate its inclusion, and some believe that it was included only because of the traditional belief in Solomon’s authorship. However, it is more plausible that SoS was kept in the Jewish canon because the rabbis understood that the Divine was a part of all life, including sexuality. And we are indebted to them for this wise decision.
James 1:17-27
Are you “quick to listen, slow to speak, and slow to anger?” Maybe a better way to consider the question is to think of settings in which you are likely to be quick to listen, slow to speak, and slow to anger, as compared to situations in which you are quick to anger, interrupt, and not listen to others.8 How does this reflect on who you are as a person that claims Christian faith? Another way to ingest this text would be to evaluate your belief and practice as a “doer” or “hearer” of the word. A first question would be, “Whose word or what word?” Is it the “Word” proclaimed by the Gospel of John? Is it the “Word” proclaimed by the Apostle Paul? Is the “Word” the good news of God as proclaimed by Jesus of Nazareth in the gospels as a whole? The author of James provides a hint in vv. 23-24, though it is an awkward metaphor. A translation note in the NISB provides another way to read and hear the text.
Mark 7:1-8, 14-15, 21-23
This is a good week to put a few of your congregation’s traditions, as well as a few traditions of Christianity, under a microscope and ask, “Why?” Think about your worship service. Where are communion, offering, and preaching placed in your order of worship? Why do you have that order of worship? Who is chosen from the congregation as deacon or elder? How do you practice baptism, what do you ask a person who comes forward to join your congregation, and who is welcome into membership of your congregation? This is not about questioning for questioning’s sake. It is about determining the intentions of “traditions” and if those are consistent with the teachings of Jesus and your understanding of God. It’s about recognizing when a person, congregation, or religion chooses tradition’s interpretation of a sacred text over what the sacred text says or does not say. It is important to remember that the biblical witness was organized based on “tradition’s” power structures as well. Many Christian siblings, who continue to believe and argue that women should not be ministers, do so even though all the gospels agree that Mary Magdalene was one of the first to experience Christ’s resurrection and, according to the Gospel of John, was told by the risen Christ to go and tell (preach) to the disciples the good news that he had risen. Yet, the Roman Catholic Church and many Protestants deny women the process and the affirmation to answer their call to ordained Christian ministry, often based on church’s tradition.