Many of the issues that I have been facing in the past few months center on what – at least to me – is a needless struggle between following Jesus – primarily as revealed in the Sermon on the Mount – or the doctrines and dogma that seem to be a plague that may well be the true reason behind the continuing decline of many of the “mainline denominations” in our current culture.

My thinking on this was brought to the forefront while I was reading the book that I introduced in the last post: Changed By Grace: V. C. Kitchen, the Oxford Group, and A.A. by Glenn Chesnut (New York: iUniverse, Inc., 2006). As a result this post will take a look at more of Chesnut’s writing with particular emphasis on the life and work of V. C. Kitchen.

Chesnut introduces Kitchen with these words: Victor Constant Kitchen (1891-1975) was a New York City advertising executive. His firm – Doyle, Kitchen & McCormick – had its offices at 42nd Street and Fifth Avenue. He had a great interest in the Calvary Rescue Mission for down-and-outers at 246 East 23rd Street near Second Avenue, an operation which was supported by Calvary Episcopal Church and run by Oxford Group members.

In November 1934, the same year that Kitchen’s book [“I Was a Pagan”] came out, an Oxford Group member named Ebby Thacher came to visit a stock broker named Bill Wilson in his kitchen in the second floor apartment at 182 Clinton Street in Brooklyn, and told him about the group and its teachings. As a result Bill visited Calvary Rescue Mission, began learning more about the Oxford Group, and eventually (after his vision of the light in Towns Hospital) began attending Oxford Group meetings at Calvary House, where he got to know Father Shoemaker himself. Bill Wilson eventually founded Alcoholics Anonymous as a split-off from the Oxford Group of some of the members who were recovering alcoholics, who saw their drinking problem as their central spiritual issue(1-2).

A few pages later Chesnut continues his profile of V. C. Kitchen, writing: Kitchen had already been taught in church when he was young that we are justified by faith alone and not by works of the law. But before he came in contact with the Oxford Group, he thought that faith meant belief in church dogmas, and that we could automatically obtain the fruits of the spiritual life simply by believing the right doctrines and performing the correct religious rituals. As Kitchen put it: “In my early church life I was taught salvation by faith. But I was not taught how to make my faith anything more than a belief in certain doctrines. It seemed I had only to stand up, say I believed in Christ and submit to baptism. I then became a ‘full-fledged’ member of he church. There was to me no real birth here. I was not even an incipient saint. And there was no growth thereafter. I remained an adult spiritual infant. The faith that was nothing but a credulous belief lay stored in my memory, like a suit of clothes stored in the attic, and just about as useful.” And one of the biggest problems he had had as a child, Kitchen said, was that the church told him to believe all sorts of teachings about God’s enormous power, but gave him no proof that any of these things actually worked at the pragmatic level of life.

In order to be intellectually honest, people living in the modern scientific world had to ask a major question about any kind of religious system, which required a credible answer . . . What the founders of the modern evangelical movement had realized was that no spiritual system could be effective in the modern world unless it responded to this Enlightenment attack . . . Unfortunately, by the beginning of he twentieth century, there were people all over the world who claimed to be evangelicals, but who were in fact teaching only the old authoritarian and legalistic religion of woks righteousness: being “saved” meant following all of their rigid fear-based rules about what kind of clothes you could wear and how you had to fix your hair, and so on and so forth, and it meant accepting all their particular sect’s laws and rules with a blind and unquestioning faith(58-59).

And so it seems to me that not a lot has changed over the years. The issues and points of contention may be different, but the difficulty largely remains unchanged. Sadly, in many many situations the standards for being Christian today would likely not be recognized by the person for whom Christianity is named – Jesus the Christ!

This now becomes a launching point for our continuing discussions.

In the post on Monday, May 12, 2014 I made the following statement as my reason for resuming this blog: “the events of recent days have led me to the point where I am no longer able to stay silent” – and that is true. However, I feel that it is only fair to begin at the start of my current adventure with an event that was very positive – also – one which has generated at least two more significant writing projects – more about that later in this blog.

For a number of years I have been part of a discussion group made up of professionals involved in various roles in assisting people in the process of making the continuing journey of recovery from substance abuse. This group of colleagues and friends have made a significant impact on my life – an impact for which I will always be extremely grateful. Sometimes we have read books and had discussions that mostly left me in the dust wondering if I really should be in such a group – examples: Drug and Alcohol Abuse: A Clinical Guide to Diagnosis and Treatment by Marc A. Schukit and Traumatic Stress: The Effects of Overwhelming Experience on Mind, Body, and Society edited by Bessel A. van der Kolk, Alexander C. McFarlane, and Lars Weisaeth. Recently the group – which had been on sabbatical for several months – studied Changed by Grace: V. C. Kitchen, the Oxford Group, and A.A.written by Glenn F. Chesnut (New York: iUniverse, Inc., 2006). The Preface of this superb volume includes the following:

A number of wise commentators have already uttered the judgment that Alcoholics Anonymous was the most important new spiritual movement in the twentieth century . . . their twelve step approach to spiritual development also successfully navigated the sweeping transformation in our understanding of the world which took place over the course of the twentieth century, and did it far better than most religious and spiritual groups of that period . . . the biggest shift in human understanding since the Ancient Greeks destroyed the old mythological world view over two thousand years ago . . . Instead of fighting the new science, A.A. learned how to express fundamental spiritual concepts in ways which men and women of the new scientific era could understand and accept. Ancient spiritual ideas came back to life again with a bold new power when expressed in twelve step terms.(xi-xii)

The opening chapter of the book traces the work of Victor Constant Kitchen (1891-1975) and Frank Buchman (1878-1961), founder of the Oxford Group, and their influence on the founders of Alcoholics Anonymous. Chesnut also explores the impact of the work of two “key” figures from the modern evangelical movement, Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758), a Congregationalist pastor in Massachusetts, who was selected as the first president of Princeton University before his death, and John Wesley in England (1703-1791), a priest of the Church of England who taught Greek and Latin classics and theology, including the New Testament, at Oxford University.(Chesnut, 7) Wesley, of course, is remembered as the founder of Methodism. Chesnut describes the environment which surrounded these two important figures: Edwards and Wesley were both thoroughly conversant with the new Newtonian physics, as well as the writings of John Locke, the founder of modern psychology. Both believed firmly that good theology had to fit in with the best findings of modern science. Neither one saw any necessity for conflict between science and religion, if the theologians were doing their job properly . . . both [were] highly educated intellectuals who not only knew the ancient philosophical and theological tradition backwards and forwards, but were right at the forefront of all the new developments in thought which were taking place during their lifetimes, which was the period when the rise of modern science first began to affect western ideas in a major way.(8)

Chesnut also speaks to the environment of the life of Frank Buchman, a Lutheran pastor of German-Swiss background.(3): The modern Protestant evangelical movement had arisen within the English-speaking world, and moved to a very different kind of spirit than was found in orthodox German and Scandinavian Lutheranism. Orthodox Lutheran pastors laid great emphasis upon holding all of the correct doctrines and dogmas which had been laid out in such enormous detail in the Augsburg Confession, the Book of Concord, and the other standards of Lutheran orthodoxy . . . The emphasis which Frank Buchman placed upon Gefuhl (feeling and emotions) and the religion of the heart also came from his Lutheran pietist background. So Buchman’s pietism enabled him to break with the kind of rigid orthodoxy which was typical of so many Lutheran pastors, and made it possible for him to learn how to work with Christians who held a wide variety of other beliefs.(3-6)

The writing of Chesnut immediately sent me on a journey that will eventually result in two more significant research and writing projects. The first centers on the evolution of spiritual thought and understanding beginning with the thinking of Aristotle and continuing to the present day. The second, which develops from the first, focuses on the different ways that certain faith traditions have developed and the possible ways that the development of those traditions may have with the discord that is present in many of our current institutional faith traditions. Certainly, I will have much more to say about each of these in future writings.

Enough has been said, however, in this post – so – grace and peace until we meet again.

On June 17, 2013 I posted the following on this blog: “Time for the summer vacation . . . will resume posting in about one month. In the meantime – love each other as we all have been loved!!!”

At the time it was my intention to take about a month of vacation from blog writing and then to resume. At some point during that month I found myself questioning if there was any reason to resume my blogging. Clearly I decided that the answer was “NO” – however – the events of recent days have led me to the point where I am no longer able to stay silent – so – I title this post, “Here we go again . . . time for another new beginning . . .” At some point in the coming days I will elaborate about the happenings that have caused me to return to writing – but today – it is sufficient to say that there are some things that I must say – I am no longer able to remain silent!

Before I begin I need to make a request of the people who read this blog. I do not want this writing to remain a solo endeavor. It is my great desire that people who read this will respond with comments that create a community of discussion. That is very important to me because I know that I am stronger when I am not alone. I need other people – those who sometimes agree with me and those who often – or possibly always – disagree with me. The only ground rule that I will establish is this — it is imperative that our discussions be civil and polite because I am convinced that we experience growth through what Frances Taylor Gench labels as “faithful disagreement.” (In a future post I will describe the process that led Professor Gench toward the writing of her book Faithful Disagreement: Wrestling with Scripture in the Midst of Church Conflict – Westminster John Knox Press, 2009). As we journey along together I will do my very best to honestly state my thoughts and I ask that you do the same. Also, please make others aware of this discussion if you believe they would have interest and benefit from our discussions.

Today I conclude with some words that have frequently assisted me along the path of my personal journey. They are the opening words from the final chapter of Faithsong: A New Look at the Ministry of Music by Thomas L. Are (The Westminster Press, 1981).

The song we sing is good. It is called grace.

For the prophets, the only requirement for writing a book was to begin by saying, “Thus saith the [Holy One].” Later the church fathers [and mothers] would write: “The church has always said . . . .” But the most I can say about the gospel we sing is, “It seems to me.” I can’t say, “Thus saith the [Holy One],” because [God] doesn’t always speak to me. Nor can I say, “The church has always said . . . ,” for the church has seldom had enough unity to have always said anything. The most honest thing I can say is, “It seems to me.” (93)

And so we begin again . . .

Time for the summer vacation . . . will resume posting in about one month. In the meantime – love each other as we all have been loved!!!

Grace and peace!

The psalmist writes:

By the waters of Babylon, there we sat down and wept, when we remembered Zion.
On the willows there we hung up our lyres.
For there our captors required of us songs,
and our tormentors, mirth, saying, “Sing us one of the songs of Zion!”
How shall we sing the Lord’s song in a foreign land? Psalm 137:1-4 (ESV)

For me – this is exile:

People have conversations with you – they smile – they tell you how wonderful you are – they tell you that no one will ever be able to replace you when when you are gone – and on and on and on.

And then later you discover that what you have been told to your face is the complete opposite of what the same people are saying about you to others – that is exile – that is captivity in a foreign land!!

Home is where both of those conversations are the same – where people have the courage to honestly speak their mind – where the value of another child of God is not determined by whether we agree or disagree – where we hear God’s call to love one another – remembering that God’s call to love one another does not mean that we all need to be of one mind on everything (or anything) – or – that truth may only be spoken if it is convienient, pleasant, and socially polite.

I am so grateful to be back home!!

It seems to me that a lot of people are very conflicted in their living. I believe that many people truly want to let the commandments spoken by Jesus as recorded in Matthew 22:37-40 be the guiding standard for their living. It appears to be so simple and straightforward: love God with all your heart, soul, and mind – and – love your neighbor as yourself.

I have known a great number of people who would willingly and happily live by these guiding principles – IF – and this is a huge IF – IF they were able to genuinely love self – without fear of the unknown, the future, or the past. Further, I acknowledge that this is not just a present day issue – in some form it has been part of our human experience since the days following the beginning of creation.

Today – for reasons that I am not sure – I felt compelled to re-visit the website that offers the church-wide letter written by leaders of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) around the time of the passing of “Amendment 10-A.” That letter, dated May 10, 2011, may be found at http://www.pcusa.org/news/2011/5/10/churchwide-letter-concerning-amendment-10-/. The primary content of the site is followed by the posting of a large number of comments. As might be expected the comments offer a very wide range of responses. I took the time to read many of them today. I really did not expect to find anything that I had not already heard or read – and, in fact, that was the case. The statements ranged from overwhelming joy, relief, and gratitude to overwhelming fear, disappointment, and condemnation.

Then I read again the text of the letter – and – was particularly struck by the following:

However, as Presbyterians, we believe that the only way we will find God’s will for the church is by seeking it together – worshiping, praying, thinking, and serving alongside one another. We are neighbors and colleagues, friends and family. Most importantly, we are all children of God, saved and taught by Jesus Christ, and filled with the Holy Spirit.

It is Jesus Christ who calls individuals to ordained ministries, and all those who are called to ordained office continue to acknowledge Jesus as Lord of all and Head of the church. It is this same Jesus Christ who is the foundation of our faith and to whom we cling.

I am deeply saddened that some have chosen to no longer be part of our denomination. I have listened as many of them have cited that their actions are a result of a “crisis of conscience.” With deep respect I respond that this entire situation has also resulted in a “crisis of conscience” for me as well. I have struggled a great deal with the idea that some – including a significant number of colleagues and dear friends – believe that the only remedy is division and separation. I also have deep regrets that my relationship with a number of these people has either become very distant or no longer existent.

So it seems to me that what I must do is continue to pray that God’s will be done on earth – this very day and every day – as it is, always has been and always will be in heaven – and – that I practice in all things that I do and say hospitality that is welcoming, inclusive, and loving. It seems to me that is the intention of the words of Jesus in Matthew 22.

So let us live in love!!

It seems to me that relevance is more than a matter of style!!

Over the years – I have observed with curiosity a number of changes in the music and language of worship – and – at least for the most part – a majority of those changes have been made at the superficial level of style. I have heard people say that the “old traditional hymns” are stodgy – they are like funeral dirges – they are not “peppy” enough to be accepted by the current generation – and so they have been tossed aside for music that mimics the current popular culture – a sort of “top of the charts” music. And the result: now people are observing that people no longer sing in worship – it must be a matter of generational preference. I don’t think that is the case. Much of the music that people now “listen to” in worship was never conceived to be music for participation – it was written as music for presentation – by a solo artist or group. And the result: worship has evolved from a liturgy of participation to a liturgy of presentation.

Some years ago – a colleague of mine observed that in many churches on many Sunday mornings all of the hymns were offered at the same tempo (generally too slow) and at the same volume (in many cases led by an organ played by an organist who seemed determined to “win” the competition with the congregation – and – often the crowning blow of that competition was a free-hymn accompaniment on the final stanza, following an extravagant and extended interlude of epic performance proportions) that wandered into harmonic tonalities that left even the most experienced singers wondering how they should attempt to sing the familiar tune against a tonal progression that seemed to have as its primary goal the creation of an environment that would prohibit even those with perfect pitch from being able to sing the tune.

Sometimes it is just a simple uninformed seemingly insignificant matter that can undercut the best of intentions. For example – I once was approached by a very well-meaning head usher who informed me that I needed to make certain that all of the choir’s anthems from that time forward would be of sufficient length to make certain that adequate time was allowed for the ushers to receive the tithes and offerings from the congregation. My “evil twin” arrived just in time to suggest that the addition of a couple of more ushers would likely solve the problem – and that the selection of the anthem could continue to be based on the criteria of what might best contribute to the overall content of the worship experience.

These stories and observations could go on and on and on – and – I know a multitude of musical coleagues who could easily extend the list even further – probably approaching a point of true infinity.

So what are we to do? It seems to me that the content of the language of worship is far too important to be relegated to a place in line behind any logistical consideration or any personal preference for style. I once heard Brian Wren observe that inclusiveness involves much more than just gender neutral pronouns.

Also I will never forget attending a Session meeting where the primary subject of discussion became the difference between the business world and the church (a subject that was not even an agenda item on the printed docket for the meeting). After a signficant amount of time had passed (an amount that I am sure was not actually as long as it seemed) – one of our wise elders finally raised a hand and began to speak: “It has been my experience (he happened to be the senior excecutive vice president of a major national company) – that there are two kinds of people in the world – those who care about other people and those who do not – and – I have known some of each of those two kinds of people both in business and – in the church.”

It seems to me that we are called to love God with ALL of our heart, soul, mind, and being – and – to love ALL people at ALL times. And so it seems to me that inclusive love should be the first and only criteria for the language – liturgy – and music that we utilize when we gather for worship!

Often when I write something – I go back and read it and wonder to myself – what authority do I have to make statements like these? Everytime I have that experience – with a sigh of relief and great joy – I remember the words that Thomas L. Are used to open the concluding section of his book Faithsong: A New Look at the Ministry of Music*:

“The song we sing is good. It is called grace.

I have often felt that if I just had five days, or even five hours in which I were free to listen, God would surely speak to me. It would have been important to me if he had done so. I would have listened and now I would have been able to say, ‘Hear the new word from God.’

However, nothing like that has happened. I have had many hours free. God has had ample time to tell me anything he wants me to know. I have been more quiet than usual and God has been terribly silent.

This disappoints me. His silence has pushed me back to the old recourses of friends, books, and memories that have always sustained me. I won’t give an authoritative new chapter but will reaffirm the same old word I have already said, done, thought, experienced, and half-believed all my life.

For the prophets, the only requirement for writing a book was to begin by saying, ‘Thus saith the Lord.’ Later the church fathers would write: ‘The church has always said. . . .’ But the most I can say about the gospel we sing is, ‘It seems to me.’ I can’t say, ‘Thus saith the Lord,’ because he doesn’t alwyas speak to me. Nor can I say, ‘The church has always said . . ,’ for the church has seldom had enough unity to have always said anything. The most honest thing I can say is, ‘It seems to me.'” (93)

And then – just a few paragraphs later – Are concludes his brilliant volume with these words:

“This love of God created the church as a community of persons who love God and one another. This free love, from God, for God, and among us is the foundation for the choir’s song, and the choir’s practice. The song is good. It is about grace.” (96)

Thanks be to God!

*Are, Thomas L. Faithsong: A New Look at the Ministry of Music. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1981.

It seems to me that a person is only able to offer and receive love. When you offer love there is absolutely no guarantee that it will be received and/or returned. Likewise, when you desire love it cannot be demanded. Love – very much like grace – is a gift!

Recently I have remembered times in my life when people – friends and colleagues – have revealed their own fears through the remarks they have made about particular choices I have made for my own life. Two particular situations come to my mind as I sit to write this post today. One was the time around when I made the decision to attend Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary, and the other was when I made the decision to accept the opportunity to become Director Music at St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church here in Austin.

I have been amazed and saddened by some of the “facts” about these two places that have been reported to me by others. I admit that I have also been curious how people who made these remarks – or – posed their very pointed questions to me – learned the information they were anxious to make certain that I know that they know. My reflections on these remarks and questions – joined together with my own observations about these places gained by the fact that I have willingly become part of these communities have created an interesting process and an opportunity for my own learning about life. Over and over and over – I have generally come to the same conclusion – people often make a judgment about a place, an institution, a community of faith, etc. not by first-hand experience but, rather, by what they have heard from others (who often also are without any first-hand experience), what they have imagined, or their own fear of the unknown, the different, or the potential for lack of the comfort provided by the status-quo.

Also – I have often made choices for my life based on my own fears – and – often those choices led me on a path that proved not to be the path that God intended for me to follow – times when my willfulness became more powerful than my willingness to let go of my plans and listen for and follow God’s voice – times when I have said “I have a good idea” rather than hearing and responding to the call “Follow me.”

I am now convinced of the importance of living life in a manner defined by the first three steps of the famous Twelve Steps in the tradition of Alholics Anonymous:

1. Admitting that my life is unmanageable when I am determined to be the one in control, the one making all of the decisions, the one who is not willing to trust – because I am afraid.

2. Coming to believe (Yes, it is a process for most people rather than a single moment or event in time) that a power greater than me exists and is able to restore sanity to my life.

3. Making the conscious decision to turn my life over to that greater power which means overcoming the fear of letting go (something that sounds so simple – but – in reality can be very difficult).

Today, I am happy to report that my life has been greatly enriched and truly blessed by my willingness to find out from being present as part of the communities at Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary – and – more recently and continuing – part of the vibrant and loving community of faith known as St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church in Austin. In no way am I making the claim that these communities are perfect because they are not – but they certainly are not places that need to be feared.

It reminds me of a powerful line from one of the songs in the extraordinary musical Children of Eden – “the hardest part of love is the letting go.”

I am certain that I will be writing more about this in the coming days as I continue my preparation to teach a four week class at St. Andrew’s on the Sunday mornings during the coming month of July. I have titled the class “Singing the Music of Creation” – and I very much look foward to letting go of my fears and listening for God’s voice as I prepare and as I teach.

Grace, and peace, and love . . .

It is not possible to conclude this series of posts in honor of people blessed with the gift of lyrics without paying tribute to two incredibly gifted authors who had a profound influence on me, my writing, my theology, and my life. It was my privilege to work with both of these saints during the years I served as Director of Music Ministry for Memorial Drive Presbyterian Church in Houston. Now – in retrospect – what seemed very normal to me at the time I now know was a gift from God that allowed us to be on the cutting edge of inclusive language of love in a manner that was quite ahead of the times.

First – was Jim Wharton – who was serving Memorial Drive as Senior Pastor and Head of Staff when I first arrived in Houston in August of 1980. Jim loved opera!! One year he suggested that we write an “opera” based on the book of Ruth during the weeks that coincided with a Lenten study on Ruth. I agreed to compose the score for a “music drama” to go with his “opera libretto.” Ruth received its first and only presentation on Palm Sunday evening at Memorial Drive. Jim asked for a prologue that utilized the text from Micah 5:2-5a which later was published separately as an anthem with the title “Advent Prophecy.” Ruth was a remarkable and memorable experience and one of the highlights of my many years of music making!

Second – was Boyd Lien – who also served Memorial Drive as Associate Pastor for Christian Education durng the years I was there. Boyd is Norwegian! – and – until I met Boyd I never realized that Norwegian Independence Day was a major day in the liturgical calendar. Boyd’s writing gifts were easily matched by his ability as an artist and his seemingly endless gift of all things creative. It was during those years that I learned to properly celebrate Pentecost thanks to Boyd’s wonderful ways of bringing the day to life for all who were present. Boyd provided lyrics for numerous anthems for choirs of all different ages – but – the pinnacle of our collaboration – at least for me – was a full-length musical “Transformations” – written for and about the high school choir at Memorial Drive that toured each summer with a completely staged musical presentation. Together we created two incarnations of “Transformations” – and, happily and much to my surprise – some of it returned to life on the occasion of my retirement from Covenant Presbyterian Church in January, 2013.

My one regret about “Transformations” was – around the time it was written it seemed too sophisticated and difficult for most youth choirs – while not in the style that would be appreciated by most adult choirs. However, times have changed and I now believe that I am currently serving a congregation that would fully embrace “Transformations” – so I am beginning to dream about a possible third incarnation of this superb statement of Reformed theology and the inclusive nature of love. Oops! I think I may have just let the proverbial cat out of the bag as I have not yet shared my dream with Boyd – perhaps a fitting way to celebrate Norwegian Independence Day next year! Stay tuned . . .

I conclude this tribute to my two dear friends with the text for the first two stanzas of a song that runs throughout the musical “Transformations”:

Open our eyes Creating God that we may come to see your power in giving life and breath to all humanity.
Open our eyes to see your love transforming all around – throughout our world, in every heart, may love and peace abound.

Open our eyes Transforming God that we may come to see your power that breaks all barriers down, that forms community.
Open our eyes to see your love transforming all around – in life, in death, in life beyond, may love and hope abound.

May this be our prayer. Amen and Amen!