Blue Cord

No, this is not an updated version of The Giving Tree. Instead, the Giving Kiosk is a new way to make contributions to your church or other institution (usually non-profit organizations).

The Giving Kiosk is a product of a company called Secure Give. It is an ATM-like machine that some churches are placing in their foyers or parish halls. It allows parishioners to make donations to the church using their debit or credit cards. They then receive a slip that they may place in the offering basket during the service. The kiosks can be customized to include the church’s name, logo, and any imagery the church wants.

My reaction to this product is only slightly better than it is to the “peel-and-commune” cups that contain an individually wrapped wafer and grape juice for the Lord’s Supper. In both cases, the theology of the act is being ignored in favor of convenience. Those who are using the kiosk argue that it makes donations to the church easier. People no longer have to remember to bring cash or checks. This makes the kiosks an ideal solution, since most people carry their debit and credit cards with them.

If the purpose of giving to the church was simply to raise money, then I would have no problem with this. But our tithes and offerings are not donations to the church. They are, instead, offerings that we give to God.  Our giving is an act of worship.  We are merely returning to God a portion of what God has given us.   And just like the sacrifices and offerings of the OT, it is meant to be done as an act of worship.

The Giving Kiosk almost completely removes the giving from the worship service.  Instead, giving becomes something you do on your way in or out.  It becomes more like buying a ticket to the service.  It does provide you with a receipt that can be placed in the offering basket during the service, which means the act of giving is not completely separated from worship.

When our act of giving becomes more about the church raising money and less about worshiping God, we are entering some dangerous territory.  Jesus cleansed the temple of the money changers, even though the money changers probably made worship more convenient for the people. The temple also had vendors who would sell you a spotless animal.  Surely it was more convenient to buy an animal at the temple than have to bring one all the way from home.  I am not saying that the issues here are exactly the same, but I still think the comparison highlights some of the problems with the Giving Kiosk.

Finally, it seems to me that making worship more convenient is not necessarily a good thing. If it were, drive-thru communion would make a lot more sense.  But worship is work.  Liturgy literal means “the work of the people.” We are supposed to be bringing our best to God, not what is most convenient, and our best and our easiest are seldom the same.  Having to remember to bring money to church means that our act of giving is not a spur of the moment donation but something that we have thought through and planned.  Our giving doesn’t begin and end at church; it is something that we had to think about as part of our preparation for worship.

I think convenience is a good thing.  I am much happier having to carry paper currency to church than I would be having to wrangle an animal into the sanctuary.  But too much convenience lessens the worship experience.  Our culture thrives on microwaves and fast food, but our worship doesn’t have to acquiesce to that model.

Revised Common Lectionary, Year A, Proper 18 (series reading)

The Revised Common Lectionary appoints Exodus 12:1-14 as its OT series reading for this coming Sunday. It is part of a nine week series from the book of Exodus that began two weeks ago with the description of the Israelite’s slavery in Egypt and the birth of Moses. It continues through the deliverance at the Sea of Reeds, the journey to Sinai, the giving of the law, and the golden calf incident.

This passage, which comes from HS, is set as an interruption to the story of the final plague - the killing of the firstborn. It provides the law for the Feast of Unleavened Bread, placing the instructions for the feast in the middle of the story of Passover. It is immediately followed by the command to leave Egypt.

These instructions show the standard Priestly concern with the calendar. It sets up the month of Passover as the first month of the year. This places the beginning of the year in the Spring around the vernal equinox. This would later be changed in the Jewish calendar, which moved the beginning of the year to Rosh Hashannah in the Fall, near the autumnal equinox. ¹ The theology of connecting the new year with the Passover is clear: just as the final plague and deliverance from Egypt begin Israel’s new life with God, so does the remembrance of that event mark the beginning of the new year.

The Israelites are commanded to slaughter a lamb and place the blood on the lintel of the door. The requirement of the lamb and the command that it be entirely eaten before the morning suggests that the lamb is intended as a peace / fellowship offering offered for giving thanks (Leviticus 7:11-15).² In no way is it viewed as a sin offering. Although this passage does not describe the lamb as a sacrifice, the Priestly layers in the Pentateuch viewed all killing of animals as a sacrifice (a view which the Deuteronomists did not share). Of course, the picturing of the Passover according to the Priestly sacrificial scheme is a later interpretation of an earlier feast.

1. It should be noted that some scholars argue that originally the New Year was in the Fall and see the Priestly author’s concept of it falling in the Spring as an innovation. [back]
2. Please note that this is merely a suggestion and I have not researched it thoroughly. [back]

Revised Common Lectionary, Year C, Proper 12 (series reading)

The OT reading from the Revised Common Lectionary for this Sunday is Hosea 1:2-10. This is the theme reading, although the connection between this passage and the NT readings is not immediately clear (assuming there is one).

The Hosea is passage is well-known to most preachers. It would be hard to imagine a seminary class on the OT that didn’t deal with this text when covering Hosea. The danger with such familiar passages, of course, is that we allow our prior understanding of the text to take the place of doing the exegesis again. Because of that, I wanted to point out something that seems to me to be a surprising element in the text that a preacher might not have noticed in previous readings.

The first of these is the fact that Hosea names his first child Jezreel, because God is going to punish the Jehu Dynasty for the coup in Jezreel that brought them to power. This is an interesting statement, because the coup in Jezreel was originally done at the command of God through the prophet Elisha. A common way of dealing with this is by saying that Jehu went overboard when he killed everyone in the Omrid Dynasty, but this is not supported by the texts we have. In 2 Kings 9:7, Jehu is told specifically that he is to destroy the house of Ahab. It is hard to go overboard when you are told to destroy something, as destruction involves wiping something out completely.

It seems to me that the direction of theological reflection on this text seems to me to be the multiple voices that the Bible is presenting concerning Jehu’s coup. Hosea views the coup negatively, at least in the way it was carried out. The DtrH, on the other hand, views it positively. The question for preachers is how to hear both voices and allow each to have its say without privileging one text over the other. The canon does not set the texts at odds with each other, but neither does it resolve the tension. Preachers can draw on that tension to provide energy to their sermons.

Revised Common Lectionary, Year C, Proper 10 (theme reading)

The thematic OT reading from the Revised Common Lectionary for this coming Sunday is Deuteronomy 30:9-14. The series OT reading switches from 1 & 2 Kings, which it has been covering since Pentecost, to Amos. The readings from Amos only last this week and next. This post will focus on the reading from Deuteronomy.

The first thing to notice about the Deuteronomy reading is that it starts in the middle of the passage. Verse 9 is neither the beginning of a paragraph nor even the beginning of a sentence. If we read it as it stands, then it merely sounds like a promise that God will make the people of Israel prosper. The full message is actually much more involved than that.

To fully understand the passage, we need to go back to Deuteronomy 29, where this discourse begins. In that chapter, Moses is delivering a sermon to the people of Israel, who are gathered in Moab before entering the Promised Land. He lays out clearly that if the people of Israel do not follow the law, they will be sent into exile in a foreign land. Only when the people repent and return to the Lord will he forgive them and cause them to prosper. The reading for this Sunday picks up at this point. When the people are in a foreign land, realize that they have sinned, and return to obedience, then and only then will God do all of the things promised in Deuteronomy 30:9-14.

The placement of this sermon on the plains of Moab is not accidental, as it seems to indeed be intended as a sermon for Israelites who are about to enter the land. It is likely that this section of Deuteronomy was written towards the end of the Babylonian exile, when the people had repented and returned to God. The sermon is directed to them as they prepare to return to Judah. Notice the statement in 29:14-15, which extended the covenant beyond just those who were present in Moab. The sense that the people returning from exile were re-entering the covenant seems strong in this passage. Just as their ancestors had stood on the banks of the Jordan and made a covenant with God before entering the land, so do the Israelites returning from Babylon. It is now up to them to be obedient in the land, so the fate of their ancestors does not befall them as well.

As I mentioned before, many parishes in the Episcopal Church are switching to the Revised Common Lectionary.  This is due to the General Convention, which voted to use the RCL in the next version of the Book of Common Prayer.  Of course, most other mainline denominations already follow the RCL.

Because of this, I thought I would begin posting on the OT readings for the RCL.  Each week I will write at least one post on one of the two OT reading options for the coming Sunday.  I hope to have it up by the middle of the week, in case some pastors begin using my posts for a resource in sermon preparation.  I make no promises, however.  It may not make it up until Friday or Saturday.  Some pastors wait until then to begin writing their sermons anyway, so it won’t be a problem for them.

The RCL provides two OT readings for each week.  One is a thematic reading that fits with the epistle and gospel readings.  The other is a reading that allows pastors to preach from one book in order for several weeks.  I probably will not be posting on both, although that may happen sometimes.  And I won’t consistently focus on the thematic or the series readings.  I will simply pick which reading looks more interesting to me and go with that one.  I won’t be providing a complete workup of the passage, but merely some exegetical notes and suggestions for how the passage might be preached.

If anyone would like to propose improvements for the series once it gets going, I hope you will feel free to make suggestions.  Because this is intended as a resource for preachers and congregants, I want to make it as useful as possible.