The Nature of God

Deuteronomy 15: 7-11, Psalm 112, 2 Corinthians 8:1-9, 13-15, Mark 4: 35-41 (5: 1-20)

This coming Tuesday is the 4^th of July when we celebrate the birth of the United States of America as an independent nation. History tells us that the decision to actually break from England at that time was not taken lightly. The colonists spent 15 – 20 years trying to maintain an amiable relationship with the King and the government of England. When our nation was finally established, though, it was based upon principles of fairness to all people, and even the rulers were to be subject to the law. This was in contrast to the practice at that time in most countries where the rulers placed themselves above and outside the limitations of law. Our government was established upon lofty ideals. The second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence starts with these words, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”  Eight years later as the current form of our government became established, a Constitution was instituted that began this way “We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

          These are high ideals upon which our nation was founded. The basics of our government have changed little over the past 230 years, although our understanding of these ideals has expanded and they are now applied more inclusively that when first written; as they include full and equal rights for women, and for people of all races and ethnic backgrounds. Moral and ethical decisions have been made through the years that forced our high principles to be implemented more fairly and representatively. But, liberty is never complete and justice has never been uniformly perfected for everyone. We must continue to test our own thoughts and actions to maintain these ideals for ourselves and for the future.

There is a lot of controversy and turmoil in the world, in our nation and in the church. How we see these situations and how we respond as Episcopalian Christians quite often comes down to our understanding of, “What is the nature of God?” That question has a natural follow-up, “What are my responsibilities based on that understanding of God?”

          There currently seem to be two main images of God. The first image is what is sometimes described as “The God of the Old Testament”. This image shows God as the distributor of powerful justice; perhaps a bit vengeful, quick to deal with his enemies by destroying their homes, by causing their cities to sink into great chasms in the earth, or causing plagues to destroy their land completely. This picture is of an angry God, such as those painted by the Renaissance artists… an old man with the white beard, larger than life, waiting and watching for us to do something wrong so we can be punished. Although this may be a common image of God, I believe it is a false one. This frightening image keeps many people from building a spiritual connection to God. Yes, the Hebrew histories of the Old Testament include these stories of power and destruction but they are overshadowed by the other histories which consistently show a God - forgiving, compassionate, and steadfast. God has repeatedly been willing to give us, his stubborn and wayward people another chance. This second image of God can be described as “The God of Love”, is often associated with Jesus, and is thought of as “The New Testament God”. But I avow this is the original image of God the creator and provider of all things. This is the image of God who looked at the first day of creation (and every day that has followed) and stated “It is Good.” This is the God of love, compassion, charity, and mercy.

          These two views of the nature of God are in conflict to one another. “God of Love” or “God of the Law”; which one more clearly defines God? I believe that the God of Love represents the basic and unchanging nature of God.

How did I come to that conclusion? I started thinking of all I was taught about God. It seemed to me that as I was being brought up through the Methodist Church Sunday School, there was a lot more talk of love than there was talk of rules and destruction. So when I began preparing for this sermon, I decided to check it out and see if my memory was right. I went to the “Concordance” in the back my study Bible. The Concordance lists the major words and phrases in the entire Bible, and this is what I found. The word “Law” associated with the punishing God is referenced 118 times in this Bible, 39 times in the Old Testament and the other 79 times in the New Testament. That appeared to be quite a number of references until I looked up the word “Love”. This word, associated with the compassionate forgiving God is referenced a total of 738 times in my study Bible, an overwhelming 500 of those references are in the Old Testament. Simply by weight of the numbers “Love” would win. Of these 738 references to love, though, there are five that for me directly address the questions and complete the argument about God’s nature; they provide insight consistent with and maintain uniformity within the full message of God.

          The First Letter of John, verses 4:7-8, addresses the nature of God this way, “Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.”

          The other four references address our response and accountability in life. The instruction is found in similar forms in Matthew 23: 37 – 40, Mark 12: 29 – 31, Luke 10: 27 and John 13: 34 – 35 and is called the “The Greatest Commandment”.  Reading from Mark, “One of the teachers of the law asked Jesus, “Of all the commandments, which is the most important?” The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this:’ Hear O

Israel

, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength. The second is this ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than these.” 

          Today’s reading from Deuteronomy describes how we individually are to respond to need.

          “If anyone is in need – do not be hard-hearted or tight-fisted toward your needy neighbor. Open you hand, willingly lending enough to meet the need. Be careful not to view your needy neighbor with hostility and give nothing. Give liberally and be ungrudging when you do so, for on this account the Lord your God will bless you in all your work and in all that you undertake. Since there will never cease to be some in need on the earth, I therefore command you, “Open you hand to the poor and needy neighbor in your land.”

          This call to generosity is continued in the Epistle lesson from 2 Corinthians and describes how the community is to respond.

Speaking of the early churches “during a severe ordeal of affliction, their abundant joy and their extreme poverty have overflowed in a wealth of generosity on their part….they gave according to their means, and even beyond their means…Now as you excel in everything – in faith, in speech, in knowledge, in utmost eagerness, and in our love for you – so we want you to excel also in this generous undertaking. As it is written “The one who had much did not have too much and the one who had little did not have too little.”

These biblical and historical situations required ethical decisions and action. Decisions made while looking through the filter of love are not always “black and white”.

I have in my possession a pair of ruby lensed sun glasses. When I put them on a most amazing transformation occurs. Every object that has any tint of red becomes more brilliant, flowers become more colorful, those red racing cars seem to shine with a light of their own, and even objects of pure white seem to have a warmer glow about them. On the other side of the color spectrum though, green objects seem to fade into the background. The tree leaves and grass become a uniform tan color and the sky fades slightly to become a backdrop for the brilliant warm colors of the clouds, the flowers and the birds.

If one thinks of red as the color representative of God’s love, this amazing physical phenomenon can be translated to an understanding of how The God of Love sees us and our actions.  Through this red filter of love, our inner spirit becomes more brilliant and our failings and transgressions fade into the background as we attempt to live our lives with love, compassion, and mercy.

I would like you to continue to think through this filter of love as I speak of recent controversies within the Episcopal Church. Our Diocesan and General Conventions have taken actions that have become controversial.

 Most recently, the Bishops at General convention elected Reverend Katharine Jefferts Schori as Presiding Bishop, the spiritual leader, chief pastor and preacher of the church in the United States. This decision has caused shock waves through the rest of the Anglican Communion – because of her gender. I had the pleasure to meet and hear Bishop Schori at diocesan convention a couple of years ago. I was struck by her obvious spirituality and impressed with her story of struggle to meet the needs in all of far flung diocese in Nevada. She expresses compassion for those suffering from starvation, poverty, disease, lack of educational opportunities locally and around the world. She shares a vision of a bountiful table God has provided and a responsibility for us to share in a just manner. I believe that members of the General convention looked through the ruby filter of love - what became evident was not her gender but her spiritual commitment and her love. God is apparent in her life.

Another decision made here in Northern Californiaand ratified by the General Convention was the succession of Rev Canon Barry Beisner as our next diocesan bishop. Canon Beisner is well known to us in Sacramento, and we at St. Pauls’s have had the opportunity to hear him preach from this pulpit. Controversy surfaced at General Convention as it became known that Canon Beisner has been divorced twice and is currently married for a third time. Having heard Canon Beisner speak of his spiritual journey, I am struck again by an obvious spirituality. In all conversations to which I have been a witness, Canon Beisner speaks eloquently in terms of his commitment to prayer, his joy and love for the church and God’s mission for the church. Once again, I believe that the members of our diocesan convention and the General convention looked thorough that ruby filter of love. What became apparent were not a lack values or an inability to make meaningful commitments but the strength of his spiritual commitment and his love.

 

Probably, these decisions by the Episcopal Church in the United Stateswould not have become so controversial except that they come on the heels of General Convention in 2003, which consented to the election of Bishop Gene Robinson by the Diocese of New Hampshire. This was extremely controversial because Bishop Robinson is an openly gay man. The Anglican Communion is been responding to this event even today. Members of the diocese that elected Bishop Robinson knew him well. Before his election he served that community for many years, they knew about his sexuality, and still they elected him on the first ballot. It was and remains controversial but I believe that the members of the New Hampshire Convention and the General Convention in 2003 looked through that ruby filter of love in making their decision. What became apparent to them was not an issue of sexuality but spirituality - the spiritual commitment with which Bishop Robinson leads his life.

I would like to close by paraphrasing part of a letter written by our Bishop Jerry Lamb following the convention in 2003. Bishop Lamb wrote, “As I pondered and prayed about these questions facing the church I came to see that it is Baptism that makes each of us a child of God, a new creation, in Paul’s words. It is Christ Jesus who gives us new life no matter who or what we are. Homosexuality”, gender, divorce and marriage status, sexuality in general – are “part of the human condition. It is not something that a person chooses any more than they can choose the color of their skin or their genetic makeup. As human beings and children of God by Baptism all should have the right to relationships and full access to life in the church community as well as society at large.

All these issues, political and moral will resonate within society for years to come. I ask you always to consider them with compassion, mercy, and love.

Amen