Forty-five or more years ago, according to legend, children’s television icon Soupy Sales encouraged his young viewers to go into their parents’ bedroom, find Daddy’s wallet, or Mommy’s purse, take out the green pieces of paper and mail them to him at the address given.  As the story goes, much to Soupy’s astonishment, he received some $40,000 from his devoted followers.  He sent the money back, and got thrown off of television for his antics.

Soupy always made me laugh, and I enjoy hearing stories about him such as this one and another which I won’t repeat here.

This all came to mind when I read about a priest in Virginia who is facing 40 years in prison, plus fines, for absconding with hundreds of thousands of dollars from two parishes he “served” for a number of years.  It seems they were serving him.

First of all, this Roman Catholic priest was married with children, but he lived 50 miles away from the parishes and managed to keep this reality hidden from the two congregations.  Then, he gave them an address to which they were instructed to mail their contributions.  The money ended up in his person account.  One would think someone in the churches would be a little suspicious, or at least hesitant to comply with these arrangements. 

But then, he was the pastor of these churches for only thirteen years!

Whenever I hear about or witness people blindly following a religious leader, even to the point of thoughtlessly complying with questionable practices and expectations, I truly am amazed.  The Jim Jones case was an extreme example, when he led his followers into a mass suicide ritual a generation ago.  There have been other cases, as well.

But sometimes people project onto their pastors images, hopes, desires, and more.  I’m not sure why.  Is it so they have someone to look up to?  Or is it so they can let themselves off the hook of high expectations and personal standards?

My suggestion is that people in faith communities remember we’re all in this together, and while a pastor may have specialized training, and even a calling, he or she is not superior to others.  He or she does not have secret knowledge.   He or she is not the object of the church’s focus.  He or she does not bear the burden of faithfulness or righteousness for the whole community. 

The journey -- and the responsibility -- is for everyone.

Several years ago, during an election campaign for the House of Representatives, the two candidates appeared together on a radio call-in program.  I’ll never forget the response one made to the other following a characterization of his views and experience:  “If you will stop lying about my record, I’ll stop telling the truth about yours.”  I’m not sure if that was an original retort or not, but I thought it was pretty clever.

That’s one of the distasteful aspects of political campaigns, though – candidates criticizing, ridiculing, and otherwise putting down their opponents, painting them as pathetic losers who couldn’t possibly handle the rigors of the office for which they are competing. 

While it can be amusing (think Lloyd Bentsen in his debate with Dan Quayle when both were running for Vice President – “You, sir, are no Jack Kennedy!”), it also reaches a point at which there is no reason for paying attention.  Distortions and caricatures render it all irrelevant.

The text for this Sunday, from Luke 18, features the Pharisee and the Tax Collector. Rather, as the Pharisee sees it, the Pharisee and the tax collector.   The Pharisee touts his own righteousness.  He fasts twice a week; he tithes; he’s righteous beyond the call of duty.  He’s a sure sight better than that lousy tax collector in the pew across the way!

The tax collector is a lout.  He works for the oppressor; he cheats people out of their money; he’s a traitor; and, he probably has bad breath, too!  But he prostrates himself before God and says, “Lord, be merciful to me, a sinner!”

The Pharisee was proud of himself.  In fact, his “prayer” was full of himself.  The tax collector wouldn’t even look up as he pleaded for God’s grace.

Jesus said he “went home justified.”  The Pharisee left the synagogue, not thinking of God, or of God’s mercy, but rather left thinking of himself.

It seems he missed something along the way.

I get very uncomfortable when religious faith, generally “Christian,” gets mixed in with government processes or events.  It appears to me that requests for prayer at public civic ceremonies or legislative sessions are either something of a superstitious ritual or an attempt to co-opt the faith, reassuring those with political position and influence that God is a cooperative or even manageable entity.

In some ways, it seems as if such prayer really has no meaning, except to appease …someone.  I’m not sure whom.  By the time the prayer is parsed and neutered so as not to offend anyone, it doesn’t fully reflect the convictions of the person praying.  It’s almost an apology, really.  My question is, “What’s the point?”

I turned down a request to offer such a prayer at a building dedication sponsored by the city government, and I was especially glad I did so when I saw that, at the event, the prayer was combined with the Pledge of Allegiance.  Someone made sure all the bases were covered, I guess.

The City Council of Akron, Ohio recently dropped its long-standing practice of opening its business sessions with the Lord’s Prayer.  An advocacy group specializing in the separation of church and state threatened legal action.  Rather than defend their practice, and, in the process, define its meaning, the council rolled over.

The president of the council made a telling comment.  He said the tradition “most likely” was begun to assure the local citizens that outside guidance was sought by the city leaders.  Most likely.  He wasn’t sure why they recited the Lord’s Prayer at the beginning of their meetings.  It apparently really didn’t mean anything, and it certainly was not worth fighting for.

Doesn’t one of the Ten Commandments say something about taking the Lord’s name in vain?

The World Series soon will begin, featuring a match-up between the Boston Red Sox and the Colorado Rockies.  The Red Sox won the World Series in 2004, after 86 years of futility, blamed by some on their trading Babe Ruth to the New York Yankees long ago – “The Curse of the Bambino.”  More likely, it had something to do with poor pitching and bad hitting.

The Colorado Rockies are a relatively new team, having joined the National League maybe ten years ago or so.  They never have advanced to the playoffs before, let alone the World Series.

I have no prediction or favorite to root for in the series.   As a Yankees fan, I am obligated to dislike the Red Sox.  That’s the law.  Having grown up in the American League (my hometown team was the Washington Senators, until they moved away, and then Baltimore was the closest team, also in the AL), I find it difficult ever to root for the National League.  So, if I watch any of the games, I’ll just look for interesting plays and/or comments from the announcers.

Apparently, the Colorado Rockies have a reputation for having a number of Christians on the team, and some have attributed their recent success to Divine Intervention.  Interestingly, they defeated the San Diego Padres to gain a berth in the playoffs.  The Padres were named for Catholic priests who manned missions in California when Spain was running the show in the territory a long time ago.  I guess being a Padre in name only doesn’t hold sway with God when it comes to controlling the outcome of baseball games!

Some of the Rockies players make the sign of the cross on the playing field, or point to heaven when they get a hit or make a difficult catch.  One player, in an interview, credited God with helping the team achieve victory, only to have his references to God deleted on the official Major League Baseball website version of his remarks. 

The manager, a recovering alcoholic on his third marriage, notes that in selecting players, “character” is important to team decision-makers.  The Rockies, like a number of other teams in the league, host a Faith Day promotion during the season, at which some of the players share their testimonies with the fans in attendance.

All well and good.

But, it seems to me that:

a)      God likely is not as concerned with who wins baseball games as some might believe;

b)      It’s easy to proclaim the benefits of faith when you live a life of privilege.  The minimum major league salary is over $300,000 per year, and the average salary is several million dollars;

c)     The Bible never promises that faithfulness leads to worldly success and acclaim.   In fact, there seems to be an emphasis on sacrifice and even suffering in the teachings of Jesus.

I’m pleased that some of the players for the Colorado Rockies are Christians, and that it’s important to them.  Their success as a team, though, more likely resulted simply from good pitching and timely hitting.

There apparently is a law that passed in 1978 allowing civilian federal employees to designate “comp time” to be used later for religious observances rather than applying other leave time to that purpose.  One man, who retired after 30 years of service, made such a designation for his overtime hours, but didn’t use them.  His final paycheck included an additional chunk of change totaling almost $19,000.

Lo, and behold, there are folks who abuse the privilege, as an investigation discovered, using their “religious observance” time for other things such as golf outings, gambling excursions, participation in marathons, and European trips – not to mention padding their retirement pay-outs.

Three civilian managers in the Navy were discovered to have used their religious observance benefit for vacations, saving up their actual vacation time for cash sums to be paid at the end of their careers.  Some workers at the Food and Drug Administration somehow were able to accrue religious observance hours at a rate higher than allowable by law, and got cash for some of the extra hours when they left their jobs.

It seems the investigation is gaining steam, and some in Congress are not going to stand by and let people take advantage of the system.  Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) chairs the House Energy and Commerce investigative subcommittee.  His committee discovered the fun and games occurring at the FDA.  Stupak said, “To abuse this privilege as a money-making scam is an insult to men and women of faith.”  The original law allowed people to take time for religious observances “in lieu of overtime pay,” so no money was supposed to change hands in this deal.  Regulations later created, however, made the pay-outs possible.

So, it all has become, as Oliver Hardy would say, “Another fine mess.”

A line I found amusing in the article about all this was the response of one of the Navy workers who was asked whether golf tournaments really could be religious observances.  He replied, “They could be for some people.”

Must be those folks who have said to me they can experience God just as well “out in nature” as they can during a worship service at church.

I guess when the names of God and Jesus are spoken on the golf course, it’s really a prayer!

A report of reaching out to religious folks by the presidential campaign of Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) indicates that he’s making a broad-based effort to promote discussion of relevant issues and enlist their support.  Obama is a member of the United Church of Christ, seen by many as a liberal denomination, but he is not presenting himself solely in that light.

In New Hampshire, Obama’s campaign is hosting “faith forums” to talk about the interplay between faith and politics.  “The candidate himself wasn’t on the bill.  But about 50 showed up to talk about the war, poverty and trying to seize back the moral mantle some in the GOP claim.  The night also featured an Obama video and campaign altar call – an invitation to become a ‘congregation contact’ and rally support for the candidate.”

Our afore-mentioned friend, Welton Gaddy, head of the Interfaith Alliance, isn’t impressed.  In fact, he went so far as to suggest that Barack Obama, “has sounded precisely like George W. Bush,” as he has addressed people of faith at their churches.

I have to admit I’m not sold on Obama as a viable candidate.  I like the fact that he isn’t simply another person of privilege being propped up to hold the seat of power, having spent time actually trying to improve the lives of other people through his community organizing work in Chicago.  His limited experience in government causes me to wonder if he is ready to be president, but then, the Current Occupant didn’t have much of a resume when he ran for the job, either.  Also, when candidates start trying to “talk the talk” with church people, I become suspicious of their motives.  Hopefully, I’m wrong about that.

But, this is where Obama gives me pause.  He has said he wants to be “an instrument of God,” which is ok, I suppose, but I cringed when I read this quote: “we can create a kingdom right here on earth.”

God’s reign already exists, and people of faith are called to live in it.  We don’t create it.  We don’t set the terms.  We don’t decide who’s in and who’s out.  All of that is up to God, who is beyond partisan politics, ideologies, and political parties.

What we need, it seems to me, is clarity in recognizing God’s reign and discernment as to how we might express its reality in and through our lives.

This morning, along with several hundred other people, I attended the annual “Mayor’s Prayer Breakfast” in our town.  It was held at the Coliseum, site of a scene or two from the 1985 Ron Howard movie “Cocoon,” starring Don Ameche, Brian Dennehy, Hume Cronyn and others.

Local ministers and others offered prayers; a choir drawing from local congregations provided lovely music; the mayor made remarks and introductions; and a wonderful breakfast was served.  The guest speaker was someone who apparently has a program broadcast on Christian radio stations across the continent.  He spoke about a “special word” that provides meaning to his life and work.  The word is integrity.

His outline was that personal peace is not possible without integrity; relationships are not possible without integrity; and impact is not possible without integrity.  He did a creditable job of filling in his outline with pertinent observations.  He pulled in a few scripture verses to underscore his points.  His whole approach stemmed from his experience growing up with a father who pushed for excellence, achievement, and success, and from his own personal “emptiness” when he followed his father’s guidance.  The whole talk, while helpful and enlightening, focused strictly on the individual.

My hope is that someday a Mayor’s Prayer Breakfast, wherever it might be held, would encourage cooperation, working together, and appreciation of the differences people bring to the table in trying to address the concerns of the community.  My wish is that such a gathering would challenge those in attendance (always privileged, connected, or wanting-to-be-connected) to share ideas and resources in looking for ways to improve the lives of everyone in the community.  My prayer is that these kinds of breakfasts would be less feel-good and more of an inspiration to live transformed lives.

Together.  In community.  For the sake of everyone.  As an expression of faith.  As a response to the blessings we receive in abundance.

The National Council of Churches is set to name a Disciple as the next General Secretary.  It will be Michael Kinnamon, currently the Allen and Dottie Miller Professor of Mission and Peace at Eden Theological Seminary in St. Louis.  Following final approval at a November board meeting, Michael will begin his new duties on January 1, relocating to New York.

A long-time leader in ecumenical circles, he is a great choice to succeed Bob Edgar as the head of the NCC.   Edgar, a pastor and former member of Congress, left the NCC at the end of his stated term to become the president of Common Cause in Washington, DC.

Kinnamon will be the 10^th person to serve as general secretary of the NCC, and third Disciple.  The NCC was established in 1950.  You can bet Disciples were heavily involved in laying the groundwork for the organization, given our heritage of Christian unity and ecumenism.

Kinnamon stated that one of the main challenges for North American churches is “being ecumenical.”  He further remarked, “We cooperate well. We do things together. But the idea that we need each other…that’s never taken deep root…There’s no such thing as a self-sufficient church.” 

The Disciples are blessed to include Michael Kinnamon among our ranks, and the NCC is blessed that he now will lead their organization.

Way to go, Michael and NCC.

I like Richard Cizik.  Mind you, I’ve never met the man, but I’ve seen him talking on television, and have read about him from time to time.  Cizik is the Vice President for Governmental Affairs for the National Association of Evangelicals.  So, he’s the “Washington guy” for evangelical Christians.

My impression of Richard Cizik, first and foremost, is that he doesn’t take himself too seriously – always a plus for a clergyperson, as well as for a Washington guy.  Cizik also seems to be open-minded and thoughtful.  Again, plus factors.  He is an evangelical who acknowledges that global warming is a reality, a position not widely shared among evangelicals.  

According to an article by Dana Milbank, “Two dozen prominent evangelical leaders, including Focus on the Family founder James Dobson, wrote a letter earlier this year demanding that NAE silence Cizik’s ‘relentless campaign’ on climate change or force him to resign.”  Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK) refers to Cizik as a “global-warming alarmist” whose views differ from most evangelicals.

Cizik has a broader picture of evangelical Christians than many, and perhaps that is what keeps him from getting pushed aside by people like Dobson, Pat Robertson, and the late Jerry Falwell.  Cizik maintains, “Evangelicals are not what people think they are.  We aren’t the Hummer-driving, Wall Street Journal-reading armchair armageddonists that we’re characterized as.”

Richard Cizik even went so far as to invite United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to address a major NAE dinner held just across the Potomac River.  This is remarkable because significant numbers of evangelicals fear the United Nations, and in the “Left Behind” book series popular with many of them, the fictional equivalent of Ban is the Antichrist who heads up “an abortion-promoting world government.”  Who makes up this nonsense?  (Answer:  Someone who knows how to cash in on people’s worst impulses and fears.)

In any case, it looks to me as if Richard Cizik has his stuff together, and while it's possible he and I would not agree on everything, I also am sure “We are one in the spirit, we are one in Lord.”

With all the emphasis and talk about religious faith in the unfolding presidential campaign, one of the candidates, the newest one, is taking a different approach.  According to Bloomberg News Service, former senator and television actor Fred Thompson told some fellow Republicans in South Carolina “that he is not a regular churchgoer and does not plan to talk about his beliefs in the campaign.”  Fair enough.

He further stated that while he goes to church with his mother when he visits her in Tennessee, he is not a member of any church, nor does he attend one where he lives.  He also told them, “I know I’m right with God and the people I love.”

It will be interesting to see how Thompson gets through the campaign without talking about his “beliefs.”  Apparently, he was baptized in the Church of Christ, cousins of us Disciples in the Stone-Campbell movement.  I realize a lot of us in our tradition are somewhat reticent about faith-sharing and testimonials, but to not talk about it at all leads me to wonder how important Thompson’s “beliefs” might be to him.  Especially since he is clear that worshipping God and pursuing Christian spiritual growth are not on his personal agenda.

I also wonder how he determined that he was “right with God.”  Did he make a deal with God?  Did he have a vision in which God told him, “You’re excused from worship, fellowship, stewardship, and Bible study?”

At least he seems to be clear and certain about what he “believes,” as are so many others who have determined that they can relate to God apart from the community of believers to which Jesus called his followers, and which was so important to Peter, Paul, James, Silas, Timothy and others; the community so important to the people of Israel, as they were called out from slavery in Egypt to make God’s name known, and to be a blessing to others; the community, actually, which is paramount throughout the whole of scripture.

Who needs it? Right?

I’m glad, though, that Sen. Thompson is not putting on phony airs about his faith.  I guess we can rest assured that with him, “what you see is what you get.”