November 6, 2011

All Saints Day, 2011

Nov. 6, 2011 

Reverend Gregg D. Wood

The gospel for today is what we call the Beatitudes. This is a collection of nine sayings, most of which begin, "Blessed are those who…" followed by some unhappy condition; then they conclude by saying that the unhappy condition will be reversed.  For example, the second beatitude reads, “Blessed are those who mourn” – that is, blessed are those who have lost a loved one and are suffering grief as a result– “for they will be comforted.”  Their unhappy state of mourning will be reversed.

But there is one beatitude that stands out because it does not fit this pattern. That is the sixth beatitude – “Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God.”   Being pure of heart is not an unhappy condition, and seeing God is not a reversal of that condition but rather the reward, or the ultimate result, of that condition. Now Jesus' method of teaching, as we have seen in the parables, is to insert the odd thing in the midst of familiar things, to embed the peculiar teaching in the midst of more conventional teachings, and in this way to call attention to it. I believe this is what he is doing here in the Beatitudes. The really important beatitude is the sixth one: Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.

Let's think for a minute about what it means to see God. When Moses received the Commandments from God at Mount Sinai, he asked to be able to see God. In Exodus chapter 33, God allows Moses to see his back as he passes by, but he also says, "You shall not see my face, no one can see my face and live."  And we in this life do not see God face to face. We experience God through his Word, given to us in the Holy Scripture, and in the sacraments, which are outward and visible signs of what is inward and spiritual. The bread and wine of the Eucharist are sacraments, visible signs, of Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ is himself the outward and visible sign of the eternal God.  But the saints in heaven see God face to face, and worship him. To see God is the ultimate end and the goal of the Christian life. Seeing God is not just one good thing among other good things; it is the final good thing, the end and goal of all our strivings.

And according to this beatitude, the privilege of seeing God is given to those who are pure of heart. And what is purity? The words pure and purity are used frequently in the Bible, but they are mostly not used of human beings.  It is usually material things that are spoken of as pure: pure gold, meaning gold without any other metals or alloys in it; pure ointment, with which a woman anoints the feet of Jesus; pure linen, worn by the priests in the temple.

How would this concept of purity apply to human beings? If pure gold is gold that is unalloyed by any other metals, then a pure heart would be a heart that has only one desire, a heart that is single-minded. The philosopher Soren Kierkegaard wrote a book called, Purity of Heart is to Will One Thing. The title tells it all. To be pure in heart is to be single-minded in one's devotion, not to have conflicting or divided loyalties or desires.  It is, if you will, putting all your eggs in one basket.

When  it comes to human beings, however, we have a problem. In Job, chapter 25, verse four, the question is asked, "How can one born of woman be pure?"  Psalm 51, verse three says, "For I know my transgressions, and my sin is ever before me." Purity seems to be an especially difficult condition for human beings to achieve.

Most of us, when it comes to living our faith, are like a swimmer who keeps one foot on the bottom.  He trusts in his ability to swim, but not completely.  And as a result he never experiences the joy, and the dread, and the victory, of really swimming.  How many of us really trust in God to the extent that we let go of the escape routes and the safety nets?  But that is exactly what purity of heart is all about.

In the Old Testament, and among the Pharisees, there is much concern over ritual purity – purity concerning outward things and behavior. Ritual purity meant avoiding foods that were considered unclean or impure, as well as people who were considered unclean or impure. It involved cleaning pots and dishes, and doing things for which Jesus often criticized the Pharisees. You clean the outside, he says, but inside you are impure. 

Being ritually pure is a way of telling yourself you are pure while avoiding the sterner demands of purity of heart. 

Yet even in the Old Testament, there was a recognition that there was a difference between external and internal purity. For example, Psalm 24 asks the question, "who can ascend the hill of the Lord? And who can stand in his holy place?”  And the following verse gives the answer: "those who have clean hands and a pure heart, who have not pledged themselves to falsehood, nor sworn by what is a fraud."  The writer of this Psalm recognized that there was a difference between clean hands, that is, outward ritual purity, and a pure heart.  And of course, in his teaching Jesus emphasized the greater importance of purity of heart as over against external, ritual purity.

In the 10th chapter of the book of Acts, Peter was hungry, and he fell into a trance and had a vision of all kinds of animals, "four footed creatures, reptiles, birds of the air," and then heard the voice of God saying "get up Peter, kill and eat." Peter objects that he has never eaten an unclean animal. But the voice says, "What God has made clean you must not call profane." In this way, Christianity was set on a very different path from other religions, such as Judaism or Islam, both of which have strict dietary laws prescribing what is acceptable to eat and what is unclean. But for Christians, the teaching is best expressed in the letter to Titus, chapter 1, verse 15: "to the pure all things are pure."

This is a pretty radical teaching, especially when it is applied not just to food and eating, but to all other aspects of human behavior and relationships.  Fundamentally, purity is a matter of intentions and desires, and not so much a matter of external behavior.

Of course, pure intentions and desires should lead to outward behavior that is faithful and compassionate. The Letter of James puts it this way in chapter 1 verse 27: "Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the father, is this, to care for orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world." So purity begins in the heart but inevitably leads to good actions in the world and to service to others and to God.

Today we celebrate the lives and ministries of all the saints, all those who served God and their fellow human beings in this life with purity of heart, and now stand before his presence, seeing him face-to-face and offering everlasting praise and thanksgiving.  May we have grace to follow those blessed saints in all virtuous and godly living, that we too may come to those ineffable joys that God has prepared for those who truly love him.  Amen.

October 30, 2011

Sermon - Proper 26, October 30, 2011

Reverend Gregg D. Wood

Jesus, in today’s Gospel, is critical of the Scribes and Pharisees because “They preach, but do not practice.”  He goes on to illustrate his point with some examples. 

There is a word for what the scribes and Pharisees were doing.  It is hypocrisy.  Although Jesus does not use the word here, he does elsewhere.

I think it is important to understand what Jesus is saying about hypocrisy, because what he is saying applies to each of us.  But in order to do this, I want to turn to one of the healing stories in the Gospel of Luke.  It is in chapter 13, at verse ten.  Let me read it.

“Now [Jesus] was teaching in one of the synagogues on the sabbath. ¹¹And just then there appeared a woman with a spirit that had crippled her for eighteen years. She was bent over and was quite unable to stand up straight. When Jesus saw her, he called her over and said, ‘Woman, you are set free from your ailment.’ When he laid his hands on her, immediately she stood up straight and began praising God. But the leader of the synagogue, indignant because Jesus had cured on the sabbath, kept saying to the crowd, ‘There are six days on which work ought to be done; come on those days and be cured, and not on the sabbath day.’ But the Lord answered him and said, ‘You hypocrites! Does not each of you on the sabbath untie his ox or his donkey from the manger, and lead it away to give it water? And ought not this woman, a daughter of Abraham whom Satan bound for eighteen long years, be set free from this bondage on the sabbath day?’ When he said this, all his opponents were put to shame; and the entire crowd was rejoicing at all the wonderful things that he was doing.”

In this Gospel passage, Jesus heals a woman who is “bent over and not able to stand up straight.”  Although we are told that this affliction was caused by “a spirit that had afflicted her for 18 years,” it sounds to me like the condition we today would call osteoporosis, a bone disease which usually affects women more than men.  Whatever the cause of the condition, Jesus laid hands on her and pronounced her to be healed, and lo, she was healed. 

But that is not the end of the passage.  The leader of the synagogue criticizes Jesus because he healed the woman on the Sabbath.  And how does Jesus respond to the criticism?  He draws a comparison.  “If it’s okay for you to untie your ox and your donkey on the sabbath so they can get to water,” asks Jesus, “then why isn’t it ok for me to free this woman from her 18-year bondage to this crippling condition?”  And at the very beginning of his response, he names the sin of which his accusers are guilty.  He says, YOU HYPOCRITES!

So this story is not just about healing.  The healing is a springboard for a teaching about the sin which seemed to outrage Jesus more than any other — the sin of HYPOCRISY. 

There can be little doubt that Jesus hated the sin of hypocrisy to a great degree.  The word “hypocrisy” and its cognates are mentioned in the New Testament 25 times, always spoken by Jesus, and always spoken to the Pharisees and other people in the religious establishment.    And there is a vehemence and a passion in his voice as he upbraids these people which contrasts sharply with the gentleness and comprehensiveness of much of his teaching.   Here is a sample of his pronouncements against hypocrisy:

Matt 23:23 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!  For you tithe mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith,

Matt 23: Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!  For you are like whitewashed tombs, which on the outside look beautiful, but inside they are full of the bones of the dead and all kinds of filth.

And what is hypocrisy?  The dictionary defines it as “the [habit] of expressing feelings, beliefs, or virtues one does not hold or possess.”  

Now I think most Christians would agree that we should not be hypocrites.  And if most of us were asked point-blank, “Are you a hypocrite?”  We would probably say no, or at the very least, “I hope not.”  So Jesus’ criticism doesn’t seem to be addressed to us.

But before we get too comfortable, we should go back to the text.  It’s important to realize that observing the Sabbath by not working was an extremely important issue for the Jews of Jesus’ time, as indeed it still is for Orthodox Jews today.  There was a long tradition of interpretation which specified what constituted work.  According to those traditions, it was permitted to feed and water one’s animals, because that was not considered work.  But healing was considered work.   No doubt the leader of the synagogue was quite sincere in his criticism of Jesus.  I doubt that he intended to be a hypocrite.  But Jesus points out that there is hypocrisy involved.  How can it be acceptable to untie animals to feed them, yet it is not acceptable to free a woman from bondage to a terrible disease?  By adhering too closely to the letter of the law, it is possible to subvert the spirit of the law.  By concentrating on small matters, you may well overlook the important ones.   And yet, if we are not careful, we can do it almost automatically.  So Jesus is speaking, not so much against intentional, malicious hypocrisy, but rather against unconscious, automatic hypocrisy — hypocrisy we don’t even realize we’re doing until we get some distance from it, or someone points it out to us.

Let me give an example from my own experience:  When I was younger, I was a smoker.  When my daughter Lisa was three we enrolled her in a nursery school.  One day, when I was driving her home, smoking a cigarette, Lisa started telling me I shouldn’t smoke.  Apparently her school had done some teaching about the evils of smoking.  She pointed out that she was expected to brush her teeth and wash behind her ears, etc., but that smoking was more serious than failing to do these other things.  So why didn’t I stop smoking?

Well, to finish the story, within a few years I did stop smoking.  But what Lisa was accusing me of (although she didn’t know the word yet) was hypocrisy.   I was hypocritical in expecting her to avoid bad health habits when I myself was practicing a really bad health habit.  Of course, when it was pointed out to me, I realized the truth of it.  Normally though, I was blind to this particular hypocrisy.  And that is what Jesus is complaining about:  the hypocrisies that are so habitual, so common, and so unconscious, that we are blind to them.

Here is another example, this time from American history.  In 1776 Thomas Jefferson wrote, in one of the founding documents of our nation, that “All men are created equal.”  And for 87 years this idea of equality was preached in sermons and celebrated in 4th of July speeches.  Yet for that same 87 years the institution of slavery based on race survived and thrived in this country — an institution that completely betrayed the promise of equality.  This was hypocrisy on a national scale — a hypocrisy so habitual, so common, and so unconscious, that people were blind to it.

The teaching from today’s Gospel points to a task for us to do.  We should try to become aware of our unconscious, habitual hypocrisies.  In the Liturgy for Ash Wednesday, we are specifically called to do this, for we pray in these words: 

We confess to you, Lord, all our past unfaithfulness: the pride, hypocrisy, and impatience of our lives.

In the spirit of that prayer, we should try to examine our lives for hypocrisy.  Where do we preach something that we do not practice?  And how can we correct that fault?

Of course, this may not be easy to do.  By definition, an unconscious hypocrisy is one we are not aware of.   We may need help from other people.  Perhaps a spouse or partner can point out that which we ourselves are not aware of.  Perhaps a child can do it.  That’s how it happened with me.  Children usually have a good ear for cant and hypocrisy.   Or you might ask a close friend, a trusted colleague, or a priest who knows you well.

Finally, it’s encouraging to realize that hypocrisy is something that can only affect those who are already making an effort in their moral and spiritual life.  It’s like pretending you got an A when you really got a C: you wouldn’t do it unless you really cared about getting an A in the first place.  Hypocrisy is a fault of those who care.  That’s why in the Gospels it is always the people who are trying to be good and do what is right — the scribes and Pharisees — whom Jesus accuses of hypocrisy.  And his anger against them is stronger because he really loves them, he loves that they love God and they care. 

So as you try to deal with the hypocrisy in your own life, remember that the presence of hypocrisy is itself a sign that you are seriously pursuing a righteous life.  God hates the hypocrisy but God loves you.  Press on with God’s help!   

Sunday, October 23

Proper 25, Year A

Reverend Gregg D. Wood

Meditation on Psalm 1.

Usually when preachers preach, they take for their lesson the Gospel for the day.  But there are actually four lessons, the Old Testament Lesson, the Psalm, a reading from the New Testament but not the Gospels (usually from one of Paul’s letters), and the Gospel itself.  We should not neglect the other parts of the Scriptures.  The psalms are especially a rich source of moral and spiritual imagery and teaching, so today I would like to focus on the psalm, which today is the first psalm in the whole psalter. 

It has six verses.  And if we look down to the sixth verse, we will be able to understand the structure of the psalm,  For it says,

For the Lord knows the way of the righteous,

But the way of the wicked is doomed.

So this psalm is about the righteous and the wicked.  And it gives both groups “equal time:” we have three verses for the righteous, and then three verses for the wicked.

The psalm, then, is what we call a two ways writing: it describes two ways of living, the way of the righteous and the way of the unrighteous or wicked.  And it sets out a contrast between these two opposite ways of living. 

Why only two ways?  We know that there are many paths open to us in life.  We can choose what we study in school, we can find what interests us and what we are good at, and there are many vocational paths open to us.  Likewise with our “lifestyles:” we can choose to be single or married, we can choose to be traditional or “cutting edge,” we can choose our friends and associates.

The underlying assumption of the psalm is that we can also, to a large extent, choose the moral path we follow in life.  But in that area, there are only three possibilities.  There are choices that are morally neutral, and then there are choices that are either good or bad.  So for those choices that really matter there are only two options. We can choose to be good, or we can choose to be wicked.  The “two ways” writings always present the choice as a fairly clear one, between good and evil. 

This psalm follows a pattern that we encounter elsewhere, not only in the psalms but in other places in Scripture.  For example, the beatitudes.  We are probably pretty familiar with the beatitudes of Jesus from Matthew’s Gospel.  It is a series of nine blessings.  The first one says, "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven".  The rest are in a similar form.  But in Luke’s Gospel, there are four blessings and four woes.  The first blessing is, "Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God".  The first woe is, "Woe to you who are rich, for you have received your consolation".  So the beatitudes in Luke set up a contrast between the way of the righteous and the way of the wicked.

Getting back to the first psalm, the first verse of the psalm says,

"Happy are they who have not walked in the counsel of the wicked, not lingered in the way of sinners, nor sat in the seats of the scornful!" 

This first verse warns us against keeping company with those whose aims are not upright.  Avoid walking with them, “lingering” with them, or sitting in their seats.  We are judged by the company we keep, so avoid the company of the wicked.  Another reason to avoid the company of the wicked is that we may not be as morally strong and resistant as we like to think we are.  We may be drawn into their schemes, their distorted and self-centered ways of looking at things, their disregard for the rights and feelings of others.  After all, the wicked don’t present themselves as such.  They don’t introduce themselves: “I’m John, and I’m wicked.”  Instead, they present themselves as more knowledgeable, more cool, or more wise in the ways of the world.  A susceptible person might be attracted to their company.

Note the word “scornful.”  Nor have I sat in the seats of the scornful.  Scorn is contempt for someone or something that is thought to be inferior.  One of the great weapons of the unrighteous with the susceptible person is scorn.  “Oh, you don’t believe that, do you?”  The righteous are warned, not only not to be scornful, but not to associate with those who are – not to sit in their seats – because their attitude may be contagious.

The second verse tells us that [the righteous] delight in the law of the Lord, and they meditate on his law day and night.   This should be seen as a follow-up to the first verse.  If we’re not going to keep company with the wicked, how should we spend our time?  The second verse gives the answer: by studying and meditating on God’s law.

This means actual Bible study of course, but it is not limited to that.  It could include reading devotional and inspirational books, or watching tv shows and movies that inspire faith, hope, and love.  Or, of course, actually doing good things.

The third verse gives us a suggestion as to why we should be righteous.  What are the beneficial results of righteousness?  The third verse tells us that the righteous are like trees planted by streams of water, bearing fruit in due season, with leaves that do not wither; everything they do shall prosper.  

The psalms come from a desert country, where streams and lakes of water are a rare and welcome sight.  Likewise trees; trees will only grow strong and long-lived when they are planted near a reliable body of water.  There is a word, oasis, which describes any place in the desert where there is water and shade trees. So the writer of the psalm compares the righteous to trees planted by a body of water; they are strong, and they have deep roots because they are “watered” by the continuing refreshment of God’s grace.  The righteous are like an oasis in the desert.

The metaphor continues.  Just as trees bear fruit, so do the righteous; whether or not they have real offspring, they have spiritual children, other people for whom they are teachers, models, and examples. 

Finally, there is the promise that “everything they do shall prosper.”

The last three verses of the psalm are concerned with the wicked.  The fourth verse relates directly to the third, which compared the righteous to trees planted near water.  By contrast, the wicked are like chaff which the wind blows away.  In other words, they and their projects are transient and ephemeral.  They are always looking for the immediate gain, the easy victory.  They are unwilling to think in long-range terms; they do not consider the long-range consequences of their actions.  In their relationships, they don’t do the spadework which is necessary if others are to have lasting trust and confidence in them. 

The result of their behavior is shown clearly in verse 5.  If you don’t behave in a trustworthy manner; if you consistently put your own welfare ahead of the well-being of others; if you are scornful of others, what happens?  For a while, you may have some success.  As Abraham Lincoln said, you may be able to fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.  Sooner or later, they get your number.  This is reflected in verse 5:  Therefore the wicked shall not stand upright when judgment comes, nor the sinner in the council of the righteous.  Sooner or later everyone gets your number and you will be called to account. 

Verse six is a final summary on the two ways.  Which way should we follow, then, the way of the righteous, or the way of the wicked?  It’s not even close, says the sixth verse:  The Lord knows the way of the righteous, but the way of the wicked is doomed.

The teaching of this psalm is reflected in an old Cherokee story, with which I will close this sermon.

A Cherokee grandfather was telling his grandson about a great battle that goes on inside people.  He said, “My son, the battle is between two wolves inside us all.  One is Evil.  It is anger, jealousy, regret, greed, arrogance, self-pity, resentment, lies, false pride, superiority, and ego.  The other is Good.  It is joy, peace, love, hope, serenity, humility, kindness, benevolence, empathy, generosity, truth, compassion and faith.”  The grandson thought about it for a minute and then asked his grandfather: “Wow!  I see that: two wolves.  But – which one wins?”

And his grandfather said, “The one you feed.”  

October 16, 2011

Sermon for Proper 24, Year A

 Reverend Gregg D. Wood

“Then the Pharisees went and plotted to entrap him in what he said.” 

It’s important to recall that the words of today’s Gospel, and most of the gospel passages we read at this time of the year, were spoken in Jerusalem during Holy Week, a few days before Jesus was crucified.  By going to Jerusalem, Jesus had come to the place where the Temple of the Living God, the dwelling place of His Heavenly Father, was located.  But it was also the place where his enemies were gathered, the scribes and Pharisees, those whose role it was to resist and suppress innovations to the traditional religion, innovations urged by Jesus and people like him.  So Jesus was under constant verbal attack from his adversaries.

“Tell us, then, what you think,” they said.  “Is it lawful to pay taxes to the emperor, or not?”

Why was this such a tricky question?  The Romans occupied and controlled Israel, as they controlled much of the civilized world at that time.  For the most part, the Romans left their subject peoples alone.  The only thing they really wanted were taxes.  They even employed local people to collect their taxes for them, under a percentage commission arrangement which encouraged the tax collectors to collect more than what was rightly owed to them.  As a result, tax collectors were hated; they were considered no better than people who collaborated or spied for the Roman authorities. 

People wanted to hear that they did not have to pay taxes to the Romans.  So this was a trick question, just like the famous trick question, “Have you stopped beating your wife?”  If Jesus answered “yes, it is lawful to pay taxes to the emperor,” his own Jewish people would hate him; and if he said “no, it is not lawful to pay taxes to the emperor,” the Romans would no doubt arrest him for preaching sedition. 

So Jesus cleverly turns the question around.  He takes the coin, points to the image on it, and asks, who is this?  They answer, the emperor.  So Jesus answers, “Give to the emperor the things that are the emperor’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” 

It seems to make a neat division of the world, into the sphere of things belonging to the emperor (politics, military matters, affairs of state) and things belonging to God (moral and religious matters).  But if we think about the matter more deeply, we are forced to ask:  is there anything that belongs to the emperor, that does not also belong to God?  How can you separate the things of God from affairs of state?

This saying of Jesus has always been understood to be saying something about the relationship between church and state.  So perhaps this is a good time to think about that relationship, between religious institutions and the political order, or as we say, between church and state.

For most of human history, people felt that you could not separate church and state.  They believed there must be one church and one state, and they must work together.  Sometimes, as in the late Middle Ages, it was the church that was in the driver’s seat, when the great medieval popes directed the affairs of nations.  Sometimes the state was in the driver’s seat, such as at the time of the English Reformation, when King Henry VIII had Parliament declare him, and not the pope, to be the supreme head of the church in England.  Under Henry the secular and religious powers were centered in one and the same person.

When the time came to write a constitution for our own country, there were a variety of religions.  In New York and Virginia, the Anglicans had the most influence; in Pennsylvania, the Quakers; in Massachusetts and Connecticut, the Congregationalist descendants of the Puritans.  And in Rhode Island, there were many religions, with toleration for all and no one of them established as the official religion.  The writers of the Constitution decided to follow the Rhode Island model.  And so began the great American experiment which we call, religious freedom.  No single religion would be established as the official religion, and all religions would be free to practice.  “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”  So says the very first article of the Bill of Rights, which was included as part of the Constitution shortly after its adoption.  

Sometimes we hear the term, “wall of separation.”  There is a wall of separation between church and state.  Thomas Jefferson used this term in one of his writings.  And so there has risen the idea that, in our country, there is and must be some great eternal wall between church and state. 

But is there such a wall?  It seems to shift back and forth.  At one time it was ok to have prayers in the public schools.  Now that is forbidden, yet in the very seat of our national government, the Senate and the House of Representatives start each of their sessions with a prayer by a chaplain.  Again, it is not allowed to support religious schools with tax money, but (in NY anyway) the local school districts must provide buses to transport students to these religious schools.  (We don’t pay for the education but we do pay for the buses.)  Again, although abortion is a legal procedure, doctors and nurses may legitimately refuse to perform abortions on religious grounds.  Furthermore, every church and religious organization is exempt from paying local property taxes, yet it is not allowed to have a Christmas display of a manger scene in a public park.  And finally, in one of the most puzzling decisions of all, it is forbidden to display the ten commandments inside a courtroom in Alabama but it’s ok to display the ten commandments outside some government buildings in Texas.

It people are confused about this “wall of separation,” perhaps it is because the builders of the wall are confused themselves.

Now Thomas Jefferson was a great thinker and designer.  He designed many of the original buildings at the University of Virginia, which is sometimes called “Mr. Jefferson’s University.”  And one of the things he designed was a type of wall, called a serpentine wall.  It twists and curves just the way a snake would twist and curve making its way from one point to another.  I like to think that when Jefferson talked about a wall of separation between church and state, he was thinking of his serpentine wall.  I think he was having a little joke, because he knew that there was no clear, absolute way to separate church and state, and any wall between them would be like his serpentine wall, twisting and turning to forbid one thing and allow other things, with no clear underlying logic.

And yet, even though it is hard to know where to draw the line, even though the wall twists and turns, even though the Supreme Court itself stumbles and falls when it tries to draw this line, I think our Constitution does provide the basis for one clear and valuable idea about church and state.  And that is, that the state should not try to control the church, and the church should not try to control the state.   That has been a valuable idea, not only for America, but for other countries that have imported it into their own political systems.

There is one more thing that has to be said.  Although the church may be separate from the state, God is not separate from either the church or the state.  We cannot check our beliefs about justice and morality at the door when we leave the church and participate in the worlds of politics, government, or business.  Each of us has a responsibility to witness to the truth of God, the justice of God, and the love of God for all humanity.  Separation of church and state does not mean that God is separate from the world, or that we are excused from our moral and religious duties.   Usually our duty to God and our legal and political duties are consistent with each other.  But not necessarily, and not always.  There may come a time when our duty to God calls us to challenge or oppose something that is being done in the political order.  There may come a time when we have to stand up and be counted for what is right and just.

Jesus said, “Give to the emperor the things that are the emperor’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”  The emperor must mind his affairs, and the church must mind its affairs, but both answer to God.  There is nothing that belongs to the emperor that does not also belong to God. 

May we be loyal citizens of the state, and good members of the church, but above all faithful and loving children of God our Father.