Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for May, 2014

stillbornI just finished reading An Exact Replica of a Figment of my Imagination by Elizabeth McCracken at the same time I read David and Bathsheba’s story of their own first child, who only lived seven days before dying as foretold by the prophet Nathan for David’s illicit with relationship with Bathsheba and ordering the death of her husband in battle. Both stories capture a view of grief we rarely see.

He [David] answered, “While the child was still alive, I fasted and wept. I thought, ‘Who knows? The Lord may be gracious to me and let the child live.’  [II Samuel 12:22, NIV]

For McCracken, the newborn infant, nicknamed Pudding, was their first and neither she nor her husband broke any laws or treated Pudding with anything but ultra care: the right foods, the right rest, the right attitude. It was a pregnancy made in heaven. But then, near the end of her last trimester, Pudding stopped moving, at least it seemed so to her. Many thought she might be overreacting (they were living in France at the time), and she was sent home. However, by the next day, her own concern pressed the issue and she sidestepped her midwife and went to the doctor’s office where it was discovered that the child was, indeed, dead but McCracken would still have to bear this lifeless child into the world. The depth of her pain and anguish are laced throughout this slim volume.

Back in the day, when I was still performing my one woman show, Pente, one of the women in that quintet was Bathsheba because her story is minimized in scripture; her grief and loss are summarized in the single line, “Then David comforted his wife Bathsheba, and he went to her and made love to her . . . ” [vs 24a] but I believe McCracken’s tale captures a more realistic picture of a mother’s heart and the depth of her pain.

But getting back to my selected scripture, it is intriguing to me that David, who knew that he had sinned and who knew that Nathan was a formidable prophet whose words always came true, pressed into the 7-day period of prayer and fasting and, undoubtedly, deep confession. As long as the child lived, David did not give up even the slightest sliver of hope. David could not change what he had done but he could surrender his helplessness to God, who could still change the outcome. God’s outcome is never fixed in time. And yet . . .

The child died.

And David could do nothing more than surrender again.

We have choices beforehand, before the inevitable happens. But once tragedy strikes, whether deserved or undeserved, we only have our response to God. The pain is still there but can be muted if we wrap it into the embrace of God. Grace lives.

Read Full Post »

I don’t have any trouble singing in church. In fact, in general I love choral singing as well. I’m not the best singer by far, but in a group setting, I feel bolstered by the voices around me and feel I can sing with the best of them. I am always a little sad when people around me don’t sing at all. My daughter rarely sings in church but she will sing along with the radio all the time. She says it’s the music she doesn’t particularly like, not her style and all that. But my real question is to God: why are we told to sing or even commanded? What is it about singing that is different from speaking?

Give thanks to the Lord with the lyre!
    Sing praises to him with the ten-stringed harp!
Sing to him a new song!
    Play your best with joyful shouts! [Psalm 33:2-3; CEB]

Some results from a cursory Internet search include:

  • Singing is the act of producing musical sounds with the voice, and augments regular speech by the use of both tonality and rhythm. Singing expresses emotion and united communities.
  • Back in 1588, William Byrd wrote that singing is delightful to Nature and preserves our health.
  • In a book entitled Music and the the Brain, there is evidence that singing is therapeutic.
  • There are even studies out there that claim people who sing live longer.
  • People who stutter often lose their stutter completely while singing the words (Anyone remember the film, The King’s Speech?)
  • A song can also help people to learn something or remember concepts.
  • Singing is a part of cultural identity.
  • Singing helps people understand who they are.
  • Singing helps people experience worship.
  • But it is also a way to bring people together for a cause, for a right, a touchpoint.

There are songs in the church that have the same power but it’s rarely embraced with the furor of social change, which is too bad. If our passion for God could be as rich as our passion for justice, lives would be changed.

And so I say: sing. Sing unto God. Sing together. Sing alone. Sing.

Read Full Post »

Art by Kelly Watts

Art by Kelly Watts

Apparently, there were several concentric circles of influence, courage, and power around King David. In I Chronicles 11, there are several references to both the three and the thirty. Unfortunately, they don’t exactly match up with sister references in II Samuel 23. (See Wikipedia article for details.) And yet, they are provocative in their specificity:

Jashobeam, a Hacmonite, was commander of the Thirty . . . Next in command came Eleazar, Dodo’s son the Ahohite, who was one of the three warriors. . . . Abishai, Joab’s brother, was chief of the Thirty. He raised his spear against the three hundred men he had slain, but he wasn’t considered one of the Three. He was the most famous of the Thirty. He became their commander, but he wasn’t among the Three. . . .  He [Benaiah] was famous among the Thirty, but didn’t become one of the Three. [I Chronicles 10b; 12; 20-21; 25]

These groups represent spheres of influence as well as strategies of leadership.They were predominately known to be mighty warriors.

Jesus also had spheres: the three closest disciples [Peter, James & John, so referenced in Mark 9:2] and of course, the twelve who became the core group, “first, Simon (who is called Peter) and his brother Andrew; James son of Zebedee, and his brother John;Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus; Simon the Zealot and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him” [Matthew 10:2-4] and lastly, the seventy or seventy-two, “After this the Lord appointed seventy-two others and sent them two by two ahead of him to every town and place where he was about to go [Luke 10:1].

In each case, these groups had particular assignments. In David’s case, they were warriors and commanders, built for strength, battle, and protection. They displayed courage and often risked their lives for their beloved King. They came to David gifted in these areas.

On the other hand, the disciples that Jesus selected seemed less than qualified. They came from different walks of life except for a sub-group of them who were identified as fisherman and one a tax collector. We don’t know much about the rest, but we do know they were not the normal supplicants who would follow a rabbi. Many stories, in fact, show some frustration on Jesus’s part at their ability to grasp his teachings and what his teachings meant. Essentially, the disciples did not really come into their own until Jesus commissioned them upon his resurrection.

In recent years, the phrase, “God doesn’t call the qualified, but qualifies the called” has become quite popular. And although that is true in some cases, like the New Testament disciples who learned by doing and following their Teacher, we also have the example of the Three and the Thirty who were already gifted and committed their gifts to the King. They gave what they had.

Both are needed: those who have talents can surrender them to God and those who don’t know what their talents might be can surrender their will to God and their use will evolve.

Read Full Post »