Morning Readings 12-30-10

Isaiah 25:1-9 Revelation 1:9-20 John 7:53-8:11

The first part of the reading from Isaiah looks backwards to the faithfulness of God in destroying hostile powers and in caring for the weak and needy. It is not clear to me whether these lines look back to particular instances or rehearses types of experiences or interpretations of the past. The passage continues by looking forward to what God will do in the future to deliver his people from oppressive powers. The passage ends with an affirmation that we wait for God to save us, and God will come to save us. It would seem immediately that God is the one who saves and that we need only be faithful in order to triumph. I see no encouragement to take action to right things ourselves.

The Gospel reading today is of the woman caught in adultery. Her guilt is clear, and yet Jesus confronts those who accuse her. I see the same theme emerge that I have seen in the readings for a number of days, that those who accuse and condemn, albeit justly, are shamed.

The issues that are highlighted are not so much those of doing the right thing, as those of purity of heart. Both the Old and the New Testament readings touch on the misuse of power, judgment against wickedness, and God’s standing by the powerless one. God’s “with-ness” is not restricted to those the righteous. While we see that God supports the oppressed and promises them salvation, God also stands with the law-breaker against her “righteous” judges. Being “right” does not seem to be the point. Again, I feel confrontation against my own anger against those who destroy the environment, and I feel that God calls me to examine and purify my motivations.

Morning Readings 12-18-10; St. John

Proverbs 8:22-30 John 13:20-35

The Proverbs reading lends itself to—begs for—an environmental reading. Creation itself is seen within the embrace of God, as an exquisite expression of God’s Wisdom. Divine Wisdom was present and essential in the very founding of creation, in the very forming of nature itself. Elsewhere, God calls Job’s attention to these very wonders when Job is existentially separated from God by his fixation on his misfortunes and his notions of God’s justice relationship to the world. The inscrutability of the very natural world itself can lead us directly to a contemplative awe before God that relativizes our perspective and understanding.

The difficult gospel passage, however, and I would prefer to jump over this exercise. Nevertheless, I think we can see that, as we know, and as we see in the Hebrew Bible reading, the universe has been established in God, and that (as we glean from Job) God’s creation dwarfs human conceptions of God’s justice. The difficulties posed by the Gospel reading implicate God in the very acts we most despise: the betrayal of God. Yet through the consequences of this betrayal, whatever model of redemption we might ascribe to, are redemptive. Our desire to blame Judas is met by the fact that Jesus actually sends Judas out to complete his errand.

Does that say anything to us applicable to environmental issues? Again, it seems that we are cautioned against scapegoating and vilification. I suppose we could follow my reasoning further and posit that God is behind environmental degradation for some obscure divine purpose, but I cannot make that leap. It offends me; I believe such degradation to be a grave form of sin against humans as well as against the whole of creation. What does that say about my reading of the Bible? That I have my own prejudices, my own ideas of God, and that they govern my reading.

Morning Readings 12-23-10

Isaiah 29:13-24 Revelation 21:22-22:5 Luke 1:39-56

The passage from Isaiah is a message of healing, that those who are trodden down shall be delivered from those who oppress them, that God will stop the unjust in the midst of their works. And yet, lest we who judge the unrighteous (from our privileged vantage point) be overcome by self-righteousness, the final verses tell us that the perpetrators of injustice, too, will “come to understanding” and “accept instruction.”

The readings from Revelations elaborate on the vision of the Holy City, where the veil of cultic mediation is removed and we see directly by the light of God. We see a union between the garden of Genesis and the City, hinted at by the river and the Tree of Life (the other tree in the garden).

Still, a tension appears in both passages: the message of openness and inclusiveness—the open gates, the reciprocal movement of light and glory between the Holy City and the nations. However, the passage also implies separation of the holy from the unholy, those who are omitted from the book of life. Is this a restriction on the city, a statement about exclusion, or is it an affirmation of the essential goodness (and therefore) safety of the city? In light of Isaiah, I am inclined to see it as the latter, as an ultimate resolution rather than an eternal division.

Elizabeth displays remarkable cognizance of what has occurred with Mary and expresses wonder and praise for God and for Mary’s response to God. Yet, today I notice that, in her Magnificat, Mary doesn’t focus on herself all, but on the work of God in the past and for the future. She is not triumphant about retribution against perpetrators of evil, but on the character of God and God’s dealing with people. It is a remarkable statement of faith, and totally unlike the self-referential faith most of us possess in which we attend mostly to how God affects us. The quick reversal of fortunes, the precariousness that marks life, is highlighted in the Gospel of Luke; we hear similar reversals in the Sermon on the Plain. Yet neither Mary nor the Sermon treats these reversals as retributive justice. Perhaps we can hear in this fact, and in the precariousness of life itself, as expressions of the harsh love of a God whose goodness and holiness remain to us inscrutable.

So what is our environmental application today? Is it that tables turn and fortunes change, that God cares for the weak, for the victim? Is it not also that God cares for those who cannot see or hear the truth, who refuse instruction? Could this be a message of hope, not for a miracle to avoid environmental disaster, but to trust in the presence of God regardless, a reminder to those of us who nurse the coals of our “righteous” anger that God loves the sinner and the sufferer, the generations to follow, and the earth with its uncountable living creatures, all of whom suffer from the choices we—all of us—make today.

Morning Readings 12-22-10

Isaiah 28:9-22 Revelation 21:9-21 Luke 1:26-38

If we take the Isaiah reading out of historical context and apply it to our environmental situation today, it comes alive as both revealing and frightening. We also have leaders who scoff at scientific analyses of the environmental threats facing the world today. Like their forbearers in the time of Isaiah, they trust convenient lies that enable them to deny the dangers of our times. And like their forbearers, they also are shielded from negative environmental consequences (whatever their cause). The reading, however, warns that there is no protection; it implies that the threat reaches even those with the means to mitigate the worst effects of climate change.

It is easy to cast blame, but really, are we not all the same? Are we not all reluctant to accept (even perceive) news that disturbs our comfort and security, our perceived independence and freedom? What is it that those of us who genuinely do believe that our way of life threatens the very environmental foundations of life on earth? Do we not continually make small choices that deny that belief, choices that protect our comfort and convenience—and certainly our immediate and personal security.

What purpose is served by those who refuse to accept the verdict of the international Union of Concerned Scientists? By their own admission, they seek to prevent the economic consequences of taking anthropogenic climate change seriously. And what does economic prosperity really represent? I suspect it represents individual power to effect security and comfort. Yet, as the word of the Lord tells us, these are lies; there is no shelter, no security from the consequences of our economic/environmental/lifestyle choices. Not only the poor, the disaffected who ultimately must suffer from climate change, but we also, despite our imagined insulation--for we are not disconnected units, but members of a body.

I never really saw before how much the very foundations and structure of the holy city in Revelations is a communal vision. All twelve tribes are represented equally (despite historical tensions, invasions, exile, and return). Even the jewels--delicate crystal lattices grown over eons, cut, and polished--number twelve: the perfection of the tribes whose history was anything but polished or perfect. The diversity and strife that marked Israelite history is here resolved, sin purged, impurities transformed, all things present and transfigured. And more than Israelite history, for this is a Christian text, and the 12 jewels represent all, for they are "every" jewel.

Here none is lost to the Lake of Fire. We find rather the whole of humanity: the powerful and the weak, the socialist and the individualist, those whose humanity undermined by debilitating insecurity together with those whose compassion allows them to risk everything. For all our fears and all our just grievances, we are one in God.

In reading the Annunciation this time, I noticed the implicit contrast between the “kingdom” promised for Mary’s Son and those of our current day. The angel highlights that God’s kingdom will never pass away. Does that make us thing about our kingdom? Just what, effectively, is our “kingdom”? Is it our country, our economic system (which is now transnational)?

How do we conceive of our “kingdom”? Do we assume that it will “pass away” only at some divine culmination of history? In other words, do we invest in the political/economic status quo an ultimacy that it does not have? Even more, do we persist in the consumerist way of life in the (unconscious) false assumption that perpetuating its cult serves some transcendent good? Insofar as we do this—the stability—even the continued existence—of that status quo is endangered. It is precisely this threat that, for those with eyes to see, unmasks our collective, unconscious idolatry.

The message of the angel is more than an annunciation for Mary, or even for us to become inwardly as Mary. Today, the Annunciation, is a call to recognize and question the million in which we serve the “kingdom” of our Way of Life every day.

Morning Readings 12-18-10

Luke 3:1-9 Jude 17-25 Isaiah 10:20-27 (NRSV)

If we look at the deleterious consequences of climate change as “the wrath to come,” we might well ask those economic interests whose policies and practices put us in this position, “Who warned you to flee?” But ironically, when the environment begins to unravel, and storms, drought, and sea level rise threaten us, those with economic and political are the ones who have the wherewithal to move to safety. Ultimately, however, our fundamental need for each other and for a healthy and fruitful earth will be felt by even those with the means to hide from that interdependence. Like the “wrath of God,” the destruction of environmental integrity eventually chases us down. This is judgment on how we are living on the earth.

The first lesson warns that we “lean on those” who strike us. Instead of deeply questioning our assumptions about the way we live, we lean on that which leads us further into our precarious environmental situation: the status quo of consumerism, individualism, personal profit, as though in them we had salvation from the very problems they engender and exacerbate. We are called instead to look to God, a God who radically questions all our assumptions, and who threatens the very comfort and convenience we fiercely protect.

Morning Readings for 12-11-10

Isaiah 8:1-15 2 Thess 3:6-18 Luke 22:31-38

Isaiah tells his people that what they fear is not the thing they should fear. They need to think clearly, not to be led by the crowd. In the Epistle, Paul exhorts the Thessalonians to make their own way, not to be dependent on the labor of others. And in the Gospel, Jesus reveals to Peter that even his strongest feelings of faithfulness cannot resist the temptation to protect himself from ridicule. Nevertheless, beneath that runs a current that will guide him in the truth (“when you turn back”). In addition, Jesus sends this disciples out out again, this time not without staff or extra sandals, but with all their resources.

How can we see these readings in light of environmental concern? Isaiah recognizes how easily we can be distracted from true problems by immediate threats and popular fears. However, what we identify as the main threat may not in fact be the main threat. What happens if we delay efforts to reduce climate change in order to protect the more immediate needs of our economy? How would that serve the world in the end? How would that serve even us in the end?

Paul exhorts us to live on our own labor; but in a world increasingly globalized, we are more and more dependent on the labor of others. We sit in the middle of a consumerist web served by those whose labor is exploited to make our way of life possible--even to perpetuate our relative prosperity. Even in our midst, many people (lucky enough to have a job) work grueling hours in demeaning conditions in order for some of us to work only 40 hours (or fewer) in comfort (for greater remuneration). Paul calls us to a deeper awareness of these ugly inequalities that characterize our way of life.

Jesus shows us that despite the strength of our feeling of love and faithfulness, we are weak, and in the end vulnerable to the temptation to protect ourselves rather than stand up to what we really believe in. Nevertheless, Christ remains with us, and when we recognize what we have done in our weakness, and “turn back,” we can strengthen our sisters and brothers in a struggle that may take all our resources, a struggle in which, rather than turning away from those who do not accept us, it seems, we must confront evil. How often are we cowed by naysayers who deny our current environmental precariousness?

Morning Readings for 12-10-10

Isaiah 7:10-25 2 Thess 2:13-3:5 Luke 22: 14-30

I notice conflict in all of these readings. In each case, the “faithful” are threatened by those more powerful in various ways--political and military power, social power (i.e., generally aligned with the status quo). In each reading, the message seems to be to remain faithful to what you know, to stand firm, to avoid being coerced or frightened into action.

It is also interesting to note that in the gospel account of the institution of the Eucharist, the disciples' impulse to blame someone (they questioned among themselves which one of them would do this) is immediately connected with their impulse for self-aggrandizement (the dispute about who was the greatest). Jesus redirects their attention not to personal security or status, but to service, to looking out for the other.

So, with regard to the environment, we ask, what is it that we do that is motivated solely out of fear—or out of avoidance. Neither of these motivations is grounded in wisdom and truth. The flippant Zen saying fits here: “Don’t just do something; sit there.” Now is indeed a time for environmental action, but our situation is far too serious and it is far too late for flailing around. The dangers are that we bury our heads and pretend nothing is wrong (protecting the status quo), cast blame (which alienates others and makes cooperation impossible--although it makes us feel better about ourselves), and or that we seek to protect our own interests at the cost of others. Instead, we must act with wisdom and genuine concern for the well-being of the other--all others. In all three readings we are assured of God’s presence “with us.”

Morning Prayer 12-4-10

Luke 21: 5-19

I am reluctant to tackle this because it has so many apocalyptic associations—so often interpreted in the sense that the world doesn’t matter; God will save me in the end. So, I wish to set aside questions of the Lord’s coming, how the Lord comes, when, and so on, because I do not want to concentrate on this as a worldwide, historical event, an event in the flow of history; rather, I see it as an event always already present.

In that sense, I think the passage can mean, don’t be discouraged from faithfulness to what you believe to be true. We must not act like frightened sheep in the face of terrorist threats, natural disasters, and war. The alternatives given to us then, and the leaders that emerge then, arise from the blinkered context of a particular situation and the fear of threat to the status quo (fear, that is, for those for the status quo is beneficial).

But we are called to take a longer view, a broader view; we are called to see beyond immediate self-interest, and to act with the courage that defies even the fear of death. For, paradoxically, while “they will put some of you to death,” “not a hair of your head will perish.” Does this mean that you will be rewarded for holding right beliefs by being translated to heaven? I think not. I think that “by endurance you will gain your souls” now, in the present travail, rather than live as soulless shells in fear of speaking out against injustice (national, human, and environmental) that is often at the root of human disasters.

Morning Prayer 11-29-10

Of all the readings for this morning, the one from Isaiah fits so well with an environmental theme that it almost seems written with that intent. In it, God rails against the hypocricy of acting out religious observances when one lives out treachery. It might lead us to question why people Isaiah was addressing persisted in their religious practices when they were insincere. Was it ignorance? Were the people merely following rituals because they were customary? Had they simply not listened to the teachings about what God expected of them? Or was it cynicism? Could they have been participating in rituals they didn't believe in in order to maintain social status/power?


Regardless of the reason, God viewed their participation in sacrifices and solemn assemblies duplicitous. Isaiah states that their hands are "full of blood." Of just what does he accuse them? We can tell by how he urges them to act instead: "seek justice, rescue the oppressed, defend the orphan, plead for the widow." In other words, look out for the powerless, and struggle for justice against that which oppresses them.

As a consequence of the way they live, their prayers are empty. And God warns of the consequences of their continuation: disruption of their fruitful relationship with the land, and war.

Can this passage be read through an environmental lens? Ccan we identify acts of policies that are environmentally unjust? Whom do they oppress? Most of us are aware of at least the most egregious environmental exploitive practices, and we know that they are practiced most by the richest countries. We also know that as other nations imitate us, they also follow a similar path. In addition, we know that the people most affected by environmental sin are the poor--both in our country and worldwide.


Why do we persist in such practices? For the most part, our environmental sin is systemic; it is part of how our cutlure and economy functions. We feel helpless; for this reason we might wish to close our eyes to the consequences of our actions. Nevertheless, we also know that we do have choices. Even if we are not activists, we have a degree of control over the details of how we live. And we could exercise it, if we thought it really mattered.


Interestingly, the consequences of hypocricy in the time of Isaiah seem parallel to the dangers we are being warned of right now: the destruction of our fruitful relationship with the land, and resource wars. It has been said that resource depletion may represent the highest risk security for nations worldwide.

Reading for Morning Prayer 11-27-10

Today's gospel reading is about the wise and the foolish bridesmaids.

Doesn’t it seem odd that Jesus does not imply that the wise bridesmaids should have compassion on the foolish ones and share their oil so that everyone can meet the bridegroom? Elsewhere he urges us to forgive 70 times 7 times. He tells us to turn the other cheek, to give our shirt as well as our cloak. And we are to make these concessions to people who have (or may) directly hurt us.

Surely, you will say that this parable it is not about showing compassion on others, but on where we stand at the end times, about our worthiness before God, something only we ourselves are answerable for. Perhaps this is a warning that if we don’t get right with God, we won’t get through the narrow door. If we believe in a God like that, a God who shuts the door on mercy, that interpretation might work. Or perhaps it’s about some other way in which we must take responsibility for ourselves, something which cannot be effected for us, a sort of warning about the nature of a reality larger and deeper than our everyday experience.

Regardless, I’m interested here in whether this parable can be read with an environmental lens. While this story would not have been intended to point us to environmental stewardship, the message applies uncannily well. If we really look at the range and complexity of dangers associated with climate change—many of which we are already beginning to experience—we can see that the integrity of natural systems that can provide sufficient resources for everyone is endangered by the foolish. It is as though the foolish bridesmaids had woken in the middle of the night, stolen the oil of the wise bridesmaids (who were sleeping), and used it all up partying, so that when groom was announced, there was too little oil remaining for any of them.

Morning Prayer Reflections, 11-26-10

In yesterday’s reading from Ephesians, we saw that God had chosen us for himself from “before the foundation of the world.” The fulfillment of humankind in Christ is not represented in this text as separate from the fate of the rest of creation, but is spoken of in the context of the consummation of “all things.”

In the gospel reading for today, Christ rides a young donkey into the city, hailed as King by the multitudes. The Pharisees rebuke Jesus for allowing their acclamations. Clearly, they do not see what the disciples see, or know what the disciples know. Yet humans are fickle. We know that later in the week, Jesus will be derided and abandoned. And doubtless, many in the crowd may simply have been carried along by the mass feeling.

But while human opinion, human recognition of truth and falsehood is demonstrably feeble and fickle, nature itself is not. The nonhuman world, in this gospel account, the nonsentient world itself recognizes the presence of God: “If these were silent, the stones would shout out.”

What is Jesus saying? It is surely a figure of speech (or has become one). But might it point to even more than that? Is the mineral world somehow wedded to our own?

We live as though we are the only beings whose inner life is significant. Thus, we discount or ignore the inconvenient needs or feelings of other animals. We almost unanimously disregard the survival rights of the plant world—except (and usually under duress) insofar as they affect the survival or well being of certain animate creatures—and we are discovering that that list of creatures becomes longer and longer. Even today, many people are not yet convinced that we disregard the mutual wellbeing of plant and animal life to own peril. What role does the mineral world play in the web of life? Does it have a significance of its own?

Interested in an Environmental Ministry?

As a member of the newly reconstituted Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth, I am interested in connecting with other Episcopalians, both within this diocese and beyond, who are engaged in environmental ministry.

With this blog, I intend to pull together a variety of resources--links to books, programs, other diocesan ministries--to assist Fort Worth Episcopalians in theological and practical engagement with the environment, both locally and worldwide.

I look forward to meeting others who share my concerns.