Hilton Head Island, SC – September 22, 2024
The Chapel Without Walls
Jeremiah 6:1-8; 6:9-15
A Sermon by John M. Miller
Text – “They have healed the wound of my people lightly, saying, ‘Peace, peace,’ when there is no peace.” Jeremiah 6:14
The Bible is filled with many direct and indirect references to politics. That is especially true of the Old Testament. But even the New Testament has several instances where politics is either covertly or overtly the main subject being addressed.
The Israelite prophets frequently addressed political issues, and social issues that had political ramifications. in what they wrote. The four books of First and Second Kings and First and Second Chronicles essentially are brief histories of the reigns of every king in Judah and Israel from the monarchy of King Saul in the late 11th century BCE to the reign of Jehoiachin, the last king of Judah in the early 6th century BCE. Furthermore, whoever wrote these books said that nearly the whole lot of them were a group of immoral, unethical, unthinking, inept, politically disastrous, unwise, and religiously unfaithful misfits. In addition, the prophets did not seem to respect them very much, either, in case anyone wondered what they really thought of them. In other words, people in general back then had as limited admiration for their leaders as do people today. However, the low esteem of politicians may also indicate how difficult the nature of politics is for monarchs or politicians to be perceived favorably by the public.
When in the course of human events political figures become so influential that they are some of the best-known individuals in every society, they also become the people at whom everyone feels free to take potshots. If the actions of the leaders and politicians are perceived by both the people and the prophets to be seriously flawed, the politicians are subjected to what leaders and politicians think are their own unique “slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,” as Shakespeare said, he being a famous playwright who delighted in skewering kings, princes, and other high muckymucks. Shakespeare being Shakespeare, he also skewered low muckymucks, harmless dreamers, and highly motivated but tragically flawed do-gooders and do-badders.
Many if not most religious people believe that of all human institutions, religion has the greatest influence on every society. For much of my early life I hoped that was true, but for the last fifty years or so, my opinion is that politics (and by implication, government) have by far the largest influence on nearly everything that occurs in nations, provinces within nations, and municipalities within provinces or individual states. Politics of one sort or another is an absolute necessity wherever people on this planet live. If there is no smoothly functioning political process, chaos is bound to be the result of such political vacuums.
In the Bible, virtually everyone was convinced that whatever happened anywhere, for good or ill, it was ultimately determined by God. If Israel prospered, it was because God was pleased with Israel. If it experienced decline, such as political or military decay, it was because God was punishing Israel for its sins.
Probably all of the prophets also were at least somewhat convinced of that. However, they seemed to take the position that if the kings and their courtiers had behaved according to God’s will, the people of Israel would not have experienced the periodic military, political, or natural disasters that befell them. For the early part of my life I thought that too, but for half a century or more I have concluded that if things go well in the USA or in the world, it is not because God caused the good times, and if the USA and/or the world are in deep trouble, it is not because God caused it, but because government and misdirected policies are the primary cause, along with individual mistakes and indiscretions that cause the world to appear to have become unglued. However, no successful period can go on forever, and no horrendous mess is completely irreparable. That is why prophets and pundits have things to say about whatever is going on.
I have stated this in previous sermons, but it bears repeating: In my judgment, there are two kinds of preachers. They are either basically pastoral preachers or prophetic preachers, and there are a great many more of the former than the latter. Again in my judgment, pastoral preachers believe it is better to try to heal wounded souls with soft words, whereas prophetic preachers think it better to try to overcome the causes of individual or social ills by applying sharp words to battering or to battered souls.
Furthermore, in my view it is personality traits that determine which kind of clergyperson becomes which kind of preacher. Irenic, peace-loving clergy become pastoral preachers. They inherently try to avoid stirring things up. Prophetic preachers believe that progress is made, especially in bad situations, only if the pot is frequently stirred. If you have any doubt as to which type of personality I am, the second of my wives will be glad to tell you, and why that is so. Having known four of the six members of my family of origin, including me, she would say at least three of the four Lois has known are who they are because of our dominant maternal Hutt bellicose genes, and that the Miller genes are decidedly overpowered by the Hutt genes. Lois has also met other Hutt and Miller relatives, she would say the other Miller relatives are personality peace-lovers and the Hutts are the vocal pugilists. I would agree with her on both sets of observations. Furthermore, I am a congenital contrarian.
I may sound like I am making light of these distinctions, but I am not. As there are two types of preachers, there are also two types of people: peace-lovers and pot-stirrers. It is a blessing that there are considerably more peace-lovers than pot-stirrers. Nevertheless, for the good of all, both types are of vital importance to the future of our race. As long there are pots that need stirring, there will be politicians who, correctly or incorrectly, will do their unrequested stirring. And to change the analogy, prophetic types will gladly put their oar into the water and row as hard as they can in one of many possible directions. Both types of human beings are necessary for the good of the whole society. As long as there are social and political problems (and that will be forever), there will be well-intended people trying to steer the world in one or the opposite direction they think is the more needed one.
Even among the prophets there are degrees of prophetic zeal. Isaiah has always been my favorite prophet, because while he illustrates more pessimism than optimism, where he is optimistic, he writes wonderfully optimistic poetry. Most people remember that side of Isaiah far more readily than his doom-and-gloom side. It is understandable, because most people probably prefer to hope that troubles will take care of themselves than they are to face them directly and to let the chips fall where they may.
Hosea is my second-favorite prophet, and he is a shorter version of Isaiah. Jeremiah is my third-favorite prophet, but he is virtually doom and gloom from Chapter One through Chapter Fifty-two. Lamentations, which Jeremiah also wrote, is even doomier and gloomier. Many Old Testament scholars say that anything cheerful in Jeremiah was put there by a scribe who tried to make the Gloomiest Grump sound as least a tad cheerful every once in a while.
Allow me now to focus for a few minutes on The Chapel Without Walls. I have been a called pastor in four Presbyterian congregations, and the founding pastor of this non-denominational congregation that, sadly will go out of existence in less than four months. Despite that, again I want to acknowledge that this also has been the happiest of my five pastorates. To begin with, I have personally known every person who ever attended this church in greater depth than in any of the four Presbyterian churches. That may be because we have always been small, and have gotten smaller with each passing year. Because of that, we know one another more intimately, although some of you know only some of you intimately. Of those who are still attending The Chapel regularly, thirteen of you have put up with me in both the First Presbyterian Church and The Chapel, and fifteen of you know and have known my quirks only through The Chapel.
Secondly, we are essentially a congregationally-governed congregation, which I will not take time to explain, except to say in every such congregation, the members can vote to fire their minister. Within two or three years of being here, I felt entirely free to preach whatever I felt called to say, even if it may have been too provocative or too poorly thought through. I never once feared that I might get fired for anything I said. That has been more liberating than you probably can imagine. That doesn’t imply that I happily gave up my Presbyterian allegiance, where ministers can be fired, but it is very difficult, disruptive, and rare. Some congregationally- governed congregations change pastors much more frequently than they change the oil in their cars, and that’s not good. On the other hand, in hard-to-fire-the-pastor denominations, sometimes the pastors stay too long for their good and especially for the wellbeing of the congregations.
Because of everything I wrote in the previous paragraph (and in the past nine months I have told you more about myself than I did in the previous twenty years), I also want you to know that I have always written every word of every sermon since my first sermon nearly sixty years ago. In my ministerial vocation, I see myself as prophet more than a pastor. Therefore, I always tried to say exactly what I intended to say. I never used either notes or an outline., out of concern I might say something I hadn’t intended to say.
In seminary we were taught that the calling of the prophets was not to predict the future, but to speak to the strengths and weaknesses of the present, and to attempt to portray a biblical understanding on the issues and challenges of the unfolding drama of human history. That idea is often stated this way: The primary calling of the prophets is not to foretell the future, and to predict what will happen, but to forthtell, to speak out on behalf of what the prophet sees to be God’s word - - - not the prophet’s word, but God’s word. It may or may not be what God would actually want to be said by the prophets, but the prophets spoke and speak what they believe is a proper understanding about what God wants us to do to improve this planet that He created.
Jeremiah lived in a period when it was becoming increasingly evident to every thoughtful person that Judah was in a greatly weakened state, and that sooner or later the Babylonians were going to invade it and likely to destroy the Jewish kingdom. Nobody wanted to hear that, but that is what Jeremiah felt compelled by God to proclaim. Writing as though he was God’s voice, Jeremiah said, “The comely and delicately bred I will destroy, the daughter of Zion. Shepherds with their flocks [the Babylonians] shall come against [Israel]; they shall pitch their tents around her, they shall pasture, each in his place” (6:2 & 3).
Besides being prophets, the prophets were also poets, and they wrote poetry that was grim, inspirational, terrifying, uplifting, and enigmatic, as is much poetry in every language. “For thus says the Lord of hosts [that terms literally means the Lord of the armies]: Hew down [Israel’s] trees; cast up a siege mound against Jerusalem; this is the city which must be punished; there is nothing but oppression within her’” (6:6).
The prophets did not sit down and in a week or month write their entire books of prophecy. They did it over years, over their entire lifetime. This is only the sixth chapter of Jeremiah; did he write this several or many years before the Babylonians came in 587 BCE, and they made Jerusalem what Israel has made Gaza today? Did God tell Jeremiah that is what inevitably would transpire? Fifty years ago I thought that is the way history and prophecy work, but I think it no longer.
“For from the least to the greatest of them, everyone is greedy for unjust gain, and from prophet to priest, everyone deals falsely” (6:13). Prophets often overstate things, and false prophets do it in nearly everything they say. There is an infamous current false prophet who constantly deals falsely. That is no overstatement, but, like the prophets of old often did, I have not identified the false one who says that he is sent by God to save both the United States of America and the world.
“They have healed the wound of my people lightly, saying, ‘Peace, peace,’ when there is no peace. Were they ashamed when they committed abomination? No, they were not at all ashamed; they did not know how to blush” (6:14-15a). We are living in a time when countless people do not know how to blush, especially the one by whom they are dangerously led astray. For that reason and others like that do I preach political sermons.
When I gave six sermon titles to Scott to print in the “Upcoming Sermons” section of the weekly bulletin, I did not realize I gave him six political/social/pot-stirrer sermons in a row. Now I am going to do something I have never done in sixty years of preaching; I am going to give you an option which I have never given to any other congregation I served. I am going to give you the opportunity to tell whether or not you want me to preach all six sermons one after the other. ”You have two choices, but you must decide in ten seconds, and I hope all of you will vote. The two choices are these: 1) I want other sermons interspersed with these stinging sermons to mitigate the sting, or 2) I want the other four of the rest of these stinging sermons to be thrust on us now to get them over as quickly as possible. (Stopping the rest of them altogether is not an option.) So, Choice 1: Intersperse. - - - - Choice 2: Get them over quickly - - - -. (Obliterating them altogether is not an option.)
Religion in many parts of the world is in serious decline. There are many reasons for this, but one of them almost certainly is this: In my opinion, there are too few prophetic (i.e. pot-stirrer) preachers, and too many never-stir-the-pot preachers. Peace-loving clergy fail their congregation if they think it will only make things worse if they address painful negative realities in the world around them. As Jeremiah (not God, but Jeremiah) said, “They have healed the wound of my people lightly, saying, ‘Peace, peace!’, when there is no peace.” There is a cancer in many parts of the world, but especially in our part of the world. If it is not excised, it may destroy too much of what is good by allowing that which is bad to continue its metastasis. That, in essence, is why I believe political sermons must be preached.