<= /o:p>

Restoring T= ouch

2 Kings 5: 1-14

An ancient, foreign ruler was back in the news recen= tly, nearly 3500 years after her reign had ended. I’m referring to the Pharoah= Queen Hat-shep-sut, granddaughter of Queen Nefirtiti, and ruler of Egypt during t= he 15th century BC. Antiquities experts reported that at the conclusion of her reign in 1453 BC, all traces= of her mysteriously disappeared, including her mummy. It has just recently been discover= ed that a mummy found in the Valley of the Kings in 1903, and left on site unt= il two months ago, appears to be the lost queen (Kratovac A7).

As intriguing as all this investigative work may be-= --and we can all watch the documentary on the Discovery channel some time during = this month of July---the hook in this story that aroused my curiosity was the re= port that the queen was known for dressing like a man and wearing a false beard. Now I’m not goin= g to try to unpack the implications of all that in this morning’s sermon--= -I would refer you to the forthcoming documentary. But the report did get me thinking= about the ways in which our self identity and the roles we assume, impact the relationships we share and the people with whom we share those relationship= s.

Some of these same dynamics are at work in this morning’s story concerning General Naaman. The text introduces the man as “…the commander of the army of the King of Aram,…a great = man and in high favor with his master…a mighty warrior….” (5.= 1).

This is clearly an individual held in high esteem. His prowess on the battle field ha= s won him the favor of the king he serves and, undoubtedly, the troops that he commands. Naaman has an ident= ity as an accomplished, trusted, confidant of the king and a person of great power= and prestige among the people whom he serves.

But the recorder of this morning’s account, we= aves in two additional threads associated with Naaman’s identity that are critical to the story. The fi= rst one has to do with Naaman’s affliction. “The man, though a mighty wa= rrior, suffered from leprosy” (5.1).

Leprosy was a term the Old Testament writers used to describe several different types of skin disease, the most dreaded of which caused mutilations and deformities on the body of its victims. Lepers lose their sense of touch i= n the afflicted parts of their body. And in its advanced stages, the disease can result in deterioration of muscle t= issue and paralysis.

As a Gentile living in the nation of Aram, Naaman= 217;s prowess as a military officer was the basis for his identity. The disease was incidental to his accomplishments and the high esteem he garnered from the king. However, that would not have been = the case had Naaman been an Israelite living under Jewish law.

In the Jewish world of Old Testament times, lepers w= ere considered defiled people, ritualistically impure, and forced to live in isolation---figuratively and literally---on the edges of the community. The book of Leviticus tells us tha= t the leprous person was required to wear torn clothes, allow the hair of his hea= d to be disheveled and cover his upper lip while crying out, “Unclean, unclean.” (Leviticus 14.45) People who came into physical contact with a leper were subsequently deemed defiled and required to undergo a lengthy purification process under= the watchful eye of the temple priest.

Had Naaman been a Hebrew under Jewish law, his ident= ity would have been based on his affliction and not on his accomplishments. Rather than being a mighty warrior= , held in high esteem by the king, who happens to have leprosy, Naaman would have = been identified and isolated as a leper who once served in the king’s army= .

The second element associated with Naaman’s identity, carefully woven into the introduction of our story, was the autho= r’s recognition that Naaman’s success on the battlefield and subsequent f= avor with the king was “…because by him the Lord had given victory to Aram” (5.1). The record= er of this account was suggesting that God used Naaman as God’s agent to deliver victory to the kingdom of Aram in order that God’s plan be accomplished.

However, in this Gentile nation, I don’t belie= ve either the king or Naaman attributed their military success to anything oth= er than their own power, might, ingenuity, and skill. Naaman was a self made man enjoyin= g the fruits of a successful career who just happened to have a touch of leprosy.=

Last week Pastor Wayne referenced a book study sever= al deacons and elders have undertaken over this past month. The book is entitled Leading Chang= e in the Congregation: Spiritual and Organizational Tools for Leaders by Gilbert= R. Rendle. One of the models the author describes in the text is called the adult learning cycle. Rendle makes the point that itR= 17;s important for leaders to encourage and support adult learning in the local congregation as members search for new ways of being church.

And just what does adult learning look like in the l= ocal congregation? Rendle describe= s the process as a cycle comprised of four components: (1) do; (2) reflect; (3) connect; and (4) decide.

The author suggests that “Adults learn best wh= en they pause after doing something to reflect on what they just did and what = they learned from it. The new lear= ning is enriched when they then connect their new learnings with previous experiences and insights that can help to inform their reflection on what t= hey just did. Then with this new learning in place they make a decision about next steps and then implement = (do) those steps” (Rendle 20).

Now, where this model becomes incriminating, is when= we recognize that in our pursuit of stability and minimizing change, we gravit= ate toward the left side of the cycle, at the expense of the tasks of reflecting and connecting. We spend the = bulk of our time doing and deciding and very little time reflecting and connecting.

The agendas for most of our church meetings bear out= this reality. We typically have ac= tion items to deal with and we make decisions on those action items. Then we assign those decisions to a committee to implement and they come back next month to report what they di= d, propose new action items, and we begin another round of decision making. There’s little or no time scheduled on the agenda to reflect and connect.

I want to push this imagery a bit further by proposi= ng this unbalanced learning cycle might well be descriptive of the contemporary culture in which we live. We = live in a world driven by a frenetic pace. We are constantly being bombarded with more information than we can process. It’s almost as if the culture is drawing us to the left side of the cycle, filling our overscheduled days with activities and decisions mad= e on the fly, compromising any time for reflection and connection.

It’s in just such a setting that some successf= ul, accomplished people can fall into the trap of giving themselves credit for successfully negotiating this scenario and rising above the fray---crafting= an identity built on self worth, self initiative, and self accomplishment.

And how could that be? How might outwardly successful peo= ple fall into the trap of believing that they are the source of their own success? Because there’s little or no time given to reflection and connection. There’s no time to see God&#= 8217;s hand in the midst of hectic, overscheduled lives. There’s no time to relate to people other than as accessories or accomplices in decisions that need to be made or actions that need to be completed.=

It’s a life based on a perpetual cycle of doin= g and then deciding what to do next. As a former pastor used to say, these are people who are constantly--- on to the next good thing!

I want to suggest this morning that this affliction = is a 21st century form of leprosy. It’s a disease that can isolate us, disconnect us, and cause u= s to “lose touch.” It = causes us to “lose touch” with the God who desperately wants to delive= r us from such toil. It causes us = to “lose touch” with the people who befriend us and love us and support us and wish there was more quality time for such relationships. It causes us to “lose touch&= #8221; with the history and traditions that shape our lives. And most especially, it causes us = to “lose touch” with the possibilities for new life that God places before us, because we have become prisoners within an identity we have crea= ted for ourselves----cutoff from either the capacity or the willingness to take= the time for reflection and connection..

It’s an affliction that causes us to forget wh= o we are and whose we are.

There is a certain distinguishable pride that can ar= ise in the midst of these self made identities.&n= bsp; Naaman discloses a hint of that with an expression of anger, just be= fore he agrees to submit to Elisha’s prescribed treatment plan in the Jord= an River.

Remember how the story unfolds….Naaman, the fa= mous military commander who happens to have leprosy, captures a servant girl from Israel that is assigned to work for Mrs. Naaman. The servant girl knows the One Tru= e God and discloses to Mrs. Naaman that there are prophets in Israel that can cure such diseases. Mrs. Naaman presumably says to her husband something like, “If you expect me to s= tay in this relationship, you’re going to have to do something about that skin thing. Now the girl who = does my nails on Tuesdays says there is a prophet in Samaria who can fix that.”

Naaman then shares this information with the king who writes an official letter of introduction and sends him off with gifts of g= old, silver, and ten new suits for the king of Israel. After some commotion at the palace= in Israel, Elisha sends word to direct the travelers to his place. Upon arrival, Elisha sends a messe= nger outside his gate to meet the party with the instructions, “Go, wash in the Jordan seven times, and your flesh shall be restored and you shall be clean” (5.10).

This is where Naaman’s pride in his identity a= s a man in high favor with the king reveals itself. Naaman expresses anger in the fact= that Elisha had the audacity to send a messenger out to deliver the prescription. A man in such h= igh favor, on official business for the king of Aram, a mighty warrior with victories over the people of Samaria as well as Israel, clearly deserves mo= re respect and recognition than to have to deal with the messenger of the local prophet!

In fact, Naaman had worked himself into such a huff = about this breach of royal etiquette, that he was packing up to return home. It’s at this point in the ac= count, that God’s deliverance prevails over Naaman’s pride. Naaman pauses to listen to the adv= ice of his servant when the servant says,

“Father, if the prophet had commanded you to d= o something difficult, would you not have done it?&nbs= p; How much more, when all he said to you was, ‘Wash and be clean’?” So Naama= n went down and immersed himself seven times in the Jordan, according to the word = of the man of God; his flesh was restored like the flesh of a young boy, and he was clean” (5.13-14).

Imagine that---the commander of the army of the King= of Aram, a great man held in high favor by the king, a mighty warrior---pausin= g to entertain a comment from a lowly servant.&= nbsp; Somehow Naaman is able to suspend (set aside) his resume of earthly accomplishments for the sake of truly listening and acting upon the words o= f a servant. And it’s at that moment, God delivers Naaman to health, to wholeness, and to faith.

Sometimes we need to let go of dated or inappropriate images of our own making so we can be delivered to the identity God intends= for us. This is the message for u= s this day.

Ours is a congregation seeking transformation as we = work to discern God’s will for ministry in this place. Ours is a congregation in transiti= on as we make preparations for calling a new pastor and head of staff. But how do we go about letting go = of a congregational identity that may no longer be appropriate?

We might begin by being more intentional as a commun= ity in dedicating time for reflection and connection, to restore some balance with= the flurry of activity and decision making that occurs here regularly.

This morning’s lesson also suggests that a cri= tical part of that connecting process involves listening---listening to the people with whom we may have lost touch over the last five years, listening to the people who may have been marginalized by the renovation project, listening = to that faithful remnant of believers which resides just at the edges of the m= ore vocal, engaged leadership circles within this community….

These are God’s servant messengers---inviting = us to set aside who we think we are so that we might be delivered to the health, = the wholeness, and the faith which God intends.

In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the = Holy Spirit. Amen.

References Cited

Kratovac, Katrina.&= nbsp; “Remains of pharaoh queen identified.” Kalamazoo Gazette. 27 June 2007. A7.

Rendle, Gilbert R.&= nbsp; Leading Change in the Congregation: Spiritual and Organizational Too= ls for Leaders. Washington D.C./= The Alban Institute. 1998.

Text: = 2 Kings 5: 1-14

Date: = July 8, 2007 14th Sunday in Ordinary = Time (C)

Title: Restoring Touch

Doctrine: Salvation

Focus: God delivers people to health, wholeness, and faith.

Function: To invite congregation to receive God’s deliverance for renewal by liste= ning to the members with whom we have lost touch.Nicodemus cannot for the life of himself figure out what Jesus is talking about. Nor perhaps can we. How can anyone be born after becoming old? For Nicodemus and too many of us things = have become fixed. We have “stayed the course” far too long. What we have written into our lives as persons and as church cannot be erased. We h= ave made our choices, some helpful and others harmful, but we cannot undo any of them. It doesn’t make much sense to talk about being born again.

Well, for Jesus it never was a matter of living life= over again. Rather it was the possibility of a new life; a new quality of life t= hat moves with the changing flow of the universe and the Spirit within us. Jesus was amazed that this leader of Israel could find nothing in his tradition to speak to him of new possibilities; of being born into a new quality of life. Surely Nicodemus knew the words of the prophet Ezekiel to Israel in exile: “I will take you from the nations…I will bring you into your own land. I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and you shall be clean. A new h= eart I will give you and a new spirit I will put within you.” How did Nicodemus ever miss it? How do we miss it? Perhaps it is too painful to giv= e up what seems to make sense to us to become something new? Is that why churches keep on doing= the same things over and over again with the same diminishing results? The pain of giving up is indeed th= e pain of death. But the death of the old is the birth of the new.

My goodness! Nicodemus was really on the spot! For what would he say to his fellow rulers on the Sanhedrin if he took Jesus seriously? What if he were no long= er threatened by Jesus but nurtured into new life? What if he became competent= in a new way? How would he explain that? What about being competent Christians= out there in the world? What if our competence as a congregation brought us a credibility that would lead people ask us, progressive Christians, the real= ly important questions about life? Competence, the dictionary says among other things, is the ability to undergo transformation. It means having sufficient resources for all occasi= ons. Competence for bacteria is the “readiness of bacteria to undergo gene= tic transformation.” Perhaps then, Christian competence is the readiness = to undergo spiritual transformation. Competent Christians would then be open to the leading of the Spirit. They would not be possessed of tired old opinions and programs.

It does not mean that what is old is bad. It simply = means that what is old is old and needs to be transformed, if not forgotten, if n= ot buried. Michael Slaughter, pastor of the Ginghamsburg United Methodist Chur= ch in northwest Ohio, a once small rural parish of 80 members, now numbers 2,0= 00 people in conventional worship every week-end and several hundred more in t= heir café churches, says that we in old line denominations have the theol= ogy that speaks to our time. Not the mega churches, not the conservative evange= lical churches of the Christian right, but the progressive theology of mainline protestant churches. What is required is that we become competent at what w= e do and how we respond to the leading of God. Competent Christians pay attentio= n to what is going on in the culture, and what change that requires on our part = to attract a hearing. Competent Christians will have a theology that brings together the paradoxes of a scientific/technological age with a Biblical st= ory that has meaning for our age, and can mold intentional Christians who are equipped to respond to the challenges of a world in turmoil.

But we need that competence that comes from spiritual transformation. Diana Butler Bass, whom you will hear me speak a great deal= of in coming weeks talks about us becoming “intentional congregations.” Intentional congregations are non-geographical, where people decide to attend for a particular reason. Intentional congregations welcome lay participation, are not clergy dominated or hierarchical, are creative with worship and music, and are not caught up in doctrinal uniform= ity. People come because the church presents a theologically meaningful vision in worship, preaching and teaching that is intellectually satisfying, thoughtf= ul and reflective, giving people the ability to see their work, relationships = and the world with new spiritual insight. People are drawn because in all the congregation does, they sense a transcendent connection with God that helps them deal with their lives and = the world as it is. There are several hundred identified parishes that are doing this with competence and they are growing, stimulating, and exciting places= to be living out the Christian journey. And we could be one of them. We have in this faith community, the financial resources, the theological and intellec= tual resources, the human resources to be one of them. Do we have the will to fi= gure out what God wants us to do and to become as a non geographical church on Bronson Park? Can we in a grand experience of unity bring this whole congre= gation into an exciting new adventure? Do we have the courage to risk the changes necessary to turn this place around from a congregation in decline to one experiencing exciting and meaningful growth? Competent Christians; transfor= med; thoughtful, reflective, unafraid of taking risks and facing change; compete= nt church! Amen.