Epiphany 4
Jeremiah 1:4-10; 1 Corinthians 13:1-13; Psalm 71:1-6; Luke 4:21-30
You can also subscribe to this podcast on Apple, Spotify, or YouTube.
I.
This is part two of a sermon series called, “Operation Reconquista.”
Last week’s sermon was well-received, though it was intended to stir things up, and, I think, it did stir things up.
The premise of a Reconquista, of any reformation, is that things are not as they should be.
Specifically, when we are talking about the Reconquista of the mainline Protestant churches, we are saying that they are not as they should be.
We see this clearly in their collapsing membership.
Up until the 1960s, nearly half of all Americans identified with one of the mainline Protestant churches.
The mainline churches include: The United Methodist Church (UM), the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA), the American Baptist Churches USA. (ABCUSA), the Presbyterian Church (USA) (PCUSA), the Episcopal Church, the United Church of Christ (UCC), and the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) (DOC).
First Church Woodbury is a mainline Protestant church. We affiliate voluntarily with the United Church of Christ.
In 1960, the United Church of Christ had 2,246,610 members. As of 2020, it had 773,539, with a loss of 285,000 over the previous decade.1
Now, let me pause here and say that this story is nothing new.
I am 51 years old, and this has been the story for my entire adult life, and for all of my ordained ministry: these churches are dying.
That is true, and the trend has not gotten any better, but I wonder now if we aren’t in the death spiral.
For instance, one article projects that the Episcopal Church will have no members by 2050.
I pick this example because it’s the one I am most familiar with, having been an ordained Episcopal minister for most of my career.
It’s also a bellwether for two other closely related denominations: The Presbyterian Church (USA) and our own United Church of Christ.
Strictly speaking, it’s not correct to say the Episcopal Church will have no members by 2050.
The article I’m citing projects it will have about 150,000, making it what sociologists call a “micro denomination.”
As the author, David Goodhew, puts it, “So, will T[he] E[piscopal] C[hurch] be dead by 2050? The answer is technically ‘no,’ but operatively ‘yes.’”2
This same article projects that by the year 2050, only 750 marriages will be performed across the entire denomination – a denomination which as of 2025 – is still active in all 50 states, U.S. territories, and 16 other countries. Only 750 marriages.
As an ordained minister, I can tell you anecdotally, that matches my own experience.
By far, I have performed the most funerals, so many I can’t remember them all, followed by baptisms, which, if I thought about it, I could probably list them, certainly the number is under 20, followed by weddings, of which I have done only four.
Four weddings, many funerals, and a handful of baptisms in fifteen years of ordained ministry, the last 10 of which were in full-time parish ministry.
So, the story of mainline decline is nothing new, but it does seem to be accelerating, and there really is no sugar-coating where things stand and what we face.
II.
Now, demographic collapse is one thing, and there are many reasons for it, but the other reason for the collapse of the mainline Protestant churches is God’s judgment.
I believe, collectively, these churches have provoked God’s wrath and called down His judgment.
For a century now, they have hidden the clear meaning of the Scriptures with man-made interpretations.
These interpretations all have names, and so sometimes you’ll hear someone discuss the “feminist critique” of certain stories in the Bible, or the third-world perspective, or the gay, African, liberationist, anti-colonial perspectives, etc.
Back during 2020, during the height of the woke craze, a book came out called “Reading the Bible While Black.”
All these critical interpretations are based in cultural Marxism, which is to say they were planted and matured in the soil of atheism and contempt for the Church and Christian culture.
Now, I am not saying that these critiques have nothing to say, or that one can’t glean some insights from studying them. Good scholarship is good scholarship.
What I am saying is that these ideological interpretations of the Bible all amount to the same thing: an attempt to separate God from His word.
However, as we will see in a few moments, when we look at this morning’s texts, that cannot be done.
The word of God is an expression of God Himself, of His character and nature, and God will defend Himself from all manner of falsehoods, lies, and distortions that men substitute for the plain sense of God’s word.
Now, if collectively, the mainline Protestant churches are under judgment, that means that we too are under judgment.
We can’t just pat ourselves on the back and say, “Well, we’re not flying a rainbow flag, or we never voted to become Open and Affirming, or we hired a conservative pastor.”
No, we must own our part in this mess.
With that, let us stand and hear God’s word for us in Luke 4:21-30.
Let us pray.
Father, we are eager to hear that your word is being fulfilled in our midst, even if it means that your word must pierce our hearts, that it must convict us of our sins, and that it must force us to face things that are difficult to face, both in the solitude of our hearts and together as your Church. Give us grace, Lord, to grasp the clear sense of your word, and to apply it in our lives. Amen.
Please be seated.
III.
The texts during the Epiphany season are all about showing Jesus for who He is.
Today’s texts from Jeremiah and Luke continue to show us Jesus as the Christ, the Messiah, the one who fulfills both the words of the prophets and Israel’s destiny, which is to be a blessing to the world.
That destiny is spoken as a promise to Abraham in Genesis 12:3.
I will bless those who bless you, and him who curses you I will curse; and by you all the families of the earth shall bless themselves.
But that blessing is not evenly distributed.
Jeremiah the prophet is commissioned by God to speak, and by his words he will both destroy and overthrow, build and plant.
I think part of the problem in the mainline churches, and for Christians in general, is that we close our ears to the “destroy and overthrow” part, and hear only the part about building and planting.
Not too many churches are going to use the first part of Jeremiah 1:10 in their mission statement or put it on the splash screen of their websites:
At the fictional “17th Congregational Church of Jeremiahville,” we believe that God has set us over nations and over kingdoms, to pluck up and to break down, to destroy and to overthrow.
Such talk will usually upset people.
But it really shouldn’t, because, if you’re going to build, you’ve got to tear down and clear the site first, and if you’re going to plant, you’ve first have to break the soil and pull up weeds.
One reason we might be in the mess we’re in is because we are not listening to all that the Bible has to say. We are not heeding the whole counsel of God.
So, it’s clear that Jeremiah’s words are not always going to be words of blessing.
As a prophet, he is called to curse as well as to bless.
The same is true for Jesus. The blessings of Christ are not evenly distributed. They don’t fall in measured spoonfuls equally around Galilee.
This is why Jesus makes an example of the widow of Zarephath and Naaman the Syrian.
The foreign widow and enemy commander receive God’s blessing of food during a famine and healing from leprosy, but God’s own people are cut off.
The members of His hometown synagogue in Nazareth pick up on this right away.
At first, Luke tells us, they speak well of him and find wonder and delight in His gracious words.
But something happens in the second part of Luke 4:22. It’s not quite clear what, but after that semicolon, everything changes.
And all spoke well of him, and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth; and they said, “Is not this Joseph’s son?”
The tone changes to one of contempt.
Yes, at first, they speak well of Jesus, but then it dawns on them that they know Him all too well: “Is not this Joseph’s son?”
It’s in that moment that they try to do something that all of us are guilty of (because it’s so easy to do).
They try to separate Jesus and who He is from Jesus and what He says.
That is, they say, “These are just the words of Joseph’s son, not the words of the Messiah.”
They try to do something that should never be attempted, because it cannot be done.
They try to separate God from His word.
God will resist anyone who tries.
Now, why do I say that? Why do I say you cannot separate God from His word?
Well, let’s look at Jeremiah 1:9-10
Verse 9: “Then the Lord put forth his hand and touched my mouth; and the Lord said to me, ‘Behold, I have put my words in your mouth.’”
Scholars will tell you that this is figurative language, an anthropomorphism, a figure of speech that gives God man-like qualities and gestures.
They will say that the language makes God sound human when He’s really not. But, to me, this is just one of many examples of how riddled with the Incarnation the Old Testament really is.
People say there’s no Jesus in the Old Testament, but I ask you, just who do you think is putting forth His hand and sticking His words into Jeremiah’s mouth?
The point is, by use of this human and humanizing language, Scripture is telling us just how close God is to His prophets.
It’s physical, it’s as close as you can get, the word is being shoved into Jeremiah’s mouth.
The prophet cannot be separated from God’s word, and God’s word cannot be separated from God.
Now, let’s look at verse 10:
“See, I have set you this day over nations and over kingdoms, to pluck up and to break down, to destroy and to overthrow, to build and to plant.”
The political implications of this are clear.
Jeremiah is set over nations and kingdoms.
Those that try to separate Jeremiah from God’s word will be overthrown, but the opposite is also true: those who accept the prophet’s words as God’s word will be planted and built up.
There’s a striking example of all this from Exodus, in the middle of the sequence of plagues that God sends upon Pharaoh and the Egyptians.
During the plague of hail and thunder, some of Pharaoh’s slaves realize that if they listen to God’s word, they can escape the plague.
Exodus 9:20 says, “Then he who feared the word of the Lord among the servants of Pharaoh made his slaves and his cattle flee into the houses” to escape the deadly hail storm.
The word of the Lord protects even the Egyptians from God’s curses.
That’s an important lesson for us as we try to recover our church. We can invoke the blessing of God to shield us from the curse of God.
If we follow His word, we have every reason to hope that we will escape His judgment, just as some of Pharaoh’s slaves discovered.
IV.
But if we look at the mainline Protestant churches today, can we say that’s what we’ve done?
Have we at least taken advantage of the blessing, like Pharaoh’s slaves, or have we tried to separate God from His word and called down the curse?
Anyone who points out that we have, in fact, separated God from His word gets labeled a fundamentalist, a bigot, a sexist, a homophobe, a transphobe, a racist, or even an antisemite.
Here’s an example from the United Church of Christ’s website, ucc.org.
I screen shot this at 4:31 PM on Friday, January 31, 2025.
On the rotator, on the home page, it says, “TRANS & NON-BINARY SIBLINGS ARE DIVINE.”
The word divine is in italics to emphasize it.
Now, let’s set aside for the moment Genesis 1:27, which reads, “God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.”
Clearly the categories trans and non-binary seek to separate God from His word.
They do so by replacing the God-given categories with the man-made categories, trans and non-binary.
I would also add that gay and straight are man-made categories that also seek to separate God from His word.
But, because we’ve gotten used to gay and straight, after years of cultural conditioning, years of Will & Grace and Modern Family episodes, we forget how separated from God’s word we’ve become.3
But there’s an even more obvious separation on display here.
In fact, it’s not so much an attempt to separate God from His word, as it is an attempt to usurp God altogether.
Trans and non-binary siblings are now divine?
The United Church of Christ has ascribed deity to a class of human beings based on their sexual identification.
This is idolatry. The ancient pagan pantheons were filled with divinized sexuality.
But Exodus 20:2-3 says:
I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. “You shall have no other gods before me.”
Jesus read the Isaiah scroll in His hometown synagogue and declared that, “Today this scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.”
His friends and neighbors in the congregation thought He spoke well, but then they turned on Him. “Is not this Joseph’s son?” they asked with contempt.
Jesus is not moved by their attempt to emotionally sabotage Him.
He does not speak to their “woundedness” or try to smooth their ruffled feathers.
Instead, He says, “Truly, I say to you, no prophet is acceptable in his own country.”
Why?
Because while they admired the “gracious words” that Jesus spoke, they still sought to separate those words from the one who spoke them.
For this, Jesus judged them.
“You are not like the widow of Zarephath and Naaman the Syrian,” He says.
“The blessing will not come to you. It will go to the pagans instead.”
This is because they wanted a Messiah who would affirm them as they were, while demanding no transformative change in their lives — or in their congregation in Nazareth.
When we hear Jesus say, “Today this scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing,” we must be ready to accept both the one speaking the words of Scripture and the words themselves.
After all, John’s Gospel is clear that they are the same thing, the same person.
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1).
We cannot accept God, yet, at the same time, reject His word, or, to put it positively, if we accept God, we must take Him at His word.
V.
I think I should stop here and continue next week with a third installment in this Operation Reconquista series.
I had thought to get through it in just two sermons, but there is much to cover here and I don’t want to overwhelm you all in one or two sittings.
Also, the lectionary texts this year lend themselves perfectly to this subject.
Last week and this week we saw Jesus announce His own Operation Reconquista, “Today this scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.”
Next week, we will follow along as He chooses His first disciples, which is fitting, because that’s how you and I can enter the story.
So, let’s wrap up this week’s sermon.
Last week, you will recall, I ended with two points.
First, the mainline Protestant churches never lost their Bibles. Like the exiles returning from Babylon, we’ve managed to keep that much.
Second, I said that all church reformation begins by going back to the Bible.
This week, we can add two more points.
First, we cannot separate God from His word, or, to put it positively, if we accept God, then we will take Him at His word, like Pharaoh’s slaves did, thereby saving their lives and the lives of their cattle. This is how we can save First Church Woodbury.
The second point is this. If we attempt this separation, we are behaving very foolishly. We are attempting to tear apart something that God has joined together.
If we do that, then, like the members of Jesus’ hometown synagogue, we invite God’s judgment, not only on ourselves as individuals, but on our churches as well.
We should not be surprised if they one day sit empty, for the glory will have long since departed from them.
Let us pray.
O GOD, who knowest us to be set in the midst of so many and great dangers, that by reason of the frailty of our nature we cannot always stand upright; Grant to us such strength and protection, as may support us in all dangers, and carry us through all temptations; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
Preached on February 2, 2025 at the First Congregational Church, Woodbury, Connecticut.
Reflection Questions:
How do we, as a congregation, view the current state of the church and its decline? Do we see it as a result of external factors, or is it a consequence of spiritual choices we’ve made?
The sermon speaks about the judgment of God on those who distort His word. How can we ensure we’re faithfully presenting and living out the truth of God’s word in our church community?
The preacher challenges us to accept both God and His word fully. What areas in your life or in the church might be resistant to accepting the full counsel of God?
Reflect on the role of cultural influences (such as feminism or LGBTQ+ perspectives) in shaping how we interpret Scripture. How can we engage with these influences while remaining true to God’s word?
Richard Ostling, “This Is Still News? Mainline Protestantism, Once Central in U.S. Culture, Keeps Collapsing,” GetReligion, September 28, 2023, accessed January 31, 2025, https://www.getreligion.org/getreligion/2023/9/27/this-is-still-news-mainline-protestantism-once-central-in-us-culture-keeps-collapsing.
David Goodhew, “The Episcopal Church in 2050,” The Living Church, accessed January 31, 2025, https://livingchurch.org/covenant/the-episcopal-church-in-2050/.
Homosexuality was largely a foreign import, almost unknown in English-speaking Protestant countries in 1900. It was introduced aggressively into this country and normalized through correspondence networks and intentional migration. See: Jon Harris, “Origins of the Gay Agenda with Doug Robinson,” Conversations That Matter (YouTube: September 19, 2024) accessed January 31, 2025 and Martin Dennis Meeker, Come out West: Communication and the Gay and Lesbian Migration to San Francisco, 1940s-1960s (University of Southern California: December 2000) accessed January 31, 2025, https://impa.usc.edu/archive/Come-out-West---Communication-and-the-gay-and-lesbian-migration-to-San-Francisco--1940s--1960s-2A3BF1LOSTB4.html.
Share this post