Who Cuts the Barber’s Hair?

This is the message that I gave on the 16^th Sunday after Pentecost, 28 September 2003, at Tompkins Corners United Methodist Church, Putnam Valley, NY.  The Scriptures for that Sunday were Esther 7: 1 – 6, 9 – 10; 9: 20; James 5: 13 – 20; and Mark 9: 38 – 50.

——————————————————————

It sounds very simple but it is a puzzle with some interesting considerations.

A barber posts the following sign in his window, “I cut the hair of all those men in town, and only those men in town that do not cut their own hair.”

This is a paradox for if the barber cuts his own hair, then he belongs to that group of men who cut their own hair. But that is the one grouping of men whose hair the barber does not cut. If someone else cut’s the barber’s hair, then he does not cut his own hair and the sign says that he does. Either the sign is wrong or nobody, including the barber, can cut the barber’s hair.

This paradox, which we should not and will not spend a lot of time discussing, was developed by the mathematician Bertrand Russell and is related to set theory and logic. Much has been done with this problem, both in jest and serious study of what constitutes sets and groups. Paradoxes are those special problems that intrigue us by defying all logic and reason. There are many paradoxes in life but only because we try to apply logic in situations where logic is the one thing that cannot be applied.

It would seem that we are faced with a number of such paradoxes in today’s Gospel and Epistle readings. James says in the Epistle lesson for today, “Are any among you suffering? They should pray.” (James 5: 13) and the disciples are grumbling that others are saving people in the name of Jesus, which to them is a clear violation of the notion that only they, the chosen twelve, can do the work of Jesus.

But the problem is that when we limit ourselves or force our thinking from a limited viewpoint, we are never going to see the whole picture. The problem for the disciples, at least at this point in the Gospel story is that they have lost sight of the true kingdom and think only instead of their own power and territory. Like the early Israelites during the Exodus who reacted to the dangers of their journey with fear, the disciples have reacted with fear and jealousy to the notion that others can heal in Jesus’ name.

Remember that during the Exodus from Egypt, the Israelites were constantly complaining. At points along the journey from Egypt to the Promised Land, they complained about the lack of food and the lack of water. Each time God responded with the needed items. The transition from slavery to freedom was not the easy step they, the Israelites, felt it would be. They would have accepted the comforts of slavery rather than the nourishment of God; they would have traded their freedom for a few leeks and cucumbers.

Even Moses was getting upset with them. “If this is the way you are going to treat me, put me to death at one… and do not let me see my misery.”(Numbers 11: 15)  And when God responds to Moses’ pleas and empowers others to assume the responsibility of leadership, Joshua gets upset. Joshua is Moses’ chief assistant and the heir apparent to the leadership role of Israel; yet, he begs Moses to stop this sharing of power and responsibilities. Here is an opportunity for a community in which all are prepared and willing to share the burdens of the communities. But the one who should most want the additional help is the loudest to complain.

Jesus reacts to the disciples’ complaints by noting that “whoever is not against us is for us.” (Mark 9: 40)  Obviously, our desires to limit the work of God to only our hands or our church or our faith are nothing new. But egoism and territorialism were rejected from the very beginning. God’s prophets will not always speak our language, pray our prayers, or look like us. And we can be sure that spectacular examples of blindness and ignorance will come from our ranks just as easily as they come from others. Only when we assume responsibility for our own faith community and discern together can we hope to see clearly and act rightly.

The prayer that James calls for in the passage that we read today is not a prayer of hopelessness, nor is it a paradox. For we have to look beyond the call of those who are suffering to pray. We need to see that it is a call for the community to act, to come to the aid of those in need.

That is the whole reason for the story of Ester that we read today. From one standpoint, the Book of Ester is in itself a paradox. There is no mention of God or His name Yahweh found in the entire book. Some say that this is because of the author’s chosen point of view.

The author of this book may have felt that the Jewish people who remained in Persia and did not return to Israel (remember this book comes after Nehemiah and the return of the Jews to Israel after the Babylonian captivity) were people cut off from the principal blessings of God. Thus, the absence of God’s name is a way of expressing God’s distance from them. At the same time, the book clearly reveals God’s surprising protection.

The second view is that it is written to explain to the Persian people what the Jewish celebration of Purim is about. It explains the emphasis on the Persian king but writes about the Jewish people in a detached manner. This also may explain why the book is in the only one in the Bible that does not directly mention God.

The Book of Esther is a story of a young orphan girl who rises from obscurity to become queen while hiding a deadly secret. It is a story with romantic love, power, intrigue, and a startling exposé at the end. It is the type of story that could be one of those less memorable made for TV movies. But through the twists and turns it is a story about God’s character. At a time when He seemed so distant, God was preparing to deliver His people.

The celebration of Purim reminds the people of Israel of God’s presence in the community of believer, even believers far away. I think that what we have to remember today is that our community is not a limited one but rather one with many members in many places. And because there are so many who are not here, we must make the effort to reach out to those not here, as a reminder that they are not forgotten.

I would hope that each and every member of the community that is called Tompkins Corners United Methodist Church will join in the birthday celebration when it is their turn. Perhaps we can also include anniversaries as well as birthdays. It is a way of saying thanks to God. And the monies collected will go to Habitat for Humanity, an organization devoted to building communities.

But I also think that we should take the opportunity to send birthday cards to those who are not here. This would serve as a reminder to them that they are not forgotten and they too are a part of the community of believers.

Too often, many churches say to those who are not here that they are not wanted. Sometimes it is a subtle statement; other times it is a bold and brazen one. It sometimes is stated by not sharing tasks, by stating that a particular task is the property of one person only. Sometimes it is said by having the person take on a task without any help from others.

Many churches today seem to be like the disciples, feeling that certain parts of the church and its work are theirs and theirs alone. We also send out messages that Christianity is limited to only a few people. It is limited but those who choose not to hear the word of the Gospel place the limits. Unfortunately, many Christians today feel that they are the ones who can define the limits.

There are many reasons why people are driven from the church. And in a time when membership is declining, it may be that we need to find ways to bring people back. There isn’t a marketing scheme developed that will do this. But if people want to hear the Gospel, there should be a place where they can hear and see the Gospel in action.

If a church is to have a vision of the future, it must see the future through the present. In the words of James, whom will they call if they are sick? For some the answer that James gives means the elderly of the church, those advanced in years. But the Greek term for elders also means those holding positions of authority in the community or in the local congregation and, since our particular congregation has adopted the council as a whole concept, that would mean everyone. The final verses of today’s reading are the final verses of James’ letter to the congregation; they are reminded that what the congregation does will be the final determination of whether or not someone is saved.

If the congregation does nothing to help one person who is lost, then that person is lost. But if the congregation works together to help bring that person back, then the soul is saved.

It is the question that perplexes mankind to this day. In a community where the barber cuts everyone’s hair, who cuts the barber’s hair? In a community where there are believers, who will watch out for the believers if they do not watch out for the lost, the sick, and the troubled?

---

Tarawa

This was supposed to be a piece questioning the motives of those who marched in Washington last weekend. At best, they have a selective memory; at worst, they are representative of days past when the police set the dogs on the children in Birmingham, state troopers beat the marchers on the Edmund Pettis bridge outside Selma and a church with four little girls was bombed during Sunday services.

Let me first say that I am in agreement with them about the nature of government but probably for a whole different set of reasons. There is a limit to the size of any organization, be it a government in general, a government agency, or even something like a church.

When you do not know the people who are the beneficiaries of the work that you do, your organization may be too big. But if one were to ask me “how big is too big?” I am not sure that I would have an easy answer.

The problem for those who marched last weekend is that, at least from my viewpoint, they see any government as too big. It is one thing to cry out against big government and its associated cost but where were these people when the deficit was being run up during the previous administration’s watch? And what will many of these people do if they achieve their goal of no federal medical insurance program and they turn 65 and there is no Medicare, a government-run program?

What are they going to do when the water that they drink and the air that they breathe is so polluted that drinking the water or breathing the air poisons the body? How are they going to travel if there are no air traffic controllers to make sure that planes don’t crash into each other while taking off, landing, or going from point A to point B? It would be nice to know that our money is safe and protected as well.

And what will they do when we must contract out our military obligations to firms like Xe (formerly known as Blackwater)? Who will pay the contractors?

The cry of so many of the people in that march was that government was too big but what parts are they going to cut? For sure, the cries of the Republicans over the years have been to cut social programs but the two biggest bureaucracies in the government are the Defense Department and the Department of Homeland Security. If there is waste in the Education Department, how much waste is in the Defense Department?

There has to be a government and it seems logical to me that it be a federal government. The whole rationale for the Constitution was that a confederation of states, independent in thought and mind, wouldn’t work. But if a government is to be of the people, by the people, and for the people, it must be responsive to the needs of the people.

In one sense, I agree with the protestors who marched last weekend. The government does not respond to the needs of the people. Whatever form the healthcare reform bill takes, it will be thousands of pages long and filled with paragraphs that will bedazzle and baffle even the most experienced legal scholar. And buried in the countless paragraphs will be money spent, not on healthcare reform, but on pet projects of representatives and senators, otherwise known as “pork” and all but designed to benefit political benefactors in their districts.

It is one thing to say that monies are needed in a district to fix the roads and repair the bridges. Lord knows, the road in front of my house could use some work and maybe, just maybe, with the money in the stimulus bill, it might get done. But no one on our street is a major campaign donor and there are some of us who have opposed some of the local politician’s pet projects, so I don’t think we will get the money any time soon.

And while these people are protesting any attempts to reform the healthcare process in this country, they are probably also calling for more troops to be sent to Afghanistan. With the fighting in that country seemingly endless in nature and with the number of dead and wounded seeming to increase, it would only be logical to say that if I don’t care if someone lives or dies in this country because of illness, why should I care if they live or die in some far-off land. And we have already gone on the record that we really don’t care for our veterans when they come home.

It appears that there will be a report out this week (if it hasn’t already gone out) indicating that many of our military leaders wonder what our strategy, what our goal in Afghanistan is. It also appears that there will be some sort of report this week stating that we need to raise the number of troops in that part of the world. Those two points suggest Viet Nam all over again. But they also ask another question.

Where are they going to get the troops? We can forget the draft. If we were to reinstate the draft, it would have more and bigger loopholes than the ones presently in the tax code. So, we must recycle our troops, our strained and exhausted troops! It turns out that a tour in Iraq is different from a tour in Afghanistan, and you are not exempt from being sent to Afghanistan just because someone has done a tour or two or three in Iraq.

But what do we care? We are safe and sound at home as long as the fighting is somewhere else. I hope that those who are against any type of social programs in this country but want to send our troops overseas make sure that their sons and daughters are sent off to front-line duty. Let’s make sure though that they don’t get some sort of cushy jobs in Indiana or Alabama.

I truthfully pray that all our military personnel come home, safe and unharmed with no lingering effects from combat and scenes of death and destruction or watching their friends, buddies and comrades die.

But we, the people of this country, need to know that the policies of the last administration are still in place and no one will ever see the pictures of dead soldiers and marines killed in some far-off land. And there will be no one to welcome the bodies of those killed when they arrive at Dover Air Force Base at midnight. And no one responsible for sending those young men and women overseas will be there when the family has to bury their child and they receive the flag that draped the coffin and they receive the thanks from a grateful nation. It seems to me that such thanks are hollow thanks.

Why did I name this piece Tarawa? Because Tarawa was one of the first of many bloody engagements that would mark the war in the Pacific and the pictures of dead and dying Marines on the reefs of that island were so shocking that the War Department didn’t want them published. They didn’t want them published because to do so would be to show people what war was like. We tried to do the same thing with Viet Nam but when the bodies started coming home in increasing numbers it became impossible to deny the truth. But we have done so in Iraq and we have “sanitized” the war to make it safe. But war is not safe; war is not clean. War is too dangerous and too dirty for the truth of war to be hidden or kept from the people.

What I want is a government that can tell the truth to the people and the people will know that it is the truth; I don’t want my children or grandchildren fighting in a war in a far-off land for a cause that was invented and twisted and then long ago forgotten. I don’t want to worry that my wife or mother or I might have our healthcare cut off when we get sick because it will put a dent in some insurance companies profit margin.

I want a government that is of the people, for the people, and by the people. I want a government that cares for its people all of the time. What I want is a government that cares for its people, its healthy and its sick, its rich and its poor, its soldiers and its civilians.

—————————————-

Cross-posted to RedBlueChristian