Completing the Circle

Many of you know that in August I was blessed to be in just the right position to help start, from the ground up, a non-profit ministry serving the families staying at Reunion Arena who had been forced to leave their homes in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina. We thought we understood how amazing an experience that was at the time.

Only a few days after the Reunion shelter closed its doors I received a call from my dad to go to New Orleans and work as an insurance adjuster. I know that many people think that the term "insurance" is inherently vile in those parts...and maybe now it is. However, because I had the benefit of working for an independent firm which paid me depending on what the insureds received, I was actually encouraged to find every single penny I could. When people learned that we were on the same side, walls and defenses came crashing down. This time was indescribable. I was able to minister in ways I'd never before experienced. The homeowners would often ask just the right questions which revealed that I was a "minister in disguise" (obviously proselytizing was discouraged by the adjusting firm who hired me!) and we would end up praying in their front yard...I saw unbelievable faith in the faces of these people who had nothing else left. We thought we understood how amazing an experience that was at the time.

And now I'm returning. I've accepted a job with the Tammany Oaks Church of Christ in Mandeville, LA - just north of New Orleans. God has used this small congregation to create a life-giving disaster relief ministry. (I recommend checking out the disaster relief blog, here and there is one article in particular that really gives a great synopsis, found here.

I've been asked by this congregation to work with the pastoral and relational aspects of the relief efforts as the Outreach Minister. Looking back over the last 8 months, I believe that God has not only been using me for his kingdom, he has been preparing me for this role...I'm not sure that I would have been ready to accept this position otherwise.

To those who have been praying for us during this wilderness experience, we thank you. We have truly discovered the blessing of community and hopefully will never again take this gift for granted. And to my friends in ministry, I think I know about some potential mission trip/service weekend experiences!

I look forward to seeing many of you as you make mission/service trips to southern Louisiana. Please keep praying for our family as we have no idea what this position will lead to for the long term.

Shalom

Postmodernism and Spiritual FormationPart 3: On Relativism, Anxiety and Doubt

Though there have been a couple people refer to them as such, I don't really consider these writings as an apologetic for postmodernism per se. Rather, I hope that it is always true that my cause for apology is the Gospel of Christ. However, my intentions in these three short posts (they may not be short by blog standards, but given all that is at stake in this conversation, a total of 4500 words can not be considered comprehensive) have been to show that postmodernism is not the natural enemy of the Gospel. I would argue that someone could simultaneously consider themselves a postmodern Christian and an orthodox Christian without having to appeal to a relativistic worldview that says something can be and not-be at the same time. In other words, postmodern Christianity and orthodox Christianity are not inherently mutually exclusive terms. So then does that mean that Relativism is a correct, orthodox teaching? Well, maybe it is for you, but not for me…(for those who are not well versed in sarcasm and humor, that was a joke).

In truth, relativism applied as a universal philosophy is a logical absurdity. If someone holds that everything is relative, then for them, at least one thing is not relative – relativity, therefore everything is not relative for them. Relativism is, I believe, a reaction to the harsh, arrogant, self-absorbed, rigid control of truth wielded without compassion by previous generations. Practically speaking, relativists are often just as harsh, arrogant, self-absorbed and rigid in their control of “truth”. Again, the statement that there is no absolute truth is itself an absolute statement and therefore self defeating.

Moreover, the hallmark of postmodern relativism is tolerance. Art Lindsley, in his book True Truth* has been very helpful to me in dealing with the issue of tolerance. It is the Church, not Relativists, that has the philosophical grounds for tolerance. For without a transcendent Truth, who is to say that being tolerant is good and intolerant bad? On what basis should I be tolerant of you if there is no ultimate truth that says that it is better for me not to ignore, oppress or even kill you? Would a relativist defend the rape of women? The enslavement of African Americans? The Holocaust? Ethnic cleansing in Africa? Widespread arrests and execution of Relativists in America? I think not. Who says that we have the right to believe what is true for us? Who says we have rights at all? If everything is relative then every thing is relative…except this statement.

Christians on the other hand should exhibit more tolerance than we are typically known for. With humility we should consider others better than ourselves. We should look to the interests of even those with whom we disagree. We who believe that God made man in His Image should be actively looking for the fingerprints of the Creator everywhere we fix our eyes. We should never operate from a position of arrogance. But that does not mean that we elevate all worldviews to equal status.

Again, Lindsley points out that it is not arrogant to say that Jesus is Truth if we accept him as Lord and he claimed to be Truth. In fact, if we accept Jesus as Lord and deny that he is truth, we are acting from an extremely arrogant standpoint of claiming to know more than the one we call Lord.

I hold to view that the created universe is noncontradictory. A tree cannot be present and not-present in one place simultaneously. If that is true then God cannot exist and not-exist simultaneously; therefore we cannot say that all religions are equally valid.

In our rush to defend against the danger of Relativism, I think we often make two major mistakes. 1)Relativism as a universal philosophy is unacceptable, but that doesn’t mean that no truth is relative. To say we believe in absolute truth should not have to mean that all aspects and instances of truth are absolute. We shouldn’t have any problem accepting that aesthetics are (at least) somewhat subjective and relative. Food taste is incredibly relative – it can be true for me that seafood is good, while it is definitely not true for my wife. This truth is not absolute, though it seems that there is an absolute at work: we all have preferences when it comes to food, music, art, etc. In our defense against relativism lets not make the mistake of becoming legalists who put burdens on the backs of people without so much as lifting a finger to help them.

The second problem we must be careful of: equating relativism with postmodernism. The two are not synonymous terms. The Relativist philosophy is undeniably one of the negative offshoots of secular postmodernism that has found its way into religious conversations. But there are many people who are sympathetic to postmodern thought who would not consider themselves relativists. We also need to recognize the validity of and deal honestly with the postmodern critique on Truth – humans don’t seem to be very good at discerning that which is absolutely true and that which is shaped by culture and preference.

My son believes that the things he thinks taste yucky are absolutely yucky whether I believe they’re yucky or not. He has not learned to distinguish this belief as something other than an absolute. Could it be that we super-smart grown-ups may have our own list of issues that we cannot separate and understand absolutely? I think so. However when we start to peel away our confidence in human ability what are we left with? Many critics of postmodernism have noted how this cynical, negative view of our (in)ability to understand and know leads to debilitating doubt and terrible anxiety. While I disagree that the negative attitude is inherently a part of postmodern thought (I think it is a definite characteristic of Generation X postmoderns, but the following generation, the Millennials seems to be much more optimistic in general, even in relation to ambiguity) I don’t deny that the doubt and anxiety issue must be addressed.

Why are we anxious? Deconstructionism, which (like relativism) is sometimes mistakenly assumed to be synonymous with postmodernism, creates the terribly anxious situation of chaos. Philosophers whose agenda is the destruction of all metanarratives or coherent worldviews create a situation where there is no firm footing left. However, if there are no controlling metanarratives, then by what standard do they assert their deconstruction philosophy? Again we are dealing with a self-defeating theory that cannot stand up to its own logic.

Yet, if we decide together that there are absolutes but that we, as finite beings are not fully capable of grasping something finite, many people will still be gripped with the same anxiety. If we cannot know the absolutes then there might as well not be any absolutes right? If we can’t predict and control all the variables then how can we sleep? The answer lies in our understanding of the nature of doubt (and conversely, faith).

Doubt is the enemy of the Enlightenment. The goal to master our universe is thwarted by the admission that we cannot know fully. But doubt is not the enemy of Christianity, rather it is an integral part of our life in Christ. Doubt is present when complete knowledge of all variable is absent – only in a situation where there is room for doubt is there room for faith. Remember, faith is being sure of things hoped for, and certain of things unseen (Hebrews 11:1).

In a system that is defined by human ability, doubt and faith seem to be death sentences. Postmodernity seeks to provide, in some ways, a rejection of this system. However secular postmodernism is woefully inadequate to replace the equally inadequate assertions of modernity. Orthodox Christians can claim solidarity with the postmodern community in embracing doubt because we offer the companion experience of faith.

Deconstruction is only a logical fallacy if it is viewed as an end rather than a tool. We engage in the practice of deconstruction all the time. Any time we try to convince another person (or ourselves) of anything, we are engaging in deconstruction. However, if we are not willing to do the hard work of reconstructing we are being irresponsible and perhaps something more sinister. Deconstructionists say that there is no reconstruction to do because there isn’t any overarching metanarrative to reconstruct…but this is a controlling system, a metanarrative is created by omission. By not rebuilding the pile of rubble into some kind of dwelling, then the pile of rubble becomes the dwelling – either way, we have a dwelling. If the rubble is going to operate as a dwelling anyway, then on what grounds do we justify not rebuilding an adequate dwelling? On the basis that there isn’t an adequate dwelling to be built? Then what makes the inadequate dwelling of rubble more appropriate than the inadequate dwelling we tore down?

So we deconstruct the previous assertion that there is no room for doubt, that humans are destined to master our universe, and we rebuild a more appropriate worldview that accepts doubt as part of being human. Yet the very word “doubt” is more than many Christians can bear. Just the word itself seems to conjure a lack of faith rather than its presence. Perhaps it is easier to swallow if we use another word to describe this doubt: mystery. There are things about this universe and certainly regarding God, that are beyond our ability to grasp: they are mysterious in their very nature. These things have always been an important part of our relationship to God. This mystery reminds us that while we are created “in the image” of God, we are not gods.

I’ve said this before, a wholesale acceptance of postmodern thought – even that being offered from Christian thinkers – would be ill-advised, just as would a complete dismissal. There are aspects of secular postmodernity, such as relativism and deconstruction as a universal philosophy that simply do not hold water. But relativism and deconstruction are not the same as postmodernity, they are a couple unhealthy products. The renewed interest (notice I do not describe this as “new”) in mystery and spirituality in the Christian life; the willingness to accept that our perspective affects what we see and that there are limits to our knowledge; a focus on authentic living as of at least equal importance to mastery of presenting propositional truths; all of these are of great value to the Christian community.

While this serves as the final installment (for now) in my current thread of postmodern related posts, I do hope to address that last statement, regarding authentic living, in my next post: "The Stone that Builders Rejected."

*Lindsley, Art. True Truth: Defending Absolute Truth in a Relativistic World. Downers Grove, Illinois: IVP, 2004. Lindsley's book does a great job of pointing out the dangers which have grown out of postmodernism without resorting to pointless name calling and blind fear. This book does an especially good job dealing with issues pertaining to absolute truth and relativism. Much of my defense against relativism in this post was formed by the presentation style found in this work.

Postmodernism and Spiritual Formation Part 2 – Implications for Sp Form Ministry

If we take the view that postmodernism is neither the savior of our times nor evil incarnate, that it isn’t even truly a finished product, I believe we can find helpful implications for spiritual formation ministry in our congregations.

Like it or not we are living in a culture which is becoming increasingly comfortable with ambiguity. Roles that used to be rigidly defined are loosening (some for the better and some not) and definitions that used to be ironclad are becoming more elusive. Throughout all of this transition the language of journey has become in many ways a dominant theme for postmoderns. This seems to signify a shift from thinking of the world as a set of propositions to master to an adventure to be experienced.

The quest or pilgrimage has long contained a spiritual overtone. Pilgrims set out even though they were often unsure of how long their journey would take, what perils they would have to face, or what necessarily would await them at the end of their quest. A quest is different than a trip to the store. Today when we set off to find something, our streamlined process ensures that the product we seek is the focus of the journey, and time is of the essence. However a quest is a different kind of journey. The trip itself (which is not necessarily very streamlined or efficient) is intended to be formative. Obtaining wisdom and growth through the experience is often as important as the final goal (or may be the only actual goal).

Many postmoderns, especially those in the “Emergent Church” circles are ceasing to refer to non-Christians as the “seekers.” The dropping of such language is often seen as a threat to the distinctive message of Christianity. In some cases this may be a valid concern. However, without denying that “once we were not a people, but now we are the people of God” (1 Peter 2:10); without denying that we were lost and now we are found, I acknowledge that I am in so many ways still a “seeker.” I may not be seeking assurance for my eternal dwelling, but there are a lot of things in my spiritual growth that I have yet to attain. For one:

I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead.

Not that I have already obtained all this, or have already been made perfect, but I press on to take hold of that for which Christ Jesus took hold of me. Brothers, I do not consider myself yet to have taken hold of it. But one thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus. Phil 3:10-14(emphasis mine)

And this is where the rubber meets the road for Christians. As Paul goes on to say, we need to live up to what we have already attained. Or as Paul phrased it in Ephesians 4, we need to "walk worthily of the calling we have received." The language of journey is so very appropriate. We are indeed on a journey; a lifelong journey of being conformed to the image of Christ. This is a quest that begins in the cradle and does not end this side of the grave. We are in the process of learning to see more clearly. Though we are found, we are still wandering toward home – sometimes making a straight path and sometimes completely turned around.

The spiritual formation ministry in our congregations should be very intentional about this: that we are journeying with Christ. There is much to learn while on this earth. God is the author of truth: Paul found pieces of wisdom in the pagan poets and we too should claim truth wherever we find it. Our journey may bless us with opportunities to learn countless lessons from numerous cultures - if we are humble enough to admit we still have things to learn. But that does not mean that our story – the story of God’s interaction with humanity, found in the Bible – is just one of many equal voices.

There is a popular way of thinking which says that all spiritual realizations in humanity emanate from God and point us to God. This philosophy claims that the human experience of the spiritual can be found in many places and many theologies, all of which serve to bridge the gap between our physical existence and another metaphysical one. Interspersed throughout this claim are truths which we should not deny. All of these religious experiences are attempts to bridge this gap that we naturally feel between ourselves and something bigger than ourselves. And this urge emanates, I believe, directly from God. These urges find their source in the one God of the universe.

In this way it may be said that all of these narratives can find their place within the larger metanarrative of Jehovah God. That does not make them equal participants in dispensing grace or truth. Rather, like Paul in Athens we find ourselves able to say to our brothers and sisters that we can see how religious they are; we applaud their quest for exploring their spiritual existence; and we would love to tell them about the UNKNOWN GOD. For space reasons, I will not include the text here, but go back and read Acts 17:24-31 again (you can read it for free online at biblegateway.com).

Notice that in the scripture, Paul’s words did not convince many and it does not say that he proceeded to tell them how evil they were or foolish or anything. It just says that he left the council.

In No Man is an Island, Thomas Merton said that the truth does not need us to defend it, just to proclaim it clearly. As for defense, truth can handle its own. (my paraphrased version)

While I think there are situations where we are called to defend the truth, I also believe that many of us could benefit from a little humility where truth is concerned. Perhaps it is our own ego we are defending, I don’t know. But it could be that the postmodern aversion to absolute truth, misguided though it may be, is at least at some level a reaction to the self-centered, self-serving, arrogant and often deadly defenses of truth in our past. As a member of the Stone-Campbell Restoration movement I’ve been shaped both directly and indirectly by generations of staunch “defenders of the faith” who were sometimes as quick to disfellowship an “erring” brother as they were to condemn the pagans in “the denominations.” While I believe that we have learned a bit of grace (for the most part) the damage of our hurtful actions is being felt still.

One of the things that is most often maligned regarding openly postmodern churches is their decision to set aside the language of truth in favor of the language of authenticity. Before we are too quick to bring out the tar and feathers, let’s admit that the sons of Sceva could have benefited greatly from just such reconsideration. These guys were claiming a truth that was not authentic to the way they were living. Claiming authority such as Jesus or Paul (or scripture?) may not have the desired results if our lives are not being formed continually by those authorities we claim.

While I am opposed to dismissing truth altogether, I'm willing to entertain the notion that from time to time my obsession with truth may be blinding me to the real struggle I am having with authenticity. This does not mean that I ignore truth, deny truth or reject the validity of truth, but simply that I admit that my obsession does not make me the final arbiter of truth. I surrender myself to the author of truth and focus my energy on living in authentic relationship with Him rather than functioning solely as a hall-monitor, policing the comings-and-goings of my classmates...you know, specks, planks, irritated eyes, that whole deal.

The final issue that I have space to deal with at this time is the proliferation of single generation churches. These churches, often referred to as “young adult” or “emergent” have taken to heart the advice of many baby-boomer age church growth specialists…much to the chagrin of the baby boomers! The concept of finding a niche and focusing a congregation’s attention in that area is not new. Yet the Emergent church movement has taken this to a new level. Now this is where I’m going to get in trouble…

On the one hand the development of these churches frightens me in countless ways. The answer to our current dilemma in the Church is not more isolation and compartmentalizing. Just as I don’t believe adolescents can adequately learn to be adults by only spending time with other teens, I don’t think that young adults, middle-age adults or senior adults can hope to continue to mature in Christ if they only surround themselves with their peers.

If, in reading this, you have joyfully picked up your torches and hay forks, you may want to hold on a second. Before we are too harsh, I think we need to admit that this has been an approved practice for quite some time. We compartmentalize our ministries so that youth, childrens, women, men, senior adults, singles, young marrieds, those recovering from divorce or chemical dependency, and those who disapprove of all of the above groups each function as their own little fiefdoms. In addition to the compartmentalization of ministries the tyranny of the majority/minority can also create similar effects.

I recently referred to this as a twist on a familiar saying: “You take your toys and go home.” This is happening even now. Groups opposed to anything postmodern or emergent are circling the wagons, so to speak. Those who have a differing view are not tolerated and so in effect these churches have also created their own myopic communities. This statement can not in fairness be applied to all congregations which are hesitant or even opposed to postmodernism. However it may well be fair to say that it is as accurate a generalization as those leveled at the Emergents.

Again postmodern thought is neither our savior nor the Evil One's emissary. There are indeed both struggles to overcome and strengths on which to be capitalized, some of which I've hinted at in this post. At the end of the day, if we are not able to admit in all humility that we "see but a poor reflection as in a mirror" and that we only "know in part" then perhaps we have yet to put our childish ways behind us.

Postmodernism and Spiritual Formation part 1

Anyone who has spent anytime around me or reading this blog will know that I do not fall into the camp of those who despise everything postmodern. In fact, I believe that our culture’s shift of thinking (which we can call “postmodern,” “post-postmodern,” or whatever) has provided the Church with a great opportunity. The world is shaking its collective head clear of the Enlightenment’s refusal to acknowledge the spiritual component to reality – and we have an opportunity as a people indwelled by the Holy SPIRIT to provide reconstruction for their deconstructed paradigms.

And in one way or another it seems that many people are trying to do just that. Here in the blogosphere there is no shortage of forums, blogs and websites dedicated to postmodernism in one way or another. For many in the conservative camp, POMOPHOBIA rules the day. Anything deemed unorthodox is labeled “postmodern” or “emergent.” If a condemned postmodern does say something useful is often either ignored or heralded as remnants of “modern” virtues.

These pomophobics can themselves vary greatly on their response. Many are honestly seeking to engage in dialogue bent on discerning truth and expect the other side to respond in kind. Others have reacted so violently and responded in such an extreme way that they are now posting articles highlighting how God killed Kyle Lake at University Baptist in Waco as a message to the Emergent Church. (I don’t despise people who condemn postmodernism, but that little article was vile and completely devoid of anything useful or holy…well this is a whole other post) Still others, it seems, are simply distrustful of a group who appear to be filling the category where “New Agers” and “hippies” have previously dwelled.

However, critique is healthy during the formation of any philosophical viewpoint. In this case, there is indeed much need for a critical assessment rather than a wholesale endorsement of all things pomo.

POMOPHILIA seems to be another popular mindset these days. Some people, also in reactionary mode, are ready to accept anything labeled postmodern or emergent in a desperate attempt to escape the Church of the Enlightenment. A friend of mine is fond of warning us not to throw out the baby of reason with the bathwater of the Enlightenment. He is absolutely right. Pomophiliacs that quickly discard reason and logic are going to find themselves without a leg to stand on…if they aren’t already feeling it. For Christians, the use of narrative has long been an important approach to sharing the Gospel. That narrative, however, ceases to function as the Gospel when it is disconnected from Jehovah’s interaction with mankind through the Judeo-Christian metanarrative. This does not imply that there is nothing to be gained from conversation with other metanarratives; in truth, we have much to learn from the ways that God has been moving in the communities of all humanity. But when we place all metanarratives, explanations of the human condition, and understandings of the Divine on the same level; when we deny the distinctive character of Christ – even if our motive is to heal the damage done by previous generations of pain inflicted in Jesus’ name – then we have made a mistake equal to or in excess of those from whom we are trying to distance ourselves. Putting candles in a room and practicing Lectio Divina are themselves neither proof for or against the authenticity of a community’s worship or faith.

There is at least one way in which both extremes (phobia and philia) are making what I feel is the same mistake. POMEOSTASIS is defined by Bretster’s Dictionary as the fallacious assertion that the phenomenon currently hailed as postmodernism is a finished, static or stable product. In truth this term is fluid.

For some (usually adolescents and those who oppose pomo) it is defined almost exclusively as a rejection of absolute truth and defense of relativism. For others it has to do with the acceptance of the spiritual realm as one which is at least equal to the physical world in its relevance to the human condition. In addition to its varying use across communities, postmodernism is also being formed and reformed across time. Before we label it as something void of substance, let’s be honest and acknowledge that modern and pre-modern thought also had to go through formation…they did not fall from heaven, no matter how much some of us would like to think they did.

While I don’t claim to be able to see into the future, I predict that absolute relativism will phase itself out eventually. It will become a paragraph in the chapter of the history books referring to this age. First of all, relativism is a self-defeating ideology…it is itself an absolute statement. If you punch a relativist they will deny that you have the right to claim that as appropriate action. Life is directed by absolute truths. This is evidenced by the similarity of communal life across time and geography. Sure all cultures have differences, but there are also so many similarities to human interaction that we must admit that there are things going on below the surface. I believe that the rejection of Absolute Truth often stems more from a suspicion of human ability to comprehend Absolute Truth. If we are again willing to be honest with ourselves it becomes necessary to admit that most groups, Christians very much included, have used a convenient understanding of Truth to justify their abuse of other groups. Were the Crusades a display of Truth at work? The problem with absolute truth is that it can be used as a trump card by who have power and want to keep it or don’t have power and want to take it.

Is this a reason to reject the existence of absolute truth? No, absolutely not. Is it a good reason to be suspicious of claims regarding absolute truth? Maybe. One thing is surely true, if those who defend truth do so with anger and malice the wedge of suspicion will only be driven deeper. I realize that for many, speaking with compassion and humility has become equated with spinelessness…that too is a post for another time.

One of my friends – who doesn’t really seem to be for or against postmodern “stuff” – has told me on several occasions that he thinks this whole deal is simply the usual rejection and rebellion that one generation displays for the previous. In some ways I think he is right. The problem is that we look at everything that is going on and try to place it neatly in one category or another. Sure, there are normal rebellions going on…many people claiming postmodern thought are, after all, young adults. There also seem to be some legitimate paradigmatic shifts occurring simultaneously which make this whole debacle something that will be much more easily sorted out in a couple hundred years. Until then we should argue against relativism without resorting to hyperbole and bashing all things postmodern. In truth there are some great things happening. Great stories of life are being told, people are realizing that they should no longer compartmentalize their faith, and whole groups of previously disinterested persons are willing to hear the Gospel.

And yet we may have a typical American tragedy in the making. My final thought on this issue is our penchant for marketing and consumerism. I have told my friends that when I write a book I’m not going to put a catchy title on it. If I do, and people read it, they may use my title in conversation. This title may become a buzzword. This buzzword may become a fad. And then everyone will hate me.

I realize that this is my own little hyperbolic statement following my admonition against such things. But we are a culture of locusts (another hyperbole…well not really, I think this one’s pretty accurate!). We consume and consume and consume until we have gorged ourselves and begin vomiting out the very thing we couldn’t get enough of moments before. We are already experiencing this “death by marketing”.

I’m not sure how we stop this juggernaut; I don’t know that we can. I do know that both sides of this debate are guilty of blanket demonizations that are not only unhelpful and inaccurate, they often provide the very fuel that the other side needs for its next barrage. In this way we ensure perpetual fighting and insure ourselves against any hope for healthy dialogue.

To be continued…

Marrying our Gomer: further adventures in developing my theology of ministry

DISCLAIMER: Rachel is not my “Gomer.” If you try to tell her that I said she was a prostitute from Biblical times, I will retaliate with Old Testament force!

…I remember my frustration during the period of time when I was trying to convince Rachel that she needed to go out with me. We had become very good friends and she would come over to our house at night and complain about guys…she was clueless.

When I finally broke down and told her how I felt, she wasn’t convinced (surprise, surprise! Many of you are still wondering how I pulled that one off…I’ll never tell!). But interestingly Rachel’s hesitation had less to do with the fact that she was out of my league and more to do with her fear of getting in another relationship. Though it had been quite some time, she still had not recovered from a bad break-up which was making it hard to trust the idea of once again making herself vulnerable. Luckily for me, my persistence paid off and now she’s stuck with me…happily ever after.

I have recently experienced a similar feeling of fear myself. I felt this reticence as I thought about the next church where I would serve. Those who are not in ministry sometimes think that losing your job is losing your job, no matter what you do. While I would never take away from the difficulty of anyone being told that their “services are no longer required”, ministers have the added difficulty of loosing their church family…their support system which should be there to help people through these times.

A wise man in ministry advised me not to see the congregations where I serve as my support system or even my spiritual family but rather to cultivate that community outside with other ministers. This counsel is based on recognizing the very real possibility that any church can let you go at any time. As much as we would like to say that we are working for God, we are being paid by man.

6 months ago…actually as recently as 2 months ago, I was convinced that the only advisable course of action was to resist putting “roots down” anywhere. It made sense that I was going to have to be somewhat of an outsider because I couldn’t risk allowing myself to become vulnerable again. Over the last few years I have developed a network of good friends, which was a definite blessing during these months.

But then a couple things began running through my head. The first was the story at the beginning of this post. There came a point where Rachel had to decide that she would risk another relationship. If she hadn’t, the world would have been deprived of Conner Allan Wells and his famous vanishing finger trick!

And also I thought of Hosea.

We know the story of the prophet Hosea. He was called by God to marry an adulterous woman named Gomer. God knew that she would not be faithful to Hosea, just as he had known that Israel would not remain faithful to him. Hosea was called on to demonstrate God’s love – a love which makes itself vulnerable even in the face of certain betrayal. Hosea would have been so blessed to have witnessed the love of Christ which surpassed even his commitment to Gomer. Christ’s was a love which not only made itself vulnerable, but was willing to forfeit life for the love of an adulterous people.

As a minister, God has called me to demonstrate this kind of love as well. Thankfully in his mercy God allowed me to marry a faithful, loving wife. He has surrounded me with compassionate, loyal friends. And the small thing that I have been asked to do is to make myself vulnerable to a group of people who could possibly (as opposed to “will definitely”) end our relationship in a painful way.

I will take the advice and continue to appreciate God’s blessing of holy friends, but I will also be faithful and marry my Gomer. I must be willing to invest in a community because this is how God calls us to love his children – not with reservation but wholeheartedly, accepting risk as the Lord did by first loving us.

The Birthright of the Margins

There are lots of conversations going on in the political realm regarding morality issues. In many instances the charge for morality is led by Evangelical Christians and the “Religious Right”. There is much good to be said about Christians being willing to risk ridicule or estrangement to fight to protect that which we hold dear. I was recently talking to a friend about the present issue of whether or not the school system should teach Intelligent Design alongside the theory of Evolution. The question he asked me is whether or not the Church should be lobbying Congress for this or other issues. Until now I have been fairly silent on this, but I have finally been roused from my slumber…

Many scholars have debated the exegetical issues with Isaiah 40:3. Should the passage read, "A voice cries out in the wilderness: "Prepare the way of the Lord." or instead, "A voice cries out: "In the wilderness prepare the way of the Lord"? Regardless of how this text is rendered, I think that it holds significance for our discussion here.

The command to prepare a way is given so that all people (presumably the nations as well as Israel) can hear it. But the call is not made from/for the political halls or city gates...it is in the wilderness; that place from which God navigates the unclear paths.

I'm not sure that one couldn't make a case that our political systems today are in fact a wilderness and the prophetic voice of the Lord should be heard from within.

However if we are to prepare a "highway in the desert" we have to at some level leave the discourse of the nations for a time. I often comment that the church has been disengaged for too long now. But we have not gone to the desert to make a highway... we've made refugee camps. We've gone to the desert to die.

A friend of mine recently raised the call to engage our culture rather than ignore it in the supposed name of faithfulness. I agree that often we can use our allegiance to another Kingdom as a crutch and smokescreen to avoid our responsibility, so I applaud what Matt is calling for (check out the post on Little Holy Heroes). With this in mind, I would urge us all to consider the ways in which the Church can regain its birthright of the margins. How do we once again become the place from which Jesus calls to the poor, the oppressed, the weak?

It is only when we identify ourselves as the poor, the oppressed and the weak! We must rejoice in our sufferings and embrace our rightful place at the margins of a secular society. How can we continue to focus on issues like our kids praying in school when to keep from being offensive we don't cry out in prayer away from school? How can we fight for intelligent design to be taught alongside evolution when we our own handling of this vital part of our faith is just in passing…a story for elementary students? How can we expect the government to teach people about the creative aspect of Jehovah God? Do we just want a scientific theory of creation? Of a creator? Which creator then? Which theory? Why?

The important part of our belief in God as Creator is not the way in which the world came about. It is our belief, our faith, that Jehovah God along with the Word is the creative force behind all that is, all that was and all that will ever be.

And this is our story to tell, not the government's.

It was the Church; the disciples of Jesus Christ, who were commissioned go and preach the Good News...not any government. When God's dealings were with a government (Israel), he focused on seclusion not subversion. They were not to try and convert the Canaanites, Jebusites, Amelakites, etc...they were to destroy them and avoid any interaction whatsoever.

This makes perfect sense to me. God's call is not a top-down "come-to-me-because-its-law" approach - except within the ranks of his own people. God is not afraid of proselytizing, its just supposed to come from the mouths of the meek and lowly, not the powerful. Walter Brueggemann has been very helpful on this issue. He shows evidence that God often waits to act until there is no other explanation for victory but God’s deliverance. The Christians are not ever going to be the redemptive force in our society…its always been God and God alone. I pray that we will learn to depend more fully on the Lord. I pray that we will become convinced of our world’s brokenness and our inability to fix it.

When this happens we will cry out to the Lord and he will hear us. That’s always been his promise.

Matt you are right, we need to be challenging the way the world goes about its business. But we must acknowledge that there are separate kingdoms at work here. We seek to be active participants in this world, but never at the expense of our distinctive identity as citizens of a wholly different kingdom.

Perhaps we are called to be the voice of one calling…perhaps we are called to be the ones building the highway. Either way we end up in the wilderness away from the comforts of the city council. We can be a voice to our generation; to our culture; to our country without being just another special interest group on Capital Hill. Ours is the more difficult calling, one that requires more than rhetoric, money and knowledge of Constitutional law. Our calling is predicated on lives not legislation. The life of Jesus Christ and the lifestyle of his Disciples.

Matt points out that we need to highlight the positive things that are happening. He is very right; spiritually mature Church’s know how to celebrate. So let’s celebrate the things we see going on and encourage one another so that this becomes the norm of our identity. Let’s just give it a shot. If the Church in the US decides its okay being marginalized; if we decide that following Christ may just be politically incorrect; that we have redemptive function in our workplaces and classrooms, I’ll wager we won’t have to send crowds to fight for our political agenda.

If this happens and it doesn’t have an effect, then by all means let’s retry legislating morality (I say this realizing and acknowledging Matt’s statement that all laws are a form of morality legislation). However, if we enter this experiment and it does not have any effect on our culture, I admit that I will be forced to reevaluate my faith entirely…

…but that’s a risk I’m willing to take.

The Spiritual Discipline of Love

The past couple weeks have been really hard. This job in New Orleans is all about long hours and stressful days. I enjoy the work, but the “higher ups” don’t make it very easy to do your job around here. Files come in and then are taken away, you get a hard copy of a claim but no electronic – which means you can’t write anything…which means that you can inspect the house but can’t turn in a report, and thus can’t get paid. And then there is the really frustrating “paying your dues” aspect. I’ve been humbled by going from positions of management (running this stuff down here is kinda like running a youth ministry or an extended work camp…its certainly not as hectic as Kids Corp!) to being treated like a worthless nothing. The “supervisors” don’t necessarily have any supervisor training…they’ve just been adjusters for a long time. So they ask for my help fixing their computers, learning new programs and even sending emails – but then refer to me as “little boy” or ceremoniously pretend I’m not in the room…or tell me to leave the room so that the grown-ups can talk. I don’t mind doing menial tasks as the low man on the pole, but I’m reaching the limit of ability to keep my very well-sharpened tongue in its cage.

In the midst of all this I have been reading some exchanges between early leaders in the Stone/Campbell Restoration movement for my Restoration History class at ACU (last class…comps next week…graduation in December!!!) This past week I stumbled across a series of essays over the concept of unity and how to treat others who profess Christ and yet have different understandings of what that means.

I also found a modern-day version of this debate between a friend of mine and a website of “Watch Dogs”…protectors of the Faith. "Watch Dogs"...what a conundrum of a name! I visited their site and it was sadly familiar. I greatly respect the desire of these folks to protect the Church they love. However, like we often experience with adolescents, love must mature beyond insecurity or it isn't actually love at all. When teenagers (and immature adults) are “in love” their relationship is often characterized by insecurity and jealousy. This is often viewed as protection of the beloved. However, in truth the motives here are more self-centered than other-focused. I don’t mean this in a defamatory way, but rather to point out the natural need for an intentional and continued maturation process. Love does not envy. When true love is present, fear is driven out and we can act and react from a standpoint of patience, compassion, peace and trust rather than suspicion or anger.

This love should drive us to protect, but only when an intruder is threatening our loved ones. The problem we run into with our situation is that “Watch Dogs” seem to begin from an assumption that “everyone” is an intruder and should be treated with suspicion…you have to earn the right (through agreement to a certain party-line, proper doctrinal stance, etc) to be called family. But family (supposedly loved ones) are still family even if don’t agree with them, so treating them like an intruder because you don’t like what they say is not love. It is, at best, an immature infatuation.

*************
Sidebar: You’ll notice that I’m not using any specific references to names or websites. This is not because I’m afraid or want to shout critiques from the corners. However, my goal is not to debate, confront or offend any specific person or group of people. My goal with this blog is to engage ISSUES that relate to Spiritual Formation and/or Youth Ministry. Like everyone, this is a learning process for me. One thing I have learned is that people expect critiques to be leveled at an individual and it is very hard to convince them that you are attempting otherwise. I don’t want to fight with anyone! This is not about individuals…it is about the larger ideas behind our individual actions.

Please note: words that are italicized, in bold or underlined do not suggest anger or aggression – these highlighting tools help important points to stand out from the rest of the text. Okay back to the Watch Dogs...
***********

These "Dogs" view it as their Christian duty to police the actions of others and report back to everyone else on just how wrong these bad/dumb/evil/etc people are…and why they should be reprimanded. While there may be a comment (which can often come across as offhand or insincere) about the imperfection of the Watch Dogs, a basic assumption is that they have a grasp on the height and width and depth of God’s nature, His Church and other humans’ actions. This to me seems wrong on so many levels. (Even the choice of "Watch Dogs" as a title...in Scripture, is it ever a good thing to be described as a dog?)

Interestingly, the Dogs seem to often espouse the rhetoric of unity. Unity seems often to be synonymous with ascribing to everything they believe. I stumbled across the blogs of some of these Watch Dogs just yesterday and, as always, I wish I’d just navigated away from the page as soon as I realized what it was. However, like a motorist on 635 craning my neck to see an overturned car in the other lane, I read on. A sour mood hung like a cloud over the rest of my evening.

The Unity movement - one of the fundamental tenets of the Stone-Campbell Restoration movement - seeks the unity of all believers under the banner of Christ. The Watch Dogs have shown me how dangerous it is to seek this unity on the basis of doctrine rather than behavior; of creeds (even the creed of anti-creedalism as in my own corner of the family tree) instead of conduct.

This doesn’t mean that doctrine or statements of belief are not important. Rather we should seek our unity based on the faith and following of Christ, and work out the other differences within the confines of a mutual love and respect shared between brothers/sisters.

Interestingly, these comments are probably enough to place me on the "bad list" with several of my brothers/sisters who are most ardent about unity.

I don’t intend to estrange or attack – though I admit my patience is tried by this subject. Neither would I ever suggest that everything is relative and that we should just chuck our convictions to the wind. However, I believe quite strongly that if I, or anyone else on this earth (Watch Dogs included) were judged on the basis of right doctrine and freedom from error, we would be undone. I hope that my understanding of God’s Law is maturing and developing along with my spiritual growth. With that said, I must then acknowledge the probability that there are things I am ignorant of or erroneous on at any given time which will require God’s grace.

It is much easier to find fault, raise defenses and circle the wagons than to truly seek "as much as it is up to us, to live at peace with everyone." As you pointed out Nate, we can easily come to believe that we are appointed by God to do the "guarding" and elevate our opinion to that of Sage and Prophet. The pride and seclusion that come along with believing we are our own ambassadors is difficult to combat. I’ve definitely seen that at work here in Louisiana. Without structure there will be strong ones who rise up and take a position like that of Watch Dog – without the necessary accountability or integrity. It is, to say the least, a stretch to think that if we all go our separate ways and study that we’ll all come to the same conclusions and consensus will be achieved. This is often described as trusting in the Holy Spirit or the Scriptures to clearly communicate the message of the Gospel with no “iffy” sections. However, this manner of discernment does not promote faith in God so much as faith in human ability and reason…we just don’t call it that. You can put religious or faith language on it, but we’re still talking about our ability to discern. The Unity movement, if based on human ability and reason, should be abandoned. If, rather, it is based on faith and hope in Christ’s interaction with humanity then it should be revisited, strengthened and supported with all that we are and all that we have. And then it should be proclaimed that there is indeed Good News for the oppressed, that it is Christ and not reason, doctrine or ability that will provide salvation.