Pilgrim Musings

The Words We Use

2011-05-29T19:49:00.000-04:00

My mom is a Quaker… really. No, she doesn’t dress like that Quaker guy you see on the Quaker Oats box but she speaks in that “old” style using “thee” and “thy” and “thine.” It’s not completely like listening to someone read the King James bible. She doesn’t put “-eth” (“cometh” and “sayeth” and such) at the end of verbs. But she does say things like, “How does thee feel today?” To me, it was completely normal. My grandparents (her mother and father) spoke the same way as did my aunt (her sister). It was not something they “put on.” They really spoke that way, all the time to everybody. That was just their language. That was normal.

When we (me and my siblings) were kids, my mother explained on several occasions that it was called the “simple” language. You see, in the days when everybody used that kind of language, there were two ways to address people. When you spoke to someone, one would normally use the more formal “you” to address them if they were not immediate family or close friend. If it was someone with whom one had a more intimate relationship, then they would address with the informal “thee.” For example, if you were at the hardware store, you might ask an employee, “Do you have drywall screws?” But if you were addressing a family member you might say, “Where did thee put the drywall screws?” “You” was formal and “thee” was informal. The two were never confused. Some modern languages (such as German) still have such a differentiation between the formal (“sie”) and the informal (“du”) “you.”

Quakers believed, however, that, in Christ all their relationships were fundamentally changed. Christ leveled the playing field, as it were. Consequently, Quakers (or, more properly, “Friends”) addressed one another with the informal “thee” regardless of relationships or status. Neighbors, co-workers, and even community officials (as well as family) were addressed as “thee” because Christ brings that kind of family “status” to all believers. Even God – Father, Son and Holy Spirit – were addressed with the informal and more intimate “thee” because of the new relationship established by Christ for the believer. This is why, when you read many older translations of the Bible, especially the psalms, God is always addressed with “thee” and “thou” and “thine.” It was an expression of the intimacy established through Christ by God with believers, his adopted spiritual children.

It’s interesting to note that most people who continue to use “Thee” and “Thou” and “Thine” when addressing God in prayer and worship use those words to imply, not a sense of informality but of formality. They doesn’t necessarily mean to imply a lack of intimacy with God. Indeed, many use it as a sign of deep respect, of God’s transcendent being, that though God calls us to intimacy with himself we must be ever mindful of his “otherness.” “Thee” is considered the appropriately formal way to address God. Not quite the opposite but something different from how it was first intended.

I recently heard someone pray addressing God with “thee” and “thou” and “thine.” This person later shared that this was the way he was taught to address God and that to address God as “you” was a breech of protocol; it was too cavalier.

I’ve often thought that so much of the time, many people want to come to God in a rather cavalier manner. “God is always with me; he’s my friend, my buddy.” While, in one sense, that certainly is true, it is only one aspect of the relationship between God and his people. While God certainly brings us into intimacy with himself through the person of Jesus Christ, God is still the Almighty, the Sovereign. He is still transcendent while he is imminent. He is the friend of sinners while he is still the King of kings and Lord of lords. We must never forget that part of what happened in the Incarnation is that God sacrificed simply in taking on human flesh. God the Son never sacrificed his ontological being as the Second Person of the Trinity. What he sacrificed was using that aspect of his being for the sake of his being: “Though he was in the form of God he did not deem equality with God something to be grasped at.” Simply in taking on the form of Man, God sacrificed. Jesus himself made it clear that he came to serve, to be a servant. He gave up the right to his authority as God and served, not just the Holy Father but also unholy man: “Rather he emptied himself and took the form of a slave being born in the likeness of men. He was known to be of human estate and it was thus that he humbled himself…” How much greater, then, was the sacrifice by his death on a cross: “…obediently accepting even death on a cross.”

We’d like to think it doesn’t much matter how we address God. Perhaps the auditory shape of the sounds we make doesn’t much matter. What matters, however, is what “shape” our heart is in. Perhaps in addressing God in prayer and in worship it does matter what words we use because we invest those words with meaning. What is our intent when we approach God? What is condition of our heart? With what attitude do we come to God? Might it not be possible that the words we use are a revelation of the shape of our heart?

“Thee?” or “You?” I don’t know if one is more appropriate to use in addressing God than the other. More than likely, however, giving careful attention to the words we use in prayer and in worship (including the songs we sing) might just bring our attention to the thing to which God gives his attention – our heart.

The Problem Is Not "Formalism"

2010-09-04T09:01:00.002-04:00

Due to some of the exchange that's taken place on my facebook page regarding "Dead Formalism", i wrote a short piece there in the comments section and decided to make it a separate post here.

I think i need to explain that this is not limited to corporate worship... it's not even what i had in mind when i wrote it. This is about the heart. Jesus was quite clear when he talked about the uselessness of words uttered as if the word...s alone were sufficient for prayer. If you remember he castigated those who uttered "vain repetitious prayers." So does that mean using particular words more than once in prayer make the prayer a "vain repetitious prayer"? If so, then what are we to do with the prayer Jesus gave his disciples when his disciples asked him to teach them how to pray? Is that prayer (the Lord's Prayer) considered "dead formalism" or "vain repetition"?

Again, the issue is not with formalities... or lack thereof. Repetition itself is not the problem. And simply changing from one to the other (formal to informal or vice versa, repetition to wholly original or vice versa) is not the solution, either. The solution is getting one's heart right!

John Michael Talbot wrote a book called The Fire of God that i highly recommend. While he talks about various kinds of "fires" that can burn within us (and consume us!) he is talking about passion. It is *passion* that is the issue, regardless of the "form."

God gave us forms because we, ourselves as physical creatures in a physical creation, are creatures of form. Jesus came in "the form of man." Formal forms (formalism) are good.

"Dead" is the enemy, not formalism.

So-Called "Dead Formalism"

2010-09-02T12:24:00.003-04:00

I re-read an old blog post this morning in which the term “dead formalism” was used. The writer was contemplating one of the feast days (the formalization of a certain day in the year to encourage contemplation of a particularly significant historic or person) of the Catholic Church. The particular feast day on which he was commenting was the Feast of the Transfiguration. What he noted was the difference between his perception of such formalizations prior to his conversion to the Catholic Church and how this formality now gave him opportunity and drew him in to contemplative thought of what this feast day commemorated – the Transfiguration of Christ. (The blog is Heart for God.) It got me to thinking, again, about formalities.

“Dead formality” seems to belong exclusively to the realm of religion at least in the mind of many protestants but even more so among most evangelicals . But isn't that rather hypocritical? Aren't there are lots of occasions and situations in which formality is not only preferred but appropriate and perhaps even required. Why is religion singled out as the realm of “anti-formalities”?

The military is one area in which formality is absolutely essential. Formality is not simply preferred in settings conferring military personnel to particular ranks but even required when it comes to a large part of their initial training. Some people (and by “some” I mean “many” if not “most”) prefer at least a certain degree of formality when it comes to high school proms and various kinds of ceremonies such as graduations. Weddings are typically very formal as are funerals. Induction into particular political offices are highly formal. Are any of these assumed to be “dead formalities”? Even in the area of religion, the installation of a church official to a particular office is quite formal – that is, it's done in a certain way (although that way may differ from religious group to religious group) to draw attention to the importance of the event. In the U.S., we have particular days that we have formalized as a way of drawing attention to a person or an event or even an idea. We have “Memorial Day” and “Martin Luther King, Jr. Day” and “Breast Cancer Awareness Month” and lots of other formalized days and weeks and months. Are these observances “dead” due solely to their formalization?

The examples I’ve cited are not “dead formalities” unless we deem them to be so. They are intended to draw attention to and encourage contemplative thought bringing, hopefully, some kind of positive response not only individually but even, at times, socially. The same is true in the area of religion. Formality is not inherently “dead.” A formality becomes “dead” if we make allowance for that, if we make a conscious choose to identify it as “dead.”

Jesus Christ brings life. Consequently, because of Christ, even that which is dead holds the potential for something that is full of life and even give life. But it's a choice, not an inevitability. How often are evangelicals enjoined to read the scriptures and pray and worship (among other things) even and, perhaps, particularly when they don't want to do so. Does that mean that these three things are “dead formalities.” Again, if, in the mind of the practitioner (or critic) such practices are a waste of time then, yes, probably, they are. But for the one who doesn't want them to be “dead” then they aren't even when they don't offer the preferred “feelings.” Christians should know better, that “feelings” simply don't tell the whole story. Just because something “feels” dead doesn't mean it is dead or that it must necessarily remain dead. Is there not something about this to be learned from the believers conversion from death to life in Christ let alone Christ's own death and resurrection?

The truth is we need formalities in our lives for precisely the reason the author (of the blog post I mentioned at the beginning of this article) discovered. As human beings, we are incredibly absent minded and can be outrageously myopic in our approach to life in general. Without certain formalities to remind of us and encourage us to refocus on important things (events, people, etc.) we are inclined to lose our selves in ourselves. And if we persist in such a state, we ontologically implode. Selfishness is the antithesis to all we deem morally good.

It is right to eschew the “dead” of dead formalism. But we dare not forget, no less lose the life given to us by God formally through Christ and his Church.

The Goodness of God

2010-08-19T20:15:00.005-04:00

The goodness of God exceeds our greatest need for goodness. If we can dream of how good God might truly be, we must realize that His goodness exceeds even that - not only in quantity but also in kind. And then we must realize that is exactly what has come to us, what God has given us in Jesus.

How often do we come to God asking Him for something we know is obviously good but do so in a panic and with fear that God might withhold that good from us? We can hardly imagine anything better than the good we hold in our mind. We panic because we believe that if God does not grant this good thing to which we cling - even though we don't even have it in our possession - that we will die! or at least some part of us will die. Yet is the promise God has given to us in Christ that there is no good thing that he will withhold. Our problem is that we believe we know better than God what is best even though we do not have sufficient knowledge to know what is best let alone sufficient power to obtain it. And so we fret and fear and, basically, doubt that God wants to or can give us the good we seek.

Can we trust that God really is so good that he will not withhold any good thing from us? Can we trust that God is really so good that he will wait until the perfect moment to deliver that good to us? Can we trust in the goodness of God so that we can yield our most cherished dreams, our most carefully developed plans, and our highest expectations, even to the point of embracing disappointment and heartbreak, humiliation and suffering, even persecution and destitution knowing that God will deliver on his promise because God is good?

I ask you these questions but, more to the point, i ask myself these questions. I have failed miserably to give a positive reply so many times. I suspect you may have, also, at least to some degree. But the greatest goodness that we have from God is that if we will, in deep humility, trusting in God's goodness, go to him and admit our failure and his goodness to us, especially when have been anything but good, then we discover his goodness again for the first time. Then we can hear Jesus say to us, again, "I do not condemn you. Go and sin no more."

The goodness of God exceeds our greatest dreams and desire for goodness, for some-one to be good to us. God is good. God is love.

Wheat and Grapes

2009-07-13T21:13:00.000-04:00

Jesus said, “This is my body…” speaking of the bread he blessed and broke at his last supper with his closest disciples. He also said, “This is my blood…” speaking of the wine they would drink at that same meal.

Both the bread and the wine are made from individual pieces or items – individual grains of wheat for the bread and individual grapes for the wine – that need to be crushed in order to be joined with the other crushed pieces to make the products of bread and wine. The bread can be made only after the wheat is crushed together. The wine can be made only after the grapes are crushed together. If the wheat and the grapes are not crushed, loosing their individuality in the process, they remain only wheat and grapes. And it is only after the wheat is crushed and made into bread that the bread can become the body of Christ; only after the grapes are crushed and made into wine can that wine become the blood of Christ.

I have to wonder if there is not a lesson here for us – for Christians and for the Church. God takes the wheat of our lives to make our lives bread and then as Christ himself. However, we must first be “crushed.” In the hands of God, we become the Body of Christ – both in an individual sense and in a corporate sense – but not apart from first being crushed.

We work so hard at avoiding being crushed. Does anyone imagine being crushed to be a pleasant experience? It really destroys us! Perhaps, however, that is precisely the point. We must be destroyed, in a sense. Perhaps this is the thing Jesus is trying to tell us: “The one who tries to save his life will lose it but the one who loses his life for my sake will save it.” We must embrace those things that would into our lives that would crush us and allow ourselves to be crushed. Perhaps it is even more than just allowing ourselves to be crushed. Perhaps it is even that we need to be intentional – not that we crush ourselves but that we both keep from stepping back from those “crushing experiences” and even stepping right into them… deliberately!

But this is so counterintuitive. It is not our first inclination. (At least, it’s not my first inclination.) We want to defend and protect ourselves. The paradox is that, if we give ourselves to a defensive and protective life, we die. What Jesus teaches and demonstrates to us, however, is that, if we both refuse to defend ourselves and even step directly under the weight that would crush us, even though we die, it is only then that we live with and in his life.

The Paradox

2009-06-26T10:56:00.001-04:00

Each week I lead a vespers service at our church. Originally, the senior pastor had started this, leading this weekly vespers service. There were approximately 8-12 people, including myself but other than the pastor, who joined in this prayer time. Sometimes we’d have 15 or 16 people attend, sometimes only 6 or 7. When the pastor couldn’t be there for whatever reason, he usually called on me to lead the service which I was glad to do. The pastor has since retired from this church and I have taken the lead role.

Since the pastor’s retirement, the “regular” people to join in the vespers service has dwindled down to two others plus myself. Frequently, however, I am there praying alone as the two “regulars” are periodically away on various service oriented projects. While I would certainly love to have more people regularly join me for this prayer time (one that I think is invaluable for both the Church as well as the church), I have found these solo prayer times to be quite marvelous in their own way.

I have four “times” of prayer that I had adhere to fairly consistently each day. These are most often “solo” times although I am often aware that there is “heavenly host” that is also attendant – both angels and the saints who have gone on before me. I am usually conscious of the Holy Spirit’s presence and participation (although this isn’t nearly as much a feeling as it is of an understanding of the scripture’s information about how the Spirit helps us in our prayers). All that to say this: Personal/Solo prayer time is something with which I am quite comfortable and “practiced,” although certainly not perfect.

The point I’m getting to, however, is that it is particularly during those times of weekly vespers/evening prayers at the church that is unique for me, even though what I’m doing, technically, is no different than what I do during my other prayer times. It is especially during vespers – and even more so when I am alone during that time – that I become sharply aware that I am not at all alone as I pray. I become aware of praying with the Church. It’s not just praying in the church or offering prayers and praise to God as probably many Christians are doing at that moment but I become very much aware of being part of something much larger, joining with the Church of the ages and of eternity, joining with that “great cloud of witnesses” spoken of in Hebrews, being aware of them also interceding on my behalf and interceding with me for others and for God’s glory in ways that they now understand far better than they did when they walked this earth, far better than I could possibly grasp, now. I become aware that there are angels who strain to understand the mystery in which I am engaged but cannot fathom but are sent by God as ministering spirits to help me in that moment.

I find it fascinating, this, the paradox – it is in earthly solitude that I discover myself among the heavenly multitude.

Safety

2008-09-22T07:50:00.004-04:00

It's been quite a long time since I've posted anything, here... even though I have three or four posts started waiting to be finished. This one, however, is short enough to post now.

After having read God's Will - My Will at the Heart for God blog, I was prompted to post what i wrote in my journal this morning (with slight emendations):

Show me your mercy, Lord, and keep me safe.

As I prayed that antiphon this morning, I looked up at the crucifix that hangs on the wall in the study. (I’m usually facing the crucifix during prayer in the morning.) Safety, for Jesus, was not the avoidance of the cross but the arrival at the destination - the resurrection.

So often I think of being safe in terms of being able to avoid pain, threat of death and even conflict. But, at least in this moment, it seems to me that here is another area in which I need a radical “re-learning.” I need to understand that being kept safe is not about avoiding the cross (any cross!) but arriving at the destination – life with Jesus!

A heart to follow Jesus is God's mercy. It is far safer to follow Jesus even when it leads through flood, fire, famine or even fatality than to follow anyone else... even, and perhaps especially, our own self-serving inclinations.

As Wayne Watson put it in song: I'd rather walk in the darkness with Jesus than to walk in the light on my own.

Or as Jesus put it: Take up your cross and follow me.

Those Who Mock Jesus

2008-03-20T18:55:00.003-04:00

Those mockers of Jesus, they're so cruel, so self-righteous, so arrogant. At best, those who mock Jesus are ignorant. From the cross, though, Jesus prays for them: Father, forgive them. They just don't know what they're doing. Those soldiers who mocked Jesus couldn't have understood what they were doing let alone to whom they were doing it.

Throughout a good bit of my day I frequently pray, "Lord, have mercy on me." What has occurred to me of late, however, is that behind that prayer is a heart that is really asking God to make my day easier, more comfortable. I'm not dealing with issues of disease or broken relationships. just "old man" problems and people who irritate me. Most of my daily problems are really rather benign. I don't have enemies waiting to attack me. Just people who think I drive too slow... or too fast. I'm not in financial poverty. I just wish I had a little more money. I want comfort, ease, pleasantness and pleasure. It's not as if my life is lacking these things at all. What I really want is for my life to be easier, more comfortable, more pleasant, and much more pleasurable. I claim to be a Christian but the interests of my heart betray me. Jesus never pursued comfort, ease or pleasure. Oh yes... just before he went to the cross he did ask God if He might remove the painful ordeal he was bound to face. But there was a caveat, a condition Jesus included: More than anything else, Father, I want what you want. Whenever Jesus prayed, it was always for the sake of the desire of the Father to be fulfilled.

To be a Christian means to be a Christ follower, someone who seeks and strives to live his/her life in a way that is consistent with the teachings and model Christ offered. In reading the gospels it seems pretty obvious that the pursuit of ease, comfort or pleasure (or even happiness) was not the practice of Jesus. His agenda was to love his Heavenly Father with all his heart, soul, mind and strength. Whatever the Father wanted was the most important purpose of any moment for Jesus - regardless of the apparent and immediate cost to himself.

And then I look at myself, again. Is my life lived in imitation of the life of Christ? Do I strive for each moment of my life to be lived as if consumed with a passion for the one whom I call my Lord? Or is my life more a mockery of His? Do I justify selfish pursuits - even for just a moment? Do I live as ignorantly as those soldiers spoke?

Maybe I am among those who mock Jesus.

Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.

What Did He Mean?

2008-02-01T21:08:00.000-05:00

Here's the statement Jesus made:

I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him. (John 6:53-56)

Here's how some of Jesus' disciples responded:

From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him. (John 6:66)

Here's how Jesus reacts to that:

You do not want to leave too, do you? (John 6:67)

And here is one disciple's reply (apparently speaking for others as well as himself):

Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. We believe and know that you are the Holy One of God. (John 6:68-69)

Now here's the question I ask: What did Jesus mean when he said eat my flesh and drink my blood? If he didn't mean that literally, why were the disciples bothered by that? If they misunderstood Jesus (thinking he meant it literally when he didn't) then why don't we have record of Jesus saying something like, Wait, let me explain what I mean. Why did Jesus let them walk away?

I realize arguing from silence is, at best, tricky if not dangerous. But we do that with other passages of scripture - like the time Jesus tells the rich young ruler that he would have to sell everything he owned, give it all to the poor, then come and follow me. When the fellow hears that, he walks away quite sad. Why? Because he knew Jesus meant what he said literally. If he misunderstood Jesus, wouldn't we have record of Jesus trying to explain what he really wanted him to do? Or at least some commentary from the writer explaining what Jesus meant? (After all, that's exactly what we have when Jesus talked about tearing down "this temple" and he would rebuild it in three days - the gospel writer explains that Jesus wasn't talking about the human built temple but the temple of his body.)

Aaah... I know. Someone might say, "But he was speaking in hyperbole." We know Jesus used hyperbole as a teaching tool. He said, "If your right eye causes you to sin - gauge it out. If your right hand causes you to sin - cut it off." Well, maybe it was hyperbole... or maybe not. After all, is it really the eye or the hand that actually causes a person to sin? Or is it actually something else that is the "cause". Maybe this example really isn't hyperbole.

So back to my question. What did he mean about eating his flesh and drinking his blood... if he didn't mean it literally? I'm open to explanation...

Heart for God

2008-01-28T09:17:00.001-05:00

A dear friend of mine (except for my wife, he is my closest friend) "crossed the Tiber" last year when he and his wife were received into the Catholic Church. David (along with his wife, Libby) had been in pastoral ministry in what most would call the Evangelical Church for the past 30 years, made a bold step of faith in obedience to the Spirit's call by leaving a Brethren in Christ congregation he had pastored for 18 years. God gave David a vision for a ministry dubbed Heart for God. He appeared on EWTN a couple weeks ago on "The Journey Home" and, as a result of viewer response to that appearance, has launched a web log by the same name, Heart for God.

David hasn't posted much of his story (yet) but I expect it will come out in bits and pieces over time. What he shares and has written to date, however, is insightful and something the Church - in all its current permutations - very much needs.

Epiphany and the Evangelical Church

2008-01-06T22:39:00.000-05:00

I've discovered Epiphany - the season and celebration of that season. Oh, I've known about Epiphany for many years... that it had something to do with the end of the Christmas season and the visit of the magi to the Christ child (which, if you notice in the scriptural text, took place at a house Mary, Joseph and Jesus were staying at and not in the manger where he was born). But I never paid close attention to it. After all, I AM a proud (but pious) Evangelical Anabaptist - or, at least I was.

Epiphany is about what the word means - a revealing. In the liturgical calendar, Epiphany is about the revealing of God to the world, and, more specifically the message that God's revelation is for all the world - not just "God's chosen people" but for all. The Magi, men considered to be gifted in wisdom from a culture and custom totally outside of the Jewish faith; men who, possibly, were steeped in Zoroastrianism and astrology, and were moved by their own customs to seek out a unique person - one whom they understood to be a "new king." And they were guided, according to their own understanding and wisdom (as flawed as it may be as a reliable guide for making life decisions), to discover this "new king." Little did they know he was "new" not only chronologically but also in kind - a king who rules not simply by decree but by humble service to all.

Epiphany is a reminder to the Church of her mission in the world - that just as Jesus was sent into the world to reveal himself as the light of the world (represented by the magi), so is the Church to go into all the world to reveal Jesus. It's not just about the words the Church speaks but the life the Church demonstrates - just like Jesus.

Epiphany has got to be at least as important to the Church as Christmas and Easter (and, I would include, Pentecost). It seems to me that Epiphany is perfect for the Church in terms of its emphasis (and, for some, its hyper-emphasis) on evangelism, outreach and missions.

So how come so much of the Evangelical Church skips over Epiphany?

Four Resolutions

2008-01-01T11:33:00.001-05:00

My library (a wall in my study at home) is filled with books that describe what it means to follow Jesus. And, I suppose, it's a library that could be added to hundreds of times over with more books describing what it means to follow Jesus.

I haven't actually made resolutions for I-don't-know-how-long. Based on my prayers for the past several years, though, here is my list of "resolutions" for myself - not just for 2008 but for the rest of my life.

1) Wisdom. It's not just saying clever things to people or choosing healthy foods and exercise, it's also taking the risk to do the right thing when the expected thing is so much more appealing but contrary. Jesus had the knack, not just of saying and doing the right thing, he had the personal context, a foundation for those things. He knew the scriptures, he knew the history of God's work in the world, and he was wholly devoted to God's purposes and plans. Nothing deterred him... not discomfort (emotional or physical), not social ostracization, not even death. Wisdom is the right thing even though something else might feel better or be easier (emotionally or physically). My resolution is to chose wisdom in every conscious choice.

2) Humility. God is a humble God. Again, we see this in Jesus most clearly. Those earliest Christians sang a hymn that included this: Even though he was the form of God he did not deem equality with God something to be grasped. Rather he emptied himself and took the form of a slave, in the likeness of Man. And in that form, humbled himself even further by submitting to death, even death on a cross. (Philippians 2) It means accepting every difficulty and obstacle to my ideas and goals as the perfect opportunity to rest in the gracious sovereignty of God. My resolution is to devote myself to making the honor of God the focus of all I do, all I desire, of every choice I make.

3) Hope. 21st century western civilization is fast becoming - and may already be - a culture of hopelessness. We're full of wishful thinking but our only expectation seems to be the Preacher's mantra - this, too, is futile and pointless. (See Ecclesiastes) Jesus demonstrated that there is, indeed, one hope, one reason, one purpose, one goal for which to strive - the honor and glory of God. Hope isn't just an idea; it is an actively pursued attitude. My resolution is to ground my hope not just in the scriptures but in the very Word of God - and that Word being incarnate. It also includes avoiding those things that feed a false or defective hope.

4) Love. Is this too obvious? Jesus simply loved people. Being God, he loved - and loves - people supremely. The right understanding and practice of love comes directly from God and most clearly demonstrated to us in his Incarnation. Jesus is Love Incarnate. My resolution is that I will love each person with whom I connect better this year - love when it is inconvenient, love when it costs me, love for the sake of the one to be loved and not my sake, love because that is what it means to be made in the image and likeness of God. What is greater?

Sounds pretty lofty, doesn't it? Sounds like I'm probably going to fail a lot, huh? Sounds nigh unto impossible to achieve. Actually, I probably will fail a lot... but I'm depending on the grace and mercy of God both when I do fail and for lots of times of success. Perhaps, if I can strive for some activity each day that is a manifestation of at least one of these, I can begin to string together a whole series of activities that develop into habits consistent with these resolutions. It's the habits that develop the life.

At 52 (nearly 53) it seems most daunting... but at 52 (nearly 53) I have no more time to fool around - less today then yesterday and even less tomorrow.

The Way and The Truth

2007-12-26T18:28:00.001-05:00

What follows is an excerpt from a meditation for Wednesday, Dec, 26, 2007 found in Magnificat. The meditation is by Monsignor Lorenzo Albacete. His description of the answer to life's questions that the Church offers is, I think, spot on. Let me know what you think.

[Christians] do not seek solutions to the problems of life derived from religious sentiments, spiritual approaches, or philosophical convictions. We do not have answers to questions. In each circumstance of life, whatever it is, we seek not an answer but a Presence, the human presence that is the way to the "Answer," to the Truth. We do not come together as Church to find intellectual answers to our questions about the meaning and purpose of life.This is to reduce the Church to an ideology. We come together not to find answers but to learn how to recognize and affirm a Presence. The Church is not "our way" of finding answers to our religious quest for the Truth; it is the method through which the Truth becomes humanly present to us. As the prolongation of Christ's presence in the world, it is the method through which the Truth becomes incarnate for us... We come together as the Church to learn how to recognize the fact of this Presence, and to witness to it in any circumstance of life, especially when there are no answers. Jesus Christ is the way to the Answer. In him, way and answer coincide.

Secret Advent

2007-12-23T04:40:00.001-05:00

This year, Advent has taken a re-turn, of sorts, for me.

Twenty-five years ago I spent several Christmases working at a local florist, preparing as well as delivering flowers and flower arrangements. The week of Christmas was always a 100-hr week. Did that for ten years... and instead of loving Advent, Christmas and all that went with it, I began hating it. I had all the expectation of the "joy, wonder and splendor" but was so blitzed that, if it was there, I didn't enjoy it. It began a cycle of depression each year during Advent/Christmas that I had to fight (not always successfully) for many years.

For the past several years I haven't had to battle that depression so much largely because I was engaged in exactly all the "joy, wonder and splendor" of Advent and Christmas. Don't misunderstand. There were plenty of times that I didn't feel that joy but those were largely relegated to short periods of time for various reasons. For the most part I could give my time and attention to Advent and to Christmas. That's what I loved doing.

But this year it was back to having to live in the distraction. I deliver packages for FedEx, now. I didn't have a 100-hr week, but the effect was pretty much the same - exhaustion and distraction. I was not able to take the time for prayer as I had been doing, for the most part, every day this year. The habit I've been working on - intentionally stopping for 10 minutes or so three or four times during the day (mid-morning, noon and mid-afternoon) to pray using the Liturgy - had to be put on hold. So much to do, it seemed that wouldn't allow for those 10 or even 5 minutes. And when I wasn't working, I was so tired that when I got home I usually just ate and went to bed, then got up to go to work the following day. Mornings were radically altered from my usual 45 minutes of prayer because I needed sleep (sleep depravation and driving are NOT a wise combination). Evening prayer usually failed as i would fall asleep so quickly when i sat still for a little while.

I decided, however, that I would simply do what I could do and not fret over what I couldn't. So I prayed, as best I could, throughout the day. It wasn't just praying for help with deliveries. I frequently prayed the prayers I'd learned from the Liturgy... the Invitatory, the Benedictus, the Magnificat, the Gloria, the Te Deum, and, of course, the Lord's Prayer. It was worship. It was wonderful.

I had read something about working in such a way so that my work became my prayer. I don't know if I accomplished that or not. But I took time at mid-morning, noon and mid-afternoon to stop and pray even if it was for just a minute or two: O God, come to my assistance. Lord, make haste to help me. Glory to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit. As it was in the beginning is now and will be forever. And then I would pray the prayer Jesus taught his disciples to pray: Our Father, who art in heaven... There were lots of times I'd get busy and forget... but I kept at it and, sometimes, said my prayer as i drove or even ran to a door with a package.

I listened to Christmas music (yeah... I know, it's still Advent, but you know what I mean) and reflected on the words. Not the "Grandma got run over by a reindeer" stuff, but the carols and hymns of the Church. I listened to a lot of John Michael Talbot and Michael Card, focusing particularly on songs that included Advent/Christmas related material even if it wasn't directly themed that way. And even though I sometimes had secular music on, there were also long periods of time I had nothing playing when I could just quietly (as quite as a diesel truck engine can be, anyway) THINK.

The point in all this is that I didn't sink into depression. I adjusted both my expectations and practice. I looked for God's presence as often I thought of it and... SURPRISE... found Him!

St. Bernard spoke of a "middle coming" of Christ... the one that comes between his first advent as a baby and his second advent as the conquering king and judge. This year, I believe I really did experience that secret Advent.

Come, Lord Jesus.

Mary

2007-12-23T04:10:00.000-05:00

So I wrote that I was struggling with the Assumption of Mary. Hmmm. My struggle seems to have subsided a good bit. I received a recommendation to read Dwight Longenecker's book on Mary. (Actually, he wrote to me himself and recommended his book.) I did just that. Not only has it helped me in understanding much of the Roman Catholic understanding of Mary but their approach to scripture and some other things as well. In fact, I find not only Rome's approach to Mary (in terms of stated dogma) acceptable but even wonderful. I find myself frequently talking to Mary. Not only is she the mother of my Lord but she is also MY mother.

The only problem I have, at this point, is with the excesses practiced by some. It is easy, I think, for some to get carried away with Mary, giving her a place that is reserved solely for her Son. But those are excesses and not official teaching of the Church. Excesses are, of course, to be avoided. But excesses are not best avoided by throwing out everything just to avoid any possibility of contamination - which is, it seems, what much of the Protestant Church has done.

Advent has been so helpful for me this year. Mary has been on my mind much. And what I've been pondering is how she, along with Joseph, raised Jesus. Imagine how daunting the task - to protect, raise, train and teach God the Son! Yet Mary's approach, her heart was Let it be... Apparently, she did a great job. In fact, I'd call it miraculous.

Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with you. Pray for me.

For Now

2007-12-22T19:11:00.001-05:00

I know... it's been a terribly long time since I last posted anything. For those of you who have been visiting this blog to see if there's anything new... well... here you go. Maybe you could let others who gave up know...

The lack of anything new hasn't been for any lack of things to write about. Indeed, over the past several months there are plenty of things that kept me continually pondering, reflecting, and re-reflecting. The "time issue" has kept me away for a good while. And I'm not sure how regularly or often I'll be posting. But here we are for now...

The Assumption of Mary

2007-08-16T05:36:00.001-04:00

Yesterday was the Feast of the Assumption of Mary in the Roman Catholic Church. Most Protestants have a habit of looking askance at this kind of attention given to Mary, the Mother of our Lord. To some degree, I understand… but only to some degree.

However, I struggle with this part of Catholic dogma. Pope Pius XII wrote: Scripture portrays the loving Mother of God, almost before our very eyes, as most intimately united with her divine Son and always sharing in his destiny. (Munificentissimus Deus) I don’t know what to make of this. Pius, as, I suppose, every pope thereafter, says that this is all rooted in scripture. But I don’t see it so clearly.

Now, I have to admit that there are probably tons of things that are really and truly there in the scriptures that I don’t see. I admit that I’m not the sharpest knife in the scriptural drawer. But it seems to me that if the infinitesimal things pointed to in the scriptures are the source of this kind of dogma, what of other things like when Jesus says Do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven. (Matt 23:9)

I am not, by any stretch, condemning the Catholic Church on these issues. In fact, I am very much pro-Catholic (although I am not – yet – Catholic myself). I’m just trying to understand.

That Mary is exalted so highly in the Roman church is, I think, generally not a bad thing. That Mary is almost ignored in large sectors of the Protestant church is. And I have heard it said that the kind of attention that some Catholics give to Mary is not required of all Catholics. Indeed, it seems a Catholic can not give a high degree of attention to the Mother of God and still be considered a “good Catholic.” But we’re talking dogma, here. The bodily assumption of Mary is something the Roman church holds to be every bit as authentic truth as the hypostatic union, the dual nature, of Christ… and, apparently, just as scriptural.

Does the Orthodox Church accept the bodily assumption of Mary as dogma (or whatever their equivalent of dogma is)?

Prayer

2007-07-27T04:55:00.000-04:00

I hadn't thought about it much until our cell group met and prayed last night.

In the past several months, prayer has become different for me. I find that i just don't know what to pray. There are lots of "things" and people that need prayer. Obviously God needs to work in my life and other people's lives and in situations all over. I used to spend hours praying for people and situations in specific ways. But i haven't been able to do that, lately.

I don't know what God wants, apart from what has been clearly revealed in the scriptures. I can't even pray for myself or my wife with much specificity. Sure, i can tell God what i want, but i want to want what God wants and i've discovered that i don't know what i once thought i knew.

But i do pray. I pray using the Psalms. I pray using the prayers that other saints have written. I pray using prayers from the scriptures. It's not just sitting down and reading these things like i'm reading a novel or the newspaper. I really do enter into prayer. Using the Liturgy of the Hours, i pray this way several times a day. And throughout the day, there are prayers both from the Liturgy and other places which i have memorized that well up within me spontaneously:

"Our Father who art in heaven..."
"Glory to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit..."
"You are God, we praise you..."
"My soul proclaims the greatness of the Lord..."
"Come, let us sing to the Lord..."
"Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy..."

These, among others, are the prayers I pray throughout my day.

More on Liturgy

2007-07-26T05:05:00.000-04:00

I met with my friend Dan, yesterday, and, among other things, talked about the need for certain elements of corporate worship to be regular and routine. We talked about how routine is not only not a bad thing but essential in our lives. Routine helps us persist on a particular course. Of course, routine can be bad if it takes us on a wrong course. But routine - especially in worship - seems to be "routinely" criticized as if nothing good comes of it. Diversity and spontaneity seem to be the crucial elements.

But i "routinely" tell my wife i love her. I try to take every opportunity i have to tell her. Why? First of all, because I really do love her. There is no on else in this world i would rather be with - even when there is tension between us. There is no one else I want to do more for than her - even though i so often act quite selfishly. And, yes, there are times when i say, "I love you," rather unthinkingly... but does that mean i shouldn't say it? Because it does become routine for me to tell her, "I love you," should i stop telling her that? Of course not! what i need to do is not change what i'm saying but the reason, the attitude, the heart behind it. Obviously just saying it is completely insufficient. But not saying it at all is not the solution. Rather i need to bring my heart and mind and life back to the reasons i tell her, "I love you."

And I need to tell her, not only so she can hear it from me... I need to tell her so I can hear it from me.

There are certain disciplines that are vital to the Christian life. We talk about the importance of being "in the Word" daily, of prayer, of confession, of obedience, of "simplicity, purity and humility." We talk about the importance of knowing and reminding ourselves of just who God is, of our constant need of his mercy and grace, of his righteousness and justice, of his never-ending love for us, of his holiness... and numerous other things.

Yet these basic elements are being forgotten or deliberately ignored in much of what is passed off as Christian worship, today. Things like the Lord's Prayer, the Doxology, and the Gloria Patri are seldom used on a regular basis - if ever - in many churches. The Eucharist/Communion also falls into disuse... or, at best, minimal use. The public reading of scripture is deemed as not only unnecessary but even intimidating and offensive. Acknowledgment and confession of sin is often perceived as pedantic and "overly negative."

The issue is not that we shouldn't do these things routinely but that we should routinely teach and talk about what these things mean and why they are important. It seems to me we're in too much of a hurry to "get to the good stuff" (the stuff that makes us feel good) and so miss why and what it is that makes the good stuff so good!

Although it may very well be a gross over-simplification, half the Church is told "just do it" while the other half is told "just feel it." But seldom is there discussion about what "it" is or why or what or even how "doing" or "feeling" is connected to "it."

Liturgy, all by itself, certainly is not the answer. But being left to "whatever" isn't the answer, either. That's just being left to fall of one end or the other of the same plank. The awareness and development of a life rooted in spiritual reality doesn't just happen. It takes not only cultivation but also perseverance. It is a long journey that requires a commitment to the pilgrimage... and a map. Liturgy is the practice of referring to the map... even when you're sure you haven't gone off it.

More On Pentecost

2007-07-25T20:13:00.000-04:00

I've been doing more thinking about Pentecost. It seems to me that a lot of Evangelicals look at Pentecost as the time in which the Holy Spirit initially came down upon believers so that they could "get the job" done (the job of evangelism). While i would grant that there is some credence to that understanding, i would grant only some credence. If that is the only understanding of the purpose of the Spirit's coming then it is a very myopic and, consequently, dangerously limited perception.

When Jesus told his disciples that the coming of the Holy Spirit would give them power, he added, "And you shall be my witnesses..." Many Evangelicals will put those two phrases together (not that they are too terribly separated logistically in the scriptures) to mean that Jesus was giving them power to do the "evangelistic thing." While that is, in part, true, we must not get the cart before the horse.

To be a witness of/to Jesus Christ, one must die with Christ. The Greek word that is translated "witness" is the word from which we get our word "martyr." A true Christian martyr is the most powerful witness of Jesus Christ. But not all Christians are physically killed for their faith. What they/we (I) must do is, as Paul the Apostle put it, "die daily." (1 Cor 15:31)

Stephen, the first Christian martyr, was "a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit." (Acts 6:5) He was "full of grace and power" and was "performing great wonders and signs among the people." (Acts 6:8) Yet he was not chosen to lead an evangelism team or a healing and deliverance ministry. He was chosen to serve food to widows. He was chosen to be a waiter!! There was something about Stephen that got the attention of some Jews who began arguing with Stephen even though their arguments were powerless against the wisdom given him by the Spirit. (As i recently heard, "It's tough to go against a Spirit-filled man.") The upshot of the whole thing is that Stephen, his teaching, his work, and, it would seem, his very presence were determined to be a threat. He was taken before the Sanhedrin, accused (falsely) of blasphemy, judged and sentenced on the spot.

The point is that Stephen simply was as faithful as he could be, living the gospel and manifesting the Kingdom of God in his everyday life, dying to self and comfort and pleasure. Nothing else mattered but that Jesus Christ be fully honored in his life - in his deeds as well as in his words.

The stories (in Acts) prior to this one about Stephen give testimony to the Church at that time of how the values of simplicity, purity and humility - the very characteristics of Jesus Christ, himself - dominated the lives of Christians to such a degree that most of the Church today (at least in the western world) would find it, at best, odd and extreme... or perhaps even irrelevant. Yet it is precisely these qualities for which people in the world who are seeking an alternative to this world's attitudes and values yearn - even if they don't see it clearly, yet.

Sure, Christians need to verbally share the gospel of Jesus Christ with people - but let us not imagine that this is the full extent of what it means to be a witness for Christ. How we live our lives speaks volumes more than what a few words can, but a few words backed with a life of integrity that flows out of faith in Christ becomes not only a message but a means of grace to others by the power of the Spirit. The Holy Spirit empowers believers to be witnesses of Christ because it is the Spirit who literally makes Christians what they are - people reborn in the image of Christ. And what does it mean to be "reborn in the image of Christ"? THAT is what those first even chapters of Acts tell us.

Worship

2007-06-07T05:01:00.000-04:00

All creation sings praise to God simply by being fully what the Creator intended. Obedience to God's designs is in itself an act of worship. Worship without obedience is merely hollow flattery. Yet both worship and obedience are less than Christian if they do not spring from the one root, love of God.

(From "Magnificat," Thursday June 7, Morning Prayer)

Pentecost & Liturgy

2007-05-29T05:40:00.000-04:00

This past Sunday was Pentecost Sunday. While I'm still getting used to the idea of Liturgy (let alone any particular liturgy such as the Roman Catholic liturgy), I've come to appreciate and look forward to it. Well, to be honest, what I've found is that I love it and, in reality, desperately need it.

Being "in between" (ecclesiastically might be the best way to describe it, i suppose) has been very difficult. I'm between Protestant and Catholic, between formal and informal, between formal tradition and informal tradition. To further exacerbate the problem, i've come to believe that, for the rest of my life, i'll always be in between. What i DON"T want is to always be contentious and argumentative - what i think i've been for an awfully long time. But that's not what this post is about.

I currently spend most of my corporate worship time/experience in a Brethren in Christ congregation of which i am a member. The BiC (as they frequently identify themselves) is not, as one of them has put it, "a liturgical Church." This past Sunday we had a "sharing" service. Basically what this means is that the focus was to be on "sharing" what God was doing in our lives. This means that we sang more than usual and people in the congregation spoke extemporaneously, "sharing" with others so we could, together, praise and honor God for what he has done and is doing in each other's lives about which we might not otherwise know. While i believe this type and these times of sharing are very valuable to the Church, i'm not at all in favor of them taking the place of regular worship.

Even more bothersome to me, however, is that Pentecost was completely overlooked (forgotten or ignored, i'm not sure which). However, Memorial Day was not. While it wasn't planned, near the beginning of the "sharing time," a congregant "shared" his thought that we ought to honor the veterans in our midst that morning by clapping for them. Towards the end of the service, i "shared" my extreme disappointment that Pentecost was completely absent from our "celebration" that morning. I read from the beginning Acts 2 and reminded people that today was NOT Memorial Day (I wanted to say that corporate worship was NO place for such a thing but didn't), that without Pentecost, the birth of the Church, we wouldn't even be here, that because of Pentecost lives were given... and taken, and that there were more martyrs in the 20th century alone than in the previous nineteen centuries combined. In a sense, i suppose i chastised both the congregation and, perhaps, more specifically - but indirectly - the pastoral staff.

So far, i have received only one bit of chastisement. But it has led me to write out some things. Much of what follows is taken from my journal entry from yesterday.

I get the feeling that people who oppose liturgy are opposed to it as if liturgy, itself, is at fault for “not much witnessing being done” and a general lack of spiritual "awareness" by people who are in churches who hold to such a view of liturgy. I have to wonder if the lack of liturgy in worship is not precisely the reason (and problem) with why so many congregations have eliminated scripture reading and prayer from regular corporate worship.

Liturgy is like the frame of a house. It obviously is not the house itself but it provides a necessary structure. In another sense, it’s like a wineskin or a bottle. You’ve got to have something in which to carry the wine.

It’s not that non-liturgical churches are not liturgical altogether but that they have a minimalist view of liturgy. And I think they do precisely because they believe that liturgy itself is to blame for a sort of spiritual apathy among many who are liturgically oriented. The only problem I see with liturgy is whether or not it is sufficient for the amount of wine to be carried.

One understanding of Pentecost is a comparison to the incident at the Tower of Babel, that Pentecost is about a reversal of what happened at the Tower of Babel. The former event divided people. The latter event united people. The former event gave witness to division and disunity due to of Man’s perceived self-reliance. The latter event gave witness to unity and oneness due to God’s self-revealed power and mercy.

But Pentecost was more than that. Jesus said, “You will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you.” That power is directly related to being Jesus’ “witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.” But is not the power to be a witness more than just an ability to speak? Jesus himself said that the world will recognize a true disciple (of Christ) by their love. The very definition of love is revealed for us, not by what we say or do but by God in Christ: “This is how we know what love is: Jesus Christ laid down his life for us.” But John’s thought is not complete with that statement. He finishes it by saying: “And we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers.” Pentecost is what makes this possible.

Consequently, to suppose that the regular and formal observance of Pentecost is not important, it seems to me, is a terrible mistake. I know there are many who say that our formal annual observance and celebrations of Christmas and the resurrection are nowhere commanded in the Bible. They are right. But to then further suggest (even directly) that we ought not bother with them in any way is tantamount to saying that we should not do anything that the scriptures do not explicitly state we should do. In that case, prescription meds are out as well as cars, most careers and lots of other things in contemporary life!

Non-liturgical churches may not have an explicitly stated liturgy but they have adopted “parts.” Most often, however, the “adoption” is, at best, a catch-as-catch-can approach; at worst, it’s, take-it-or-leave-it. In other words, any liturgy is completely optional.

My contention is that most of the liturgy such churches have adopted (like the observance of Christmas and Easter) is largely culturally received. Christmas is a huge deal because it is (now) a huge business and social deal. (Besides – there’s a baby involved. Everybody loves babies.) Easter isn’t so big but still affects our cultural activities (despite the horrible corruption of the “Easter Bunny”). Pentecost does not fit at all in our culture. That’s because it belongs squarely in and solely to the Church. Pentecost is the birth of the Church, the mysterious yet real birth of God’s Kingdom in this world. If there is any “holy day” that belongs to the Church more than any other, it is Pentecost. Christmas is God coming into the world for the world. Easter is Christ’s death (by and for the world) and resurrection. Pentecost is God’s “deposit” of His Kingdom in the world, the birth of the Church, the transformation of ordinary “believers” into saints.

This is why the observance of Pentecost is important. The telling of the story of the Church is incomplete without it. And if we do not know our story then we do not know ourselves. And if we do now know ourselves, then we are not free to be anything we want to be; we are condemned to be, at best, nothing at all.

This, then, can be understood, not just as a justification and defense for the liturgical observance of Pentecost but of liturgy in general. The real question for churches is not one of whether or not they are liturgical but one of how liturgical they will be. That some/many people seem to be inclined to cease to give a clear and passionate witness to the gospel where there is a strong liturgical framework is not due to liturgy itself. The constant is not that liturgy is bad but that people are still affected by sin. Liturgy is not sinful. People are.

Discovering Me

2007-04-23T17:06:00.000-04:00

I have only a cursory familiarity with Father Thomas Merton. I read this excerpt of his in Magnificat's Meditation of the Day (today)

The secret of my identity is hidden in the love and mercy of God.

But whatever is in God is really identical with him for his infinite simplicity admits no division and no distinction. Therefore I cannot hope to find myself anywhere except in him.

Ultimately the only way that I can be myself is to become identified with him in whom is hidden the reason and fulfillment of my existence.

Therefore there is only one problem on which all my existence, my peace, and my happiness depend: to discover myself in discovering God. If I find him I will find myself and if I find my true self I will find him.

But although this looks simple, it is in reality immensely difficult. In fact, if I am left to myself it will be utterly impossible. For although I can know something of God's existence and nature by my own reason, there is no human and rational way in which I can arrive at that contact, that possession of him, which will be the discovery of who he really is and of who I am in him.

That is something that no man can ever do alone.

Nor can all the men and all the created things in the universe help him in this work.

The only one who can teach me to find God is God himself, alone.

Closer to Catholocism?

2007-04-23T16:54:00.000-04:00

I have been enjoying Father Longenecker's blog Standing On My Head. He's a Catholic priest converted from Anglicanism to which he converted after attending Bob Jones University. He recently wrote about traditional, evangelical and charismatic Catholics (Charismatic Tridentine Mass). Both what he writes and the comments i have found fascinating. Sounds like there may, indeed, be a place in the Catholic Church for me, after all!!

Now, if only they would do something about the goofy hats some of them wear.

Still in Easter

2007-04-22T21:54:00.000-04:00

In general, I tend to be rather melancholy and, often, depressed. I recently read something by a Spanish priest of the earlier part of last century. He wrote as if God were speaking. Part of what came out of that reading for me was the recognition of an assumption i have held but never realized before - I assumed that my melancholy, my grief, and my despair were all greater than God's grace. I had grown comfortable in my various miseries. They've become something familiar and even comfortable for me. I have let those things define me. But, according to the scriptures, those things don't really define me - not since Christ did on the cross for my redemption and rose from the grave to give me life. What i need to do - actually and not just figuratively - is to give them up as a sacrifice to God. It sounds kind of weird to put it that way. After all, isn't a sacrifice supposed to be about giving God our best? No... sacrifice has more to do with giving God what we most cherish. And i have cherished my melancholy.

I love the whole Easter season - including Lent which precedes it and the weeks of Easter after Easter Sunday that lead up to Ascension Day and Pentecost. I am reminded of who i truly am in Christ. I am encouraged to recognize more and more of who i thought i was, leave it behind, and live in concert with who i truly am in Christ.

Put off your old nature which belongs to your former manner of life and is corrupt through deceitful lusts, and be renewed in the spirit of your minds, and put on the new nature, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness. (Ephesians 4:22-24 RSV)

Christians are people who have been transformed... and yet, at the same time, they are still going through the transformation process. That transformation does not occur apart from the Christian's cooperation with God's Spirit. Part of that cooperation is learning to think differently. Christians are to set their minds, as well as their hearts, on things above. (Colossians 3:1, 2) The Christian mind is to be in a state of constant renewal. (Romans 12:2; Ephesians 4:23)

Easter is a powerful reminder that, although the Christian's transformation is not yet complete, it is taking place with the guaranteed result of total Christ-likeness. That process for Christians does not occur apart from participation in every facet of the life Christ himself lived. In other words sacrifice, servanthood, humility, grace, mercy and love are more than just words in the Christian vocabulary. They are the
marks of spiritual transformation. Christians participate in the Spirit's work as they intentionally give themselves to acting in these ways thus giving the Spirit "room" to transform heart and mind. Easter is the historical mark that reminds us God has already provided us with everything necessary for life and godliness. Easter reminds us that, through Christ, God already is victor over all - including death. Easter further reminds us that there really is nothing that exceeds God's grace and mercy - even the melancholy, fear and guilt that used to define me.

The Lord is risen. Alleluia!

Easter

2007-04-08T06:53:00.000-04:00

The Lord is risen! Alleluia!

Today is a day of rejoicing! Today we celebrate our Lord's rising from the dead. The power of sin has been vanquished. Death is destroyed from the inside out. Today is the day that both fulfills the promise and confirms all the promises of God.

For nearly 2000 years, the Church has celebrated the resurrection of Christ who, although slain, did not remain so. Not only that, but when he died he took sin to the grave and, by his resurrection, defeated it.

Sinners crave to know the reality of the resurrection in their own lives; in their hearts they instinctively know there is something there they desperately need and want. The Church must show them. Christians must become the reality sinners crave by living the resurrection every day, in every situation, in every moment.

O God, you are my God, for you I long;
for you my soul is thirsting
My body pines for you
like a dry, weary land without water.
So I gaze on you in the sanctuary
to see your strength and your glory.

For your love is better than life...

May Christians, sinners who have received the gifts of death and life from the crucified and risen Christ, share the life Christ has now given them with those who have not yet received it. May their single purpose be to glorify the Lord in their own lives as he has been glorified in the resurrection.

The Lord is risen, indeed! Alleluia!!

Journal Entry for March 25, 2007

2007-03-25T07:49:00.000-04:00

Here is my journal entry for today. (Why do i feel compelled to post this?)

I think this journey gets more and more difficult. Perhaps it becomes more difficult with the more direct path. It has always been uphill. Perhaps it was a long time of just going round and round the mountain. It makes for an easier climb but a much longer one. Perhaps I am headed more directly for the top. The destination is in sight and closer but the journey requires so much more effort… and tears seem to become increasingly inevitable. And the question, “Will I make it?” seems to ring more loudly and incessantly.

Today is the Annunciation of our Lord. I would have thought of comfort and encouragement today. The Incarnation of our Lord! Instead, I am made so aware of my own failure and sin again… more deeply than I have felt it for a long time. I am again aware of my weakness of my self-seeking, of my pursuit of comfort and ease and pleasure. Mary did not. The Mother of my Lord, the Mother of the Church, my Mother gave herself with “no holds barred.” I am a miserable wretch next to her… all the more next to my Lord who, because of her, is also my Brother.

I speak of one passion, of desiring only to be holy, to honor God, to give unblemished witness and praise to him. Yet my true passion is for my own ease. I seek, more than anything, to be rid of all discomfort. I simply want to feel good. And now, all I feel is pain, sadness, remorse, regret, sorrow. I feel trapped and my own fears are the chains.

Has not Jesus broken those chains? Has not He who is omnipotent provided everything needed for life and godliness? Cannot he who held the sun in place so the battle could be completed hold my heart, my soul so that his work can be completed in me?

I have no passion for teaching. I want to teach… but I have no unrestrained drive to pursue it. I do not know what I want to “do” other than just to rid myself of this “body of death” and be fully clothed in Life.

There is a deep and all-consuming work that I need to pursue – but it is beyond me. It is more than I can manage and requires more discipline than I have ever managed.

O God, do this thing in me. There is no one else to whom I can turn… no one in heaven, no one on earth I desire besides you. My body and even my heart fail me… but YOU are my strength, the strength of my heart, the strength of my life. You are everything. Remind me. Teach me. Hold me. Strengthen me.

O God, you are my God, earnestly I seek you; my soul thirsts for you, my body longs for you, in a dry and weary land where there is no water.

I have seen you in the sanctuary and beheld your power and your glory.

Because your love is better than life, my lips will glorify you.

I will praise you as long as I live, and in your name I will lift up my hands.

My soul will be satisfied as with the richest of foods; with singing lips my mouth will praise you.

On my bed I remember you; I think of you through the watches of the night.

Because you are my help, I sing in the shadow of your wings.

My soul clings to you; your right hand upholds me.

O God, you are my God, earnestly I seek you…

The Church

2007-03-18T21:24:00.000-04:00

I attended two very different worship services this morning. One was at an
Evangelical Free church. The other was at a Roman Catholic Church.

The music at the E Free (as they call them) church was tremendous. Not the
usual "pop" music so many "contemporary" evangelical churches are aiming at.
A mix of traditional hymns and more modern worship songs. There was a vocal
quartet that helped to lead vocally. (I couldn't look at them as the one
fellow was very distracting with his gestures and facial expressions. He
may have been genuinely worshipping, but I couldn't tell if that was the
case and it detracted from my own sense of worship.) There was piano,
guitar, bass and brass choir accompaniment. No organ, but the brass made up
for that! And the brass didn't just "play along." They had their own parts
that were both well written and well played.

There was also some scripture reading and several prayers. At the end,
there was communion and we even spoke the Mystery of Faith: Christ has
died. Christ is risen. Christ will come again.

The sermon, focusing on Jesus' statement, "I am the vine..." lasted about 25
minutes. Actually, it lasted twice as long as it should have. When the
preacher (the senior pastor, in this case) read the passage, he kept making
comments as he read through it... I prefer just reading the passage and then
hearing whatever comments are to be made. While he made his point - that we
need to stay attached and "in" the vine in order to produce fruit (not just
the fruit of new believers but the fruit of the Spirit at least equally as
well) - he could have said it half (or even a third) of the time he took.
It wasn't really exegetical and didn't really describe how that is done
other than mentioning reading the Bible and doing what Jesus says we should
do. (Of course, that's a huge chunk of it, right there.)

We then were served communion. Typical, as far as evangelical churches, go.
The bread and the cup are merely symbolic of the body and the blood of
Christ. On that basis, I did not feel I could participate in partaking.
But I prayed and sang the songs as the elements were served.

One really nice thing that was different from what I've seen at most
protestant services that use PowerPoint was that the actually music notation
was projected on the screen along with the text of the songs - like you were
reading pieces of sheet music. Really much better than just the words...
especially for unfamiliar songs. (Of course, they must pay huge fees to
compensate for copyrights on both text and music.)

After most of our singing there were announcements. I could do away with
announcements altogether. Never liked them when I pastored a church,
either.

Most of the people there seemed very engaged throughout most of the worship
service. I did have a fairly strong sense of God's presence through the
service.

The second service was, obviously, far more liturgical. We were late coming
from the other service and so missed some of my favorite parts (like the
confession of sin). But I loved the liturgy, as usual. The music wasn't
too bad... The organist was very decent and the cantor was an excellent
vocalist. The songs themselves were either traditional hymns or traditional
responses. The hymns were in the hymnal - but I still don't know the tunes
for the responses - which I find frustrating.

I love the liturgy because in every mass the crucifixion is played out for
us so clearly. And we do exactly what millions of other Christians do and
have done for nearly 2000 years.

The homily was fairly typical - rather atrocious. No exegesis. No
foundation for why we should do what we're supposed to do. No real practical
application. Merely a summarizing of the three readings (this time ending
with the parable of the prodigal and his father) and the call to "come home
to the Father." No discussion as to why or how. No discussion of the
Father's heart. No discussion about where we are in the story. Very little
(albeit some) discussion of the father's heart.

But few people seemed engaged with the service. Very few sang anything.
Some (quite a few) left the service early.

If only we could merge the liturgy and mass of the RC with the music and
"spirit" of the evangelical (plus the exegetical and practical preaching of
someone like David Hall) - WOW!!

Forgive me, Lord, for being judgmental of your Church. She belongs to you,
not me. Have mercy on her, Lord. Be glorified in her and through her.
Make me worthy to honor and glorify you. Heal me. Heal your Church. Glory
and praise to you, Lord.

The Way of the Cross

2007-03-13T11:20:00.001-04:00

Jesus said, "Let anyone who wishes to come after me deny himself, take up
his cross and follow me."

After more than 30 years as a Christian, I think I'm only just now beginning
to understand this... I'm just a beginner and may never be any more than
that. I think of St. John of the Cross and cannot imagine "St. Jim of the
Cross."

Dying is so hard, especially when everything within screams, "I want to
LIVE!" I once heard a man say, "You cannot crucify yourself. You may be
able to nail down your feet and one hand but what happens to the other
hand?" The problem is that I'm not even sure I can climb onto the cross
myself, let alone nail myself to it.

And I think of a poem by C. S. Lewis:

All this is flashy rhetoric about loving you
I never had a selfish thought since I was born.
I am mercenary and self-seeking through and through.
I want God, you, all friends, merely to serve my turn.
Peace reassurance, pleasure are the goals I seek;
I cannot crawl one inch outside my proper skin.
I talk of love (a scholar's parrot may talk Greek)
But, self-imprisoned, always end where I begin.

Only that now you taught me (but how late the lack!)
I see the chasm. Everything you are was making
my heart into a bridge by which I might get back
From exile, and grow man. And now the bridge is breaking.

I'm not sure I understand what all Lewis meant in this but what I recognize
is that he recognized a condition of heart that was in desperate need of God
to do something, to do that thing that only God can and even would do. He
seemed to recognize that that what he needed was something that needed to be
done again and again and again.

It's not simply a matter of "being" dead to sin, dead to self and dead to
the world. It's not a once and done thing. It is, whether we like it or
not (and I certainly do not), a process of dying. I suppose this means that
we don't get to have our Gethsemane "once and for all." There must be lots
of them.

So, let it be, Lord. Make my heart, make our hearts what they ought to be.
Make it so in all your people, Lord. Then we will truly be one with you,
one with each other, and the whole world will know that you are God.

More Thoughts During Lent

2007-03-13T10:36:00.001-04:00

Lent is always such an emotionally mixed bag for me... and that's so
frustrating because I really don't want it to be emotional at all.

Many have said it before and said it better than me: The closer we get to
God the more acutely aware become of our own sin. Just when I think I can't
take another step forward, I become aware, in some way and once again, that
God's mercy and grace are "bigger" than I thought.

I've been praying the Rosary periodically for the past year. I know most
Protestants become Hoovers when I say that. But to be honest, when I pray
the Rosary, it's not about Mary. I think Mary helps with my prayers but
it's not about her. It's all about her Blessed Son. Today, as I prayed the
Sorrowful Mysteries, focusing on the last day of Jesus' life, I was so
forcefully struck, again, that the suffering, the incredible,
incomprehensible and intentionally CHOSEN suffering Jesus endured was for
me.

Every morning during Lent, the antiphon for the Invitatory Psalm is: "Come
let us worship Christ the Lord who, for our sake, endured temptation and
suffering." For our sake... It wasn't for his sake. He didn't need
anything suffering might offer him. He gained nothing by it. It was all
for my sake... for our sake.

And the last reading this morning was from the prophet Joel: "Return to me
with your whole heart, with fasting, and with weeping, and mourning; rend
your hearts, not your garments, and return to the Lord, your God. For
gracious and merciful is he, slow to anger, rich in kindness, and relenting
in punishment." (Joel 2:12-13)

I still have comprehended so little of God grace and mercy... and it seems
that the only way for me to more fully realize and comprehend his grace and
mercy are for me to more fully realize and comprehend my own sinfulness and
desperate situation without them... without him.

Perhaps fasting during Lent really does have an effect on prayer. I don't
understand it, how it can... but maybe there's something to it, after all.

Perhaps I need to fast during other times, as well...

Last Sunday

2007-03-12T12:12:00.000-04:00

Not only this last Sunday, but it's also the last Sunday. David preached
his last sermon as the senior pastor at EBICC, yesterday. It wasn't his
usual fare as it was not an expository sermon at all... but it was certainly
of God, nonetheless.

My own tears were not that it was his last Sunday as the Sr. Pastor. It
wasn't that he a Libby sang the song I wrote for them. It was actually more
of the same, more of what's been going on for the past couple/several years.
Anytime I take the time or listen to the encouragement - whether it is the
encouragement to abstain from sin or obediently trust God or passionately
pursue and follow Jesus - or ponder again the indescribable, inconceivable,
illogical, irrational, inscrutable, undeniable love of God, I am nearly
always broken and/or in awe. I'm broken because of the realization of
unworthy I am of God's love (and always shall be) because of my sin and
unloving heart. I am in awe because of the power and majesty and glory and
(even more so) the call God has upon my life to simply be like Jesus and (as
our "church motto" puts it) - "to reproduce the likeness of Jesus in our
world."

And this is my prayer (from "Jesus, Thy Boundless Love to Me") which we sang
during our worship:

O grant that nothing in my soul
may dwell but thy pure love alone;
O may thy love possess me whole,
My joy, my treasure and my crown.
Strange flames far from my heart remove;
My every act, word, thought, be love.

Hell

2007-03-07T04:46:00.000-05:00

Which is worse? To be thirsty with no water around or to be thirsty with water around but no access to it?

Very often, hell is associated with death. The "common" biblical understanding of death is the absence of God's presence. While that may be true of death, i'm not so sure that the same holds true for hell. I wonder which would be worse - the absence of God or the presence of God without "access" to him?

Perhaps hell is being near the presence of God but being cut off from him... with a two-fold consequence. First, there would be the torment of remembering - what could have been and could be "now." Second, there would be the torment of understanding - realizing God's eternal goodness and beauty and understanding my own putrid wretchedness... with no way to ever be better.

Holy Free Fall?

2007-03-01T11:40:00.000-05:00

I have a friend who is committed to bringing leaders in the Church in this region together for prayer to seek a genuine outpouring of God's Spirit. For many years I had been quite involved with the group he was gathering... but I became more and more "restless" (for lack of a better term) as I felt more and more keenly the brokenness of the Church. The issue that kept resurfacing in my heart was that this was a gathering of Protestants. We met on Protestant terms. It seemed clear to me there was no way Catholic and Protestant Church leaders would ever gather together for this kind of prayer meeting. Either the Protestants would have to become more Catholic (and that was likely not to happen with this bunch) or the Catholics would have to become more Protestant (which is likely never to happen in this region). What divided the two "camps"? The same thing that seems to always divide them...

I've not attended these prayer times for a couple of years, now. (My circumstances of changed and my schedule precludes me from being able to join them.) My friend (I'll call him Bob, which is not his real name), Bob, sends me e-mail regularly as part of a mass mailing to summarize what he sees and hears from the these gatherings, trying to discern what the Spirit is saying and doing. He often sends out mailings after personal prayer and reflection on scripture, again, attempting to "hear what the Spirit says" to the Church in our community.

Bob is rather prolific. I get e-mail from him several times a week. There is a lot of value in much of what he has sent out... things regarding the need for greater humility and repentance in the Church, the need for a much greater rejection of the cultural "norms," God's broken heart over lost souls, and much more. In a sense, Bob is a kind of prophet - not so much foretelling future events but speaking to people as a kind of mouthpiece of God. I like that about Bob.

But Bob is an independent. He's not associated with any congregation. He meets with a few people on a fairly regular basis... but there is no one group to which he "belongs." I don't mean to be judgmental but Bob is a typical Protestant... acting out his protest against the Church that Jesus Christ established through the earliest apostles and any "form" of church (deliberate use of lower-case "c") that disagrees with his ideas of what a church should look like and be doing.

My criticism of Bob isn't really about Bob but me. I read (albeit, slowly) the ante-Nicene writings of the early Church Fathers and wonder why I'm still in the denomination I'm in. Why am I still a Protestant? Am I still protesting? If so, against what am I protesting? I find fault with my denomination, with the this group of Protestants with whom I am associated, with 21st century Evangelicalism, with Protestantism in general... but I also find fault with Catholicism.

But maybe it's not so much Catholicism itself with which I find fault but with the way it is often demonstrated and popularly discussed... or just assumed. When I read the early Church fathers, I am so impressed with how and what they think, with how they lived their lives. I am impressed that so much of what Protestants have tossed out simply because "it's too Catholic" is discussed in the Church's earliest documents... things like the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, the exaltation of Mary, the invocation of the saints in prayer, etc. I realize the Protestant movement was intended to be a "back to the Bible" movement, for the most part. But I have to wonder, if since the Catholic counter-reformation and, more recently, Vatican II, Protestantism isn't established simply for the sake of being "non-Catholic."

I think what I want is Bob's zeal and devotion to and for holiness and true Christian discipleship coupled with the early Church father's understanding and practice of what it takes for the true Christian to live the true Christian life in true relationship with the Lord of the Church.

There are groups identifying themselves as "Evangelical Catholics." I think that's at least part of what I'm looking for. There seems to be room in the Catholic Church for that sort of thing.

But I wonder if there are groups identifying themselves as "Catholic Evangelicals." I wonder if it's even desirable given the nature of Protestantism let alone if it's at all possible. And if there are such groups, then how do they understand apostolic succession? How do they reconcile the differences in that understanding with the earliest understandings of apostolic succession? We can’t just toss their understanding aside because it was that earliest understanding that enabled them to identify what it is that constituted the scriptures! And to challenge that means a challenge to the whole of the entire Judeo-Christian history. I don’t think much of the rest of the world would care (except for some being quite ecstatic about it) but it would throw the Church itself into a free fall with nowhere to land.

Maybe that’s precisely the problem with Protestantism – and especially Evangelicalism – today. Is there such a thing as “holy free fall?”

Sorrow For Muslims

2007-02-24T17:11:00.000-05:00

There are times when I am gripped with a profound sorrow for Muslims. It doesn't matter whether or not theirs is a religion of peace. The reality is that their religion is religion of a godless eternity.

Allah (which is, literally, simply the Arabic word for 'God' but I will use it for the Muslim understanding of God to differentiate from the God of the Bible) is eternal. But apparently, Allah is not omnipresent. The reason the Christian understanding of the nature of Jesus is blasphemous to Muslims is because Allah simply refuses to and is incapable to have anything to do with the material world. That Allah should draw near to a human being (let alone touch or - horror - take on human flesh) is to become contaminated.

Christians take tremendous comfort and even joy at the marvelous mystery that God not only thinks of human beings and desires to be with them but that he actually took on the complete human form and nature. Other than his divine nature, the only difference between Jesus and us is that he was pure, wholly without sin.

But the thing over which I grieve for my Muslim "cousins" is that their eternity is spent apart from Allah!! A Christian cannot imagine such a thing for him/herself. At the consummation of the ages, all the saints who have ever lived join around the throne of God in his very presence to worship him altogether. In fact, the definitions of life and death hinge on the presence of God. Where God is, there is life. Where God is not, there is death. Death is the absence of life. Death is the absence of God.

Never mind that the Muslim idea of eternal paradise revolves around fleshly pleasures (they get the things that are forbidden them, now). Who cares that they can drink all the booze they want and have their virgins at their beck and call? Allah is absent. The one they are to revere most of all is completely absent - for eternity!!

To be eternally separated from God is not paradise or heaven... even if all fleshly pleasure is available. There are many in this world who even now can attest to that. Eternity without God is hell.

How I ache for my Muslim friends. I do not want to kill them. They can mock my faith. They can mock my Jesus. I will not strike them. Far worse for them, they will be stricken with an eternal emptiness for which there is no cure except that Allah should touch them to heal them, to replace their eternal death and give them Eternal Life. Alas, he will not... he cannot.

May God have mercy on them. Praise and glory to God through Christ who gives us life.

Lent

2007-02-24T15:51:00.001-05:00

I once read (can't remember from whom) that Easter without Lent is like the
climax of a movie without the rest of the movie.

Perhaps it's partly because I'm introspective by nature and often rather
melancholy that I really like Lent. If there is a specific time during
which I take some pleasure in reflecting on struggle and really embracing
the difficulty of being who and what God created me to be, it's the Lenten
season.

Israel spent 40 years wandering in the wilderness. They made some pretty
dumb decisions (stuff that involved relying on their own "ingenuity" and not
trusting God) so God let them wander around in a huge circle. While it was
a tremendously hard time for them (well, that's putting it mildly... and
they still made some dumb decisions) God provided miraculously for them. It
wasn't just the manna. Their clothes and shoes never wore out... 40 years!!
(I look forward to worn out clothes so I have sufficient reason to buy
something new!)

Jesus spent 40 days/nights in the wilderness fasting and praying. It's
interesting to note the Bible says it was AFTER those 40 days/nights that
Jesus was hungry. I wonder if it was hard on Jesus or if there was an
ecstasy for him since it was an opportunity for him to focus exclusively for
over a month on the Father.

I don't think I do Lent very well. I chose my "mortification" this year and
am practicing it... But I worry that I'm not really getting the full benefit
from it that I should because I'm often so easily distracted... From prayer,
from meditation.

Israel was forced into it. Jesus volunteered for it. I guess I volunteered
for it, too. I just wish I could get my heart attitude into better
condition for it, with it, through it. I really do want to embrace the
struggle. But emotionally I run away from it. Perhaps, if nothing else,
for now, I can at least DO it without feeling the need to feel good about
it.

Orthodoxy. Orthopraxy. Is there such a thing as orthopathy?

God Is Here

2007-02-18T06:15:00.001-05:00

This week I listened to a lot of John Michael Talbot and some other
Christian singer/song-writers most of the day while I rode around. I
probably have about 30 hrs worth of songs on my mp3 player. Today I heard
(again but for the first time in a long time) a song written by Tom Booth -
"Here I Am." It's written as if from Jesus to the listener. Here are the
verses.

Do not fear when the tempter beckons
Do not fear even though you might fall
Do not fear for I have conquered evil
Do not fear; never be afraid

I am here in the face of every child
I am here in every warm embrace
I am here with tenderness and mercy
Here I am. I am here.

I am here in the midst of every trial
I am here in the face of your despair
I am here in pardon and forgiveness
Here I am. I am here.

The refrain - beginning, end and in between the verses

Here I am, standing right beside you
Here I am, do not be afraid
Here I am, I'm waiting like a lover
I am here. Here I am.

The song is really quite simple... but it is the first and last verses that
seem to really "get" me. I hear Jesus speaking these things to me. And I
think the reason is because I am so fearful. There are mistakes I make
because I don't think enough. There are "mistakes" I make because I don't
want to think otherwise. And there are those "mistakes" I make because I'm
afraid of either losing or not getting something that seems important to me.

The real problem is that I really don't have a very good grasp of the
incredible, inscrutable, unreasonable, illogical, unfathomable love of God
in Christ. Consequently, my faith in God doesn't go nearly deep enough.
And so I become afraid, angry, resentful, anxious, etc. These are not
qualities of the Spirit of God. They are qualities of the "flesh."

The reason God is "here" is precisely because of his great and powerful
love... a love so powerful that it endured death and then beat death at its
own game. And that Love is HERE. He is here not only to bring mercy and
forgiveness but also bring grace and the power to be transformed. The great
thing - and this is the thing of which I need to keep reminding myself and
remind other Christians and teach to non-Christians - is that it's not just
for a moment and then it's gone. Love is here for this moment... and this
moment... and this one... and this one... and on and on and on in every
single moment.

To love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength
requires that one knows God in a profound way. And that requires
experience. I can't prescribe the "shape" of that experience for every
person - it can be vastly different for lots of people (although it appears
to be very similar for lots of people, too). But everyone of us needs to
come into this experience of knowing God's great love for us.

And it needs to happen more than once in a lifetime or once a year or even
once a day. We desperately need this experience as a constant aspect of our
lives. Realistically, it may happen in seemingly disconnected moments, but
ideally it ought to be the normal life experience of every moment. And it
needs to happen in each person. You can't have the experience for me. And
when I do have the experience, I need to re-experience I in the very next
moment... and all the moments that follow.

It is the experience of God's presence with us, right next to us, in us. It
is the experience of Love that goes beyond even our wildest dreams. It is
the experience of rest and peace to such a degree that it becomes obviously
other-worldly.

To know love and to love... This is what it means to know that God is here.

Today's Grace

2007-02-14T20:16:00.001-05:00

80 deliveries on my truck today - only one of which I actually delivered. Stuck
in the snow for 3 hours. Was really mad at myself for having even attempted
any deliveries today - but Wendy said it was the right thing to do... taking
responsibility for the job no matter what. But I was equally mad at Fed Ex
for not just closing down for the day. Besides... only a third of the
entire work staff (drivers, package handlers, etc.) showed up. (But I was
one out of only two drivers who made all their deliveries yesterday.)

Tomorrow? Doesn't look real good - but hopefully better than today... at
least in terms of the roads. Numbers of packages will be through the
roof...

Anyway, that's background to what happened while I was sitting and,
initially, fuming. I wasn't just fuming... If my anger had been actual
physical energy I could have melted the ice around me for miles. But then
my anger turned inward. I was angry for being so angry. I told the Lord
how much I despise that part of myself. It's been more apparent in the last
several weeks than it has otherwise been for a long time. At one point,
when I was talking to Wendy on the phone (which I did several times while I
sat), I told her how much I hate this s*** (yeah, I cussed - something that
is rare for me but less rare in the past few weeks). What I really hate,
though, is not being able to "handle" it - that I am still so clearly UNLIKE
Jesus deep inside. So I talked with God for a while about it. I plugged in
John Michael. (I device to play my music through the FM radio.) Then I
grabbed my Liturgy... ( I always take that with me) and prayed. I wanted to
find God's Grace at that moment. And I again realized the presence of His
Grace in prayer - that simply because I did pray grace was present, not so
much because my prayer brought grace (although I think it did to some
degree) but because, apart from grace, I wouldn't have prayed.

And I began to calm down.

I hate this "thing" in me... this beast. I wish it were just dead...
completely gone. But at least, until it is, there is grace that can reign
it in. How I long for the completion of God's work in me. How I long to be
like Jesus in every way.

With Other Pilgrims

2007-02-12T22:13:00.001-05:00

I've been meeting with a couple of others once or twice a month for a couple
of years, now, in a cell group. We've meet for about 1 1/2 - 2 hrs, sharing
what our lives have been like, how we see (or want to see or can't seem to
see) what God is doing in, through and around us, reading and discussing
some aspects of the Rule for the Brothers and Sisters of Charity, reading
and discussing (most recently) "The Fire of God" by John Michael Talbot
(founder and spiritual director of Little Portion Hermitage and the Brothers
and Sisters of Charity), and praying together.

We met again this evening and had another one of what I call our "Pilgrimage
Discussions." There's only three of us meeting regularly together, but I
find these discussions so helpful for me. It's not just a matter of, "Oh,
yeah, that's what I've felt/thought/experienced, too." Part of what goes on
for me during these times is a kind of refining of the understanding of my
own experience.

I've long been convinced that it's dangerous for us to try to live out our
Christian lives in a kind of isolated state even though we may be engaged
with a gathering of Christian believers in worship each week. We (and I'm
not sure how to define that "we" other than "people") tend to head towards
extremes that are unbalanced. It's not that we don't want to be balanced,
generally. But the only experience of which we are aware is our own
experience unless we deliberately engage in discussion with others and
listen to them talk about their experiences. I include in that "experience"
both the daily, practical, "life experience" but also our experience with
the Word of God as the written word and the Living Word - Jesus Christ.

It also seems to me that we Americans are particularly prone to strive for
isolation (that we can make it through life - or even just through a day -
without the aid of anybody else). But if, as Christians, we take seriously
that we have been made to reflect that character and nature of God himself,
we sin if we live by this "rugged individualism" concept. While God
certainly does not need us to accomplish anything he desires, God is, within
himself, a community... a tri-unity. If human beings have been made in the
image and likeness of God, despite what Sin has done to us, it has not
altered the fact that part of our "fulfillment" is to somehow live and
journey together with other Pilgrims.

While I am not a terribly social person (I'd much rather spend a full month
of evenings at home with my wife than spend even two nights of that month
with any sizeable group of people), the reality is that I need others in my
life. I am grateful to God that, in his sovereign grace, he has provided me
with, not only my wife, but a few others who are willing to journey with me
on this pilgrimage toward Home. It's not necessarily all, "What a wonderful
fellow you are to be with, Jim." But it is, "I see you struggling to
persevere on this journey as am I. May I come along with you so that I may
both be encouraged and, perhaps, encourage you, too, as we travel."

There are many times when I think John Bunyan was writing about me when he
wrote about Pilgrim and his progress towards the Celestial City, and the
people that journeyed with him.

Perhaps you, too, are on this pilgrimage towards Home. I would welcome the
opportunity to, if you desire, to chat with you "along the way." Perhaps we
can encourage each other to persevere when we get discouraged or tempted to
get (or maybe even tricked into becoming) sidetracked. The journey is every
bit as important as the destination... And it's important to travel with
other Pilgrims.

How wonderful, how beautiful, when brothers and sisters get along!
It's like costly anointing oil flowing down head and beard,
Flowing down Aaron's beard, flowing down the collar of his priestly robes.
It's like the dew on Mount Hermon flowing down the slopes of Zion.
Yes, that's where GOD commands the blessing, ordains eternal life.
(Psalm 133)

Context

2007-02-11T22:03:00.001-05:00

Our "small group" met at out house tonight. We've been discussing selected
readings from Theresa of Avila. Tonight we were discussing some things she
had to say about defending our personal "rights." Tom, one of the fellows
in our group brought to our attention what I thought was a particularly
insightful thought (probably because this is what I think about, also). The
gist of what he said, along with my own thoughts, is what follows.

We tend to get terribly fixated on a very myopic perception of life. As
Christians, we need to remember the big picture which is, in brief,
creation, sin, and redemption. We all have our story to live and tell but
we must remember that our story is part of a much larger story that God is
telling. The story is not about "me" but about God. My rights are really
only important insofar as they are part of the God-story.

This is why it's important for Christians always to associate their lives,
their choices, and their responses to people and situations with all those
same aspects of Jesus Christ who himself, was and is, the image (icon) of
the invisible God. In other words, just as it is dangerous to try to
understand and interpret something someone has said or written apart from
its and their context, so it is dangerous to try to understand and interpret
the events and experiences of our lives apart from our context - not just
"in the world" but as people of the Kingdom, people of the Story.

Context is absolutely crucial. Meaning can only be discerned within a
particular context. Words are understood within sentences, sentences within
paragraphs, etc. Our lives are within a particular context but far too
often we tend to ignore the context in order to focus simply and exclusively
on "the moment," which, I fear, has more to do with "feeling" than anything.
A proper understanding of the importance (or lack thereof) of our rights can
only be gained if we know and remember our context. (Perhaps this is one
definition of sin: the ignorance - whether deliberate or otherwise - of our
context.)

In a very literal sense, I really don't and can't know anybody else's
context. The only person's context about which I can have any real
confidence is my own. It's not so much important that I know anybody else's
context. I know mine. I am a follower of Christ. Christ's Spirit lives in
me. I have been infected by sin but through the grace of Christ, that
infection and its power over me has been reversed and broken. I'm not
completely healed of the infection but I the cure has been administered and
I must simply live accordingly - regardless of what others may do or say.
And part of what that means is that the story of both the infection and the
cure aren't really about me. My rights really are no longer about what I
should have or get but about what I can give and to whom... To love the Lord
with all my heart, soul, mind and strength and to love others as I have
loved myself. Love is the theme of God's story. God's story is my context.

I just need to remember the context of my story.

Poverty, Greed and Following Jesus

2007-02-11T02:41:00.001-05:00

I really know nothing of poverty. I have some academic awareness of it -
but no experience with it.

Jesus said, "Blessed are the poor." I have read of many Christians who,
having come from wealthy families and living in lavish opulence and having
heard these words of Jesus, left all their wealth and deliberately took up a
life of poverty. It's not that poverty in itself is so great... but you
have to wonder when you hear Jesus say, "If you want to be perfect, go, sell
your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven.
Then come, follow me." (Matt 19:21) Or when he lavishes his praise on the
poor woman who gave her last two cents away. "She gave far more than all
those who gave out of the excess of their wealth." (Mark 12:43-44, my
paraphrase)

And so I have to wonder what I know of Jesus. (Certainly I ought not take
food from my wife's mouth to give to someone else - but that's an extreme
that is an unnecessary consideration just now.) I sit in room with lots of
books, electronics, musical instruments... and stuff. All this in a house
with lots of... stuff... and much of that "in storage." Jesus told his
disciples, "Watch out! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; a man's
life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions." (Luke 12:15)

How do I "guard against all kinds of greed" if not by just not yielding to
the desire to "get" and "have?" Perhaps that's only half the equation.
Perhaps the other half is "give."

"Love the Lord with all your heart, soul, mind and strength. Love your
neighbor as yourself." Perhaps wealth works against that, somehow. Even if
wealth does not, greed certainly does. And I have a thought that my concept
of greed is simply acceptable American idealism.

Jesus, show me your way... and make my heart to desire your way.

The "Middle" Coming of Jesus

2006-12-07T06:17:00.000-05:00

God's Word Will Come To Us
(St. Bernard, Abbot & Archbishop of Vienne, France - 9th century)

We know that there are three comings of the Lord. The third lies between the
other two. It is invisible, while the other two are visible. In the first
coming he was seen on earth, dwelling among men; he himself testifies that
they saw him and hated him. In the final coming all flesh will see the
salvation of our God, and they will look on him whom they pierced. The
intermediate coming is a hidden one; in it only the elect see the Lord
within their own selves, and they are saved. In his first coming our Lord
came in our flesh and in our weakness; in this middle coming he comes in
spirit and in power; in the final coming he will be seen in glory and
majesty.

Because this coming lies between the other two, it is like a road on which
we travel from the first coming to the last. In the first, Christ was our
redemption; in the last, he will appear as our life; in this middle coming,
he is our rest and consolation.

In case someone should think that what we say about this middle coming is
sheer invention, listen to what our Lord himself says: If anyone loves me,
he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him.
There is another passage of Scripture which reads: He who fears God will do
good, but something further has been said about the one who loves, that is,
that he will keep God's word. Where is God's word to be kept? Obviously in
the heart, as the prophet says: I have hidden your words in my heart, so
that I may not sin against you.

Keep God's word in this way. Let it enter into your very being, let it take
possession of your desires and your whole way of life. Feed on goodness, and
your soul will delight in its richness. Remember to eat your bread, or your
heart will wither away. Fill your soul with richness and strength.

If you keep the word of God in this way, it will also keep you. The Son with
the Father will come to you. The great Prophet who will build the new
Jerusalem will come, the one who makes all things new. This coming will
fulfill what is written: As we have borne the likeness of the earthly man,
we shall also bear the likeness of the heavenly man. Just as Adam's sin
spread through all mankind and took hold of all, so Christ, who created and
redeemed all, will glorify all, once he takes possession of all.

Death, Home & Life

2006-11-20T11:39:00.000-05:00

Henry was one of the most godly men I've ever known. He served, with his
wife, as a missionary doctor in India for many years in their younger days.
He went with a team I led to London to join a much larger team in ministry
to Muslims in London for two weeks. At that time he was 70-some years old -
but you won't have known it by looking at or listening to him.

He had such a heart for people. But his heart, first of all, was for Jesus.
It was all very obvious to me... as well as to many others.

I just received news that he died this morning - his body succumbing to the
cancer sought to destroy it. He's home now. And Henry is more alive now
than he's every been.

I didn't think it would hit me this way. Henry was so ready to leave this
earth - not in a negative way at all... just ready to see Jesus
face-to-face. I'm happy for Henry but feel a heaviness... for his wife...
and for me. Henry was a man I deeply admired and wanted to emulate in
devotion to Christ, in discipline, in willingness to bring changes to his
life so that he could walk more closely to Jesus... to love others as he
understood Christ loved him.

I've missed seeing Henry around the past several weeks. I knew he was
dying. He was under hospice care. But I just didn't think that his death
would affect me this way. I don't want Henry to be gone. I'm not ready for
that. This world isn't ready for Henry to be gone. But I suppose God knows
best - what's best for Henry, for his wife, for me, for all of us. It's
best not just for Henry but for all of us. That's the way God works.

Thank you, Lord, for the time I had with Henry. Thank you for showing me
more of your grace and mercy in and through Henry... to see you a little
more clearly because of Henry.

Blessed is the Lord. Glory to the Father, to the Son, and to the Holy
Spirit. As it was, so it is and so it shall be forever. Amen.

Hocus Pocus

2006-11-10T20:37:00.000-05:00

The priest lifts the bread of the Eucharist out and perhaps above his head. He prays, reciting the words of Christ in Latin, "Hoc est corpus." ("This my body.") He breaks it and eats, taking into himself the broken body of Christ. Then he takes some wine and some water and pours a bit of each into a chalice, lifts the chalice and prays, reciting the words of Christ, what is translated into English as "This is my blood." He then drinks from the chalice, taking into himself the poured out blood of Christ.

Jesus said of the bread, "This is my body given for you..." Of the cup he said, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you." Christians believe that somehow the bread and the wine (juice) is the body and blood of Christ - more than just a representation, a symbol. Mystically, even though the they still look and taste exactly like bread and wine/juice.

At one time, pagans, too, came to believe that the bread and the wine became something else - body and blood. They, too began to recite the words "hoc est corpus" believing there was some magical power in the recitation of those words - an incantation. But like the game "Whisper Down the Lane," someone didn't get it quite right. The Latin became corrupted and what came out are the words we English speakers more familiarly know as "hocus pocus." The words are still used to today describe something mystical or magical - but often with a touch of cynicism.

It seems to be this way with many things that have originated in the Church. People who may indeed come "to church" but are not part of "the Church" frequently seem to come away from the Church with corruptions of what the Church does or teaches. Love - that wonderful determination to serve and care for someone regardless of cost to self - has been reduced to some kind of emotional "charge." Humility has become a nice personality characteristic but only if it doesn't keep you from getting what you want in this world. Justice has become a tool of political and financial convenience or promotion. Spirituality has nothing to do with one's own spirit being molded into the likeness of Christ by His own Holy Spirit - just a connection with the "All." Happiness has become the elusive goal of the earthbound who never realize that it is something like water. The more you try to grasp hold of it, the less of it you get - but if you simply prepare to received it (a container or cupped hands or an open mouth) you can then quench your thirst with it.

If only Christians would quit paying so much attention to what the rest of the world says is so important and real. Love God. Love your neighbor. And guess what happens. You can't just love your neighbor and forget about loving God. We're just not that good. And you can't just love God and forget about your neighbor. Love for God "spills out" to neighbors - even the enigmatic and troublesome ones.

We need to pay close attention to the Church - to what it has been teaching and practicing for 2000 years, despite what some in the Church have said and done during that time. If we would simply take into ourselves the brokenness of Christ and the spilled blood of Christ, if we would just love God and love others, what would happen? Perhaps something truly amazing and mystical and wonderful... hocus pocus! The kingdom of God here on earth.

Nothing except Christ

2006-11-04T09:14:00.000-05:00

"For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and
him crucified." (1 Corinthians 2:2)

This is an absolutely astounding statement. It seems as if the only thing
that captured the aposotle Paul's heart was the knowledge of Christ and,
within that, the knowledge of Christ's crucifixion.

Today, so much of the Church seems to be interested in how to "grow" the
Church. We have evangelism seminars, discipleship seminars, even seminars
on how to run seminars! What about seminars on Christ? What about seminars
on the meaning of Christ's crucifixion? What about the meaning of our lives
because of the crucifixion of Christ?

So many Christians' lives - mine included - are full of "things." Our
curiosities and passions take us off in directions that, while seemingly
good, lead us away from the knowledge of Christ and him crucified. Michael
W. Smith has written a song, the lyrics of which represent the need of the
vast majority of the Church in America to confess, repent and pray:

I have built an altar where I worship things of men
I have taken journeys that have drawn me far from You
Now I am returning to Your mercies ever flowing
Pardon my transgressions
Help me love You again

And then the refrain

Lord have mercy
Christ have mercy
Lord have mercy on me

If we are going to know the joy and peace of Christ in a truly radical way
we must come to "know nothing... except Jesus Christ and him crucified.
Church leaders must give themselves to studying and meditating on Christ
himself - not methods, not strategies, not vision casting, not marketing.

The love of God is a radical love. It calls us to what will appear to many
as a radical way of life. Our job as Christians is not to convince anyone
of its validity or necessity, only to love God totally with every ounce of
our being and to love others as love ourselves. This is possible only if we
make our purpose and goal in life to love God as he has shown us in Christ what that means and to love others, again, as he has shown us in Christ. Everything else must be abandoned.

Are we willing to abandon everything we have gained according to this world
for the sake of Christ? Are we willing to turn off our TVs, put down our
magazines and newspapers and isolate ourselves for even just 5 or 10 minutes
a few times a week to purposely meditate on Christ's crucifixion? Are we
willing to take a first step towards that? Are we willing to at least cry
out to God to make us willing?

If we truly want to "know Christ and the power of his resurrection," then we
must be willing and even deliberate to embrace "the fellowship of sharing in
his sufferings" even to the point of "becoming like him in his death." That doesn't
necessarily mean we must literally be physically crucified like Christ was but it
does mean that we will probably have to die to many of our dreams, desires,
and hopes in order to "fix our eyes on Jesus."

Lord, have mercy... on me.

Live Simple, Pray Hard

2006-10-21T11:28:00.000-04:00

We make "simple living" and "hard prayer" out to be much harder than they
really are, sometimes.

To live simply means living according to Jesus' summary of the Law and the
Prophets: Love the Lord in absolutely every way possible and be dedicated to
the welfare of others as much as you care for your own. Included in that is
the idea that what is comfortable and easy for us is NOT the goal,
Consequently, to live simply, to live in conjunction with the command, is to
incorporate into our only those things of this world that are truly
necessary. We could learn much from the Amish - both in the direct
implications of simple living and in loving others.

To pray hard is really just giving ourselves to prayer even when we don't
want to. Muslims are to pray five times a day. Jews used to pray (maybe
some still due) at "the hour for prayer" in their day every day. Christians
are to "pray unceasingly." That may seem like a daunting task - but if we
simply pray the prayers we have (the Psalms among other scripture portions)
and have been taught (The Lord's Prayer, The Jesus Prayer, the Te Deum, just
to name a few) and then keep a constant prayer in our hearts when those are
not being cognitively said... Something like, "How can I best honor you now,
Lord?"

Live simply, Pray Hard. Make it so in me, Lord.

A Response To Baba Ali (re: Who Hijacked Islam/My Religion?)

2006-10-17T13:09:00.004-04:00

This may take a little while to load once you click on the play button. Alternatively, you could go to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlhNAEClzZw. It's about 10 minutes long.

Who Hijacked Islam?

2006-10-16T10:32:00.000-04:00

I just watched a very interesting video on YouTube. (Click the title on this article to view the video.) Baba Ali wants to know who hijacked his religion. His point seems to be that Islam is getting a bad name because the media is preseting a prejudicial view by broadcasting only those who present Muslims as terrorists or, at least, support the terrorists. He says that the barbaric acts committed by s0-called Muslims is completely inconsistent with Islam. He says that the so-called experts of Islam really know know Islam at all - certainly no better than the terrorists claiming to be Muslim. He wants Islam to be protrayed by those who truly know Islam, but those who practice Islam as it was intended to be, as taught in the Qur'an. He wants good examples of Islam. Muslims who carry out and support acts of terrorism are not good examples of Islam. They are not good Muslims. They do not truly represent Islam.

My question: Whom does he propose is a good example of Islam? Who would he like to see represent Islam? Who would constitute a good, a true Muslim? Who represents Islam better than anyone else. I would think, of course, that Baba Ali would at least name Muhammed. Does Muhammed represent true Islam? It is my understanding (and I am open to correction) that Muhammed lived the teachings of the Koran as the model for what the Qur'an truly means.

The challenge, then is to know how Muhammed lived. How can we know how Muhammed lived. The Hadith is one way.

The problem, it seems to me, is that Muhammed engaged in his own acts of barbarism. Check the Hadith. The record is clear. Muhammed did slay numbers of people; at least one time it was an entire village. Was he justified in the killings he committed and/or directed? I won't answer that one... But let me make a comparison.

Who represents Christianity better than anyone else? Jesus Christ. And whom did Jesus kill? Whom did Jesus direct to be killed? What did Jesus teach about how to treat one's enemies? Granted, the Church has not always been consistent with the teachings of Jesus. Some in the Church have committed barbarous acts. But would you agree with me that Christians who act this way are not modeling what Christ modeled?

What model does Muhammed provide?

Answer that question and we may begin to get a picture of who hijacked Islam.

Everything is Changed but Nothing is Different

2006-10-04T21:10:00.000-04:00

I saw it again in an editorial in today's local paper. The tragic events
that have occurred have somehow "changed our world." Nothing will ever be
the same. Everything is changed... but nothing is different.

Just this past Monday, in our area there was a shooting at an Amish school -
five girls died, plus the killer, as a result of that shooting. Five other
girls are in the hospital.

We seem to think a tragedy changes the world - that now it's not as safe as
it used to be. After the shooting Columbine, everything changed. After
9-11, everything changed. In one week there were three more school
shootings - one at an Amish school - and now everything has changed. Oddly,
nothing is different. Nothing, that is, except, perhaps, our perception.

The world is a dangerous place. We don't always see it or feel it... but
it's always dangerous. There are no guarantees of any kind of safety in
this world. As one old bumper sticker put it - "You won't get out of this
life alive."

And so what are we to do? How do we protect ourselves and our loved ones
and, especially, our children? The sad and painful reality is that we
can't... oh, maybe we can up to a certain point - but that point comes
quickly and, just as quickly, can disappear. Life is dangerous. Life is
hard. Life is NOT guaranteed.

My grandfather used to tell me, "There are two things every person HAS to do
in this world. One is that you have to die. The second is that you HAVE to
pay taxes. Nobody gets to skip out on taxes this year. And nobody gets to
skip death

Except...

Jesus said, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will
live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never
die. " (John 11:25-26)

Maybe you do have to die - but who said death has to have the last word? If
that's true, then everything really is different. But it was made different
long before 9-11, long before Columbine. It was made different 2000 years
ago when a Jewish carpenter was killed by the state for nothing he had done
wrong, was buried in a tomb and then, three days later, was discovered to be
alive!!

Now, everything really is changed. Nothing is the same.

Oh yes, there's one more thing Jesus said... right at the end of his
statement about dying and yet living. "Do you believe believe this?"

Do you?

The True Heart of Love

2006-10-04T16:18:00.000-04:00

This is a portion of John Michael Talbot's "Reflections on the Gospels" from
Luke 9:43-45.

A heart of love... is a heart of mystery. It lives by dying for those it
loves. It is glorified in being humbled for those it loves. It is given
abundant wealth by becoming poor so that those it loves might share in its
wealth. These things are all paradoxes. They are all mystery. Yet they all
boldly and clearly proclaim the truth of God's love. This love was most
clearly revealed in the death of God's Son, Jesus the Christ.

Do we understand this mystery, or do we still seek a Messiah who will come
in pragmatic, worldly victory? Do we really seek the action of the Spirit in
our life so we might understand this mystery? Do we really allow ourselves
to be daily born again in his love by coming to share in a daily death to
selfishness and sin?

A Prayer

2006-10-03T19:59:00.000-04:00

Inflame our hearts with love for Thee, O Christ our God, that loving Thee
with all our heart, with all our mind, with all our soul, and with all our
strength, and our neighbors as ourselves, we may obey Thy commandments and
glorify Thee, the Giver of all good things. Amen.

An Eastern Orthodox Prayer

Even If It Does "Moo"

2006-09-14T16:35:00.000-04:00

In Colorado a few months ago, the Gill Foundation sponsored ads in order to
(as they claim) get people thinking and talking (again) about the debate on
whether or not homosexuality is or is not genetic. Their advertisements
centered around a cute puppie that said "Moo" instead of "Aarff."

And if there really is a gene that predisposes a person to alcoholism, does
that make it okay for him/her to get drunk?

And if there really is a gene that predisposes a person to homicidal
behavior, should we adjust our laws (let alone our morality) to let him/her
do what is "only natural"?

Even if a dog really does moo instead of barks, does that make the dog a
cow?

Yes, Virginia, there really is such a thing as a stupid question.

Does God Want You To Be Rich?

2006-09-11T08:53:00.000-04:00

This was the title of the cover article in the Sept 18, 2006 issue in Time
magazine. I just read it after a friend sent me a copy of the article
itself.

It seems to me that, once again, we're asking the wrong question. Yes, I
believe there are lots of people who not only want to ask that question but
also want it answered (and people like Joel Osteen certainly want to give
you the answer they have)... But I'm not sure that there is a truly biblical
answer to that question... And here's why.

What we are told time and time again throughout the scriptures is that God's
primary concern is that human beings "grow up." What does it mean to grow
up? According to scripture, one's maturity is measured by how well one
loves. Of course, love has to be defined, too.

This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son
as an atoning sacrifice for our sins. (1 John 4:10)

This is love for God: to obey his commands. (1 John 5:3)

"'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with
all your strength and with all your mind'; and, 'Love your neighbor as
yourself.'" (Luke 10:27)

And this is love: that we walk in obedience to his commands. As you have
heard from the beginning, his command is that you walk in love. (2 John 6)

Love is not primarily about what you feel towards something or someone.
Love is about what you commit to sacrifice for the welfare of the other.
Sacrifice means giving of yourself. It may be a "thing" that you give (such
as money) but there is something of your self that has been invested in it.
Love means sacrifice.

The question really isn't, "How much does God want you to have?" The real
question is, "How much does God intend for you to keep?"

Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched
the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people
threw in large amounts. But a poor widow came and put in two very small
copper coins, worth only a fraction of a penny. Calling his disciples to
him, Jesus said, "I tell you the truth, this poor widow has put more into
the treasury than all the others. They all gave out of their wealth; but
she, out of her poverty, put in everything- all she had to live on." (Mark
12:41-44)

John Wesley said, "Make all you can. Save all you can. Give all you can."
As my friend has said... It's that last one that's the killer.

Does God want you to be rich? Yes... In love, my friend, in love.

Confession

2006-09-06T21:11:00.000-04:00

Okay, maybe I've been a bit hard on the so-called mega-churches. Maybe.
Perhaps one of the things we might learn from them is that, if we
(Christians) are going to communicate the message of the gospel to whatever
culture in which we happen to find ourselves, we must use the "tools" that
culture has available - the "language" they use.

But... (you knew there was going to be a "but", didn't you?)

But my point really isn't about how outreach, evangelism and missions is
being done. My point is that worship is not evangelism. It's not outreach.
It's not that I'm opposed to unbelievers being present in the worship
service but when we tailor worship to be "palatable" to the unbeliever -
regardless of the cultural setting - then we really need to ask: What is the
purpose of worship - specifically corporate worship?

I cannot speak for other faiths or religions. I can speak for Christians
and for the Church, however. Historically, worship has been for the
believer. Period. Worship never was something the Church "used." It is
something God's Spirit uses - not so much like a "tool" as it is a
"breathable atmosphere." Christian worship is like a husband and wife
making love to each other. It's the act of "making love" but it's also more
than the act itself. It is the bonding of two hearts, two souls that are
totally committed to each other - exclusively to each other and to no one
else.

Sadly, many churches have made their so-called worship a theatre
performance, a concert, a "Your Best Life Now" instruction series, a
twelve-step program, a call to "come and get it." It's something THEY have
made... and not something the Spirit has made.

Worship is, as one song says, "all about you, Jesus." I fear that Jesus has
often been left out of the worship service - and not even missed. I recall
the words of one Christian (non-American) visiting a prayer meeting I was at some years
ago: "It's amazing what the Church in America has been able to accomplish...
Without any help at all from the Spirit."

And I wonder... How much success I have attained in even my own life without
any help from the Spirit? "For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain
the whole world, and lose his own soul?" (Mark 8:36)

Lord, have mercy.
Christ, have mercy.
Lord, have mercy.

The "Mega-Church" and the "Mega-Church Wannabe's"

2006-09-04T21:36:00.000-04:00

This is my response to one of the comments to my "Church Growth" post. I changed only the last couple of lines a bit from the original post. I just thought some may read it as a regular blog post rather than as a response to a blog post. And if you disagree with me (or if you do agree with me), feel free to leave your comment. I may or may not respond. So here it is...

--------------------------

Most mega-churches and mega-church "wannabes" have sold out to our culture. (Notice i said "most.") What goes on in the "worship" service? It is, for the most part, a concert atmosphere. Get 'em in. Make 'em feel good. Get 'em to bring their friends. There is NO scripture read. Prayers are utilitarian. There are virtually no sacraments. Church tradition is ignored (at best!). The message (sermon?) is frequently a Tony Robbins knock-off.

Why has this approach been adopted? Because it brings in the numbers. The Church in America - particularly the Evangelical Church - has sold out to the pop culture. What the Spirit says to the Church (churches) in the Revelation of John is ignored because we'd rather give attention to our demographic studies and social preferences. We get "better results" through strategic planning than through preaching about sin and holiness.

Church structures are now routinely designed to avoid looking like a church because we don't want unbelievers thinking they're coming into anything religious. A gymnasium with no Christian symbols is preferred to an adorned sanctuary so people will feel "comfortable" and won't be reminded of the despicability of their sin and need for the blood (eeewwwww) of Christ.

Image has become far more important than substance in the Evangelical Church in America. Yet our brothers and sisters in other societies suffer extreme physical deprivation - not to mention the millions of those suffering outside the Church - so we can have our Starbucks Cathedrals.

The issue is far less about numbers than it is about what constitutes a Christian, what constitutes the Church. Multitudes flocked to hear Jesus... and what did he tell them? Blessed are the POOR... Blessed are the MEEK... Blessed are the PERSECUTED...

I never said the Church should ignore numbers. What i said was that the Church should be paying attention to a different set of numbers. For example: How many people in your church attend a prayer meeting where the time is actually spent in prayer? (Check out the Korean church!) How much of a tithe/offering do individuals provide each week? (Check out the Zimbabwean church!) There are lots of numbers we would do well to look at.

And having said all that I look at myself and am ashamed... for I have prticipated in the very things i have condemned. Lord have mercy.

Is it possible that multitudes today come to hear the gospel at one particular church of this "mega" brand kind? It's possible. But I believe that, in America, it's the exception... at least from what i've seen.

First Things First

2006-09-04T10:28:00.000-04:00

Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has
been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing
them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and
teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with
you always, to the very end of the age." (Matthew 28:18-20

"...you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will
be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends
of the earth." (Acts 1:8)

It might be awfully tempting to think, as many actually do, that this is the
most important thing the individual Christian has to do right now.
Evangelization is Priority One... Or is it?

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have
not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until
heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of
a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is
accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and
teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven,
but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the
kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses
that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not
enter the kingdom of heaven." (Matt 5:17-20)

It might be tempting to think that this is the priority. After all, if our
lives do not match what we preach, of what use is our preaching? But is it the
root issue? Is either evangelization or holy living really the primary goal for
the Christian? Are either of these what Christianity is all about? Someone
actually asked Jesus that question, albeit not in those words, but very
close to it.

"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" Jesus replied:
"'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with
all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second
is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets
hang on these two commandments." (Matt 22:35-40)

This is what author Scot McKnight calls "The Jesus Creed."

This is what Christians are all about: Love God. Love one another. Love is
defined for us by God himself. But that's for another post. God designed
us to love. We failed. God redeemed us to so that we could love. Apart
from faith in the grace and mercy of God, it doesn't happen. But himself
God is love. We were made and redeemed to love God... And each other.

To the Church: Let's make sure we get first things first.

Church Growth

2006-08-20T22:01:00.000-04:00

If you listen in on pastors talking "shop," quite likely one of the first
things you'll hear will be the question: How large is your congregation?

That seems to be the most important issue in much of the Church (at least in
much of the American Evangelical Church) these days. Growth is measured in
terms of how many more attendees there are now than there were a year ago in
the worship service - or house churches or small groups or whatever... It's
about numbers. Let's make sure we're keeping an accurate count. Let's put
it on a chart. Let's demonstrate what God has done by teaching others how
to get more people to come to their church.

King David took a count, a census, even though God told him that was
something that should not be done. David did anyway. (We're not told why,
we're just told he did.) And right after he did that he regretted it. He
had disobeyed God and he was sorry. He confessed his sin to God. He cried
out for forgiveness. And God forgave him... but there were still grave
consequences. Because of King David's disobedience, there was plague that
ravaged the people of Israel for three months. 70,000 people died.

Are you sure you want to "measure" Church growth this way?

I've got a suggestion. Let's change the question. Instead of keeping count
of how many we have in our congregations, instead of counting how many more
we have this week than we had last week, instead of determing who the
"great" pastors are by the size of their congregation, instead of asking,
"How many are in your congregation" let's ask this question:

How many of your congregation died because they followed Christ today? How
many in your parish are now martyrs for their faith in Christ?

The Church in China has it right. Here is true Church growth. Because they
are sacrificing everything - literally - to trust and follow Jesus, they are
being ostracized, they are beeing persecuted, they are being beaten and they
are being killed. But they are not dying... they are living! And as a
result they are taking the gospel to those who have never before heard of
Jesus Christ or his gospel - they may be ostracized, persecuted, beaten and
killed... but so what. That's no different than what they've already
experienced.

I don't care how large your worship attendance is. I want to know how many
have literally given their lives for the sake of Christ.

"They overcame [Satan] by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their
testimony; they did not love their lives so much as to shrink from death."
(Rev. 12:11) When the Church in America makes this the important "count"
then the Church in America will grow.

Worship

2006-08-20T21:25:00.000-04:00

It happened again today... or perhaps more to the point, it didn't happen
again.

I was at another church in which the worship service would have been
completely devoid of any scripture reading had it not been that I began my
message with it.

What is happening? How is this kind of sloppy approach to worship thought
to be acceptable? For centuries the Church has organized her worship
service around the Word. Now it seems to be organized around songs that are
appealing. (Speaking of which, the songs that were sung were all very
"upbeat" and focused mostly on "me." What happened to the substance of the
singing being theologically oriented, teaching about God?)

Somewhere along the line the "leaders" of a group of people gathering to
declare themselves as present for worship have decided that they can
determine what constitutes worship... Never mind what the Church has
practiced for centuries. Never mind what the apostles practiced. Never
mind what the apostles taught!!

If evangelicals don't realize that they cannot cut themselves off from the
historic Church they will become - at best - a cult.

Someone needs to start asking the question "Who's in Charge?" Who has the
authority to declare what does and does not constitute Christian worship?

I've been accused of attempting to push my "preferences" over other people's
preferences. Well, if that's true, then here's my preference and I WILL
push it... Christian worship is not whatever you want it to be. It's not
whatever makes people feel good. It's not evangelism!! It is God-centered,
God-directed, God-focused, God-glorifying. Whether it benefits me or not isn't the point. Does it benefit God?!?

The place of God in our worship has become, at best, a consideration and no longer the focus. No, I don't care that the word "God" or "Lord" is used periodically in the songs, in the instructions and pleas, or even in the prayers. God has become nothing more than a tool to make my life feel better, happier, more pleasant. Christians are being taught
a utilitarian approach to God, to the Word, to prayer, and to worship. What
makes a good worship service good? Ask someone - most of the time you'll
hear this kind of answer in response: "I really got a lot out of that
service."

SO WHAT!!?? Who cares what you get out of the worship service!? The whole
direction/point/focus/purpose of worship is to give God what HE wants out of
YOU! When asked, "How was worship?" We must resist "measuring" our worship by how we felt about it. We must consider how God felt about it. It's not about what "I" got out of it but what did God get out of me? Did I praise him despite the lousy week i had? Was I aware of his presence as the scriptures were read? Did i "taste and see" him in the bread and in the cup? Did I repent of my self-indulgence and self-righteousness and arrogant judgementalism? Did I give myself as fully and completely as I could to God... again? Did I listen for God? Did I determine I would do whatever God might tell me to do even before I heard from him - and then follow through?

The American Evangelical Church has become a place where we seek to
make people feel better about... well, whatever they want their lives to be about. Never mind following Jesus and suffering. Never mind following Jesus and dying.

Debbie Boone sang, "You light up my life... It can't be wrong when it feels
so right, cause You light up my life."

And that is the focus of worship in most of the Evangelical Church.
Congratulations, you have successfully integrated into the American culture.
Too bad the Kingdom of Christ contradicts American culture.

Where Are You?

2006-08-01T18:05:00.000-04:00

I remember hearing over an intercom, some years ago, an announcement for the parents of a small child to meet their child at the security office. The announcer explained that their child was looking for them but couldn't find them because they were lost! I chuckled at that announcement (and still do) wondering if the announcer had decided to put that spin on the situation or if the child really thought his parents were lost.

After Adam and Eve had sinned, we're told, in Genesis 3:8-9, that Adam and Eve heard the sound of God walking along in the garden during the cool of the day - but instead of walking out to meet God, they hid themselves. We're then told that God called out and said, "Where are you?"

Doesn't it seem odd that God had to ask "Where are you?" God, who is omniscient, asks a question that appears to indicate that he did not know where Adam was!

Could it be that Adam and Eve's sin really did somehow keep God from getting to them? Although God is omnipotent and omniscient, it does seem that he voluntarily limits himself in certain ways especially when dealing with human beings. One of those ways is that, although God exercises sovereignty over the affairs of Man, he also exercises restraint in his sovereignty because of his great love towards us. This allows for individual human beings to legitimately practice free will - especially when humans choose to go against God's will. But another aspect of God's self-limitation seems to be that he at least permits sin to affect him. (Otherwise, why would God sorrow over Man's sin? Why would have "Jesus wept" over Jerusalem's resistance to and rebellion against him?) Perhaps another way in which God permits himself to be affected by a person's sin is that he cannot "find" the sinner - until the sinner wants to be found.

And yet God must have some idea of where the sinner can be found. The sinful condition of the human heart is such that it cannot, of its own accord, decide to quit sinning and seek God. God, himself, must first do something in the sinner's heart to cause that heart to want to be changed.

And therein lies the next point to ponder. Perhaps God's question, "Where are you?" is not merely a question God is asking in order to find the one who is lost. Perhaps the question is asked so that the one who is lost can realize that he truly is actually lost! How often has a person gone off on a trip in a certain direction only to discover he wasn't where he should be and didn't know where he was? If he had known right away he was going in the wrong direction, he might not have become "as lost" or even lost at all!

The reality is that, not only are we lost but we either don't know it or don't care... or simply refuse to allow ourselves to be found. But not only has God asked, "Where are you?" In Christ God even answers the question, "Aahh... there you are."

Before You Ask

2006-07-10T16:47:00.000-04:00

The following is from today's "Slice of Infinity." - J

====================================================

Helen Roseveare was an English missionary from 1953 to 1973 in what is now
the Democratic Republic of Congo (formerly Zaire). She used her skills as a
doctor to minister to the many physical needs in a politically unstable
country, founding hospitals and a medical school, while at the same time
sharing her faith with people who had known great suffering.

Throughout her ministry Roseveare found herself in need of financial support
to carry on her work. In spite of many pressing needs, early in her
ministry she established the practice of tithing (giving ten percent) of any
gift that came in, giving it back to God in faith.

One morning in her first year of clinic work, she slipped away to her house,
hoping for ten minutes of quiet. She found on her doorstep a man with his
wife and two small children. He informed her that he had been sent to her
for work. She told him that she didn't have any work for him, and that he
should inquire of the missionary down the road who might hire him. The man
adamantly insisted that he would work for her, and informed her that he had
been cooking for missionaries for eighteen years. When Roseveare asked why
he had left his previous employers, he rolled up the sleeve of his shirt.
Roseveare recognized at once that the man was infected with leprosy.

The young missionary doctor's heart sank. She felt a deep conviction that
this man's coming meant God wanted her to begin a new work for the treatment
of lepers. She was not afraid of leprosy, but the stigma the disease
carried meant they would need separate facilities, costing more money and
more of her already scarce time. Yet though she clearly could see the cost
that this work would entail, Roseveare believed that if God wanted it to go
forward, He would provide the resources. In faith, she hired the man named
Aunzo to be her cook.

They built a small mud-and-thatch building to serve as a leprosy clinic, and
sent off for medicine, bandages, and equipment. The supplies came with a
bill for 4,320 Belgian Congo francs, money that Roseveare did not have. She
prayed that God would provide the money, then slipped the bill into her
Bible.

The mission had a strict policy that all bills must be paid by the end of
the month. As the month's end drew near, Roseveare expected God to provide
the needed amount, but no funds appeared. As the first day of the next
month dawned, Roseveare went to work discouraged and confused.

At lunch time, Aunzo greeted her with a large brown envelope. It had been
delivered the previous day to a different missionary by mistake! Inside the
envelope was money that came to the sum of 4,800 francs. Roseveare quickly
subtracted the tithe in her head, which left 4,320 francs, the exact amount
needed to pay the bill for the supplies. She writes:

"The total was made up of three gifts, from an unknown couple in North
America, from two prayer partners in Northern Ireland, and from a Girl
Crusaders' Union class in southeast England. The North American gift had
been on the way some four months, transferred from our Philadelphia office
to the London office, from London to Brussels, Brussels to Leopoldville
(Kinshasa), and finally upcountry from Leopoldville to Paulis (Isiro).
Every transfer involved a certain percentage cost. At the end, the three
gifts had arrived together to make the exact sum needed, and two of the
gifts were designated: 'for your leprosy work'-and I did not have a leprosy
work when the money was actually given!"(1)

God does not always work so neatly and obviously, but extraordinary
provisions such as this one serve as a reminder that, "your Father knows
what you need before you ask him" (Matthew 6:8). God had a leprosy clinic
in mind long before Roseveare thought of it, and he put it in the hearts of
his children to give the money for that work. In the days to come, days
which would bring scarcity, hard labor, and very real danger, this was a
promise that Helen Roseveare could keep close to her heart. Even as you
read this, God is anticipating your needs and making provision for them.
You can bring them to him with joyful anticipation that He is expecting you.

Betsy Childs is associate writer at Ravi Zacharias International Ministries
in Atlanta, Georgia.

(1) Helen Roseveare, Living Faith (Minneapolis: Bethany House, 1980), 43.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright(c) 2005
Ravi Zacharias International Ministries (RZIM).
Reprinted with permission.

To subscribe, send an empty email to:
<mailto:slice-text-subscribe@lists.rzim.org>

Not So Much

2006-07-09T23:25:00.000-04:00

They overcame him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their
testimony; they did not love their lives so much as to shrink from death.
(Revelation 12:11)

I read this verse again (I've already read it numerous times) a couple weeks
ago. It's been on my mind... and bothering me. Actually, it's not the
verse that bothers me but the standard against which my life is compared.

Christians are going to be persecuted. Jesus says that (see Matthew 10).
He wasn't talking about those who call themselves Christians because they
don't associate with pagan religions. Jesus is talking about those who
follow him, those who seek to imitate him and to be like him as much as
possible, those who are staking their lives on trusting and obeying him and
what he taught.

Lately (over the past several months... maybe years...) I've begun to
question my own love for Christ, my understanding of the love he has poured
out on me, of the grace he has lavished on me. I tend to live so selfishly.
I anger easily. I despair quickly. I talk too much and pray too little.
I'm judgemental and arrogant. I tend to be manipulative and defensive. I
work towards self-comfort and flee self-sacrifice. Care for self is a high
priority. Love for others is, at best, small and fickle depending on what
it will cost me - or what I fear it may cost me. I'm calculating and
fearful.

Lord, have mercy.

How do I come to this point of being able to love as Christ loved me? To
give as Christ gave? To choose death at the hands of an accuser and
attacker for the sake of love rather than choose life through self-defense
for the sake of... well... self.

There are times, Jesus, I feel so far from your kingdom of light and life
and love. O grant me your Holy Spirit that my way of thinking and the
desires of my heart would more closely resemble your own.

Christ, have mercy.

To overcome the sting of death, to defeat the enemy and destroy the works of
the devil, my Lord entered into the very bowels of death, marching directly
into enemy territory and destroyed death and the devil from the inside out.
And he gained eternal life - for himself and for all. And now I must follow
him... despite my fear of pain and loss. For what good is it for a man to
gain the whole world and lose his soul. I must lose my life for the sake of
Christ and his kingdom if I am to have life.

Lord, have mercy.

"...they did not love their lives so much as to shrink from death." O Lord,
may I love my life not so much. Help me to love you with all my heart,
soul, mind and strength... and to love others as I love myself... as you
have loved me, Jesus.

Camels With No Necks

2006-07-02T18:44:00.000-04:00

Camels With No Necks

Great article about why Christians are not free to redefine Jesus Christ other than the way the orthodox Church doctrine has understood and defined him.

The Body of Christ (part 1 of 4)

2006-07-01T21:01:00.008-04:00

1. What is “the Body of Christ?” There are four statements that define “body of Christ” quite clearly for us in the New Testament.

a. And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way. (Eph 1:22-23 – “Hhis” and “him” are references to Christ.)

b. The husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. (Eph 5:23)

c. He is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. (Col 1:18 – Again, “he” references Christ.)

d. Now I rejoice in what was suffered for you, and I fill up in my flesh what is still lacking in regard to Christ’s afflictions, for the sake of his body, which is the church. (Col 1:24)

e. There may be other verses we could reference but these are sufficient to make the point. The apostle Paul states quite clearly that the Church is the Body of Christ. Amazingly though, Paul then goes on to say that the Body is “the fullness of him who fills all in all. This hearkens to Paul’s declaration that in Christ all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form. (Col 2:9 ) As Christ possesses all the fullness of Deity so the Church possesses all the fullness of Christ. And so each Christian is “complete” (or full) as part of and within the Body of Christ since it is in his Body that the Spirit of Christ dwells. We must be very clear that no individual Christian is complete in him- or herself. It is within the context of the Body of Christ, the Church, that the individual Christian finds completeness.

f. In discussing the relationship God intended between a husband and wife, St. Paul draws the parallel to the relationship between Christ and “the Church, his body, of which he is the Savior.” (Ephesians 5:23) Paul begins this comparison between the marriage relationship and the spiritual relationship, however, by identifying that “Christ is the head of the Church…” In the context of the letter, Paul seems to be making the point that while the husband is one with his wife, just as Christ is one with his Church, that there is still a hierarchy that must be observed. The relationship between the Church as the Body and Christ as the Head must be understood that, though there is a deep and abiding intimacy, they cannot be separated; the Head is the one who controls the Body and not the other way around.

i. A similar but shorter statement is made by the apostle to the Colossian Church that Christ is the head of the body, the church. (Colossians 1:18) In the opening of Colossians, Paul is attempting to establish the nature of Christ as having superiority over all created things. It is because of who Christ is (and not just what he’s done) that makes him head of the Church. After all, He is the image of the invisible God. That virtue alone would qualify him to be head of the Church since he possesses supremacy over all that exists but the rest of the godhead. Again, this passage makes it quite clear that while the “Body of Christ” holds a relationship with Christ that is like no other relationship between God and creation, personal and intimate, it is still under the authority of Christ just as the physical body is under the authority of the physical head despite their obviously intimate relationship.

ii. Additionally, there is this statement Paul makes to the Colossian Church that reiterates the same statement within the previous two passages: Now I rejoice in what was suffered for you, and I fill up in my flesh what is still lacking in regard to Christ’s afflictions, for the sake of his body, which is the church. (Col 1:24)

g. The phrase and the point of these three verses we should notice, is that the Body of Christ is the Church and the Church is the Body of Christ. The Church, at this point meaning the universal or catholic Church, constitutes the Body of Christ. There is no part of the Church that is not also part of the Body of Christ and, conversely, there is no part of the Body of Christ that is not also part of the Church. But this begs another question.

h. As well, no Christian can be a Christian without being part of the Body of Christ, the Church. People who claim to be Christian but refuse to have anything to do with the Church are saying, in essence, “I’m part of the Body of Christ but I want nothing to do with the Body of Christ.” They may mean that they don’t like the way the Body of Christ sometimes seems to act. They may despise the brokenness and fracturing of the Church. There may be lots of things they don’t like about the Church or about specific Christians. Refusal to associate with the Body of Christ, however, is like a finger saying that it refuses to associate with the rest of the body of which it is, by nature, a part. To “cut itself off” from the rest of the body is death for that part. As it is for the physical body, so it is for the Body of Christ.

i. But all this begs another question. Who, specifically, qualify as members of Christ’s Body? What “defines” the Body of Christ? We shall consider that question in a post to follow.

What Christians Believe

2006-06-28T09:59:00.000-04:00

After posting about the article in the Eufala Tribune and the lack of any presentation of Christian belief, I decided it would be right for me to post what it is that constitutes basic Christian belief here.

This is most frequently identified as The Apostle's Creed. Not all who call themselves Christians agree with all of it. I would contend that anyone who does not agree with it is probably not a Christian.

I believe in God, the Father Almighty,
Maker of heaven and earth;
and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord;
Who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried.
He descended into the place of the dead;
the third day He arose again from the dead.
He ascended into heaven,
and sits at the right hand of God, the Father Almighty;
from there He shall come to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the Holy Catholic Church,
the communion of Saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body
and life everlasting.

Upcoming Posts

2006-06-28T09:40:00.000-04:00

Clearly my web log does not have a vast following - if any at all. But just
in case you read this and are interested I plan to post a series of talks I
just gave to a group of 20-somethings who were (at the time of this writing,
they still are) preparing to go to three different countries overseas to do
missionary work for a month. I'll post each talk in short "clips" since
each one took about an hour and involved anywhere from 4-7 pages of
manuscript.

To be honest, I'm doing this at my wife's encouragement. I never would have
thought to do so.

There are four topics I address in five talks - The Body of Christ,
Servanthood, Spiritual Warfare (in two parts), and Holy Spirit Empowerment.
I hope you (whoever you may be) will find these helpful.

I'd be quite glad to "hear" from you as you read these. Just click
"comment" below the appropriate post and send me a note.

Christian-Muslim Dialogue

2006-06-28T09:31:00.000-04:00

The Eufaula Tribune (Alabama) today reported on a panel discussion that took
place in that town between Muslims and Christians in the hopes that a better
understanding of each other between the two might help to establish peaceful
relations between Islam and Christianity. ("Christians, Muslims discuss
beliefs")

The Eufaula Tribune said that Imam Yusuf Hassan spoke for Muslims in which
he spoke of the Five Pillars of Islam. Each of those Five Pillars with a
brief explanation of each were printed in the Tribune article.

The article said Pastor Ken Jackson of Christian Life Church in Eufaula
spoke addressed the basics of Christian belief. The Tribune printed nothing
about what those basics were.

This is example of what troubles me in much of the reporting of the
so-called Christian-Muslim Dialogue (or Muslim-Christian Dialogue) in our
country. Why was there no mention - absolutely none - of even one aspect of
basic Christian belief? Is it just assumed that everybody knows what
constitutes basic Christian belief? Not a safe assumption! But I hardly
think that's the reason for the omission.

It seems to me that there is a clear bias in much of our media that attempts
to either denigrate Christian faith or to marginalize it. How can we - the
masses - hope to be engaged in a process of peace when the "news" that is
presented only presents the sensational. It is a huge mistake the media
makes when most of the news on Islam and Muslims focuses on the extreme.
Equally as much is it a mistake to focus primarily on Islam.

How can issues be considered when only half the issues are presented. I'll
bet the folks at the panel discussion heard from both sides. I wonder if
Eric Betts was actually present. And if he was, I wonder if he listened to
all that went on. And if he did, I wonder if he figured the Christian
presentation was irrelevant or, at best, just not news-worthy.

What it means is that there is a bias against Christianity. - at least at
the Eufaula Tribune. The Trib seems to be in good company - or at least in
company, good or otherwise. Guess I shouldn't get too worked up over this.
After all, Jesus did warn his disciples that there would be days like
this... many, many days.

A Prayer

2006-06-19T12:59:00.000-04:00

Lord, your Word, which stands firm for ever in heaven, dwells in your
Church; may his presence bring lasting light to your temple.

Reading What's Not There

2006-06-18T22:36:00.000-04:00

It all started with Eve, the mother of us all. The story of the first
humans, Even and Adam, opens the Bible with a tangle of loneliness,
companionship, desire, and love. It tells how woman, made in the Creator's
image, gives up a life of ease in an idyllic setting, along with the promise
of immortality, and instead, chooses to pursue wisdom and intimacy with her
man.

This how Naomi Harris Rosenblatt opens her article, "The First Rebel", in a
special edition of US News and World Report titled "Women of the Bible."
While it isn't stated in the Introduction, I can't help wondering if this
isn't directly connected to the release of the movie version of Dan Brown's
book, "The Da Vinci Code."

Quite frankly, after reading the first paragraph of Rosenblatt's article,
I'm not terribly interested in reading the rest of it. But I kept
reading...

The Garden of Eden is an ideal playground, a place of innocence where life
is beautiful and safe, lacking all challenges.

I'm wondering if Rosenblatt has read Genesis any time recently, or if she's
referring either to what she's heard others say about it or what she
remembers from having someone read it to her when she was 4 or 5. Or maybe
she has read it herself recently and decided to "fill in" what she felt was
lacking... or even completely alter some of what's already there in order
fit a 21st century post-modern feminist agenda.

What's clear is that she's ascribing this to the Genesis/Eden account things
that are simply not there - not even between the lines.

The choice Eve had to make was whether or not to choose trust in and
obedience to God - not whether to choose an idyllic setting for an easy life
or wisdom and certainly not choosing between immortality or intimacy with
her man. The characterization is absurd... at best. Nowhere - nowhere in
all of the Bible let alone Genesis - is Eve's choice depicted as giving up
fantasy for reality.

The "life of ease" Rosenblatt depicts is not a biblical characterization
describing Eden. There is no description to suggest what life was like in
Eden except that God was present, that he talked with Adam and Eve, and that
he had given them responsibility for all that was in the Garden. Sounds
like at least some kind of work to me - not at all "lacking all challenges."
About the only description on which I agree with Rosenblatt is that it was a
"place of innocence where life is beautiful." The fact that there was a
serpent seeking to tempt them to do that which would get them kicked of such
a place means it certainly was not "safe."

May I suggest that when you read the Bible and begin to work out what it
means for your life, the least that can be done is to read what is there and
don't read what is not there. That's not as easy as it sounds. It requires
a willingness to recognize and accept that there are questions the Bible
does not answer. It was not designed to serve as an exhaustive treatise on
every subject under the sun. It is not a history book - although it
contains history. It is not a financial strategy book - although it
contains financial strategy. It is not a science book - although it
contains some science. It is not a book of philosophy - although it does
contain philosophy. What the Bible is, more than anything else, is the
revelation of God by God to Man about God's and Man's relationship with each
other. Furthermore, and perhaps most importantly, it is the revelation of
God's heart for all of mankind, the root problem that mankind faces, and the
solution God has provided because of his heart for each and all of mankind.

But even then, the Bible does not answer all our questions. What we must
recognize is that God has answered all the essential questions, the answers
that could not be discovered apart from God's revelation. We may gain
answers to some of our questions outside of the Bible but we dare not
attribute to the Bible things that are not included within it - even by
implication.

Rosenblatt - and many like her - typically want the Bible to say more than
it says AND less than it says. Reading one's own personal biases (whether
they be cultural or political or any other) into it helps us make what the
Bible say what we want it to say. That way we don't have to wrestle with
what it actually does say... and doesn't say.

Orthodox Christianity has been taking a lot of hard knocks in recent
history. Granted, the Church deserves SOME of those hard knocks. But it
appears that our 21st century American culture has recently made the
adolescent discovery that there is someone to pick on and blame for all our
ills - orthodox Christians. You know what... it's been done before. The
Church in America ought not be shaking its fist at American culture but
bending her knees and folding her hands for Americans as well as all others.
Christians in America must not be duped into following the gods and
goddesses of American culture - literate or illiterate - even though they
must. Perhaps they should even welcome the God-given opportunity to live
among them. But those same Christians must remember that their citizenship
is in a different Kingdom, their behavior dictated by a different Law, their
allegiance belongs to a different Leader.

The Church is the one who, in regards to the Bible, is capable and
authorized to "read between the lines." But that's because she doesn't read
what's not there. She's been reading it - and listening to it - for nearly
2000 years. She hasn't always got all the details right. And there are
still a lot of details that are questioned and unclear. But she's not
trying to make the scriptures fit preconceived agendas regardless of what's
there. Her agenda is to understand and love the revelation as well as the
God who sent it. After all, the revelation is not just about God, it is God
himself.

Leap Rabbit

2006-06-17T06:50:00.000-04:00

This is a sharp departure from my usual post.

You probably know the child's game "Leap Frog" where one person kneels down
on all fours and another person "leaps" over them. Then that person
immediately gets down on all fours and the person that was leaped over gets
up and "leaps." So goes the game.

I was looking outside out back window yesterday morning when I saw two
rabbits in our yard. That's nothing unusual. I noticed these two rabbits
seemed to be having a staring context from just a few feet apart. Suddenly,
one rabbit darts towards the other one. The second rabbit leaps up into the
air while the first one seems to "miss" the second and runs right under it.
This happened two or three times.

Wished I had a camcorder.

Probably not as funny to you as it was to me.

Okay... never mind.

Happy Meal Christians

2006-06-14T13:19:00.000-04:00

A good friend of mine sent this to me today.

If we can't understand why Christians in America don't seem to look or act
or think any differently than most of the rest of our society and the world,
maybe this explains it.

-----------------

Happy Meals

For years our family's choice in restaurants was determined
largely by our children. They preferred, of course, to eat at a place that
had a play area and happy meals. They were mesmerized, not by the
nutritional value of the food they were eating but by the free toy included
in their meals. The person who came up with the idea of a happy meal was a
genius at marketing. Kids continue to flock into these types of restaurants
not necessarily because they have the healthiest food of all, but simply to
enjoy the "happy meal" experience.

I'm afraid the craving for happy meals is not just restricted to fast food
restaurants but is also seen in churches today. It seems that worshipers
have developed an appetite for a church experience that has plenty of fluff
and frills. Marketing strategies have lured church leaders to do whatever
works to get a crowd. Many churches have plenty
of activity and excitement. The crowds are attracted by the gimmicks and
happy meals are served all around.

But I wonder if we are missing something. I wonder if we are missing the
balanced diet of biblical teaching that we are called to serve to those who
come. The people in the book of Hebrews had a problem. They had neglected
the solid food of biblical teaching and had become dull of hearing. They got
tired of listening to the careful exposition of Scripture and now would only
tolerate milk. They had become "happy meal Christians." Hebrews 5:14 tells
us that those who are spiritually mature will have a craving for solid food.

Don't you think it is time for those of us who want to grow strong in our
faith to insist on a well balanced diet of the whole counsel of God? That's
the only kind of food that will help us to grow more and more into the image
of Jesus Christ. Don't settle for a happy meal church experience. Insist on
the solid food of the Word of God.

Pastor Jim Stultz
Calvary Baptist Church, Wabash, Ind.
www.jmsmeditation.blogspot.com

Strangers In Our Midst

2006-06-09T13:45:00.000-04:00

Here's a link to a great article by Charles Colson on just one of the
problems we face regarding illegal immigration and how the Church can and
should be responding. (Just click on the message title.)

WARNING: This is not even close to most of what comes out of your TV,
radio or newspaper.

The Church is called upon to present to the world's problems (which really
has only one problem from which all others stem - that being infection from
Sin) an alternative that brings true healing, wholeness, truth and life as permanent solutions. And while there certainly are many in this world who are, at best, un-interested in the alternative the Church offers (at worst, they want to destroy not only the Church but the alternative the Church offers), there are many who are crying out for exactly what the Church provides.

Forgiveness

2006-06-05T22:05:00.000-04:00

Forgive as the Lord forgave you. (Colossians 3:13)

Of course, the question that ought to follow that is, "How did the Lord
forgive me/us?"

What Jesus did was to take the judgment against our sin upon himself. He did
this on his own. It wasn't put on him. He wasn't forced. It wasn't even
with a sense of heavy obligation. Although he certainly struggled as he
closer to it as the reality of what it would cost him became ever clearer
and more imminent, he still chose to take that judgment upon himself.

Forgive as the Lord forgave you.

So I need to take the judgment of my offender's offense upon myself. Just
as Jesus chose to bear what should have been my consequences for my offenses
against him, I need to bear the consequences of what my offender would
otherwise suffer for his offenses against me.

Forgive as the Lord forgave you.

First, this obviously means that retaliation is out of the question.

Second, it means that even thoughts of retaliation must be eliminated.

Third, it means that I should not even desire that something "bad" should
happen to my offender.

Fourth, it means that this is going to take something more than what I am
capable of in myself.

Forgiveness isn't just saying, "Oh, that's okay." God never does that with
sin. That means I should not, either. And forgiveness can't mean that I
simply accept the way the offender acts (offensively) because God had
something to say about that, too. (I do not condemn you. Now, go and sin no
more.)

That's what Jesus did! He took on himself the condemnation that was mine.
That's what forgiveness is - taking the condemnation of my offender's sin
into myself.

But if I've been wounded through someone else's offense, doesn't it mean
that taking the condemnation of his offense into myself will wound me more?

Probably - but I think what we see in Jesus is that he understood that, even
though he would be terribly wounded - mortally so!! - it was not the end.
Indeed, even though taking that condemnation into himself ultimately killed
him, death did not have the last word.

That's what we, who claim the name of Christ for ourselves, need to realize.
Even though the cross brought death (which was the rightful consequence to
our sin) to Jesus, death was not the winner. Death was not the end. Death
lost.

When we forgive someone their sin, we, in essence, take into ourselves the
condemnation they deserve. In other words, we die. And dying always feels
terrible. But we must remember that, because of Christ and because of the
faith God has given us in him, death is not the winner, Death is not the
end. Death loses.

Mother Mary

2006-05-08T19:47:00.000-04:00

Then the dragon was enraged at the woman and went off to make war against
the rest of her offspring- those who obey God's commandments and hold to the
testimony of Jesus. (Rev. 12:17)

I never before noticed this - even though I've read it probably dozens or
even scores of times. The woman is not identified except that she is the
mother of all Christians. I have long assumed that the woman who gave birth
to the child in John's revelation was Mary. I also assumed that the child
to whom the woman gave birth was Jesus. What I never thought about before
(good ol' Anabaptist that I am) was this verse. Mary is the mother of the
Church!

I am finding more and more in Catholic and Orthodox doctrine - stuff that I
had dismissed as "doctrines of men" - is far more biblical than much of what
I had been taught and assumed. Here, now, is apparent and clear biblical
teaching that Mary is the spiritual mother of all those follow Jesus. That
I should call her "Mother Mary" and "Blessed Mother" doesn't seem
ridiculous.

Feeling Warm and Fuzzy

2006-04-18T08:44:00.000-04:00

If you want to feel warm and fuzzy, put some bread mold in the microwave.

Kenosis

2006-04-14T08:51:00.000-04:00

I delivered this message to a men's gathering early this morning, Good Friday.

I have a son who is now 25 years old. He towers over both me and Wendy,
standing at nearly 6' 4". I love my son. I have always loved my son. He's
my favorite son. He's my only son. Whenever I read a story or watch a
movie about a father who has only one child, a son, I frequently can't help
but to think of my son's and my relationship.

When he was quite young, there would be certain games he and I would play
together. May times I would play in such a fashion so as to deliberately
lose. I could have easily won those games but the goal in playing games
with my son wasn't to beat him at the game. Nor did I deliberately lose
because I preferred losing over winning. I played those games with my son
because I loved him. I deliberately lost at those games so I could
demonstrate to him that I loved him and that I would do anything to build
that love relationship with him... even if I had to lose games. I had to
give up what I was capable of in order to accomplish what I wanted. I had
to deny myself. In a sense, I had to empty myself even though I never
ceased to be who I am. Indeed, you might even say that if I had not
"emptied" myself, I could not have proven myself as a loving father to my
son.

You see, love, by its very nature, requires personal sacrifice. Love can be
measured by the degree to which the lover sacrifices self for the beloved.
In fact, we might even go so far as to say that apart from sacrifice, there
is no love.

There is a wonderful word theologians use that comes from the original
language of the New Testament (Greek) for this sacrifice of self, this
self-emptying. The word is kenosis. When the Saint Paul writes in
Philippians 2 that Jesus "emptied himself" or "made himself nothing," he
uses the word kenosis. In order for God to become fully human in the person
of Jesus Christ, God put himself through a kenotic process, this process of
self-emptying. He didn't cease being God but he voluntarily suspended the
use of his "god-ness." Kenosis explains how God, who is infinite, could come
to dwell in a finite human body. Kenosis explains how one who is omniscient
could honestly declare to his inquirers that he did not know the precise
time of certain future events and even had to be informed of a friend's
grave illness. Because he emptied himself and became nothing, God, who is
omnipotent, could be overcome by hunger and thirst and exhaustion. Kenosis
is how and why he who is omnipresent took time and traveled around a fairly
small geographical area to preach and teaching his message: "Repent for the
kingdom of heaven is near."

But that was not the full extent of God's kenosis. Good Friday demonstrates
to us, if we will pay attention to the scriptures and to the teachings of
the Church, that God had decided that his kenotic love could only be fully
expressed if he emptied himself, sacrificing even of his humanity. Jesus
not only refused to take hold of his "god-ness" to dwell with humans, he
even allowed human beings to treat him as something less than what they
themselves were, creatures made in the image of God. Jesus emptied himself
of even the sanctity of human life.

"Good Friday" is a term we often struggle with because of how we tend to
think about what constitutes "good." We think of "good" being something
that we enjoy, something that provides us with obvious benefits that we
naturally desire. That's what we want and expect any "good" day to be. But
Good Friday is not good for those reasons. Good Friday is good because it
is God's Friday. Good Friday shows us what kind of god God is. Good Friday
shows us how good God really is.

The Resurrection, which we will celebrate in just a couple of days, shows us
God's power to fulfill his promise of life and glory to those who trust him.
But today is Good Friday and we must not ignore it or skip over it. We must
face the reality of it full on. The cross and the grave of this day reveal
to us the small, infantile, corrupt and wicked heart of Man who, because of
sin, chose to kill God rather than decide to turn from sin and trust him.
The cross and the grave also reveal to us the heart of God who, rather than
leaving Man in his heinous condition, executed a plan to change the heart
and mind of men. Good Friday is the day God chose to deliberately lose so
that he might win what was really on his heart and so grant the victory to
those who would trust in him.

Let your heart and mind dwell on the cross and the grave today. Jesus chose
kenosis. He chose to empty himself and become nothing as if to lose
everything. We, too, must chose kenosis, to empty ourselves of "self" and
become as nothing as if to lose everything. In chosing kenosis we can then
receive the salvation Jesus offers and his eternal life. It is only in
allowing the cross and the grave of God's Friday to grip our hearts and
change our minds that our lives are then changed to become like Christ's.

Lord Jesus Christ, to reflect on the cross and the grave, to reflect on your
suffering by our selfishness, and to reflect on your death by our sin,
causes us to grieve. The more we dwell on it, the more we discover our true
brokenness. Help us not to turn away from it. Help us, by the power of the
Holy Spirit sent to us from the Father, help us to let ourselves be broken
and be emptied of self, to be grieved over our sinful ways, to repent and
trust in you. Help us to trust in your promise of salvation by your grace to
all who believe and obey you, today. Thank you for your great and
incalculable love that forgives all our wrong deeds, wrong motives and wrong
attitudes. What an amazing God you are. We praise you for your
incomprehensible love, for your lavish grace, for your mercy that always
follows us, for your mercy that is always fresh and new and constantly
renewed. Bring us all, by your Spirit and by the faith you have granted us,
to the experience of the Resurrection to the praise of your glory just as
you dwell with the Father and the Spirit in glory, one God now and forever.
Amen.

Prayer: Seeking the Face of God

2006-03-25T18:21:00.000-05:00

A fairly common phrase we hear among Christians - or at least many of the
"evangelical" variety - is that we need to seek the face of God. The phrase
is usually used as a euphemism for prayer and, often, the kind of prayer in
which the will of God is being sought.

But I have to wonder and ask two questions: Why are we seeking God's face?
And are we, in reality, seeking the face of God?

Seeking the face of God? Have we stopped to consider what this means? It
should be fairly obvious that this is a quest of tremendous magnitude. Have
we "researched" this kind of quest to see if there is anything about which
we ought to be aware if we undertake this pursuit? There is some historical
precedent we ought to consider.

Moses wanted to see God's face. In fact, Moses told that to God himself.
Perhaps it was a brazen request, or perhaps it was just the humble cry of a
"thirsty heart." Regardless, God responded to Moses with these words that
we have recorded in Exodus 33:20, "You cannot see my face, for no one may
see me and live."

There are two points that are important for us to note. First of all, there
are very serious consequences to seeing the face of God. Is this the kind
of consequence a person is willing to confront if one does, indeed, see
God's face? Is it a good idea to trade one's life for even a glimpse of
God's face? Is death what we're willing to embrace in the act of seeing the
face of God?

Maybe that is precisely the point. Better to see the face of God and die
than to live and never see God's face.

God revealed his glory to Moses. But in making himself known to Moses in
that way, God says, "When my glory passes by, I will put you in a cleft in
the rock and cover you with my hand until I have passed by. Then I will
remove my hand and you will see my back; but my face must not be seen."

Is it possible that the glory of God is his holiness - that we being sinful
beings - simply cannot withstand the sight of such holiness? I have often
speculated what would have happened to Moses if he had been able to "sneek a
peek." Would he have exploded because of the massive "download" he was
trying to assimilate? Or would his heart of just stopped being overwhelmed
by the grandeur and magnificence of glory emanating from the face of God?
Or maybe he would have been so struck with the power of God's glory that he
would have been so transformed in his nature that no one would have
recognized him as the man who went up to the mountain to meet with God?

Obviously that last bit is all speculation - but I'm not sure it's worthless
speculation. God has made it clear - to see his face is to die. A friend
of mine has often said, "Be careful what you ask for. You just might get
it."

The other thing I note, though, is God's genuine care for Moses. God does
not want Moses to die. Whether or not dying is a bad thing or a good thing,
God apparently saw Moses' death (whatever that might mean) as not being the
right thing - at least not at that moment. It doesn't seem likely that
Moses understood what it is he was asking for until God told him of the
consequence. Surely he understood Moses' heart because he didn't say,
"Sure, Moe. Just watch what happens!" Nor did he say, "Ooo, Moses, I don't
think that's a good idea. How about we just settle for my showing you how
to get water from rocks."

It seems rather obvious (at least to me) that God wants not just what is
good for us but what is best for us. God doesn't chastise Moses for his
request. He seems to say something like, "Look, this is a good thing you
want, but right now it would be harmful to you. Let's work this in a way
that you get something of what you want but in a way that is most helpful to
you right now."

So here's my last question. Are we doing what we really think we're doing
when we say we're "seeing the face of God"? Hopefully we're finding that
prayer is not as much a matter of our seeking the face of God as it is God
getting hold of the heart of man.

Jim
_____________________________
The best work one can do is to glorify God.

That's Not Fair

2006-02-12T09:06:00.000-05:00

Since August of last year, my wife has been working as the office manager at an out-patient drug and alcohol rehab clinic. Periodically she'll make a comment about a client that will talk with her (without using names, of course). Fairly often my wife comments on the way most of the clients beginning their recovery are initially unwilling to take responsibility for the condition in which they find themselves. They are usually convinced that it is up to someone else to do something about their problematic situation. Initially, says my wife, few of them take responsibility for the choices they are making now.

Children are notorious for the quip, "That's not fair!" I remember hearing it from my siblings (I'm the oldest of four) when we were growing up -- especially at times, for example, when I was allowed to stay up an hour later at night than they were. I remember my son saying it when we wouldn't allow him to participate in an activity his friends were doing. I've heard
lots of adults say it, too.

While there are lots of things about which I believe I'm fully qualified to declare as "fair" or "unfair," there are lots more that I am not. But there is one thing about which I believe I can declare with absolute accurateness and authority... Life Is Not Fair! There are a lot of people, just right around me let alone in the rest of the world, who experience life in profoundly unfair ways. Good friends of ours, who now live 2 1/2 hours away, are experiencing some of the hardest things a family can experience without any fault of their own. They are experiencing - and have been experiencing for many years - the profound unfairness of life. My heart breaks for them and those like them. But they are some of the most gracious, kind-hearted, compassionate people you will ever know. Life certainly has not been fair to them but they have decided that, despite the severe things they seem to have to always live with, they are not defeated and they take responsibility for their choices. Those choices include attitude, respect and kindness towards others, faith in the gracious sovereignty of God... and more.

So here's my conclusion. "Life" may not be fair but "life" is not what determines our character. Our own choices, the ones over which we have full control, determine who and what kind of person we are. You may have a tendency towards anger over the unfairness of life and over those whom you perceive treat you unfairly, but the choice you have is not how life and others treat you, but how you treat others, how you will approach life.

If you live expecting life in this world to be fair the likelihood is that you will live in either frustration and anger or in depression and defensiveness... or some combination of those.

But God is always good. He always does the right thing at the right time. God himself does not deal with us in terms of fairness. If God did what was "fair" we'd all be condemned to hell. Instead, all that "fairness" fell upon the Son of God, Jesus Christ. What we get from God, now, is not "fair." It's grace.

A Religion of Peace?

2006-02-07T04:46:00.000-05:00

I haven’t seen the cartoons, so I can’t say anything about them. I have seen the violent demonstrations against those cartoons by Muslims… or at least I’ve seen what the media has broadcast.

So here’s the question… Just what IS a “religion of peace?”

Jesus said, “If all you do is love those who love you, so what? Even thieves do that much!”

If the only time peace is demonstrated is when things all around are going your way, so what? If your ability to be at peace and act peacefully is wholly dependant upon your circumstances, so what?

Look, I don’t fault those Muslims (and I’m not saying they are representative of all Muslims or of true Islam) for being angry. I don’t fault them for acting out their anger. I can understand and empathize with how they feel. But I do fault them for declaring themselves to be part of a group that declares peace as a way of life… and then doesn’t. And it would be one thing if this were an isolated incident but it is not. This is consistent with how Muslims have acted since the very beginning of Islam. This is consistent with how their own prophet acted. (This is a matter of historical record and not conjecture.)

I’ve not said Islam is not a religion of peace… but where is the evidence that it is such? It would seem to me that one of the best ways to understand what a particular “movement” (I know, Islam is more than a movement, but give me a little license here for the moment) is about is to identify how the founder(s) of that movement acted in concert with what they taught.

Mohammed said, “Kill those who rise up against you.” He slaughtered hundreds. Muslims who followed Mohammed (the earliest followers) understood him and imitated him.

Jesus said, “Love your enemies.” Christians who followed Jesus (the earliest followers) understood him, too, and imitated him.

So I ask the question again… Just what IS a religion of peace? Where do I go to see that? Towards whom do I look?

Every Ounce

2006-01-24T09:40:00.000-05:00

I read a bit of something St. Basil the Great wrote back in the 4^th Century. He was responding to the question, “How shall we repay the Lord for all his goodness to us?” As St. Basil writes, he talks a bit about the immensity of God’s goodness to us. Then, in reflecting upon his own experience, Basil writes:

He is so good that he asks no recompense except our love: that is the only payment he requires. To confess my personal feelings, when I reflect on all these blessings I am overcome by a kind of dread and numbness at the very possibility of ceasing to love God and of bringing shame upon Christ because of my lack of recollection and my preoccupation with trivialities.

This is one of the things I ponder periodically, also, and, if I’m not careful, can fall into despair. It is the very real possibility that I may be so taken with the things of this world with which I become fascinated that my love for my Lord may grow cold. It is quite possible that my heart may even grow resentful against God for keeping me from those things that I think I may end up craving. That thought often brings me to repentance and contrition. And that act nearly always ends in humble thanks and praise to God for his mercy and grace.

The psalmist wrote, “My sin is ever before me.” (Psalm 51:3) It is quite obvious to me, when I am given to reflection on it, that I am a man who is in constant and desperate need of the grace of God at every moment in and in every fashion for my life. That God lavishes grace on me (Ephesians 1:7-8) is not because he’s got so much that he doesn’t know what to do with it all. God dumps those bucketfuls of grace out on me, one us, because we need every ounce. And there isn’t one ounce of grace that God holds back from us.

Don't Make Me Come Down There!!

2006-01-20T12:12:00.000-05:00

I remember a time when i was a kid that my sisters, brother and i were clowning around. Dad was upstairs and had told us to settle down before someone gets hurt or something gets broken... but we kept at it. Dad was nearing the end of his patience and stood at the top of stairs yelling at us. We knew that if he came down stairs, we were going to get a whoopin' - or worse!

Sometimes i wonder what some people think of God. Do they think he stands at the top of the stairs threatening us? "Don't make me come down there!" What do they think he'd do if he made that threat and followed through on it.

In fact, God DID "come down." If that was a threat, he carried it out... but not at all like anybody thought he would. The consequences to what we've done wrong, to all our "clowning around" (in the worst sense of that phrase), are very real. God said, "Hey, if you don't straighten, i'm coming down there. THEN you'll see that those consequences are for real." We didn't "straighten up." And God made good on his promise. He came down showed us the consequences of our foolish, selfish behavior and heart. The full consequences of all our sin fell upon Him... on the cross.

By Their Fruit

2006-01-20T12:05:00.000-05:00

Click on the title of this post to see the Barna article referred to in my comments.

Okay, Barna says that there are a lot of pastors who think their churches and, apparently, the nation is in pretty good spiritual health. He says that most pastors think that about 3/4 of the people in their congregations place God as #1 in their lives but that only about15% of those congregants poled agreed.

Who are these pastors who think that 3/4 of the people they see every week are really spiritually healthy? The reality, it seems to me, is fairly obvious. Look at how most people in the Church in America live! What do they spend their time doing? On what do they spend their money? About what do they dream?

When kids from "really good," church-going, Christian homes kill their girlfriend's parents, this ought to be some sort of clue. Granted, not every "really good," church-going, Christian does that kind of thing - or anything even really close to it. The point is that people can talk 'til their blue in the face. "Truth" that is heard but never seen lacks something.

Jesus said, "By their fruit you shall know them."

Fear

2006-01-05T06:00:00.000-05:00

Last month I decided to put away my “heavy” reading for the month. Instead, I read the first five “Harry Potter” books. Harry is an adolescent boy who has discovered he’s actually a wizard. The books are about his growing up, learning to be a wizard and struggling and fighting against his nemesis and the enemy of the entire wizarding community. Once thought dead, Lord Voldemort is back. His name strikes terror into the heart of nearly all. So great is their fear that they refer to him most frequently as You-Know-Who or He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named. Occasionally, he is referred to as the Dark Lord. Lord Voldemort desires absolute control over all. His primary tactics are intimidation and fear. Even without the use of magic, through fear, Lord Voldemort is able to wield control. The premise is simple; that which we fear controls us.

I think I’m safe to say that everybody fears something or someone. Many seek ways to control their fears. Some pretend they have no fears. Perhaps it is because they fear having any fear. Most of us, I would say, seek to remove as much fear from our lives as possible. The problem is that what is “possible” for us regarding the elimination of all fear, is very little.

The issue with which we must reckon is not how to rid ourselves of fear but to discover what it is we ought to fear. Someone has said, “There is nothing to fear but fear itself.” Poppycock! There is something for us to truly fear. To think that we can and should avoid, refuse and eliminate all fear is foolishness. That is every bit as dangerous as letting the wrong fears (or too many fears) control us.

Many fear insecurity. Many fear loss of possessions. Maybe there is something behind all our fears that needs to be discovered and examined. Maybe most of our fears are rooted in one fear. I would submit that what we fear is our destruction. We perceive that through many other fears we harbor, but the root the fear that we will be destroyed.

Jesus said, “Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.” Jesus says, in essence, that there is improper fear and proper fear. For the most part, we tend to fear the wrong things because we don’t understand or are simply ignorant of what we should fear.

The issue is not to eliminate all our fears but to discover what we ought to fear. Proper fear does not center so much on “what” as on “who.” The One to fear is not our fellow human beings. The One to fear isn’t the Dark Lord. The One to fear is He who is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent. And when we discover who this One is, we discover that, thought he holds all power, including the power of eternal destruction and damnation, we might also discover that he is also omni-compassionate. He pours out his mercy fresh and new upon us very morning. He lavishes his grace upon us. His love endures forever. We must learn that he is holy, just and righteous. He always does the right thing even when we do the wrong thing. His love never abrogates his righteousness. But his love moved him to be wholly righteous and wholly merciful at the same time.

He is the One who met Moses at the burning bush and told Moses his name, “I AM.” And he came in the season Christians all over the world just celebrated last month. He is Emmanuel. He is Jesus Christ. He comes to us in the storms of life that we so much fear, walking on top of them. And if we see him, above the storm, we may become terribly fearful. But he then speaks to us and says, “Fear not. I AM.”

Hypocrites and Hypocrisy

2005-12-31T21:07:00.000-05:00

The English word “hypocrite” comes from a Greek word meaning “actor.” In ancient Greek, the actor was a person putting on a performance, pretending to be and trying to get others to, at least for a little while, believe him to be someone other than who he actually was. This actor would frequently hold up a mask on a stick indicating that he was not acting or speaking in accordance with who he actually was.

Today, we understand a hypocrite to be someone who acts and speaks differently than who he or she actually is. The difference between our current definition and the ancient Greek meaning is that today’s hypocrites want to portray themselves to people as truly being different than they actually are – deliberately, intentionally.

I doubt that there is anybody today who would advocate hypocrisy. I doubt there is anyone who wants to be known as a hypocrite.

I hate hypocrisy. I hate it in others. I hate it even more in myself. The problem is that every last one of us is a hypocrite. At some point or another, every one of us has said something or acted in a way that is contrary to who we actually are or what we actually believe to be true. Hypocrisy is the ultimate lie.

I have come to believe that hypocrisy is what lies at they root of sin. The reason why sin is so sinful is because it says, “Do this. Think this way. This is who you really are,” when in reality the exact opposite is true.

Sin is often defined as that which is contrary to the nature and character of God. If God were to act in a way that was contrary to himself, that would be sin, it would be hypocrisy.

The Bible says that human beings were made in the image and likeness of God. To “act” hypocritically is to “act” in a way that is contrary to our true nature and character. If we humans have been made in the image of God then sin is not just acting in a way contrary to God’s character and nature; it is an act of hypocrisy.

Mary - Theotokos

2005-12-19T06:30:00.000-05:00

I’ve posted on my website a sermon I preached a couple of years ago and updated it as a result of a lesson I taught this year. It’s about Theotokos. That’s a theological term (and Greek) applied to Mary. When Mary came to Elizabeth, Elizabeth proclaimed her to be “the mother of my Lord.” I’m not willing to go as far as the Roman Catholics (I don’t know about Orthodox, yet) but we “right wing protestants” (I mean that as negatively as I can) have got to take far more time to reflect on Mary than to which we are prone. We’ve got to get past the “that’s too Catholic” thing.

Mary is, if you will, the Christian disciple prototype. From our human perspective, we look at Mary and say, “What a great thing she did in giving birth to the Son of God.” Yes, that clearly is a great thing. But let’s not get so carried away that we lose sight of the greater thing. She trusted God. That’s what attracted God’s favor to Mary. She, apparently, didn’t realize how big a deal trusting God really was.

Click the link at the title of today’s web log entry if you’re interested in reading my sermon. It’s fairly short (at least, short for me).

More Advent Reflections

2005-12-13T21:19:00.000-05:00

Having just read some of John Michael Talbot’s personal reflections on Advent, there have been some more things stirred up in me about Advent.

Actually, Advent itself has that effect on me. It constantly stirs things up in me to think about causing me to reflect. Sometimes those reflections on new to me, but more often they are reflections on familiar thoughts but with more brilliance or more… I don’t know… something.

Very often, my reflections during Advent are rather melancholy. Such thoughts usually focus on what it was Jesus initiated by coming to earth that has yet to be completed. Lately, much of that seems to center on the condition of the Church in the world today. It seems that, fairly regularly over the past several months or even years, I have been saddened and frustrated by and critical of and sometimes cynical towards the Church. I’m frustrated at what seems obviously wrong-headed to me about the Church – Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox. But it has been pointed out to me (once by a friend and once by my wife) that I am too critical and that the kind and manner of my criticism may very well be a symptom of arrogance.

And I have to agree with them.

The Church is not yet perfect. It’s broken because it’s full of broken people who have not yet been perfectly healed and restored to the image of Jesus. I know it will be, one day, but not until all of Creation is perfected. It’s not a case of which comes first – the perfecting of the Church or the perfecting of Creation. They will both be perfected when Christ comes again. I/We just have to wait until the mystery of Christ has been fully revealed – Christ has died; Christ has risen; Christ will come again. We’ve got two of the three. It’s that third part for which we/I have got to patiently and faithfully wait.

The message of Advent, or at least one of the messages of Advent is precisely that. Because Christ has already come once, we can count on him to come again.

Even so, come, Lord Jesus. Amen.

It's All About The Numbers

2005-12-10T08:37:00.000-05:00

Click the link above and read the article. This is enough to make me go into spasms.

I’ve read about this twice, now (two different reports), and just heard about it again this morning on NBC’s morning news program. One pastor said something to this effect, “The Bible doesn’t command us to remember the birth of Christ. We’re commanded to remember the death and resurrection of Christ.”

Why did Christians begin worshipping on Sunday? Why has the Church continued to meet for worship on Sundays for 2000 years? Precisely because, on this day, we remember and celebrate the resurrection of Jesus Christ. It’s not about “remembering” the birth of Christ.

“We want families to be together to celebrate the birth of Christ.” Hmm… they won’t be together if they join together for an hour or so?

“We’re not into forcing anyone to remember Christmas.” No, you’re into forcing them to stay away from a gathering place when it suits you.

“Well, there are lots of people that come to worship on Christmas Eve – probably the highest attended worship service in the year.” That’s a rationale?

“There won’t be very many people who will want to come that morning, anyway.” I wonder how many you must have in order to worship together, in order for Christ to be present. I remember that he did have something to say about that… something about two or three… thousand? hundred?

There is no acceptable rationale for cancelling worship services on Sunday when Christmas happens to fall on that day of the week.

Wait, here’s an idea… let’s send CDs and DVDs for families and individuals to use for “worship” on Christmas. We’ll be able to “reach” far more that way.” And since that is such an obviously great idea, let’s expand on that and skip worshipping together completely and just send out CDs and DVDs to everybody we know. It’s probably more cost effective that way (but don’t count on it), people can “worship” whenever they feel like it (instead of being forced to a particular time slot in the week) and we can do mass mailings every week instead of actually having to personally interact with any of them! Besides, we can “reach” a lot more people that way than we can trying to call meetings all the time.

Gee, it’s too bad Jesus didn’t have all this technology available to him back then. He could have had WAY more apostles than just those 12…

Repentance

2005-12-04T21:23:00.000-05:00

From the sermon in our worship service this morning…

“Repentance is the process of keeping soft to the Spirit... One cannot repent of sin without replacing it with righesousness.”

Lessons From My Dog

2005-12-04T07:30:00.000-05:00

After I’d been in prayer for a while this morning, my dog began to rattle around. I mean that literally. Max wears a collar with some dog tags on it that rattle when he moves around. I got out of my chair and took Max outside. I brought him in when he was finished and he headed straight for the bedroom in which my wife was asleep. Max is rather old. He doesn’t see or hear very well so he no longer hears my loud whisper, “Max, get out.” I pushed him out of the room and he headed for the door, again, as if he was thinking I was going to take him outside again. I began to get frustrated. I just wanted him to lay back down again, which he will often do after we’ve first taken him out early in the morning. I left him standing in the living room and headed back to the study to pray some more. Just as I sat down I thought, “I’m not going to leave him there. He’ll just wander around and make noise.” So I went back out and, even though I was feeling rather frustrated with him, I bent down, gently picked him up (he’s a small bichon) and carried him back to the study where I set him down and gently pushed him towards a pillow of his in there.

In my prayers, I had been thanking God for the freedom he has given me – more freedom than most people have in the world – to choose what to do in the course of a day let alone with most of my life. I reflected on some of the wrong choices I’ve made and wondered if I hadn’t been better off with God restricting me more with fewer options. (I read an article that said that wealth is measured by the choices we have available to us. Wealthy people have more options.)

I then thought of Max. I gave Max some options and he chose ones I didn’t want him to choose. After a bit of time, I chose for him, although the result did not seem to be one of rebellion or anger on his part.

Sometimes God puts us in a place where our choices are limited because he recognizes that the choice that needs to be made is likely to be lost if there are too many options available. But God wants us to be free… like himself. The salvation that Christ brought to us through his own sacrifice is one that brings us back to being like God, having the freedom to choose that which is good and right and lovely and pure.

I want my day to be filled with those kinds of choices regardless of the options I do or do not have. Regardless of what my dog may choose or even think, I always have the option to choose what God would have me choose. That’s freedom. That’s salvation. That’s the good news.

“It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.” (Galatians 5:1)

Reflecting on Advent

2005-12-01T08:09:00.000-05:00

I have to admit that I really like the season Advent. This is not the same as Christmas. Don’t get me wrong… I like Christmas. But I really do like Advent. Maybe it’s because I grew up and then spent so many years in the Church without ever knowing about Advent. Oh, I’d heard the name, but I just thought Advent was sort of “pre-Christmas.” It is that – but it’s far more than that.

For example, the first Sunday and the first week of Advent, we focus on the coming of the Christ. This isn’t just about remembering the coming of the Christ-child 2000 years ago. It’s remembering that Christ is going to be returning. It’s about remembering that life on this planet is not primarily a party but a work to prepare for the time when our Lord returns to establish his heavenly kingdom fully and finally throughout all creation.

I love thinking about that – not to get lost in it to such an extent that “now” doesn’t matter. (Of course it matters!) But there is hope – no matter how bad things may be now, not matter how badly our best laid plans may turn out, God’s plans will ultimately prevail. All I need to do is align my plans with his. That will determine what I do now both in broad, general ways and in very specific, detailed ways. It determines what is “good” and what is “bad,” what is “right” and what is “wrong.”

So much of the time I am easily distracted by the things that are limited to this world alone. And anybody with an honest bone in their body will admit that there is more to life than just what this world can offer – certainly far more than we comprehend through only our five physical senses. But so much in this world seems to demand that we give it our attention. Advent reminds me that I don’t have to give in to those demands. What I think about during Advent gradually works its way into my mind and heart throughout the rest of the year, throughout the rest of my life. I love being reminded of what I already know to be true because I forget it so often.

This is one of the reasons I so appreciate and enjoy Advent.

About a year ago (yep, it was this time last year) that I first read a snippet from St. Bernard (I believe an abbot of 12^th century France) about Christ coming in three ways. Posted below is the reading.

Three Comings

2005-12-01T06:59:00.000-05:00

From a sermon by St. Bernard

(Lit. v. I, p. 168-170)

We know that there are three comings of the Lord. The third lies between the other two. It is invisible, while the other two are visible. In the first coming he was seen on earth, dwelling among men; he himself testifies that they saw him and hated him. In the final coming all flesh will see the salvation of our God, and they will look on him whom they pierced. The intermediate coming is a hidden one; in it only the elect see the Lord within their own selves, and they are saved. In his first coming our Lord came in our flesh and in our weakness; in this middle coming he comes in spirit and in power; in the final coming he will be seen in glory and majesty.

Because this coming lies between the other two, it is like a road on which we travel from the first coming to the last. In the first, Christ was our redemption; in the last, he will appear as our life; in this middle coming, he is our rest and consolation.

In case someone should think that what we say about this middle coming is sheer invention, listen to what our Lord himself says: If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him. There is another passage of Scripture which reads: He who fears God will do good, but something further has been said about the one who loves, that is, that he will keep God’s word.

Where is God’s word to be kept? Obviously in the heart, as the prophet says: I have hidden your words in my heart, so that I may not sin against you.

Keep God’s word in this way. Let it enter into your very being, let it take possession of your desires and your whole way of life. Feed on goodness, and your soul will delight in its richness. Remember to eat your bread, or your heart will wither away. Fill your soul with richness and strength.

If you keep the word of God in this way, it will also keep you. The Son with the Father will come to you. The great Prophet who will build the new Jerusalem will come, the one who makes all things new. This coming will fulfill what is written: As we have borne the likeness of the earthly man, we shall also bear the likeness of the heavenly man. Just as Adam’s sin spread through all mankind and took hold of all, so Christ, who created and redeemed all, will glorify all, once he takes possession of all.

Sing Alleluia to God

2005-11-26T10:21:00.000-05:00

From a sermon by Saint Augustine, bishop

(Sermo 256, 1.2.3: PL38, 1191-1193)

Let us sing alleluia to the good God who delivers us from evil

Let us sing alleluia here on earth, while we still live in anxiety, so that we may sing it one day in heaven in full security. Why do we now live in anxiety? Can you expect me not to feel anxious when I read: Is not man’s life on earth a time of trial? Can you expect me not to feel anxious when the words still ring in my ears: Watch and pray that you will not be put to the test? Can you expect me not to feel anxious when there are so many temptations here below that prayer itself reminds us of them, when we say: Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us? Every day we make our petitions, every day we sin. Do you want me to feel secure when I am daily asking pardon for my sins, and requesting help in time of trial? Because of my past sins I pray: Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us, and then, because of the perils still before me, I immediately go on to add: Lead us not into temptation. How can all be well with people who are crying out with me: Deliver us from evil? And yet, brothers, while we are still in the midst of this evil, let us sing alleluia to the good God who delivers us from evil.

Even here amidst trials and temptations let us, let all men, sing alleluia. God is faithful, says holy Scripture, and he will not allow you to be tried beyond your strength. So let us sing alleluia, even here on earth. Man is still a debtor, but God is faithful. Scripture does not say that he will not allow you to be tried, but that he will not allow you to be tried beyond your strength. Whatever the trial, he will see you through it safely, and so enable you to endure. You have entered upon a time of trial but you will come to no harm—God’s help will bring you through it safely. You are like a piece of pottery, shaped by instruction, fired by tribulation. When you are put into the oven therefore, keep your thoughts on the time when you will be taken out again; for God is faithful, and he will guard both your going in and your coming out.

But in the next life, when this body of ours has become immortal and incorruptible, then all trials will be over. Your body is indeed dead, and why? Because of sin. Nevertheless, your spirit lives, because you have been justified. Are we to leave our dead bodies behind then? By no means. Listen to the words of holy Scripture: If the Spirit of him who raised Christ from the dead dwells within you, then he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your own mortal bodies. At present your body receives its life from the soul, but then it will receive it from the Spirit.

O the happiness of the heavenly alleluia, sung in security, in fear of no adversity! We shall have no enemies in heaven, we shall never lose a friend. God’s praises are sung both there and here, but here they are sung in anxiety, there, in security; here they are sung by those destined to die, there, by those destined to live for ever; here they are sung in hope, there, in hope’s fulfillment; here they are sung by wayfarers, there, by those living in their own country.

So, then, my brothers, let us sing now, not in order to enjoy a life of leisure, but in order to lighten our labors. You should sing as wayfarers do—sing, but continue your journey. Do not be lazy, but sing to make your journey more enjoyable. Sing, but keep going. What do I mean by keep going? Keep on making progress. This progress, however, must be in virtue; for there are some, the Apostle warns, whose only progress is in vice. If you make progress, you will be continuing your journey, but be sure that your progress is in virtue, true faith and right living. Sing then, but keep going.

Danny's Self-Portrait

2005-11-10T07:55:00.000-05:00

Danny was here with his parents a few weeks ago. I took a few pictures of Danny, then Danny decided he wanted to take some pictures. In about an hour he shot about 150 photos. He decided to take some photos of himself, too. This is absolutely one of my favorites!

Intelligent Fools

2005-11-10T07:52:00.000-05:00

I have to admit that I really don’t get it… unless it’s fear. In his Breakpoint commentary a few days ago, Chuck Colson had this to say:

This past week, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) announced that they would no longer allow their copyrighted materials to be used in any curriculum that challenges Darwin's theories.

To be honest, I really don’t know if there is a “raging” controversy in the scientific world regarding Darwinians Evolution vs. Intelligent Design… but I know there is at least some controversy. And it is a controversy that seems to have some merit because it is based on scientific observation. There are some scientists (yes, they’re real scientists – molecular biologists and such) who admit that Darwinian Evolution may not be the best explanation, that there are major problems with the current models of evolution. Scientists who can speak scientifically (without letting their emotional commitments get in the way) will admit that, while there is evidence that strongly indicates evolutionary theory is credible to explain much of the development of species and, specifically Man, there is evidence that is not consistent with current evolutionary theory and even contradicts evolutionary theory.

So what is the problem with discussing these issues in the science classroom of high schoolers? Are these scientists afraid of losing their self-perceived status? Are they afraid children won’t believe in science or scientists anymore? If children stop believing in them, will they die? Don’t worry scientists! I believe. I believe!!

Well, I believe in science and scientists who function as scientists in the work of science… but not as Tinkerbell.

Ecofeminist McFague

2005-11-08T20:46:00.000-05:00

I’ve been reading some of Sallie McFague’s writings lately, all relating my current studies in contemporary theology. There are some things that McFague and those of her ilk have to say that I think is probably important that evangelicals hear. But for the most part, what I’ve read of hers has been sad, frustrating, erroneous and irresponsible.

One of the last things of hers that I read was in her book, “The Body of God.” In that book –page 32, she makes this statement: “…some early theologians did, however, speak of the world as a body filled with and ordered by the Logos in a manner similar to the Platonic World-soul: the Logos as the intermediary between mind (God) and matter. Origen, for instance, wrote, “The cosmos is a ‘huge animate being’ held together by one Soul.”

She gives you the impression that she is quoting Origen – but she’s not. She’s quoting what her husband says (it’s footnoted) in an article he wrote entitled “Divine Action.” Now, to find out if he quoted Origen correctly (looking for “huge animate being” as what he says Origen said) I went to the writings of Origen was have in “Ante-Nicene Father”; part of a collection of 38 volumes containing the writings of the early Church Fathers. Searching through Origen’s writings (using a digital copy of the book) i did not find that quote nor anything similar to it. What I did find, however, is that Origen wrote against this kind of thinking in his writings “Against Celsus.”

One of the chief problems I have had with McFague and many of the feminist theologians (indeed, with most of the liberation theologians) is that the foundation on which they build their theology does not begin with the scriptures or Church tradition but with their own experience. Their experiences are used to explain the scriptures instead of vice versa. McFague goes beyond the pale, though, by pulling out ideas that have no anchor in anything but her own mind.

Well, I guess I haven’t left too much room for anyone to wonder how I really feel about this…

No Going Back...

2005-10-22T11:03:00.000-04:00

A very friend of mine who is facing prostate cancer sent this to me yesterday…

A few days ago I read these words about those who truly embrace the cross, and as I read I recognized the Lord’s work in my life:

They were living to themselves; self with its hopes and promises and dreams, still had hold of them; but the Lord began to fulfill their prayers. They had asked for contrition, and had surrendered for it to be given them at any cost, and He sent them sorrow; they had asked for purity, and He sent them thrilling anguish; they had asked to be meek, and He had broken their hearts; they had asked to be dead to the world, and He slew all their living hopes; they had asked to be made like unto Him, and He placed them in the furnace, sitting by "as a refiner and purifier of silver," until they should reflect His image; they had asked to lay hold of His cross, and when He had reached it to them it lacerated their hands.

....They could almost pray Him to depart for them, or to hide His awfulness... But they cannot go back, for they have come too near the unseen cross, and its virtues have pierced too deeply within them. He is fulfilling to them His promise, "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me" (John 12:32). [Streams in the Desert, reading for October 17th]

My prayer, like his, is that God will do whatever it is that needs to be done simply so I may 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. (Phil 3:10-11)

Faith & Sin

2005-10-07T22:33:00.000-04:00

As i've been reading of some of the prevailing philosophical thought that developed out of the post-Enlightenment period leading up to liberal and neo-orthodox theology in the 19th and then early 20th century, I have been struck with Reinhold Neihbur's understanding of the real dilemma of humanity. The problem, as he seems to define it, isn't so much that of finite human beings trying to understand an infinite God. Rather, the problem is that of sinful human beings needing to be reconciled to a holy God.

Stanley Grenz and Roger Olson characterize Neihbur's understanding of faith and sin in this way: "Faith is the acceptance of our dependancy on God, whereas sin is the denial of our creaturehood." Regarding sin, i take that to mean that it is the denial of our dependancy on God. And while i think that understanding may be a good beginning, i think it is just the beginning of each. Both "faith" and "sin" are more that. The Bible says that "Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the the conviction of things not seen." (Heb 11:1 - NASB) Another translation puts it this way: "Faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see." (NIV)

Faith must be more than just an acceptance of our dependancy on God. This sounds rather passive. I accept that I have colitis. I accept that I have ADD. But this can be done in a very passive way, in a way that not only does not require active response but that denies such a response is actually necessary. Faith is not passive. The Bible says that if a person has faith, that faith will somehow be made visible, tangible. It's not that faith itself becomes something a person can see or touch but that true faith causes a person to act in particular ways. Faith, apart from that kind of active response, really isn't faith - just strong feelings. If there is one thing that ought to be clear about what faith is and is not, faith is not about strong feelings. Faith is about conviction that leads to behaviors in correspondance to that conviction.

Sin, on the other hand, is more than just a denial of our "creaturehood." In a sense, sin is two-fold. There is that aspect of sin that is the denial or rejection of our utter dependance upon God. There is also that aspect of sin that is ignorance of our dependance upon God. The Bible talks about sin that is willful as well as that which is our of ignorance, sins of commission and sins of ommission.

So here's the question that i won't explore much more than to ask the question. If faith is recognition of and response to our dependancy upon God and if sin is both intentional as well as ignorance, is it possible to sin "in faith," at least in terms of that letter aspect of sin?

My Friend & God's Glory

2005-10-02T22:14:00.000-04:00

My friend, D, is going to the hospital tomorrow for a prostatectomy. He was diagnosed with prostate cancer a few months ago. The surgeon believes for a very successful outcome. Of course, there are always "issues," the "what if's" that are "could be's."

He and his family and I know that God exercises his sovereignty with grace. God's goodness always exceeds our perceptions - and our expectations and dreams. There is more that God is doing in all of this than we can possibly perceive. We must simply (is it really simple?) trust him because he is a good God and he always does the right thing at the right time. And what is good and right is always good and right for everyone involved.

I went over to D's house tonight to anoint and pray over him. He talked about his possible death. That's always disconcerting. But it's also always a very real possibility. The truth is, if D does indeed die he'll be totally blissful over it. We're the one's who will be left with "the mess." Our grief will be for ourselves, not him.

He's in God's hands... completely. Let God be glorified. That's really all D wants. It's all I want. It's always what's best.

Worshiping God

2005-10-02T21:58:00.000-04:00

What is it that draws people into the worship of God?

It seems to me that at least one factor that is critically important helping people to and drawing people into worship lies with those who are giving leadership to corporate worship. Those who are leading worship MUST be genuinely engaged in the worship of God as they lead worship.

Part of this is my reaction to those who seem to think that it's very important that what goes on in a "worship" service be appealing to those who are present. While we certainly need to be aware of the cultural issues (language, symbolic representations, cultural stuff in general), we must be aware that our worship is Christ-centered and Spirit-driven, not comfort-centered and feelings-driven.

Many churches are adopting what they call a "contemporary style" of worship. I think that, at best, a "contemporary style" would be simply a matter of, again being sensitive to the cultural issues of modern people. However, what i often see passing a "worship" in a "contemporary setting" has nothing to do with cultural sensitivities. The elements of worship itself are being tosses around, in and out, as if every aspect of worship was optional. There seems to be an intense effort in getting congregants to "enjoy" the service - which ends up being a show, a performance, intended to get people to "feel" something or a certain way.

Here are some of the elements i have witnessed in churches that have become optional in any given worship service:

Prayer - Whether "pastoral" or "congregational," prayer, as an element of worship, has become optional. If it is perceived that persons in the congregation (read "audience") might be uncomfortable with prayer, it can be left out.
Scripture - Well, if we're concerned about comfort levels, scripture can be very uncomfortable. We'll make this optional, too, even and pershaps especially as part of the preching
Preaching - Depends on what you call "preaching." Exegetically based sermons are out. "How-to's" are in. Don't talk about sin or hell or damnation, talk about the positive values. Talk about love and successful living. Most of what is passed off as preaching is really just public speaking. There's a difference.
Singing - Ok, this isn't really something that's optional. Actually, it's is perceived more and more that, you can't worship without singing - or at least music of some sort. No music = No worship. But along with this is the "type" of music utilized. Throw out the stodgy old hymns. Let's just use the praise choruses that we all know and love. Except, what are we praising the Lord for? On what is our praise based? God's love? But how do we know how great is God's love? Hmmm. If you're going to start somewhere, better start here. Maybe we don't need the "old" hymns... but maybe we do.
Eucharist/Communion - Wow. Here'a a biggy. Totally optional for some. Nothing there that's relevant for some - at least that's the perception. Except that, regarding the bread and the cup, Jesus said, "This is my body. This is my blood." If Christ is present in the bread and the cup, then what's the unrelevant part? Others only want to "commune" periodically. "I don't want it to become common and taken for granted." Hmmm... I've been telling my wife i love her nearly every day for about 30 years. I wonder if i've been doing that too much, too often.

Worship is not about me, about self, about "I." It's about God, what he likes, what please him.

I've heard people complain about written prayers that are read. There is the complaint that written prayers don't leave room for the Spirit's spontaneous work. The problem isn't with the prayer on the page. The problem is with the pray-er on the platform.

Shallow Waters

2005-09-22T03:49:00.000-04:00

God is leading us through some very difficult things right now, for which
some we are praising God simply out of obedience and faith. This is
probably the new "stretch point" for us. I was at a concert Saturday
night that ended with a song of prayer: "Take me out of the shallow waters
where I can stand on my own. Carry me over the deepest parts where I trust
in you alone. If holding you is a weakness, don't let me be so strong.
Take me out of the shallow waters; in Your arms is where I belong."

Praise God for his amazing mercy and grace. It is more than we can grasp as
much as it is more than we deserve. God is good... all the time.

Alien Invasion

2005-09-05T10:37:00.000-04:00

I suppose there's been plenty said about the devastation along the Gulf
Coast. I'm concerned for the kinds of things being said... perhaps more so
for what's not being said except from so very few.

The major media outlets seem to have jumped on the band wagon crying out
that the federal government has failed, is failing and will probably
continue to fail in the midst of this tragedy. People are angry,
frustrated, tired and afraid. While we should certainly empathize with
those who are suffering and working to meet their needs, we don't need to
join with them in their anger and finger pointing. That doesn't help.

One of the things i hear over and over again is that this should never have
happened. There is blame assigned to those who have focused resources on
the war in the Middle East but left us "open" to this kind of natural
disaster. Certainly there is lots that could have and should be now done,
the reality is that there is an expectation that our government - or at
least SOMEBODY - who is supposed to be protecting us from such suffering...
and has failed to do so.

The sad reality is that suffering is part of life in this world. We all
seem to naturally have the idea in our heads that suffering is not something
that is supposed to part of life. We treat suffering as if it is an alien
invasion - an attack from an enemy against whom we should be able to defend
ourselves.

The only way we can make sense of this suffering is if we take a very long
view - all the way back to our First Parents. They chose to disobey God.
Sin entered into our world. And now we suffer. I don't mean it is because
of specific sins that this terrible loss of safety and life has taken place.
I'm not smart enough to figure that out - and those who have thought so have
often been proved to be tragically wrong... like Job's friends.

I don't know much, but i do know that despite the kind or depth of
suffering, there is always something God is working out... something really
good, beyond what we can imagine. We can see that when we look at Jesus on
the cross. The worst thing that could possibly happen - that we should kill
the Son of God - God turned around and made the best possible thing...
twice -- His magnificent resurrection and, thus, our salvation and new life.
All we have to do is trust him.

Radical or Extreme?

2005-08-04T14:53:00.000-04:00

We have a pretty good idea of what radical Muslims look like. Or at least what radical extremist Muslims look like. Or at least what "they" say they look like. Supposedly they are following the teachings of the Koran as completely as they can. Supposedly they look to Mohammad and imitate him as closely as they can. Was Mohammad a radical? Was he extreme?

What does a radical Christian look like? Or maybe we should ask what a radical extremist Christian looks like. Do we know how to be one? Would we be able to tell if we saw one? Some people think radical Christians aren't any different than radical Muslims. Is this true?

Would it be safe to say that radical Muslims and radical Christians are people who live their lives based on what their respective holy books teach then and who attempt to imitate (follow) the person who founded their respective movements? If so, then we should be able to determine the value of the movement according to the founder and according to the kind of behavior "radical followers" demonstrate.

Or is that simply extreme?