Words cannot express....

I've been reading small sections of a book called "The Presence of God." I have been meaning to read it for the last few years now. It's essentially the writings of a humble man who was a monk. But, he was a monk of a different color. Brother Lawrence believed in the ordinary and the regular. One of the things that makes him stand out is that he felt that God could be worshipped in everything....even the menial things. It's a great book.

I started by reading the foreword of the book and came across and interesting quote. The author of the foreword notes that we simply don't have very many of Brother Lawrence's writings. We don't have them because, "Brother Lawrence only wrote occasionally and often destroyed his writing because he found it so far removed from the vibrant immediacy of his religious experience." I was shocked by the truth of that sentiment.

I love God deeply, but I am often reluctant to force my experience of God into words or song or any other medium. In my own Christian experience, I was often awed when people talked about how they had experienced God. But the more I listened, the less I was impressed. I found people used their religious experience to prove their own salvation, holieness, or the authenticity of their faith. Gradually, I began to feel that many of their experiences of God were disengenuous and they often seemed to follow certain recipes or prescriptions. They were used for shallow comparisons and they always seemed to pale in comparison to the Real Thing.

Can the experience of God be contained within human words? I wonder if we sometimes diminish our experiences of the Divine when we speak of them? Yet by the same token I love the intimacy of the religious Psalms and I love their poetic descriptions of the experience of the presence of God. Maybe it's just that we need more creativity in our expressions of our experience of God, a wider religious vocabulary when it comes to the experiential? Yet can we still recognize that words fall short and that we need to speak softly, tear up some of our writings, and turn down our religious songs? After all, what expresses the inexpressible better than some silence?

Comparative Religions, Comparative Parables

I have blogged about the Parable of the Prodigal Son in the past. This probably won't be the last time either. A few weeks ago I was doing some research for a sermon and was on-line and encountered a comparative religions websitre that juxtaposed a Buddhist parable of the Prodigal with the Christian parable of the Prodigal.

The point of this juxtapositioning was not to undermine one with the other or to determine which was better or which one had more truth. The idea behind the look was that the simple act of comparison would reveal a great deal about the differing theologies/philosphies that are present in the new faiths.

I think I liked it because I have always argued that all religions have truth, but to claim that it is the same truth or the same path is silly. I find it dishonoring to each individual and distinct faith to claim that, in its essensce, it is the same as any other faith. Furthermore, I find that there are many religious truth claims that cannot be reconciled with one another. They are different in terms of factuality and nuanced worldview. They have led to dramatically different societal and familial structures.

Explore the two parables here. I found the Buddhist parable shed great light on the Grace of God in the Christian faith. In other words it freshened my understanding of my own Scriptures and what makes my theology distinctive and unique. I have probably heard the parable of the Prodigal Son 5,000 times in a variety of settings and formats. To have encountered a new facet or dynamic is an exciting adventure. The Buddhist version is quite a bit longer, but it is worth the read. Blessings.

All the hairs on our head......

I was having a conversation with some friends of mine the other day and began thinking about knowledge of self and knowledge of others. It has struck me time and time again as I have been engaged in ministry that each individual is so incredibly unique. People say this all the time, so much so that it often becomes cliche. But, I truly am dumbfounded at each of our stories and how they shape us.

All of this has shed new light on my understanding of how I understand God's intimate knowledge of each of us. As I sit in front of my congregation and preach or speak each Sunday I am often overwhelmed at the burden of trying to take into account the myriad of stories that sit out in front of me. There is addiction, divorce, financial crisis, problems with children, celebrations of new life, death, celebrations of marriage, accomplishments, milestones etc. etc. It is amazing.

Anyway, as I sit there I often wonder what it is I am supposed to declare to these people. How can I speak in a way that takes this tapestry of life into account. In the same moment, being prophetic can be challenging to one and completely insensitive to another. The worst part of this predicament is that I know that when my words fail to take into account the narrative of someone sitting out there, they almost never will mention it or approach me about it. Rather, they will exit out the back quietly mulling over an often contorted version of what I said or meant. Their is no moment for frank conversation, no opportunity for explanantion, and no gracious reconciliation in such a relationship.

In the end, I have come to the conclusion that I have to simply trust the Holy Spirit in this interaction. I cannot possibly take into account the sum total of every unique narrative that sits before me. If any minister attempted to do so, they would be left with a style of preaching that was completely denuded of all value. There could be no prophetic words. There could be no exhortations. I think all declarations offend someone and in many ways the gospel is meant to be offensive.

All this to say that I have come to a new appreciation of a God who can take all of my story into account. It's nice to be known. I hope my congregants feel known in a similar way by God and by their pastor.

Mission statements...unmissional???

I just visited an interesting website the other day. It was from a church that I went to a few times when I was back in college. I drop in on my old haunts from time to time through the internet. It is an interesting way to revisit old memories from time to time.

Anyway, I was checking out their website and I noted their sort of mission statement or purpose statement. The portion of their purpose statement that was devoted to mission was particularly interesting. The word that they used was "cause".

I don't like the word 'cause'. I think most of us don't. It implies a certain level of busybodieness that we can't stand. But, I especially can't stand it when I see it attached to mission. What was worse about the whole affair was that the website was loaded with "missional" lingo. It was filled with God's mission to the world and our mission to others. We are people with a "cause".

The problem I see is that our God is not the God of the "cause" but is a God of incarnation. God does not go out and do things to or for others. He actually enters in or alongside of others in their sufferings and plight. That is incarnational ministry and it is at the heart of missional theology. A missionality of "cause" is an oxymoron. The mission of "cause" is a model of the 19th century and early 20th century and it is one we abandoned because it usually has involved us imposing Western "progress" onto others around the world, or it has involved us only giving handouts to those in our communities and then abandoning them.

My hope is not to degrade this church for what it had on its website. It is the tip of the iceberg in terms of what I have seen in the U.S. churches. It is one big "missional" lovefest in which no one has taken the time to really read any deep books on missional theology. Instead they toss the term about the room and it ends up being misused. It's driving me crazy. Missionality in not about a cause. It is not a linguistic equivalent to "social justice" either. I wish more of us could keep that in mind.

Jesus or Mother Teresa

Sometimes I wish I was a follower of Mother Teresa instead of Jesus. Let's face it, everybody likes Mother Teresa. But, you mention the name Jesus and people blow a gasket on you. Mother Teresa cared for some of the poorest people in the world in the most destitute situations of neglect. Jesus seems to be responsible for mega-churches and the Republican party. It really would be a lot easier if I could walk around wearing white and telling people I am a Teresan. At least they might ask, "What's that?" They might be curious about that way of life. They might wonder what my white bracelet was all about with its two blue stripes. I could explain her life and ministry and that the blue and white colors were to mimic her garb. Nobody would associate me with intellectual smallism or exclusionary practices or shady politics or anything else. They would just associate me with Mother Teresa, a nice but determined lady who just went out, shut-up, and did ministry. It's too bad Christianity has ruined Jesus. But maybe that's what human beings do to everything that is genuinely good. I bet in about a week or two people would be over Teresans. Somebody would make a mistake or say something rude and the whole thing would crumble under the weight of perceived hypocrisy. I wonder if Jesus will ever be fresh again? Will he ever be appealing again?

The Kingom of Heaven

Below is a column that I wrote for the Appeal Democrat which is a local paper here in my area. Let me know what you think. I have included this link in the column so that people can come and discuss the column and respond to it if they would like to. Speak graciously and humbly, that is all that I ask.

The Kingdom of Heaven has Come Near!
I am continually amazed at the urgency of retail stores and how quickly they begin to display this year’s latest Christmas items. As I drove to the DMV the other day I was shocked to see a bright red and white tent up along the road. It took me a few seconds to realize the tent was for Christmas trees. Often at this time of year it seems that the retailers are the first to announce that Christmas, ready or not, is on its way.

As I decided what to write for this column I came to the conclusion that if it’s time for the stores to decorate, then it’s time to start the anticipation within the Christian community as well. Jesus, ready or not, is on the way. And there is no better place to begin that anticipation than with John the Baptist. Although John’s ministry comes well after Jesus’ birth, many churches like to remember John’s words, “Repent, the Kingdom of Heaven has come near” before the Christmas season. It’s not the phrase we put on our greeting cards, but it’s important. In fact, three of the four gospels (Mark, Luke, and to an extent John) begin with John the Baptist rather than with Jesus. John’s words are our primer for what is about to come. He is the spiritual preparation for us as we enter into a new time and place when we encounter Jesus Christ. But, what is this Kingdom of Heaven that is drawing near?

The Kingdom is often a difficult concept to get our heads around. We often think of it as heaven: “The Kingdom of Heaven is the place where Christians go when they die.” Or, we think of it as some type of Kingdom Christians are building on earth: “Let’s build the Kingdom by winning converts to the faith.” And while, those examples may be partially true, Jesus seems to think the Kingdom is also something else.

For Jesus Christ, the Kingdom of Heaven (or God) is a new reality and a new ethic for life that is both here and now and in the future when he returns. Some have described this new reality as “already and not yet.” The Kingdom represents a time that is already among us and not fully here yet, when God’s sovereign rule will be experienced. Peace, justice, hospitality, mercy, grace, reconciliation, forgiveness, trust, generosity, and celebration will all characterize this future Kingdom, but should also characterize those who follow after Jesus here and now.

The Kingdom of God is not about just getting folks into heaven. To think in those terms is to render impotent God’s amazing vision for the world. Instead, John’s message that the Kingdom is at hand invites us to actively prepare by living as Christian communities in which this new reality (characterized in the list above) can be experienced here and now and anticipated in the future. When we miss this new Kingdom way of living here and now, the church simply becomes one more retailer that peddles doctrine, heaven, and programs rather than an authentic witness to God’s vision for the world.

Our calling has never been to win converts and then sit around and wait for Jesus to show up. Rather, it has always been to participate in what God is already doing to usher in his Kingdom in our communities. We are to model reconciliation, labor for God’s justice, practice hospitality, extend forgiveness, etc. These are the practices of Christ and they are the things that draw people to Christ more than doctrine, church programs, or Christmas goods on a shelf over at Michael’s or at our local Christian bookstore.

The Kingdom of Heaven has come near! Will we participate in what God is doing?

Emerging Dualism?

I have been reading some more regarding the Emergent churches and emerging churches in both the U.K. and the U.S. I must confess that as a mainliner, I find their efforts and new ground fascinating. Many of their creative efforts are positively stimulating to me and are a refreshing breeze in our church world. Other aspects I find troubling or simply in need of some further thought and discussion.

Recently I was reading that emerging churches are generally opposed in prinicpal to any dualisms. They oppose the dualistic splits that modernity imposed upon society. And while I agree with this mentality, I wonder if it is possible to exist without any dualisms. For example, I agree that the church was wrong in allowing the Enlightenment to convince us that there is a split between the spiritual and the secular. I agree that all things are in some sense spiritual since they fall under the umbrella of the sovereign God. I agree that too often the church has spent too much time focusing on dualisms such as "us" and "them", "saved" and "unsaved", and "in here" versus "out there". However, I think that some dualisms are clearly inherent in Scripture.

The gospels speak of both light and darkness and while we may argue that darkness is simply the absence of light, I am not sure that is not an anachronistic framework we impose on the biblical authors. Second, Jesus speaks of wheat and chaff and various other images (sheep and wolves). He makes distinctions often in dualistic terms. And while I would love to say that he is merely honoring the cultural context and millieu that he found himself in, I don't think that is the case. To say that would make Jesus out to be a deceiver even if only at some minor level. Finally, how can we ever abandon the dualism of good/evil? Clearly, we are not very good judges of what is one and what is the other, but can we honestly say there is no evil in this world? How can we be prophetic without such a concept? How can God stand over and against certain human actions without such a concept? Does not Jesus pray "deliver us from evil"?

I am all for tossing a great many elements of the modernist/Enlightenment experiment. However, we also need to be careful that we are not tossing other deeper elements of the Hebrew Christian tradition out with them. Some dualisms preceeded the likes of Scotus, Descartes, Voltaire, etc. Lets not be naive.