Still Learning

Truth & the Facts

2012-05-14T09:40:00.001-05:00

This has been sitting in my email for months. I'm not even sure where I first got it (might have been a Scott Daniels sermon). Anyway, I'm sharing:

The chief priests’ and elders’ question has been repeated through the centuries of Christian history. Attempts to answer the question as posed inevitably result in diverse forms of Christian heresy, for the attempt to establish grounds more determinative than Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection for why we should believe in him results in idolatry. If one needs a standard of truth to insure that Jesus is the Messiah, then one ought to worship that standard of truth, not Jesus. There is no place one might go to know with certainty that Jesus is who he says he is. To know that Jesus is the Son of God requires that we take up his cross and follow him. Having taken up the cross, Christians discover they have no fear of the truth, no matter from where it might come.

– Stanley Hauerwas

The Hunger Games Review

2012-03-24T11:39:00.000-05:00

If you're reading this, I might imagine what you're thinking: "Jeremy is finally breaking his blogging absence by reviewing a teenaged-hyped movie?" Yes...yes, I am, actually.

-----------

I remember that when my wife was first reading the Hunger Games trilogy, she was slightly disturbed by the content. I think I recall her asking me something about them, but I just passed the books off as the next Twilight. Despite that I now reject the comparison of the two series for the most part (having read them all), the first movie went to pathetic lengths to imply similar themes. If the scenes that flash Gale's reaction to Peeta & Katniss' interactions were meant to bring forth the whimpers of teenage girls, the directors were successful (at least judging from the row of them that sat in front of me at the theater last night). And though I've not read the Twilight books and only suffered through one of the movies, even I can see the resemblance between the character cast as Gale and the one I think is the werewolf dude in Twilight.

I decided to read the books after a Mennonite pastor whose blog I read suggested that those drawn to the peaceable Kingdom (or the "nonviolence of Christ') would do well to interact with the themes. I read the first and was hooked. I couldn't wait for the movie. After initial reviews came out, including a not-so-good one from the afore-mentioned pastor, I was worried that what I valued in the series would be absent from the film.

While there were several things that I didn't like, overall, I thought the movie did very well with the story.

The casting and performance of Katniss was great. I've been sorely disappointed when characters formed in my mind while reading a book were drastically different when cast in a movie. The girl who played Katniss, while beautiful, was not "perfect" in the sense of today's magazine cover teenager. And she played the role of Katness wonderfully.

I had been warned that the effect of violence was not present in the movie in the ways it was in the book. However, I found Katniss' response to Rue's death wonderfully-depicted. The result and response to fear and violence in the books was what made them worthwhile to me. I believe we need to wrestle more with the agony of death and our role in it.

That said, Katniss was a bit too "innocent" for me. One of the things I valued in the series was the inner turmoil she had with the notion of killing. Short of a narrator-like over-voice in the movie (which would have had the potential to be horrible), much of this was probably impossible to portray. Hopefully, the forth-coming movies will not remove this important part of the story. I can envision a director making the final killing scene of the series one of revenge rather than the confused, conflicted, and impulsive action of a young woman devastated by the effects of violence.

What I'm saying is this: the main reason I even "enjoyed" the series were the implications of "power by fear" and "fear by [the threat of] violence". While the state and situation of Panem might seem far-removed from 21st century America, the notion of out-sourcing violence isn't so much. Do we ever really wonder just how it is that America is so "peaceful" while we every so often hear rumors of war, trial, violence, and death throughout much of the rest of the world?

Just how and why is it that we eat enough to get so fat that we spend billions in fat remedies while other parts of the world starve in hunger?

How and why would a bunch of human beings decide to board airplanes and exterminate themselves by kamikaze-ing them into our centers of commerce and government? Just what exactly breeds that passion and willingness to kill?

I don't think these are questions to leave to those who lead and who oversee power. In fact...the thought is rather scary.

But back to the movie: the interplay between scenes in the arena and in the control room (which was remarkably similar to one of my favorite movies: The Truman Show) or dialogue between President Snow/Seneca Crane/Haymitch was probably necessary, but it sure was a departure from the book. It seemed to blatantly tell the "progression" of power, rather than the guessed implications of what was going on through Katniss' thought processes in the book.

Movies like Wall-E and The Lorax are okay in that they demonstrate the effect of human ravaging upon all of nature. But the story of The Hunger Games does me better in showing the effects of humans ravaging one another.

While the arena and the idea of an annual event like the Hunger Games (a death-match to instill fear and maintain the "pax of Panem" disguised as entertainment's value) is again far-removed from our society, there are plenty of ways in which power is enacted or abused for entertainment's sake or one's own pleasure. These include the sex-trafficking trade, massive pornography industry, food over-consumption, sports industries, and certainly the whacko bi-partisan political scene which is little more than a spectator's sport at the moment.

Perhaps The Hunger Games will go beyond a teenaged romance triangle for some people.

In the end, I enjoyed the movie very much and look forward to the next. But as almost always...the book was better. :-)

Why I Don't Gamble

2012-02-06T09:56:00.000-06:00

Last night, I had made eight not-so-serious predictions prior to the Super Bowl on Twitter. After, I jokingly tweeted: "Only two of my eight predictions for the #SuperBowl were correct. #fessingup #whyidontbet". An old friend responded via private message asking why it is that I don't gamble. I thought I'd share some of what I responded:

First of all, as with most things these days, I claim the spirit of Romans 14 in this. You asked my thoughts, so if you hear any legalism or forced piety directed at you within my response, check your filter. In other words, my conclusion on this is a non-essential and I'd be happy to sit at the table of Communion with someone despite our disagreement on this (and an ever-increasing list of other things).

There have been very brief times in my life when I've toyed with the notion of gambling. I've had some success with Blackjack and variant forms of online Poker. I believe that with patience and the proper amount of time spent, I could be a decent gambler and bring in more money than I'd lose. I can imagine myself being able to do that and while it may sound cocky, I generally believe it to be true.

But in the end, I see gambling as just another form of taking other people's money.

I'm less concerned about becoming addicted myself (I do believe that is a possibility for anyone, though not a certainty for everyone). I'm more concerned that if I did indeed win, I'd simply be profiting from the impulsivity and addiction of others. That doesn't jive with my understanding of Christ. Even (and especially) when I win, I'm just contributing to the system. Put differently, gambling is just another way to confess my faith in power, specifically, the power of money (but also "winning" and "thrill"). That's something I'm trying to avoid as I try and understand the self-emptying of Christ.

Most people waste money in one form or another, and I am no exception. Sometimes I take my kids on the carousel. It costs $2.50 or so. I'm basically paying for the brief thrilling experience and - if I'm lucky - a small memory, because the money and the moment are both gone almost as quickly as a round of Blackjack. I could see how some say the same of gambling - they enjoy the thrill. I can understand that. But the overall picture I describe in the previous paragraph is enough for me to avoid this as a whole.

After the Yellow Ribbon

2012-01-24T09:40:00.001-06:00

"In any war, at least one side loses; in some wars, no side wins." - John Howard Yoder

Back in November, I flew down to North Carolina for a very short conference called "After the Yellow Ribbon" put on by the students of Duke Divinity School on their campus. It was my first time at Duke: impressive all around, as expected. Quite a stately campus. I've been on my share of campuses, but I'm not sure that I've been more in awe than at Duke. Of course, the fact that my favorite theologian (Hauerwas) walks those halls might have been a factor (though not for long, this is his last semester, I'm told). And there was indeed a Duke men's basketball game that weekend, making for a crazy campus. Anyway, the conference was bringing together three parties: the Church, the Academy, and the Military to talk about our response to soldiers who have come home from war. Some of my notes and reflections are below.

Overall, I was greatly challenged by the conference, as I knew I would be. I'm not really sure how to be proactive in response. I don't know any recent veterans (in my area, at least). My path to and on nonviolence basically led me to understand that despite my contrarian feelings about the US's military actions, my responsibility as a follower of Christ is to be directed to those who are hurting and those who are ignored. Veterans often to fit both of those demographics.

I was a bit out of place - it was mostly Duke Divinity students (academics) and a few in the military. It only kindled the fire in me to be back in school, but this is to come. There might have been a few other pastors, but I didn't perceive that anyone else really flew in for it.

A lot of this is a sporadism of notes, but glean what you can.

----- Friday Evening: Lieut. Colonel Pete Kilner -----

Lt. Col. Kilner teaches at West Point.

"There are elements of heaven that are only in war." - This is related this to a "band of brothers"-type camaraderie/community. I've actually considered this in relation to the Church and koinonia and have a sermon series on the very back burner along these lines. Good relationship generally cannot be manufactured. Something happens to people when they sweat and bleed together. I've not experienced war, but I've known the sweat and tears of serving for a couple of weeks in an impoverished area. The people I was with and I have bonds that cannot be explained nor recreated.

I was made to consider the notion of selective conscientious objection. Generally, a conscientious objector must object to ALL war...not just the current one. (i.e.: "Would you fight in WWII?") I have had my paperwork to sign and file to my denomination for my conscientious objection sitting on my desk for over half a year. I'm not sure why I haven't sent it in yet. Part of me wonders that if a situation like WWII did come about, I might actually want to participate. Anyway, Lt. Col. and others at the conference talked about "selective conscientious objection." I forget Kilner's feelings about it, but others would lobby for it. And I think I would too.

[paraphrasing] The people are not doing their job in doing a good public debate concerning the just-ness of war.

One take-away was just the notion of creating some kind of a "Soldiers Anonymous" group in our community. I would need a leader(s) though, and it certainly can't be me. But we need to create safe places where veterans can come and talk of their experience together...or at least just be together.

----- Saturday morning, Exploring the Moral Landscape: Military, Theological, and Academic Intersections (Elyse Gustafson, Herman Keizer, Warren Kinghorn) -----

(Kinghorn) PTSD - not just anxiety, traumatic events in the past act determinatively in the course of life in the present; generally considered a medical condition/diagnosis, responded to with medicine and therapy; But Kinghorn, while acknowledging the reality of PTSD, believes it can be an oversimplification for those coming back from combat, as PTSD is a general "explanation". But unlike other physical diagnoses, PTSD is in and of itself the symptoms. (Other diagnoses come about because of symptoms, which point to the diagnosis.) He might consider PTSD as coming about due to the _moral_ effects of war. He notes the difference between recipient trauma and agentive trauma ("done unto" and "done to others"). His belief is that these are the majoritive causes for PTSD in combat-related PTSD.

"moral injury" - perpetrating or failing to prevent the occurrence of moral events. problem: moral injury can hardly be classified simply as a medical term. As such, the issues and thus, the responses, are as diverse as the number of soldiers coming home. Again: create spaces for personal narrative-sharing

(Gustafson) First Liut. Gustafson's presentation was probably the most moving of the conference for me. She told us of her experience in receiving soldiers home as a chaplain.

One such: "Dan" - combat soldier, on going to Church: "I'm treated either as a hero or a monster. Neither is a person." She wrote a prayer for "Dan."

When she read it to him, he cried, and she describes the experience as "the closest she'd ever felt to God." To me, she is describing Matthew 25.

Reconciliation for the penitent: confession; examination of conscience - Yes, confession. Growing up, like so many other Protestant boys and girls, confession was this crazy-idea to control people invented by the Roman Catholic Church (Forgive me, please). And even still, I have to remember that confession is only sometimes about culpability. But confession and incarnational ministry is as of Christ - "Taking the sin of the world upon oneself." This sharing in the RESULT of sin is our ministry. Soldiers (like all those who have injuries) need spaces of confession. The complexity of issues, responses, etc. is astounding.

"It's true confession if it brings people into community."

(Keizer) Chaplain Col. Keizer spoke freely and from the heart, obviously from decades of experience.

Reported that 52% of Veterans are reserves, meaning they do not go back to people that understand them. There apparently is a much different debriefing process for reservists. (parenthetical comment by me: so far, my respect for the military has increased and for politicians and citizens has decreased)

"Reflexive" versus "reflective" in making decision to kill.

Again: the opportunity of selective conscientious objection

"If we're no longer able to be critical of our country, then we are unable to be good citizens of our country."

Keizer spoke of two things I need to read: Matterhorn (novel on Vietnam) and his own article: "I'll be home for Christmas"

He encouraged us to use the psalms to help veterans speak and heal.

----- Seminar: Caring for Veterans After War (Chaplains Bill Cantrell & John Oliver) -----

Bill is a Navy Chaplain, working for the VA here in Durham

Trauma:
Often challenges the integrity of our body and our sense of ourselves
Challenges our beliefs about: life, death, meaning, our sense of mastery and potency in the world
Can challenge the very foundations upon which we build our lives
Affects our identity and identification

Moral Injury: Causes & Consequences
[persistent threats to assumptions of right & wrong]
Altered assumptions/changed humanity
Affects decision-making & behavior
Actings out, revenge, retribution

The Emotional Toll
Fear, Anxiety, Stress (Guerilla warfare, civilian threat)
Guilt, Shame (killing, abusiveness, destruction)
Anger, Rage (Helplessness, betrayal/violation)
Sadness, Dysphoria (Loss, hopelessness, witnessing grave suffering)

Spiritual Fitness Guide
Fit-->Stressed-->Depleted-->Drained

The journey home marks the beginning of an internal war for the [soldiers].

Spiritual Aids to Recovery
Group exercises
Community Involvement
Spiritual Practices
Existential Topics
Forgiveness
Values for Living
Finding Meaning and Purpose
Ritual

George Washington, November 10, 1781: "The willingness with which our young people are likely to serve in any war, no matter how justified, shall be directly proportional to how they perceive how the veterans of earlier wars were treated and appreciated by their nation." (parenthetical: I'm not sure if this is good or bad...)

John Oliver - Pastoral Care

6308 US fatalities
4017 wounded (as of Wednesday of last week)
...in comparison...
Vietnam - over 60,000
WWII - hundreds of thousands

So we've kept the casualties down, but this means more wounded coming home. What are the implications of this?

Four Issues:
Life Threat (you could die)
Wear & Tear on Body/Spirit/Soul
Ongoing loss of friends and family
Inner conflict of moral dilemmas

Of those interviewed coming home:
92% knew of someone killed
81% attacked or ambushed
75% seen dead bodies

30% of combat soldiers have some kind of diagnosis
So this means that there are 70% who are "resilient" - they are strong people

As pastors, the language of "disorder" is difficult in what it does as a label or even as a self-fulfilling prophecy

There are three people types in regard to trauma:
Been through a trauma
Those who are going through a trauma
Those who will go through trauma

Pattern of Lament:
Life is good.
Life is disrupted.
...yet...
Trust. Hope.

We can see this in the progression of Psalm 22 - 23 - 24
Let this be a pattern of how we serve as pastor to people through trauma

The removal from the community of the "band of brothers" is so difficult.
Can we bring them "home" into the community of the Church?
...this will not be easy, particularly because of the facade of community in the Church.

Spiritual reactions to trauma:
Confusion about God
Discounting community
Alters one sense of meaning in life
Loss of previously sustained and sustaining beliefs (especially superficial ones)
Guilt
Anger
Self-blaming
Questions of theodicy
Questions of God's love ("God can't love me..." I'd rather die than bring this stuff home to my family)

Three stages of recovery:
1. Safety (people need to know that they are safe)
2. Remembrance & Mourning
3. Reconnection

Sometimes remembering is difficult not simply because they don't want to, but because they can't

----- Mapping the Moral Landscape Discovering Resources for Recovery with Stephen Xenakis, David Miller, Peter Bowen -----

(Miller) Should the first place soldiers return to be a rally or the confessional? Because when they return, they are returning from having done things that no human should ever have to do (Again...confession isn't always about culpability, but about the opportunity of releasing the effects of sin.)

I really appreciated Miller's talk. It again left me wondering if I might be a better fit in an anabaptist tradition.

The Church needs to focus on nurturing the baptized in priority to speaking in the public square.

Trauma results in a disconnection from others.

I love this quote: "May the next generation create no veterans." - David Miller

Penn State, Fathering, & the Nonviolence of Christ via Pastor Rudy Rasmus

2011-11-21T10:30:00.001-06:00

Often when people get into a discussion of the nonviolent response of Christ, and thus, of his followers, the typical response is a presentation of the hypothetical question: "But what about if someone is hurting someone you love? What would you do then?"

As one convinced of Christ's peaceable living, and as one who loves my wife and four children dearly...this is a haunting question. (It's also a little bit of a ridiculous question, not because I can't imagine it happening, but because there is a certain insanity after a while when it comes to hypothetical questions. Life is not hypothetical.). I recently read a short book by John Hower Yoder, who many see as the go-to when it comes to Christian pacificism that seeks to begin to "answer" this question. It was a great read. But part of the insanity of this over-simplified question is that there is no over-simplified answer, at least not for the pacifist.

Today, I found a video thanks again to TWOTP.com from Pastor Rudy Rasmus. I've only heard of/from Rasmus a couple of times, but I perceive him to be a man of one message: love, and love at all costs. So I was intrigued as to what his response would be in light of the Penn State child sexual abuse situation. He responds not as a pastor, but as a father who follows Christ. I appreciate his honesty.

"Daddy, I would have hated to have lost twice."

Crossing Over To Love from The Work Of The People on Vimeo.

A Great Prayer

2011-11-13T06:37:00.001-06:00

Your kingdom come around and through and in me;
Your power and glory, let them shine through me;
Your Hallowed name, O may I bear with honor,
And may Your living Kingdom come in me.
The Bread of Life, O may I share with honor,
And may You feed a hungry world through me.

Once every three months or so, I listen to this version of Gloria Gaither's song, I Then Shall Live. I'd probably otherwise assume that the Gaither Band is a "sweet-by-and-by---someday-we'll-get-to-heaven" kind of propagation...and I'd be wrong.

Pretty much the whole song is quotable ("I've been so loved that I'll risk loving too!"), but the third verse above is such a great prayer for your day and your life, here and now.

May it be so.

After the Yellow Ribbon, Pre-Conference

2011-11-11T12:45:00.001-06:00

Why would someone who believes in the nonviolence of the cross of Christ decide to go to a conference based around our response to and support of American soldiers?

Today is Veteran's Day. I'm right now sitting at JFK Airport in New York City on a layover from Boston to Raleigh-Durham for a Conference at Duke University. There are yellow balloons everywhere, probably 500 or so just within 100 feet of me, in bunches and making a huge archway. There is a troop of Boy Scouts, probably 15-20 of them here, waiting for soldiers from the New York National Guard to come in from a flight. My Facebook feed is saturated with patriotic pictures, thanks made to veterans, and yellow ribbons. People are remembering veterans today. This is of mixed emotions for me.

A problem with holidays is that we tend to reserve the designated celebration or thankfulness for those holidays. But my mother is my mother 365 days a year and not just a day in May. And it's good to be thankful on days other than November 25th. And we would do well to resolve to do well in our lives other than on the first day of the year.

So I fear that I will forget veterans tomorrow and the day after. It's likely that most of the country will as well.

I've twice now read the stat that veterans of the recent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are committing suicide at the rate of 17 a day.

...seventeen a day...

I didn't even know that there were that many vets to go around. (I still kind of question the statistic.)

The ongoing effects of war and the results of fighting in war are so incomprehensible to me. I truly can ONLY imagine. Stanley Hauerwas calls us to consider the difficult transitions and situations that soldiers go to in the video below.

Hauerwas on moral fragmentation

And so I hate the wars. I hate that the most powerful nation in the world chose to fight them in the ways that she has. I hate the money that has gone into them. I hate that men and women from the United States have died by the thousands in them. I hate that hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and Afghans have died, many of whom were not soldiers.

Selfishly, I hate most of all that Bobby Moscillo is dead today because of the war in Iraq.

So in a few hours I will be sitting with a group of people listening to and responding to the topic of our response to the homecoming of soldiers.

Why am I going?

Because the compassion of Christ to which I am called is for all. I'm no great futurist or sociologist, but I can imagine that there will be veterans whose lives have been drastically affected by these wars around us for decades to come. As a pastor in a small church, I expect that I will come across many of them in the coming years. Indeed, I already have.

There are a variety of ways that evil causes us to suffer. Veterans are suffering after returning home from the evils of war the likes of which I cannot imagine. Christ's call is for his followers to identify the suffering and suffer with them ("with suffering" = com - passion).

That's why I'm going.

Wesley's Spiritual Disciplines

2011-11-04T09:51:00.000-05:00

When my good friend, John Reilly, first spoke to me about Wesley's spiritual disciplines as though there was a set group or list of them, I was intrigued. After that conversation, I went home and searched for them, but didn't easily find any comprehensive or generally agreed-upon list. I emailed John, and he sent me something that had been compiled from Dr. Henry ("Hal") Knight's dissertation, which is now in published book form: The Presence of God in the Christian Life: John Wesley and the Means of Grace. But don't look for the Kindle version and be prepared to spend at least $50 if you want it in book form. This compilation/list is at the end of this post in three parts.

But this past Tuesday and Wednesday, I was able to hear John present some of his work from his own dissertation, and he presented what I think is a more comprehensive work. I believe this list is his own compilation and have an email out to him to verify (update: verified). Some asked me to share this when I returned, so here they are, Wesley's Spiritual Disciplines:

Prayer - Personal/Corporate
Fasting - Personal/Corporate
Journaling - Personal
Solitude - Personal/Corporate
Silence - Personal/Corporate
Bible Reading - Personal/Corporate
"Feeding" the Poor - Personal/Corporate
Christian Conferencing - Corporate
Circumstantial Grace - Personal/Corporate

John was continually insistent on reminding us that all of these are framed around, pointed at, and intentionally directed to a heart of love. So the practices don't matter unless they are directed at this purpose.

Now I don't believe that they were ever presented in such a list/form from Wesley himself. Let's remember that Wesley's writings are extensive. Sometimes I feel like if something can be said one way or another, then Wesley said it that way at some point. He often changed his mind. So a single voice in the totality of his writings is often difficult to ascertain. Nonetheless, I find the above list helpful as I consider my own discipleship and the oversight of others. They can certainly be demonstrated to be within the totality of Wesley's encouragement to those who listened to him.

I'd love to believe that in the next several weeks I might blog a post commenting on each one, but those who know me know that this will not happen. So let me comment generally:

For me, discipleship is firstly formed by Christ. As I look at this list, I can understand from the witness of scripture Jesus Christ himself participating in a form of each one, with the exceptions of journaling and perhaps silence (we might assume it from his regular solitude, but it's not there explicitly). But the rest are easily demonstrated to be within his own discipleship, even in both forms and all of them are within scripture. I haven't yet explained that this list was given with the distinction of whether or not each practice can be either personal, corporate, or both. Wesley apparently encouraged the distinction, and practicing each both individually and in community as was possible.

Any time a list is presented, one runs the risk of codification or fostering legalism. I'm willing to run that risk since discipleship is so impoverished these days. At least in my own tradition, discipleship generally means "Sunday School" and "book studies." The intentional and regular practice of fasting, solitude, silence, etc. is reserved for old saints, super-pastors, and monks. Even for a denomination that prides itself on compassionate ministry, it's vastly encouraged as a means to change the world rather than to change me.

There are obviously things not on the list, namely for me: evangelism. While evangelism is generally not considered an act of discipline/discipleship, I argue that it indeed is. Jesus, in forming his own disciples, sent them out to evangelize as an act. Evangelism is a spiritual discipline and is the last one Jesus handed on in the synoptics. Making disciples is part of our discipleship in Christ.

Now, for the list as given from Dr. Knight:

All means of grace have as their end the life of love, the Christian life.

General Means of Grace

Universal obedience
Keeping all the commandments
Watching
Denying ourselves
Taking up our cross daily
Exercise of the presence of God

Instituted (Particular) Means of Grace

Prayer: private, family, public; consisting of deprecation, petition, intercession, thanksgiving; extemporaneous, written
Searching scripture by reading, meditating, hearing; attending the ministry of the word, either read or expounded
The Lord’s Supper
Fasting, or abstinence
Christian Conferencing, which includes both the fellowship of believers and rightly ordered conversations which minister grace to hearers

Prudential Means of Grace

Particular rules or acts of holy living
Class and band meetings
Prayer meetings, covenant services, watch night services, love feasts
Visiting the sick
Doing all the good one can, doing no harm
Reading devotional classics and all edifying literature

Why give a nod to Halloween?

2011-10-31T14:54:00.001-05:00

I have a love-hate relationship with Halloween.

Not big on the candy, costumes, and hoop-la.

But I think it's a great opportunity to remind us of life & love.

I don't really single it out. There are aspects of Easter and Christmas that bug me too. And I find little value in Valentine's Day, St. Patrick's Day, Mothers'-Fathers' Days, and Flag Day. (Flag Day... Really?!)

Anyway, Halloween is today. Our culture knows this: the day is second only to Christmas in terms of dollars spent in anticipation of (industry expected $6.9 billion for Halloween this year). I know it goes with the ages of my children, but it seems like the hype surrounding Halloween grows each and every year. My kids were invited to wear their costumes at their music recitals. They were invited to parties (on nights other than Oct. 31). My oldest - in first grade - even got a "boo-gram" again this year. (Kind of fun, actually: another child tapes candy to a piece of paper that says, "You've been BOOED!", puts it on the doorstep, rings the bell, and runs away.) The lawn and house ornaments and lights, etc. are so overdone, it's not even funny. There are enough blow-up spiders on roofs in Hingham to make any arachnophobe tremble. It's unbelievable.

And why...?

With Christmas or Easter, we might explain that at least most people value the story and Christian tradition behind the holidays.

But Halloween...? Do people know?

Before I get to that, I almost forgot: my first-grade son Brayden came home from school one day last week and said, "Hey Dad, do you know the holiday called 'Day of the Dead'?"

Now I vaguely remembered hearing of this Mexican holiday, but at the moment, I just assumed he was confused: "You mean All Saints' Day, right?"

Brayden: "No, Dad. We learned in Spanish today about Day of the Dead. It's in Mexico. They all go into the cemetery and think about the dead."

Me: "Okay, Brayden, but that sounds a lot like our All Saints Day."

Brayden: "Well what's All Saints Day?"

Me: "It's a day when we remember those who have died in Christ."

Brayden: "Oh, no. Not that, Dad. My teacher said Day of the Dead has nothing to do with Jesus. It's not like rising from the dead."

[...silence...]

Me: "Um, Brayden, when is Day of the Dead?"

Brayden: "November 1st."

Me: "Hmm...that's the same day as All Saints Day. So I imagine that they're related. ...so Jesus is kind of important to All Saints Day."

Brayden: "That's not what my teacher said. She said it has nothing to do with Jesus."

Now I have a lot of respect for public school teachers, so I let it drop for the moment. I looked it up and remembered hearing in the past about Day of the Dead, which is indeed a national holiday in Mexico. Yep: while pre-dating even Christ with Aztec roots, the day is intentionally set on November 1st and 2nd in connection with All Saints/Souls Days. Not even sure why I looked it up.

But "it's got nothing to do with Jesus," of course. :-p

Anyway, I actually want Brayden to know about All Saints Day. So we've been having some conversations. Here's why I think Halloween is an opportunity for we who follow Christ and why I am up for working a bit to re-claim All Saints Day:

We're horrible at dealing with death. I wish I was talking about just American society in general, but it's true of my church tradition as well. So All Saints Day is a wonderful way to remind us what we believe about life, death, and resurrection by the Resurrected One himself, Jesus Christ.

So, I wrote the below for our church. For the third year in a row, we are handing out hot apple cider (for warmth), glow bracelets (for safety!), and candy (I guess because we're supposed to) to those who walk by the chapel. We're also adding about 75 milk jug luminaries around the property to light up the neighborhood. I may even pull out a table and light our red sanctuary candles that we have in memory of those saints who've gone before us. I'm hoping this continues to catch on for our church community.

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

Why would an evangelical Christian church do anything on Halloween?

"There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear..."

John was one of the first followers of Jesus Christ. He wrote the above words in one of the books of the Bible that's attributed to him. In today’s contemporary world, one in which much is built upon or informed by fear, our church believes rather that love is to be at the heart of what we do.

So we reject any continued and intentional effort to instill fear in anyone. Quite frankly, much of what causes fear these days is nothing at all to even be feared!

Life, Death, and Resurrection

What about participating in the evil of Halloween? It's true that many see Halloween as a night of opportunity for interacting with "evil," whatever that may be or look like. And this has mostly come from the subject of death and "what happens" after death: the folklore of ghosts, ghouls, zombies, and other scary things that we'd otherwise rather avoid. The mockery made of these things may actually be well-played, for in mockery, we are often seeking to rise above the things that scare us. But sometimes we mock things as an easy way to avoid dealing with an otherwise difficult subject.

What might be well-intentioned mockery to a child (or adult!) on October 31st may take form in untrue yet seemingly realistic and very influential ways when Grandpa or Mom or Brother dies any other time of the year.

For Christians, we don't fear death. We acknowledge its reality, but we seek to overcome it by the Resurrected Christ. We seek to speak life, light, hope, and love in the midst of death. As far as we know, we will all die someday. But those who follow the Risen Christ think differently about death, knowing that death is not the end, but a state of "rest" in which the dead are "waiting" for the return of Christ and the Great Resurrection.

So people who have died aren't wandering spirits, but instead are...well...dead. You've likely seen the popular usage of "R.I.P." on decorative Halloween tombstones, which means, "rest in peace." Well this is meaningful and not at all scary for Christians: that those who have died in Christ now lay in rest, waiting for his return.

For we who remain, we remember the dead (even with sadness sometimes), but we don't fear them! We acknowledge death, but we don't "meddle" in it. Death is for real and while mockery may help ease the all-too-often real "sting," for those who follow Christ, the true avenue to overcoming death and the hurt, despair, and other difficult things surrounding it is found in the Resurrection of Jesus Christ.

So we "practice" the things of resurrection now: life, love, light, hope, and peace.

You may know that the Halloween of today is a descendant of a holiday of the Christian Church. Even today, many churches still give a slight nod to what is called "All Saints Day" (and also for many, the subsequent "All Souls Day"). All Saints Day (or "All Hallows Day") is November 1st and the night before ("eve") has since become "All Hallows Eve" or Halloween.

For Christians, remembering our dead is a way to proclaim the continued reign of the Resurrected Christ. We don't fear them in their deaths...we celebrate their lives. Surely we miss them. But in Christ, we know that death is only temporary.

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

I'm looking forward to finally preaching two corresponding series this coming Lent & Easter on death and life. I think we need it. Jesus was pretty intent on bringing healing to people, good morals and all. But his life & ministry culminated on the cross and out of the empty tomb. This is our message.

"Bringing a little Dorchester" to Hingham

2011-10-25T14:20:00.000-05:00

"We're bringing a little Dorchester with us."

That's what Donnie Wahlberg said last night at the grand opening/premiere/party thing that opened up the new Wahlburgers restaurant about 2 miles from where I live, minister, and worship.

I find the statement so ironic. It's what I often wish would happen in Hingham.

Now the Wahlberg boys aren't stupid. Chef Paul (brother to the famous Donnie of NKOTB and even more famous Mark) chose the Hingham Shipyard as the location for his two (soon to be three) restaurants and not their actual hometown of Dorchester. Dorchester would have been a horrible business decision. The first restaurant is reportedly doing very well, and the second - scheduled to open to the public today - will likely as well. If the likes of the people who showed up to the private yet well-publicized premiere opening last night have anything to do with it, it will be just fine. David Ortiz, Kevin Youkilis, Danny Paille, and Rob Gronkowski were all there, completing the four major Boston sports teams. Alas, the minister from the closest house of worship was not invited. :-) And I'm not sure if the poor were there either. But I could be wrong.

Anyway, it's them (the poor) that made me write today.

At the very same time that these were celebrating the new establishment, much of the rest of Hingham was focused on establishing the financial foundation for a new middle school to the tune of $60.9 million. After much debate, the article at Hingham Town Meeting passed just fine by 82 votes (it now goes to general election this Saturday). I couldn't make it to the special Town Meeting as I had an Overseers meeting for the church, but I'm not sure how I would have voted had I been there. If and when I do go, I like to listen to the heart of democracy work (the New England town meeting is a thing of beauty and wonder) and then decide.

But I'm not really in the business of deciding the need for a new school. I think education is important, but I'm not overly worried about the quality of education in Hingham. I tend to think that the space is much less important than the people (teachers) and the medium (curriculum, etc.). But you do need a place to make these things happen. As it stands I "kind of" have three children in Hingham Schools: my oldest is in first grade and my twin girls go to the Integrated Preschool that we can't afford for about 10 hours a week. So I recognize and affirm the need for education and the much more subservient need for a place to do it.

...I'm just not sure why it takes $60.9 million.

Some of the scare tactics used to lobby for the school were laughable: "Crack forms in ceiling. Need new school." I guess I grew up in a different way: if the car needed a new radiator, we didn't buy a new car, we got a new radiator. I don't want to downplay the importance of fixing things for safety's sake. I do want to downplay the desire for fresh paint and an auditorium in a middle school. The middle school I went to (in a fairly wealthy town) had no auditorium. That was for the likes of a high school. And "not adequate space" for the music room? Wait...you mean there's a music room!? And did you see all those instruments!? Anyway, I'm way too into details at this point.

What is my point?

It's in moments like these that I wish we could really do what Donnie Wahlberg suggests: bring a little Dorchester to Hingham. When I read the local paper and see people go on and on with the passion and zeal of Dr. King himself about where to put stoplights and whether or not the lines downtown should be yellow like everyone else's or red, white, and blue for the 4th of July, it makes me want to rent some coach buses and take my fellow Hinghamites a few miles down the road to Dorchester. Just to get out, ya know?

I want to give the town of Hingham some credit. If there's a need, the community is going to take care of it. The school system is pretty good, the roads are well-paved, and the stoplights are pretty (although the way we handle trash and recyclables needs to go!). The average home selling price is above $700,000 for good reason. Despite the "horrible" economy of the past several years, the housing market in Hingham hardly took a hit. There are houses on my street in which I could run from one side to the other in less than a second (=small...and I've got bad knees) that have sold multiple times in the last couple of years for over half a million dollars. Even the tiny house that I live in which is need of some repair and a decent paint job (again!) is assessed near $500,000 (five years ago).***

Further, there are really smart, thoughtful, and resourceful people here who know how to find money and exercise the various grants, funds, etc. available from nonprofits and levels of government outside the town. Example: did you know that there are grants that you can apply for to purchase a boat pump out station? Someone in Hingham did. Props to them! And this $60.9 million middle school will actually "only" cost the taxpayers of Hingham $35.6 million because the state is kicking in some $25 million.

...If I lived in Dorchester, I'd kind of wonder why Hingham is getting $25 million dollars to build a new school. I mean...really? Hingham needs help building a school?

I'm not offering answers here, just throwing out these thoughts as a way of thinking more deeply than a scare-tactic YouTube video (Single-pane windows!? The horror! Can't we get new windows?). Education isn't about facility. Facilities are servants to more important things.

In six years, if I'm still in Hingham, my oldest son will go to the new middle school. I'm sure it will be great. And I understand about the opportune time in regard to the state funds.

I just struggle with the amount of money.

***Disclosure: By the way, I should really point out that I am hardly a Hingham taxpayer. I am a resident of almost six years, but the only taxes I've paid are from my vehicle and I believe, a small entertainment/food tax from the restaurants. The church owns the house we live in, and being a nonprofit, pays no real estate taxes. I'm conflicted by this when I consider town issues. So I don't even really have reason to complain as the tax increases won't affect me. I'll never be able to afford to buy in Hingham.

A Non-Resistant Ethical Blueprint?

2011-10-07T09:37:00.002-05:00

I basically am typing this out and posting it for future reference as it describes better how nonviolence plays out for the one(s) following Christ.

If we took the precept of non-resistance as an ethical blueprint for general application, we should indeed be indulging in idealistic dreams: we should be dreaming of a utopia with laws which the world would never obey. To make non-resistance a principle for secular life is to deny God, by undermining his gracious ordinance for the preservation of the world. But Jesus is no draughtsman of political blueprints, he is the one who vanquished evil through suffering. It looked as though evil had triumphed on the cross, but the real victory belonged to Jesus. And the cross is the only justification for the precept of non-violence, for it alone can kindle a faith in the victory over evil which will enable men to obey that precept. And only such obedience is blessed with the promise that we shall be partakers of Christ's victory as well as of his sufferings. (Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship)

Pardon my Bennet Brauer quotational-tendencies for a moment, but when I first starting flirting with these understandings of Christ several years ago (just out of seminary), I was told by that I would "get over it," it was "just a phase," that I was "idealistic," etc. I was "out of touch with reality." At one panel discussion on nonviolence, one senior clergy-person said to me: "Yes, but Jeremy, right now there are terrorists hiding in those mountains who have a notion to kill innocent people," as if I didn't think about that.

In the years since, I've been more silent about my understanding of the nonviolent Christ. But my faith conviction in the prescriptive cross has not gone away and has actually only been kindled as I continue to watch the powers of the world bicker and smolder in a struggle of power and control. And by "powers" I don't only mean nation-states, but also the individuals around me (including myself) who so often resort to the ways and means of control to make situations as I would have them to be.

There is no blueprint, really. That would be another Law. Rather, there is a call to follow Jesus in the moments of life. Questions of "What if someone's rapin' your Grandma?" might slightly begin to help flesh out what to do, but only obedience to the will of God by the grace of God will lead us as it did Christ.

So really, it's not about "killing or not killing" at all. If the discussion/debate focuses there, we're doing no better. It's not even a discussion at all, really. And it's certainly not a "position" (of pacifism, or whatever else you want to call it). It's a decision to follow in the path and example of the crucified Christ. Obedience...

The notion of, "Yes, but in real life..." doesn't stop Jesus. We'd all be in big trouble if it did.

A Prayer on the 10th Anniversary of 9-11

2011-08-31T07:58:00.000-05:00

I participate in the local religious leaders group here in Hingham (Hingham & Hull Religious Leaders Association). It's a great group of people. We meet monthly for fellowship, conversation, and to challenge one another, usually in the form of a current topic, issue, need, etc. We also have various events and services (MLK Day, Thanksgiving Service, etc.). This year, we are gathering in the afternoon on the 10th anniversary of 9-11 to have a service of remembrance for the day. We are also ringing our various chapel/church bells throughout town in the morning at the time of the second WTC building collapse.

This occasion is of mixed emotions for me. It's no secret that I'm not a big fan of how the United States has responded. I don't know all the answers. I know that my hope is in a peace that rises above the ever-contradictory "fight for peace." A lot of things have been said since then:
"It changed the world forever."
"We'll never be the same."
"We'll never forget."

I challenge the notion of these kinds of statements. I'm not sure we have changed. I think the world is pretty much the same as it was before: one big power struggle between human beings. The powerful have become stronger, the powerless have become weaker, and fear reigns. It's with these notions and others that I wrote this prayer for the 10th anniversary of that horrible day.

So Keep Us True to Our Words
Jeremy Scott

God:
9-11 happened.
We responded.
And we respond.
Help us.

We've said, "We will never forget."
So help us to do so out of respect for and in memory of those lost,
And not out of revenge toward those responsible,
For we understand that to be yours.

We've said, "We will never be the same."
So help us to bring this to fruition:
That we might not be the same as those who've sought to destroy us:
Returning fire for fire; But instead, love, despite the fire.

We've said, "We will never forget."
So help us to remember that which it takes and means to make peace;
That our re-member-ance would be all 'putting-back-together'
And not an excuse for more 'tearing apart'.

We've said, "We will never be the same."
So help us to make this true:
That this day ten years ago would indeed make us different:
Our love: only genuine;
Our hate: only of those things that are evil;
Our holding on: only to that which is good.
Our quest to outdo: only in the things of honor.

We've committed to keep shopping.
So help us spend the currencies of mercy, grace, and love,
All in the favor of the universal product-good that is peace.

So cast from us fear,
Deep into your love.

Thus, keep us true to our words.

Amen.

Belief, Faithing, & Doctrine

2011-08-01T08:41:00.000-05:00

"I believe what I write, or rather, by writing I learn to believe. But then I do not put much stock in 'believing in God.' The grammar of 'belief' invites a far too rationalistic account of what it means to be a Christian. 'Belief' implies propositions about which you get to make up your mind before you know the work they are meant to do. Does that mean I do not believe in God? Of course not, but I am far more interested in what a declaration of belief entails for how I live my life."

The above is from Stanley Hauerwas in his memoir, Hannah's Child.

"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord', will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only one who does the will of my Father in heaven. On that day many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many deeds of power in your name?' Then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; go away from me, you evildoers.'"

The above is from Jesus in Matthew 7.

Why is it so hard for so many Christians to realize that Jesus' call is to action and not simply to "head-think"? "We're saved by faith and not by works!" is the general response. But the New Testament is full of statements like the one from Jesus above, not to mention that faith is inherently active in the Bible from beginning to end.

Bryan Stone points out that this is another word where the English language fails us. "Faith" is a noun and not a verb. We shift to "believe" when we want a verb, but this doesn't actually work. Dr. Stone (half-jokingly, I think I remember) proposes a new word to help us: "faithing." Faith is not faith unless it is active.

It's not unlike a marriage. If a husband sits on the computer all day, calling out "I love you!" once an hour to his wife, all the rest of the while doing nothing to demonstrate this, his words will eventually move from intimacy to platitude, from truth to lie, from actuality to fantasy. He might like the idea of loving her, but he doesn't actually love her simply by saying it.

The distinction of "saved by faith while judged by works" is helpful to begin, but it's still a head-think, doctrinal way of describing what happens. That's a start, but if faith is to be faith, our feet will move out of faith from the love and mission of God, not a law or doctrine.

Doctrine is great in telling us what happens, but not so great in helping us get there.

As usual, I appreciate Hauerwas' honesty. There is a vulnerability in writing and crafting, whether it's in a book, a sermon, on a blog, or on Facebook. The temptation is to think that we have to have everything perfect and correct before "putting it out there." And who can blame us? Our elementary, middle, and high school teachers demanded such excellence. But life is rarely lived in the finished product. We want to put out our best, but we can only get there by trying out what we've got first.

It's the same with our faith(fulness) in God, in our discipleship behind Christ. We generally read the passages of Peter, or Thomas, or Philip, or another disciple saying something stupid to Jesus with an air of pity, but at least they tried. And they eventually got it. Or even if they didn't fully grasp it (for who of us can?), moving through mistake or doubt at least eventually took them to greater places.

The Wild Goose (Part 4 of the Bible)

2011-07-12T13:31:00.000-05:00

If you're still with me after the first three parts of this, you may find yourself asking, "So what?".

I think it's important how we view scripture. Allow me to do something I'm not too big a fan of: proof-texting:
It cannot become what the Law was for the Pharisees.
It cannot replace God.
It is not God. It is God's servant.
And it is our servant (useful!).

I struggle when I see faith statements or church belief statements that begin not with God, but with scripture. Our story doesn't begin in or with scripture. It begins with God (even scripture says so). Faith does not come from the Bible, faith is fed and shaped by the Bible. The Bible is not the "source" of our faith or the "foundation" of who we are. Jesus is (by the Holy Spirit.)

Speaking of the Holy Spirit...sometimes it feels to me like the primal authority that is often given to scripture cheapens the active presence, work, and person of the Holy Spirit. Jesus, by the way, did not leave us the Bible. Jesus left us his Holy Spirit. We didn't trust ourselves a couple of centuries later, and thusly canonized scripture (and it's a good thing, because we certainly did/do need it).

But ultimately, anything is nothing without the active presence (=inspiration) of the Holy Spirit. We can understand that this was the same Spirit of God that inspired the people who spoke and wrote scripture and is the same Spirit of God who helps us with it today.

Faith is not so easily a matter of black and white. And the spotlight of our faith (the Holy Spirit) is not a matter of black and white. There is a good reason that the Holy Spirit is called "spirit" and not a Holy "Rock" or Holy "Head" or Holy "Statue" or anything else that we can easily see, manipulate, control, or stick in our pockets. Material things can be controlled. But you can't control the things of spirit. We might even say that it blows where it pleases. Further, there are good reasons that the Holy Spirit is described by images like stillness, fire, wind, and loud noises. Again: none of those are easily controlled.

We're able to control the words of the Bible with our own power. We can shape and form them as we see fit. And we do so very often (all of us). None of us come to the scriptures with unbiased lenses. But the Holy Spirit doesn't live in our pockets or in covers with zippers that Grandma stitched. (I was recently informed that a Celtic image for the Holy Spirit is the "wild goose." Not bad. Though even a goose can be caught and manipulated for our own purposes.)

It's difficult to place too much priority on things that are of divinity, but I'm comfortable saying that the Bible is subservient to God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.

But it's notable how they work and dance together.

So I will continue this later with a further post on how I tend to think the various ways that authority comes to us. It's my feeling that if I give the Bible too much authority, I'm actually devaluing the living and active God. I have one or two other posts brewing as well in response to questions that have come up. I'm not sure I can do this daily from here on, but I will try.
________________
This is Part 4 of a short series on The Bible.
Part 1 - Chan, the Bible, & Jesus
Part 2 - I love the Bible. Really.
Part 3 - A Signpost and a Compass

A Signpost & Compass (Part 3 of the Bible)

2011-07-11T10:00:00.004-05:00

N.T. Wright is one of my favorite biblical scholars (certainly the one I've read the most from). (I realize that when I make that statement, it already puts me in the danger zone in the eyes of many of my brothers and sisters in Christ.) Wright talks about the signposts of scripture. I love this image and find it very useful in talking about what scripture is and does:

A sign along the road is something that points us in the right direction to get to a destination. It is not the destination in and of itself, but without it, we may never get to the destination. Once we've passed a road sign and arrive at our destination, we don't need the sign anymore.

So to flesh the image, the destination is to be "in Christ," with Christ, etc. The Bible is a signpost to get us there. We will always need the Bible in this lifetime. But in eternity, the Bible will be quite moot. It's not part of God's creation. It's of human hands, inspired by God.

(By the way, this is one thing that separates us from those who were directly given their scripture from God like Islam (via Mohammed) or Mormons (via Joseph Smith).)

At the same time, scripture is more like a compass than it is a roadmap. A roadmap tells us exactly where and when to turn, with every step along the way. A compass points us in a direction, and we often find we need to return to the compass to be re-aligned.

The destination is Jesus.
The point is Jesus.
The Bible tells us about the point and isn't in and of itself the point.
________________
This is Part 3 of a series on The Bible. I'll post the fourth tomorrow.
Part 1 - Chan, the Bible, & Jesus
Part 2 - I love the Bible. Really.
Part 4 - The Wild Goose

I love the Bible. Really. (Part 2 of The Bible)

2011-07-08T10:00:00.005-05:00

I read, study, preach, and otherwise talk about the Bible for hours every week. It's kind of important to what I do as a pastor. I love scripture. I have dozens of Bibles and hundreds of biblical commentaries. The more I read scripture, the more I love it. I love the incredible melting pot of personalities, love, anger, creativity, emotion, narrative, power, weakness, divinity, humanity, poetry, art, inspiration, and so much more that the Bible is. I love reading about the people of the Bible. I'll never forget staying up late reading my children's bible as a kid (I particularly liked Joseph, David, and Daniel). Today, the gospels sit at the center for me, while Paul's description of the sacrifice of Christ and the community of his Body (the Church) continually inspire and challenge me.

But the Bible is not God, falls well short of God, is temporal, and should not be made more than it actually is. I even believe that the Church is above scripture, always has been, and always will be, even despite our whorish and schismatic brokenness today (a predicament that makes what I'm saying here challenging in orthopraxy, I know).

All by the grace and inspiration of God, the Bible was:
formed by the Church (the people of God),
selected by the Church,
has been maintained by the Church,
and is taught by the Church.

Unless one is part of a church that only reads from the original text in Hebrew, Greek, and the little bit of Aramaic and Latin (meaning no preaching, no teaching, or anything else other than reading verbatim from the original text), this is pretty much how everyone operates. Interpretation has begun the very moment that someone opens their mouth with words other than the text to explain the text.

I am glad that the Bible is the most printed book in all of history, and I am glad that it's so accessible and more accessible every day. I wish everyone in the world had a Bible. But...there is something to the concern that the RCC had about the Bible being in the hands of all during the Reformation. They were wrong in their monopolization and fist-grip, but they were partly right in their concern about what might happen. (As an aside, I loved how the movie The Book of Eli dealt in the slight with this.) Some of the greatest acts of history were inspired by the words of scripture. And some of the worst atrocities of history were supported by the same.

Don't get me wrong: I believe that God will use whatever vessel, means, path, or anything else to reveal Godself to people. If someone wants to begin with the Bible, I believe that God will honor that. But the Bible simply cannot become God, or the only source by which one finds God throughout the whole of life.

Tim Suttle discusses this wonderfully in his new book:

...the Bible is not self-explanatory. Just as the Ethiopian eunuch needed Philip to help him understand what he was reading, we need help as well. No one can read the Bible apart from community. For one thing it is a written document. You cannot read it unless you’ve been taught how to read. One has to know the language, and language is socially and culturally mediated. You have to be taught the meaning of words by someone else before you can read them. No one is born with the ability to read and understand words. For another thing, the Bible was written in languages hardly any of us can read. It has to be translated into a language which we can understand. This means as soon as we pick up an English translation, we are reading a text which has been mediated by someone else. Lastly, the Bible was never intended to be read apart from community. For the first fifteen hundred years of the Bible’s existence, until the invention of the printing press, it was read privately only in very rare cases. Our ability to read comes from community, as does the Bible itself. People love to point to the case of the addict who grabs the Gideon’s Bible from the hotel room and comes to faith in Christ as an individualistic event. But, who taught him to read? Who put the Bible there? Who translated it into English? Who authored it? Who decided what writings would be included and not included in the canon? Much of what we know about God has come to us through community and has been mediated by that community under the guidance of the Spirit. (An Evangelical Social Gospel?: Finding God's Story in the Midst of Extremes, Chapter 5)

That bold and underline emphasis is mine. The Bible is nothing without the Holy Spirit, which I'll deal with in the next post.

________________
This is Part 2 of a series on The Bible.
Part 1 - Chan, the Bible, & Jesus
Part 3 - A Signpost and a Compass
Part 4 - The Wild Goose

Chan, the Bible, & Jesus

2011-07-07T23:07:00.005-05:00

So Francis Chan spoke tonight at Nazarene Youth Conference. The die-down on Twitter and Facebook of chatter piqued my curiosity a bit. People were excited about him being there. There's no doubt why: he's popular, catchy, cool, and has written what I've been told is a good book (sound familiar?, I mean really...look at those two pictures side-by-side again). But I don't see how Chan's very Wesleyan. I'm sure that he loves Jesus, Jesus loves him, and I could learn a lot from his incredible example. I hope and pray that people were changed tonight for eternity. I trust that it happened and is happening.

But if so, it was because he showed them Jesus and not just the Bible.

Several weeks ago someone posted this video on Facebook. I appreciate much of what Chan says (love the part about clay telling clay about the potter). I had to chuckle at the coupled warning to "be careful what we read" with the blatant "buy my forthcoming book" (on hell). And I find the reaction to Bell's book on hell predictable. Both Chan and Bell have ingenious marketing folk.

But the video has led me back to thinking about what I believe is the primary difference and divide amongst so many in evangelical, mainline, and other circles of the Body of Christ today.

We can list issues that vigorously separate Christians today: homosexuality, abortion, peace/war, atonement theories, the age-old Reformed/Arminian spectrum, and more. But it's more than likely that the position held by someone(s) boils down to one thing: how we read, use, and view scripture, its authority, revelation, and inspiration. That's a lot of words, but it boils down to: the Bible.

(By the way, in the time that I took to type this post out, some chatter has arisen on Twitter about NYC and how great Chan was tonight. Awesome!)
________________

This is Part 1 of a series on The Bible.
Part 2 - I love the Bible. Really.
Part 3 - A Signpost and a Compass
Part 4 - The Wild Goose

Some more thoughts on compassion

2011-07-02T14:28:00.000-05:00

In the below video of Brene Brown (yeah, I'm a big fan) from Altar Video Magazine, she quotes Buddhist nun Pema Chodron who says, "Compassion is not a relationship between the healer and the wounded. It's a relationship between equals."

Part of her point is that we can only become truly com-passionate ("suffering with") once we have realized and actualized our own brokenness. I'm not sure I completely agree (it seems like Chodron is describing empathy more than "suffering with").

But it's likely that I'm drastically influenced by the compassion of Christ, who was both at the same time: equals ("man") and also healer ("God"). However, I definitely like how Chodron (and Brown as well) are challenging people to realize that compassion is hardly just the healthy helping the unhealthy and cannot be equated with charity. It sounds familiar. The Incarnation is all about this.

Anyone else have thoughts?

Learning How To Sit In The Dark from The Work Of The People on Vimeo.

Leaving [a] Church

2011-06-28T22:46:00.001-05:00

I'm reading a great book right now by Tim Suttle, who I had a class or two with in seminary. Perhaps I'll write a review when I'm done, but probably not. I always say I'll do something on this blog and then don't, so don't count on it (I'm sure you were).

There are a lot of "take-homes" from this book. But this paragraph is particularly chewable:

I’ve noticed a pattern within this phenomenon. People who tell me they are leaving our church always begin the decision with the same three words: “We have decided.” By the time those words are uttered, faith has already been broken. These are some of the most painful words I ever have to hear. “We have decided to leave for this or that reason.” The reasons they give vary and they usually have at least some merit. Yet they pale in comparison to the egregious sin of breaking fellowship—read faith, fidelity, faithfulness, allegiance, pistis—with that part of the body of Christ to which they have been given. This is one of the most insidious forms of individualism. Why do people feel as though they can make the decision to leave their community of faith in private, without ever submitting this decision to the rest of the body? In truth this action violates the unity of the body. It runs counter to the notion that our worship runs much deeper than simply where we go to church on Sunday. Rather worship involves the whole of our lives. To “decide” privately to leave a church means we sever deep bonds of friendship and community that are meant to be reciprocal relationships. The phrase, “We have decided,” is a sign that individualism has so pervaded our lives and our Christian faith that we think we are fully justified in making decisions on behalf of everyone in our community without consulting them. This, I believe, is one of the most damaging effects of individualism on the church.

Ouch. What's often sensitively difficult about these situations is that these people most often try to demonstrate "concern" about hurting the feelings of the pastor (me). They'll make statements like, "We really like you, but..." or "It's not you, it's..." These statements only add to the disconnect between who the Church is perceived to be (largely pastor-driven, pastor-led) and who it should be (a community of people following Christ who have a pastor).*

But I also have a bit of a difficulty with what Tim's saying, as it assumes that this kind of reciprocal relationship was ever there in the first place. That's perhaps even more disturbing.

I Corinthians 12 continues to be formational for my ecclesiology (=theology of the Church). It's such a far cry from what the typical local church looks like today. For sure, we are a much more transient society than in Paul and Corinth's day. People are going to move geographically and as such, change local churches. And no one's saying that no one should ever leave a church body. But the flippancy with which it happens these days is whorish.

And if one does leave a church, let the church send you! What a beautiful way for the Body of Christ to participate in the on-going revelation of the Kingdom of God in the commissioning and sending of one another. If indeed it is right for an individual or family to move from one church to another (even if it's across the street), couldn't we all participate in that?

When a family or individual leaves a church, the most grievous moments are the ones when we remember such things as their marriage, or the baptism of their child, or the grief that we shared together in the death of a loved one. It's these kinds of sacramental moments that make us responsible for one another in Christ and by the grace and love of Christ, can over-power the fickle temptation to run elsewhere in the moment of disagreement, misunderstanding, hurt, or offense.

(By the way, Tim does wonderfully in responding more to this issue in the book. Read it!)

*I do want to give some credit to those who would at least talk to a pastor or better yet, several people in their church community, before moving on rather than just simply moving on. But even then, as Tim says, the decision is usually already made. I also want to acknowledge that the last I knew, the average pastoral tenure in my own denomination (the Church of the Nazarene) was less than 4.5 years. Pastors apparently are no different, and perhaps even worse.

Ordination Invocation

2011-05-21T16:50:00.000-05:00

God our Father in Heaven, your name is holy.

As this corner of your Kingdom gathers now,
This limb of the Body of Christ coming together
To be joined by the sinew of your Holy Spirit,
Would you hit us with these reminders this morning:

Of the call of your whole church to the work and movement of your mission (your Kingdom come)
Of the hope that is in what you want for your people and the whole world (your will be done)
Of the field in which we find ourselves to fulfill these things (on earth)
Of your mission already at work (as it is in heaven)
Of your hand full of those things that we need (give us this day our daily bread)
Of your call to the ministry of forgiveness and reconciliation (forgive us as we we forgive)
Of your guidance and direction to good ends (lead us not into temptation)
And of your great sacrifice of liberation in Jesus Christ (so deliver us from evil)

That today is not an end, but a beginning:
An endeavor of authentication, authorization, recognition, and confirmation
To be stewards, proclaimers, gospel-bearers, and holy witnesses
Fed by the gifts and graces swathed upon our backs by your good hand.

Ever and always...this kingdom: yours.
And each day, week, season, and year...the power: yours.
And today, even in this great moment for your church and her ministers...the glory: yours.
In the name of the First Beloved Ordinand at whose initiation you were greatly pleased,
Jesus Christ,
Amen.
_______________

Written for the 2011 New England District Church of the Nazarene Assembly Ordination Service, May 21, 2011

Joe Baldinger (who I'm pretty sure I remember giving me a ride on his motorcycle when I was a kid), Nell Becker Sweeden (with whom I was in seminary), Sharon Desrochers (who was youth group leader when I was a teen at the Lowell First CotN), Melissa DeBono (who is such a great friend), my colleague: Lynnette McCabe (pastoring in Pawtucket, RI), and Tom Quattrociocchi were all ordained as elders into ministry in the Church of the Nazarene this morning. As always, I really appreciated the service.

Thoughts on Food, The Biggest Loser, and another Dinner Prayer

2011-05-11T09:08:00.000-05:00

A couple of years ago, I wrote a dinner prayer for our family. You can read it here. It has stuck, the kids know it, and I love it when we pray it (we also still often pray the other ones that I mentioned in that post).

I wrote another one this past week:

Lord God,
We’ve gathered at this table here,
The food before us all to share.
We take it just as Christ has done.
Thank you for this course we’ll run.
We break it: make us, Lord as one.
We give it, God, as did your Son.
And in his name we ask your seal
Upon and in and through this meal,
His presence in our bond revealed.
Amen.

I was preparing to preach on Jesus' meal with the two from Emmaus, and was reminded that there is a repeated pattern in the meals Jesus oversaw. Jesus, in numerous places, takes the food, thanks God for it, breaks it, and gives it. He did this at the Emmaus table, in the feeding of the 5000 in Luke, and at the Lord's Supper in Luke (I haven't looked at the pattern in the other gospels at this point). If we pray before eating, we generally are good at the second part (thanking). And we do the first as well, but almost exclusively subconsciously and involuntarily.

The main point of the sermon this past week was that we can let our meal times be a reminder to us of Christ's presence to us. I find this encouraging, refreshing, and strengthening. It's to be celebrated! In our eating, God gives us the opportunity to be reminded of what God has done and what God is doing.

Call me old-fashioned, but I'm more and more convinced that our meal times are so very often wasted. We rush them, make them happen as an aside to other activities, and otherwise unhealthily abuse them. When I noted on Sunday morning that this is abnormal in comparison to much of the rest of the world and the rest of human history, the five or so people seated in our sanctuary who have served on the mission field nodded their heads, some of them vigorously so. For most of the rest of humanity and for most of the rest of human history, food is the #1 order of the day. Daily schedules are centered around putting food on the table and eating it. In our society, it's mostly centered around things and other various often meaningless activities.

I am a huge closet fan of the show, The Biggest Loser. Some reality shows have come and gone on my list of what I watch, especially as the list has grown shorter and shorter due to time and the capacity to care. But The Biggest Loser has remained. Call me a sucker, but I love it. While I realize that the bottom line of pretty much anything we see on television is money and ratings, I do appreciate how the show maintains that it isn't just about weight loss, but about not allowing the things of food, depression, self-worthlessness, and other various forms of abuse control us.

Food and the practices surrounding it is a major problem in our American society. So take time to pray and be thankful, to break and share. Enjoy your food, but don't let it control you. And enjoy the ones with whom you eat. If you usually eat alone, try and find time and space to not to. It's harder to sin in general when you're with others, and similarly, eating with others might be a good way to change some of your eating habits for the better. And while fights can certainly be had at the dinner table, it's generally true that it's harder to fight with someone when you're sharing some good food.

(I appear to some to be becoming more and more drawn to the things of the "whacko" Amish, Mennonite, and Brethren. Yes, that's true. Guilty as charged. :-)

Even Exchange?

2011-05-02T07:28:00.000-05:00

Five years ago yesterday (5/1/2006), my little buddy Bobby Moscillo was killed in Iraq. "Different war," yeah I know. Yesterday (5/1/2011), Osama bin Laden was killed.

Even exchange?

Tauros. Skubala.

Will My Son Be a Christian?

2011-04-30T20:02:00.001-05:00

Sometimes I read something that completely nails how I feel about something. This is one of those times: from Miroslav Volf, the first paragraph of his article entitled Will My Son Be a Christian?

The statistics are clearly in my favor. An overwhelming majority of children adopt the religion of their parents. So I shouldn't worry. It is highly probably that my son Nathanael - and his younger brother, Aaron - will grow up in some sense a Christian. But I still worry, mainly because I am not satisfied with his being a Christian "in some sense." Mindful of Kierkegaard's critique of Christendom, I'd almost rather that he be no Christian than an indifferent Christian, or, even worse, a zealous Christian manipulating faith to promote his own selfish ends. But I want him to embrace Christianity as a faith by which to live and for which to die.

Yeah.

That.

It reminds me of these words from Stanley Hauerwas in the below video:
"One of the most heart-breaking aspects of our lives today are young people, desperate to have something to die for, and we're afraid to give it to them."

Good Friday

2011-04-22T07:48:00.001-05:00

Good Friday is always such a weird day. It's difficult to wrap our minds around: Why's it "good"? What was really going on? How can God die? Why didn't Jesus do something? Was it really a transaction? Did the Father forsake the Son? Did the Trinity lose a member for three days? Why did Jesus have to die?

And so on.

I've come to appreciate that these tensions are better left taut than exhaustively figured out. It better typifies actual life. Words so often fall short. But other forms of expression might speak better in these times. I've found the following songs and visuals to be great focal points for a day like today.

Oh My God
A Portrait of Jesus
Why We Call It That

Any others?

Lenten Journey 2011

2011-04-15T07:04:00.000-05:00

I haven't posted in a while, but it doesn't mean I haven't been writing. I'm again writing with a group of others for a season of the Church. We wrote together during Advent, and are now in Lent. Two of my short reflections are out as of the moment, and I thought I'd post them here as well. I'll post the rest as they come out.

March 9, 2011 - Decisions & Directives
March 18, 2011 - Solidarity in Christ
March 28, 2011 - The King's Face
April 6, 2011 - Spirit & Clay
April 15, 2011 - ...that we may die with him.
April 25, 2011