Blog Plagiarism

Well, I guess it's not plagiarism if I tell you this post is from Next Reformation. And actually, that he cites his source as well. In any case, it's a great post:

“We need to begin to read the Bible differently. Americans have been preoccupied with the end of the Gospel of Matthew, the Great Commission: “Go and make.” I call them go-and-make missionaries. These are the go-and-fix-it people. The go-and-make people are those who act like it’s all in our power, and all we have to do is “finish the task.” They love that passage! But when read from the center of power, that passage simply reinforces the illusion that it’s about us, that we are in charge.

“I would like to suggest a new favorite passage, the Great Invitation. It’s what we find if we read from the beginning of the Gospels rather than the end. Jesus says, “Come, follow me. I will make you fishers of men.” Not “Go and make,” but “I will make you.” It’s all about Jesus. And do you know the last words of Jesus to Peter, in John 21? “Follow me.” The last words of Simon Peter’s encounter are the same as the first words…” (Bishop David Niringiye in an interview with Andy Crouch, “Experiencing Life at the Margins.” Christianity Today. July 2006, Vol. 50, No. 7, Page 32)

The Social Justice Formula: Love

I am just beginning to learn about following Jesus with a holistic approach that takes His directives seriously. Unto that end, I want my everyday financial decisions (earning, giving, consumption) to reflect the social justice values that I find in scripture.

As I read the article about the new monastics in the LA Times, this question kept surfacing: How much is 'enough' to live on? Where do we draw that 'simple living' line ? How do we ensure that our resource allotment aligns with obedience to scriptural social justice commands? What things do we forgo so that more is left for others? Which things don't we deem necessary to forgo - ice cream, lattes, what? The group in the article had difficulty coming to a consensus on these issues. And I keep coming back to the "there's no formula" answer. I think that ultimately, we each have to ask God what He wants us to do, and then obey Him. I believe it's that simple.

As I get to know Jesus better, I find that what is important to Him becomes important to me. And He really loves. He really, really, really loves. The vulnerable, the ones on the margins that have no voice, no social, political or financial power - these have a special place in His heart. He loves them and I'm learning to as well. As I love Him, it's natural that I would grow to love what He loves.

This morning I was reading Childview (World Vision's magazine) and had to stop and cry a little upon reading the following excerpt written by Rev. Stephanie Douglas: "News of Maryam's death took me completely by surprise. Mischievous, bright-eyed and only three: who could have foreseen it? She had taken ill barely a week earlier. There was a fever, her father told me, chills and vomiting. Likely, it was malaria. Just like that, beloved Maryam was gone."

I think sometimes we hear these stories and dissociate from the reality. Maryam was just as real as my own daughter, just as loved, just as valuable. But unlike my daughter, she was born in Burkina Faso under radically different circumstances. I cried for the loss of this child whom I don't know. I can't cry for them all, but the Lord touched me with this one little girl's story. And I realized how important our small decision to participate in Malaria No More was. We buy just one mosquito net each month.

The title of the article was "Think Small." Douglas confesses in her article, "We're not in a position to give a large donation to a development organization this year, or even to sponsor another child overseas...So instead, we are doing what we can. We're buying a mosquito net from World Vision's Gift Catalogue."

Before reading the article, I had forgotten we even participated in the fight against malaria since the funds are withdrawn automatically from our account. I will never see the results of those contributions this side of heaven. I won't ever know the people who will be saved as a result of such a small contribution. But God will. He knows them. And He loves each one of them. And so, so do I.

Check This Out

In light of our paradigms for understanding 'church' or 'ecclesia', I thoroughly enjoyed Brant Hansen's post "Ah, the Church of the First Century". I'm also continuing to enjoy Grace's series called Missional Mondays. Here's her latest post on that topic. I want to post something that I've been processing lately regarding social justice, but can't seem to find the time to sit down and type it up...

No Formula

Well, this is what I've come to on the subject of 'ecclesia.' There's no formula. You can't say: If we do A, B, and C, then Christ will be formed in us and mission will be accomplished through us. I think that holds true for any expression (institutional, house church, new monastics, whatever-else-is-out-there). It's a matter of our heart. If we have it all figured out, and we've got our little formula of 'this is how God does it', then we won't ask questions. And if we don't ask questions, we don't have room to hear His answers. While I do think methodology matters, I think that heart attitude matters more. If we recognize our need to hear from Him, to be formed and informed by Him, then we have positioned ourselves in humility. All we can do is ask Him: "What would You desire me to understand, to know, to live, to obey? How do you want me to follow you? Teach me to follow You and teach me Your ways." So I guess that leaves me with a lot of questions (for Him) and few answers for you! :p Here's to 'journey' and 'process'!

Diversity or Dogmatism (and Reformation)

Andi raised some important (21st century reformational) questions on this topic at his blog. It's short enough to repost here, but I recommend going to his site for some links in his original post (if anyone wants further info). Andi writes:

"U TEACH WHAT U R

Can you be a reformator and still pastor an old-system church? I for certain could not, but some of our Connect friends feel called so. (God help them!..!) I remember challenging them in Prague to "think structure":

* What pattern are you actually setting with your behaviour?
* What behaviour are you reinforcing by the infrastructure of your building or the way the chairs are positioned?
* To what percentage are you (or "leaders") talking and to what extent do the participants actually do something else than listen, sing'n pray?
* Who is actually doing what - and why - when you meet? And what are the people expecting to happen?
* How can you break free from established patterns of interaction and experiment with participatory forms of interaction?

My suggestion for alternatives went into the direction of adopting the "second view" perspective, employing sound moderation techniques, and experimenting with established large group facilitation methods like Future Search Conferences.
This for sure is not a miracle remedy, but I'm convinced here is one key to the future:

* be sensitive to the patterns of interaction actually happening and
* take steps to cautiously & courageously increase interaction quality by structure, guidance, and role model."

I thought Andi's post would be good to bring into the discussion since it highlights some of the tension of reformation. Reformation is a process (both individual and within the church universal) and it will not take 5 minutes to get from point A to point B. So part of the question for reformers is how to balance the grace and patience necessary for 'journey' and 'process' with the desire not to compromise one's reformative convictions.

Diversity or Dogmatism Part 2

I saw this video on Pilgrimguide and thought it a beautiful example of a missional institutional church where God is clearly at work.



At the LA Times online, I read this article about a group of new monastics in Billings, Montana. God is clearly at work there too.

Well, the baby will be waking soon, and I've got housework ministry to do. :)

Vocabulary Review

I'm an English teacher, so vocabulary and clear communication is important to me. I discovered this post on Brother Maynard's blog Subversive Influence. I found it to be an interesting review of vocabulary commonly used (at least in my experience) to understand discipleship and social relationships in the Body in general.

Diversity or Dogmatism? Or is that a loaded question?

I have gone back and forth on this one and I'm interested in your opinion. If you read this, but don't usually comment, please take the time to comment now. Here's my question:

Regarding our expression of ecclessia - is there a "right" way? (Or even certain confines within which there's room for some variation, but as long as it stays within the confines of the acceptable boundaries of practice)?

Or, is there a variety and diversity of possible expressions of ecclesia that God works within and uses? (Even if it is totally out of the box and informal, maybe even somewhat fluid, flexible or spontaneous)?

If I look through church history, the congregational model has gone pretty unchallenged until recently (with the mass exodus of committed believers from congregational structures, and the refocus on church as relationships and mission as opposed to meetings). So I believe this is a really valid question. What I am cautious of is the dogmatism that I see on both sides of the congregational/organic divide. Why must everyone do it the way we would do it, or the way we have vision to do it? I've been guilty of this dogmatism, and I'm trying to move beyond it. Or, maybe I'm wrong. And there really is a "right" worldview of ecclesia and a "proper" expression of it that is universally applicable. What do you think?

Is it possible for people to train, equip, encourage and facilitate one another as the Body using methodologies outside of the "organic/relational/informal/less structured" worldview, or outside of the "institutional/congregational/formal/structured" worldview?

I know people on both sides and highly value all of these relationships. So when you answer, from whatever worldview or grid you may be coming from, I just ask that you use grace in your comments (that is, if anybody comments at all... please comment). :)

Incarnational?

I found this little visual on Journeys In Between. I found it both helpful and insightful in my online study of "incarnational" Christianity. Matt writes:

"[Jesus calls us to be in the world but not of the world]. But often that's not what we find. Often what happens instead is we find Christians either isolating themselves from host cultures (the imperialist-fundamentalist approach) or capitulating to host cultures (the syncretist-liberal approach). Both ways lead to blunted witness. Sadly an even worse option is even more common, that of being "of the world but not in the world," whereby Christian compromise with culture and gloss it over with layers of churchianity that effectively cuts of further cultural engagement."

If I understand Matt's post, Red represents the fundamentalist approach which isolates itself completely from the culture and removes new believers from the culture, isolating them as well and conforming them to the fundamentalist church culture. Yellow seems to represent the church that has absorbed the negative value systems of the culture (in America, that would be self, consumerism, heirarchical pyramid structures) but does little to engage those outside of the church (except perhaps to get them in the seats for growing the business). And Blue is an embrace of relativism. I like Green: sent ones in the world, but not of it (of another world - a people of His presence). :)

How do we define 'ministry'?

Kingdom Grace has posted a short series of questions regarding how we define ministry. It's been a very interesting read with a variety of perspectives and approaches to the question. It has helped me to see some of my own preconceived notions about what constitutes "ministry". My understanding is limited, but I did experience a bit of a lightbulb moment.

As Peter preached in Acts 2, he recited David's prophecy. Verse 28: "You have made known to me the ways of life; You will make me full of gladness with Your presence."

A great amount of attention in the discussion was given to dualistic thinking (these "spiritual" activities are ministry, these "mundane" activities are not). I am on a journey out of Greek thinking (of which dualism is just one part) as it forms the basis for Western civilization but is pretty unhelpful for the Christian who is seeking to understand the ways of God. I am on a journey that is reflected metaphorically in Zec. 9:13 (Greek mindset vs. Hebrew mindset). As the people of I AM, the Hebrews displayed a holistic mindset and approach. This holistic paradigm was also evident in the church of Acts (They were called "the Way" after all). But it is largely foreign to those of us from western countries. But I digress...

People define "ministry" in so many different ways. But as I began to evaluate my own definition, my own paradigm of ministry, and began to ask the question, "What really ministers to people?" The only reasonable answer I think is His presence. If we are a people of His presence, then we are ministers wherever we are, whatever we're doing. I think what makes the gospel such good news is unlimited, unbroken fellowship with Him: presence. I don't know about you, but He makes me full of gladness with His presence. All the wonderful attributes of His nature are manifest in His tangible presence. I want to become a person of His presence, because I believe that's what will ultimately make for "effective" ministry. Ministry without presence is impossible.

As a side-note, I want to learn more about the emerging concepts of "incarnational" Christianity. Can anyone recommend any resources (preferably online)?

Words of Wisdom

I just read this post written by Alan at the Assembling of the Church (linked in my sidebar). I almost missed this one in my reader. I'm glad I caught it. It's a beautiful picture of the grace and freedom we enjoy as we awkwardly and inexpertly follow Jesus.

Pondering Religion

I like how Graham Cooke says it, "We're all recovering Pharisees." I think that's true of everyone, Christian or non. Religion isn't owned by the church, but for the sake of this post, that's the context I want to talk about. These are just some things I've been pondering lately. What follows is a discussion of some elements of religion (not an exhaustive list), and how following Christ is radically opposed to those elements. I refer a lot to Galations since it addresses many of the elements of religion.

Religion:

1) Law above grace

- Disapproval: a standard must be met before love and acceptance is given.
- Performance: love is earned through perfect execution of the standard (which may vary depending on the context).
- Control: belief that good performance ensures God's blessing and protection. Bad things only happen to bad people. What I do controls what God does in my life (or what happens in my life). This point leads us into the next...

2) Man above God

- Fear of man: other people's opinions are more important than God's, or worse, the two are equated (certain people's
opinions = God's opinion). Outward appearances become a more important priority than the inward attitude of the heart. Developing close relationships with certain people become more important than developing a close relationship with Jesus.
- Self-worship: one's faith is all about self. My spiritual growth, my struggles, my walk with God, my purpose, my destiny, my calling, my ministry. These things sound spiritual, but the focus is completely inward. Self is god. Man is responsible for his own transformation, taking over the job of the Holy Spirit.

Christ - following

1) Grace above law

-Unconditional love: for an individual sinner, "Neither do I condemn you, go your way. From now on, sin no more." (Jn 8:11) And for the religious, "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather you children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling." (Mt. 23:37). And for the whole planet, "For God so loved the world... For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but to save it." (Jn 3:16-17)
-Freed from the standard: "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us" (Gal 2:13).
-God's favor not controlled/earned by man: "If righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died needlessly." (Gal 2:21) "For if the inheritance is based on law, it is no longer based on a promise..."(Gal 3:18) "Who has given to Me that I should repay him? Whatever is under the whole heaven is Mine." (Job 41:11) It really is the height of arrogance to think that our good behavior can earn God's favor, or that our failures can earn His rejection. God is not controlled by man.

2) God above Man

-Fear of God: "For am I now seeking the favor of men or of God? Or am I striving to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a bond-servant of Christ." (Gal 1:10)
-Freedom from self: "...It is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me..." (Gal 2:20). "Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?" (Gal 3:3). It is not about conforming myself to Christ's image - that's His job. It is not about my spiritual growth, my walk with God, my purpose, my destiny or my ministry at all. "'Heaven is My throne and earth is My footstool. What kind of house will you build for Me?' says the Lord...'Was it not My hand which made all these things?' [and Stephen says] The Most High does not dwell in houses made by human hands." (Acts 7:48-50).

I have found it very liberating to know that there is really nothing I can do in my own effort to better myself, or to build the kingdom of God. His kingdom already is. It is to be received, not built. And so now, all I can do is receive it and look to partner with what He's already doing as I look to Him and He directs me. Right? It starts with Him and ends with Him. Alpha and Omega. I have discovered on this journey that there sure is a lot of humanism in religion.

Kumar's Story

In The Cublicle Next Door is one of the best blog posts I've read this year. I hope you enjoy it too.

New Covenant Parenting

I've been thinking and praying a lot lately about how to parent my daughter. I've been evaluating some of the cultural belief systems about children that we hold.

Allan Hugh Cole writes, "Cast as corrupt bearers of original sin, as those whose wills require breaking and reshaping, or as less than fully human entities on their way to personhood, children have been depicted and treated in ways that fall short of ancient Jewish and Jesus’ own norms and practices." I can agree with that assessment of children's traditional place in our culture.

Children are not on their way to personhood, but instead, are of equal importance to adults. They have the same claim to dignity and respect (and an age-appropriate level of autonomy) as adults. Some believe that children are inherently bad and try to get away with as much as possible, and therefore the parents' job is to teach them to be good. I'm not so sure.

I want to parent in a way that teaches my daughter how to live in the New covenant. If I rely heavily on punishments and rewards, am I training her to perform? If I focus on punishing her wrong behavior, will her shame and feeling bad about it motivate her to right behavior? I doubt it. Maybe in a religious way, she will learn to perform for me. But is that how I want to train her to relate to God?

I love God and desire to please him. Sometimes God has to discipline me because I am immature, not because it is my desire to misbehave. When He does so, I experience conviction, and His revelation regarding the issue - but He always focuses on the solution, and what He wants me to do in the future, rather than on what I've done poorly in the past. And I believe that reflects the grace that we enjoy in the new covenant since Jesus paid the price for us, we don't have to sit and feel ashamed of ourselves and experience some sort of religious punishment for missing the mark. I believe my child loves her parents and desires to please us, but she requires discipline because she is immature, not because she is intentionally trying to misbehave (at least not at this age). I want my parenting to reflect how God deals with me and really train her to make right choices for the right reasons. I don't want my parenting to reflect the old covenant, but the gospel of the new covenant.

Too Idealistic?

Quoting another blogger, Alan posts:

"Have I been blinded by idealism when it comes to my views about the bride? Some seem to think so, and I do not doubt the accuracy of the charge. Paper perfect churches can be just as disastrous as churches wearing the grey of compromise. But I cannot escape the portrait of the church that I find on the pages of the New Testament. Can you? The glowing description in Acts 2:41-47, for example, is not meant to be a picture of the "ideal" church -- lovely to contemplate but impossible to realize. The believers in Jerusalem were not being super-saints; they were enjoying normal spiritual health. Why should we consider every-member ministry and a non-professionalized and non-clericalized ministry as something unusual, occasional, and irregular?"

Alan writes, "There is one line in particular that needs to be repeated (re-repeated, I guess): "The believers in Jerusalem were not being super-saints; they were enjoying normal spiritual health." Normal spiritual health... If we are not experiencing fellowship (not fellow-attendance) with brothers and sisters in Christ then we may not be in "normal spiritual health"."

There's a great discussion that follows. I recommend clicking the link above to read...

Bible Quiz!

You know the Bible 100%!

 

Wow! You are awesome! You are a true Biblical scholar, not just a hearer but a personal reader! The books, the characters, the events, the verses - you know it all! You are fantastic!

Ultimate Bible Quiz
Create MySpace Quizzes

Ha! That was a cinch. It definitely doesn't take a Bible scholar to answer those questions, but it was fun! :)

HT: Brother Maynard

Page 123

I've just been tagged (twice!) to post this:

1. Pick up the nearest book of 123 pages or more. (No cheating!)
2. Find Page 123.
3. Find the first 5 sentences.
4. Post the next 3 sentences.
5. Tag 5 people.

I hope my answer isn't too disappointing. I also recently finished "The Great Gilly Hopkins" by Katherine Paterson. It's a Newberry Award book for kids ages 8-14 (part of the curriculum at the ESL school where I teach part time). It's a great book written from the perspective of a foster child, but it isn't 123 pages. So, here's my answer for #4 from "Leashing the Dogs of War: Conflict Management in a Divided World" (it was nearest!)

There is often a huge gulf between the battlefield and the negotiating table. What happens on the ground - which side is winning or losing - may be of little relevance to belligerents in their calculations of whether to continue fighting. Part of the problem is the often irreconcilable war aims discussed earlier.

Not to be a party-pooper, but I'm going to skip step 5. If you want, you can consider yourself tagged and do the exercise for a post on your blog - it is kind of interesting.

World Vision Fights the Slave Trade

We've been World Vision participants for quite some time now, and I'm very happy to discover this new branch. This issue is very close to my heart. The CIA estimates that there are currently between 100,000 - 200,000 trafficked persons in the United States alone. I have been learning more about this issue, and recommend the fictional movie "Trade" for people who may want to learn more.

Keepin' it Real

Here's Bill Johnson talking about the low places and the deep potential in the low places.