a lapse

I have been having trouble with this blog as of late. Therefore I have not written anything in a long time. It seems not to work so well on my computers so I may just switch over to wordpress or something. I will let keep you posted.

A Wierd Moment

So I am sitting in my study, I was trying to pray and my mind wandered to how God has blessed me. To others, God's blessings means one thing or another; for me God has blessed me with a mind and a library. I have noticed that I am kind of a nerd. I really like to read. I like outside stuff, I mean that. But, I have taken vacation to do work that most would not consider as vacation activity. So nonetheless, it is true, I am a nerd. I counted books on hand in my library as 230+-, and that is not counting my western novels or about two or three boxes of books that I have here nor the all the books (which is a lot) that I left at my in-laws when I left to do my graduate work. What I think makes this more significant is that . . . I did not graduate from high school, I got my G.E.D.

And now I am in graduate school with a personal reference library of 230+- books (in my own study). Who would have thought!

I came to one other conclusion as well. I met a pastor, who is still dear to my heart, who always had about five books that he was reading and he told me that his biggest problem was not finishing books. I could not figure this out . . . until today, when I have about five books that I am reading at the same time! I am on the same path. Which means that I have to become more disciplined with my reading or I am going to have a lot of books that are unfinished.

Anyways, today was a wierd moment

Preaching is not speeching!

In recent conversations, I have been pulled into a discussion over the nature of preaching. I have preached (though I am novice) and believe that preaching is a fundamental aspect of what I do as a minister of the Gospel and member of the Church. Therefore, I have obvious biases. I got all riled up when preaching was equated with what happens in a speech, thus preaching is speeching. I refused and still refuse to accept such premise. Such a premise shows lack of concern and understanding of what is happening on the Lord’s day.

If speech means simply talking, we should not have the word “speech,” for simply talking is not speeching; talking with a friend is not a speech (though the word can become a derogatory phrase against someone who is long-winded); talking with a group of friends is not speeching. Talk that happens in a classroom is usually called a lecture (which is different from a speech) and only applies to the “teacher” (which is not the same as a “speaker”). The example of speech would be an address from the president or something close to that nature. What this is trying to show is that there are lots of aspects involved like location and purpose of the communication.
So here is my brief discourse on preaching and its importance as preaching instead of speeching:

The preaching moment is fundamental to the life of the church, and a hallmark of Protestant worship and accordingly to the people of God. This is seen through the whole biblical narrative with God speaking through Moses and the prophets, and then through his Son Jesus (Mark 1.14 says that Jesus came preaching) and now is speaking through the Spirit. Preaching is thus Trinitarian and essential to the faith. In this same manner, religion has its teachers of every faith and doctrine. But unlike other religions, Christianity actually labels preachers to claim to actually be ambassadors of God according to 1 Peter 4.11, and heralds of the same good news that Jesus our King preached.

This is a very important aspect to the worship of God; a God who spoke creation into existence. When the preaching moment happens in worship, this is not simply one person giving a monologue on his or her own opinions on any given topic. This is a moment where the people of God have gathered to hear God speak into the lives of the community. This is a very dynamic instance in our lives as worshipers, a time when we have let the surrounding culture influence our imagination concerning reality. Society cannot have God speaking into the lives of a people nor can the nation have a people who have an allegiance above the nation. So it has taught us that religion=opinion (or morality at best) which in turn creates the teaching moment into a moral discourse or talk of opinion. We as Christians buy into this and then turn around asking why our churches have no influence or why Christianity is so uninteresting. It is because we have bought into the imagination of the society that surrounds us.

The preaching moment is an breaking-in moment where God enters into our lives to challenge us about our view of Him, challenging us to live into the Bible story. This is not a moment when someone is trying to make us more moral (whatever that could mean) but a moment when Christ is urging us to become a faithful people. Faithfulness is not morality. Faithfulness is not even about making right decisions but faithfulness is about following the King.

If we as Christians continue to believe that preaching is simply speeching, I would contend then we should simply drop it out of the service. We get to hear so many other opinions on countless topics everyday (talk radio is a better source than a sermon). The last thing we need is to hear another during worship. At the same time, if we are convinced that God does not matter in real life then we should use our time better attending to other matters like chores and house maintenance. On the other hand, if we are convinced that God matters, we need to reclaim our sermons and let our imagination be reshaped through real discipleship and attend our worship with the expectation that God spoke and still speaks! Therefore, preaching is not speeching!

It's all about the words we use . . .

We as peoples are a people of communication. We communicate by using words. All our lives revolve around such communication or lack thereof. Therefore, the words that we use are very important.

Recently, I have been accused of arguing too much about words and their definitions, and that such arguments really do not matter. Obviously I am in disagreement but it seems to be a road with no outlet if the other wants to claim that its simply 'semantics,' (as if it some sort of rhetorical tool I pull out in order to 'win' the discussion).

Let me reveal some of my experience. I am out in a shop with others working on a vehicle. Everybody in the room is way more mechanically inclined than I, (some even being professional mechanics). While I am assisting the work, they ask me to fetch tools and parts by their specific names, (almosting knowing that I may not know that I do not know the names). This is revealed because of the impatience that is shown when I have to repeatedly ask "what is that? Is it this one?" At the same time, they seem to never decide to simply point at the tool/part which could be easier for me and the quickness of the task at hand. The point is, this was a problem of semantics.

Or take going to the doctor. When someone breaks a bone in the body, we go to the doctor who takes us through all sorts of tests and examinations. Most everything that is spoken from the doctor is in it's formal, doctor language. The doctors never say, "well, i am going to hook you up to this thingy to see how fast the beeps are going for a little while." They explain whatever is happening in its formal language. They will even tell us our breaks and diseases in their fomal classifications, and we patients almost expect such talk. At least its never considered the downfall of doctors. Once again, semantics.

I suppose that these professions, among other professions, can be semantical, or use specific language because of some practical fact that these are usually physical items that we can handle and wrestle with, whereas in philosophy and theology, we are dealing with ideas and sometimes more abstract concepts.

This seems to me that in the abstract, should we use vague language? If we are talking about ideas, should we be ambiguous? Why should we be unclear when we could be clear?

Decisions, decisions

I have been rolling the theological issue of evangelism in my thinking. What this has come down to is the issue of a "personal decision" and hence a "personal" Lord. I think that this theological issue needs to be re-thought (which some are doing). We are in a post-Christiandom, post-Constantinian age (for those who do not know what those mean, simply think postmodern. if that still is drawing blanks, read some political philosophy or something current concerning religion) which means that we Christians can no longer think that we can pack out stadiums and send an evangelist in front of them to preach the Good News in order to get them "saved." It does not work like that anymore, that day is dead.

What that evangelism has generally done to the Christians is pretty much nothing. It "saved" them and then told them to go find a church and read the Bible. So a bunch of newly "saved" people who had little idea of the "liturgy" of the church and were interpreting the Bible on their individually own, entered into churches with no clue. And if these churches were somewhat normal, it seems to take some time for the congregation to warm up to those who are more introverted, which means even more isolation of the individual who thinks that he or she goes to church in order to receive that "nugget" of truth or that spiritual food, which they do but it is not in the form of an objective proposition that a person can take home like some commodified good, (and do whatever they want with "it"); it comes through the re-membering of the Body of Christ through the Liturgical re-telling of "calling out"; confession of sin; communal prayer; hearing the Word; participating in the Eucharist/Lord's Supper/Communion; and the "sending out" which re-narrates us into the narrative of the Lord Jesus Christ.

What we need to do as churches is come together and becom a prime community in our lives as Christians and not just simply something we do on Sunday morning (though the Sunday worship is absolutely vital being the eighth day of the week; The Lord's DAy. It just does not stop there). We need to find creative ways to be able to learn how to depend on each other as opposed to being completely self-sufficient. We need to learn how to help each other out of the hard times so when the real hard times come, we will know how to "be." Within this context we can start inviting our friends to participate with us (that is to say that we need to build the friendship first and when they notice that we are on a different mission that liberal, consumer-capitalist mission then we can invite them into the mission of Christ). Therefore, we are after baptisms that bring people into the story that will convert and transform them into new creatures as opposed to a "personal" decision to have a "personal" lord.

Concerning this "personal" lord idea, Christ is titled as the King of kings and the Lord of lords. He is the King of the cosmos and his mission is redeeming the creation back unto himself. This is far greater and far larger than simple some God "vacuum" with each one of us. To come together in his Body is to come together and become a part of each other lives and to confess our sins one to another and bear each other's burdens. This is the farthest thing from some simple religious "opinion." This means that the Christians in my community will have a say in my life and I in theirs, likewise Christians everywhere have the right to dialogue to me about my life and thoughts, my interpretations and actions. This is not personal as made known by our society.

Our surrounding society wants us to think that the Way is simply personal, beliefs and convictions that have no more substance than ignorant opinions. They want the Way to be opinion and it will be ok for us to have those "opinions" as long as these opinions do not leave our own personal lives. You see, as an American, my neighbor has really no right to become involved in my life if I choose to keep him out. I have even heard those stories of people sueing those who have saved others from some life-threatening tragedy! We do not even have the right to help the afflicted, for that is why society has instititued the "specialists" in those "helping areas" like the police officer and the medical technician. This society has no place for the Way, for the King of kings to really be a King of the cosmos, but it needs a cultured, impotent faith that is about a "personal" king of each "personal" individual - the "personal" being are his borders.

Therefore, we need to have a way of life in a King that crosses these false borders!

Theology and "real life"

Theology has been on my mind as of late, with a few conversations that have brought the subject up. One conversation in particular spoke as if what is happenening in theology or more generally "academia" is not what is happening in the local congregation, or more appropriately in "real life."

I disagree. I believe what I am going through in seminary is real and it is concerned with what is happening outside of the walls of the classroom. If we are exploring and wading through the assumptions that most people are affected by and which the people may live whole lives without ever becoming critical or thinking about such assumptions does not constitute my study as being not about life.

Let us take an aspect of the theology of sexuality and what I have heard titled as "Evangelical Egalitarianism." The assumption behind the egalitarian position was the liberal, western, democratic politic (not republican vs democrat vs third party politics but the idea that politics is about how we gather as a people. This way of politics makes republicans and democratic parties two side of the same coin, hence 6 to one, half a dozen to another!). The problem with the assumption is that not many people talk about this assumption, even with some people saying that they have gotten past the assumption. I do not think that not talking about the asssumption means that one has transcended the assumption. I do not talk about St. Augustine's theology and way of thinking but I know it affects me and is still a part of my assumptions. Anyways, Academia explores the deep thoughts that a regular "worker" may not ever go through, yet we do because we are trying to create a change, a difference in life. Difference does not come through simply not talking about something or trying not to do one thing the same way as before, but real change comes from altering and exposing the deep roots of our thought "scripts" or patterns or ways or how ever you want to entitle them.

He is Risen!

Easter has passed and it has been one of the most spiritual Easters that I have had. There is so much going on in my life that I do not know where to look, whatever way I look it is something new and more confusing!

So, here is some things that I have found on the Bible in my Bible said by Dietrich Bonhoeffer, "In our meditiation we ponder the chosen text on the strength of the promise that it has something utterly personal to say to us for this day and for our Christian life" found in "life Together."

or

"Just as you do not analyse the words of someone you love, but accept them as they are said to you, accept the Word of Scripture and ponder it in your heart." found in "The Way of Freedom"

I do not care who you are, that's intense.

The mist that entails life here . . .

Easter is coming, and I have been on a journey of preparation for the celebration. I have fasting for the lenten season and it has been a life changing experience. Along with this I have been reflecting on my faith in the Lord Jesus Christ the King.

This reflecting has made me realize how much the world still has its grip upon me. Its as if the world has me in a choke hold and I break out of it only to trip over and become choked again. The world and society today has such strong, subtle, almost invisible ways to keep the church silent and powerless to the powers that be (read Ephesians 6). Take for example the way that my mind is being trained to imagine; its essentially theological. Yet to the majority of every normal person, theology, hence religion, is nothing but a matter of opinion. Or to use the words of the title, its a mist; this kind of glowing, scarry looking mist that eerily moves about the land. When I step out of my front door, I always expect to hear some sort of horror movie play in my background, artistically speaking, "oh no, here comes the god fog again. Don't run up the stairs!"

This is to say that my way of thinking has been reformed by the powers that be to being an opinion. Nothing more than opinion. If I want to submit to the Lord Christ Jesus, its ok because that is a freedom that america gives me, but I should not commit anyone else to because its only my opinion. At least this is what I am told through all sorts of different avenues. I have come to realize that this is what the world tells me and that I probably listen more closely than I should.


When I look at my life, I know that I have taken great steps of sacrifice to be where I am at. Now, what I am told is that its ok because whatever makes me happy, or to each his own, or something of that nature. Yet, I see this as something completely different. I see this kind of like how some see the soldiers being sent off to war. At the departure, the spectatures have this sense of respect at the sacrifice they are making. Those of us at home have that sense of respect when we remember those veterans and soldiers who are currently there or have been there for that great sacrifice they have made. What is the sacrifice for? Well, the freedom of this nation is the most common phrase.

What about all those in training for the pastorate and all those who pastor churches? What about all the Christians? Are we really living by opinion? I do not think so. We are making the people safe, we are bringing a freedom that no military can. Now, I have to admit that the church has been failing at this but that is why we need more Christians to hear their callings! I mean, think about this. Is there a greater cause than bringing people into the church which is the body of Christ, under the Lordship of Jesus the Christ, King of the Cosmos? I do not think so. Without Christ and his body, everyone else is left to be slaves to the powers that be. No way around this fact. In a Henri Nouwen book I am reading, this is spoken through the desert fathers and mothers who seen society as a ship wreck. The fathers and mothers swam for their lives and only when they reached the dry ground could they pull others from drowning. Without the church being the church, people are left to be eaten up by the powers that be. We think we are free but there are subtle powers at work here! Whether they be powers of addiction, powers of greed (consumerism) and hate, or even powers of contract (say our constitutional understanding of who we are: individuals - me vs. you - thank goodness for rights! which subject our essence of being communal to a contract which creates an image of humanity that is essentially individual!).

I am just saying I think this is pretty important stuff. I do not think that King Jesus is a matter of merely opinion. Thats all I am saying.

What the church may look like?

It seems that I have created a series of blogs. It was asked of my last post basically what would this look like according to worship, community, architecture, administration, staffing, volunteer, service; and then there is the values that would need to be addressed. I will attempt my best at addressing these yet it should remain in the fore-front that this is a very large range of topics for discussion; therefore I will not be exhaustive.


The first issue is that this new imagination of church begins within the two aspects of worship and community. It is a community that worships, primarily speaking. What this is not then is a community that can gather and never have a real effect on each other. In American life today, a person can have such a fragmented life and generally the common church does nothing nor has realized the resource of overcoming this fragmentation. The fragmentation can be seen in how we can classify our friends; these are my bowling friends; these are my softball friends; these are my fishing buddies; and my church friends. This means that the church needs to become a more primary aspect of the Christian lives. There is also this aspect of volunteerism that needs to be countered. I am not going to unpack that term but what I am trying to say is that there needs to be some real honest, committed people to each other to go through the thick and the thin.


As for the architecture, I am torn and am not done trying to figure this aspect out. I went and listened to an Armenian Apostolic church father speak about his church’s liturgy. We were in the sanctuary of his church and it was one of the most theologically beautiful things that I have seen. Everything had its place and symbolic meaning; meaning that the space was holy. Likewise, I seen churches function the space out of a functionality mode where most everything was changeable and movable, to allow multiple uses for the space.


The staffing structure would have to become different as well, I think. The CEO-type of leadership just does not fit and makes us Christians unconsciously think that we are a non-profit organization which means hence a business. The church is not a business. Likewise the idea of volunteers has to change. When I clean my own house or do something to further my family along the path of life, I am not volunteering my time. This goes for the church as well. If we are a business then, yes, volunteers are necessary for the non-profit to function. If we are going to think of ourselves differently then we need to describe what we do differently. It’s sort of like being at home with my children when my wife leaves. I am not babysitting though a babysitter would do essentially the same thing. It is just different. What we do as Christians in church is different than volunteering my time with a secular community program.


Service becomes a way of life. We tend to think of our lives in compartments and service/good deeds become another compartment. We should be gathered in such a way that provides us to live a life of service. We should have a way of life in the church that provides safety to a person who may lose a job because he or she went above and beyond the traditional modes of service and hospitality. I have seen only glimpses of this in my life, yet the church has the resources to achieve this way of life.


Finally, there may not be one way that this church will look like, because all people are different and all places are different, therefore the churches will be gathering under different circumstances. It is like saying that if we were in Russia right now talking about this, my whole article would be different because there are different ideals and ways of life that we would be different from.


Though I do not have tangible community for this, I would say that I hear that congregations in places are trying to become something like this. I would say that some sort of contemporary monastic-type of look will take place, and that I intend to bring my future congregation or life to witness to this.

the church's response to the thread

In my previous post, I spoke briefly about the thread of culture that runs through the tapestry of America. This thread was summarized by democratic and capitalistic values that create a rabid individualism. I want to address that there may be a response to this from the Church which is the Body of Christ.

Generally speaking, regardless of what cultures we are talking about, when they are found in America and the clashes are happening on this land, the basic presuppositions that they need to have is that basic democratic, capitalistic, individualism. Therefore, the clashes are really not clashes at all but a different way of articulating the same thing. Its six to one, half a dozen to another.

What I am saying is that the Church actually has the resources and story to overcome and become a real alternative to the democratic, capitalistic, individualism of America. Now, in my experience of overhearing conversations about such, there seems to be this lack of imagination among the participants of the conversation, namely the parties that may like being a democratic, capitalistic, individual. It seems that there are only two other options to being a democratic, capitalistic, individual; a socialist or a communist.

I am not saying that the Church needs to become either of these options and in fact, saying that these are the only two other options to a democratic, capitalistic, individualistic lifestyle exemplifies a lack of imagination. A lack of imagination that hinders people from seeing the Church as it really is, a political enterprise unto itself. I suppose the American Republicanism ideal has some of the blame for this, for the effects of this cause has blinded us. We no longer see the Church but as an aggregate of like-minded individuals, whereas the Bible story tells us something completely different. The Church is the Body of Christ (found in Romans 12 and 1 Corinthians 12) where we come together as a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, (the Church, not America for America did not exist during New Testament times) a people belonging to God. (1 Peter 2.9)

This means that we can come together and be a people together, a people that does not need to have "rights" to get along. For rights act as a trump in order to protect individuals who no longer can trust one another, in order to live in some sort of proximity of each other (this can be seen with the stories I have read about children divorcing from their parents through a system of rights). Likewise, being the Church gives us the resources that no longer have to force us to chase after the profits and gains of money. Money is still needed for life but it no longer needs to be my money and your money and his money but our money. It is not that we pool ALL of our money together but that we see our money as one avenue for the service of God. This does not mean some of our money but All of it. That means we give to the poor, and we give to those in the Body that need it. Likewise we can have other means for support and security, like depending upon the Body for support of the family and children (widows and orphans: James 1.27) as opposed to life insurances.

Yet, this can only begin to take shape when we gather not as democratic, capitalistic, individuals but as members of the Body of Christ and members of each other, carrying each others burdens (galations 6). Only then will we realize and remember our polity as the Church.

It will be only then that we will begin to find real communion in the midst of freedom.

Multiculturalism

Multiculturalism has been recently brought back to my attention. This, I think, is an interesting topic for discussion and it has shown itself in all places that I have studied. Now I do not really know what is meant by “multiculturalism” but I do know that when I was up in northern Minnesota by the reservations, there were cultural clashes going on. I have moved into western Chicagoland and there are cultural clashes going on. Even the move from a smaller, more rural northern Minnesota to the ‘burbs in Illinois became a culture shock for myself. I understand that even some have called America a melting pot of culture and people, there are way more cultures within America than I thought.


Yet there is room to consider if there is something (like a thread in a tapestry) that runs through the minds of the people that live in this land between the oceans. Because in the midst of all the multi-cultures, I believe that there are some commonalities found here. In other words, it is not a chaotic smorgasbord. I think that these threads are:


· Democratic values
· Capitalistic values
o Both lead to individualism


Let me expound a little on what I mean by these.
Democratic values are valuing such things as “equal rights” or even the terms of “rights”; “fairness”; or “equality” is democratic values. This essentially leads to an essential view of humanity as individuals because to live in a democracy, you have to be an individual. This is seen in the tangible ways such as voting which is “one voice equals one vote.” A person does not vote because of tradition, family, or arbitrary laws but based on what they value (which seems to usually fall in line with the democratic or republican party which seems to be dictated by issues of money). Equal rights are not based upon tradition, creeds, townships or customs but upon individuals. Essentially it becomes my “rights” vs. your “rights” and the law is to arbitrate between the two parties so they do not kill each other, while still having to choose between the two who is in the right and who will be in the wrong. Equality and fairness are not based upon the differences between peoples or sexes but are based upon an assumed sameness between people; this sameness being that we are all essentially individuals.


Capitalistic values are concerned with the acquisition and accumulation of personal wealth. It becomes about saving and spending, investing in retirement and in insurances, it is about becoming individually rich. It is the economic value that can create a situation where the poorest neighborhoods become islands surrounded by the richest neighborhoods and people generally will not see the problems with this. It creates a life where people can live in apartments and not know the neighbors. It creates an understanding that the poor are really getting rich off of begging or are at best just lazy or have not learned the lessons they should learn from choosing to be poor in the first place.


Hence, people are taught to essentially see themselves as individuals. Rousseau said it best in his work Social Contract that man was born free but is everywhere in bondage. This is telling us that to become free again we have to release ourselves from the bondages that surround us, which means also from each other.

Where I want to go from here is to see if there is a alternative to this.