Random

Some thoughts from today's round of roasting on the mower under the hot summer sun:

1. It's not the answer that's difficult, it's what the answer requires that's difficult. We spend so much time at studying and pondering and wrestling with Scripture and doctrine and huddled in little groups staring at the Bible in our laps ... what further information could we possibly require? What is there about the inertia to "do" that keeps us bent on further seeking?

2. Mother Theresa is reported to have said, "We can do no great things, only small things with great love." Many people, upon hearing this quote, will be quick to point out that MT is "not saved" and has said things that make them think she is not a Christian. Well, let's leave that up to God, eh? Get over your need to judge, divide and label. How about that statement? That is a good reflection of the teaching of Christ and the understanding of our ability in this world. Bono (another that may not "be saved") said in a song something akin to, "I can't change the world but I can change to world in me when I rejoice." Another great reflection of the world-view of Jesus and, hopefully, his followers.

3. If we cannot get past the urge to judge, divide and label, then allow me to counter that you should not put any further reliance upon the utterings and teachings of Charles Stanley. He believes (by design or by default, I do not know which) that the principles of Christianity that are good and proper for his congregation and his association are not binding upon him. That is the only conclusion that one can reach from the facts surrounding his decision to remain on his throne - er, in his pulpit - after he and his wife divorced.

4. I think Jesus addressed the idea of checklists and we may have overlooked it. In Luke 18:18-23 we read of an encounter between a ruler and Jesus. The ruler asked, "What shall I do to inherit eternal life?" Jesus reminds him of the commandments and the ruler states that he has kept these. Jesus then goes one further and says that the ruler needs to sell his possessions, give the proceeds to the poor and follow Jesus. This is either a point blank lesson that following the law does not equate or rise to the level of following Jesus, or a lesson that a checklist is never good enough. As the saying in the old war movie (The Bridge on the River Kwai, I think) is put forth by a wisened British commander, "On the theory that there is always one more thing to do . . . " Or, maybe it stands for both.

Recipe for Complexity

Step one: Take a life. Any life will do, whether in motion or at rest, whether great or small, whether treasured or common.

Step two: Place the life in society. Society, after all, is the foundation of complexity. A life by itself in a bowl has no complexity. It needs society, the presence of other lives, in order to be prepared for the introduction of complexity.

Step three: Add government. For beginners, a general, national government will do. As you grow in the experience of creating complexity, you may add other governments. The more governing bodies, the more complexity will increase. Please note this is not linear, but more approaching exponential increase in complexity. In my society of the United States of America, in just a shade over 230 years, we have generated an enormous amount of government (and thus complexity). It is a wonder that we do not collapse under the sheer weight of it. As I sit today, I am under the governmental jurisdiction of: federal, state and county.

But the sinister beauty of government for making complexity is its yeast-like quality. The three governments that touch me are not entirely self-contained. They have germinated other governments that affect me. So that one may sit in one's living room and be the citizen of: federal government expressed as taxing authorities, police authorities, environmental authorities, trade authorities, banking authorities, utility authority and so forth. The state is worse because they promulgate not only their own taxing, police, environmental and utility authority, but they empower the county to wreak havoc. The county can have city governments, too. Between them you are subject to further tax law, further policing, water conservation issues, lifestyle restriction (as in smoking bans) and zoning laws which take away property rights that our ancestors died to gain. And on and on and on.

So government is the best ingredient for complexity, but use with care.

Step four: Mix in religion. Government, despite its best efforts, cannot touch the conscience of the life. You will need religion to reach into the heart of man and make it complex. Life has a natural inclination of right and wrong. A master chef can blend religion into this natural flavor to create anxiety and guilt and endless comparison and other emotions which are useful molecules of complexity.

Step five: Garnish with family. Or, if you prefer, you can use family with social organizations. Or just social organizations. Or organized sports. Or even hobbies.

Step six: Store your complexity carefully. Complexity does not fare well in rested mind, nor is it long-lived in a life of spiritual reflection. So limit solitude, seal out as much humor as possible and keep the busy-ness set as high as is tolerable.

Bon Appetit!

The Feet of Faith

Just a quick thought about your faith and mine.

How real is it? What does it count for in the end? How are you separated at the end of all things? Jesus said at the end he will divide, as it were, the sheep from the goats. To the sheep he will say, "Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for your since the creation of the world."

And then he lists 6 things that mark these sheep as sheep:

1. I was hungry and you gave me something to eat.
2. I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink.
3. I was a stranger and you invited me in.
4. I needed clothes and you did clothe me.
5. I was sick and you looked after me.
6. I was in prison and you come to visit me.

The sheep are baffled because they don't remember seeing Jesus in any of these situations. But he says, "I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me."

That's heavy. It's found in Matthew 25:31-46.

Is this a checklist? It's easy to view as a checklist ... but I am not sure. I am resisting checklists whenever possible.

But what cannot be dismissed is the summation: when you do it for the least, you do it for Jesus. Another of the "stoop to conquer" values.

So maybe the place to start is the principal: we need to serve the "least of these" in our world today. The hungry, thirsty, foreigners, naked, sick and imprisoned ... not so much a checklist but a list of places to start looking.

Stop serving the upper middle class who looks like you, talks like you, hangs out where you hang out, listens to your music and "gets" you. What kind of service is it really when you gather only to affirm each other and have collective group-think about topics of minimal impact. How about envisioning a ministry - a personal, intimate ministry - to someone who is so different from you that everyone around you (and around them) will notice. That's salty. That's bright.

I am lamenting the fact that I really don't have any friends who are agnostic, unsaved or even unpolished (really).

I think there is a real value to having cross-cultural, cross-socio-economic friends. Instead of sitting around agreeing with each other all the time because we gravitate towards the same world-view, we could be a voice of difference in somebody's life. A friend where friends were not looked for. Imagine that.

And all without being a professional minister. Could it possibly work?

The limitation of knowledge

Without a doubt our current Christian society worships an idol of easy-aswerism. We want nuggets of wisdom, checklists and steps toward spiritual maturity. We need them packaged for our consumption in a way that is interesting, entertaining, low-maintenance and, if possible, relevant. It does not matter whether our latest easy-answer-god lasts for long or not. With the rise of the internet and the proliferation of published products we have many gods from which to choose.

That's the lure of the WWJD-Purpose-Driven Prayer of Jabez. Some teeth-perfectly-straightened smiling face of the author on the back of the book ... the author is dressed sharply and has not one stray hair. A couple of ringing endorsements from other published authors who are likewise devoid of vocational aptitude. A crisis that is tailored to you as a person and solved by a half dozen intellectually-suspect Scriptural principles. That is a best seller. For this week. Next week it is on the sale rack. A month from now it is clearance. A year from now you can only find in through CBD.

At the base of much, if not most, if not all, of this nonsense is the false belief that we can actually wrap our minds around much, if not most, if not all, of God's plan and work in our life, in our setting and on our planet. We operate, educate and replicate the paradigm that our understanding is as big as God's options.

Once confronted with the truth, we are quick to become correctly humble and offer up the politically acceptable disclaimer that we are "wrong to ever put God in a box." But if we are sincere about that sentiment, then the best we probably can muster is to get a bigger box for God to be in. And if we are not sincere, then we are the religious leaders that Jesus confronted all during his earthly ministry. We have kidnapped Christ and re-made the religion into our servant.

It is time to borrow from Donald Rumsfeld. His famous analogy about military intelligence will serve us well here. I think I have it right when I relate that DR said there were several categories of military intelligence:

1. Known knowns. Those things we know that we know.
2. Known unknowns. Those things that we know that we do not know.
3. Unknown unknowns. Those things about which we have not a clue.

Please do not consider your understanding of God to ever be solely in one of these categories. But never consider that God does not occupy all three categories.

Known knowns are those things we know about God, definitively. Such as, God is love.

Known unknowns are those things we know that we do not know about God. Such as, when does God stop pursuing a soul to return to Him? And, what is the width and breadth of the love that God is?

Unknown unknowns abound. Get comfortable with it and see how it changes the way you read Scriptures. I think whenever you are considering or meditating about a spiritual issue, you must include what I will call the Yahweh Factor. The Yahweh Factor is the accounting for the reality that we cannot possibly fathom God. We can only hope to nurse on the simple things and chew on the meatier things. We will never, ever, ever master enough knowledge to surround God's options in any given situation.

Let's take an easy example. The simple faith says that God answers prayer in one of three ways: yes, no, wait. Yawn. That is trite and simplistic. Such a mantra takes the responsibility off of the petitioner. You must at least expand the possibilities to include the fact that God - being infinitely clever and ever innovative - can design an answer to your prayer that you cannot, definitionally, understand or predict. So God can answer prayer in at least four ways: yes, no, wait and the Yahweh Factor. Hmmm. This example is too easy.

What's a tougher example? Something closer to a real easy-answer-god? Oh, how about whether faith without works is really dead? Dead as in "not sufficient for salvation"? Maybe. Most people put an incredible limitation on the scope of that part of James because they cannot imagine that works can play a part in salvation because, after all, how can you possibly earn salvation by works? It is by grace alone, right?

Well, I would like to agree ... but there are 3 reasons I have to allow that I could be mistaken. 1) James says what James says, 2) many other examples of faith are given in terms of tangible action, and 3) the Yahweh Factor says that I cannot understand all of the options available to God in this particular situation.

What's an even tougher example? How is it that God can love me when He knows me as well (or better) than I know me? How is it and why is it that God, as C S Lewis puts it, "stoops to conquer"? He has to love in ways that I cannot even fathom, let alone attribute, let alone model.

So, the Yahweh Factor is a part of my thinking on these matters and it allows me to read the Bible with less fuss and confusion and, more importantly, keeps me focused on living out the known knowns without a bunch of mental gymnastics trying to get my mind around things that are too "wonderful" for me.

Consider the lillies. Consider the sparrow. God is love.

The Problem of Pain

C S Lewis is at his scholarly best in The Problem of Pain. It is a difficult read for me to follow, but the author's points are dead-on accurate.

His overall thrust of the problem of pain is that pain is an inevitable possibility facing a free-will created being and an inevitable reality of a free-will created being who has chosen to exercise his free will to become self-determinant.

Pain, in this context, according to Lewis, is no less painful but much more understandable. Context arises is 3 ways:

1. Pain alerts us that all is not well. This is the section of the book where the oft-used quote occurs when Lewis relates that God whispers to us in our pleasure, speaks to us in our conscience and shouts to us in our pain - a megaphone is the exactly analogy.

2. Pain demonstrates that we are not sufficient in ourselves to address the fact that all is not well.

3. Pain confirms we have made a conscience choice to begin our return to Eden.

Those points are all subject to expansion and refinement as I continue to read and re-read the chapter called Human Pain.

Random

I actually heard this from two different people last Saturday ... they both thought is was good and would be of interest to me. They were right.

I need a t-shirt that says, "I see dumb people."

And while we are at it ... there is a one-liner that I heard about a month ago that bears repeating:

Some people are like slinkies. Not useful for much but you still smile when you see them get pushed down a staircase.

Bonus Rant

Additional rant because of a letter I received into today's mail.

This letter comes from a ministry I admire and is written by a man I respect. I think that if I talked to him about it, he would understand and correct or at least explain his wording. But the fact is, the wording (I believe) betrays the real thinking of many of those who are in full-time ministry about their position as contrasted with the position of those who are not in full-time ministry.

The actual letter is to announce that the ministry has chosen a person to become the new Director to replace the letter's author, who is the current Director and is retiring at year's end. We will use the name Buster Bilge for the new Director. With the insertion of the new name, here is the paragraph exactly as it appears in the letter:

"Buster has experience in the business world as well as in Campus Ministry. He worked for two years in Research and Design and as Head of Conceptualization for a large toy company in St. Louis. He has started and sold off two small companies himself. He has been offered other jobs but turned them down because he wants his life to make a real difference in the world. As he put it in a casual conversation with me one day, "I want my life to count for Truth with a capital "T." He believes Jesus is that Truth and that Campus Ministry is the right place for him to invest his life."

Okay, I will not quarrel with Buster's motivation and statement, but I will absolutely take issue with the idea presented that leaving the secular world and pursuing full time ministry as a vocation is the way to make a real difference in the world.

That secular-sacred dichotomy creeps into everything. As if those in "secular" work cannot be ministers and cannot make a "real difference in the world."

NEWS FLASH: If it wasn't for those of us in "secular" ministry who see part (and only part) of our ministry as being the support of the full time vocational "sacred" ministers ... where would you be? You definitely wouldn't be kicking back at Starbucks on a Monday morning with a bunch of other spoiled, soft and snide shepherds discussing the latest problems with the flock.

Here's an idea ... spend some time with us peons in the trenches and see how it is that people really suffer. In the trenches people suffer by degrees and die by systematic attrition of idealism. In the "real difference"-making world of full time ministry, you have to pick up the pieces after a major melt-down, but here in the non-"real difference"-making work-a-day world, we have the opportunity - nay, the obligation - to help people who are struggling with the all-too-real erosion of their hope, security and understanding. You may see one in ten sinners who come to your church on your terms to receive help as you define it and administer it - all on your schedule. We see all ten and, get this, have the opportunity to be the church - to be Jesus - to them as they need it: when and where they need it.

If you want to make a real difference, the realize that you are the church wherever you are. Wherever you are called to be. Whether in the trenches of society, or in the ivory towers of churchy-church-church.

Get on with it.

Rant

It has been a week since I saw the movie, Pirates of the Caribbean, Dead Man's Chest (DMC), and I am still a little upset about having lost those 3 hours of my life.

Sure I was able to relax and spend some honey-honey time with my wife but, that movie is awful. Truly awful. Here are some random thoughts.

Apparently the new age of digital special effects has rendered the need for plot and character development as optional pandering to the casually intelligent movie-goer. Eye candy reigns supreme in DMC to the point where it is tiring to the brain. Of course, to the brain, special effects are like cotton candy, flat soda and carbohydrates. Plot and character development are protein. So, if I understand the procedure, watching this movie is something like indoctrination into a cult.

The story in DMC is not only flat-lining but the writer's seem to put a pillow over its face and suffocate it entirely in an effort to bring in other elements so as to see more special effects.

I am pretty easy-going about the idea of suspended disbelief when seeing movies, especially fantasy type movies. However, in one particularly insulting sequence of DMC it takes longer for a giant wheel to roll down the side of a mountain and into the bay than it does for the other characters to run there on foot while fighting with other characters.

Of course Johnny Depp is funny and always interesting to watch. Not as a character in this movie, but just as a human exhibit. Sort of like staring at a social freak in the airport. His character provided exactly two moments of comic relief in this film. Other than that one was just watching him move about in his ambiguously-sexually-oriented strut. Does everyone in France walk like that? Or does he just think that all pirates strode about in a manner that made law-abiding citizens wonder if the rumors about pirate sexual preference were true or not?

All that aside, the most insulting aspect of this movie is that we are not supposed to recognize the fact that the poor excuse for writing is really just a rip-off of the first Star Wars trilogy. Let's see, that would be Star Wars episodes IV, V and VI. (As if George Lucas really had all six episodes in his head and decided to start with episode IV. Yeah, the story sure seemed tightly written in that regard. Uh-huh. But I digress.)

DMC and Empire Strikes Back (ESB) have a lot in common.

Three lead heroes --
ESB: Luke Skywalker, Princess Leia, and Han Solo.
DMC: Will Turner, Elizabeth Swan, Jack Sparrow.

A couple of evil villians --
ESB: Darth Vader and The Emporer
DMC: Norrington (?) and Lord Beckett

Let's see . . . the need for wisdom from an outside authority --
ESB: Yoda, who lives in a weird, lush swamp
DMC: Tia Dalma, who lives in a weird, lush swamp

Oh, and the need for a cliff hanger to make sure the next part of the story will be a box-office must --
ESB: Han Solo frozen in carbonite
DMC: Jack Sparrow swallowed by the Kraken

Someone assist lead the expedition to save the imperiled hero --
ESB: Lando Calrissian
DMC: Captain Barbossa

Background cannon fodder of the evil side --
ESB: cookie-cutter, faceless stormtroopers whose death has no emotional pull on the audience
DMC: inept, enslaved and quasi-dead pirates who don't have free will or sufficient talent to seek other roles (they were probably 90% CG anyway)

Comic relief from idiotic sideshow freaks patterned after Laurel & Hardy --
ESB: C3PO and R2D2
DMC: Ragetti and Pintel

It goes on, but my mind throbs in protest of the memories.

Still, just a couple o' more . . .

Who will make mountains of money from this mediocre story set against a spectacular special effects production --
ESB: George Lucas (who now sees the possibilities of episodes I, II and III materialize)
DMC: Disney (who now sees the possibilities of more movie-based rides and ride-based movies)

Who will shell out money to see these future productions --
ESB: Me and the general population (though I was more and more disappointed as the series drug on)
DMC: The general population, but not me (unless of course I accompany the lovely wife or suffer exposure to a memory-altering Disney ray)

Church Thought

I was praying and thinking yesterday while riding the lawn mower in the blistering heat.

I was meditating on the concept of church and why our Sunday afternoon group feels like church and the Friday night group feels like Bible study. It's not the style or the subject or the personality of those involved. I think it is because the people who are in the Sunday afternoon group purpose for it to be a church. The Friday night group does not have that desire/ability.

By the way, I call the Sunday group the Travelling Mug Society because there are a lot of coffee drinkers and it has a cool, alternative sound. And I call the Friday night group the TGIF Crowd because I don't know what else to call it. No one else calls these groups by those monikers, just me. But I fine with that. I am used to having the conversation in my head, for me alone. I enjoy the company. If others want to come along: bonus.

The TGIF Crowd does not have any identity just yet. But it is early. So far there is not even consistent attendance. Which, by the way, belies the fact that people do not see it as a church. I don't think I want to step in and crusade or get otherwise activist about that. This is JT's vision, not mine. I will help and contribute, but I don't want to guide.

Still, as I was circling in the sun, I prayed for what I should do about the TGIF Crowd and my involvement. I don't want to be in another Bible study. If it's not going to go deeper, then I will probably mark my days there to draw to an end sometime in the fall. But that all remains to be seen. I don't want to dictate the agenda - even for me - so I must simply ask God for guidance. And what do you suppose he said to me?

"You are wondering whether or not it is the church? Have you forgotten so much so soon? It's not about the group and whether or not everyone is in the same place as you. It's about the church. Don't go to church; be the church."

And so there is this woman in the TGIF Crowd who had her identity partially stolen by way of a hacked credit card account. She seems mostly recovered, but I think I need to reach out to her with some legal help about making sure she protects her rights as a consumer. Nothing major ... but some assurance and direction for her would probably be a good service for me to undertake.

Sorry Rick Warren, but it is about me. I need to be the church to the extent of my abilities, talents and gifts. That is serving from essence, not from my excess.

After a couple more laps around the yard I was again struck with a thought about the Travelling Mug Society. Of the 7 cores in that group, we are all artistically talented. Whether music, pictures or words ... we all have some talents in that area. Yet we don't treat our group as a refuge of inspiration and support for those talents. That needs to be addressed. That is way too much "in common" for us to ignore. So let us take advantage of the artistic people that we have joined together with in the common bond of churchly filial relation. These are my brothers and sisters. We are in this together. Not just in service, no just in sacred. But in life.

This will be a good topic to re-discuss at the next ABC Convention ... more on that group another time :)

World War One

So I have been reading about World War I.

WWI and WWII are linked in my mind. They are actually one war. I came to this conclusion after reading about the events that led to WWII. They were directly the results of the way WWI was concluded. So I decided to go back and read about WWI.

The events that led up to WWI are complex and the subject of scholarly differences of opnion, but no one denies or debates that the trigger event was the assasination of Archduke Ferdinand.

The assination was by a single gunman who was part of a larger plot by a terrorist organization. However, the plot of the organization failed earlier that day.

It just happened that the single gunman was sitting in a cafe when he noticed the Archduke's car go by, stop and begin to back up (it had taken a wrong turn).

So the single gunman was able to carry out the assasination not as part of a plot, but as a crime of opportunity.

That man's name was Gavrilo Princip.

One man who's actions triggered WWI (and, to me, WWII).

So if I form band - and you never know, I might - it will be called Princip. Or Princip Jesus or Princip Christ or Princip Adam. All from the idea of the actions of one affecting so many for so long.

Thought you'd like to know.

Love is . . . (continuing)

So we had a discussion last night and the question was raised as to whether, as our host put is, "one could love if one was not saved?"

I don't find that questions useful, but still I answered. I said, "Yes." I was thinking of altruistic and charitable acts undertaken by persons apart from a desire to follow God. Something in their hard-wiring - their genetic make-up, that is - that allows that capacity to exist.

The counter-point was raised (if I followed rightly) that love could not exist with self as an interested part and that no one, apart from God, would act without some level of "self" motivation (that's a good pun for another time). Therefore those acts may look like love but are not because they are self-seeking and thus removed, defitionally, from love.

Hmmmmmm.

Well, I gently inserted that I think "self" motivation is a bit of a player in the love even of most people we regard as Christians. Can you really ever be totally rid of self and still occupy this creation as a created being?

But I don't want to argue the point, really. Frankly I don't need to thump on I Corinthians 13 for a total assurance of my understanding of love. That passage occurs in the middle of a discourse about spiritual gifts and is a direct rebuke to the notion of the Corinthian church that status was determined by gifts and thus to be more spiritual you would naturally desire greater gifts rather than less. And thus comparison was running rampant. The idea of love is inserted in this discourse because it is, as St. Paul said, "a way beyond comparison." So instead of comparison and gift-envy, you should love. Love is (if you bother to read the whole 3 chapters as a contextual piece) the maturity that rises above the kindergarten mentality of comparison.

14:1 brings it rather into focus: Pursue love and be eager for the spiritual gifts . . .

I see that as a statement of priority, not balance. Pursue love. Gifts will follow, but love is the goal.

So to make I Corinthians 13, so commonly called "the love chapter," stretch to be the definitive passage about love in the entire canon of Scripture is, in my opinion, asking it to do work for which it was not intended. I do see why people are drawn to it ... it is a checklist. And most Christians (indeed, most people) have an inner infatuation with checklists as a way to govern their development. You can thank the industrial revolution and western culture for that monster. But put aside the idea of the checklist and look at the qualities (positively defined and negatively defined) as a whole.

If you really need a checklist, then be sure to add what Jesus himself said: "Greater love has no man that this - that he lay down his life for his friends." Get busy on that why don't-cha.